In regard to Kristin Wieben’s March 4 column on Madison’s seemingly racist anti-loitering ordinance: U.S. government statistics reveal the drug war is being waged in a racist manner throughout the nation. Blacks and whites use drugs at roughly the same rates.

Although only 15 percent of the nation’s drug users are black, blacks account for 37 percent of those arrested for drug violations, over 42 percent of those in federal prisons for drug violations, and almost 60 percent of those in state prisons for drug felonies. Support for the drug war would end overnight if whites were incarcerated for drugs at the same rate as minorities.

It’s worth noting America’s drug laws were once intended as a means of disenfranchising minorities. The Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 was preceded by a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment. Opium was identified with Chinese laborers, marijuana with Mexicans and cocaine with African Americans.

Jim Crow was very much alive in the early 20th century. Racial profiling was expected. Granted, modern-day drug warriors are (hopefully) not out to incarcerate as many minorities as possible.

Nonetheless, the racist intent on the part of early drug warriors is very relevant to today’s racist outcomes. With the passage of time, the drug war has evolved into an intergenerational culture war. With members of the ’60s counterculture grown up, youth rave culture is the latest target.

Ironically, the two deadliest recreational drugs are both legal.

Alcohol poisoning kills thousands annually, more than all illegal drugs combined.

Tobacco is one of the most addictive drugs available and by far the deadliest. It’s not health outcomes that determine America’s drug laws, but rather cultural norms.

Robert Sharpe, M.P.A.

Program Officer, Drug Policy Alliance

Washington, D.C.

AB 831, a revision of AB 546, proposes to dismantle the state’s family-planning services. Once again, anti-abortion lobbyists show their true colors. They don’t care about the health and welfare of the unborn or the born, because if their bill passes, the health and welfare of low-income mothers, fathers and children will be threatened.

The bill proposes taking state and federal family-planning funds away from Planned Parenthood and any other organization that performs, refers or advocates for abortion and all-options pregnancy counseling.

Should those who cannot afford the exorbitant costs of health insurance be in jeopardy of not receiving annual screenings for breast and cervical cancers because so-called “Right to Lifers” think they are protecting life? Do young mothers not have the right to receive prenatal advice and counseling in order to ensure those children who are born are born healthy?

Furthermore, our legislators’ energy and enthusiasm should be put toward fixing the budget instead of creating more fiscal headaches for the state in years to come. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, each dollar spent on family planning services saves an estimated $3.00 that would otherwise be spent on medical care and other social services to women who, by law, would be eligible for such services if they became pregnant.

Family planning is good for the state: Wake up anti-abortionists! If AB 831 passes–and it is expected to pass the State Assembly–more state funding will be needed to fix the ghastly problems arising from a lack of affordable reproductive health care: premature births, unwanted pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases, cervical and breast cancer, etc.

The entire state should be revolting against this bill.

Lisa Rainwater van Suntum

Co-President Madison NOW

Benjamin Thompson (“An Indefensible Decision,” March 6) could not possibly be more wrong. President Bush should be applauded for his decision to raise the tariff on steel.

If the United States wants to remain a strong manufacturing nation, it is essential we take all the steps necessary to protect our domestic industries. The president’s tariff will provide the U.S. steel industry with some breathing room to rebuild itself, which is in the long-term interest of the United States.

Temporarily, the price of many domestic goods might rise, but over time the country will see an increase in manufacturing jobs and lose its growing dependence on foreign steel. The long-range benefits of the move heavily outweigh its immediate negative implications.

The president has also made sure this action is legally acceptable by being within WTO guidelines. It is unlikely the affected countries will attempt to start a trade war over the issue because the American market is too valuable. Even so, economic independence should be the primary concern in our trade policy.

Although Bush will likely face a barrage of criticism over the move, it is refreshing to see he had the courage to take such a step to aid American workers and manufacturers.

Anthony Carver

UW sophomore