WASHINGTON --- Senator Chuck Grassley has expressed concern to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales about possible delays with the implementation of the Combat Meth Act of 2005.

            Grassley said that the benefits of not permitting meth cooks easy access to products that allow them to continue producing this dangerous drug far outweigh the small inconveniences that might occur as a result of the Combat Meth Act.

 “Meth can ruin people’s lives which is why I’m working to put a stop to it,” Grassley said. “I have heard from a number of constituents who are afraid the enforcement of the law will be delayed.”

            Grassley has been a leader in the Combat Meth Act since it was introduced in 2005. During Judiciary Committee consideration of the Combat Meth Act, Grassley, along with Sen. Tom Coburn, led the effort to take out the section of the bill that would have allowed a national law to override a stronger state law in the bill.  

Grassley is a senior member of the Judiciary Committee and Chairman of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control.

            Grassley sent this letter with Senators Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, Conrad Burns, Tom Coburn, Tom Harkin, Dianne Feinstein and Ken Salazar. 

            Here is a copy of the April 5 letter.

The Honorable Alberto R. Gonzales

Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

Robert F. Kennedy Building

Tenth Street and Constitution, NW

Washington, DC 22201

We are contacting you regarding the Combat Methamphetamine Act of 2005. Members of Congress realize the horrible effects the scourge of methamphetamine has had on our nation for too long, and as such have acted to combat this epidemic with the passing of the Combat Meth Act. The passage of the Combat Meth Act was long overdue and the tools it provides must be utilized quickly by law enforcement if we are to gain control of the production of methamphetamine in the United States.

We know that you also recognize this problem. Since your confirmation as Attorney General, you have spoke publicly about the devastating effects methamphetamine has had on communities across the country. We appreciate your leadership on this issue and encourage you to continue to raise awareness about the destruction methamphetamine causes.

Unfortunately, not everyone appreciates the gravity of this situation. The same interests who have blocked pseudoephedrine control for a decade began seeking “technical corrections” to the Combat Meth Act shortly after it was passed in an attempt to delay implementation of some provisions of the law. When it became apparent that strategy was not working, they decided to pressure the DEA to delay the enforcement of certain provisions of the Combat Meth Act. The effective dates for implementation of the provisions in the bill reflect tedious negotiations with the above mentioned interests. Rest assured there are no drafting errors in this law.

There is no need to delay the enforcement of the provisions which are clearly stated in the Combat Meth Act. The relatively quick implementation of the sales limits of no more than 3.6 grams per person within 24 hours, and the requirements that all meth precursor chemicals be sold in blister packs was agreed to as a reflection of the severity of the problems meth causes in our communities and the determination of Congress to stop the use of these products as precursors. We are aware that restrictions to these products may cause some inconvenience. However, we believe these inconveniences are outweighed by the benefits of not allowing meth cooks easy access to products that allow them to continue to produce this poison.

We expect those who manufacture and sell products containing pseudoephedrine to act quickly and in good faith to fully implement and enforce the provisions of this Act. We also expect strong leadership from you and the law enforcement community in addressing the meth crisis.

We appreciate your attention to our concerns. Please inform us if there is anything else we can do to assist you in your efforts to combat this deadly drug.