Drug WarRant

It’s April 15, and apparently some people are buying bags of a different kind of tea (Pekoe, not sensi) and waving them around, or mailing them, or something, in some kind of FOXnews-run protest against taxes that don’t exist yet… and gay abortion, I think — it’s been getting kind of confusing (it seemed to start as one thing and get co-opted so many times that I’m not sure anyone knows what it means.)
Also apparently, there’s some teabagging going on, though people seem to be still learning the term.
In the meantime, there are a group of citizens that are begging the U.S. government to let them pay taxes, and, in a time of economic disaster, the government laughs at them.
So today, all they’ll get from that group is a mock check.

The ASA Lawsuit against HHS over the Data Quality Act (see Saturday’s post) was argued today in Circuit Court. ASA is, of course, asking that HHS simply not give false information about medical marijuana on their website and materials.
The government’s defense?

Justice Department lawyer Alisa Klein told the appeals court panel that the government shouldn’t be forced to defend the accuracy of “countless pieces of information” in its massive archives. U.S. Circuit Court Judge Marsha S. Berzon, an appointee of President Clinton, said the law at issue in the case was “amazing” because it did appear to require the government to correct all inaccurate statements, a result she called “troubling.”

Boy, it sure is asking a lot to want the Department of Health and Human Services of the United States Government to give out information that’s, you know, accurate.
It’s sort of like wanting NASA to use accurate numbers for computing trajectories, or asking the Treasury Department to use accurate information for assessing the health of the economy. Should we just say, “Oh, that’s too hard.”

Here’s one I’d like to hear on the radio in 2010…

It’s time for a change from the failed policies of Senator Incumbent. He voted 24 times in favor of drug laws that increase the profits for black-market criminals — from the gangs that roam the streets of our town to the drug cartels causing death and destruction in Mexico.
Senator Incumbent is actually opposed to setting age limits for drugs like marijuana — even cocaine or heroin! He actually prefers that criminals decide at what age kids can buy drugs.
Senator Incumbent refuses to even discuss policy options that have been proven to reduce violence. What is he afraid of? Does he have a reason to keep drug profits high?
It’s time for a change. Vote Challenger for Senate. For smart drug regulation that reduces violence — protecting children, families, and our community.

A criminally stupid war on drugs in the US by Clive Crook

How much misery can a policy cause before it is acknowledged as a failure and reversed? The US ‹war on drugsŠ suggests there is no upper limit. The country‰s implacable blend of prohibition and punitive criminal justice is wrong-headed in every way: immoral in principle, since it prosecutes victimless crimes, and in practice a disaster of remarkable proportions. Yet for a US politician to suggest wholesale reform of this brainless regime is still seen as an act of reckless self-harm.

Hilariously stupid article by James Osborne at FoxNews: Obama’s Effort at Online Transparency Stymied by Internet Trolls
subhead:

President Obama’s pledge to provide open dialogue on his Web site is being tested by Internet trolls — gangs of activists who try to derail discussions — and now the White House faces unique challenges as it tries to manage the posts without infringing on the right to free speech. [emphasis added]

Hmmm… maybe not strong enough. Let’s flesh it out in the first paragraph:
first paragraph:

President Obama’s pledge to open the White House up to the public through online forums faces an irksome challenge: a plague of Internet “trolls” — troublemakers who work to derail cyber-conversations through harassing and inflammatory posts.

Yeah, that’s better.

Three and a half million people participated in the event, but the “trolls” had their way: Following a coordinated campaign by marijuana advocates to vote their topic to the top of the list, questions on the future of the U.S. dollar and the rising unemployment rate were superseded by questions about legalizing pot as an economic remedy.

Osborne then goes on at length to discuss the problem of trolling in general and give specific examples in the history of the internet of trolling, before finally explaining:

While Obama’s marijuana advocates wouldn’t technically be considered trolls, who are defined by their lack of definitive positions and a simple desire for disorder, these special-interest groups do muddle the president’s message and related discourse.

So… the problem with the marijuana activists is that they’re trolls (except that they’re not) and they muddle the President’s message (except that it’s in a forum where the President is asking for the people’s ideas).
But the reason that Osborne is coming down so hard on the “trolls” is to watch out for the interests of the White House. I mean, after all…

Unlike privately run Web sites, whose managers are free to remove nettlesome material, the White House finds itself searching for a way to combat these disruptive users without infringing on their right to free speech and inciting cries of censorship.

Ah, I see, James. So how upset was the White House about this “disruption”?

[White House Spokesman:] “People were informed that this was a community-moderated system, and people should remember that even though they may not like the viewpoint behind someone’s question, everyone has a right to their opinion.”

Verdict: James Osborne, super-moron. (It’s pretty sad when you can thoroughly fisk an article with the author’s own words.)
The fact that people asked the question they most wanted answered was the whole point.
The fact that some organizations suggested that people participate is, well, perfectly normal. That’s part of activism everyday, everywhere. Every organization in existence tells their members to call the White House or write Congress about issues of importance, sometimes giving them online forms to do so easily.
Everytime I hear one of these wankers complain about marijuana activist “trolls,” I find their outrage hilarious, particularly since they have to avoid acknowledging and explaining the obvious fact that the “stoners” were more politically aware and active than other special interests.
Update: Scott Morgan helpfully explains to Osborne what a troll is.

