BLOG
War on Drugs Pales in Comparison to Legalized Health Care Industry
In 1971, the American government took its first step in the War on Drugs when President Richard Nixon declared the beginning of what would become a four-decade battle. Since then, according to Esquire Magazine, its costs have ballooned to $52.3 billion dollars in taxpayer funds and 15,223 dead in 2009 alone. But the truly egregious fact is that the government, on one hand, punishes offenders for minor offenses, yet sanctions and encourages the $291 billion dollar prescription drug industry because it is backed by powerful lobbyists on K Street. photo credit: RESchroeder The situation has become so sordid that almost 50 million Americans are uninsured, according to health insurance provider, "Affordable Health Insurance." These Americans are growing quickly as a result of the economic malaise of 2008-2009, and because they pay inflated prices for government-sanctioned drugs they've opted not to pay the equally inflated premiums for health plans with prescription coverage. It's time for Congress to act and stop the untrammeled, exponential growth in drug costs by ending the War on Drugs and legalizing certain non-debilitating and clinically proven drugs on the free market. After all, a free market will ensure lower prices for all, lower health care costs, and a better quality of life.
Employment Discrimination Against Medical Marijuana Patients Must End
If 80% of Americans support medical marijuana, why do we keep hearing stories like this one:Jane Roe has suffered from severe migraines for years⦠Jane tried every prescription drug imaginable but none gave her relief. She finally found the answer after receiving authorization for medical marijuana from a doctor. Not long after that, Jane was hired at a company called TeleTech. Her position involved answering customer service calls for Sprint at TeleTech's Bremerton office. Jane was up front about her situation with the company from the very start.Roe: "I knew that I already had medical marijuana; I didn't want to have to hide it. So I went to the Human Resources Department and provided them with a copy, they said they did not want one. They told me to still go take the drug test."Jane did as she was asked and then began her training program. On her tenth day, she was called out of the training. She was told her drug test had come back positive and she would have to leave immediately. Jane felt humiliated. [KUOW.org]She's not the one who should be embarrassed by this. TeleTech is the second company this month to get ugly press attention for discriminating against patients. In the current political climate, only an idiot would want their business associated with this sort of reckless cruelty and prejudice.Unfortunately, those enforcing such arbitrary policies are still hiding behind claims of conflicting laws and vague liability concerns. It might be totally incoherent, but it goes to show how federal intransigence continues to leave patients vulnerable to abuse despite improvements in enforcement policy. It's time for the White House to move beyond the argument that medical marijuana raids are a "poor use of resources," and directly acknowledge that medical use is a basic human right. Even the worst drug warriors will be the first to insist that patients aren't arrested and jailed in the war on medical marijuana. Shouldn't firing patients from their jobs be considered comparably reprehensible?
Is it Time for Mexico to Cut a Deal With the Drug Cartels? Jorge Castaneda Wonders If It Hasn't Happened Already
The Winds of Change: Drug Policy in the World opened yesterday in Colonia Napoles, a ritzy area of Mexico City. I would have blogged about it yesterday, but I was in the conference all day long, and in the evening, I attended a related event where they plied us with wine, so I never got around to it. Former Mexican foreign minister Jorge Castaneda got it all started in fine provocative form. He suggested during the opening session that Mexico needs to go back to the "good old days" of rule by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), at least when it comes to dealing with drug trafficking organizations. The PRI, of course, ruled Mexico in a virtual one-party state for 70 years before being defeated by Vicente Fox and the conservative National Action Party (PAN) in the 2000 elections. It was widely (and correctly) seen as not fighting the drug trade so much as managing it. Fox, under whom Castaneda served, started to move against the cartels, and his successor, Calderon, accelerated the offensive by bringing in the military in a big way. The result has been a bloody disaster, with Mexico being wracked by an ever mounting death toll as the army and federal police wage war on the so-called cartels, the cartels wage war on the police and the army, and when they're not busy killing cops and soldiers, turn