On Needle Exchanges, Another 1,000-Foot Mistake

I wish this post brought better news. A bill before Congress would lift the ban on federal funding for needle exchanges. Good so far, right?

Here’s the problem: the bill would actually extend the ban formost of the 200 needle exchanges in the U.S., by preventing them from drawing federal money if they are within 1,000 feet of a school, library, park, college, video arcade or any other place children might gather. It’s a backhanded effort to hinder needle exchanges, and its result will be higher rates of HIV and AIDS, STDs and drug addiction.

A parallel rule will block city funding for exchanges in Washington, D.C., that fail the 1,000-foot test. The D.C. bill was introduced by U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston, a Georgia Republican, who claims to be thinking of the children.

“Let’s protect these kids,” he told the Times. “They don’t need to be playing kickball in the playground and seeing people lined up for needle exchange.”

Oh, the horror. Can you imagine? How could they possibly continue with their kickball game, once their innocence has been stolen by a line of scary heroin addicts right outside the playground? Kingston's comment is straight-up fear mongering and, like other 1,000-foot rules, the bill masquerades punishment as safety.

I've yet to see a 1,000-foot rule (or a 2,500-foot rule) that I would support -- whether it be a drug sentence enhancement, a sex offender restriction or this needle exchange nonsense. These are long distances, and they make it especially hard to provide services in an urban environment. Sure, we shouldn’t have a needle exchange at a school. We shouldn’t hire convicted sex offenders as teachers. But why can’t we make these distance laws read “within sight of” instead of 1,000 feet?

What the 1,000-foot rule does is block most possible locations for a desperately needed needle exchange in an environment like Manhattan or Baltimore. Needle exchanges prevent the spread of disease, they couple harm reduction with offers of addiction treatment that might actually help people kick drug habits, they offer other crucial services like disease testing and soup kitchens. We need them, and this rule would prevent them from being effective.

These 1,000-foot rules are devastating elsewhere, too. As I’ve written before, sex offenders prohibited from living 1,000 feet from anywhere kids might congregate often end up homeless. And the shelters can’t even take them, if they also house kids or if they’re anywhere near a school.

Drug-free zone laws of similar nature manage to simply add years to the sentences of nearly anyone caught selling drugs in an inner city, because everything is 1,000 feet from a "place children congregate." No one has ever shown that a drug dealer 500 feet from a school is more likely to sell to kids than one 1,500 feet away. Yes, someone caught selling drugs to kids should be punished. But selling drugs to an adult 995 feet from a school is no cause for a Draconian sentence.

Needle exchange is similar. The New York Times today points to the Harm Reduction Center of South Oregon. The center, which offers needle exchange and anti-drug programs, is struggling to make ends meet and a lift of the federal ban on needle exchanges would be welcome. But the organization is 997 feet from a school so the ban would persist under the proposed bill.

Distance limits make for dishonest, ineffective policy, and this proposal needs to go for the needle exchange ban to truly be lifted.

Simpsons image via aazmaaish.