In one of Obama’s recent online forums, I saw this question: “How many donuts can I fit on my dong?” That was a troll, and it got deleted. This is a movement, and it isn’t going away. Our issue is bigger than the organizations backing it. It didn’t win Obama’s forum because marijuana reformers know something about online organizing that other interest groups don’t. It won because it is this defining question that quickly separates petty hypocrites from bold leaders, that distinguishes self-evident truths from antiquated propaganda, and that pits common sense against the mindless drug war hysteria that maintains a frigid stranglehold on our political culture, rendering impotent the promise of change that inspired so many hopeful Americans to lay their hopes and dreams at the steps of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

First, we have the Mexican ambassador yesterday on CBS’ Face the Nation calling for a discussion on marijuana legalization…

“This is a debate that needs to be taken seriously, that we have to engage in on both sides of the border: both in producing, in trafficking, and in consumption countries,” Sarukhan said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday, when asked about legalization.

Now today we hear that a full national discussion is taking place.

Mexican lawmakers and experts on Monday began a first debate on the legalization of marijuana as part of a possible strategy to tackle the country’s powerful drug cartels. […]
Mexican lawmakers and experts on Monday began a first debate on the legalization of marijuana as part of a possible strategy to tackle the country’s powerful drug cartels.

Looks like our friends south of the border are doing a pretty good job with elevator arguments…
Can we use this to shame our own Congress?

Lawmakers in Mexico are looking at all options for reducing the drug war violence that is tearing apart their country. Regardless of your views on legalization, don’t we owe it to the thousands who have died to insure that every possibility has been fully considered, analyzed, and debated?

“bullet” Talk about data quality… This was a a few weeks ago, but I still get a kick out of it.

Investigators Get Government Approval for Fake Medical Product:
The Government Accountability Office was able to register with the Health and Human Services Department a fictitious institutional review board and panel of doctors and scientists that was led by a dog named Trooper.

“bullet” Another wrong address drug raid. Don’t know much about the details on this one, but a family about an hour away from me is suing police for a raid on the wrong apartment.
“bullet” Legalizing Key to Ending Drug Violence. Bill Steigerwald interviews Jeffrey Miron.

If there were no demand for drugs, there would be no drug market. It wouldn’t matter whether we prohibited drugs; there would be no violence. But there is going to be a demand for drugs whether we like it or not, and if we drive the market underground we are going to have many more negative sideeffects of that market than if we were to adopt a regime of legalization.

“bullet” Wall Street Journal: The Antidrug Campaign Tries a New Message. Um, no. It’s an old message and it doesn’t work.

Lloyd Johnston, principal investigator of the University of Michigan’s “Monitoring the Future Study,” which is funded by the federal government’s National Institute on Drug Abuse and tracks drug, alcohol and tobacco use, says he plans to press the Obama administration and the Partnership for a Drug-Free America to use the death toll in Mexico to engage the consciences of pot smokers.
Mr. Johnston likens the Mexico argument to the campaign against secondhand cigarette smoke; when smokers learned their habit was harming others, he says, many quit who wouldn’t have otherwise.

Yeah, like that terrorism thing, right?

The argument that pot smokers are unintentional collaborators in drug-related violence has been tried before. After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the ONDCP ran ads in which one middle-aged man told another that buying drugs supported international terrorism. That campaign broadened into ads saying that casual drug use supported violent groups in Mexico, Colombia and U.S. cities.
“A lot of young people, especially teenagers, can sometimes be a little impervious to just simply, ‘This is bad for your health,’ or ‘This is bad for your future,”‘ says Mr. Walters. “They are idealistic and … they don’t like supporting people who kill others and harm the innocent.”
But research suggested the ads did not work. A federally funded study released in 2006 and conducted by the research firm Westat and the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communication found that antidrug ads by the ONDCP during that time had no effect on the kids who’d seen them, and in some cases actually made them more interested in marijuana.

“bullet” Outstanding OpEd by Mike Gray in the Washington Post – a must read. We Tried A War Like This Once Before

Capone and his boys were agents of misguided policy. Ninety years ago, the United States tried to cure the national thirst for alcohol, and it led to an explosion of violence unlike anything we’d ever seen. Today, it’s hard to ignore the echoes of Prohibition in the drug-related mayhem along our southern border. Over the past 15 months, there have been 7,200 drug-war deaths in Mexico alone, as the government there battles an army of killers that would scare the pants off Al Capone.

“bullet” Obama taps addiction specialist for No. 2 drug czar

In another clear break from past policy, President Obama announced Friday that he intended to nominate as the nation’s No. 2 drug czar a scientist often considered the No. 1 researcher on addiction and treatment.

