---

Grade drug tests by
‘ice’ detection

THE ISSUE Mid-Pacific Institute will begin a voluntary drug testing program during the coming school year.

DRUG testing will begin next week with the opening of the school year at Mid-Pacific Institute under a voluntary program. White House drug czar John Walters praised the effort, but detection of crystal methamphetamine usage may be the measure of success.

The only students who will be tested are those who consent. Urine test results will be sent to their parents and will be kept from school officials. Joe Rice, the school's president, says about half of the students who responded so far have agreed to the testing, and the school will randomly test about 10 percent of those in the pool each month.

Skeptics point out that methamphetamine, the drug of greatest concern, doesn't remain in the body system for very long so users of "ice" may go undetected. One in 10 high school seniors nationally has used meth.

Walters, who was in Honolulu to attend a national conference of lieutenant governors, said the Mid-Pac program "is one that needs to be replicated across the country." Public schools in Hawaii should look closely at the example.

His office has been criticized for underplaying the scourge of methamphetamine, which Attorney General Alberto Gonzales recently called "the most dangerous drug in America -- a problem that has surpassed marijuana." A national survey of sheriffs found that 58 percent regarded meth as their biggest drug problem.

At Mid-Pac, Walters recognized that crystal meth is the biggest drug threat in Hawaii, the implication being that the epidemic is not so severe in other states. In addition, he said, "We also need to recognize that there are other substances that lead them to that."

He was referring to marijuana, which he insists is of greater concern than meth as a "gateway" to more dangerous drugs. Marijuana has 15 million users, he says, while meth, is used by only 1 million. His office clings to the position that meth does not qualify as an epidemic.

---

BACK TO TOP
|

Energy bill won’t free
U.S. from foreign oil

THE ISSUE Congress has sent a broad energy measure to President Bush for his signature.

AFTER six years and countless hours of political rhetoric, Congress has forged a bill that comes up short in increasing this country's energy security, and does little to shift energy policy from its current course.

Consumers hoping for lower energy costs will be disappointed. Environmentalists hoping for pollution reductions and continued protection of natural areas will be disappointed. Renewable energy supporters who sought requirements for clean power production and curbs in fossil-fuel consumption also will be let down.

But oil and energy companies that spent $367 million to lobby federal officials will get a nice return: most of the $14.5 billion in tax breaks, fast-tracked permits for drilling on public lands and exemptions from federal clean water laws.

The bill, which received the support of Hawaii's congressional delegation, save for Rep. Ed Case, will not dent U.S. appetite for oil. The House removed two Senate provisions, one to require power companies to boost renewable production to at least 10 percent in 15 years and another to direct the administration to find ways to cut consumption by a million barrels a day. Congress did not consider imposing higher fuel economy standards for SUVs and other gas guzzlers, which would have gone a long way in curtailing consumption.

There are bright spots. For the first time in 20 years, homeowners will be eligible for a federal tax credit of up to $2,000, less any state credits, when they install solar systems. Wind farm, biomass and geothermal production credits that could help Hawaii enterprises will be renewed, albeit for only two more years. People who buy hybrid-engine cars also will receive tax credits.

President Bush, eager to sign the bill, characterized the measure as "critically important to our long-term national and economic security." It could have been if it were a fundamental change in energy policy.

---

---

---