Needling Perry
by David Benzion · 05/10/2007 12:44 pmThe annoyingly thoughtful and courteous left-wing red-diaper doper-baby blogger “Grits for Breakfast” has an update on legislative deliberations regarding conservative Republican Senator Robert Deuell’s needle-exchange bill.
We note with pleasure our assignation by Grits in the “small government” wing of the GOP; others, who have already voted against the needle-exchange concept, are banished to the “authoritarian” branch of the Party, despite their occasionally more-libertarian lapses. 
In the course of pouting about his doomed HPV vaccine program, Gov. Perry took some pops at the needle-exchange bill; we thought LST readers might enjoy reading Sen. Deuell’s response.
May 9, 2007
The Honorable Rick Perry
Governor of Texas
1100 Congress, Room 2S.1
Austin, Texas 78701Dear Governor Perry:
During your statement on May 8 regarding HB 1098, you included the following sentence:
“I am also mystified by the argument that making this vaccine widely available encourages promiscuity, especially from legislators who voted for a needle exchange program that encourages drug addicts to continue to abuse illegal drugs.”
I would respectfully suggest that you have been misinformed on needle exchange programs. I know of no research that indicates needle exchange programs encourage drug use. On the contrary, numerous studies, including reports from the U.S. Surgeon General and the National Institutes of Health, have concluded that needle exchange programs do not increase drug use and may actually decrease it. One study, published in the Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, found new participants in an exchange program in Seattle were five times more likely to enter treatment than those who had never used the exchange.
My legislation permitting voluntary needle exchange programs, SB 308, did not have a single witness testify against it. If it really did increase drug use, there would have been numerous anti-drug groups attending the hearing and working against it. Instead, many of these groups are working for the passage of this bill. They see this as a way to establish contact with injection drug users so they can get them into rehabilitation.
I would also call to your attention the significant impact needle exchange programs can have on reducing HIV and Hepatitis C rates. About half of new HIV infections and 40% of Hepatitis C infections come, directly or indirectly, from injection drug use. A new case of HIV will cost about $385,000 over the patients’ lifetime and Medicaid will pick up the tab for much of this. The cost to Medicaid for Hepatitis C in Texas is about $30 million per year. The National Institutes of Health estimates that needle exchange programs reduce HIV transmission rates by about 30%. As you can see, that can save a lot of lives and money in our state.
Given these facts, it is easy to understand why 49 states now allow voluntary needle exchange programs. I am pleased that the Texas Senate made the wise and compassionate decision last month to join the rest of the nation in allowing these programs.
I would be happy to discuss this issue with you at your convenience. I would also encourage you to talk about the concept of needle exchange with anyone who works in the area of disease prevention or drug abuse. I am confident you will find the facts support this idea and that it is time for Texas to permit it.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Deuell, M.D.
District Two
For those of you unsure of where you stand, keep in mind that Senator Deuell is a conservative Republican.
Plus, supporting needle-exchange is now another way you can piss off the Governor.
That should win it a few votes.
Filed Under Uncategorized · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
10 Responses to “Needling Perry”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
David,
I loved the “annoyingly thoughtful” designation and will only offer one small disagreement with your characterization of my place on the ideological spectrum.
I certainly don’t consider myself some left-wing militant. I pretty frequently champion free markets and competition. I was a Reagan small-government conservative until he began launching wars in Central America and spawned the modern drug war. As far as I’m concerned, the GOP changed more than my politics did - to this day I split tickets at the ballot box. But you read my stuff and so are welcome and assess my positions any way you like. Mine may not be the correct interpretation. Quien sabe?
However my late and sainted mother, a hyper-religious Souther Baptist who volunteered for Republican candidates and as a poll worker in Smith County for decades before her premature death, would spin in her grave at the idea I am a “red diaper baby”!! Not. Even. Close. My father switched to the Republican Party in the ’70s along with John Connally, and turned down a district judgeship during Reagan’s presidency because he preferred to litigate (and avoid a pay cut!).
I live in Travis County so I vote in Democratic primaries because that’s where all the local election action happens. Otherwise, e.g., I’d never vote in a meaningful judge’s or county commissioner’s race. And I’m probably more liberal than Bigjolly - then, so are some of the members of the Aryan Nation prison gang.
In any event, I’m glad we found a topic we can agree on! best,
“Red-diaper doper-baby” was a rhetorical flourish, not meant to be an accurate descriptor, and I apologize to both your parents. They are not to blame for your wayward path.
As for BigJolly… how can he be to the Right of White Pride prison gangs when the Village Voice agrees with him?
http://lonestartimes.com/2007/05/08/too-good-to-be-true/
Hey, what’d I do?
Call me insensitive or outright mean, but I think if you catch HIV because you are committing an illegal act of using illegal drugs, then the taxpayer should not foot the bill of your medical treatment. Since the drug abusers don’t care too much about living anyway (or why would they be using drugs that will most likely kill them) our tax money should not be used to keep them alive when the money could be spent on those people unable to afford cancer treatment for instance. Many of them are turned away becuase they can’t afford the treatment and they “are too rich” to get medicaid. It’s sickening that my father-in-law, who had lymphoma for 10 years and during the last 2 year of his life suffered strokes cause by this disease could not get disability. But a heroin user could.
You go DC! You are dead on!!
Why must law-abiding taxpayers keep picking up the tab for people’s stupid and illegal conduct that gets them in harm’s way?!
I do note that the snippet from Gov. Goodhair sounded more than sophomoric. Did he graduate high school yet? What’s his next argument going to be: “I know you are, but what am I?”
It’s amazing to me that anybody saw fit to elect this liberal twit governor of our great republic.
#5 This is what we get when we vote for ” eye-candy”
Problem is, dcgirl, the Supreme Court has ruled (and the Roberts court certainly will not overturn this) that if the state chooses to restrict someone’s liberty by incarcerating them, the state become responsible for their healthcare and other upkeep costs. So if you like lock-em-up solutions to social problems, paying for prisoners increasingly expensive health care costs is just part of the cost of doing business. That’s fine, but it’s less expensive if fewer prisoners have HIV.
6
How about “AYE” Candy
http://www.theadnostic.com/lauren/PirateGirl.jpg
I guess I was under the mistaken impression that the free needle program was for the UNincarcerated. If they are not incarcerated and get HIV from using heroin, etc. then they should not receive free medical treatment. That’s like giving medical treatment to an inmate who has a scheduled date with death in the next week.
The needle program is for the unincarcerated, dcgirl, but junkies tend to cycle in and out of the criminal justice system until they break their habit (or die), so in practice you’re talking about a lot of the same people.