UK: You Don't Know The Half Of It

YOU DON'T KNOW THE HALF OF IT You probably realise your teenage kids aren't exactly angels. But do you really know what they get up to? Are they taking drugs, having sex, shoplifting? We commissioned an ICM poll, asking parents about their children's bad habits. Then we asked the kids themselves for the truth. To introduce the results, Polly Samson and her 16-year-old son Charlie come clean Polly and Charlie Samson The Guardian ( UK ) The mother Like many parents, I wouldn't honestly expect, or even want, to be dazzled by my teenager's halo, so when I filled in the survey about Charlie, I knew that a saintly clean sheet would be an unlikely result. The boxes I ticked, probably like most participating parents, reflected what I hoped as well as believed he had experienced. At my most optimistic, I imagine my children will try most things - but just once - because there are activities I regret missing out on during my early teens. Shoplifting, for example. I was surprised that 65% of parents didn't think their children had shoplifted, because I assumed that most kids would give it a shot at some point. I would hate to find myself doing a Winona now, but I yearn to try my sleight of hand and it just isn't age-appropriate. So, off you go, children - but remember, only steal from large conglomerates and not from small businesses. In fact, when I was Charlie's age, I wouldn't have been able to tick many of the boxes in the survey myself. And I don't think that's because the times have changed, because I remember feeling miffed about the credit I didn't receive for my relatively good behaviour at the time - my parents clearly believed me to be something of a raver ( "If I ever catch you with drugs, I'll march you straight to the police station" ), but the reality was nothing more alarming than the underage Bacardi and Cokes in the one pub in town whose rheumy-eyed landlord enjoyed the company of children. It was a strain carrying around this perceived disapproval, wanting to scream, "Don't you realise how lucky you are?" I made a point of telling them true stories about my more wayward friends, who did terrifying things like losing their virginity at the age of 11 with the 12-year-old super-stud from our class. I particularly enjoyed throwing in the grisly detail: "And it was by the water jump on the racecourse." We know that the things we do rub off on our children. We read books, they read books; we despair about global warming and so do they; and what a credit to us they are when they bother to switch out a light as they leave the room. It's harder to accept responsibility for their vices, however, and that might explain why only 9% of parents face the fact that their children smoke ( and is probably the reason that my mother never questioned the improbable quantity of cigarette packets on her monthly grocery bill ). Smokers are born of smokers, and by the time I had children I was addicted to opening the third packet of 20 each day and had failed utterly and miserably to kick the habit. However, the thought that my children would smoke, too, made me stop ( although I do smoke the occasional joint, not so much to get stoned but just for the sheer nostalgia of inhaling ). Given that children mimic the good and bad habits of their parents, it may seem odd that I don't hide my occasional joint-smoking from Charlie, but I do think he's a rather peculiarly reasonable child - and we have an unusually candid relationship. He's not perfect - I wouldn't want him to be - and his 15th birthday party certainly removed any rose-tinted vision I might have had. I emailed all the parents in advance to let them know that we'd decided to provide a limited amount of beer and wine, on the condition that nobody brought spirits. Rather you than us, came most of the responses, bar one mother who replied, "You mean to say you are giving alcohol to the children ?" As it turned out, the lovely children hid the vodka - many, many bottles of vodka - in the hollow legs of the tables. Two hours in and the pizzas we had supplied reappeared in pools all over the house. A boy in a white shirt had vomited so much that he resembled a painting by Jackson Pollock; several girls had to be walked around in the cold night air to keep them conscious. Out of my peripheral vision I witnessed Charlie smoke a joint, swig vodka from the bottle and snog a variety of girls. It was not the best night of my life, nor of his, but it did provide the groundwork for the honest relationship I believe we have built since. At the end of the evening, I was amazed to see his formerly barely conscious friends one by one spring to their feet and switch identity - Keith Richards to choirboy - in the click of a car door. "Yes, thank you, Mummy. I had a lovely time." Several days later, Charlie and I struck a deal on the dope smoking: "If you give up, I will." Now we tell each other if we succumb, though since it's usually me, I could do without the feeling that I'm stuck in an episode of Absolutely Fabulous. I don't think that what works with Charlie will necessarily work with my three younger children, at least one of whom has a particular glint in the eye that tells me I won't always have the luxury of feeling this smug about the reassuring honesty of my offspring and that it may well be time my own occasional foible goes underground, or that I stop altogether. And just as I won't necessarily want to be as open with my more cagey children as I am with Charlie, I'm not sure how much I'll want, or need, to know about their teenage kicks. Enough to believe that they are not in mortal danger, I suppose. Judging by some of this survey's results, that is no mean feat. Teenagers are more of a mystery than ever before, mainly due to the mobile phone and MSN messaging. This survey will prove most interesting to parents who would formerly have been able to monitor their offspring's behaviour by hovering around the family phone gesticulating about the phone bill while in reality taking the opportunity to tune in to the nefarious plotting. My 11-year-old already shrinks the computer screen when I walk in when he's messaging, which I'm told is typical, so it's no wonder so many parents are in the dark. But even with my potentially sneakier younger children, I still hope I'll know them well enough not to be one of the 65% of parents who wrongly assume their teenagers have not tried drugs. I would prefer not to think about it too much, and the ideal is that they stay in optimum health, but I would find it more alarming to be the parent of a child who never would. I am always fascinated by the four daughters of friends, three of whom I've witnessed during their teen years driving their parents to drink with their often exceptionally wild behaviour, including episodes of cocaine abuse and an unwanted pregnancy. What interests me, though, is that the daughter