Skip to main content

Latest

Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle

Free Speech: ACLU Backs Pain Activist's Effort to Quash Subpoena Issued in Kansas Case

Kansas federal prosecutor Tanya Treadway may have picked on the wrong woman when she went after the Pain Relief Network's Siobhan Reynolds for criticizing her prosecution of a local pain management physician. Now, the ACLU has joined Reynolds in fighting off a Treadway subpoena aimed at chilling her free speech rights and seeing what the doctor's defense is up to.
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle

Weekly: Blogging @ the Speakeasy

"Increased Marijuana Potency is an Argument for Legalization, Not Against It," "Wall Street Journal Thinks Americans Still Love the Drug War," "New Drug Czar Says 'War on Drugs' Mentality is Over," "CNBC Attacks Schwarzenegger for Endorsing Marijuana Legalization Debate," "DEA Agent Indicted for Framing 17 Innocent People," "Who Put Stephen Baldwin in Charge of Opposing Marijuana Legalization?," "Former Mexican President Calls for Drug Legalization Debate," "Obama Claims to Support Needle Exchange, While Telling Congress to Ban It," "The States Don't Need Federal Permission to Legalize Marijuana," "How Much Money is Marijuana Legalization Worth?"
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle

Warning: No One Is Safe from SWAT Raids

Our new video draws attention to the overuse of SWAT teams. The accompanying petition calls for their use to be limited to emergency or especially high-intensity situations only.
Blog

Increased Marijuana Potency is an Argument for Legalization, Not Against it

Here we go again:

The average potency of marijuana, which has risen steadily for three decades, has exceeded 10 percent for the first time, the U.S. government will report on Thursday.
…
The stronger marijuana is of particular concern because high concentrations of THC have the opposite effect of low concentrations, officials say. [CNN]

Who the f#$k said that? My god, is it really necessary to explain that stronger marijuana has the exact same effect, except more of it? This is basic, basic stuff here. The argument that good pot makes people feels unpleasant is just a non-starter, and I couldn’t be less surprised not to find a name attached to it.

Marijuana has gotten stronger under marijuana prohibition, just like alcohol got stronger during alcohol prohibition. Suppliers are incentivized to maximize the potency of their product to achieve the highest profit while reducing risk. Harsh laws also encourage consumers to obtain the strongest product since penalties are determined by weight, not potency.

In a regulated market, there would be high demand for lower potency marijuana, just as light beer and light cigarettes are extremely popular. A flavorful strain with mild effects and a low price could become a big seller, but nobody in their right mind would ever try to grow something like that right now. Why risk jail over a crop that's half as profitable? Prohibition is shaping the marijuana market, yet drug warriors ironically turn around and cite potent pot as an argument for keeping the policy that made things the way they are.

There's really nothing bad about higher potency pot, since it's completely non-toxic and easy to consume in controlled doses, but to whatever extent anyone is concerned about it, the obvious solution is regulation. Test it. Label it. Put age restrictions on it. Then watch in amazement as marijuana users become even healthier and happier than they already are.
Blog

Wall Street Journal Thinks Americans Still Love the Drug War

Yesterday's Wall Street Journal interview with new drug czar Gil Kerlikowske is generating discussion due to Kerlikowske's statement that we must move beyond the "war on drugs" analogy. But Gary Fields's piece also included a dubious assumption that shouldn’t escape notice:

Mr. Kerlikowske's comments are a signal that the Obama administration is set to follow a more moderate -- and likely more controversial -- stance on the nation's drug problems. Prior administrations talked about pushing treatment and reducing demand while continuing to focus primarily on a tough criminal-justice approach.

This is controversial? There is no evidence of that. In fact, everywhere you look, you'll see a changing political climate with regards to drug policy:

1. Obama made repeated statements in favor of various drug policy reforms on the campaign trail, including support for medical marijuana, treatment over incarceration, needle exchange, and fixing the crack/cocaine sentencing disparity. In a hard-fought campaign, these were among his least controversial positions.

2. Support for legalizing marijuana is surging in America, currently polling as high as 52%. Since taking office, Obama's biggest controversy with regards to drug policy was his statement in opposition to legalizing marijuana.

3. A recent Zogby poll found that 76% of Americans believe the war on drugs has failed. This view was held by a majority of Democrats, Republicans, and independents.

The idea that there's anything controversial about moving towards a more moderate drug policy is just false on its face. The opposite is true. Americans are tired of the "tough criminal justice approach" and they elected a president who said he'd bring a new perspective to this issue.

If anything, it would have made more sense to say these policy shifts will most likely make our drug policy less controversial. Certainly, that's what Kerlikowske expects by making these conciliatory remarks. He's pandering to the growing public sentiment that the drug war is getting out of hand. Seriously, why on earth would anyone expect controversy over this? To the contrary, people find it reassuring, which is exactly why the White House is framing it this way. I thought that was obvious.

Thus, with this one seemingly harmless quip, "likely more controversial," the WSJ ends up missing the entire point of the story and utterly misdiagnosing what Kerlikowske represents. Public attitudes about the war on drugs are changing, thereby forcing our political leadership to begin implementing certain popular reforms while generally reframing the entire issue.

