An initiative that would have provided for the nation's first legal, regulated sale of marijuana for personal use is on hold.

Drug war hall-of-famer Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN) is running for re-election in a tight race, yet his campaign site doesn’t say one word about his extensive contributions as the leading congressional advocate for "tough on drugs" policies. It’s easily the defining issue of his political career, yet with everything on the line, he doesn’t seem to think his drug war demagoguery is a selling point for his campaign.

Wouldn’t it be ironic if Mark Souder’s campaign has determined that it would be "political suicide" to associate him with the increasingly unpopular war on drugs? Welcome to the new drug war politics, Mark Souder. We made you a nametag and saved a seat next to Bob Barr. When can we expect you?

(This blog post was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)

According to a Zogby/Inter-American Dialogue poll released Thursday, more than three-quarters of likely voters polled said America's

The Drug Free America Foundation’s perpetually panic-stricken director Calvina Fay gave a speech at the World Forum Against Drugs that was so over-the-top crazy, I wish more people could have heard it. Pete Guither recounts and refutes it here, so I’ll call attention to the one thing she said that is actually truthful:

Just since the beginning of 2008, we have seen an extraordinary increase in drug legalization efforts and activities in the US.

Nice to meet you too, Calvina. Welcome to the future of the drug war debate, a bizarre upside down world in which you are the extremist and everyone else is talking about reform. That’s the only stop on this train, so I hope you brought some reading material. In fact, here, have a free copy of Drug War Facts. You'll need this where we're going.

New Zogby data shows a bipartisan consensus that the drug war is a losing battle:

Three in four likely voters (76%) believe the U.S. war on drugs is failing, a sentiment that cuts across the political spectrum – including the vast majority of Democrats (86%), political independents (81%), and most Republicans (61%). There is also a strong belief that the anti-drug effort is failing among those who intend to vote for Barack Obama (89%) for president, as well as most supporters of John McCain (61%).

When asked what they believe is the single best way to combat international drug trafficking and illicit use, 27% of likely voters said legalizing some drugs would be the best approach -- 34% of Obama supporters and 20% of McCain backers agreed.

* One in four likely voters (25%) believe stopping the drugs at the border is the best tactic to battle drugs -- 39% of McCain supporters, but  just 12% of Obama backers agree.
* Overall, 19% of likely voters said reducing demand through treatment and education should be the top focus of the war on drugs.
* 13% believe that the best way to fight the war on drugs is to prevent production of narcotics in the country of origin.

At first glance, 27% support for legalization appears disappointing, but a look at the question itself provides a much more encouraging outlook. Respondents were asked to select "the single best way to handle the war on drugs" and here’s the breakdown of their responses:

Prevent production of narcotics at their country of origin:  12.7%
Stopping drugs at the U.S. border:                                            24.8%
Reducing demand through treatment and education:           18.7%
Legalizing some drugs in the U.S.:                                            27.5%
Ending the War on Drugs:                                                           8.2%
Not sure/none of the above:                                                        8.1%

Legalization was the most popular answer. Support for interdiction/eradication encompassed only 37.5% of respondents, thus the majority clearly supports some level of reform. I don’t see how you could look at this without concluding that supply reduction strategies lack public support. A smart politician could easily begin chipping away at the most militaristic aspects of the war on drugs without suffering any political consequences.

If there ever existed a tangible political advantage for candidates who play the "tough on drugs" card for votes, those days are behind us. The current political climate favors cutting bad programs and changing business-as-usual in Washington, D.C. The drug war belongs at the top of that list, and while it isn’t there yet, we are undeniably on a trajectory towards a unique moment when the political landscape that sustains prohibition will face re-evaluation. At that point, anything and everything we’ve understood about the politics of drug policy reform could change overnight.

Note: I will begin refering to this concept as "the new drug war politics."

[Courtesy of Angus Reid Strategies]

[VANCOUVER – Jul. 16, 2008] – Canadians are open to the idea of having some non-violent offenders punished with alternative penalties rather than prison, but reject the scheme being applied to cases of credit card fraud, drunk driving and arson, a new Angus Reid Strategies poll has found.

In the online survey of a representative national sample, seven-in-ten respondents (70%) would like to see the justice system using alternative penalties—such as fines, probation, or community service—rather than jail to punish non-violent offences.

Four-in-five respondents (80%) think that personal marijuana use should not be punished with a jail sentence, but rather with an alternative penalty.

However, most respondents disagree with granting this option to persons convicted for other non-violent offences: 62 per cent of respondents oppose using alternative penalties for credit card fraud; 72 per cent oppose this rationale for drunk driving convictions; and 84 per cent oppose it for arson.

Respondents living in Ontario (74%) are more likely to support the idea of sentencing non-violent offenders through alternative reform programs. Ontarians are also the most inclined to support alternative penalties for personal marijuana use (85% compared to 73% in Alberta, the lowest regional level).
Albertans are adamantly opposed to granting alternative penalties to credit card fraud offences (72%), drunk driving (85%) and arson (92%). Conversely, two-in-five respondents in Quebec would support punishing credit-card fraud and drunk driving with sentences other than jail.

Overall support for alternative penalties for non-violent offences is higher among respondents with at least one university degree (78%), those in the middle-income bracket (73%), and those over the age of 55 (74%).

This is the third in a series of four Angus Reid Strategies surveys that look at the way Canadians feel about their justice system.

CONTACT Mario Canseco, Director of Global Studies, 604-647-3570, mario.canseco@angus-reid.com.

For more information, see: http://angusreidstrategies.com/uploads/pages/pdfs/2008.07.16_JusticeIII.....

Release Date: April 19, 2007

Contacts:
Steve Kubby, National Director
The American Medical Marijuana Association (AMMA) http://www.americanmarijuana.org/ 707-964-7743

Board of Supervisors Office

Release Date:
April 17, 2007

Contacts:
Steve Kubby, National Director
The American Medical Marijuana Association (AMMA) http://www.americanmarijuana.org/ 707-964-7743

Board of Supervisors Office

Release Date:
April 17, 2007

Contacts:
Steve Kubby, National Director
The American Medical Marijuana Association (AMMA) http://www.americanmarijuana.org/ 707-964-7743

Board of Supervisors Office

Only about one quarter of adults in Europe believe marijuana should be legal for personal use, according to a