who worries them the most - in fact, the one who throws them into despair - is the eldest who, now in her late 20s, has never had any sort of lost weekend, doesn't drink, has never taken drugs and, as far as anyone knows, has yet to experience sex. There is an inherent problem with the age range of this survey, because it is impossible to consider the behaviour of most 11- and 12-year-olds in the same breath as that of 15- and 16-year-olds. My 11-year-old son, for example, would be appalled if someone thought he might have taken drugs or had sex. He even objected the other day when I suggested he offer his piano teacher a glass of wine: "But won't she think you're an alcoholic if you keep giving her wine?" Charlie has asked me to fill in the survey as if I were a 16-year-old, and I wonder if that's because he thinks he doesn't know me as well as I know him. I think he'd be surprised by my moderation, perhaps even a little disappointed. Internet porn? Nope. Ketamine? Nope. Shoplifting? Regrettably, nope. Unprotected sex? Well, he wouldn't be here if I hadn't. Looking at the survey makes me realise anew just how little I did experience, and now that I'm a reasonably responsible mother of four, it's too late: perhaps I should have spent less of my teens trying to please my parents and more time pleasing myself. I'll just have to fantasise about old age, which by then will be the new teen age. I'll shoplift to my heart's content and I'll have all my friends to stay. We'll smoke opium all week and drop ecstasy on Saturday nights just to tell each other how beautiful we really are. There's just one problem: Charlie says that if I do, he won't bring my grandchildren to see me. Polly Samson The son So, teenagers lie to their parents and parents lie to themselves. What's the story? Actually, this study suggests parents lie to themselves more than their children do. In my view, one of the most worrying findings is that 44% of kids have communicated with strangers online and, not only that, the majority did so with their parents' full knowledge. On questioning my 11-year-old brother, I was pretty shocked to discover that he had, in fact, talked online to strangers and seemed fairly unaware of the dangers in doing so. My mother and I filled out the survey in separate rooms, me listing my experience of smoking ( no ), alcohol ( yes ), drugs ( yes ), sex ( oh yes ), internet ( yes ), truancy ( where do you think I found the time to write this piece? ) and shoplifting ( no ) - in short, the seven deadly sins - and she calculating how much of a sinner I'd been. On comparison, I discovered she was, eerily, almost 100% right, estimating my alcohol intake slightly lower and my drug intake slightly higher - and she thought I'd taken magic mushrooms! - but otherwise spot on. Among my friends, those with the most domineering parents tend to spin the most elaborate lies and usually get the most trashed on whatever they can snort, smoke or drink. At the other end of the spectrum, one of my friends has a seemingly rosy relationship with his mum - "Yeah, we're really close, I tell my mum everything." This picture of domestic harmony is shattered when he adds, "Then I laugh in her face 'cos she can't stop me!" Clearly her laissez-faire attitude drives him to distraction. Indeed, she is so disengaged that when we returned to his house at four in the morning after a bout of heavy drinking, she didn't even question his claim that we had been at an all-night tiddlywinks marathon. I doubt her reaction would have been any different if he had claimed we'd been out shooting heroin at the local needle exchange. Paradoxically, she works as a social worker specialising in family strife. If she had been a participant in this survey, I don't think she would've had a clue what he really gets up to. My friend's mother is not alone in this. I suspect it's a lot less painful for a parent just to accept their child's lies than it is to accuse them of dishonesty; and often the lie is to spare the parent embarrassment. Although it's against my interests to say so, it probably is better that the parent knows what's going on with their child. The survey shows that around one in five adolescents admits to shoplifting, but only 8% of parents seem to be aware of their children's light-fingered practices. I've stolen only twice, both times from my parents. The first item was a large bottle of vodka carelessly left in temptation's way. Upon discovering the theft, they accepted my ridiculous explanation that I'd drunk the missing half-litre, and even seemed pleased that I felt able to confess. In actual fact, the vodka had been integrated into an explosive mixture brewing among the smelly socks and other undesirable oddments under my bed. My parents realised their mistake when, in a fit of pure teenage rebellion and stupidity, I detonated the lethal concoction of alcohol, fertiliser, weedkiller and various substances liberated from the school chemistry lab. As I ran around the house with my hair and eyebrows on fire, screaming, at least they knew the time and effort put into my education had not been wasted. The second theft involved alcohol, too, this time a bottle of cooking wine that I smuggled into school for a clandestine party. It ended in disaster, thanks to the crushing disciplinary regime at the college and the insistence by my parents that, instead of replacing the cooking wine, I cough up UKP100, the cost of a bottle of wine sufficiently marvellous to negate the stress I'd caused. This survey shows that more than a quarter of teenagers admit to drinking in a normal week - on average, five units a week, though this is likely to be concentrated in binges rather than the odd pint with the family curry. Parents, on the other hand, thought that only 19% of their kids drank in an average week. Well, there's plenty of time for sobriety in later life, and getting drunk is a major teenage pastime, essential for lowering our inhibitions and providing an excuse for our behaviour the night before. It's all too easy to obtain large quantities of alcohol. In my experience corner shops and supermarkets are the most likely to accept your ID without checking the date of birth written on it. Failing that, a fake driver's licence, realistic enough to convince the local barman if not the immigration authorities, can be found on the internet for as little as UKP10 under the guise of "novelty identification". As a child of liberal parents, incidents of real dishonesty such as this have been the exception rather than the rule for me. At least one of my parents has been there and back with drugs, and they leave me little to rebel against. They've always told me the truth and given me reasonable advice, and because of that - nothing to do with those classes at school ( "Just Say No!" Gosh, thank you, PC Cake, for that invaluable advice ) - I tend to avoid drugs. The survey reports