Drug War Chronicle #631 - May 7, 2010

Feature: Obama's First National Drug Strategy -- The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

A leaked draft of the overdue 2010 National Drug Strategy was published by Newsweek over the weekend, and it reveals some positive shifts away from Bush-era drug policy paradigms and toward more progressive and pragmatic approaches. But there is a lot of continuity as well, and despite the Obama administration's rhetorical shift away from the "war on drugs," the drug war juggernaut is still rolling along.

That doesn't quite jibe with Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP -- the drug czar's office) director Gil Kerlikowske's words when he announced in April 2009 that the phrase "war on drugs" was no longer in favor. "Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them. We're not at war with people in this country."

The leak was reported by long-time Washington insider and Newsweek columnist Michael Isikoff, who mentioned it almost off-handedly in a piece asserting "The White House Drug Czar's Diminished Status." Isikoff asserted in the piece that the unveiling of the strategy had been delayed because Kerlikowske didn't have the clout to get President Obama to schedule a joint appearance to release it. His office had been downgraded from cabinet level, Isikoff noted.

That sparked an angry retort from UCLA professor Mark Kleiman, a burr under the saddle to prohibitionists and anti-prohibitionists alike for his heterodox views on drug policy. In a blog post, Kleiman seemed personally offended at the leak, twice referring to the leaker as "a jerk," defending the new drug strategy as innovative if bound by interagency politics, and deriding Isikoff's article as "gossipy."

Kleiman also suggested strongly that the leaker was none other than former John Walters on the basis of an editing mark on the document that had his name on it. But Walters has not confirmed that, and others have point out it could have been a current staffer who is using the same computer Walters used while in office.

On the plus side, the draft strategy embraces some harm reduction programs, such as needle exchanges and the use of naloxone to prevent overdoses, although without ever uttering the words "harm reduction." There is also a renewed emphasis on prevention and treatment, with slight spending increases. But again reality fails to live up to rhetoric, with overall federal drug control spending maintaining the long-lived 2:1 ration in spending for law enforcement, eradication, and interdiction versus that for treatment and prevention.

The strategy also promotes alternatives to incarceration, such drug courts, community courts and the like and for the first time hints that it recognizes the harms that can be caused by the punitive approach to drug policy. And it explicitly calls for reform of the sentencing disparity for crack and powder cocaine offenses.

It sets a number of measurable goals related to reducing drug use. By 2015, ONDCP vows to cut last month drug use by young adults by 10% and cut last month use by teens, lifetime use by 8th graders, and the number of chronic drug users by 15%.

The 2010 goals of a 15% reduction reflect diminishing expectations after years of more ambitious drug use reduction goals followed by the drug policy establishment's inability to achieve them. That could inoculate the Obama administration from the kind of criticism faced by the Clinton administration back in the 1990s when it did set much more ambitious goals.

The Clinton administration's 1998 National Drug Control Strategy called for a "ten-year conceptual framework to reduce drug use and drug availability by 50%." That didn't happen. That strategy put the number of drug users at 13.5 million, but instead of decreasing, according to the 2008 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse and Health, by 2007 the number of drug users was at 20.1 million.

While Clinton took criticism from Republicans that his goals were not ambitious enough -- Newt Gingrich said we should just wipe out drugs -- the Bush administration set similar goals, and achieved similarly modest results. The Bush administration's 2002 National Drug Control Strategy sought a 25% reduction in drug use by both teenagers and adults within five years. While teen drug use declined from 11.6% in 2002 to 9.3% in 2007, then drug czar Walters missed his goal. He did less well with adult use almost unchanged, at 6.3% in 2000 and 5.9% in 2007.

The draft strategy, however, remains wedded to law enforcement, eradication, and interdiction, calls for strong federal support for local drug task forces, and explicitly rejects marijuana legalization. It also seeks to make drugged driving a top priority, which would be especially problematic if the administration adopts per se zero tolerance measures (meaning the presence of any metabolites of a controlled substance could result in a driver's arrest whether he was actually impaired or not).

Still, while the draft strategy is definitely a mixed bag, a pair of keen observers of ONDCP and federal drug policy pronounced themselves fairly pleased overall. While still heavy on the law enforcement side, the first Obama national drug strategy is a far cry from the propaganda-driven documents of Bush era drug czar John Walters.

The Good

"This is somewhat of a surprise, because for the first time they have included reducing the funds associated with the drug war in their strategy, although not in a big way, they're calling for reform of the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity, and they are calling for the reform of laws that penalize people," said Bill Piper, national affairs director for the Drug Policy Alliance. "This is the first time they've included anything recognizing that some of our policies are creating harm," he added.

"The stuff about syringe exchange and naloxone for overdose prevention is pretty good. It's the first time they've embraced any part of harm reduction, even though they don't use that name," Piper noted.

"I'm also impressed with the section on alternatives to incarceration," said Piper. "They basically said most drug users don't belong in jail, and a lot of dealers don't, either. It's still wedded to the criminal justice system, but it's good that they looked at so many different things -- drug courts, community courts, Operation Highpoint (warning dealers to desist instead of just arresting them as a means of breaking up open-air drug markets), programs for veterans. They seem interested in finding out what works, which is an evidence-based approach that had been lacking in previous strategies."

The Status Quo

"Drug war reformers have eagerly been waiting the release of President Obama's first National Drug Control Strategy," noted Matthew Robinson, professor of Government and Justice Studies at Appalachian State University and coauthor (with Renee Scherlen) of "Lies, Damned Lies, and Drug War Statistics: A Critical Analysis of Claims Made by the ONDCP." "Would it put Obama's and Kerlikowske's words into action, or would it be more of the same in terms of federal drug control policy? The answer is yes. And no. There is real, meaningful, exciting change proposed in the 2010 Strategy. But there's a lot of the status quo, too," he said.

"The first sentence of the Strategy hints at status quo approaches to federal drug control policy; it announces 'a blueprint for reducing illicit drug use and its harmful consequences in America,'" Robinson said. "That ONDCP will still focus on drug use (as opposed to abuse) is unfortunate, for the fact remains that most drug use is normal, recreational, pro-social, and even beneficial to users; it does not usually lead to bad outcomes for users, including abuse or addiction," he said.

"Just like under the leadership of Director John Walters, Kerlikowske's ONDCP characterizes its drug control approaches as 'balanced,' yet FY 2011 federal drug control spending is still imbalanced in favor of supply side measures (64%), while the demand side measures of treatment and prevention will only receive 36% of the budget," Robinson pointed out. "In FY 2010, the percentages were 65% and 35%, respectively. Perhaps when Barack Obama said 'Change we can believe in,' what he really meant was 'Change you can believe in, one percentage point at a time.'"

There is also much of the status quo in funding levels, Robinson said. "There will also be plenty of drug war funding left in this 'non-war on drugs.' For example, FY 2011 federal drug control spending includes $3.8 billion for the Department of Homeland Security (which includes Customs and Border Protection spending), more than $3.4 billion for the Department of Justice (which includes Drug Enforcement Agency spending), and nearly $1.6 billion for the Department of Defense (which includes military spending). Thus, the drug war will continue on under President Obama even if White House officials do not refer to federal drug control policy as a 'war on drugs,'" he noted.

The Bad

"ONDCP repeatedly stresses the importance of reducing supply of drugs into the United States through crop eradication and interdiction efforts, international collaboration, disruption of drug smuggling organizations, and so forth," Robinson noted. "It still promotes efforts like Plan Colombia, the Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy, and many other similar programs aimed at eradicating drugs in foreign countries and preventing them from entering the United States. The bottom line here is that the 'non war on drugs' will still look and feel like a war on drugs under President Obama, especially to citizens of the foreign nations where the United States does the bulk of its drug war fighting."

"They are still wedded to interdiction and eradication," said Piper. "There is no recognition that they aren't very effective and do more harm than good. Coming only a couple of weeks after the drug czar testified under oath that eradication in Colombia and Afghanistan and elsewhere had no impact on the availability of drugs in the US, to then put out a strategy embracing what he said was least effective is quite disturbing."

"The ringing endorsement of per se standards for drugged driving is potentially troubling," said Piper. "It looks a lot like zero tolerance. We have to look at this also in the context of new performance measures, which are missing from the draft. In the introduction, they talk about setting goals for reducing drug use and that they went to set other performance measures, such as for reducing drug overdoses and drugged driving. If they actually say they're going to reduce drugged driving by such and such an amount with a certain number of years, that will be more important. We'll have to see what makes it into the final draft."

"They took a gratuitous shot at marijuana reform," Piper noted. "It was unfortunate they felt the need to bash something that half of Americans support and to do it in the way they did, listing a litany of Reefer Madness allegations and connecting marijuana to virtually every problem in America. That was really unfortunate."

More Good

There are some changes in spending priorities. "Spending on prevention will grow 13.4% from FY 2010 to FY 2011, while spending on treatment will grow 3.7%," Robinson noted. "The growth in treatment is surprisingly small given that ONDCP notes that 90% of people who need treatment do not receive it. Increases are much smaller for spending on interdiction (an increase of 2.4%), domestic law enforcement (an increase of 1.9%), and international spending (an increase of 0.9%). This is evidence of a shift in federal drug control strategy under President Obama; there will be a greater effort to prevent drug use in the first place as well as treat those that become addicted to drugs than there ever was under President Bush."

Robinson also lauded the Obama administration for more clarity in the strategy than was evident under either Clinton or Bush. "Obama's first Strategy clearly states its guiding principles, each of which is followed by a specific set of actions to be initiated and implemented over time to achieve goals and objectives related to its principles. Of course, this is Obama's first Strategy, so in subsequent years, there will be more data presented for evaluation purposes, and it should become easier to decipher the ideology that will drive the 'non war on drugs' under President Obama," he said.

But he suggested that ideology still plays too big a role. "ONDCP hints at its ideology when it claims that programs such as 'interdiction, anti-trafficking initiatives, drug crop reduction, intelligence sharing and partner nation capacity building... have proven effective in the past.' It offers almost no evidence that this is the case other than some very limited, short-term data on potential cocaine production in Colombia. ONDCP claims it is declining, yet only offers data from 2007 to 2008. Kerlikowske's ONDCP seems ready to accept the dominant drug war ideology of Walters that supply side measures work -- even when long-term data show they do not."

Robinson also lauded ONDCP's apparent revelation that drug addiction is a disease. "Obama's first strategy embraces a new approach to achieving federal drug control goals of 'reducing illicit drug consumption' and 'reducing the consequences of illicit drug use in the United States,' one that is evidence-based and public health oriented," Robinson said. "ONDCP recognizes that drug addiction is a disease and it specifies that federal drug control policy should be assisted by parties in all of the systems that relate to drug use and abuse, including families, schools, communities, faith-based organizations, the medical profession, and so forth. This is certainly a change from the Bush Administration, which repeatedly characterized drug use as a moral or personal failing."

While the Obama drug strategy may have its faults, said Robinson, it is a qualitative improvement over Bush era drug strategies. "Under the Bush Administration, ONDCP came across as downright dismissive of data, evidence, and science, unless it was used to generate fear and increased punitive responses to drug-related behaviors. Honestly, there is very little of this in Obama's first strategy, aside from the usual drugs produce crime, disorder, family disruption, illness, addiction, death, and terrorism argument that has for so long been employed by ONDCP," he said. "Instead, the Strategy is hopeful in tone and lays out dozens of concrete programs and policies that aim to prevent drug use among young people (through public education programs, mentoring initiatives, increasing collaboration between public health and safety organizations); treat adults who have developed drug abuse and addiction problems (though screening and intervention by medical personnel, increased investments in addiction treatment, new treatment medications); and, for the first time, invest heavily in recovery efforts that are restorative in nature and aimed at giving addicts a new lease on life," he noted.

