Our Congressional Candidates on the Opioid Epidemic
The death toll of the opioid epidemic is rising at an alarming rate on the Eastern Shore. In 2017, a total of 234 died of opioid overdoses in the nine counties, involving people of all races and age groups. Preliminary data from the Maryland Department of Health indicate that Cecil, Queen Anne’s, Somerset, Wicomico and Worcester counties are experiencing even higher numbers of overdose deaths in 2018—mostly due to fentanyl use.
According to the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, 96 percent of people with drug addiction began using before the age of 18. In 2017 Talbot County pioneered a community-wide “Talbot Goes Purple” drug awareness campaign designed to steer youth away from opioid addiction. This year several other counties, including Caroline, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne’s and Somerset, are conducting similar campaigns.
Experts say that while no single policy will bring the epidemic to a rapid end, the nation especially needs to massively increase the capacity of effective treatment programs. The US Surgeon General reported in 2016 that only about 10 percent of people seeking specialty care for drug use disorders were able to obtain the care they needed—and the need is much greater now.
In a recent taxpayer-funded mailing, Representative Andy Harris touted his vote to provide more than $1 billion in additional funds to combat the epidemic in the current fiscal year. Experts say, however, that the size of the problem requires a much larger effort. Estimates are that tens of billions of dollars per year will be required over a sustained period of time for on-demand programs that help today’s addicts recover and for mental health programs to help prevent new addictions. For comparison, the federal budget for HIV is $32 billion/year.
Candidate Jesse Colvin, Harris’s opponent, appears to appreciate the scope of the problem. Responding to a questionnaire published in the Baltimore Sun, he wrote, “we must recognize that addiction is a public health issue and we must, therefore, integrate treatment into the rest of health care. The federal government’s main role in this crisis is funding, [especially] Medicaid, which covers 40% of non-elderly adults who are addicted to opioids. And congressional candidates need to be honest: the work will cost a great deal of money. But, in the final analysis, it’s an investment in our families and our communities – and one that is worth making.”
In his answer to the same questionnaire, Representative Harris vaguely replied, “The federal government has to partner with state and local governments, as well as communities, to be sure that they have the tools to deal with addiction treatment.” At the same time, he has consistently supported efforts to cut Medicaid spending.
Representative Harris also cited the need to close our borders to narcotic drug trafficking, echoing the Trump Administration’s emphasis on law enforcement approaches to the problem. Given that most fentanyl arrives through the mail from China, experts are skeptical that enhancing border security can do much to improve the opioid crisis in the short term. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse argues that an overemphasis on supply reduction through law enforcement has not proven to be nearly as effective as demand reduction efforts that focus on prevention and treatment. Voters will have to decide which approach will best help solve the crisis.
Common Sense for the Eastern Shore