that 13% of kids aged 11 to 16 have at some point taken drugs, and less than half their parents know about it, the drug of choice in most cases being cannabis, with 25% of those admitting to taking drugs using skunk, the super-strong cousin of marijuana. Cannabis used to be more than a drug, it was a lifestyle choice - you were either turned on or you were a square; but today it's become just another way of getting wasted, making it that much harder for parents to know if their kids are using it. I was 13 when, with my older half-brother, I smoked my first joint, and I'm certain my parents were unaware. The increased availability of cheap marijuana means that, where alcohol isn't readily available, cannabis is often seen as a viable, and more portable, alternative or even a superior option. Most of the wild-side walkers will be among the older participants. In fact, a recent EU survey showed that 42% of all 15- to 24-year-olds admit to smoking cannabis. Cannabis today is far stronger than the mild toe fluff smoked in the misspent youth of the parental generation. As a direct result of regularly smoking large quantities of skunk with a high psychotropic content, two friends I've known since toddlerhood have been brought to suicidal depression; one was so scarred he is nowa day patient in a mental-health unit. At my school, a co-ed in the countryside, cannabis and alcohol are the main drugs of choice. Both have been used at some point by most of my year - everyone wants to be a rock star, and cannabis is smoked more in the hope of tarnishing some of that shiny private-school persona and gaining cool than it is for the actual effects. In fact, my mother smokes more pot than I do, and I often find myself having to play the drug police. The worst part about her habit is that she hasn't learned simple drug etiquette: when smoking a joint, it is terrible manners not to share it, something she doesn't seem to have quite grasped. As cannabis becomes increasingly socially acceptable throughout society, perhaps, just as parents are encouraged to demonstrate responsible drinking to their children, they should encourage responsible smoking. The open relationship I have with my mum regarding our occasional indulgences actually helps us both curb our intake as we discuss the similar negative effects it has on us. Pretty liberal though my parents are, I still can't quite imagine us trading recipes for hash brownies while sharing a family joint before dinner. Most teenagers will smoke cannabis if it's there, so why not just accept it and help them do it in the safest way possible, rather than forcing them to lie to indulge their curiosity? I have noticed that my mother's joints tend to appear when my grandparents come to visit, and I get the feeling part of her still smokes it to get at her parents as she mischievously passes the lit spliff to my grandmother who, in her 70s, has too much bravado to refuse. There's nothing quite as surreal as your stoned grandma telling you for the third time in 10 minutes about the time she had tea with Ho Chi Minh. The thing that surprised me most when reading the survey was the proportion of kids who'd had unprotected sex: 51% of those who'd lost their virginity hadn't used protection. I conducted my own thoroughly unscientific survey and found that only two out of the 20 or so people in my class had had unprotected sex, probably due to the graphic images of the effects of syphilis on the human genitalia shown to the school during a seemingly innocent lecture on modern Catholicism. Though relatively few, more parents than I'd have expected think their children have had unprotected sex: with the increased anonymity surrounding teenage abortions and sexually transmitted disease clinics, there is less need for the parent to be involved when sex goes wrong. If the participants had been older, I think the results of this survey would have been more dramatic. Looking at my 11-year-old brother, it's impossible for me to conceive of him touching any of the drugs listed in the survey, smoking or even drinking; and if, aged 11, I'd been part of the survey, I probably would have made a pretty dull statistic, too. My first joint was at age 13; first cigarette, 14; first ride on the proverbial train of love, 16. Thinking about it now, I did talk to strangers online, although I had full knowledge of the dangers and found baiting paedophiles in online chatrooms, then posing as a member of the police, a rather amusing game for a while. In all, teens commit 10% of antisocial behaviour, yet in opinion polls they are cited as the main cause. It seems to me that the so-called degradation of the morals of adolescents and the rise of uncontrollable hordes of "feral youth" are just desperate attempts to live up to the expectations of our elders. Charlie Samson Gilmour Teen survey results Drugs, cigarettes, drink Of the children who have tried drugs, 65% of their parents believe they haven't taken drugs, or don't know. Of the children who smoke, 52% of their parents believe they don't, or don't know. ( Among the smokers, the average number of cigarettes smoked per day is 7. ) Of the children who drink, 45% of their parents believe they don't, or don't know. ( The average alcohol consumption per week among these child drinkers is five units. ) Sex Of the parents who say they are the ones who first taught their children about sex, 58% are wrong, according to their children. ( They mostly say they learn from their friends. ) Of the children who have lost their virginity, 50% of their parents believe this is not the case, or don't know. Of the children who have had unprotected sex, 83% of their parents believe they have not had unprotected sex. ( More than half of the children who have had sex have had unprotected sex. ) Online Of the children who have communicated with strangers online, 46% of their parents do not think they have done so, or don't know. ( 15% of children have talked about sex online. Few - 3% - admit to meeting a stranger they encountered online, but only 1% of their parents believe such a meeting took place. ) Of the children who have looked at pornography online, 60% of their parents do not think they have done so, or don't know. ( By the age of 16, at least one-third of children have looked at pornography online. ) Bad habits Of the children who have shoplifted, 65% of their parents do not believe they have done so or don't know. ( By the age of 16, half of children have played truant, and a fair number of parents - 61% - are aware that they have. ) . ICM Research interviewed a random location, quota sample of 1,038 people, half of whom were aged 11-16; the other half were one of their parents who lived in the same household. Interviews were conducted around the country and the results have been weighted to the parental profile of eligible parents. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.