"ONDCP also seems to suddenly have a better grasp on why the vast majority of people who need treatment do not get it," said Robinson. "Under Walters, ONDCP claimed that drug users were in denial and needed to be compassionately coerced to seek treatment. In the 2010 Strategy, ONDCP outlines numerous problems with delivery of treatment services including problems with the nation's health care systems generally. The 2010 Strategy seems so much better informed about the realities of drug treatment than previous Strategy reports," he added.

"The strategy also repeatedly calls for meaningful change in areas such as alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent, low-level drug offenders; drug testing in courts (and schools, unfortunately, in spite of data showing it is ineffective); and reentry programs for inmates who need help finding jobs and places to live upon release from prison or jail. ONDCP also implicitly acknowledges that that federal drug control policy imposes costs on families (including the break-up of families), and shows with real data that costs are greater economically for imprisonment of mothers and foster care for their children than family-based treatment," Robinson noted.

"ONDCP makes the case that we are wasting a lot of money dealing with the consequences of drug use and abuse when this money would be better spent preventing use and abuse in the first place. Drug policy reformers will embrace this claim," Robinson predicted.

"The strategy also calls for a renewed emphasis on prescription drug abuse, which it calls 'the fastest growing drug problem in the United States,'" Robinson pointed out. "Here, as in the past, ONDCP suggests regulation is the answer because prescription drugs have legitimate uses that should not be restricted merely because some people use them illegally. And, as in the past, ONDCP does not consider this approach for marijuana, which also has legitimate medicinal users in spite of the fact that some people use it illegally," he said.

The Verdict

"President Obama's first National Drug Control Strategy offers real, meaningful, exciting change," Robinson summed up. "Whether this change amounts to 'change we can believe in' will be debated by drug policy reformers. For those who support demand side measures, many will embrace the 2010 Strategy and call for even greater funding for prevention and treatment. For those who support harm reduction measures such as needled exchange, methadone maintenance and so forth, there will be celebration. Yet, for those who support real alternatives to federal drug control policy such as legalization or decriminalization, all will be disappointed. And even if Obama officials will not refer to its drug control policies as a 'war on drugs,' they still amount to just that."

back to top

Feature: The Global Marijuana Marches, Part One

If this is the first week in May, then it is time for the annual celebration of cannabis culture known variously as the World Marijuana March, Global Marijuana March, the Million Marijuana March, or, more informally, International Weed Day. This year, because of the calendar, the marches are being held over two weekends, with the first batch occurring last Saturday. From Auckland to Austin and from Madison to Missoula, marijuana supporters took to the streets to call for legalization and to free the weed.

From nerve centers at Cures Not Wars in New York City, Cannabis Culture magazine in Vancouver, and the European NGO Coalition for Safe and Effective Drug Policies in Brussels, activists in more than 320 cities across the planet took the local initiative in the own communities. In some places, particularly Canada and New Zealand, marchers came out in the thousands, while in others, including small communities and college campuses across the US, the number was in the dozens.

Reports from Europe and Latin America are that most marches there will go off tomorrow, with large crowds expected in Buenos Aires and Mexico City. In one European city, Brighton, England, 200 people marched last Saturday to call for legalization, saying they wanted to "enjoy a smoke without the hassle of being arrested." Two of them were, though, perhaps making their point.

The same sort of problem emerged in Denver, where police picked two protestors out of a crowd of about 100 and ticketed them for pot possession. That led to angry yelling and the rapid reinforcement of police before the march resumed peacefully. Only two weeks ago, thousands of people rallied in Denver in the annual 4/20 celebrations.

In Canada, where the Conservative government just this week announced plans to reintroduce its draconian mandatory minimum sentence for growing marijuana bill, 20,000 people gathered in Toronto, the largest known march so far this year. Thousands more rallied in Ottawa and Vancouver. In Toronto, "Prince of Pot" Marc Emery addressed the crowd, seeking support for his effort to avoid deportation to the US to serve a five-year prison sentence for selling seeds and calling on Canadians to "overgrow the government."

In New Zealand, where police just weeks ago busted hundreds of people in a scheme aimed at grow shops and their customers, thousands of people turned out in Auckland, Wellington, and other communities to protest the attack on Kiwi cannabis culture. New Zealand NORML president Phil Saxby called the raids "a waste of time and money" and said they contributed to a large turnout across the country.

"It's our biggest J-Day for years, both in terms of crowd numbers and the number of centres participating: Auckland, Hamilton, New Plymouth, Napier, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin," he said. "The police are working hard to sell the story that they have hurt the local cannabis cultivation industry, but there are no reports of any big quantities found. It looks like they have wasted all this time and money on a few small operators growing a low-level, low risk drug. Police continue to tell us that Operation Lime has been a success in 'breaking the cornerstone' of the cannabis industry in New Zealand, but there seemed to be no shortage of cannabis around the place on Saturday", said Saxby.

Both Portland, Oregon and Austin, Texas saw around a thousand people show up for pro-pot rallies. In Portland, marchers were energized by the prospect of either a medical marijuana dispensary initiative or a pot legalization initiative or both making the November ballot, and signature-gatherers worked the crowd. In Austin, the counterculture capital of Texas as well as the actual state capital, the Third Annual Texas Cannabis Crusade marched through downtown before rallying at the capital.

"It's not a war against drugs, it's a war against people, it's a war against your personal liberties and personal freedom," shouted one marcher, sharing a sentiment echoed by marchers around the globe.

Both Oregon and Texas saw other, smaller marches as well. In Eugene nearly a hundred people marched, while in Dallas about 50 enthusiastic pot people rallied downtown, waving flags and posters and cheering at passing cars.

