Noting the 75th Anniversary of the Repeal of Prohibition

I don't often agree with the sentiments of Republican speeches made during special orders in the House of Representatives, but I agree whole heartedly with Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) speaking on Dec. 4, 2007 on the 75th anniversary of the repeal of alcohol prohibition.

THE 75TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE END OF PROHIBITION

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) is recognized for 5
minutes.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Madam Speaker, December 5, 1933, December 5,
2007. So, tomorrow we mark the 75th anniversary of something, and
most people will just pass it by and not be aware that tomorrow
marks the end of America's great and noble experiment. It is the
75th anniversary of the end of the national prohibition of alcoholic
beverages.

With the repeal of prohibition in 1933, that was 75 years ago
tomorrow, the United States ended a social planning policy that
created organized crime in America, crowded our jails with
nonviolent prisoners, corrupted our police, increased urban
violence, and destroyed the lives of thousands of victims of
unadulterated and poisoned substances, substances which if they were
permitted would have been subject to normal market protections of
fraud and quality standards. However, during prohibition, these
substances which were consumed by the American people often poisoned
them and caused them to lose their lives.

Philosopher Santayana told us that those who cannot learn from
history are doomed to repeat it. Have we in Washington learned the
lesson of prohibition that ended 75 years ago?

Why did America reject the prohibition of alcoholic beverages?
Well, when government attempts to control the peaceful behavior of
its citizens, it often sets in motion forces that are more dangerous
than the social evil that they are trying to control. Today's war on
drugs is perhaps an example.

The war on drugs has resulted in a multimillion dollar network
of violent organized crime. The war on drugs has created the deaths
by drive-by shootings and turf wars among gangs in our cities. The
war on drugs has overcrowded our prisons. More than half of Federal
prison space is occupied by nonviolent drug users. The war on drugs
has corrupted our police and crowded our courts. We apparently did
not learn the lesson of the prohibition of alcoholic beverages.

Today, on the campaign trail we hear new calls for prohibitions on
cigarettes, on fatty foods, and even more money should be spent,
yes, on the war on drugs.

But, as we mark the 75th anniversary of the repeal of prohibition,
let us have the courage to learn from the mistakes of the past.
Perhaps it would be better for us to focus our energies not on the
supply side of drugs just as they were doing with the supply side of
alcohol, but instead to focus our efforts on trying to help those
people who are addicted to drugs; perhaps to try to help our young
people, deter our young people from getting involved in drugs;
perhaps to take a whole new approach on this, rather than this
monstrous war on drugs that has done nothing but create havoc in our
inner cities, making so many young people who have been arrested and
their lives destroyed because they will never be able to get a
decent job after one arrest being a teenager.

So many people have been hurt by the war on drugs; yet we keep it
because we want to supposedly help people. Well, I would suggest
that this 75th anniversary of the repeal of prohibition, which was
the greatest failure of American social planning in the history of
our country, let us try to commit ourselves to help ensure that our
young people are dissuaded and deterred from the use of narcotics.

Let us work with those who are, indeed, addicted to narcotics and
help them free themselves from this habit. But let's end this notion
that we can try to control the use of narcotics in our country by
simply controlling the supply. Simply controlling the supply will
not work. We've got to look at the demand side, try to treat people
humanely, and use the limited resources that we have in a much more
constructive way, rather than just creating more police who are
committed to drugs and interdiction and all the rest of the major
expenses, court expenses and others that go into a war on drugs
rather than an attempt to help people who are susceptible to the use
of drugs.

I call the attention of my fellow colleagues to this the 75th
anniversary of the repeal of the prohibition of alcoholic beverages.
(CR-H14135; Dec 4, 2007)

"We couldn't get much higher"

Here's a cute musical satire of our culture's current pharmaceutical fascination, "We couldn't get much higher."

Sept. 19, Anniversary of death of President Garfield

Today, The New York Times historical front page is from Sept. 20, 1881, the day after President James Garfield succumbed to the gun shot wounds inflicted on July 2, 1881, by an attorney who failed to get patronage job.

It caused me to reflect that the Presidents elected in 2o year intervals have died in office or been grievously wounded in gunshots.

1840 -- William Henry Harrison, died
1860 -- Abraham Lincoln, assassinated in second term
1880 -- James Garfield, assassinated
1900 -- William McKinley, assassinated
1920 -- Warren Harding, died in office
1940 -- Franklin Roosevelt, died in office
1960 -- John F. Kennedy, assassinated
1980 -- Ronald Reagan, survived attempted assassination

Let us pray that President Bush, who was elected in 2000, remains healthy and the Secret Service safely protects him. It would be a terrible tragedy if he were killed, by an act of violence, or a bicycle mishap, or anything else. His death in office would be terribly destabilizing -- whether he were succeeded by Vice President Dick Cheney or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. If through a terrorist act the President and Vice President were both killed, given the political suspicion and mistrust that pervades the nation, many are likely to charge that the act was motivated to bring a Democrat to the White House.

The crime would be just terrible for the nation.

Mental Illness -- the tension between diagnosis and treatment

Sally Satel has a very illuminating, non-polemical op-ed in The New York Times today.

Taking off on the revision of the DSM by a DSM-V due to come out in five years, she notes that we still know very little about the causes of mental illness.

She points out that a lot of treatment is directed at the symptom rather than an certain underlying condition.

If you think about the role of mental illness in our society -- and who does not? -- this is a very thought provoking little essay.

Food Safety

Consumers Union is organizing support for increased federal action to protect food and consumer product safety.

Here's the letter I sent to my Representative in Congress and my two Senators:

My family eats a lot of seafood because it is healthy, supposedly. To my dismay, I learned today that China is the leading supplier of imported seafood to the US, supplying 16 percent of ALL the fish we eat.

Given the profound gaps in Chinese product and food safety laws and programs, this is a serious danger to me and my family.

Then I learned that FDA inspects only 2 percent of seafood imports and rejects about 1 in 10 shipments.

This is unbelievable! Food production hazards and inadequate inspection are imperiling my family! Such a failure rate demands correction. This seafood rejection rate and the enormous number of recalls of food, toys and other products, demonstrate we need comprehensive reform of our food and consumer product safety programs.

I want to be sure that the food I eat and the products I use are safe. Recalls announced after hazardous goods are in the market and being consumed are too little and too late.

Congress MUST increase the resources of federal agencies that police the safety of the nation's products and food supply. They must conduct more frequent inspections. They MUST impose meaningful penalties for safety violations.

Producers, importers, distributors, and retailers MUST be accountable for the products they import and sell in the United States. We should require pre-shipment inspections and testing, and require certification and traceability for ALL food, products, and their components. The government agencies must have clear recall authority for contaminated food.

We need all these steps to prevent unsafe products from entering our marketplace and our homes. We must effectively protect American consumers at the end of a global production system. When that protection system is breached, we must alert consumers promptly and effectively! Safety in these matters is not an option!

The current Federal food and consumer product safety system is not working! Congress must enact substantial changes in these laws and programs to keep our families safe.

Tags: food safety, imported food, imported seafood, China, product safety, Consumers Union