|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Forget Iraq, warrantless spying on American citizens and
our new $9 trillion debt ceiling. No, what really should give you pause is
the fact that The Weather Channel is now taking itself seriously. They
actually think that they should be developing hour-long programs that don’t
involve weather maps. On the other hand, the programs
that they’re promoting are mini mirrors of the psychotic phobias to which
most of us are attuned these days. We’re a nation transfixed by fear, fear
and more fear. Tune into “Storm Stories and its adjunct “Tornado Week” and feel
the fear that meteorological disasters can inject into your system, as you
watch whirling black clouds, raging rivers, flattened homes and teddy bears
lying amongst the rubble. Or watch “It Could Happen Tomorrow” and learn how
New York or Virginia Beach could be wiped out by a category 5 hurricane or a
tsunami. This is frightening stuff. But it’s all consonant with our
fearful way of life these days, and The Weather Channel, which revels in
severe thunderstorm and tornado watches, to say nothing of hurricanes, knows
this. Frighten people to death and they’ll keep watching. It’s not just the prediction of
nasty weather that frightens us. We’re frightened by any kind of dire
prediction that the media or political interest groups choose to hype. We’re
frightened by the Asian flu, the Chinese flu, the Moroccan flu and now the
avian flu. No flu shot means instant death. What do you mean there’s no
vaccine? There’s no phobia we don’t
cling to. We’re homophobes, heterophobes, lipophobes, acrophobes,
triskaidekaphobes, xenophobes and shudder at the thought of erectile
dysfunction. Enmeshed in Islamophobia we now refer to Muslims as
Islamo-fascists, though, despite their excesses, you never hear of
Christo-fascists or Judeo-fascists. Whereas we used to fear
Communists, we now fear terrorists. Instead of ducking under desks to avert
nuclear fallout, we’re wrapping our homes in plastic and duct tape. And all
because the lunatics in power know that to stay in power they have to scare
the bejeezus out of the public and promise protection from the scary things
out there in the forest. Yes, we have become a people
driven by and stupidly accepting of irrational fear. Hence it came as no surprise
that school superintendent Gary Mathews somewhat self-righteously tossed
pharmacophobia into the mix and proclaimed that drug abuse was running
rampant through our high schools. So frightened must we be of this, argued
Mathews, that we should mandate random drug testing for all athletes, tuba
players, drama students and anyone else involved in extra-curricular
activities. In fact, just about anyone who uses the schools’ parking lots
should be tested. As it turns out, according to
the School Board’s website, the drug epidemic last Fall was limited to 29
of nearly 3,000 high school students.
Why, then, all the hoopla? What
really lay behind the push for mandatory random drug testing? Quite apart from the fact that
the legalization of drugs, especially marijuana, would allow for far fewer
people in jail and better control of addiction, there is very slim evidence
indeed that random drug testing is worth a whit when it comes to diminishing
substance abuse. Yet, there are organizations
throughout the country that survive on the basis of fear of drug use and the
notion that any drug use is automatically drug abuse. One such group, headed
by Roger D. Morgan, is known as Californians for Drug-Free Schools. As part
of their countrywide assault they latch onto various school districts and
infuse them with the notion that mandatory random drug testing is the only
means by which drug abuse can be wiped out and states can save millions of
dollars in drug treatment programs. Thus in the midst of the debate
here about random drug testing, the California organization took out full
page ads in both the Daily Press (at a cost of $2,000) and the Gazette to advocate their position
for testing. In addition, throughout the ads they heavily promoted
Williamsburg’s Drug Action Center, also known as Bacon Street. According to Section VII of
their IRS tax return for the fiscal year 2004-2005, Bacon Street received a
total of $369,586 in revenues from fees collected from individuals ($59,371)
and the Colonial Services Board and local school systems ($310,215). This
constitutes more than half of their total revenue for the year. Without
support from the CSB and the schools and without the referrals the schools
provide, Bacon Street’s budget would take a severe hit. Does this mean that Bacon
Street’s strong support for mandatory random drug testing is not altruistic?
Absolutely not. They obviously provide a necessary and caring service for
those who have become addicted to drugs. On the other hand, their economic
stance in all this, as well as that of the California group, is certainly
worthy of consideration relative to an expanded program of mandatory
testing. While Ron Vaught shamelessly
impugned the source of Mary Ann Maimone’s inspired compromise solution to the
questionable drug epidemic in the schools, the better question relative to
source is who birthed the bogeyman of a drug epidemic to begin with? Why is a
California-based group spending thousands for full page ads in local Virginia
papers to promote Bacon Street? With only 29 students involved
in drug abuse last Fall, why are the proponents of drug testing, like The
Weather Channel, raising the specter of severe thunderstorms when only
sprinkles are actually falling? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lewleadbeater.com Copyright 2002 All Rights Reserved
email: LWL@lewleadbeater.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||