Larger rallies took place in Raleigh, North Carolina and Madison, Wisconsin. In Madison, at least 250 ralliers marched to the annual Mifflin Street Block Party, where they were joined by thousands of celebrants. A march is set for this Saturday in Milwaukee. In Raleigh, hundreds more rallied at the State Capitol before marching through downtown to demand that the legislature pass a medical marijuana bill.

Smaller events occurred in cities and towns across the country, from Wichita to Missoula to Toledo, while numerous college campuses also hosted rallies. There will be more this weekend. Come back next week for part two of our coverage of the Global Marijuana Marches.

back to top

Medical Marijuana: DC City Council Approves Bill, Advocates Criticize Restrictions

The District of Columbia City Council Tuesday voted unanimously to give final approval to a bill that would legalize the use of medical marijuana in the nation's capital. But while medical marijuana advocates welcomed the move, they complained that the bill is unduly restrictive.

It is not quite a done deal. The bill now goes to Mayor Adrian Fenty for his signature. After that happens, it must then undergo a mandatory 30-day review by Congress, but since Congress last year lifted the rider that had barred DC from implementing medical marijuana ever since voters approved it in 1998, it is not expected to turn around and kill it in the District now.

The measure allows for five distribution centers to provide marijuana to seriously ill patients suffering from chronic or debilitating medical conditions. That number could rise to eight under rule-making authority held by the mayor. Distribution centers can be for-profit or non-profit and must be at least 300 feet from schools.

Marijuana for patients will be grown in registered cultivation centers. Each center will be allowed to grow no more than 95 plants.

Patients may legally obtain marijuana only from distribution centers. They may not legally grow their own supply or procure it outside the DC medical marijuana system. Patients may possess no more than two ounces of marijuana per month, although the mayor is authorized to raise that cap to four ounces under his rule-making authority. Patients can only use their medicine at home.

The final bill is largely unchanged from the bill approved two weeks ago, much to the chagrin of medical marijuana advocates. They had sought a number of changes, including:

• Removing the language prohibiting patients from using marijuana or paraphernalia not obtained from a licensed dispensary.

• Removing the limitation to home consumption in favor of a simple public smoking ban.
• Including severe, chronic pain as a qualifying condition for patients.
• Removing the cap of 95 plants on cultivation centers.
• Increased possession/purchasing limits.
• Including home cultivation.

Advocates did not get the changes they wanted, leaving DC with a medical marijuana law that is one of the most restrictive in the land. All they got was the future possibility of raising the possession and purchasing cap for patients. Still, a medical marijuana law is a medical marijuana law.

"Today marks a long overdue victory for DC voters and potentially thousands of chronically ill residents who will benefit from legal access to medical marijuana," said Karen O'Keefe, director of state policies for the Marijuana Policy Project. "It has taken nearly 12 years, but the District will at last have a law that recognizes the mounting scientific consensus that, for many conditions, marijuana can be safe and effective medicine."

The DC medical marijuana program would allow members of Congress to get a firsthand look at how such programs work and ease the passage of medical marijuana legislation at the federal level, O'Keefe suggested. "A well-working medical marijuana program in the nation's capital will also provide members of Congress who have never seen such programs up close with a unique opportunity to do so, she said. Once they see for themselves that these laws do nothing but provide compassionate care for seriously ill patients, hopefully they will understand the need to create a federal policy that no longer criminalizes patients in any state who could benefit from this legitimate treatment option."

The Drug Policy Alliance also welcomed passage of the bill, but was more critical of its faults. "The DC Council should be congratulated for exempting AIDS, cancer and other patients from the punitive war on marijuana," said national affairs director Bill Piper. "No one should face jail for using marijuana, especially patients following their doctor's recommendation. This has been a long fight, but the voice of DC voters is finally starting to be heard."

Piper noted that DC voters passed medical marijuana with 69% of the vote in 1998 and accused the council of ignoring what voters wanted. "While the Council is heeding the will of voters in important areas, such as allowing the regulated sale of marijuana for medical use, it is ignoring the will of voters in other important areas -- most notably by prohibiting patients from growing their own medicine; a key component of the 1998 initiative, and a key component of medical marijuana laws in 13 states," he said. "The legislation also only protects patients from arrest if they use marijuana obtained from a dispensary.
Yet experience in other states show that dispensaries routinely face shortages of marijuana. And the federal government could shut down DC's dispensaries. If either happens, patients will be forced to buy their marijuana from non-dispensary sources. They shouldn't face arrest for doing so. No patient should face arrest for following their doctor's recommendation. This is a glaring problem with the legislation; the Council needs to fix it or the health of patients could be undermined."

The reaction from Americans for Safe Access (ASA) was similar. "We are certainly excited to implement a bill that has taken 11 years to see the light of day," said Steph Sherer, ASA executive director. "However, the District Council's failure to listen to patients' needs will have serious unintended effects that may force us to work for years to correct."

Once the legislation takes effect, DC will join 14 states that recognize medical marijuana.

back to top

Appeal: 2010 is Important in Drug Policy -- And So Are You

Dear friend of drug policy reform:

I am writing today to ask you to step up for drug policy reform. 2010 is a critical year in drug policy, with great opportunities for changing minds, laws, and lives:

• Polls show an approaching majority supporting marijuana legalization -- California with an initiative this November is at 56%.
• The horrific violence in Mexico is making opinion leaders consider total drug legalization more seriously too.
• More good drug policy reform legislation -- lowering crack sentences, allowing needle exchange funding, unblocking DC's medical marijuana law -- has come out of Congress the past year than in decades.

There is a long, hard road still ahead, but things are definitely moving our way. Like every nonprofit, our funding has been affected by the troubled state of the economy, and we need your help. Can we count on your support in this important year? Please make a generous donation to StoptheDrugWar.org (DRCNet) today!

