Monday, August 2, 2004

Drug WarRant takes on the 2004 elections Last week I mentioned that I was working on a new project for voting and drug policy reform activism. I now have the beginnings of that project to show you. While I am going to continue to look at the Presidential race, I'm shifting the focus of this site's activism in attempt to have greater impact. The recent Hinchey amendment votes in the House of Representatives got me thinking that the drug policy reform community might be able to make a real difference by swinging some U.S. House races. Most of the focus, therefore, will be on House races, with the goal of tipping the balance on such issues as not interfering with the states when it comes to medical marijuana, repealing the HEA drug provision, reducing the drug war support in Colombia, etc. As time permits (and depending on the help I get from readers), I'll have recommendations in a large range of U.S. House races. Recommendations will be entirely on what's best for drug policy reform, and not any other issues. Endorsements will also be made regardless of party affiliation. Illinois Candidate Details by U.S. House District Right now, I only have Illinois up, but plan to add additional states. I'm looking for volunteers to help out in gathering the information. You don't need to know anything about the candidates. I'll provide you with everything you need and specific instructions. It's just a matter of taking a couple of hours to cross reference some statistics. The next states I would like to add are California, Nebraska, and Maryland. Also, if you have additional information to add on any race that I'm profiling, please let me know. Drug WarRant Featured Race Drug WarRant also has a featured race for 2004. It is, interestingly enough, my own district - Illinois 11. It is a competitive race, with a real good chance of removing Weller and replacing him with someone clearly on our side. Weller has voted in lock step with his friend (and drug warrior) Mark Souder. He's voted against the Hinchey amendment twice (which would have prevented the feds from interfering with states on medical marijuana), and has spoken out to support increased funding for the drug war in Colombia. Tari (pronounced "Terry") Renner is in favor of medical marijuana and also supports decriminalizing marijuana -- a very dramatic change from Weller. Senator Durbin strongly supports Renner (and Durbin has been a friend to drug policy reform), so Renner will have some additional advantages in getting connected in Washington. An additional advantage to this race is because it's in my district. It would give Drug WarRant a Representative to talk to who is open to reforming the failed drug war policies. I may be able to help educate and even make suggestions regarding some positive reform bills. Go to Tari Renner's site and help out. Even better, donate! I did. This is a race where you can make a difference. Over the next few months, I may add several more featured races. If you have suggestions, let me know. 12:03:01 AM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?

Sunday, August 1, 2004

Odds and ends and more stupidity Check out D'Alliance. Baylen is reporting from Bolivia. Patriot Act being used for busting marijuana smuggling. More Stupid Drug Task Force Tricks ... about a dozen law enforcement officers from several agencies banged on the front door of Stone's house between 6:45 a.m. and 7 a.m. July 20, so hard that it knocked pictures off the wall. The officers would not let him put his clothes on after he got out of bed, demanding that he come outside immediately just as he was, Stone told The Paris News. When he said no one was there by the name of the female defendant they sought, they demanded his wife come outside. Stone said he and his wife were traumatized by about a dozen officers who kept rifles pointed at their heads. He said his mailbox was off its hinges because of the force with which the officers had hammered on his door. The officers threw his lawn chairs in the yard and stepped all over his flowers, he said. At first, Stone said, the officers refused to believe him when he said the woman they sought was not there and hadn't lived there -- in his father's rent house -- for two years. Finally, they left, he said, after laughing at him because he was wearing raggedy drawers. They left without an apology, he said. (Thanks to commenter sister geoff) 9:25:55 PM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?

Thursday, July 29, 2004

More stupid drug task force tricks In the HoustonChronicle (via FARK): Landscape contractor Blair Davis was in his northwest Harris County home around 2 p.m. Tuesday when there was a knock at his door. Davis said he hadn't even gotten his hand on the doorknob when it flew open and he was looking at the barrel of a pistol. Behind the gun were about 10 members of the Harris County Organized Crime and Narcotics Task Force, who burst into the home, guns drawn, and began shouting at him to get down on the floor. There on the floor, Davis said, it took a while to figure out that what had caused the swarm of lawmen to descend upon him was the hibiscus in his front yard ... But: "It's got white buds on it," Davis said. "Hello." ... Davis said the team of narcotics officers combed his house for about an hour, at one point discussing whether red and gold bamboo growing in his window might be marijuana. They also asked what he did with the watermelons and cantaloupes growing in his back yard. "What would I do with them?" Davis said. Finally the officers gave up and left, leaving Davis only a "citizen's information card" with "closed-report" written on it. Again, Drug Task Forces are completely out of control. Citizens need to start getting together and disbanding these entities now. Hibiscus? And does a dangerous drug trafficker (who needs to be subdued by an armed 10-man task force) grow marijuana in their front yard? With white flowers? And what if Blair Davis had been legally armed? Would he be dead now? Update: Just read Libby's coverage of the same story (she had me beat by a few hours). We do think alike. 5:55:11 PM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?