OK, but it’s hard to get excited when the Partnership for a Drug-Free America approves…

“We’re blown away. He understands,” said Stephen J. Pasierb, president and chief executive of the Partnership for a Drug-Free America, that addiction “is a parent, a family, a child issue.”

“bullet” In an article about the Supreme Court case of the 13-year-old girl who was strip-searched in school over trying to find some non-prescription Advil, this passage really points out the cluelessness that we see so often in the drug war.

“I guess it’s the fact that they think they were not wrong, they’re not remorseful, never said they were sorry,” April Redding said this week, as she and Savana talked about the legal fight over that search, which has now reached the Supreme Court.
And even more: When, days later, the principal met with April Redding to discuss what had happened, she said he was dismissive of an event so humiliating that her daughter never returned to classes at Safford Middle School.
“He said, ‘There was an incident with some pills, and we had to find out if Savana had them, but you should be happy because we didn’t find any on her,’ ” Redding recalled. “I got really upset and was telling him, ‘Why did you do this to her? How could you do this to her?’ ”

We humiliated you and violated your rights, but you should be happy! We didn’t find anything so you’re innocent. Why are you upset?
“bullet” DrugSense Weekly
“bullet” “drcnet”

Yes, old timers. I’m talking about the Data Quality Act – the DQA – aka the IQA. Does it bring back memories? Are you feeling ancient right now?
Quick primer for the newbies:
The Data Quality Act was a regulation put into effect requiring government agencies to disseminate accurate and truthful information (really!), allowing groups or individuals to challenge that information, and requiring the agencies to respond in 60 days.
Well, Americans for Safe Access (ASA) decided to put that to the test. Health and Human Services had a lot of inaccurate information (OK, lies) about medical marijuana on their website and other materials. If corrected to the real truth about the medical validity of marijuana, it would actually make it much harder for the federal government to deny marijuana re-scheduling appeals (ie, if HHS has the truth on their website, then the DEA can’t point to HHS and say “see, there’s no accepted medical use for cannabis – HHS says so”).
So the petition went forward…

• October 6, 2004: Original complaint filed (good, I thought — HHS will have to correct its information by the end of the year. Right.)
• December 1, 2004. HHS says it needs more time. (Note: You can read all the letters here)
• February 2, 2005. HHS says it needs more time.
• April 5, 2005. HHS says it needs more time.
• April 20, 2005. HHS claims that it doesn’t really need to respond.
• May 19, 2005. ASA appeals the non-response.
• July 28, 2005. HHS says it needs more time to respond to the appeal.
• October 5, 2005. HHS says it needs more time.
• December 8, 2005. HHS says it needs more time.
• February 7, 2006. HHS says it needs more time.
• April 12, 2006. HHS says it needs more time.
• April 20, 2006. FDA comes out with its nonsense declaration about marijuana not being medicine.
• May 2, 2006. ASA sends a letter threatening to sue if HHS continues to delay.
• July 12, 2006. HHS denies the appeal (by avoiding the question)
• February 21, 2007: ASA files lawsuit in district court.
• May 25, 2007. Government files motion to dismiss claiming that the courts don’t have jurisdiction and that ASA doesn’t have standing.
• June 21, 2007. ASA responds
• November 20, 2007. District court dismisses ASA’s lawsuit, stating that HHS wasn’t really required to do anything.

and now…
ASA has filed an appeal in the 9th Circuit Court. This is from their opening brief.

The primary issue on appeal is whether the “Information Quality Act” … (“IQA,” also referred to as the Data Quality Act)… gave ASA a legal right to obtain a timely, substantive response to its IQA Petition, or whether, as the district court held, the IQA is merely horatory and that Congress intended to allow agencies to obey the IQA’s commands, or not, as they choose, free from all judicial review.

Good luck, ASA! I admire your perseverance.
One of the standard tactics of the federal government is to delay, delay, delay hoping you’ll tire or die before they have to do anything.
Of course, it would be foolish to depend only on the results of a drawn-out administrative procedure, but hitting them from all sides — that’s powerful. So, pursuing the DQA, pushing for re-scheduling, lobbying Congress, educating the people, correcting the media, writing letters in newspapers, committing acts of civil disobedience, demanding scientific truth, writing a blog — it all adds up to critical mass.

A very important film is opening on April 17 (in select theatres, as they say).

American Violet (official film site) is based on the true story of one of those horribly destructive and racist drug war situations involving a snitch and the arrests of dozens of African-Americans in Hearne, Texas who often had no recourse but to plead guilty, even when they were innocent. One young black single mother had the courage to maintain her innocence and finally won, bringing to light the corruption involved in the drug war.
The movie has a top-notch cast (including Alfre Woodard, Charles Dutton, and Will Patton).
Spread the word and support the film if you can.

The TV is showing ads for an upcoming show by blue collar comedian Ron White, including this clip of him talking about his drug bust.

They found seven-eighths of a gram of marijuana. Now, when I have seven-eighths of a gram of marijuana, I consider myself to be out of pot.