Straight From the Whitehouse: Marijuana is Dangerous

First, Seattle Hempfest congratulates him for his new title and commends him for being one of “Seattle’s finest”.

Then, he calls for an end to the “war on drugs".

And for a couple of months, he manages to remain completely silent about drugs, using the excuse that he's still finding his way around the office.

But finally, last week, Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske shocks the nation during a speech in California, stating that,

Marijuana is dangerous and has no medicinal benefit [The Fresno Bee]

Seriously. Even after the Obama administration promised to stop raids on medical marijuana dispensaries, Kerlikowske manages to somehow convince himself that it’s a good idea to tell hundreds of Californians that medical marijuana is bullshit. So much for the “science based approach to drug policy rather than the scorched earth policies of the previous administration” Seattle Hempfest claimed Kerlikowske so obviously respected.

If you’re as outraged as I am, please take a second to fill out this form to send an e-mail to President Obama about Kerlikowske’s statement. We can't just let such appalling and offensive lies slide unnoticed.

House Cuts Anti-Drug Media Campaign

Last Friday, the House Appropriations Committee reduced the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign's yearly funding by 71% from $70 million to $20 million. The report states the remaining $20 million in funding is specifically intended for ads targeting parents, which means they recommend no more ads targeting teenagers.

Since 1998, the federal government has spent more than $1 billion on an offensive and misleading anti-drug advertising campaign run by the Office of National Drug Control Policy. But scientific studies have repeatedly shown that the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign is not only ineffective at reducing drug abuse, but that the ads may actually increase pro-drug attitudes in teens.

Here's an excerpt of the House committee report:

The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for media and outreach, rather than the $70,000,000 appropriated in fiscal year 2009 and requested for fiscal year 2010, for the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign...The Committee does not recommend continuation of the national paid advertising campaign targeted to teenagers...If the best that can be said about the youth media campaign is that there is evidence that it has a `weak' association with anti-drug attitudes, while a comprehensive multi-year evaluation with more extensive data found no evidence of any positive effect at all, consideration must be given to shifting the substantial resources used for the advertising campaign to other uses.

Watch SSDP’s video parody of one of the more ineffective and strange taxpayer-funded anti-drug ads involving aliens stealing girlfriends.

Because the remaining funding targets parents only, the end of the ridiculous and wasteful National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign is in sight!

Unfortunately, the Senate appropriations committee fully funds the $70 million the White House requested for its anti-drug media campaign. That means the final funding figure will have to be worked out in a conference committee where members of both houses of Congress iron out the differences in their respective bills. Those conferees need to hear you support the House version that cuts wasteful spending.

If you agree that we should not be funding these ineffective and misleading ads, take action.

Strip Searching Students is Not Ok. Duh!

I'm not sure what the school administrators were thinking when they decided it was necessary to strip search 13 year old Savannah Redding because they suspected she was hiding ibuprofen in her underwear. Not only did the humiliating and unconstitutional search not find any of that oh-so dangerous ibuprofen, but those who carried out the search contended that they had done nothing wrong.

After years of going from court to court, Redding, now 19, finally has some closure. The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that her consitutional rights were violated by the school. However, they also ruled 7-2 that the school officials "are nevertheless protected from liability through qualified immunity."

Savannah did what too many young people are afraid or intimidated to do - she stood up for herself and for her rights in the hopes that she might be able to stop this from happening to another young person.

"It frustrated me that everyone else could see that it was wrong, except for the people that did it," Redding said.

Boy. If that doesn't sum up what its like to be a drug policy reformer - I don't know what does!

Thank you Savannah!

Gimme a L... Gimme a E... Gimme a G...

What does that spell? Legalize! A word that supposedly, neither President Obama nor ONDCP Director Gil Kelikowske have in their combined vocabulary.

Ok. While Obama doesn't say legalize here - he does say decriminalize. What is much more important in this clip is:

"I think that the war on drugs has been an utter failure."

Is failure in their vocabulary? Because they better get used that word being associated with U.S. drug policy if neither are willing to even say the "L-word". How can we take these two seriously when it comes to the much needed reform of our criminal justice system and drug policies?

Just Doing Their Jobs...

That's what Prince George's County Sheriff Michael Jackson had to say about last summer's botched drug raid at the home of Berwyn Heights, MD Mayor Cheye Calvo. The drug raid, which turned up no drugs, resulted in the mayor being handcuffed to a table in his underwear and guns being pointed at his mother in law while they watched the deputies shoot the family dogs. And no, these weren't rottweilers or pitbulls - these were black labs.

The findings of the internal review "are consistent with what I've felt all along: My deputies did their job to the fullest extent of their abilities," Sheriff Michael Jackson said at a news conference.

The drug war has disillusioned American citizens, politicians, and the criminal justice system so much that when a drug raid on the wrong house, the mayor's house none the less, results in no confiscation of drugs and the killing of two family dogs - we commend the police officers that planned and carried out the raid.

Truly outrageous.

I'm glad to see that the Mayor isn't taking this laying down - he's suing the the state of Maryland and officials at the county sheriff's office and police department.