The support of our generous members has been part of a winning combination that saw us draw nearly two million annual visitors to our web site last year -- the most yet! -- and which saw opinion leaders in the blogosphere using our work on a regular basis. (See links about this below.) StoptheDrugWar.org, thanks to you, is the #1 source for news, information and activism promoting sensible drug law reform and an end to prohibition worldwide. The more we do at StoptheDrugWar.org, the faster the reform movement will grow and the sooner that minds, laws and lives will change.

Your support counts now more than ever -- please join our 2010 "Changing Minds, Changing Laws, Changing Lives" campaign by donating to StoptheDrugWar.org today.

I would like to send you some free gifts to show our appreciation. For a contribution of $30 or more, choose either the important new DVD, 10 Rules for Dealing with Police, or its classic predecessor, Busted: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters -- or choose either of our popular StoptheDrugWar.org t-shirts -- "alcohol prohibition/drug prohibition" or "consequences of prohibition." For a gift of $55 or more, you get to pick any two... for a gift of $80 or more, pick any three... for a gift of $100 or more you can get all four! (Want to substitute? No problem. Choose any item from our inventory of books, videos and StoptheDrugWar.org items.)

By joining today, you will make an immediate impact by helping StoptheDrugWar.org:

• Reach millions of people per year.
• Influence the discussion on major blogosphere sites.
• Fuel the legalization debate with weekly features like our Mexico Drug War Update.
• And continue to build a successful movement through our web site, newsletter and organizing activities as we've been doing for years.

We are truly seeing more good things happen than ever before -- and the road ahead while challenging is also promising. Please donate to StoptheDrugWar.org today - with your help, we can win this.

Sincerely,

David Borden
Executive Director, StoptheDrugWar.org (DRCNet)

P.S. Prohibition does not work -- and more and more people know it. Now is the perfect time to galvanize support for the cause. Please send in your donation and get your thank-you gifts today! Thank you for your support.

back to top

Law Enforcement: Video of SWAT Team Killing Dogs in Front of Child During Pot Raid Stirs Outrage

A February SWAT raid in Columbia, Missouri, in which police shot two dogs, killing one of them, in front of a Columbia man and his terrified wife and seven-year-old child is stirring outrage months later -- after video of the raid was released this week. Police in Columbia are reporting death threats as the video goes viral and Internet message boards grow bloated with angry, outraged comments.

As of Friday morning , the YouTube video had been watched more than 500,000 times. The Columbia Tribune article linked to below contained a whopping 593 comments Thursday night, the vast majority critical of police, many downright hostile.

The SWAT team hit the home of Jonathan Whitworth, 25, with a search warrant alleging he was holding a major amount of marijuana and was a drug dealer. They found a pipe, a grinder, and a small amount of marijuana. Along the way, they shot the dogs, killing one of them, shouted profanities at the frightened family, and generally behaved as if they were Special Forces raiding a Taliban hide-out.

Police claimed they shot and killed a pit bull because it was "acting in an uncontrollably aggressive manner," but while the video shows barking, it shows no growling. No reason was given for shooting and wounding the second dog, a corgi.

According to the Columbia Tribune, police said they were unaware that a child resided at the home. Between the bad intelligence indicating they had a major drug bust and the bad intelligence regarding who lived at the target residence, the raid would seem to suggest a force gone lax in its procedures and a local judiciary inclined to rubber stamp search warrant applications.

Jonathan Whitworth was arrested on marijuana possession and drug paraphernalia charges, and recently pleaded guilty to the paraphernalia charge. Now, he can concentrate on whether to file a lawsuit against the police department. "Their focus right now is to get this behind them," said Whitworth attorney Jeff Hilbrenner said. "Obviously, this was a traumatic event for his wife and son. A final decision has not been made, but they are evaluating all of their options."

The Columbia Police say they are conducting an internal review. It is worth nothing that in 2004, Columbia voted to make adult marijuana law offenses the lowest law enforcement priority. Somebody should mention that to the police department and its out-of-control SWAT team.

back to top

Latin America: Mexico Drug War Update

by Bernd Debusmann, Jr.

Mexican drug trafficking organizations make billions each year smuggling drugs into the United States, profiting enormously from the prohibitionist drug policies of the US government. Since Mexican president Felipe Calderon took office in December 2006 and called the armed forces into the fight against the so-called cartels, prohibition-related violence has killed over 19,000 people, with a death toll of nearly 8,000 in 2009 and over 3,000 so far in 2010. The increasing militarization of the drug war and the arrest of several high-profile drug traffickers have failed to stem the flow of drugs -- or the violence -- whatsoever. The Merida initiative, which provides $1.4 billion over three years for the US to assist the Mexican government with training, equipment and intelligence, has so far failed to make a difference. Here are a few of the latest developments in Mexico's drug war:

Saturday, May 1

In Miguel Aleman, Tamaulipas, three people, including a man and woman were found dead in a car on a rural highway outside the city. The incident came just hours after two grenade attacks occurred in Reynosa's red light district. One of the grenades exploded near a police station in Reynosa's "zone of tolerance," where prostitution and retail-level drug trafficking are allowed to flourish. Earlier in the week, police closed a bridge to allow them to clear explosives that had been left there.

Sunday, May 2

In Chihuahua, 24 people were murdered over the weekend in various parts of the state. Eight of the killings occurred in Ciudad Juarez, ten occurred in the city of Chihuahua, five in Cuauhtémoc, one in the town of Parral. The five men killed in Cuauhtémoc were killed after gunmen entered a bar and opened fire. All the dead were young males between the ages of 18 and 25. According to Chihuahua State attorney general spokesman Carlos Gonzalez, most of the killings are believed to be related to the ongoing struggle between the Sinaloa and Juarez Cartels for control of the Juarez drug trafficking corridor.

