After 44 years of attending the "benighted building" I saw something else.
While it does feel very good to kick sand in the face of the Drug Policy Alliance and the incessant caterwauling of all those entitled "non profits" who flooded the few public hearings and submitted testimony made it clear THEY hated HB 4002, other than it backing six inches off Measure 110 it has little to say for it.
Drug Court, when it worked, did so because it had the ability to THREATEN the loss of gun rights, hunting rights, even the right to serve on a jury (not that many covet such a right). But in their zeal to package up ANYTHING in response to overwhelming public revulsion at the scam they had been sold just 4 years ago with Measure 110, HB 4002 does VERY little.
No fines, or any kind of financial penalties allowed...ever. Not that the state made much money, but the whole idea of peeling someone off addiction is to force them to make better decisions, not to make NO decisions. It's an "unclassified misdemeanor" which is the way the state signals judges, DAs, cops, everyone just how serious the charge is...not very. At most a minor shoplifting charge.
What follows is dull but critical. It is the missive the Association of Oregon Counties sent to all 36 elected Sheriffs, DAs, and County Commissioners, keeping in mind that for all their strum and drang it is actually the COUNTIES that finance and fund non-felony criminal enforcement (the counties pay for the sheriffs, jails, and all the DA's costs EXCEPT the salary of the elected DA)
There are THREE levels of inaction built into HB 4002 to avoid inconveniencing fentanyl addicts; a whole new made up one that doesn't involve cops they have called "deflection," then two existing "off ramps" (new buzzwords of the way) diversion, and conditional discharge. The last two were used for decades as a way to avoid ever finalizing a conviction as part of drug court, but always lurking was the possibility that if the addict kept using, kept failing to show, that the court could eventually pull the trigger and create some REAL consequences (not state prison or even jail longer than 30 days) but some seriously disruptive intervention.
But while the language is bureaucratese at its worst, the intent of what follows is clear to cops and DAs; "back off and don't do anything."
We will apply for funding, if needed, to the ‘Improving People’s Access to Community-based Treatment, Supports and Services’ (IMPACTS) Grant Review Committee. We also agree to participate in the IMPACTS data collection and review process. If barriers other than funding prevent programs from being stood up, we will work in partnership with the legislature and the IMPACTS Grant Review Committee to identify solutions by September 1, 2024. As soon as funding is received, we will work to immediately stand-up programs in our communities. Once developed, funded, and stood up, our law enforcement partners commit to divert individuals whom are facing a PCS-U charge based off objective evidence-based national standards. Additionally, our District Attorney will divert all successful participants away from the criminal justice system and not pursue the PCS-U charge.
(note - a PCS-U means a charge of Possession of Controlled Substance, unclassified misdemeanor).
Thank you Mr. Eager for your relentless pursuing of investigative journalism, a lost art today and not popular in many social circles.
I can't share in your enthusiasm for the passage of 4002 however. I see it as far too little and implementation as too far down the road. When implemented I don't expect to see any change in hospitalizations or deaths.
Through my rose colored glasses I was hoping for a complete reversal of 110. Hard stop. I guess there's too many pols taking Soros money to expect that to have happened.
First Great job on keeping this on the front burner. I am more in accordance with Mr. Marquis evaluation but a baby step is better than none. I believe, the action on this from the legislature was due to their fear of the un-enlighted masses picking up their torches and pitchforks and heading for their figurative castle or, God forbid, voting republican. Keep up the pressure things just might get better
The "re-criminalization" has so many off-ramps, diversions, probations, and "treatment" facilities that either don't exist or lacks professionals available to run them, or are in the state-funded grip of "harm reduction," that we might be forgiven for some measure of cynicism.
And isn't it interesting that Big Media is trumpeting the "compromises" that led to the final mishmash bill--in a state run, top to bottom, by a party/progressdive machine that has the numbers to not give a fig about "compromise" on just about any other bill. The same machine that turned remaining state forests into firetraps, despite a trucker-protest around the state capitol (which looks like what it is: an impervious concrete bunker). All to satisfy the climate-change/ecology fanatics.
One thing we can agree with: Jeff Eager is doing yeoman work in political journalism and commentary. Keep sluggin'"...
a bit of an aside, I heard a rumor that the drug policy alliance is now supporting to potential DAs, Matthew Ellis in Hood River County and Kara Davis in Wasco County. if this is true they are not giving up. we must keep fighting until the Soros money goes elsewhere.
Thanks for your level headed assessments of our off balanced state. Your writing is a great help as I navigate discussions with peers & friends, and in writing elected “representatives.” (Who are they representing?)
I hope you are right.
After 44 years of attending the "benighted building" I saw something else.
While it does feel very good to kick sand in the face of the Drug Policy Alliance and the incessant caterwauling of all those entitled "non profits" who flooded the few public hearings and submitted testimony made it clear THEY hated HB 4002, other than it backing six inches off Measure 110 it has little to say for it.
