I'm Waiting for My Man: President Obama
Notice those posters around town that say "AIDS is DC's Katrina"? Maybe they ought to say that Obama's AIDS policy is Bush's AIDS policy.
The poster features a concerned (discombobulated?) President George W. Bush staring from his window seat down at the landscape below. Presumably he's looking down at Hurricane Katrina, as far away from the devastation as his federal prevention efforts were from useful. The message of the poster is that President Obama runs the risk of doing nothing as a terrible disaster befalls the people who share a city with him.
President Obama has done a little worse than nothing to prevent the AIDS epidemic in the District. In May of this year, Obama put out a budget that continued the ban on using federal funding for needle-exchange programs. This, despite a campaign promise to overturn the ban, and notwithstanding the good sense and science behind the program.
At the time, White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said that Obama did not approve of the use of the budget process "to litigate divisive issues and score political points." Fair enough, though it'd be a hell of a lot easier to get clean needles and prevent HIV if he did.
AIDS czar Jeff Crowley assured Time and Obama's critics that the President was playing the long game: "The President is looking forward to working with Congress and the American people to build support for this change, and his Administration is committed to moving forward to address the federal ban on syringe exchange programs as a part of a national HIV/AIDS strategy."
Now, that's not what the White House Web site says any more (thanks, Ryan Grim). But if it's true that Obama intends to exercise the option, now would be an excellent time for that play.
Obama did nothing to get that sweet, sweet federal needle money flowing. For that we can thank the House, who voted 264-153 for the health, labor, and education bill that lifted the 21-year-old ban. And two years ago, the House lifted the extra-special restriction that prevented the District from using even local dollars to fund needle-exchange programs.
Squaresville House Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) would like to change all that, with an amendment that would prevent a needle-exchange program center from operating within 1,000 feet of anywhere a child has ever been. As you've read in the Post, that restriction would effectively regulate needle-exchange programs out of existence. Mike DeBonis says the District should start handing out needles at Nationals Park and outside congressional office buildings.
Better would be for Obama to do what he said he'd do in the first place. First—and not that he doesn't have a ton of shit to deal with already—but the Obama administration has yet to articulate a strong, central policy for preventing the transmission of HIV/AIDS in the U.S. Circumcision promotion's all the rage . . . OK, it's just as controversial as needle exchange and does nothing to target the most at-risk populations in the U.S. (The research on circumcision promotion was conducted in Africa and largely among heterosexuals, as Dana Goldstein reports.) Which isn't to say that circumcision promotion isn't worthwhile, but what we do know is that needle-exchange programs are proven to reduce the transmission of HIV and other diseases, they don't actually encourage drug use, and they bring intravenous drug users into regular contact with friendly, helpful, drug-free neighborhood clinicians.
Once upon a time—back when he was campaigning—President Obama had his own reasons for supporting the repeal of the federal ban. There is still time for him to stand up for those reasons, and there's definitely need for it: The Senate version of the bill could wind up with the same sort of nullification amendment tacked on. Or the House amendment could survive in the final legislation.
And since an amendment-enabled bill would make the situation worse—rewinding what progress the District has made since the ban on using local funds was lifted two years ago—it's incumbent upon Obama to make a stand. For the District, for its fight against AIDS, and for the policy he's said he believes in. If he does nothing now, it's worse than politics as usual. He can't even say (like George W. Bush) that he didn't see the disaster coming.