Netherlands to Close Prisons Due to Lack of Crime

A headline I hope to one day read here in the states. Just imagine it. Treating drug use/abuse as a public health issue with experts in mental health creating the policies rather than law enforcement officials and politicians that think being "tough on crime" means overcrowding our prisons with non-violent offenders, spending valuable police resources on marijuana, and spending tax payer money without significantly reducing crime.

You can often hear opponents of marijuana legalization go on and on about how the Netherlands, and Amsterdam in particular, are filled with crime and the reason for this is their toleration for the retail sale of marijuana in coffee shops.

In a country where new prisons and jails are being built every year - it's hard to imagine the U.S. actually having to close prisons, not because of budget crises, but because crime is down. But it looks like those wacky folks from the Netherlands, in all their supposed pot smoking glory, have done just that. In fact, they'll be closing 8 prisons due to lack of crime. Let me say that again. Lack of crime. It just sounds so nice to say.

I think it's just common sense. In Portugal where drugs have been decriminalized, we've seen reductions in not just crime but drug use! And it's important to mention that Portugal saw an increase in those seeking help for drug addiction. When you aren't stigmatized for having a problem - you're more likely to seek help for it.

Look at this recent comparison of crime and incarceration rates in New York and in California. While I don't want to make light of New York's drug laws (the Rockefeller Drug Laws have resulted in disproportionate numbers of African Americans making being incarcerated for drug offenses), the study done by Northwestern University School of Law provides even more proof that we can't just jail our way out of the drug problem.

New York's prison population declined by 9% between 1995 and 2007, while it's violent and property crime rates fell by 47% and 51%, respectively, during the same period, according to data in the report. California's prison population rose by 31% during that period, while the two types of crime declined by 46% and 38%, respectively, the report said. Northwestern adjunct professor Malcolm C. Young, the author of the report, attributes the dichotomy to the differences in the states' mandatory minimum sentences, incarceration policies and rehabilitation efforts.

"The data show that you can increase prisons and have less effect on crime than can be achieved in a state that chooses not to increase its incarceration," Malcolm said in an interview. "Treatment and rehabilitation are important, but what New York learned is that a lot of these people just don't need to be in the criminal justice system."

Lets get back to the core message of SSDP here: Education NOT Incarceration. College students that are convicted of drug possession, even first time possession of a joint, are denied federal financial aid for school.

Lets get smart about drugs. Its like Revenge of the Nerds. Sure, in the beginning the big strong jocks had muscles, cool cars and all the girls. But they were idiots and by the end it all fell apart for them and they had to make room for those that wanted change and weren't afraid to let people know about it. Policies like the HEA Aid Elimination Penalty and Marijuana Prohibition are like those jocks and SSDPers are like those awesome nerds jamming with Roland synthesizers, electric violins, and 80's hairdoos (except we wear suites and ties and engage in political process).

Feeding Your Children to Lions: The Only Way to Keep Them Off Drugs

Alright, alright. The title is a little misleading. But check this out - the D.A.R.E program of Brantford, Ontario requested $1,500 toward the $3,620 (U.S.) cost of a lion costume.

And look - they wanted to use this for 11-12 year olds. Are you kidding? If some asshole dressed as a lion came into my classroom when I was 12 years old to talk to me about the dangers of drugs - I'd probably want to do anything to not end up like him. And if that means using drugs - so be it. I'm not dressing up like a fucking lion for a living when my favorite rock stars and presidents have all admitted to trying drugs.

Luckily, the police services board realized this was a waste of money. "I like the idea of a real lion to scare the kids not to use drugs" joked one board member. Ahh yes, because drugs are more dangerous than putting your child in the same room as a lion - the king of the jungle.

Its true that the board did not approve funding for this yet and likely won't be doing so with the economy in the shape its in. But here is a concerning comment from the same board member that joked about using real lions:

"We don't want to send the message that we don't support D. A. R. E."

That comment likely means that had there not been a budget crisis at the moment this costume would have been approved. When is it ok to throw away money on stupid efforts that we know will not reduce drug use? We cannot base policies and funding on groups like D.A.R.E. simply because their intentions are good and we're afraid to send the message that we don't support them.

I'm all for reducing drug use/abuse among young people. But lions don't talk and they don't use drugs - so grow up and use your head when requesting to use thousands of tax payer dollars.

Or they could just get Stephen Seagal to teach kids about drugs and violence... The man that breaks people necks with the flick of his wrist.

Minnesota Governor Thinks Terminally Ill Medical Marijuana Patients Should be Arrested

Last week Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) vetoed a medical marijuana bill that would have protected terminally ill patients - despite the bill passing the Minnesota Senate and House of Representatives

The bill was watered down to help ease concerns that the governor had about the bill. Ultimately, the House decided to narrow it down to only protect those that are terminally ill from being arrested for using marijuana to relieve pain and suffering.

Astonishingly, Pawlenty didn't think that even terminally ill Minnesota citizens should be spared from prosecution for using marijuana.

“While I am sympathetic to those dealing with end-of-life illnesses and accompanying pain, I stand with law enforcement in opposition to this legislation,” Pawlenty said in his veto letter.