Any questions?
In The Trenches

International Drug Policy Consortium Alert -- May 2009

IDPC Alert - May 2009

Welcome to the May 2009 IDPC Alert.  This Alert contains news items, updates on the latest publications and upcoming events.  Please note that the IDPC website address and email addresses have changed.  The IDPC website address is now www.idpc.net - the content is being updated and we plan to re-launch the website in early June.  The new IDPC staff and associate emails are as follows:

Ann Fordham – [email protected]
Mike Trace – [email protected]
Dave Bewley-Taylor – [email protected]
Gabor Somogyi – [email protected]
Genevieve Horwood – [email protected]
Chris Hallam – [email protected]
Coletta Youngers – [email protected]
Grazia Zuffa – [email protected]

Although the old addresses will auto-forward for a limited period, please update your address books.
 

Recent publications

IDPC Concept Note: Effective Drug Law Enforcement

Many law enforcement managers and analysts have come to the conclusion that strong action against drug production, distribution and use cannot be successful in eradicating drug markets, and that new strategies and approaches are needed. Consistent with general IDPC drug policy principles, we argue in this paper that the focus of law enforcement action against illegal drug markets should move towards partnership work to reduce the health and social consequences, such as drug related crime or HIV/AIDS. The concept paper describes an IDPC project that aims to bring together law enforcement managers and strategists from around the world to refine ideas for effective use of law enforcement resources, and promote these strategies to the relevant authorities. Read the concept note. If you know of any senior law enforcement managers who are supportive of these principles, and who would be interested in engaging with the team currently working on this project, please put them in touch with Ann Fordham at [email protected].


The Swiss Four Pillars Policy: An evolution from local experimentation to federal law – a briefing paper by the Beckley Foundation’s Drug Policy Programme

Within the context of the November referendum, this briefing paper aims to relate lessons learned by the incremental implementation of the Four Pillar Policy in Switzerland.  Initially innovative and centred in ‘progressive’ urban areas, the 4-Pillar Policy spread little by little throughout the nation.  Considered politically radical at its inception, the principle of harm reduction gradually gained the support of the population as a whole.  Read the report.


The Incarceration of Drug Offenders: An Overview – a report by the Beckley Foundation’s Drug Policy Programme

This report published by the Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme in partnership with the International Centre for Prison Studies at Kings College London, revisits the topic of the incarceration of drug offenders. The report provides an overview of some of the available incarceration data from around the world and brings together much contemporary research on the topic. A great deal of the discussion concerns one of the most enthusiastic supporters of incarceration as a drug prevention measure, the United States.  It is suggested however, that the results of policy within the United States should be used as evidence to encourage other member states not to follow this route. Read the report.


Compulsory Drug Treatment in Thailand: Observations on the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act B.E. 2545 (2002) – a report by the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

This paper has two main objectives. The first objective is to provide a general overview of Thailand’s Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act, B.E. 2545 (2002) (“the Act”) and the system of diversion into compulsory drug treatment that the Act has established. The second objective of this paper is to offer some preliminary observations on the implementation of the Act on its own terms — i.e., that people who are dependent on drugs should be “treated as patients and not criminals.” One of the central findings of this paper is that this approach is undermined by a number of different ways the Act has been implemented.  Read the report.

In The Trenches

The Sentencing Project: Disenfranchisement News 5/14/09

Washington State: Voting Equals Productive, Law-abiding Citizens Samuel Merrill, the legislative chair for the Friends Committee on Washington Public Policy, published an op-ed column in the News Tribune applauding Gov. Chris Gregoire's recent move to eliminate what was referred to as a "poll tax" for voters with felony offenses. Applauding the legislators who backed the bill, he stated "the right to vote is an essential step in encouraging those returning from prison to feel that they, too, have a stake in our society and a chance to become productive, stable and law-abiding citizens." The law takes affect July 26. Pennsylvania: Inmates to Receive Notification of Voting Rights, Materials A state House committee passed a bill that would require Pennsylvania prisons to provide soon-to-be released inmates with voter-registration materials. "Doing so would benefit the inmates and society," stated a Daily Review editorial. "State lawmakers should pass the bill and Gov. Ed Rendell should sign it as a means to help those who have broken the law to embrace better citizenship, and to help their communities in the process." - - - - - - Help The Sentencing Project continue to bring you news and updates on disenfranchisement! Make a contribution today. Contact Information -- e-mail: [email protected], web: http://www.sentencingproject.org
In The Trenches

Drug Sense FOCUS ALERT: #403 White House Czar Calls for End to 'War on Drugs'

Readers of The Wall Street Journal today will find a headline and article which would have seemed unlikely last year even after the election. The Wall Street Journal competes with USA today for the top U.S. circulation spot with a circulation of over two million copies. The newspaper reaches an audience which is more influential. Articles and opinion items which question the war on drugs appear to be increasing as may be seen at http://www.mapinc.org/source/Wall+Street+Journal News items about our new drug czar are found at http://www.mapinc.org/people/Kerlikowske Both are worthy targets for your letters to the editor. ********************************************************************** Page: A3 Copyright: 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Contact: [email protected] Author: Gary Fields WHITE HOUSE CZAR CALLS FOR END TO 'WAR ON DRUGS' Kerlikowske Says Analogy Is Counterproductive; Shift Aligns With Administration Preference for Treatment Over Incarceration WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration's new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting "a war on drugs," a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use. In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation's drug issues. "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," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country." Mr. Kerlikowske's comments are a signal that the Obama administration is set to follow a more moderate -- and likely more controversial -- stance on the nation's drug problems. Prior administrations talked about pushing treatment and reducing demand while continuing to focus primarily on a tough criminal-justice approach. The Obama administration is likely to deal with drugs as a matter of public health rather than criminal justice alone, with treatment's role growing relative to incarceration, Mr. Kerlikowske said. Already, the administration has called for an end to the disparity in how crimes involving crack cocaine and powder cocaine are dealt with. Critics of the law say it unfairly targeted African-American communities, where crack is more prevalent. The administration also said federal authorities would no longer raid medical-marijuana dispensaries in the 13 states where voters have made medical marijuana legal. Agents had previously done so under federal law, which doesn't provide for any exceptions to its marijuana prohibition. During the presidential campaign, President Barack Obama also talked about ending the federal ban on funding for needle-exchange programs, which are used to stem the spread of HIV among intravenous-drug users. The drug czar doesn't have the power to enforce any of these changes himself, but Mr. Kerlikowske plans to work with Congress and other agencies to alter current policies. He said he hasn't yet focused on U.S. policy toward fighting drug-related crime in other countries. Mr. Kerlikowske was most recently the police chief in Seattle, a city known for experimenting with drug programs. In 2003, voters there passed an initiative making the enforcement of simple marijuana violations a low priority. The city has long had a needle-exchange program and hosts Hempfest, which draws tens of thousands of hemp and marijuana advocates. Seattle currently is considering setting up a project that would divert drug defendants to treatment programs. Mr. Kerlikowske said he opposed the city's 2003 initiative on police priorities. His officers, however, say drug enforcement -- especially for pot crimes -- took a back seat, according to Sgt. Richard O'Neill, president of the Seattle Police Officers Guild. One result was an open-air drug market in the downtown business district, Mr. O'Neill said. "The average rank-and-file officer is saying, 'He can't control two blocks of Seattle, how is he going to control the nation?' " Mr. O'Neill said. Sen. Tom Coburn, the lone senator to vote against Mr. Kerlikowske, was concerned about the permissive attitude toward marijuana enforcement, a spokesman for the conservative Oklahoma Republican said. [drug war] Others said they are pleased by the way Seattle police balanced the available options. "I think he believes there is a place for using the criminal sanctions to address the drug-abuse problem, but he's more open to giving a hard look to solutions that look at the demand side of the equation," said Alison Holcomb, drug-policy director with the Washington state American Civil Liberties Union. Mr. Kerlikowske said the issue was one of limited police resources, adding that he doesn't support efforts to legalize drugs. He also said he supports needle-exchange programs, calling them "part of a complete public-health model for dealing with addiction." Mr. Kerlikowske's career began in St. Petersburg, Fla. He recalled one incident as a Florida undercover officer during the 1970s that spurred his thinking that arrests alone wouldn't fix matters. "While we were sitting there, the guy we're buying from is smoking pot and his toddler comes over and he blows smoke in the toddler's face," Mr. Kerlikowske said. "You go home at night, and you think of your own kids and your own family and you realize" the depth of the problem. Since then, he has run four police departments, as well as the Justice Department's Office of Community Policing during the Clinton administration. Ethan Nadelmann of the Drug Policy Alliance, a group that supports legalization of medical marijuana, said he is "cautiously optimistic" about Mr. Kerlikowske. "The analogy we have is this is like turning around an ocean liner," he said. "What's important is the damn thing is beginning to turn." James Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, the nation's largest law-enforcement labor organization, said that while he holds Mr. Kerlikowske in high regard, police officers are wary. "While I don't necessarily disagree with Gil's focus on treatment and demand reduction, I don't want to see it at the expense of law enforcement. People need to understand that when they violate the law there are consequences." ********************************************************************** PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER Please post copies of your letters to the sent letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed. Subscribing to the Sent LTE list will help you to review other sent LTEs and perhaps come up with new ideas or approaches. To subscribe to the Sent LTE mailing list see http://www.mapinc.org/lists/index.htm#form Suggestions for writing LTEs are at our Media Activism Center http://www.mapinc.org/resource/#guides ********************************************************************** Prepared by: Richard Lake, Senior Editor www.mapinc.org === . DrugSense provides many services at no charge, but they are not free to produce. Your contributions make DrugSense and its Media Awareness Project (MAP) happen. Please donate today. Our secure Web server at http://www.drugsense.org/donate.htm accepts credit cards and Paypal. Or, mail your check or money order to: DrugSense 14252 Culver Drive #328 Irvine, CA 92604-0326. (800) 266 5759
Blog