Monday, May 3

In Acapulco, gunmen shot and killed eight men as they played soccer in the early afternoon. The gunmen, who arrived in a convoy of 14 vehicles, were reportedly opening fire throughout the neighborhood for some 40 minutes, terrorizing the local population. In addition to the five men who were left dead on the soccer field, three of the bodies were picked up and taken away by the gunmen. The Acapulco area has seen an upswing in violence over the last few months as rival factions of the Beltran-Leyva cartel fight each other for the leadership of the organization.

In Nuevo Leon, a mother and her daughter were killed and disappeared after being caught in a gun battle between suspected rival drug trafficking groups. The incident was reported by the woman's husband, who claims that the car in which the family was traveling was caught in a firefight on the highway. The car was struck by several bullets, killing the woman and the child. The husband was wounded, but managed to take refuge in a nearby house. When he returned to his vehicle, the bodies of his wife and daughter had vanished.

In Sinaloa, four people were killed in different incidents across the state. In one incident, the bullet riddled bodies of two men were found on the side of the Culiacan-Las Brisas highway. In another incident, an unidentified man was killed after gunmen ambushed him as he drove in the Emiliano Zapata neighborhood of Culiacan.

Tuesday, May 4

In Tabasco, three women were killed in a parking lot in the municipality of Cardenas. The three women, none of whom have been identified, were beaten and abused before being killed.

Wednesday, May 5

In Mexico, El Universal reported that it is now estimated that there are 35 illegal firearms for every one policeman in the country. This figure comes from reports from Oxfam, Amnesty International, and the Collective for Security, Democracy and Human Rights. According to these figures, there are now at least 15 million illegal firearms in Mexico, and 426,800 federal, local, and state law enforcement officers.

In Cuernavaca, a new cartel claimed responsibility for the ambush of a high ranking police official in the city last Monday. The Cartel de Pacifico Sur (CPS) left signs on several bridges and overpasses in the city, claiming that they carried out the attack on Preventive Police Special Operations chief Jose Luis Arragon, which killed a woman who was riding in the car with him. Little is known about the relatively new CPS Cartel, but it is thought to be a faction of the Beltran-Leyva Cartel, which was left leaderless in December after Mexican naval commandos killed boss Arturo Beltran-Leyva. Many of the signs left by the group threaten American-born trafficker Edgar Valdez Villareal, aka "El Barbie", who is currently battling Hector Beltran-Leyva for control of the organization.

In Durango, a high-ranking police official was ambushed and killed by a group of armed men on highway 66. A bodyguard was also killed in the attack.

[Editor's Note: Due to a glitch last week at El Universal, on whose body count we rely, the running total was misreported. This week's total reflects the accurate number.]

Total Body Count for the Week: 109

Total Body Count for the Year: 3,233

Total Body Count since Calderon took office: 19,560

Read the last Mexico Drug War Update here.

back to top

Law Enforcement: This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories

A South Carolina sheriff gets busted for cocaine trafficking, and so does a Texas border town cop. And, as always, we have a couple of misbehaving jail guards, too. Let's get to it:

In Florence, South Carolina, the Florence County sheriff was arrested Saturday along with six other people for operating a cocaine trafficking ring. Sheriff EJ Melvin and the others face federal charges of conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute more than five kilograms of powder cocaine and more than 50 grams of crack cocaine. He is also accused of extorting money from drug dealers for protection or to reduce the charges against them. Melvin, who had been sheriff for a decade, resigned Monday morning. He and the others face up to life in prison if convicted.

In Laredo, Texas, a Laredo police officer was arrested April 28 on federal drug charges. Orland Jesus Hale, 27, is charged with conspiracy to possess and intent to distribute cocaine and possession of a fire arm during the commission of a drug crime. Hale is alleged to have participated with another indicted Laredo police officer, Pedro Martinez, in a scheme to use police cars to protect drug shipments. He faces up to life in prison on the conspiracy charge and a mandatory minimum of five years on the gun charge.

In Port St. Joe, Florida, a Gulf County Detention Center guard was arrested April 30 for allegedly smuggling marijuana and tobacco into the jail for prisoners. Guard John Pritchard, 24, is charged with conspiracy to introduce contraband and unlawful compensation. Also busted were a 24-year-old woman and a 24-year-old prisoner.

In Pocomoke City, Maryland, a Wiconomico County jail guard was arrested Saturday for selling cocaine on the streets. Jeremy Dashawn Moore, 29, faces 15 counts of cocaine possession and distribution. He went down after an eight-month investigation by local law enforcement, which included the use of a confidential informant who repeatedly bought cocaine from Moore. He is now out on $90,000 bail.

back to top

Marijuana: Detroit Possession Legalization Initiative Hands in Signatures

Organizers of a municipal initiative that would decriminalize the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by adults handed in 6,000 signatures to the Detroit City Clerk Wednesday. They need only 3,700 valid signatures to make the ballot, so they have a quite comfortable cushion.

According to the Coalition for a Safer Detroit, which is spearheaded by long-time local activist Tim Beck and which organized the signature-gathering drive, more than 1,500 people were arrested for simple marijuana possession in Detroit last year. The group also reports that Detroit police have begun issuing "civil citations" for marijuana possession and seizing vehicles or other property owned by pot smokers. This asset seizure, which is done without a hearing, forces the ticketed person to pay large sums -- fines, towing and storage fees -- to retrieve the seized property -- and the "civil citation" is recorded as a misdemeanor on his criminal record.

The initiative would amend the city code to exempt from arrest or prosecution "the use or possession of less than one ounce of marijuana, on private property, by anyone who has attained the age of 21 years."

Passage of the initiative would not necessarily end pot possession arrests in Detroit. Detroit police could still charge marijuana users under state law if they so desired. But passage of the initiative would send a clear message to police, prosecutors, the city council, and the mayor that voters do not want their law enforcement resources wasted on minor pot busts.

back to top

Marijuana: Weed War Breaks Out Among Philly Politicos

We recently reported on the move by new Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams to treat marijuana possession cases more leniently. That didn't sit well with his predecessor, hard-line prosecutor Lynne Abraham, who used a US Senate committee hearing Monday to attack Williams for the move, which was also supported by two Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices. The Williams camp has responded in kind.