Drug Court, when it worked, did so because it had the ability to THREATEN the loss of gun rights, hunting rights, even the right to serve on a jury (not that many covet such a right). But in their zeal to package up ANYTHING in response to overwhelming public revulsion at the scam they had been sold just 4 years ago with Measure 110, HB 4002 does VERY little.
No fines, or any kind of financial penalties allowed...ever. Not that the state made much money, but the whole idea of peeling someone off addiction is to force them to make better decisions, not to make NO decisions. It's an "unclassified misdemeanor" which is the way the state signals judges, DAs, cops, everyone just how serious the charge is...not very. At most a minor shoplifting charge.
What follows is dull but critical. It is the missive the Association of Oregon Counties sent to all 36 elected Sheriffs, DAs, and County Commissioners, keeping in mind that for all their strum and drang it is actually the COUNTIES that finance and fund non-felony criminal enforcement (the counties pay for the sheriffs, jails, and all the DA's costs EXCEPT the salary of the elected DA)
There are THREE levels of inaction built into HB 4002 to avoid inconveniencing fentanyl addicts; a whole new made up one that doesn't involve cops they have called "deflection," then two existing "off ramps" (new buzzwords of the way) diversion, and conditional discharge. The last two were used for decades as a way to avoid ever finalizing a conviction as part of drug court, but always lurking was the possibility that if the addict kept using, kept failing to show, that the court could eventually pull the trigger and create some REAL consequences (not state prison or even jail longer than 30 days) but some seriously disruptive intervention.
But while the language is bureaucratese at its worst, the intent of what follows is clear to cops and DAs; "back off and don't do anything."
We will apply for funding, if needed, to the ‘Improving People’s Access to Community-based Treatment, Supports and Services’ (IMPACTS) Grant Review Committee. We also agree to participate in the IMPACTS data collection and review process. If barriers other than funding prevent programs from being stood up, we will work in partnership with the legislature and the IMPACTS Grant Review Committee to identify solutions by September 1, 2024. As soon as funding is received, we will work to immediately stand-up programs in our communities. Once developed, funded, and stood up, our law enforcement partners commit to divert individuals whom are facing a PCS-U charge based off objective evidence-based national standards. Additionally, our District Attorney will divert all successful participants away from the criminal justice system and not pursue the PCS-U charge.
(note - a PCS-U means a charge of Possession of Controlled Substance, unclassified misdemeanor).
Thank you Mr. Eager for your relentless pursuing of investigative journalism, a lost art today and not popular in many social circles.
I can't share in your enthusiasm for the passage of 4002 however. I see it as far too little and implementation as too far down the road. When implemented I don't expect to see any change in hospitalizations or deaths.
Through my rose colored glasses I was hoping for a complete reversal of 110. Hard stop. I guess there's too many pols taking Soros money to expect that to have happened.
good work, Jeff!
not to pick any nits, but I haven't heard the fat lady sing yet. no rest for the wicked, they are still out there.
First Great job on keeping this on the front burner. I am more in accordance with Mr. Marquis evaluation but a baby step is better than none. I believe, the action on this from the legislature was due to their fear of the un-enlighted masses picking up their torches and pitchforks and heading for their figurative castle or, God forbid, voting republican. Keep up the pressure things just might get better
We won...kinda.
The "re-criminalization" has so many off-ramps, diversions, probations, and "treatment" facilities that either don't exist or lacks professionals available to run them, or are in the state-funded grip of "harm reduction," that we might be forgiven for some measure of cynicism.
And isn't it interesting that Big Media is trumpeting the "compromises" that led to the final mishmash bill--in a state run, top to bottom, by a party/progressdive machine that has the numbers to not give a fig about "compromise" on just about any other bill. The same machine that turned remaining state forests into firetraps, despite a trucker-protest around the state capitol (which looks like what it is: an impervious concrete bunker). All to satisfy the climate-change/ecology fanatics.
One thing we can agree with: Jeff Eager is doing yeoman work in political journalism and commentary. Keep sluggin'"...
You give us Conservative Oregonians hope. Keep doing the right thing! Neil
Thank you for including all of us "normals," in taking the win. So good to point out such wins are still possible in this state.
a bit of an aside, I heard a rumor that the drug policy alliance is now supporting to potential DAs, Matthew Ellis in Hood River County and Kara Davis in Wasco County. if this is true they are not giving up. we must keep fighting until the Soros money goes elsewhere.
Now let’s elect DA’s who will charge drug dealers whose clients die from overdoses with murder
Thanks for your level headed assessments of our off balanced state. Your writing is a great help as I navigate discussions with peers & friends, and in writing elected “representatives.” (Who are they representing?)
if you face south you have a natural lean to the left. :o(