Xavier Becerra Jen Psaki Usa Washington prevention Health reports Xavier Becerra Jen Psaki Usa Washington

Govt. program does not pay for crack pipes, White House says

Reading now: 571
www.fox29.com

Man holding a crack pipe. WASHINGTON (AP) - Following outrage on the political right, the Biden administration said Wednesday that a grant program to help prevent additional harm to people who use illicit drugs will not pay for safer pipes to smoke crack or meth."No federal funding will be used directly or through subsequent reimbursement of grantees to put pipes in safe smoking kits," Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and White House drug policy adviser Rahul Gupta said in a statement.White House press secretary Jen Psaki said separately that was never the intention, complaining that impression was created by "inaccurate reporting."Monday was the deadline for service organizations and state and local governments to apply for a share of $30 million in federal money for "harm reduction" efforts intended to prevent disease, injury and other collateral trauma to people addicted to illicit drugs.RELATED: 93,000 Americans died of overdoses last year, a new recordThe original request for funding proposals from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration had listed "safe smoking kits/supplies" among the items that could be purchased with taxpayer money.

They were among a dozen categories that included overdose prevention drugs, medication lockboxes, test kits for infectious diseases, and syringe disposal containers.

The grant solicitation did not specifically mention pipes, although they can be part of safe smoking kits.That triggered online reports that the Biden administration was using federal dollars to pay for "crack pipes." Some Republican senators castigated the administration on Twitter.The White House is pushing back against claims that the Biden administration is funding a safe.

Read more on fox29.com
The website covid-19.rehab is an aggregator of news from open sources. The source is indicated at the beginning and at the end of the announcement. You can send a complaint on the news if you find it unreliable.

Related News

Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena - Supreme Court delivers PTA Bill determination to Parliament - newsfirst.lk - Sri Lanka
newsfirst.lk
37%
704
Supreme Court delivers PTA Bill determination to Parliament
COLOMBO (News 1st); Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court has delivered its determination to the Parliament on the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Bill.The determination read out by Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena is as follows:Clause 2 of the Bill is NOT inconsistent with any provision of the constitution.Clause 3 of the Bill cannot be enacted into law unless the number of votes cast in favor amounts not less than 2/3 of the whole number of members, including those not present, as per the constitution.The Supreme Court is however of the view that if the provisions of Clause 3 of the bill are amended as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court, it would ease to be inconsistent with any provision of the constitution.Clause 4 of the Bill, the Supreme Court states that be that as it may, the learned Additional Solicitor General had informed the court that the Attorney General would be advising the Minister to insert article 141 into the body of the proposed section 10 in Clause 4 of the Bill and the Minister would move that amendment at the Parliament Committee stage to address the concerns of the petitioners.Clause 5 of the Bill, for the reason mentioned in the determination of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court holds that Clause 5 is NOT inconsistent with any provision of the constitution.Clause 6 of the Bill, the Supreme Court holds that it cannot inquire into pronounce upon or in any manner called into question, the validity of section 11 of the PTA on any grounds whatsoever, in terms of article 83 of the constitution.Clause 10 of the Bill, the Supreme Court holds that if amended as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court would cease to be inconsistent with any provision of the
DMCA