their guns on each other. And the drugs keep flowing north and the guns and cash keep flowing south. Perhaps it is time to return to a quiet arrangement with the cartels, Castaneda suggested. "How do we construct a modus vivendi?" he asked. "The Americans have a modus vivendi in Afghanistan," he noted pointedly. "They don't care if Afghanistan exports heroin to the rest of the world; they are at war with Al Qaeda." Castenada's comments on Afghanistan rang especially true this week, as American soldiers push through poppy fields in their offensive on Marja. The US has made an explicit decision to arrive at a modus vivendi with poppy farmers, although it still fights the trade by interdiction and going after traffickersâor at least those linked to the Taliban. President Karzai's buddies, not so much. Casteneda also came up with another provocative example, especially for Mexican leftists in the audience. "We had a modus vivendi with the Zapatistas in Chiapas," he noted. "We also pretended they were real guerrillas with their wooden rifles. We created a liberated zone, and the army respected it, and it's still there. But it is a simulationâthe army could eliminate it in 90 seconds." And in yet another provocative comment on the theme, Casteneda suggested that somebody may already have arrived at a modus vivendi with the Sinaloa Cartelâa suggestion that is getting big play in Mexican newspapers these days. "Why is it that of the 70,000 drug war prisoners in Mexico, only 800 are Chapo Guzman's men?" he asked. "Many people think the government has made a deal with the Sinaloa cartel. I don't know if it's true." This isn't the first time Castaneda has made provocative statements in recent months. At the Drug Policy Alliance conference in Albuquerque in November, he said bluntly that the Mexican military is committing extrajudicial executions of drug gang members and blithely repeated the charge when called on it. All of the Mexicans I've been talking to think Castaneda has political ambitions. Perhaps he's angling for a cabinet appointment in the next presidency or perhaps he's getting ready to run for political office himself. In any case, he certainly has no problem stirring things up when it comes to making allegations about what's going on beneath the surface in Mexico's drug war. Stay tuned for some more blog posts about the conference, which ended just a couple of hours ago. Now that it's done, I have some time to write about it.
Federal Policy on Medical Marijuana is Still a Confusing Mess
I'll be the first to tell you that medical marijuana is in a better position politically than ever before. Even the recent ugliness in Colorado doesn't approach what we've seen in years past (and you know it's true so don't accuse me of Obama-worship or naivety). But the fact remains that the current federal rules of engagement are impossibly vague and will inevitably become deeply problematic for both sides.  LA Times explains perfectly why this is so:The confusion can be resolved only by Washington. Fourteen states currently have medical marijuana laws, and more are likely to adopt them, multiplying the legal disarray exponentially.The new policy of respecting state laws is already helping to expand the medical marijuana map (NJ, DC), yet the feds still claim the right to intervene at their own discretion. DEA enforcement against clear violations of state law might be tolerated politically, but their active involvement becomes less sustainable as new states enter the picture. As long as DEA maintains its authority to enforce local regulations, any inaction on their part will inevitably resemble tacit approval. It makes far more sense to step aside entirely and let state police and state courts take full responsibility for interpreting and enforcing their own laws.If the White House wants to shield itself from political fallout over medical marijuana, the quickest and easiest approach is to get out of the game altogether.
Do You Think the Drug War Isn't a Big Deal in Mexico? Check This Out
I flew into Mexico City last night to attend the Winds of Change: Drug Policy in the World conference on Monday and Tuesday. I'll be blogging about and reporting on that next week. But today, I want to provide you with one example of how much the narco-violence and the Mexican government's response to it dominates the political discourse in Mexico these days. In today's print edition of the well-respected, slightly left-leaning Mexico City newspaper La Jornada, we have the following headlines on the front page and adjoining main news section: The front page is mainly a come-on for the rest of the paper. The big headline is "In Cancun, [Bolivian President] Evo [Morales] Announces a New OAS Without Canada or the United States." Then there is a half-page photo of the secretary of defense and two generals with a bikini-clad woman facing them, her upturned bottom getting plenty of space. The generals are announcing a pay raise for the troops. I have no idea what the bikini-clad woman was doing there. Then there are some teasers... Page 2--letters to the editor Page 3--The politics page. A story about Cuban-Mexican relations. Page 4--"The PAN [ruling party] 'Unauthorizes' Criticisms by [PAN Sen. Manuel] Clouthier [of Sinaloa]. Clouthier had accused the federal government of coddling "a state government that colludes with delinquency [the narcos]." Clouthier is talking about the state government of his own state, home of the Sinaloa Cartel. Page 5--"Secretary of Defense: It is Inconvenient and Undesirable to Make Permanent the Military Fight Against the Narco." On the same page, a cartoon with the defense secretary saying, "We need a legal framework for the drug war," and President Calderon replying, "Yes, a law that prohibits persecuting El Chapo [Guzman, head of the Sinaloa cartel], for example." Page 6--"The Defense Department Reinforces Security at its Headquarters Fearing Possible Attacks From the Hampa (Narcos). The subhead reads: "The Navy is Also Taking Measures After the Death of [cartel head] Arturo Beltran Leyva," who was gunned down by Naval Marines a few weeks ago." Also on page 6: "Complaints Against the Army Increase 400%, Says the National Commission on Human Rights.' Page 7--"It's Not the Army's Role to Fight the Narcos, Say Senators of the PRD, PRI, and PT." Those, of course, are the opposition parties. Also on page 7: "Initiatives Over Military Participation" about a legal framework for the military's role in the drug war. Also on page 7: "Colin Powell Singles Out the Work of Intelligence Against the Cartels" at a speech in Monterrey. The subhead reads: "He Recognizes the Role of the US in the Growth of Violence Here." Page 8--"The Federal Government Will Inaugurate an Office in Ciudad Juarez to Make Social Programs More Responsive." Also on page 8: "Yesterday's Wave of Violence Leaves 31 Executed, 11 of the Victims in Chihuahua." It is only by page 9 that La Jornada gets around to rest of the national news. The violence in Mexico may get the occasional 30-second treatment on the US networks and the occasional story in the US press, but down here it is a very big deal, all day and every day.
Dallas Police Plan Widespread Warrantless Drug Searches
As long as the public remains largely ignorant about 4th Amendment rights, police will continue to rely on coercive tactics that treat people as guilty until proven innocent:Dallas police began a new initiative today to combat drugs. Citywide, officers are headed to suspected drug houses to "knock and talk" with the occupants.The technique involves knocking on the door of a suspected drug house and trying to talk the people inside into inviting officers in to search without a warrant. Police can enter without a search warrant if they see illegal activity happening.Dallas police have long used the technique, but its use will be widened during the next few months to include more officers and more areas within the city. [Dallas Morning News]If this sounds to anyone like a program that only affects drug offenders, it's not. Police tactics like these are always framed as an effort to "get weapons and drugs off the street," but they are so much more than that. By definition, the people targeted under such policies are innocent citizens against whom police have no actionable evidence of criminal activity. After all, when police have credible facts indicating that drug crimes are taking place at a specific location, they may obtain a search warrant and enter lawfully. The "knock and talk" approach is used exclusively to enter private residences in the absence of probable cause. Vague and unfounded suspicions, or even prejudices, could ultimately determine which locations are singled out for investigation. In the process, innocent people living in high-crime neighborhoods are placed at great risk of arrest in the event that a guest, neighbor or former tenant left something illegal on their property.As misguided as these tactics are, there is one simple option available to concerned citizens who don't want police digging through their drawers: just don’t let them in. Unless you give them permission to enter, police need a warrant to search your home. You may simply decline the search and tell the officers that you'll gladly cooperate if they return with a warrant. If that makes you uncomfortable, another option is not to answer the door at all, which also reduces the likelihood of police claiming that they saw or smelled something illegal when you opened the door for them. The bottom line is that invasive "knock and talk" programs don't work if everyone knows their rights, which is why the D.C. police simply canceled theirs after we started doing this:Anyone in Dallas who's concerned about the new policy should consider organizing a similar effort.