Sympathetic? How could you be sympathetic and then decide that dying people should be arrested and even jailed just because law enforcement officials want to arrest them? This is some seriously pathetic stuff here folks. This isn't California's medical marijuana legislation. Again - this bill would have only protected terminally ill people from arrest.

Here is an example of the people that Minnesota law enforcement and Gov. Pawlenty feel should be arrested for using marijuana:

Joni Whiting, whose testimony of finding marijuana for her dying daughter brought tears to many legislators’ eyes, had harsh words for Pawlenty.

“The governor thinks I’m a criminal for allowing my daughter some comfort during the last months of her life,” she said. “I don’t know how he sleeps at night, but I do know I’m not giving up until others in my daughter’s situation are protected.”

The fight isn't over though. SSDP has started new chapters in MN this year and we expect to see even more come September.

“Since the governor has refused to listen to reason or to the overwhelming majority of Minnesotans, we have no choice but to bypass him and take this directly to the people through a constitutional amendment,” said Sen. Steve Murphy, DFL-Red Wing.

MN polls show that over 60% of MN residents supported the bill. Instead of allowing common sense legislation to take place - legislation that would have been the country's most restrictive medical marijuana bill - Pawlenty just made himself look like a heartless, nonsensical demagogue and I don't think it will be too long until we see medical marijuana in MN.

Kerlikowske vs. Walters

While the newest director of the ONDCP, Gil Kerlikowske, isn't likely to be advocating for legalization anytime soon - I think he may be taking us in the right direction - toward actually caring about substance abuse.

"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."

For the past 8 years the focus of the ONDCP has been honed on marijuana. And we've most certainly been at war with people that use drugs. Marijuana, then drug czar John Walters would say, is as dangerous as crack. He opposed state medical marijuana laws (again comparing it to "medical crack") and has spoken out against states making marijuana the lowest law enforcement priority. But Kerlikowske is different. In this interview with the Wall Street Journal, Kerlikowske was asked:

What's the number one drug problem?

Well [illegal] prescription drug use is rising and one problem I want to shout about. At the federal level it's easy to look at things nationally but drug issues are different depending on the geography. In some places meth may be far more serious, even though on a national scale it doesn't appear that way. In Appalachia Oxycotin may be far more serious. I want to look at things regionally and in a narrower focus than in a national focus.

Without a doubt, Walters would have answered marijuana to that question. He may have thrown meth in their too but not without claiming that marijuana leads to meth. Kerlikowske doesn't even mention marijuana. He states the truth - prescription drugs and their diversion are a serious problem. He's also smart to look at this regionally rather than create a blanket campaign against a single drug.

Check out this 2003 article from the Seattle Times concerning Seattle's lowest law enforcement priority ballot question. You'll see that Kerlikowske opposed the initiative for an almost sensible reason: Arresting people for possessing marijuana for personal use, says Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske, is not a priority now. Officers aren't now bringing in everyone they see smoking a joint, he said.

Kerlikowske at least promises to take his job more seriously than Walters. He doesn't have to support legalization for me to get behind policies that make sense. Furthermore, I don't think full out legalization is necessary for us to make improvements with treating drug addiction (though it sure would help a lot) because as LEAP's Peter Christ says "Legalizing drugs is not the answer to our drug problem. Legalizing drugs is the answer to our crime problem." The drug problem, unfortunately, isn't going anywhere - its here to stay - legalized drugs or not. But we can stop throwing gas on the fire now.

If Kerlikowske is ready to put our money where his mouth is - we'll see a campaign from the ONDCP that shows needle exchange programs work to reduce disease transmissions and provide places where addicts can go to get help and eventually - off drugs. We'll see funding for law enforcement decrease and treatment funding increase (you'll see here that Obama's budget, while increasing treatment funding, also decreases prevention funding and unfortunately calls for more $$ for law enforcement). Talking dogs and flying aliens warning our kids about pot will be replaced with realistic drug education that focuses on America's real drug problems - not support for a witch-hunt of marijuana users.

Deprioritization is key at this point. We can't focus on marijuana anymore and I think our new drug czar knows this. At least that much leaves me optimistic.

FBI Director Gets Schooled on Marijuana

It seems like one congressman has had just about enough of marijuana prohibition. Congressman Steven Cohen of Tennessee wasn't taking any shit when he questioned FBI director Robert Mueller on whether he thinks the drug war has been successful - considering, well you know... the violence on the Mexican border, more 10th graders now smoking marijuana than tobacco, American voters supporting legalization, our newest drug czar calling drug abuse a public health issue, Olympic superstars smoking the ganj, 2 states introducing marijuana legalization legislation - that stuff.

Mueller: "Uh, I think there have been some success..."
Cohen: "You say some success. Do you have any statistics for those successes? The statistics I have show there are more people smoking marijuana."
Mueller: "All I can say is ask the parents of a child that has died from drugs."
Cohen: "Show me the parents of a child that had died from marijuana."
Mueller: "I can't"
Cohen: "That's right - because that hasn't happened."

Oh, just watch it for yourself.