brought to you by... http://www.ezdetox.com/ where you can find help in how to pass a drug test

US: Budget Boom

BUDGET BOOM States Set Big Spending Plans As Washington Preaches Austerity Washington may currently be focused on fiscal austerity. But a major spending spree is shaping up in the states, as local legislators abandon a half-decade of fiscal conservatism to pursue bigger budgets. From New York to Montana to California, states are proposing budget increases that outpace inflation and far exceed the 1% rise in domestic outlays -- outside of defense and homeland security -- that President Bush recently proposed in his fiscal 2008 federal budget. In Montana, Gov. Brian Schweitzer is cutting taxes and boosting spending by 26% over two years, including $100 million for new "meth prisons" that blend incarceration with intensive drug rehab for those convicted of methamphetamine crimes. In Vermont, Gov. Jim Douglas wants to borrow $40 million to create "the nation's first e-state," where free wireless broadband is available to all. And in Arizona, the only dispute between a Democratic governor and a Republican legislature over a half-billion-dollar road-repair program is whether to borrow the money or pay cash. The binge is bipartisan. Last year, the Massachusetts legislature approved a $1.56 billion universal health-care plan under Republican Gov. Mitt Romney, who is now running for president. This year, at least ten states -- most notably Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger's California -- are weighing similar programs. But that's just one of many areas where state governments are seeking to expand services that were long considered distant dreams by advocates. Universal prekindergarten is being championed by several incoming Democratic governors, such as New York's Eliot Spitzer, Deval Patrick of Massachusetts and Mike Beebe of Arkansas. Democratic leaders in Colorado and Pennsylvania and several other states want to create funds for state "energy independence." Many of these proposals will be topics of conversation at the National Governors Association's annual meeting, which begins in Washington today. The new state activism is driven in part by the Bush administration's budgetary focus on Iraq, defense and homeland security, which leaves states to grapple with domestic concerns on their own. Higher tax receipts and growth in energy royalties, from higher oil and natural-gas prices, have also left many states flush. But even states faced with declining revenue are mulling ways to ramp up spending -- not with unpopular tax increases, but by privatizing valuable public assets in return for big slugs of cash. Michigan and Illinois, among others, are looking at selling off their lotteries, while Missouri is considering doing the same with its student-loan portfolio. The growing popularity of health-care programs and higher teacher salaries raises the risk that states, giddy from surging revenue, may be in danger of expanding beyond their means, using short-term windfalls to create new long-term obligations at a time when tax increases remain unpopular with voters. It was just a few years ago that states last found themselves in financial dire straits. In the early 2000s, many state governments were hit hard by recession and constitutional requirements to balance budgets. Reluctant to unwind fresh tax rollbacks, states were forced not only to cease creating new services but also to cut back on many basics, such as road repairs and prisons. In 2003, the National Governors Association reported that states collectively were undergoing the worst budget crisis since World War II. Even after their economies and revenue streams recovered in the middle part of the decade, state governments concentrated on building surpluses and kept spending relatively in check. But now, many states are returning to their old ways: along with spending more, several governors are proposing hefty tax cuts as well. Like many governors, Arizona Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano faced a looming budget shortfall -- $1 billion in her case -- when she took office in 2003. Now, thanks to strong economic growth, surging sales-tax revenue and low unemployment, the state has $650 million in reserves. For fiscal year 2008, Ms. Napolitano has proposed a $10.4 billion budget that calls for a 6.9% increase in spending on top of the 18% increase last year. The extra money allows Ms. Napolitano to put tens of millions of dollars toward her priorities: pay raises for teachers, 12% more for state universities, and $60 million for projects to train and attract high-tech workers and businesses. "Somewhere out there is the next Microsoft," Ms. Napolitano said. "I'd just as soon that it be in Phoenix or Tucson." Montana's Mr. Schweitzer, who also faced an austere outlook when he first took office, is now enjoying a $1 billion surplus, largely due to higher tax revenues on capital gains and energy production. As he sees it, states spend nearly all of their money to "educate, medicate and incarcerate." His two-year, $7.7 billion budget boosts spending on all three. Legislative analysts peg the budget increase at 26%; Mr. Schweitzer excludes the rainy-day fund and payments towards pension obligations and says the jump is closer to 13%. The state's prison system will see one of the largest increases. Mr. Schweitzer says Montana leads the nation in the per-capita number of citizens incarcerated. Because the vast majority of those are for drug-related crimes, he's proposing a program that would marry the state's prison system with its Department of Health. The resulting "meth prisons," as he calls them, would combine incarceration with intensive rehab programs, which he says would allow for more early releases and, over the long term, would lower the state's cost of maintaining its prisoners. It's an unusual idea, and one he says that the federal government is unlikely to help finance. "The feds aren't really interested in new and novel things," he says. Mr. Schweitzer's budget also offers about $150 million in tax cuts and a $170 million capital construction program. "The best part is I don't have one dollar of bonding in my program," Mr. Schweitzer said. "We're paying cash." Another reason