"Local gangs and marijuana growers everywhere are positively overjoyed" at the new policy, Abraham claimed. "'Welcome to Philadelphia, Light Up a Joint' may just be our new slogan."

The new policy, under which people caught with small amounts of marijuana would be charged with summary offenses instead of misdemeanors, would give a break to serious criminals, she argued. "They are the same criminals who ruin the city's neighborhoods by aggressive, destructive conduct, engage in shoot-outs, commit violent crimes to support their habits, and they intimidate or kill witnesses," Abraham said.

"These people arrested for 20 to 30 grams of pot are not first-time offenders for the most part," she said. "They frequently are the repeat offenders who have committed untold numbers of crimes and have been arrested dozens of times."

But Abraham wasn't done yet. "The marijuana market is into the billions. Now we are going to encourage its growth," she continued. "Just think of all those Customs officers on the US-Mexico border trying to stem the tide of marijuana mules, who now will be welcomed to bring their product into Philadelphia. The drug cartels who import pot from Mexico are thrilled," she asserted.

"Hyperbole," is how Williams' top aide, First Deputy District Attorney Joseph McGettigan described Abraham's assault. Abraham misrepresented the policy shift and provided a distorted description of those arrested in minor pot busts, he said. "I would see no evidence that the de minimus users of marijuana are significant contributors to this supposed Wild West violence," he said.

Chris Goldstein, a leader of Philadelphia NORML who lobbied city officials for the change, said he was "stunned" by Abraham's remarks. "This is a joke," he said. "It's like a fusillade of falsehoods here." Most pot is domestically grown, he said, and most smokers posed no threat to anyone. "This is a false characterization of the marijuana users of Philadelphia," Goldstein said. "The vast majority of the marijuana smokers are law-abiding citizens who are working every day to contribute to this city."

Feuding between the current and former district attorneys has gone on since 2005, when Williams highlighted a low conviction rate under Abraham when he sought to unseat her in the Democratic primary. Abraham beat back that challenge, but decided not to run for reelection last year. Since taking office, Williams has shaken up the department and taken other steps that implicitly criticize Abraham's tenure.

While Abraham is squawking about Williams' minor reform, Philadelphia lags behind dozens of cities that have passed "lowest law enforcement priority" initiatives and the 13 states that have already decriminalized possession of small amounts of pot.

back to top

Drug Testing: Louisiana House Committee Passes Voluntary Drug Tests for Officials Bill

Setting aside other, less pressing business, the Louisiana House Committee on House and Governmental Affairs approved a bill, HB 1352, which would allow lawmakers and elected officials to take a voluntary drug test and mental health evaluation after election, with the state paying the tab. The bill would also allow testees to post the results on the Internet. The bill is the brainchild of Rep. John LaBruzzo (R-Metairie), who has also sponsored a bill mandating drug testing for welfare recipients.

Under the bill, the House, Senate, or elected official's office would have to pay the cost of the drug test, which could be as much as $40. No figure was given for the costs of a mental health examination. The bill now moves to the House Appropriations Committee, which will evaluate its costs.

LaBruzzo's bill originally contained only the drug testing provision, but according to the account of the New Orleans Times-Picayune, Rep. Nancy Lang (R-Lafayette) half-jokingly asked, "Have you considered having legislators undergo a mental health test?" An amendment to that effect was then offered and accepted.

Thousands of state employees, as well as all applicants for state jobs, are required to take drug tests under state law now. "We should apply ourselves to the same rules as state employees," LaBruzzo said.

"I think it is a lot of window dressing," said Rep. Patrick Connery (R-Harvey), before voting for it. He said legislators could simply abstain from drugs for long enough to pass a drug test, then take one and post the results online.

"If it is voluntary, and somebody is on drugs, why would he take it?" asked Rep. Wayne Waddell (R-Shreveport). "You are putting the perception out there that those who don't take it are on drugs."

The evidence is building that those legislators really do need those mental health evaluations.

back to top

Canada: Tories Reintroduce Mandatory Minimum Marijuana Bill

Canada's Conservative government this week reintroduced a controversial bill, now called S-10, that would impose mandatory minimum prison sentences on people who grew as few as six marijuana plants or produced any amount of hashish. The bill is part of a broader Conservative "tough on crime" agenda being reintroduced after Prime Minister Stephen Harper suddenly ended the last session of Parliament last winter.

Last year, the bill, then known as C-15, passed the lower house, but had been amended by the Senate to raise the floor for mandatory minimum sentences to 201 plants and exempt aboriginal people from the mandatory minimums. That didn't set well with the Harper government, which has since appointed enough Conservatives to the Senate to give the party a majority as well as the House of Commons. It now plans to shove through its original, hard-line bill.

"All I'll say is I wasn't impressed by the amendments made in the Senate and again we will be introducing it into the Senate. The bill that we will introduce I'm confident will have a much better chance of passing," Justice Minister Rob Nicholson told The Canadian Press in an interview Sunday. "They watered down some of the provisions with respect to the penalties. They wanted a separate aboriginal system. And again we want the bill to apply to everybody. And the penalties we were comfortable with."

The bill comes even as for the last two years, a majority of Canadians have voiced support for legalizing marijuana. In previous incarnations, the bill excited furious opposition, not only from pot aficionados, but also among researchers, drug policy groups, public health and harm reduction groups, and within Parliament itself.

"The bill is a disaster for Canada," said activist Jacob Hunter of Why Prohibition, which is organizing opposition. "S-10 will imprison thousands of Canadians for victimless crimes, send people to jail for growing 6 marijuana plants, making any hashish or baked goods, and a host of other offenses," he said.

