Drug WarRant

Just reported a few minutes ago. Barthwell resigned from the Drug Czar’s office to “explore” the idea of running for Senate.
Update: The question, of course, is “Could she win?”
Barthwell has some Illinois connections, particularly in the treatment field, and I think she’d have some money to work with. She’s also attractive and sounds intelligent. I think the key here is that the strategy will most likely be that Barthwell will attack Barack as a druggie (Barack has admitted using pot and cocaine as a youth). Knowing her willingness to sink low, I wouldn’t be surprised if she also played the race card (his drug past makes him a poor role model for blacks, etc.) Barack would then most likely backpedal and try to show how “tough” he is on drugs (using his sponsorship of an ephedra ban as a cornerstone).
This is bad for drug policy reform.
We’ll then need drug policy reformers to remind the media of the lies Andrea has told during her reign as Deputy Drug Czar and this could get Jerry Kohn some much-needed exposure by taking her on regarding the wasteful drug war.
Further Update:

I’ve got a lot of new people visiting because of the Barthwell announcement, many of whom may not know who she is, so here’s a quick overview.
Before joining the ONDCP, Andrea was president of the Board of Directors of the American Society of Addiction Medicine and a board member of the American Methadone Treatment Association. When hired for the ONDCP, she claimed she wanted to increase the focus on treatment at the Drug Czar’s office.
However, since she joined, she has mostly toured the country spouting the Drug Czar’s line, and almost exclusively focusing on marijuana, particularly as an attack dog to go against medical marijuana efforts, and also promoting massive drug testing of teens in schools.
She has regularly played loose with the facts (if not outright lying), dismissing all medical marijuana science as a “scam” and conveniently ignoring other facts. Additionally, rather than bringing an emphasis on treatment to the Drug Czar’s office, Andrea has instead pushed the lie that the Bush administration has increased the enforcement/treatment ratio toward treatment (in fact, all they did was change the rules regarding what was counted).
Some of my earlier posts on Andrea are available here, here, here, and here.
There’s no doubt that Andrea will be able to raise significant money if she is selected as the GOP nominee. Pharmaceutical companies and drug testing companies will be tripping over themselves trying to shovel cash her way. She is exactly what they want in the Senate. You can bet she already has money lined up. Even if she isn’t the GOP candidate, she’s guaranteed a high paying job in one of those companies.

Via Drug Policy Alliance’s new blog D’Alliance, I learn (oddly enough) what was reported in my own local paper: Deputy Drug Czar Andrea Barthwell is actually considering running for Senate in Illinois.
As a review, Illinois Senator Fitzgerald (R) is not seeking re-election, so there has been a race between Barack Obama (D), Jerry Kohn (L), and Jack Ryan (R). Jack, however, had a little problem — a sex scandal involving the fact that he was interested in having sex with his own wife and then didn’t. So now, everyone from Coach Ditka to Deputy Andrea is being considered.
Having Miss Drug Propaganda in the race could be interesting. I know I’d have a few things to say in letters to the editor. I’d also like to see some debates with her and Kohn on the drug war. The Trib has shown in the past that they are not taken in by Barthwell’s propaganda, and I doubt that she’d be able to win (at least I sure hope not!)

In the heat of the Hinchey amendment information, I almost missed the fact that Tommy Chong was released on Wednesday, after a nine month imprisonment that shouldn’t have happened.
Tommy will be on the Jay Leno Show tonight!

Despite the fact that all studies show DARE is a failure, it still has its fans.

But in Marshfield, Tavares said he has received only positive feedback about the program and he firmly believes it’s a needed resource. As an example, he talked about the recent case of a DARE graduate who called the police on his mother after finding marijuana in the house.

I now have the full text of the debate online. Parts of it are very much worth reading. All of Farr’s opening remarks were excellent. Rohrabacher had some nice points on states’ rights. Also speaking in favor were Paul, Woolsey, Pelosi, and Drug WarRant’s endorsement for the Democratic nomination Dennis Kucinich.
Oddly, since it’s often been referred to as the Hinchey amendment, Hinchey himself did not speak or vote. I assume he had a major conflict or illness.
The opponents mostly came up with the same tired old disproved arguments – that marijuana is dangerous because most people in treatment are there for marijuana (No, most people in treatment are there for marijuana because they’ve been forced there by law enforcement, not because of any actual danger.) – and, of course, the old “message to the children” argument. They also showed how much they were in the pocket of the pharmaceutical companies by their continual advertisements for Marinol.
Confirmed drug warrior Mark Souder submitted a bunch of letters that he solicited from die-hard drug warriors who need the status quo (and mostly lied to support their position).
And then he sunk to his lowest point yet. He used anecdotes of tragedies (that had absolutely nothing to do with medical marijuana) to get people to vote against the amendment.