Hypocritical Obama and Corporate Media Are Aggressively Undermining Pot Normalization
Hypocritical Obama and Corporate Media Are Aggressively Undermining Pot Normalization
Iowa Board of Pharmacy Recommends Medical Marijuana
The Iowa Board of Pharmacy voted unanimously Wednesday to recommend that state lawmakers reclassify marijuana as a Schedule II controlled substance and set up a task force to study how to create a medical marijuana program. Medical marijuana bills have failed to move in the state legislature, but the board's action could help spur forward momentum. Similarly to the federal Controlled Substances Act, Iowa law currently classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug with no proven medical use and a high potential for abuse. By recommending that marijuana be rescheduled to Schedule IIâa potential for abuse, but with accepted medical useâthe board acknowledged the herb's medical efficacy. Given the board's initial reluctance to take up the issue, the unanimous vote comes as something as a pleasant surprise to advocates. In May 2008, Iowans for Medical Marijuana founder Carl Olsen petitioned the board to reschedule marijuana, arguing that the evidence did not support its classification as Schedule I. The board rejected that request, and Olsen, three plaintiffs, and the ACLU of Iowa sued to force it to reconsider. (See the filings in the case here). Last year, a Polk County judge ordered the board to take another look at the matter. The board again declined to reclassify marijuana, but did agree to a series of four public hearings. It was after those hearings, which were packed with medical marijuana supporters, and after a scientific review of the literature, that the board acted this week. In doing so, it becomes the first state pharmacy board in the nation to take such a step before voters or lawmakers have legalized medical marijuana. The board's action also puts it squarely in line with popular sentiment in the Hawkeye State. According to an Iowa Poll released Tuesday, 64% of Iowans want medical marijuana to be legal. Now, if only the legislature will act on the recommendation of the board and the will of the voters.
Synthetic Marijuana: Let's Try Regulation Instead of Prohibition
If anyone hasn't heard yet about the exciting new drug that's just like pot, but won't make you fail a drug test or get you arrested, they're about to find out. The hype surrounding synthetic marijuana products, commonly known as Spice or K2, is growing and it's just a matter of time before the national hysteria kicks into full gear. This isn't the fake pot sold in High Times that doesn't get you high, and it's not Salvia that gives you terrifying hallucinations. Its effects are mild, pleasant, and remarkably familiar to the millions of Americans who already enjoy marijuana. This is the closest thing to legal marijuana anyone's ever seen in most parts of the country, and I have a feeling we're going to be talking about it a lot this year.Unfortunately, Spice's appeal could quickly become its downfall, given the strange drug war rule that a substance must be bad if it makes people feel good. Wouldn't it be nice if we could have a serious conversation about sensible regulations instead of the frenzied panic we've all come to expect when a new drug makes headlines?"A 10-year-old child could walk into a head shop and buy it," said West Plains Detective Shawn Rhoads. "It's not a tobacco, it's not regulated by anything. It would be like sending my 10-year-old son into Wal-Mart to buy potpourri." [AP]It really shouldnât be necessary to explain that nobody's selling Spice to children, but yes, there is a need for new policies to clarify where and to whom this product should be made available. We have an opportunity to make smart choices about how to deal with this, and we can't let the predictable anxieties of cops and legislators trainwreck the process through premature prohibition.Research into the drug's effects and possible risks is critical to protecting public health, but it's also an essential prerequisite to any discussion of making this illegal across the board. It's incredible that we've already got legislators in two states making moves to put people in jail over this stuff and they have no clue whether it's even remotely dangerous. Can't we at least indulge the pretext of some sort of scientific process here?
DEA Backs Down After Threatening Colorado Dispensaries
Jeffrey Sweetin of the DEA's Denver office on Saturday:"Technically, every dispensary in the state is in blatant violation of federal law," he said. "The time is coming when we go into a dispensary, we find out what their profit is, we seize the building and we arrest everybody. They're violating federal law; they're at risk of arrest and imprisonment." [Denver Post]Jeff Sweetin today:"We are not declaring war on dispensaries," he says -- though he adds with a laugh, "If we were declaring war on dispensaries, they would not be hard to find. You can't swing a dead cat around here without hitting thirty of them."Sweetin makes note of the fact that the DEA hasn't ever shut down a Colorado dispensary, and the agency doesn't plan on doing so unless there are aggravating factors involved -- like violence, ties to drug cartels or distribution to children. [Westword]It sounds an awful lot like Sweetin's comments over the weekend may have resulted in somebody important telling him to calm the hell down. What goes on behind the scenes with this stuff is a mystery to me, but I doubt Sweetin figured out on his own that those nasty comments about raiding dispensaries weren't playing well in the press. I'd prefer to think maybe he got a quick phone call from Washington. The DOJ's "official" policy of respecting state medical marijuana laws is hardly written in stone, leaving more than enough room for a nut like Sweetin to make a big mess provided that nobody yanks his leash. But if one thing is clear about medical marijuana policy under Obama, it's that they have no interest in doing battle with the 80% of Americans who support it. This latest episode isn't the first time one of the President's drug warriors has back-pedaled after making a stupid public comment about medical marijuana. There are new rules in place, and while they still leave much to be desired, it's important to appreciate the extent to which the old smash and grab medical marijuana policy has been put in check.The point here isnât that Obama loves medical marijuana, or that the DEA can now be counted on to behave itself. Politicians and drug war soldiers don't change overnight, but the mere expectation that the raids have ended can easily become a self-fulfilling prophecy when the media and the public generally believe such activity is now illegal in addition to being unpopular. Imagine trying to convict a medical marijuana defendant in federal court in the current political climate. If you lose, the Dept. of Justice will look impotent during a period of surging marijuana entrepreneurship, and if you win, Obama will get skewered in the press. So if rogue DEA officials still feel compelled to go around making angry threats in the newspaper, I say bring it on. The war on medical marijuana gets less popular every time they open their mouths.
Retirement Home Fires Staffer for Medical Marijuana Use
Even though only 20% of Americans still oppose medical marijuana, there's enough lingering prejudice to create serious problems for patients. Via MPP, here's another ugly example of the workplace discrimination many medical users continue to face:ANDERSON - Although he says he has a doctor's recommendation to smoke medical marijuana, the on-site manager of a senior apartment complex here claims he was fired by its new Southern California-based management company after he failed its drug-screening test.The firing of Christian Hughes, 33, who has two weeks in which to leave his apartment in the well-kept complex, has raised the ire of some of those senior citizens who live comfortably at the 81-unit Regency Place Senior Apartments on Red Bud Lane. [Record-Searchlight]Apparently, Hughes's popularity with the residents has made things complicated:Sixty-four-year-old Diane Bethany, an apartment complex resident who started a petition drive that obtained about 60 signatures in support of Hughes, says she and many others there are upset by his firing."He's a terrific guy," she said, adding that he's always been protective of the residents and goes above and beyond his management duties to help them out.I can't help but grin at the thought of a bunch of seniors signing a petition to protest an unfair marijuana policy. Hopefully, the press coverage will help Christian Hughes find new employment. Moreover, any companies that still discriminate against patients should take note of the public controversy you invite when you fire good people for bad reasons.
DEA Raids Legal Grower in Colorado, Threatens to Target Dispensaries
For the second time in as many weeks, DEA agents in Colorado raided a medical marijuana operation last Thursday. Highland Park medical marijuana patient and provider Chris Bartkowiscz had been seen showing off his basement garden Tuesday night in a blurb for an upcoming local news report. On Thursday, the DEA raided him, seizing his plants and growing equipment. Bartkowiscz has been jailed pending a decision from the US Attorney's Office on whether to charge him. That decision could come tomorrow. This despite last October's Department of Justice memorandum instructing federal agencies to lay off medical marijuana in states where it is legalâunless the provider is violating both state and federal law. DEA Denver Special Agent in Charge (SAC) Jeffrey Sweetin apparently didn't get the memo. Either that, or he is blatantly thumbing his nose at his bosses, the American attorney general and president. In a Saturday interview with local TV 9 News, Sweetin said that even though state law allows for medical marijuana, federal law does not. "We will continue to enforce the federal law. That's what we are paid to do," he said. Sweetin said the Justice Department guidelines give him discretion. "Discretion is: I can't send my DEA agents out on 10-plant grows. I'm not interested in that, it's not what we do. We work criminal organizations that are enterprises generating funds by distributing illegal substances," Sweetin said. Sweetin left open the door to go after medical marijuana dispensaries. "Technically, every dispensary in the state is in blatant violation of federal law. The time is coming when we go into a dispensary, we find out what their profit is, we seize the building and we arrest everybody. They're violating federal law; they're at risk of arrest and imprisonment," he told the Denver Post. "Technically, every dispensary in the state is in blatant violation of federal law." The October Justice Department memo said the feds should not go after people in "clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana." The memo said nothing about "large grows" or dispensaries not be included. Denver medical marijuana attorney Robert Corry is waiting to see whether the feds will charge Bartkowiscz. On Saturday, he filed a complaint with the Justice Department against Sweetin and the DEA, saying the raid on Bartkowiscz violated the agency's policy on enforcing drug laws in states that allow medical marijuana. Has Sweetin gone rogue? Or is the Obama administration retreating from the position staked out in the October memo? Stay tuned.
Angry Man Says Potheads Should be Kicked in the Nuts
Via DrugWarRant, here's a video that I'm sure all of you will find entertaining. I didn't think it was possible to hate marijuana more than Michael Savage does, but of course it is:As the debate over marijuana policy becomes increasingly mainstream, our opponents sound increasingly violent, reckless and insane.
Synthetic "Legal" Marijuana is Becoming Popular, So They're Trying to Ban it
One of the most interesting and least-discussed issues in drug policy over the past year is the emergence of synthetic marijuana products, sold under names such Spice and K2, which are being sold openly in head shops around the country. There's one important difference between this and the fake pot that's been advertised in High Times for many yearsâ¦it actually gets you high. The manufacturers behind this trend are reluctant to explain what's in their product, but the consensus seems to be that they've synthesized a unique combination of cannabinoids that aren't technically marijuana, but sure as hell do the trick. I'm not a scientist, but I've tried the stuff and it's legit. The effects, coupled with the fact that it's sold in stores and doesnât come up on any drug tests is enough to get a lot of people pretty excited about it.I'm a little confused about the legality of all this, given the breadth of federal legislation dealing with synthetic drugs. Nevertheless, legislators in Kansas and Missouri are trying to ban it, which gives the impression that it's legal for now:Missouri state Rep. Ward Franz, R-West Plains sponsored a bill that would add K2 to Missouriâs list of illegal drugs. That bill was heard before the House Public Safety committee Tuesday.â¦"We donât know much about this, but itâs going to end up killing somebody," Franz said.Or maybe it will cure cancer. Jut because it's a drug and people like it doesnât mean anyone has to die. In a sane society, the invention of a substance that enhances enjoyment would be considered cause for celebration, not a massive public health scare. Decades into our failed and vastly counterproductive effort to eradicate marijuana, we have an opportunity not to ban something similar without first studying it to see if it's actually dangerous. If synthetic marijuana products are prohibited without any effort to understand them, it will prove that the anti-drug zealots care more about imposing sobriety than protecting health.As advocates for sensible drug policy, we should defend the legality of new drugs as vigorously as we oppose prohibition of the old ones.
Europe: Anthrax Heroin Toll Rises as England Marks First Death
English authorities announced Wednesday that a Blackpool heroin user died of anthrax, making him the first fatality in England from what is apparently a batch of heroin contaminated with anthrax. The bad dope has been blamed for nine deaths in Scotland and one in Germany since the outbreak began in December. The anthrax fatality announcement from the National Health Service (NHS) in Blackpool came just five days after the Health Protection Agency issued a statement warning that a female heroin user in London had been hospitalized with anthrax. The spate of anthrax cases among heroin users is baffling police and health experts, who have yet to actually come up with any heroin samples containing anthrax spores. There is speculation that the heroin could have been contaminated at its likely source in Afghanistan, perhaps from contaminated soils or animal skins, or that it was present in a cutting agent added there or at some other point on its transcontinental trek to northern Europe. The cases in Germany and England have no known link to those in Scotland, leading to fears that tainted dope could be widespread. On the other hand, the numbers infected remain relatively small. Although harm reductionists and drug user advocates have called for measures including public information campaigns among users, swift access to drug treatment, and making prescription heroin more widely available, British health officials continue to do little more than tell users to quit. Dr. Arif Rajpura, director of public health at NHS Blackpool, was singing from the same official hymnal this week. He repeated warnings for users to stop using and advised them to be on the lookout for symptoms of anthrax, including rashes, swelling, severe headaches, and high fevers. "Heroin users are strongly advised to cease taking heroin by any route, if at all possible, and to seek help from their local drug treatment services. This is a very serious infection for drug users and prompt treatment is crucial," he said.
What's more important again?
I live in the "almost as backwards as Mississippi" state of Alabama and in November of 2009 a North Alabama judge put the drug war in perspective for me.
Various Interesting Links
The El Paso City Council is back with another drug policy reform resolution. LEAP has the details.CBS won't let NORML buy a ridiculously huge ad in Times Square because it's too political, even though CBS ran a super-controversial anti-abortion spot during the Super Bowl. Michael Savage hates marijuana. I don't even know where to begin with this. Listen at your own risk. Pete Guither just ruined your spring break plans. Well, actually it's the drug war's fault.
What's the Point of Asking Obama to Legalize Marijuana? I'll Explain.