states are loosening their purse strings is to compensate for a sustained decline in federal revenue sharing. In the past, the federal government could often be relied on to help finance big projects such as highways and new state initiatives, such as antipoverty programs. But the days of expanding federal revenue sharing have been on the wane for years. And the Bush administration, with its focus on war and antiterror spending, has shown little interest in supporting these efforts. In fact, governors and others say they expect cutbacks in federal support. "I don't think anyone feels the federal government is going to be a source of revenue increases any time in the near future," says Robin Prunty, a credit analyst, who specializes in state finances for bond-rating firm Standard & Poor's Corp. In New Mexico, Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson, who is running for president, is proposing a $5.7 billion budget, 11% bigger than last year's. The spending plan not only provides more than $100 million in raises for school employees, but includes some projects he had originally intended to supplement with federal grants, such as the state's commuter-rail system. "We had a commitment from the feds for $65 million but we haven't seen it yet, so I'm putting it in my own budget," Mr. Richardson says. His budget also includes a $77 million proposal to expand health care. In many states, universal-health-care proposals are potentially the most expensive propositions, and none top the gargantuan plan offered by California's Mr. Schwarzenegger. His $12 billion health-care plan would insure an estimated 6.5 million people by imposing new fees on doctors and hospitals and giving $1 billion in tax breaks to individuals who purchase their own health insurance. Mr. Schwarzenegger is touting his plan over the objections of many legislators in his own party, who argue that the program will cause budgetary havoc if the state's economy sours. It wouldn't be the first time an ambitious insurance plan created fiscal problems for a state. Tennessee launched such a plan in 1994 but was forced to painfully unwind the program in 2005, when it had grown into a $7.8 billion behemoth that accounted for nearly a third of all spending and threatened to throw the state into deficit. The biggest contributor to costs: insuring middle-aged citizens, especially those with pre-existing medical conditions. They were the first of the estimated 170,000 Tennesseans to be tossed out of the program. Scott Pattison, executive director of the National Association of State Budget Officers, says the Tennessee experience is unlikely to be an anomaly. While it's relatively cheap to insure healthy children, "a 52-year-old diabetic is a lot more expensive to cover," he says. To be sure, some states, fearing a quick reversal of fiscal fortunes, are trying to keep a lid on spending. In Alaska, a state that derives much of its revenue from oil royalties, high energy prices are expected to increase general-fund revenue to $5 billion this year, from $2 billion in 2003. Yet freshman Republican Gov. Sarah Palin vowed to limit budget growth to $3.3 billion, up less than 3% from this year. She points to a recent legislative report that predicts falling energy prices will result in declining revenue for the state as early as next year and a potential $1 billion deficit by fiscal 2010. Already, there are indications that the flush times are ending. One early sign: by late 2006, nearly a third of those states participating in an annual survey by the National Conference of State Legislatures -- 14 of them -- were either experiencing or expecting to see a decline in revenue. Moreover, the group says, for the first time in years, projected spending increases this year seems likely to outstrip revenue growth, with outlays expect to rise 7.5%, and receipts, just 3.1%. The obvious solution to flagging revenue is new taxes. But while many governors seem disposed to spend more, those same politicians remain largely conservative on taxes. Big increases, particularly on broad levies like income and sales taxes, are still considered political suicide. Instead, states from Arizona and Montana to New York, Florida and New Jersey have enacted or are considering tax rollbacks. Many states are looking at other ways to raise cash. In Massachusetts and New York, Messrs. Patrick and Spitzer are toying with the idea of legalizing gambling to raise money. In New Jersey, which already has legalized gambling, Democratic Gov. Jon S. Corzine is entertaining a wager of another sort: leasing a portion of the state's turnpike to a private company in order to raise cash. Governors in Pennsylvania and Texas are considering similar proposals. The schemes can be a windfall for states: In Indiana last fall, Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels essentially sold Interstate 85 under a 75-year lease that garnered a $3.8 billion cash payment. Now he is proposing to lease the state's lottery in return for a similar windfall -- as are several other states, including Illinois, Texas and New Jersey. But lease deals have proven controversial. Critics fret that states won't properly value the assets or will strike deals that somehow hinder future growth. Chief among the critics is the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, a trucker lobby. The lease deals being considered involve sections of some of the nation's busiest roadways. Because the deals almost always include provisions that bar states from building new roadways that might compete with the toll routes being sold, future gridlock is all but assured, the group says. In some states, there's plenty of cash -- at least for the moment. In Arizona, Ms. Napolitano finds herself allied with the conservative Goldwater Institute as she tries to beat back a proposal by the Republican-dominated legislature to raid the state's rainy-day fund for a $400 million road-improvement program. Like her Republican brethren, Ms. Napolitano wants to fix the roads. But she would rather borrow the money and keep the $650 million rainy-day account for the economic downturn she assumes is all but inevitable. "When I came in, we had no rainy day fund," says Ms. Napolitano. "I wouldn't wish that on anybody."

















