Pubdate: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 Source: Worcester Telegram & Gazette (MA) Copyright: 2001 Worcester Telegram & Gazette Contact: http://www.telegram.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/509 Author: Kenneth J. Moynihan CELLUCCI LEAVES BEHIND THE HOT ISSUE OF NEEDLE EXCHANGE Gov. Jane M. Swift has inherited from her predecessor any number of political hot potatoes. One of those is the Cellucci-Swift administration's muted support of efforts by health groups around the state to initiate programs providing intravenous drug users with clean needles. Attempts to implement such programs have run into popular and official resistance in most communities, including Worcester, where the City Council has twice turned thumbs down, most recently on a 7-4 vote in January 1999. Only Cambridge, Boston, Provincetown and Northampton have put programs into effect. Mr. Cellucci and his Department of Public Health have both been in favor of such programs. Unlike his health department, Mr. Cellucci had a chance to change the legal requirement for local approval, but he chose not to. The opportunity arose late last summer, when Sen. James P. Jajuga, D-Methuen, managed to attach to the state budget legislation that would have given the Department of Public Health authority to establish clean needle programs without local political approval. In the name of local control, Mr. Cellucci vetoed that provision, all the while urging his Department of Public Health to do more to educate the public and convince municipal authorities of the need to implement such programs. Mr. Cellucci spoke as though redoubled educational efforts by the Department of Public Health should be regarded as an alternative to state mandated programs. Local officials don't tend to see it that way at all. People who have taken a stance against needle exchange don't cotton easily to publicly funded efforts to convince their constituents that they were wrong. Part of the Department of Public health's effort was embodied in a $10,000 grant to the Henry Lee Willis Center in Worcester to conduct a survey of local attitudes toward needle exchange and also to educate the public on how such a program could slow the HIV/AIDS epidemic among the city's intravenous drug users. When District 2 Councilor Michael C. Perotto heard about the grant he questioned whether the city should allocate any block-grant funding to agencies that did not follow the council's position against needle exchange. He was persuaded by his colleagues to back off. Things took a different course in Fitchburg. After city officials expressed renewed opposition to needle exchange, the Gardner Visiting Nursing Association -- which had also received a $10,000 Department of Public Health grant to educate the local public -- withdrew from that role. As politicians are wont to do, Mr. Cellucci mixed elements that could very well have been in conflict with one another. He was combining a rhetorical stance in favor of needle exchange with a rhetorical stance in favor of local control. Since local control can thwart needle exchange, he was in effect putting local control first. As he slips off to Ottawa local control rather than public health may be becoming the main political issue. Standing up for its own power, the Worcester City Council went on record 9-2 against the Jajuga amendment last year. This year, Fitchburg's council has beaten Worcester's to the draw, voting unanimously to oppose new legislation filed by Mr. Jajuga. Ward 6 Councilor Ralph R. Romano III summed up where the debate seems to be heading. "Now it's an issue of local control," Mr. Romano said, "and no matter where you stand on the issue (of needle exchange), all of us need to take that to heart." The spotlight will soon be on the renewed effort of Mr. Jajuga, author of the legislation vetoed by Mr. Cellucci last year, to change the law. He is back with a new bill to allow the Department of Public Health to act without having to seek any form of official local approval. Hearings have yet to be scheduled on the Jajuga legislation, but they will undoubtedly give full vent to people, including some from Worcester, who don't want a program forced upon their communities. It will probably take a strong stand by legislative leaders to overcome local opposition to the proposal. All of the resistance may give the impression that public opinion is staunchly opposed to needle exchange programs. On the other hand, a poll commissioned last year by the McCormack Institute at the University of Massachusetts at Boston found that 62 percent of Massachusetts residents favored needle exchange, with support appearing across virtually all demographic groups. The Worcester City Council, which undoubtedly believes it has been reflecting the will of the city's residents and voters in resisting needle exchange, may have a chance this year to find out. One of its committees is considering two petitions filed by community activist William S. Coleman III, asking that two questions on the subject be placed on the November ballot. One would ask voters if they feel information regarding the transmission and spread of HIV/AIDS has so far been presented in a way that allows them to make an informed decision on the establishment of a needle exchange program in Worcester. The other would ask if voters support the establishment of a state-funded needle exchange program, combined with drug treatment on demand, in Worcester. The first of those questions, if it gets on the ballot and gets some discussion, might help people to understand the critical link between intravenous drug use and the spread of HIV/AIDS, which many people undoubtedly continue to regard as a disease that is almost always transmitted sexually. The second question would be the more important one, although its outcome and effects are impossible to predict. Advocates of needle exchange point repeatedly to that 62 percent support in the McCormack Institute poll, but they may not really be ready to take their chances at the polls. A ballot question might produce an educational discussion of the public health issues, or it might just give people a change to express their negative feelings about HIV/AIDS and about illegal drug use. Billboards have sprouted along Interstate 290 in support of needle exchange, and advertisements have begun to appear on Worcester radio stations. Maybe a real local campaign could get under way, and Worcester could lead the state in finding out just how hot a potato Mr. Cellucci has left Ms. Swift and the rest of us to toss around. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens