Last updated on 2019-02-28
But wait! The ACLU and I were incorrectly cranky! While the Senate did table SCR 7, which would have authorized a summer study on alternatives to throwing drug ingesters in jail, the Senate did approve Senate Bill 167, which achieves pretty much the same thing!
Senate Bill 167, Senator Jeff Partridge’s carcass bill on public safety, lay empty until last week’s crossover rush, when Senate Appropriations dropped the action items of SCR 7 into the bill and said, let ‘er rip! SB 167 would convene a 15-member panel—six legislators, secretaries of Social Services and Corrections, the Attorney General (o.k., really only 14 contributing members), two law enforcement folks picked by the Governor, two Unified Judicial System folks, and two county government representatives. SB 167 tasks that crew with studying arrests, convictions, and recidivism rates for folks busted for ingestion of controlled substances; alternatives to lockup that might help those people stop ingesting; and (cue bass drum) funding and fiscal impacts for alternative approaches to drug use.
I take it all back, Senate. Thank you for setting a reasonable priority.
SB 167 passed the Senate Monday 30–5. The five Senators who think studying this problem is a bad idea are Jensen, Monroe, Nelson, Russell, and Stalzer. While those five just keep Saying No to Drugs, maybe the House will agree with the Senate and put us to work studying the problem and maybe coming up with more sensible, effective solutions.
Good! And . . .
“the Attorney General (o.k., really only 14 contributing members)”
😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
You are a good man, Mr. H, rightly to admit your overreactions and lashing outs. I, for one, hope you take on Mr. Novstrup, the elder, in the races for the house in the coming elections.
This is only looking at the current situation and with focus on law enforcement and judicial officials does not begin to get at root causes of addiction. Half measure hopefully leading to whole measure.
Only 1 person representing treatment, and that is the secretary of social services, an Ear Nose and Throat physician.
It sounds more like an opportunity to sit down and reaffirm their faulty practices that are creating the problems they have right now – the analogy of the 3 wolves and 1 sheep deciding what to eat for dinner.
For the record, the “mainstream” medical establishment , traditional medical care providers and hospitals (like Dr. DeSautel) are generally woefully misinformed on evidence based treatment for addiction. You would be better off with a grassroots effort to reform the system than a legislative study with a bunch of individuals that likely have little to offer.
I’d suggest a consideration of the North Dakota Free Through Recovery program. With the prison system at capacity, they decided to use the funds they were going to spend on a prison and dedicate them to case management for individuals at risk for re offending. The initial results have been quite promising.
MD, a way to expect something positive from that study group is if they bring in Real Experts in the field of treating addiction and actually Listen to them.
Not holding out a great deal of hope based on the SDGOP record.
MD, that Free Through Recovery program sounds like a sensible policy response. I hope our ear nose and throat specialist has the sense to invite those North Dakota officials down to tell the task force about the program.
Cory who are the six legislators, do we know yet? Thx to MD’s solid direction.
I volunteered a similar direction to judges/probation folks 9 years ago—the slow turn of SD’s Titanic. What’s up w/ Nelson and Russell? I don’t know of the other two and Jensen is irredeemable.
Leslie, they probably won’t name legislators to the interim committees until after Session is done. Executive Board will get together and name members later in spring.