Irma Perez, age 14, the late Irma Perez, was overdosing on Ecstasy. Her friends had heard that marijuana was medical, and instead of
getting her to a doctor, where they said she would have been saved,
they gave her marijuana on top of her Ecstasy and she died.

When we have silly debates like this, quite frankly, we bear
responsibility. Yesterday, in Ohio, six people died, including a family
of four, two adults and two children, when a young person on marijuana
and alcohol collided into a truck that hit two other vehicles and
killed six people.

This is just sick. First, in Ohio, as of today no official cause has been given in the crash in Ohio, and even this guy was at fault, and even if he was impaired, and even if it could somehow be traced back to his marijuana use and not his alcohol or valium use, what possible connection would that have with cancer patients in California?
Then there’s the Irma Perez case. This is one that has more to do with the fact that ecstasy is illegal so her friends were afraid to get help.
Here’s what happened:

According to several sources close to the investigation, Perez had a strong negative reaction April 23 after taking a blue pill presumed to be MDMA, known on the street as ecstasy. Toxicological tests are still pending to show whether the pill was contaminated with other substances.

Perez complained of feeling awful and said she felt like she was “going to die,” the sources said. In response, her friends gave her water and helped her take a bath.

She also was given ibuprofen and possibly marijuana, apparently because the friends knew that drug is sometimes used to treat cancer patients, sources said.

The two girls also contacted a 17-year-old boy who allegedly supplied them with the drug and asked him for advice, the sources said. He has since been arrested on the same charges as the two girls.

So Souder wants to keep harassing medical marijuana patients because some twit girls tried everything they could think of to avoid authorities who would arrest them. Oh yeah, they also tried Ibuprofen. Better make that illegal.
By the way, via Random Act of Kindness I learn of another voice that supported the amendment — Libertarian Presidential Candidate Michael Badnarik:

“That our congress consistently acts against the will of the people on this issue is certainly no surprise to me. That the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment even needs to be offered indicates the disdain that our congress has for the Constitution. Individuals have the right to use whatever medication they see fit.”

That’s class.

The amendment that would have prevented the Federal government from harrassing medical marijuana patients in states where it’s legal has failed.
It’s what we’ve been calling the Hinchey/Rohrabacher amendement, but showed up in the House proceedings as the Farr Amendment (Final name was the Farr/Rohrabacher/Hinchey/Paul amendment due to additional sponsors).
In favor of the amendment: 19 Republicans, 128 Democrats, 1 Independent
Opposed: 202 Republicans, 66 Democrats
See how your representative voted. If they voted against the amendment, send them a letter saying how disappointed you are, and then vote them out of office.
It looks like we can’t count on the House of Representatives to do what’s right. We may be dependent on the Supreme Court.
I may have more on the debate later.
Update: Here’s the beginning of the debate. Well said by Representative Farr:

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, the purpose of this amendment is very
straightforward. In simple terms, the Farr-Rohrabacher-Hinchey-Paul
amendment prohibits the use of funds in the bill from preventing States
that have medical marijuana laws from implementing them.

As a result, the States have medical marijuana laws on the books they
can implement, regulate and enforce them, just like now. States that do
not have medical marijuana laws on the books remain subject to the
overarching Federal law.

This amendment does not stop law enforcement officials from
prosecuting illegal use of marijuana. This amendment does not encourage
the use of marijuana. This amendment does not encourage the use of
drugs in children. This amendment does not legalize any drugs. This
amendment does not change the classification of marijuana. This
amendment is recognized as States’ rights to oversee the medical scope
of practice of doctors in their States, to prescribe drugs as doctors
see as necessary for medical conditions.

Today’s Los Angeles Times points out that the Justice Department’s
medical marijuana war seems increasingly out of step with the whole
country. