Pubdate: Tue, 01 Mar 2005
Source: Sand Mountain Reporter, The (Albertsville, AL)
Copyright: 2005 Sand Mountain Reporter.
Contact:  http://www.sandmountainreporter.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1713
Author: Steve Marshall
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/meth.htm (Methamphetamine)

MARSHALL SUPPORTS EPHEDRINE BILL

Dear editor:

Shortly after graduating from law school, I had a meeting with a senior 
partner at the law firm where I worked. During this meeting, he explained 
various approaches he used in handling cases. He advised me that, after 
much trial and error, he ultimately adopted the "K.I.S.S." philosophy: Keep 
it simple, stupid. This advice has stayed with me since that time, yet 
occasionally I have to remind myself of its importance in addressing the 
issues presented by my job.

Take the issue of crystal meth for example.

A local task force spent many months studying the issue of methamphetamine 
production and use and ultimately recommended several proposals to deal 
with the situation locally.

Since that time, significant progress has been made through increased 
public awareness, drug prevention programs as well as increased arrests. 
However, we continue to see a rise in the number of methamphetamine labs 
that are discovered and graphically see its impact on our community.

The presence of illegal methamphetamine labs in a community does not 
dramatically affect the amount of meth that is available for sale 
illegally. In fact, over 80 percent of the crystal meth sold locally comes 
from Mexico or California.

Yet, clandestine labs have far-reaching consequences outside of 
methamphetamine distribution. Nationally, the clean up costs for illegal 
labs amount to millions of dollars annually and significant numbers of 
children currently reside in foster care because of mothers and fathers who 
are addicted.

In addition, children living inside labs are exposed to a highly toxic 
environment that will affect their physical and mental health on both a 
short term and long-term basis.

All this leads me back to the K.I.S.S. principle.

Many methods and programs have been implemented nationally to try to curb 
the growth of small-scale methamphetamine production.

The simplest approach was recently adopted in the state of Oklahoma. 
Through a law passed less than a year ago, pseudoephedrine and ephedrine, 
essential to the production of methamphetamine, was designated as a 
controlled substance. As such, pseudoephedrine and ephedrine products can 
no longer be sold at convenience stores or other retail outlets and are 
limited to purchases at pharmacies. Moreover, anyone buying a product with 
pseudoephedrine or ephedrine must show identification and sign a log 
reflecting the purchase. This approach, uncomplicated and straightforward, 
has produced dramatic results.

Since the law was passed, seizures of illegal methamphetamine labs have 
fallen by almost 80 percent. Moreover, this dramatic decrease is especially 
significant since Oklahoma reported the fourth highest number of 
methamphetamine labs during the previous calendar year.

The results obtained from this legislation has been so compelling that 30 
other states are considering measures to implement a similar program to 
Oklahoma. As you might expect, these efforts have faced some opposition 
from various retail organizations. This opposition is likewise true in Alabama.

Marshall County's Legislative Delegation has been extremely supportive of 
any mechanism to limit appropriately the sale of ephedrine and 
pseudoephedrine products.

To ultimately make a dramatic impact, Alabama needs to adopt legislation 
consistent with the parameters of Oklahoma's new law and not settle for 
anything less.

While I recognize there is some inconvenience created because of the 
limitation on the sale of these products, I strongly believe that this 
inconvenience is far outweighed by the long term and tangible benefits that 
can be received locally.

Not only do we hamper the ability of a user to manufacture methamphetamine 
in their own homes, we dramatically increase the opportunities for children 
to live in healthier environments.

I would encourage each of you to make your opinions known to our local 
legislative delegation.

To the extent that you believe that the inconvenience from such a law is 
justified by the dramatic results obtained from Oklahoma's effort, I would 
encourage you to contact your legislators directly.

While the business interests opposed to this approach are organized and 
influential, ultimately I believe that the tangible public good created 
from these efforts mandates that these restrictions be implemented.

If it is good enough for Oklahoma - and now having been similarly adopted 
in Arkansas in the last week - I see no reason why Alabama cannot likewise 
adopt this straightforward approach.

Steve Marshall

Marshall County District Attorney
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom