Latest

On the campaign trail, Obama made clear statements in support of needle exchange as a proven means of reducing transmission of AIDS and other diseases among drug users. Once in office, the President reiterated his commitment to ending the federal blockade against these life-saving programs:

The President also supports lifting the federal ban on needle exchange, which could dramatically reduce rates of infection among drug users.

That language appeared on the President's own website, until it was ominously removed a couple weeks ago. Today, the President's Budget (pg. 795) formally announces Obama's decision to continue the federal needle exchange ban:

"Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no funds appropriated in this Act shall be used to carry out any program of distributing sterile needles or syringes for the hypodermic injection of any illegal drug."

With that one sentence, Obama blatantly violates an important campaign promise and chooses politics over science with thousands of lives on the line. It's just disgraceful, and if he thought no one would notice, he was wrong.  

This isn't a matter of Obama not understanding the issue. He's already said that needle exchange would "dramatically reduce rates of infection among drug users," so it should be unnecessary to further debate that point or dig any deeper into the towering mountain of evidence surrounding the efficacy of needle exchange programs.

Apparently, the President simply isn't willing to spend political capital saving the lives of drug users. If this is all about politics, and I believe it is, then the question that must be asked is why the hell the President thinks needle exchange is a political liability. When Jim Ramstad's name was circulating as potential nominee for drug czar, his opposition to needle exchange was a big factor in sinking his candidacy. Moreover, the newly appointed drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, is known for supporting needle exchange during his tenure as Seattle Police Chief. Maybe Obama should talk to his new drug czar before resurrecting the Bush Administration's failed and fatal policy of opposing harm reduction.

There is simply no serious or credible opposition to implementing proven life-saving programs in the fight against AIDS. Obama's previous statements in support of such programs provoked zero backlash on the campaign trail and obviously didn’t prevent him from becoming President. All he had to do was leave this stupid language out of the budget -- like he said he would -- and no one would even have noticed.

Instead, we're forced to come to terms with the reality that our President is willing to sacrifice human lives based on an ill-conceived perception of political convenience and nothing more.

Please contact the White House to demand that Obama keep his promise to support needle exchange and save lives.

It's official:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate on Thursday approved the nomination of Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske as the nation's drug czar, signaling a change in U.S. drug policy.

Kerlikowske, a 36-year law enforcement veteran who has been Seattle's top cop for nine years, has pledged to take a balanced, science-based approach to the job. He also said he will focus on reducing demand for illicit drugs in the United States — a sharp contrast from the Bush administration's focus on intercepting drugs as they cross the border and punishing drug crimes.

I like the sound of that, but I haven't seen any evidence that Kerlikowske won't be supporting aggressive interdiction programs and harsh sentences. Regardless, there are a few reasons to feel optimistic that he will represent a departure from the blind arrogance and aggression of his predecessors.

Former Seattle Police Chief and LEAP member Norm Stamper has a terrific open letter to Kerlikowske.

The effects of long-term addiction has shown that substantial changes in the way the brain functions are present long after the addict has stopped using drugs.

I've previously noted the reluctance of the current administration to actually debate marijuana legalization. When cornered, they'll say they're against it, but they won’t say why or offer any interesting observations about our marijuana laws.

Another great example appeared in this superb MSN piece on the merits of legalizing and taxing marijuana. The article goes on and on about the economic benefits of legalization, to which the drug czar's office replied with a shrug:

A spokesman for the drug policy office declined to comment, saying the office wanted to wait until the Senate has confirmed Obama's drug czar nominee, Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske.

This wait-and-see response may sound reasonable enough, but it's totally nuts when you consider that opposing legalization is literally one of the fundamental purposes of the this office as defined by law:

Responsibilities. --The Director-- [...]

(12) shall ensure that no Federal funds appropriated to the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall be expended for any study or contract relating to the legalization (for a medical use or any other use) of a substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812) and take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance (in any form) that--

   1. is listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and
   2. has not been approved for use for medical purposes by the Food and Drug Administration;

That is all perfectly straightforward, and yet the office currently has no talking points prepared when a reporter calls for a quote about marijuana legalization? ONDCP has never been anything other than a clearinghouse for unhinged drug war propaganda. It is literally a factory for designing crazy arguments against legalizing drugs. So if they can't answer a simple pot policy question without the help of a guy who doesn’t even work there yet, then it's safe to say that ONDCP as we know it has been completely destroyed.

Once the new drug czar arrives, the office will no doubt regroup and formulate some kind of response to the thunderous cries for reform that presently surround them. I'm sure whatever they present will be deeply problematic. But it is simply delicious to witness even a temporary collapse of the once-great government drug war propaganda machine.

Opponents of taxing/regulating marijuana and other drugs frequently maintain that there's just no way we can really cripple the black market. It's true insofar as there's a black market for everything (I saw a lady buy a bootleg DVD from a guy on the subway recently). But people overwhelmingly prefer to do their shopping at actual stores. The burden shouldn’t be on us to prove that pot stores can effectively corner the market on selling pot. Of course they can.

The only reason anyone has a hard time picturing the demise of the traditional drug dealer is because there's so damn many of them, every one of which was created when we stupidly tried to ban drugs.

Anyway, go read this post from Pete Guither which addresses this point quite well.

This is interesting/disturbing:

Kern Sheriff’s deputies and agents from the Drug Enforcement Agency were searching a medical marijuana store in east Bakersfield Wednesday afternoon.
…
Calls to the sheriff’s department were not immediately returned. A spokesman from the DEA said that agency was there only to assist. The spokesman said the sheriff’s department was the lead agency in the case.
…
Sheriff Donny Youngblood said his office will not interfere with the operation of non-profit medical co-operatives run by patients for patients. But, he said, dispensaries that sell marijuana for a profit should be expected to be treated like other drug dealers. [KGET]

DEA explained that they're "only there to assist," but that doesn’t eliminate the possibility of federal charges down the road. This isn’t the first time DEA has "assisted" local law enforcement during a dispensary raid. I just spoke with Caren Woodson at Americans for Safe Access and they're waiting to learn more about the situation.

I'll update as details emerge.

Update: ASA just informed me that this appears to be a DEA raid being assisted by local authorities, rather than the other way around.

Update 2: Turns out it really was a state raid, based on a state warrant. ASA got some mixed messages from the PR dept. at DEA.