In comments, Giordano questions the value of constantly confronting the President about marijuana legalization:In the end, it makes no sense at all to ask Obama for anything more than what heâs already done for medical marijuana. His candor on the subject of cannabis will probably wait for the day heâs no longer president, just as Bill Clinton waited before scoffing at U.S. marijuana penalties.All of this is certainly worth explaining to anyone who genuinely expects the President to abolish marijuana prohibition. Yes, it's helpful to understand that he's not going to do that, neither next week nor on his last day in office. But I donât think any willingness on the President's part to publicly support legalization is necessary to justify the strategic efficacy of hounding him about it at almost every opportunity.I think we score points simply by making ourselves visible. Our early success at saturating the President's web forums was followed by an unprecedented surge in favorable media coverage. By the time the Michael Phelps saga erupted, we'd already established marijuana reform as one of the leading political issues on the internet. Web trends are measured in dollar signs like never before and we're now witnessing the rewards of our proven ability to generate clicks. Obama's new medical marijuana policy followed on the heels of an epic escalation in positive marijuana reporting from the mainstream press. The White House's decision to leak the story to the AP on a Sunday night was a powerful exhibit in their newfound faith that you could actually score political points by placating people like us. It's hardly the end of marijuana prohibition, but it shows that we're doing something right.
Canada: Federal Government to Appeal Ruling Okaying Vancouver Safe Injection Site
The Conservative federal government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper will ask the Canadian Supreme Court to overturn a provincial court ruling that okayed Vancouver's InSite safe injection site. Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said the government will appeal because the case raised important questions about the division of powers among the federal and provincial governments, the CBC reported Tuesday. InSite in the only supervised drug injection site in North America. It has been in place since 2003, when British Columbia health authorities won a temporary exemption from Canada's federal drug law. While the then Liberal government approved, the now governing Conservatives do not. InSite originally won a three-year exemption from the federal drug law. Under tremendous pressure, the Conservatives grudgingly gave InSite a 15-month extension, then extended it to 22 months ending in June 2008. But fearing the Conservatives' intentions, InSite operator the Portland Hotel Society, the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU), and two InSite clients filed a lawsuit in the BC courts seeking to have the provincial government, which under Canadian law is responsible for health care, declared the sole authority over InSiteânot the federal government and the federal drug laws. InSite and its supporters won in the BC Supreme Court in 2008 and won again last month in the province's highest court, the Court of Appeals. It is those decisions, which puts decisions on whether to keep InSite open firmly in the hands of BC health officials, that the federal government now seeks to overturn. In his remarks Tuesday, Justice Minister Nicholson said nothing about shutting down InSite, instead saying the appeal was about clarifying provincial versus federal powers. "The case we'll be presenting before the court is to ask for clarification," he said. "I think it is important to do that." But Portland Hotel Society director Mark Townsend was running out of patience with the Conservatives. "The courts have now ruled twice in favor of InSite," he said in a statement Tuesday. "Last time, they thought the feds were so out of line they made them pay all the costs. We wish Stephen Harper would stop wasting court time and the taxpayers' money and start helping to solve the drug problem in our community."
Harm Reduction: Washington Senate Passes Good Samaritan Bill; Would Protect Against Prosecution in Overdose Cases
The Washington state Senate Friday passed SB 5516, the 911 Good Samaritan Act, on a vote of 47-1. One member was absent. The bill now goes to the House. The measure provides immunity from prosecution for drug possession offenses for overdose victims and people who seek medical assistance for overdose victims. It does not grant immunity from prosecution for drug distribution offenses. It also allows expanded access to naloxone, a powerful opiate antagonist that can bring people back from the brink of death from overdoses in a matter of moments. The bill comes as the number of drug overdose deaths in Washington state have increased from around 403 in 1999 to 707, or nearly two a day, in 2006. Drug overdose is now the second leading cause of accidental death in the state, second only to traffic accidents. The bill was opposed by the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, who argued that because there was no budget for publicizing the bill, it would not affect drug-taking behaviors, and thus would be no more than another complicating factor in drug prosecutions. Drug overdose fatalities now outrank traffic accidents as the leading cause of accidental deaths in more than a dozen states. But only one state, New Mexico, has approved a Good Samaritan law. Now, perhaps Washington will be next.