The end of an epic road trip that lasted close to 6 weeks. We drove an astounding 7,487 miles. Other than Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan (which were just pass-through states) the states and provinces we explored included New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Québec, and Ontario. We rode two passenger ferries, two car ferries, and two funiculars. And we drove across an 8-mile-long bridge. For the most part, we avoided shops and tourists and found some incredible beauty. We camped 11 of the 38 nights (in Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine, Nova Scotia, and Ontario) and stayed in a variety of inexpensive motels and hotels the rest of the time. We spent time on the Atlantic Ocean, the Bay of Fundy, the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and more rivers, bays, waterfalls and lakes than we can count. We crossed international borders 4 times (and they let me!). We drove to the top of Mount Washington (6,288 feet) and many other mountains. We hiked on everything from easy boardwalks to challenging trails. We saw lots of wildlife and took thousands of photos. We also enjoyed the local culinary specialties as we ate pastrami and bagels in New York, whole belly clams in Rhode Island, chowder in Massachusetts, maple syrup and Ben and Jerry’s ice cream in Vermont, lobsters and wild blueberries in Maine, dulse in New Brunswick, single malt whiskey in Nova Scotia, mussels, potatoes, and black currants on Prince Edward Island, poutine in Québec, peameal bacon in Ontario, and much more.
We managed to mostly avoid watching or reading the news the entire time.

Consider this another open thread until I have time to catch up and post something drug-war-related.

George Soros’ quiet overhaul of the U.S. justice system

While America’s political kingmakers inject their millions into high-profile presidential and congressional contests, Democratic mega-donor George Soros has directed his wealth into an under-the-radar 2016 campaign to advance one of the progressive movement’s core goals — reshaping the American justice system.

The billionaire financier has channeled more than $3 million into seven local district-attorney campaigns in six states over the past year — a sum that exceeds the total spent on the 2016 presidential campaign by all but a handful of rival super-donors.

His money has supported African-American and Hispanic candidates for these powerful local roles, all of whom ran on platforms sharing major goals of Soros’, like reducing racial disparities in sentencing and directing some drug offenders to diversion programs instead of to trial. It is by far the most tangible action in a progressive push to find, prepare and finance criminal justice reform-oriented candidates for jobs that have been held by longtime incumbents and serve as pipelines to the federal courts — and it has inspired fury among opponents angry about the outside influence in local elections.

Demanding wholesale reform of Argentine narcotics legislation yesterday, over 500 respected legal voices commemorated the 30th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s landmark “Bazterrica” ruling and called for an end to the so-called “War on Drugs.”
The experts, who spoke in a room at the National Congress, said the landmark ruling by the land’s top court — which in 1986 declared the unconstitutionality of prosecuting individuals for possessing narcotics intended for personal consumption — had paved the way for change.

“The current law prosecutes the most vulnerable sectors of our society. There must be a sincere answer from the Argentine system, so as to judge what needs to be judged and to give users the healthcare and assistance they need,” said Judge Ángela Ledesma.
Introducing a declaration endorsed by 250 magistrates and 300 other signatories at the National Congress’ Blue Room, the Association of Penal Thinking (APP) — an NGO dealing with criminal law — filed a petition asking for a modification to National Drugs Law 23,737, which criminalizes the possession of narcotics for personal consumption.

Ledesma argued that the “War on Drugs” was failing and said that decriminalization is the only way forward.

A Christian publication takes a hard look at the need for a new view on dealing with drug problems.

Americans have a long history of viewing drug use as a moral weakness and drug users as criminals who need to be punished. But the failure of the war on drugs, and the evident success of other approaches, is changing minds. A fundamental shift in policy is under way—a shift toward a more humane and hopeful policy. For millions of drug users and their families, it can’t happen soon enough.

Note: I’m still on my extended road trip vacation. Started in Wisconsin, and headed to Ontario, Niagara Falls, the Hudson River, Manhattan, the Connecticut coast, Rhode Island harbors, Martha’s Vineyard, Cape Cod National Seashore, the scenic roads of Vermont’s Green Mountain Forest, Stowe, New Hampshire’s White Mountain National Forest and the top of Mount Washington, the Lakes and Mountains region of Maine, Ogunquit, Vinalhaven Island, and tomorrow head for Acadia National Park. Will soon be heading into easter Canada.

Just spent the day enjoying the beauty of the Hudson River, on the beginning of a month-long road trip through the NorthEast. I started in Wisconsin, and after New York, will be heading into Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, and eastern Canada.

Consider this an open thread.

Facing Tough Primary, DNC Chair Endorses Marijuana Decriminalization. Yep, the tremendously unpopular Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is having to switch to supporting marijuana decriminalization in order to avoid being primaried.

No big surprise here, but the DEA has refused to reschedule marijuana at all, and is continuing its stranglehold on industrial hemp. Meanwhile, the administration is making a very minor concession by allowing additional research supply sites for medical marijuana research projects.