Wednesday, July 28, 2004

Government, upset that marijuana is harmless, tries to make it lethal Via an anonymous reader (I believe from New Zealand) comes this news about New Zealand spraying herbicide on marijuana plants. Although the herbicide turns the plant blue, some unscrupulous dealers have been apparently spraying them green and selling them. From AP story "I have heard stories of people suffering headaches, throat damage and coughing blood. There needs to be proper research but we can't achieve this until police come clean on the chemicals it (the herbicide) uses," he said. The situation made a mockery of the police duty to protect the public, with people's health being placed at risk by the spray program, he added. New Zealand Herald: Waikato police spokeswoman Kris McGehan said the police would not disclose any operational information such as when or how the plants were sprayed. Ms McGehan said she had not heard of people getting sick from smoking poisoned drugs "but we are probably unlikely to for obvious reasons". "If you are going to buy or consume illegal drugs that is the risk you take.  Obviously it is a criminal activity that we have no control over." This brings back memories of the late 60s/early 70s when the US government was involved in spraying marijuana in Mexico with paraquat. 4:28:03 PM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?

Harrison Bergeron, the drug company version Keep the kids doped up and avoid pesky thoughts and feelings. Ritalin, Prozac, and now... From The Independent (via Last One Speaks) A radical scheme to vaccinate children against future drug addiction is being considered by ministers, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. Under the plans, doctors would immunise children at risk of becoming smokers or drug users with an injection. Childhood immunisation would provide adults with protection from the euphoria that is experienced by users, making drugs such as heroin and cocaine pointless to take. Such vaccinations are being developed by pharmaceutical companies and are due to hit the market within two years. Wouldn't want the zombies becoming euphoric. This is what happens when the drug companies own the politicians. Note: This isn't exactly new news, but I hadn't had a chance to comment on it before. See the full report by the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics called PHARMACOTHERAPY AND THE FUTURE OF THE DRUG WAR. 4:06:22 PM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?

Drug Tax Stamps - bump and update In the last couple of days, I've heard from several people regarding this Kansas revenue page on drug tax stamps. This isn't particularly new - 23 states have similar stupid laws (and Kansas has had theirs for 18 years). So I'm recycling a post from December when Missouri was considering such a tax: Missouri Senator Proposes Taxing Illegal Drugs. Each gram of marijuana would be subject to a $3.50 tax.  Other controlled substances would be taxed $200 for each gram or portion of a gram.  For drugs not sold by weight, such as Ecstasy, every 50 doses would be taxed $2,000. Note: for those of you who haven't converted to metric yet, for marijuana that's about $100 tax per ounce. Keep in mind that this is not an easing of penalties -- it is adding an additional penalty on top of criminalizing drugs. The idea is, once you're arrested for possession of drugs, not only do you get the jail time and fines for the charge, but they also go after you for tax evasion because you probably haven't bought the stamps (they don't really expect you to). A similar bill was passed in Kansas in 1987.  Last year it collected $883,846 in revenue from people arrested in possession of drugs without stamps and $370 in stamp sales. Most drug tax stamps are purchased by collectors, not drug dealers (the Texas one is quite entertaining). These taxes are really a kind of dishonesty on the part of legislatures. If you want a tougher penalty for something illegal, then make that part of the legal penalty -- don't go around looking for some other hook. Many of these taxes have run into legal trouble. Some of them have been termed unconstitutional due to the prohibition against self-incrimination. Others, if providing a serious enough penalty, have been determined to constitute double jeopardy (some Texas drug dealers in 1996 were getting off of their drug charges in court by putting a deposit down on their tax liability). Protesters of an Iowa version of this tax came up with the memorable line: No taxation without legalization. If anybody has some drug tax stamps (expired is fine) that they no longer need, I'd love to add some to my stamp collection. Update: I just got from a reliable source that Ben Masel was responsible for the "No Taxation without Legalization" slogan throughout the midwest, including Iowa. Also, the 7th Circuit recently struck down Wisconsin's drug tax stamp law as an unconstitutional double jeopardy. See also Vice Squad. 3:29:49 PM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?