brought to you by... http://www.ezdetox.com/ where you can find help in pass a drug testing

US CA: California Prison Drug Treatment Called Waste Of Money

CALIFORNIA PRISON DRUG TREATMENT CALLED WASTE OF MONEY The State Overseer Of The Corrections System Says The $1 Billion Spent Since 1989 On Programs Has Failed To Lessen The Recidivism Rate SACRAMENTO -- California's $1-billion investment in drug treatment for prisoners since 1989 has been "a complete waste of money," the state's inspector general said Wednesday, and has done nothing to reduce the number of inmates cycling in and out of custody. One study of the two largest in-prison programs found that recidivism rates for inmates who participated were actually a bit higher than those of a group of convicts who did not receive treatment, Inspector General Matt Cate said. He said corrections officials were told in more than 20 reports since 1997 that the programs were failing but did nothing to fix them, choosing instead to expand them and fund more studies of their results. Successful treatment programs could increase public safety, "change lives and help relieve the state's prison overcrowding crisis," Cate said in releasing the 50-page special review. "But so far the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has squandered that opportunity." The Office of the Inspector General is an independent state agency that oversees the corrections department. In anticipation of the scathing report, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday ordered a shake-up of the department's drug treatment operation and put someone new in charge. Kathryn Jett, director of the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs since 2000, will lead the reorganized division within corrections. The governor called Jett, 53, "the right person at the right time to take on this critical responsibility." Cate applauded Jett's appointment and the governor's "willingness to address this problem at its very foundation. What I didn't want was a patch job, because this is such a total failure," he said. Jett said she welcomed the challenge of improving outcomes for drug-addicted inmates -- and for taxpayers. In an interview, she called the inspector general's report "an excellent blueprint for change" and said she took the job because of the governor's "strong commitment to reform." One in five inmates in California is serving time for a drug offense, and an even larger proportion -- more than half of the 172,000 men and women behind bars -- need drug treatment, the inspector general said. California's recidivism rate, meanwhile, remains among the highest in the country, with about 70% of inmates returning to prison within several years of their release. Cate said treatment for substance abuse "offers one of the state's best hopes of reducing the number of inmates who repeatedly cycle in and out of prisons." Breaking that cycle could alleviate the severe overcrowding that grips the correctional system. The state is under federal court pressure to ease the jam-packed conditions by June or face a possible limit on new prison admissions. The state spends $143 million a year on substance abuse treatment for inmates and parolees, in part through 38 privately operated programs at 22 prisons. About 78,000 prisoners have been treated behind bars since the programs began in 1989. The programs' ineffectiveness, Cate said, boils down to poor management by the department, which often houses them in prison settings where they are doomed to fail. Among the problems: The state's "therapeutic community" treatment model calls for participants to be separated from other inmates, but such separation rarely occurs. Instead, participants share yards and other prison facilities with general population inmates, and security procedures routinely disrupt treatment. Some treatment programs are at prisons that are subjected to frequent lockdowns, meaning that inmates are confined to their cells around the clock. When that occurs, treatment for them essentially stops until the lockdown is lifted. Recognizing the importance of intensive group counseling, the contracts with program providers require enough counselors for an 18 to 1 ratio of inmates to counselors. About two-thirds of the programs do not meet that standard. Cate said one egregious example of the department's mismanagement was its willingness to pay for extensive studies that evaluate the treatment programs without then correcting problems those studies identified. Over a nine-year period that ended last year, the state paid $8.2 million for such studies by UCLA and San Diego State University. The research identified weaknesses and recommended fixes, but the department failed to act. Meanwhile, the Legislature twice funded an expansion of the programs without evidence that they were delivering positive results, the report said. "The litany of problems adds up to a $1-billion failure," the report said, including "most tragically, failure to help California inmates change their lives and, in so doing, make our streets safer." Rod Mullen, who runs an organization that has operated drug treatment programs in the state prisons since 1990, called the report "a mixed bag." "Saying it's a billion-dollar failure is really a mischaracterization of what's happened, because there have been some very successful programs that have delivered amazing reductions in recidivism," said Mullen, chief executive officer of Amity Foundation. Mullen agreed, however, with Cate's suggestion that it was a waste of money to provide in-prison treatment without follow-up care in the community. "That's the key, and we've known that for 10 or 15 years," Mullen said. "What's been missing is a commitment by the department, the Legislature and the governor to make sure it happens." The inspector general's report can be viewed at http://www.oig.ca.gov/.