The New York Times was pretty much bamboozled by this in their article: Obama Administration Set to Remove Barrier to Marijuana Research

The Obama administration is planning to remove a major roadblock to marijuana research, officials said Wednesday, potentially spurring broad scientific study of a drug that is being used to treat dozens of diseases in states across the nation despite little rigorous evidence of its effectiveness.

The new policy is expected to sharply increase the supply of marijuana available to researchers.

Of course, what that doesn’t change:

Researchers will still have to receive approval from federal agencies to conduct medical studies of marijuana, including from the D.E.A. and the Food and Drug Administration. Those whose projects are funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse will also need its consent.

The problem, of course, is having the DEA (or the federal government) involved at all.

Here is the full press release from the DEA:

DEA ANNOUNCES ACTIONS RELATED TO MARIJUANA AND INDUSTRIAL HEMP

WASHINGTON – The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) announced several marijuana- related actions, including actions regarding scientific research and scheduling of marijuana, as well as principles on the cultivation of industrial hemp under the Agricultural Act of 2014.

DEA Publishes Responses to Two Pending Petitions to Reschedule Marijuana

DEA has denied two petitions to reschedule marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). In response to the petitions, DEA requested a scientific and medical evaluation and scheduling recommendation from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which was conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in consultation with the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Based on the legal standards in the CSA, marijuana remains a schedule I controlled substance because it does not meet the criteria for currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, there is a lack of accepted safety for its use under medical supervision, and it has a high potential for abuse.

In his letter to the petitioners, DEA Acting Administrator Chuck Rosenberg offered a detailed response outlining the factual and legal basis for the denial of the petitions.

The full response to the petitions can be found in the Federal Register here: AND here:

The DEA and the FDA continue to believe that scientifically valid and well-controlled clinical trials conducted under investigational new drug (IND) applications are the most appropriate way to conduct research on the medicinal uses of marijuana. Furthermore, DEA and FDA believe that the drug approval process is the most appropriate way to assess whether a product derived from marijuana or its constituents is safe and effective and has an accepted medical use. This pathway allows the FDA the important ability to determine whether a product meets the FDA criteria for safety and effectiveness for approval.

Increasing the Number of Authorized Marijuana Manufacturers Supplying Researchers

DEA announced a policy change designed to foster research by expanding the number of DEA- registered marijuana manufacturers. This change should provide researchers with a more varied and robust supply of marijuana. At present, there is only one entity authorized to produce marijuana to supply researchers in the United States: the University of Mississippi, operating under a contract with NIDA. Consistent with the CSA and U.S. treaty obligations, DEA’s new policy will allow additional entities to apply to become registered with DEA so that they may grow and distribute marijuana for FDA-authorized research purposes. To read this statement, click here:

This change illustrates DEA’s commitment to working together with the FDA and NIDA to facilitate research concerning marijuana and its components. DEA currently has 350 individuals registered to conduct research on marijuana and its components. Notably, DEA has approved

every application for registration submitted by researchers seeking to use NIDA-supplied marijuana to conduct research that HHS determined to be scientifically meritorious.

Statement of Principles Concerning Industrial Hemp and the Agricultural Act of 2014

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), in consultation with DEA and the FDA, also released a statement of principles concerning provisions of the Agricultural Act of 2014 relating to the cultivation of industrial hemp. Industrial hemp is a low-concentration THC variety of the cannabis plant intended to be used for industrial purposes (e.g., fiber and seed). This statement of principles is intended to inform the public, including institutions of higher education and State departments of agriculture, how Federal law applies to activities associated with industrial hemp that is grown and cultivated in accordance with Section 7606 of the Agricultural Act of 2014.

The statement of principles can be viewed here:

This statement of principles outlines the legalized growing and cultivating of industrial hemp for research purposes under certain conditions, such as in States where growth and cultivation are legal under State law. The 2014 Act did not remove industrial hemp from the list of controlled substances and, with certain limited exceptions, the requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the CSA continue to apply to industrial hemp-related activities. The statement of principles addresses questions including the extent to which private parties may grow industrial hemp as part of an agricultural pilot program, the circumstances under which the sale of hemp products is permitted, and other related topics.

DEA Administrator Chuck Rosenberg’s letter to the petitioners can be found here: AA Rosenberg Marijuana petition_ltr_08.11.2016.pdf

While you may not notice much difference in quality of drug policy viewpoints between individual politicians on both sides of the aisle, the contrast between the Republican Party Platform and the Democratic Party Platform is pretty stark.

The full Democratic Party Platform is available to read online.

Let’s start with the most outstanding passage, given here completely:

Reforming our Criminal Justice System

Democrats are committed to reforming our criminal justice system and ending mass incarceration. Something is profoundly wrong when almost a quarter of the world’s prison population is in the United States, even though our country has less than five percent of the world’s population. We will reform mandatory minimum sentences and close private prisons and detention centers. Research and evidence, rather than slogans and sound bites, must guide criminal justice policies.

