Six days a week, Jeffrey Bilek battles morning traffic from Lynnwood to Seattle for a single sip of salvation: 80 milligrams of methadone in a plastic cup. But beginning this week, the round trip that used to take 90 minutes takes less than an hour. Yesterday, Bilek drank his dose not at a downtown Seattle building, as usual, but in a Winnebago Adventurer parked in North Seattle. "I'm thrilled about it," said Bilek, a recovering heroin addict who has been on methadone for a year. "Not only is it more convenient for me, but it helps serve more people in the community."

http://www.seattle-pi.com/local/meth14.shtml

I'm just thrilled about my tax dollars going to provide door to door delivery of methadone, aren't you? The article goes on to explain how it saves the addict the "stigma" of having to go to the clinic. It also explains how this enables treatment to be provided without the neighbors being able to object, as they would if you established a conventional clinic. I think they can probably cut the delivery service and save the 2% they're going to lose from the MVET. We don't pay for milk to be delivered to WIC moms.

-- zowie (zowie@hotmail.com), October 14, 1999

Answers

I'm curious zowie, did you fail to read the part of the article that explains how the service is being provided by a private firm and funded by a federal grant?

So basically, this has NOTHING to do with 695. It wouldn't have stopped it from taking place in the past, and won't stop it in the future. Your suggestion that they could cut this program and save some of the money lost to 695 is wrong. None of the funding comes from the state or local level. Sorry.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), October 14, 1999.

The basic service is funded out of the public health budget, some of which comes from MVET. The federal grant is our tax money too. If we weren't using it for this, it'd be available to use for something else. Besides, are you saying that the federal government wasting our money is better than the state wasting our money? There's a REAL argument for Big Government!!!

-- zowie (zowie@hotmail.com), October 14, 1999.

The basic service may be provided by the Seattle/King County Public Health department, but the door to door delivery service (the part that you mentioned you were thrilled about) is paid for by federal dollars.

Since you did say "I think they can probably cut the delivery service and save the 2% they're going to lose from the MVET." I kind of assumed that your entire point was that by passing 695, the door to door service could be cut to save money. My point was that the service receives a different funding source entirely by the only government not affected by 695. I suppose we could debate the desirability of such a program, but given the above facts, I doubt that this forum is the proper place.

Basically it's like bringing up how the federal government still spends millions of dollars stockpiling helium for blimps. It may be a waste of money, but 695 certainly won't change that particular program.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), October 14, 1999.

"My point was that the service receives a different funding source entirely by the only government not affected by 695. " And someone spent my taxes to hire someone to apply for the grant. Ever done a grant application?

-- zowie (zowie@hotmail.com), October 14, 1999.