Just say nothing

A pernicious federal bill would make free speech the latest casualty in our phony war on drugs

Warning: the editorial you are about to read would be illegal if Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) had their way.

A little more than a month ago, Feinstein and Hatch unveiled the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 1999. Now, methamphetamine is very bad stuff indeed, and certainly no one wants it to proliferate. But the bill contains a frightening assault on the First Amendment -- a provision that would make it illegal for "any communications facility" (such as this newspaper, or your Web site) to "post, publicize, transmit, publish, link to, broadcast, or otherwise advertise" any sort of "drug paraphernalia" or "controlled substances." Note that this goes way beyond methamphetamine, and could even apply to information designed to help people seeking marijuana for medical purposes. And the term "advertise" is interesting in this context: the bill bans anything that would "directly or indirectly advertise" drugs. What does it mean to "indirectly advertise"? Who knows? As the American Civil Liberties Union puts it, "There is every reason to fear that the term 'indirectly advertise' includes mere speech about drugs or drug paraphernalia."

This ludicrous legislation runs up against a vital First Amendment principle: that though the government may outlaw certain activities, such as the use of some drugs, it may not outlaw speech even if such speech advocates those activities. Last year, for instance, the courts backed organizers of the annual pot rally on Boston Common, citing the free-speech rights of the pro-marijuana forces (see "The Second Annual Muzzle Awards," News and Features, July 2). Feinstein and Hatch refuse to recognize that right, which makes you wonder what other parts of the Constitution they find inconvenient.

Unfortunately, their Just Say Nothing campaign has received virtually no media coverage other than a piece published on Wired magazine's Web site in early August, aptly headed REEFER MADNESS HITS CONGRESS. This inattention exists despite press releases issued by both Feinstein and Hatch proudly trumpeting their legislation. "The bill's on the fast track. It will probably pass the Senate quickly and easily. How they're going to enforce it, God only knows," says Rachel King, the ACLU's Washington-based legislative counsel.

In the interests of demonstrating exactly how dangerous this bill is, here are a few links the Phoenix would be banned even from mentioning -- upon pain of a fine and three years in prison -- if it becomes law. Clip and save: merely possessing this editorial would not be outlawed. At least until that particular loophole is closed, that is.

The Web site http://www.smoketoys.com sells an assortment of bongs and water pipes -- "intended for tobacco smoking only by persons over the age of 18," but no doubt adaptable to other uses as well.

A video on cultivating your own weed, Growing Sinsemilla Marijuana, is available for purchase at http://www.askhans.com.

Some how-to information on purifying LSD so that it's just as good as the stuff Timothy Leary used to drop can be found at http://www.bassdove.demon.co.uk/lsdpurity.htm. The "uk" means the site is based in Britain -- beyond the reach of US law. Any US site that publishes the address or links to it, though, would have Senators Feinstein and Hatch to answer to.

The Phoenix does not advocate the use of illegal drugs, but if we or any medium in the United States were banned from leading people to drug information, it would be wrong. The ACLU's King goes so far as to suggest that, under the proposed legislation, information about the medical uses of marijuana would be illegal under federal law even in states that have approved its use -- such as Feinstein's California. That's grotesque. Of course, harder drugs raise harder questions. The late poet Allen Ginsberg, to name just one LSD user, spoke eloquently about the effect of hallucinogens in expanding consciousness and spirituality. On the other hand, it's not likely that anyone has anything good to say about a drug as dangerous as methamphetamine. But that's not the point. The government can outlaw drugs. But it can't outlaw speech about drugs without violating the Constitution.

Call Senator Feinstein at her Washington office, (202) 224-3841, and let her know what you think about her bill. Or e-mail her at senator@feinstein.senate.gov. (Don't contact Hatch; it will only encourage him.) And contact Massachusetts's senators, Ted Kennedy (202-224-4543; senator@kennedy.senate.gov) and John Kerry (202-224-2742; john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov). Let them know that this isn't the motherhood-and-apple-pie legislation its title would suggest.

For four decades now, our government has been fighting a counterproductive war on drugs. As in any war, free speech is one of the first casualties. Don't let Feinstein and Hatch get away with this frontal assault on our rights.

What do you think? Send an e-mail to letters@phx.com.