Like other interest groups, the drug reform movement has the Obama transition under a microscope, searching for clues on the new administration's intentions as it scrutinizes those appointments for

The political landscape in Washington, DC, is undergoing a dramatic shift as the Democratic tide rolls in, and, after eight years of drug war status quo under the Republicans, drug reformers are no

Tough on crime can still trump smart on crime, if Tuesday's elections results on sentencing initiatives in two of the nation's most progressive states are any indication.

This is a final reminder for folks in California. Vote Yes on Prop. 5 tomorrow to provide treatment instead of incarceration for drug offenders.

This is a final reminder for folks in Massachusetts. Vote Yes on Question 2 tomorrow to reduce penalties for possessing small amounts of marijuana.

With election day little more than a month away, it is time for a round-up of drug policy reform initiatives facing voters in November.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   
OCTOBER 27, 2008

Hell Freezes Over:
White House Drug Czar Backs Decriminalization

John Walters Backs a Mexican Proposal Far More Sweeping Than U.S. Measures He Has Opposed

CONTACT: Bruce Mirken, MPP director of communications ............... 415-668-6403 or 202-215-4205

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Marijuana Policy Project today congratulated White House "drug czar" John Walters for backing a Mexican government proposal that would remove criminal penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana.

    "I can't believe I'm actually saying this, but John Walters is right," said MPP executive director Rob Kampia. "We heartily second his support for eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana users in Mexico, and look forward to working with him to end such penalties in the U.S. as well."

    On Oct. 22, The New York Times reported Walters' public support for a drug decriminalization proposal by Mexican President Felipe Calderon, quoting Walters as saying, "I don't think that's legalization." Under Calderon's proposal, individuals caught with small quantities of marijuana would receive no jail sentence or fine and would not receive a criminal record so long as they complete either drug education or, if addicted, drug treatment. Unlike proposals supported by MPP, the Mexican president's proposal would also decriminalize possession of small amounts of heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine.

    "It's fantastic that John Walters has recognized the massive destruction the drug war has inflicted on Mexico and is now calling for reforms there, but he's a rank hypocrite if he continues opposing similar reforms in the U.S.," Kampia said. "The Mexican proposal is far more sweeping than MPP's proposals to decriminalize marijuana or make marijuana medically available, both of which John Walters and his henchmen rail against."

    In a March 19, 2008, press release from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, deputy director Scott Burns called a New Hampshire proposal to impose a $200 fine rather than jail time for a small amount of marijuana "a dangerous first step toward complete drug legalization."

    With more than 25,000 members and 100,000 e-mail subscribers nationwide, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States. MPP believes that the best way to minimize the harm associated with marijuana is to regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol. For more information, please visit http://MarijuanaPolicy.org.

####

The Islamic Republic of Iran will not execute minors for drug offenses, but will keep capital punishment for those convicted of murder.

Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP--the drug czar's office) director John Walters headed to California this week to try t

With the November 4 elections now less than two weeks away, most people, drug reformers included, are focused on the near term.

For Immediate Release: October 20, 2008
Contact: Margaret Dooley-Sammuli at (213) 291-4190 or Tommy McDonald at (510) 229-5215

California Society of Addiction Medicine Endorses Proposition 5: Treatment Community Unifying Behind Measure

SACRAMENTO, October 20 – The California Society of Addiction Medicine (CSAM) has endorsed Proposition 5, the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act. The association of physicians specializing in addiction treatment will be discussing the measure at their annual gathering in Newport Beach this week. Prop. 5 would significantly expand access to drug treatment for young people, nonviolent offenders and California’s prison and parole populations.

Dr. Judy Martin, president of CSAM, said, “We have tried incarceration as a primary response to addictive illness for decades and it has failed utterly. Prop. 5 marks a historic shift towards a treatment approach for nonviolent drug offenses. Decades of research and experience show that addiction responds very well to treatment. By reducing addictive behavior, treatment also reduces drug-motivated crime. Now is the time for our policies to reflect that fact. Prop. 5 will bring our response to addiction in line with the science, while protecting public safety.”

Dr Martin continued, “Successful addiction treatment holds individuals accountable for their behavior. Prop. 5 gets that right, too, by incorporating sanctions in the community and jail sanctions. Prop. 5 enhances the court’s authority to determine who should and shouldn’t participate in court-supervised treatment and to hold those people accountable during treatment.”

California spends $10 billion each year to operate state prisons, but little of that money goes to treatment or rehabilitation for inmates. According to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, more than 140,000 of the 170,000 people in prison in California have a drug problem.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office calculates that Prop. 5 will lower incarceration costs by $1 billion each year and will cut another $2.5 billion in state costs for prison construction. This doesn’t include savings related to reduced crime, lower social costs (e.g. emergency room visits, child protective services, welfare), and increased individual productivity.

Dr. Martin continued, “California cannot continue with its failed policies toward addiction. Now is the time to invest in what we know works to reduce addiction-motivated crime – drug treatment.”

For more information, visit www.Prop5Yes.org and www.csam-asam.org.

I’ve been severely remiss in failing thus far to cover the very important Prop. 5 in California. The Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act (NORA) would save billions in incarceration costs by referring many drug offenders into treatment instead of prison. It’s a significant reform and the vested drug war interests are in full-blown panic mode trying to defeat it.