We will rebuild the bonds of trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve. Across the country, there are police officers inspiring trust and confidence, honorably doing their duty, deploying creative and effective strategies, and demonstrating that it is possible to prevent crime without relying on unnecessary force. They deserve our respect and support, and we should learn from those examples and build on what works.

We will work with police chiefs to invest in training for officers on issues such as de-escalation and the creation of national guidelines for the appropriate use of force. We will encourage better police-community relations, require the use of body cameras, and stop the use of weapons of war that have no place in our communities. We will end racial profiling that targets individuals solely on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, or national origin, which is un-American and counterproductive. We should report national data on policing strategies and provide greater transparency and accountability. We will require the Department of Justice to investigate all questionable or suspicious police-involved shootings, and we will support states and localities who help make those investigations and prosecutions more transparent, including through reforming the grand jury process. We will assist states in providing a system of public defense that is adequately resourced and which meets American Bar Association standards.

And we will reform the civil asset forfeiture system to protect people and remove perverse incentives for law enforcement to “police for a profit.”

Instead of investing in more jails and incarceration, we need to invest more in jobs and education, and end the school-to-prison pipeline. We will remove barriers to help formerly incarcerated individuals successfully re-enter society by “banning the box,” expanding reentry programs, and restoring voting rights. We think the next President should take executive action to ban the box for federal employers and contractors, so applicants have an opportunity to demonstrate their qualifications before being asked about their criminal records.

The “war on drugs” has led to the imprisonment of millions of Americans, disproportionately people of color, without reducing drug use. Whenever possible, Democrats will prioritize prevention and treatment over incarceration when tackling addiction and substance use disorder. We will build on effective models of drug courts, veterans’ courts, and other diversionary programs that seek to give nonviolent offenders opportunities for rehabilitation as opposed to incarceration.

Because of conflicting federal and state laws concerning marijuana, we encourage the federal government to remove marijuana from the list of “Schedule 1″ federal controlled substances and to appropriately regulate it, providing a reasoned pathway for future legalization. We believe that the states should be laboratories of democracy on the issue of marijuana, and those states that want to decriminalize it or provide access to medical marijuana should be able to do so. We support policies that will allow more research on marijuana, as well as reforming our laws to allow legal marijuana businesses to exist without uncertainty. And we recognize our current marijuana laws have had an unacceptable disparate impact in terms of arrest rates for African Americans that far outstrip arrest rates for whites, despite similar usage rates.

We will abolish the death penalty, which has proven to be a cruel and unusual form of punishment. It has no place in the United States of America. The application of the death penalty is arbitrary and unjust. The cost to taxpayers far exceeds those of life imprisonment. It does not deter crime. And, exonerations show a dangerous lack of reliability for what is an irreversible punishment.

We have been inspired by the movements for criminal justice that directly address the discriminatory treatment of African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, and American Indians to rebuild trust in the criminal justice system.

For politicians, that’s pretty outstanding. Sure, I might quibble a bit with the reliance on drug courts and forced treatment, but overall, this is really excellent.

When you get to the section on combating drug and alcohol addiction, at least the Democratic Party Platform has a plan of sorts, as opposed to the Republican Platform.

Combating Drug and Alcohol Addiction

We must confront the epidemic of drug and alcohol addiction, specifically the opioid crisis and other drugs plaguing our communities, by vastly expanding access to prevention and treatment, supporting recovery, helping community organizations, and promoting better practices by prescribers. The Democratic Party is committed to assisting the estimated 20 million people struggling with addiction in this country to find and sustain healthy lives by encouraging full recovery and integration into society and working to remove common barriers to gainful employment, housing, and education. We will continue to fight to expand access to care for addiction services, and ensure that insurance coverage is equal to that for any other health conditions. We think it is time for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Labor, and state regulatory agencies to fully implement the protections of the Mental Health Parity and Addictions Equity Act of 2008—which means that American medical insurers, including the federal government, will need to disclose how they make their medical management decisions.

We should also do more to educate our youth, as well as their families, teachers, coaches, mentors, and friends, to intervene early to prevent drug and alcohol abuse and addiction. We should help state and local leaders establish evidence-based, age-appropriate, and locally-tailored prevention programs. These programs include school-based drug education programs that have been shown to have meaningful effects on risky behavior; community-based peer mentorship and leadership programs; and after-school activities that deter drug use and encourage life skills.

It’s not a particularly good plan. The focus on pushing and funding treatment without doing something to improve the kind of treatment we offer in this country is likely to cause more damage than good. At least there is a nod to “evidence-based” programs in the prevention section, something that hasn’t really been part of what we do federally.

When it comes to international efforts, the platform goes on at length to discuss all sorts of things, but tellingly, has very little emphasis on pursuing an exported drug war – about the only mention is this brief throw-away bit in the section on the Americas:

We will bolster democratic institutions, promote economic opportunity and prosperity, and tackle the rise of drugs, transnational crime, and corruption.

Of course, a platform doesn’t necessarily translate into policy or actual action, but it is something that can be pointed to to attempt to influence lawmakers.

And this one definitely could be worse.