Random drug testing in schools

Big Brother came calling on public schools Tuesday, waving the incentive that so often makes educators fall in line: taxpayer money.

In a Las Vegas speech to school officials from 18 states, Bertha Madras, the Bush administration’s deputy drug czar, asked her audience to consider imposing random drug tests on all students who participate in extracurricular activities — and purging from teams and clubs the kids who are found to have used illegal substances.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that random drug tests on high school students pass constitutional muster, the federal government has handed out some $35 million in grants to pay for the snooping. Ms. Madras urged school officials to apply by May 8 for a share of $1.6 million available to schools this year.

“The goal is to deal with this as a public health problem and not a policing problem,” Ms. Madras said. “And above all, to prevent.”

Yes, millions of American high school students experiment with illegal drugs. But very few abuse drugs to the point that teachers, school administrators and coaches notice as much on a day-to-day basis. Intervening in the lives of these students is complicated and time-consuming, requiring documentation, counseling, parent conferences and even locker searches. It’s a lot of work with little recourse for the typical public school student, who can’t be expelled for recreational, off-campus drug use.

So some corners of the educational establishment have embraced random testing on those students with enough drive, competitiveness and energy to join teams and clubs that keep them on campus longer — those teens who have something to lose. Even better, the federal government usually picks up the tab.

It’s a costly and grossly unfair approach. When teachers and principals should be on the lookout for the warning signs of drug abuse and managing their suspicions on a case-by-case basis, millions of taxpayer dollars are wasted every year forcing “A” students and well-behaved jocks to pee in a cup so they can continue pursuing activities they love.

And if one of those students, regardless of their accomplishments, is found to have smoked a joint — even if the experience led to a vow to abstain from future drug use — school officials make an example of her and crush her dreams in the process.

The Supreme Court’s ruling, on a 5-4 vote, officially expanded the mission of schools beyond education to include “preventing, deterring, and detecting drug use,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the majority. Instead of upholding the idea that parents are responsible for providing their children with guidance in life, the court held that this “legitimate” aim outweighs students’ right to privacy.

The hypocrisy inherent in random drug testing is astounding. Most educators argue that extracurricular activities themselves are the most effective way to keep kids off illegal drugs, yet random testing scares some kids away from sports and clubs. And how many educators who came of age in the ’60s and ’70s, protesting government and police powers and using illegal drugs along the way, now willfully infringe the Fourth Amendment rights of today’s teens?

Random drug testing, like most other prevention programs that emphasize the stick over the carrot, has done nothing to curb illegal drug use. If anything, it has convinced millions of high school students that it’s perfectly acceptable to submit to government intrusion when you know you’ve done nothing wrong. When we willingly give up our constitutional rights, the powers that be inevitably try to take more.

Thankfully, the Clark County School District does not impose random drug testing on its students. District leaders should refuse Ms. Madras’ invitation.