brought to you by... http://www.ezdetox.com/ where you can find help in how to pass a drug test

US CA: The Pot Haze

THE POT HAZE Faced With Conflicting State, Federal Laws, Local Officials Struggle With Medical Marijuana Issue Ten years after state voters approved the use of medical marijuana, Sonoma County's courts, law enforcement, politicians - and patients - are still struggling to make the law work in the face of unyielding federal policy that considers any use of the drug illegal. That conflict is playing out this month in two Sonoma County courtrooms, in the Sebastopol council chambers and in the daily lives of 375 holders of state-issued medical marijuana ID cards who face huge fee increases. The courts are dealing with law enforcement authorities who are refusing to return medical marijuana because they say they are bound by federal law. At the same time, Sebastopol, following the lead of Santa Rosa and county government, is trying to set rules for setting up medical pot dispensaries in the city. The result is a dizzying array of costly policies and regulations intended to both regulate marijuana use and help and protect medical marijuana users. "It's a big mess," said Sonoma County Sheriff Bill Cogbill. "I'm really worried about how this is all going to play out. Unless something is done to clarify the law in this regard, we're going to see the proliferation of marijuana in society." Berta Bollinger, 54, an active member and patient of the Caregiver Compassion Center in Santa Rosa, said advocates are working hard to get the federal government to recognize medicinal uses for marijuana. "It's not going to happen in this administration," said Bollinger, who has a doctor's recommendation to use medical marijuana to treat her depression, panic disorder and pain and fatigue symptoms. "It's a slow process but we're getting there." The proposed ordinance that goes before the Sebastopol City Council on Tuesday would require a public permit process handled through the city's Planning Department. Cotati also is considering an ordinance to regulate dispensaries within city limits. Sebastopol and Cotati are moving forward after a period of several years in which cities countywide put a halt to the unregulated cannabis clubs that began appearing after the passage of Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996. Local officials on their own Since the act does not address the issue of how or where people are supposed to get their medical marijuana, local officials are on their own designing local regulations. "It's been a struggle. This was just so unclear in state law," said Jane Riley, a planner with the Sonoma County Permit Resource and Planning Department. "With things like granny units, state law is very specific." Sonoma County gave preliminary approval three weeks ago to an ordinance allowing for dispensaries to be set up in urban areas of the unincorporated county. The ordinance, which goes before supervisors March 20 for final approval, would require dispensaries to obtain a use permit to operate. The final language in the ordinance is currently being fine-tuned, but supervisors have said they do not want on-site consumption and that operations should be restricted to beyond 1,000 feet of a school ground. Under the proposed Sebastopol ordinance, only one dispensary would be permitted during the first year the ordinance is enacted. Another would be allowed in the second year. The number of dispensaries would be capped at two. "We are putting it through the standard public hearing process," said Kenyon Webster, a city planner in Sebastopol. "We see this as a sensitive land use that needs careful review." Webster cited potential adverse effects, such as parking and traffic problems as well as the potential for criminal activity. Criminal activity is the element that upsets neighbors and the reason cities struggle to find locations. In November, two men carrying guns and wearing ski masks forced their way into a Sebastopol home, bound the couple living there and left with marijuana plants intended for medical use. In April, a 31-year-old Santa Rosa man was shot and killed in his Wheeler Street home. Police believe the shooter was there to take the victim's marijuana, kept for medical reasons. Such examples have cities throughout the county moving carefully as they try to determine just where to allow marijuana to be sold. "There are significant legal issues between what the voters of California envision and the federal government," said Webster. Unlike under the county ordinance, on-site consumption would be allowed in Sebastopol. Legal experts say that inconsistencies such as these are a direct result of a lack of direction from the state. Santa Rosa City Attorney Brien Farrell said it's taken many years to make sense of Proposition 215 and SB 420, subsequent state legislation that created a voluntary medical marijuana ID program that was supposed to clear up ambiguities in the original proposition. Law still 'getting worked out' "There's a clear desire for consistency and clarity and an interpretation of what rules apply," Farrell said. "What is the law in California? That is still getting worked out these many years later." Santa Rosa got its medical marijuana ordinance in November 2005, just seven months after adopting a ban to gain control of unregulated dispensaries, including one on Sonoma Avenue near Juilliard Park. Nowhere has the conflict between federal and state marijuana laws become more evident than in the county courtrooms, where some law enforcement officials are refusing to return confiscated medical marijuana. On Thursday, Deputy Sonoma County Counsel Anne Keck, representing the Sheriff's Department, was handed a setback in her effort to avoid returning 25 pounds of marijuana taken from the home of an employee of Marvin's Garden, a medical marijuana cooperative in Guerneville. Superior Court Judge Raima Ballinger rejected Keck's request for lengthy civil discovery that would allow the Sheriff's Department to verify the legitimacy of Marvin's Garden, as well as the employee, Kenneth Wilson. "We don't think that returning this property is legal," said Keck, adding that it was not clear if the marijuana was being held by "a lawful person." Judge cites court's role Ballinger made it clear to Keck that it was up to the court to decide whether the marijuana should be returned and that the job of the Sheriff's Department was to act as custodian of the confiscated property. In a similar case, Judge Lawrence Antolini has ordered the Santa Rosa Police Department to return 18 pounds of medical marijuana to Shashon Jenkins, 26. Jenkins was arrested in October but the District Attorney's Office decided not to file charges after Jenkins provided evidence that he was a medical marijuana user and a provider for other patients. In both cases, law enforcement officials argue that returning the marijuana would put them in jeopardy of violating federal laws that make marijuana illegal, regardless of whether it is being used for medicinal purposes. But William Panzer, an Oakland-based attorney who co-wrote Proposition 215, said that argument is a smoke screen. Panzer, who represents Marvin's Garden, said it's a question of jurisdiction. "If you're in federal court, federal law applies. If you're in state court, state law applies," said Panzer. "Law enforcement doesn't like ( Proposition 215 ) and they don't want to follow it." Lack of federal clarity Sheriff Cogbill said it's not that simple. He wants more clarification from both the Supreme Court and Congress. Cogbill said the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said medical use of marijuana was still illegal under existing federal laws fell short of declaring such laws as Proposition 215 illegal. "What it does is put law enforcement and criminal justice in a quandary," Cogbill said. "If it has a medical use, then the federal government needs to recognize that and schedule it as one of those drugs that has a medical purpose." The quasi-legitimacy of marijuana use has led to a lack of oversight and regulation of its use as a medicine, Cogbill said."If we don't have tighter controls on it, it's going to get out of hand," said Cogbill. "Those cannabis clubs have to get their pot from someplace. Are we now allowing organized crime to have a foothold in our community?" The challenges are significant, but they are the natural result of trying to resolve the law and community needs, said one medical marijuana provider. John Sugg of the Caregiver Compassion Center in Santa Rosa said city and county ordinances regulating marijuana dispensaries are a sign that marijuana laws are being taken seriously. "Sure, it's been 10 years since the law passed, but the ( Santa Rosa ) ordinance demonstrates that the whole thing is maturing," he said.