"There is no evidence that S-10 will work," Hunter said. "Indeed, every scientific study says it will fail. We know that prohibition has never worked, and we know that mandatory minimum sentences only increase the violence in our society."

back to top

Europe: European Court of Justice Hears Case That Could Ban Foreigners from Dutch Cannabis Cafes

Late last month, the European Court of Justice heard arguments in a case that could open the door to all but Dutch citizens being banned from the country's famous cannabis cafes. The case, Josemans v. Maastricht, pits a Dutch border town coffee shop owner against his municipal government, and behind it, the Dutch government and the governments of Belgium, France, and Germany.

The case dates back to 2006, when Maastricht, right on the Belgian border and only a half hour from Germany, passed a municipal ordinance prohibiting foreigners from entering coffee shops. Shortly after that, police found two foreigners in the Easy Going coffee shop owned by Marc Joseman, who is also the leader of a regional association of coffee shop owners. That allowed the city to bring a test case, and the ordinance has not been applied pending the result of the case.

The case pits Dutch drug policy, which tolerates the sale of marijuana through the coffee shops, but in which some now wish to incorporate a limiting of "drug tourism," against the European Union's laws governing free trade on the continent. The EU guarantees a free, unified market of goods and services among its members. The question now before the court is whether that should apply to Holland's tolerated-but-not-officially-legal coffee shop industry.

Joseman's lawyer, Andre Beckers, argued that marijuana is an economic commodity like any other and should be treated as such. But Sander Lely, representing the city of Maastricht argued that marijuana is "contraband" and cannot be covered by regulations governing licit commodities.

The Dutch and Belgian governments supported that argument, saying barring foreigners from the coffee shops was important for maintaining public order in the EU. The Belgian representative asked the court to consider the "nuisance" of French pot smokers driving through Belgium, drug smuggling, and coffee shop visitors driving back home while high.

But European Commission representative Hubert van Vliet warned of possible consequences if the court found that the coffee shops were not subject to EU laws. "Everything pertaining to coffee shops would then be exempt," he argued. "What will that mean for the border workers employed there? The free flow of capital would also be affected, which means only Dutch nationals would be allowed to own coffee shops."

Van Vliet also referred to an earlier ruling by the court in a case involving Polish prostitutes in Holland in which the court held that a member state could not let its own residents conduct a business while blocking other EU nationals from doing the same. And he asked why less onerous measures had not been tried. "The European Commission does not oppose a test case in itself," he said. "But why haven't less far-reaching measures been tried first, such as a customer-card system, reducing the maximum amount available to single customers (from 5 to 3 grams for instance) or requiring customers to consume purchased wares on the spot?"

There is no firm date for a ruling, but the court said it would move swiftly. Once the European Court of Justice makes its decision, the case will move back to the Dutch courts, where the Council of State is expected to rule before year's end. Until then, new measures aimed at keeping non-Dutch out of coffee shops are on hold.

back to top

Weekly: This Week in History

May 13, 1996: The Weekly Standard reports: "Coast Guard cocaine and marijuana seizures are down 45 and 90 percent, respectively, since 1991. In 1994, the Customs Service let two million commercial trucks pass through three of the busiest ports-of-entry on the Mexican border without seizing a single kilogram of cocaine. Between 1993 and early 1995, the estimated smuggling 'disruption rate' achieved by federal interdiction agencies fell 53 percent -- the equivalent of 84 more metric tons of cocaine and marijuana arriving unimpeded in the United States each year."

May 12, 1998: The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) places an ad in the New York Times Op-Ed section headlined, "Let me ask you something... If you had a choice, what would it be, Marijuana or Martinis?" Note: The ACLU has opposed marijuana prohibition since 1968, and overall drug prohibition since 1994.

May 11, 2000: Mexican cartel leaders the Arellano-Felix brothers are charged with 10 counts of drug trafficking, conspiracy, money laundering and aiding and abetting violent crimes. The US State Department offers a $2 million reward for information leading to their arrest and conviction.

May 9, 2001: The Bush Administration announces its intention to nominate US Representative Asa Hutchinson, Republican of Arkansas, to the position of Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, replacing Acting Administrator Donnie Marshall.

May 9, 2001: At a hearing, Attorney General John Ashcroft testifies that the Justice Department has no higher priority than preventing terrorism. But a day later the department issues budgetary guidance for FY2003 to make reducing the trafficking of illegal drugs one of the two top priorities.

May 10, 2001: President Bush nominates John P. Walters as America's new Drug Czar.

May 8, 2002: The Black Ministers Council of New Jersey announces a campaign to inform minority drivers that they have a right to refuse to submit to automobile consent searches, which have been the focus of the fight over racial profiling. The ministers said at a State House news conference that they would begin their "Just Say No" campaign the following week, in the form of messages to minority churches and the news media.

back to top

Weekly: Blogging @ the Speakeasy

Along with our weekly in-depth Chronicle reporting, DRCNet also provides daily content in the way of blogging in the Stop the Drug War Speakeasy -- huge numbers of people have been reading it recently -- as well as Latest News links (upper right-hand corner of most web pages), event listings (lower right-hand corner) and other info. Check out DRCNet every day to stay on top of the drug reform game! Check out the Speakeasy main page at http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy.

Since last issue:

Scott Morgan writes: "Is Medical Marijuana a Step Towards Full Legalization?," "A Small Bag of Marijuana = Police Shooting Your Dogs in Front of Your Child," "Cop Accidentally Argues for Marijuana Legalization," "'This Administration Firmly Opposes the Legalization of Marijuana'," "Weird Drama at the Drug Czar's Office."

Phil Smith posts early copies of Drug War Chronicle articles.

David Guard posts numerous press releases, action alerts and other organizational announcements in the In the Trenches blog.

Again, http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy is the online place to stay in the loop for the fight to stop the war on drugs. Thanks for reading, and please join us on the comment boards.

back to top