Star-Tribune Editorial Board

It's good to know that potential solutions to Wyoming's methamphetamine epidemic will be part of the gubernatorial debate this year. It's a major problem that affects every age group and economic class.

We need a healthy discussion of how to deal with meth from the law enforcement, treatment and prevention perspectives. Republican candidate Ray Hunkins has proposed a cabinet-level administrator to coordinate such an effort. Democratic Gov. Dave Freudenthal dismissively labeled the proposed official a "drug czar."

Whatever you call the job, ideas for fighting meth deserve discussion in this year's campaign. The challenge -- for the candidates as well as the voters -- will be to distinguish gimmicks from effective measures to reduce the manufacture and use of meth.

As Freudenthal noted, the drug czar model has not worked effectively at the federal level. Unfortunately, Wyoming's efforts also have much room for improvement. A Legislative Service Office audit earlier this year cited a fragmented approach as one of the state's major problems in its fight against meth.

The audit indicated it's difficult to know if the Legislature's allocation of $25 million for treatment is actually helping, because of a lack of accountability, data and a solid plan to address substance abuse problems.

The state's Substance Abuse Division, meanwhile, says Wyoming needs more treatment options, especially residential services and help for adolescents and women with children.

Hunkins says he would create a Governor's Drug Enforcement, Prevention and Treatment Office. The administrator would directly report to him, and be responsible for implementing the reforms recommended in the LSO audit.

Freudenthal views such a plan as a top-down approach that would merely centralize more authority in Cheyenne. He proposes using more resources at the local level to identify and solve problems.

"The state shouldn't dictate what they do in communities," Freudenthal told a Wheatland drug conference last year.

There is tremendous potential to politicize this issue and point fingers about whom to blame for what hasn't worked. Instead, the focus should be on the best way for the state to coordinate its future efforts so we're spending money wisely, where it most needs to go.

The two gubernatorial candidates clearly have different visions of what the state should be doing. The debate surely will be interesting; we hope it's productive as well.