brought to you by... http://www.ezdetox.com/ where you can find help in how to pass a drug test

US MA: High School Drug Policy Still Subject For Debate

HIGH SCHOOL DRUG POLICY STILL SUBJECT FOR DEBATE The Martha's Vineyard Regional High School district committee was on the receiving end of some tough questions on Monday night - all of them centered on drugs at the high school. What would happen if a police dog found drugs in a student's locker? Would it automatically become a police matter? What if one student put drugs in another student's locker - or in a teacher's things? And what about student rights? The school committee is considering a new policy that would allow the regional high school principal to use state police dogs to search school buildings and parking lots for drugs. The proposed policy has stirred a debate in the school as well as the community. Before voting on the policy, which it plans to do in the coming weeks, the high school committee invited members of the public to voice their opinions at the Monday night meeting. State police Lieut. Robert Moore also attended the session. Turnout was slim, but the views were wide-ranging. "I think our goal is to say to the larger community that we are doing everything we can to keep our school environment drug free," said Vineyard schools superintendent Dr. James H. Weiss. Mr. Weiss and principal Margaret ( Peg ) Regan have said that canine searches are the most effective way to get drugs out of the school. Mrs. Regan has said that if the policy is adopted, she will give students two or three weeks' notice of the first drug search and the assurance that more searches will follow. The plan, Mrs. Regan said, will not stop students from doing drugs, but it will ensure that drugs are not in school. "We're not looking to arrest anybody - we're looking to have a drug-free zone at our school," Mrs. Regan said. "My goal is to have no drugs in the school when the dogs come." She also said: "We do have drugs here. If you want them, you can get them." Mrs. Regan said she sees cars driven by people in their early 20s, idling on the periphery of campus at the end of the school day. "They're here to sell drugs," she said. "So we call the police and put no trespassing orders on them." According to police, the regional high school is the epicenter of drug activity during the off-season on the Vineyard, Mrs. Regan said. She said students have told her it is easy to procure drugs at school. Oak Bluffs school committee member David Morris, who grew up on the Island, recalled that drugs and alcohol have always had a strong presence at the school. "I can't think of a reason why we wouldn't make it harder to bring drugs in school," Mr. Morris said. "You've got to be one step ahead of them and make it harder." A 2005 survey of Island high school students showed that over half the students had smoked marijuana - higher than the number who had smoked cigarettes - and roughly 40 per cent had smoked marijuana in the last 30 days. "Perhaps a lot of us adults are in denial," committee member Leslie Baynes of Edgartown said. "As a society, on the Vineyard, we're infested with drugs and I don't know what the answer is." Some argued that drug dogs are the wrong approach to solving the problem. "I'm not for search and seizure - I think it's a real invasion of personal rights," committee member Roxanne Ackerman of Aquinnah said. "I think it's the wrong message to send our kids." Former Oak Bluffs school committee member Timothy Dobel agreed. "I am appalled by what is going on in the area of civil liberties in our country right now," Mr. Dobel said. "Do we really really have to bring dogs in our schools?" Three regional high school students also expressed views at the discussion on Monday. "A majority would be against it," said junior Ben Williams, who attends the high school committee meetings with fellow junior Rachel Schubert to give student reports. "I've heard it from many students and many teachers that it isn't necessary." Student body president Marguerite Cogliano said that although that may be the popular view at school, the searches are in students' best interest. "There obviously are drugs at our school and I don't think high school is the place for drugs," Ms. Cogliano said. She said many students appear confused about the proposed policy and the administration's goals. Mr. Weiss said that in the last school system he worked in, there were virtually no drug finds; he said canine searches seemed to rid the school of illegal substances. Three to five students are caught each year for drug-related offenses at the regional high school, assistant principal Stephen Nixon said. "But are we going to treat the entire school like criminals for those three to five kids?" asked committee member Judy O'Donoghue of Oak Bluffs. She suggested the school use preventative programs instead. Mrs. Regan responded that the students who are caught are never the dealers. "They are the small fries," she said, adding: "I do see our students as victims of much larger dealers." Committee member John Bacheller of Tisbury said preventative programs have been around for years, but drugs still have a presence at the high school. "What is the alternative that's actually going to work?" he asked. Ms. Schubert said discussion about the drug dogs have proved to be a distraction in school, but assistant principal Anne Lemenager said she is happy with the debate the issue has generated among students and in classrooms.













brought to you by... http://www.ezdetox.com/ where you can find help in pass a drug test