The drug czar is in California right now campaigning against it, and a who’s who of drug war profiteers have assembled a well-funded No on 5 campaign, branding Prop. 5 as "the drug dealer’s bill of rights." So who exactly is funding opposition to this commonsense drug treatment initiative?

DPA director Ethan Nadelmann explains via email:

Last week the powerful prison guards union contributed $1 million to the opposition campaign.  That's on top of hundreds of thousands of dollars from Indian tribes/casinos with close links to law enforcement as well as $100,000 from the California Beer and Beverage Distributors.

Isn’t it obvious what’s going on here? The prison industry lobbies shamelessly to keep as many people in prison as possible. The alcohol industry defends the interests of the criminal justice infrastructure that protects their monopoly on legal intoxication. And yet the drug czar has the audacity to present George Soros’s support for reform as some kind of shady conspiracy. It’s just amazing, it really is.

It’s not even my style to go around accusing our opposition of unscrupulous drug war profiteering at every turn, but what else is there to say about this? It’s right in front of our face. It’s as transparent as it is hypocritical. And it can’t be allowed to succeed.

If you live in California, please vote YES on Prop. 5 and tell everyone you know to do the same.

Voters in several swing states are receiving this recorded message from Rudy Giuliani:

Hi, this is Rudy Giuliani, and I'm calling for John McCain and the Republican National Committee because you need to know that Barack Obama opposes mandatory prison sentences for sex offenders, drug dealers, and murderers.

It's true, I read Obama's words myself. And recently, Congressional liberals introduced a bill to eliminate mandatory prison sentences for violent criminals -- trying to give liberal judges the power to decide whether criminals are sent to jail or set free. With priorities like these, we just can't trust the inexperience and judgment of Barack Obama and his liberal allies. This call was paid for by the Republican National Committee and McCain-Palin 2008 at 866 558 5591. [TPM]

TPM's Greg Sargent points out the incredibly misleading use of the term "mandatory sentencing":

Note that Rudy claims Obama "opposes mandatory prison sentences" for rapists and murders, Rudy is actually referring to Obama's opposition to specific mandatory minimum sentences. By dropping the word "minimum," he's insinuating that Obama opposes mandatory prison sentences in general.

That’s dead-on. The correct term is "mandatory minimum sentencing," but Giuliani reworks the phrase to make Obama’s position on sentencing reform sound more sinister.

Of course, this is all just total nonsense. Giuliani uses the word "liberal" to disparage judges, as though they are a criminal’s best friend and they all want to "set free" sex offenders, drug dealers, and murderers. Moreover, McCain and Obama are on the same page when it comes to sentencing nonviolent drug offenders. Obama’s opposition to mandatory minimum sentencing stems from his concern that we have too many first-time nonviolent drug offenders in prison, a point McCain agrees with. The Republican platform completely omits drug crimes from the list of offenses for which republicans support mandatory minimum sentencing.

As sleazy and disgusting as this is, I just don’t see it going anywhere. At this point in the campaign, this kind of hysterical mudslinging is inherently suspect. There’s just not much to debate in terms of the candidates’ differences on crime issues anyway, so if the McCain campaign wants to go there, they’ll need to create some kind of meaningful distinction. Arguing that Obama wants to free dangerous criminals sounds ridiculous on its face and won’t survive as a talking point without some substance to back it up. There is none.

My prediction: Giuliani’s throwback to the "soft on crime" attack politics of the '80's will accomplish nothing.

(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.)

The New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement presents is Fall 2008 Symposium.

* What is the current legal landscape drug offenders face in the American judicial system?

This Cleveland Plain-Dealer story just completely blows the lid off the inherent racism of the war on drugs. Reporter Bob Paynter pulled out all the stops, digging through court records to demonstrate how people of color receive harsher punishments than white defendants for the same drug crimes.

This is superb reporting, a rare find when it comes to criminal justice issues. Reporters across the nation should repeat Paynter’s methodology. Racial disparities are endemic to the war on drugs and you will find them everywhere. All you have to do is look.

The Advisory Council for the Fair Sentencing of Children, comprised of professionals working with: the American Civil Liberties Union, the Children's Law Center of Massachusetts, Equal Justice Init

Twice in the past two weeks, courts in Malaysia have condemned people to death for marijuana trafficking offenses.

With the presidential election now less than a month away, Democratic candidate Barack Obama appears poised for victory, according to the m

This symposium is presented by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) and the Administration of Justice Department of George Mason University.

The schedule:

8:45am: Panel 1 begins
9:45am: Panel 2 begins

Try reading this unhinged Boston Globe editorial opposing decriminalization in Massachusetts with a straight face. It is an exhibit in dishonesty and an insult to everything on earth that is actually truly dangerous. The whole thing is nuts, but this line really tickled my bullshit bone:

And despite their best efforts to paint an ounce of marijuana as innocuous, the fact is that one ounce of marijuana is worth about $600 and represents about 60 individual sales.

Seriously!? Do you even know what marijuana is? The average price is around $200 an ounce. And it's not sold in 1/60th ounce increments. You can’t even roll a joint out of that. You know what a joint is, right? Seriously, I would have thought there were enough preposterous reefer madness arguments already in circulation that you wouldn’t need to create new ones.

One of the great challenges facing those who advocate sensible marijuana policies is that of responding to crazy made-up nonsense over and over again. Sometimes our opponents just lie on purpose. Other times they simply don't know what they're talking about. And frequently we can't tell the difference.