Why Can’t We Have Nice Things Like Free Crack Pipes, Jen Psaki?

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki tried to cauterize a potential political liability when she told Fox News White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich this week that the Biden administration won’t be distributing crack pipes. But why?

There were a couple of very telling exchanges at a White House press briefing Wednesday. The first was between Psaki and Heinrich, who asked about what had turned into an outrage-inducing smear on the right.

“HHS just put out a statement clarifying around some reports that crack pipes are not going to be part of the ‘safe smoking kits’ that are funded by the administration. But can you clarify for us: Were they never a part of the kit or were they removed in response to this reporting and this pushback? Just — the language was unclear,” Heinrich said.

She was referencing a statement from HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra that said, in part, “HHS and ONDCP are focused on using our resources smartly to reduce harm and save lives. Accordingly, no federal funding will be used directly or through subsequent reimbursement of grantees to put pipes in safe smoking kits.”

Psaki replied “They were never a part of the kit; it was inaccurate reporting.  And we wanted to put out information to make that clear.”

She then delivered a lengthy response defending the harm reduction program and detailing some of the other components.

“What would you say to critics who are concerned that the Biden administration is somehow encouraging illegal drug use?” Heinrich said.

Psaki delivered another detailed response that included telling Heinrich, “The President is focused on saving lives through harm reduction programs.”

Later on in the same briefing, TheGrio White House correspondent April Ryan asked about the issue from a different angle: the misinformation that was spread:

MS. RYAN: You know misinformation has a terrible ripple effect. What is this administration doing? Because this has permeated a lot of corridors that people are taking this in. Are you or the administration or HHS planning on doing something beyond the statement to let people know that this is misinformation and correct it?

MS. PSAKI: Yeah, that’s a really important point, because I think there’s been a lot of misinformation and about particularly this issue. And — and it has really clouded over what is a hugely important issue in this country, which is a fight against the opioid epidemic and the need to have bipartisan approaches that are going to help communities that are impacted address it.

But, yes, we will certainly be building out our efforts to effectively communicate that we are not — that what — what is in a safe smoking kit, what is not in smoking kit — safe smoking kit, and what we are effectively trying to do with our harm reduction program.

The backstory on this is a bit convoluted, because there is a kernel of truth in the smear that seems like a big kernel. Snopes endured a blizzard of mockery over their fact-check, unfairly in my view. Their clarification following Psaki’s comments is even more convoluted.

Essentially, they rated the original claim “mostly false” even though their conclusion stated “It’s true that the grant description required the provision of harm reduction supplies, and listed ‘safe smoking kits’ as an example” — and that those kits would contain glass pipes in addition to other things.

That sounds absurd, until you realize that the claim they were evaluating was this:

In early 2022, the Biden administration endeavored to advance racial equity by distributing crack pipes to drug users.

This “racial equity” angle is key to the whole thing, and is the glaring tell that this smear is race-based. The smear artists coupled together two entirely different aspects of the program:

It’s true that the grant description required the provision of smoking kits — an established component of harm reduction strategy — but in reality, those kits constituted just one of several sub-components of an even longer list of requirements for grant recipients. In other words, while outraged media coverage focused almost exclusively on “crack pipes,” this was actually only a very small part of the program.

Secondly, the provision of safer smoking supplies did not have as its purpose advancing the cause of racial equity. Rather, its purpose was, quite logically, to reduce harm and infection among existing drug users. However, the grant description did state that priority would be given to applicants who serve communities that are historically underserved. In other words, the grant’s terms encouraged recipients to advance racial equity while working for harm reduction, not the other way round — a crucial distinction which many outlets got wrong.

So there appears, at least, to have been an accurate expectation that the grant would fund pipes — which was meant to outrage certain people because it was cherry-picked from a larger list of things and inaccurately coupled with “racial equity.”

The implications you can sort out for yourselves, but nobody was mad that White people might get free meth or crack pipes.

That leads me to the question I posed at the top of the story: why? Why, if glass pipes in the kits are considered effective at reducing harm, preventing injury and infection, why aren’t we funding them when we are funding things like clean needles?

It’s because we still live in a country whose politics are dominated by the kinds of people whom Heinrich was referencing in her question, and who for whatever reason have all kinds of compassion for opioid addiction, but for some reason are bothered by the combination of crack and “racial equity.”

And it’s not just conservatives, it’s a big chunk of White so-called independents who are as susceptible to grievance smears as anyone, maybe more. They don’t see White people smoking meth in the Ozarks as a threat, but Black people smoking their free Biden racial equity crack pipes?

And so it is that Jen Psaki, in order to shield President Joe Biden from toxic political fallout that could help propel opponents of racial equity measures into power, ends up having to pander to this crowd.

I watched that briefing and in my West Wing-addled brain, I wanted Psaki to defiantly tell Heinrich that “Yes, we’re gonna fund crack pipes and every other kind of pipe because saving lives is more important than pandering to White grievance, so go ahead, Republicans, and run your ‘Biden Luvs Crack’ ads because the American people are smarter than that!”

But those ads would work. And that’s why we can’t have nice things like free crack pipes.

Watch above via NBC News.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.