Monday, July 26, 2004

Drug WarRant is One Year Old! One year ago today, I ventured forth in the land of blogs, thinking that I'd maybe write a post per week or so about the drug war. Considering this is post 497, I think I overshot my plans. It's been a very full year, and seems longer. I had a reader, in fact, assure me that he has read my blog daily for 2-3 years, maybe more. Certainly, it's been a success beyond my wildest dreams. In one year, Drug WarRant has moved up to 21st in Salon Blogs popularity all-time, with close to 120,000 views. Got nominated for a Koufax. And I've found tremendous support from all areas in the political spectrum. A huge thanks to all those wonderful folks in this crazy community who have been such a help (and I know I'm going to be leaving important ones out), including Libby, Jeralyn, Jeff, Walter, Sukoi, Patrick, Dave, David, Scott, Jim, Desert Cat, Serial Catowner, Brutal Hugger, Steve, Harmony, Baylen, Ben, Loretta, Elmer, Chris, disgusted vet, jackl, Matt, Matthew, Tad, Yan, Richard, and all the regular posters at MAP, SSDP, DPFIL, etc. There were some light moments during the year, including If I Were Contrarian King of the United States Increase in Burger Abuse Seen Who is the Drug Czar? (humorous, but sadly true) And there was some serious education going on, as these items have been spread widely across the internet. Why is Marijuana Illegal? Drug War Victims and to a lesser degree Frequently Asked Questions section (If you haven't read any of the above, you should.) Other highlights of the year included taking on the DEA's Karen Tandy and Michele Leonhart, covering the Hinchey amendment debates (in 2003 and 2004), The Great Debate, Clowns on C-Span and A Story for Thanksgiving. What's next? In addition to continuing to "look at the front lines of the drug war, with news, analysis, and the occasional rant," I'm very much aware that this is an election year. Look for some detailed analysis of some of the smaller races, where the drug reform community can really make a difference. I'm going to be asking for your specific help in affecting the outcome of some elections. It'll be fun! Drug WarRant will be endorsing candidates and getting readers to actively work for a few of them. More on this in a few days. But right now, I thought I'd give you a one-year anniversary present. Some inspiring quotes that appeared on the pages of Drug WarRant during its first year. This is not a comprehensive list, nor does it follow any logical rules, but these are quotes from reformers, newspaper editors, judges, and others that appeared here. Taken together, they give you a sense that perhaps drug policy reform is not such a fantasy -- that there are many people who recognize the faults of the drug war, and are willing to push for change. Read A Year of Inspirational Quotes 10:16:14 PM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?

Saturday, July 24, 2004

Reading elsewhere My show opened last night. It went extremely well, with a modest, but enthusiastic audience. Looking at a full house tonight (it's running until August 28, so you have plenty of chances to see it). So while I'm in Chicago, I've got a little time this afternoon to catch up on drug news. (Nothing like a 12" Powerbook with airport extreme, Starbucks with T-Mobile and some dark roast.) First stop is D'Alliance, where Baylen Linnekin has an excellent detailed analysis of the 9/11 report as it relates to drugs. A must read. Short version: The U.S. mistakenly put its resources and focus into the drug war rather than anti-terrorism efforts, and there's no evidence that al Qaeda got any financing through drug trafficking. I'd say the federal government owes pot smokers an apology (on both counts). Baylen also links to one of the sickest stories I've heard recently. The incident occurred late Wednesday at the Rainbow Bridge on the U.S.-Canadian border in Niagara Falls, after Customs and Border Protection officers confiscated marijuana from a male pedestrian. Officer Robert Rhodes, mistakenly believing the Chinese woman standing nearby was involved, allegedly sprayed her with pepper spray, threw her against a wall, kneed her in the head as she knelt on the ground and struck her head on the ground while holding her hair, according to witnesses. ... "Subsequent investigation reveals (the victim) had nothing to do with the marijuana smuggling but was merely a tourist who happened to be in the area," a supervisor's affidavit said. I'll be watching to see if Rhodes gets some real (deserved) jail time, but how much you want to bet that the peaceful male pedestrian gets jail for having some pot, but the sadistic homeland security officer gets nothing for beating up an innocent tourist. Last One Speaks has this post on a DOJ memo telling librarians to destroy reference documents related to civil and criminal forfeiture procedures. I'd like to know more about what these documents contain and why the DOJ thinks they should be classified as internal documents only (particularly since forfeiture is used so horrendously in the drug war). Also check out this post about a judge who regularly threw out small possession cases ("Little bags of marijuana, I'm not trying those cases.") including one involving less than a gram. The Pennsylvania appeals court, in a strange decision, is requiring that the cases be tried. Richard Lake of Media Awareness Project sent out a letter that I think demonstrates how the individual can and has made a difference in shaping new views on the drug war. Individuals, like those who read this site, are going to make the change happen. In his letter, he also references a wonderful editorial against the drug war in the newspaper of a very small town in Louisiana. I've posted Richard's letter and the article here. 5:27:13 PM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?

Thursday, July 22, 2004

The Drug Czar outdoes himself on the radio A big thanks to Scott, who sent me this surreal segment of a radio program. It's a talk show in Canada (Bill Wood Show?) that was being guest hosted by Peter Warren. And the guest on July 19 was our own U.S. Minister of Disinformation -- the Drug Czar John Walters himself. Naturally, Walters prattled on with the usual talking points. High potency [which has not been linked in any way to any problems except by inference by the drug czar, but it sounds bad, and helps them promote the "This is not the pot you smoked in college" concept] High addiction/dependency rates of marijuana as demonstrated by treatment percentages [the usual misdirection, since the vast majority of those in treatment for marijuana are there because they've been referred by criminal justice, not because they're having a problem (other than legal) with marijuana] Criminal involvement with producing and smuggling marijuana [a natural byproduct of criminalization] Here are some of his quotes on the show: "The high potency marijuna coming out of Canada is a particularly dangerous, dangerous substance. ... This isn't about, well, we have a different attitute about drugs, it's about... the most dangerous threat, the single largest cause of addiction, and a more potent version of it now being produced and sent in multi billion dollar flows." Dangerous. He even said so twice in a row. And once later. Must be really dangerous. He went on to say that he respected Canadians, that his father was Canadian, that he studied in Toronto, so he has nothing against Canada per se, but that he nevertheless had good reason to tell them how to handle their drug policy. "The legitimate [U.S.] government policy [interest is] the fact that Canadian production of high potency marijuana is a business that-- the majority of which by all available estimates is shipped to the U.S. -- it is the single greatest drug threat. It's twice as important a factor in addiction as cocaine. It's vastly more important as a problem than methamphetamine or heroin." [emphasis added] Wow! I guess the message here is that you'd better switch to cocaine or meth or heroin. Good thing we've got a drug czar to set priorities and let us know where the real dangers lie. He also said that the pot we used to smoke when we were in college years ago was only 1% THC, while now it can go as high as 29%. Of course that's a complete exaggeration, even though it is true that the average potency of pot is significantly higher today (but it wasn't generally 1% pot back then or nobody would have smoked it). Of course, part of the reason for higher potency pot is that it's illegal, so higher potency means less bulk and easier smuggling. It also tends to have lower negative health effects (related to smoke and lungs) due to the fact that you smoke less to get the same "high." And pot smokers DO self-regulate. After Walters hung up, the host expressed some mild disagreement with Walters' views and the callers were even more skeptical. One caller (a pot smoker for 30 years) agreed that pot is more potent today. But he also noted that when he was younger, they'd roll joints as big as your thumb and smoke a bunch of them. Now they roll one the size of a knitting needle, smoke half, and put it away. He also used the analogy of beer and scotch. If you show up to a party and drink 30 ounces of beer, that might be considered OK, but if you show up and drink 30 ounces of scotch, that would be ridiculous. (Note: During alcohol prohibition, whisky became the standard in smuggling because it was much higher potency and didn't take up as much room as beer.) How does Walters get away with these constant outrageous statements? One, the mainstream media has not called him to account on any regular basis. By now, each time he sends out a press release, the reporters should send it back demanding documentation and clarification before printing a word he says. And two, the people have to help by demanding the truth from their newspapers and demanding oversight by their representatives, and quite frankly, demanding that Walters be removed from office. Somebody also needs to ask why Walters attacks Canada so often, especially considering Mexico supplies 25 times as much marijuana to the United States. 8:38:48 PM | trackback | permalink | What do you think?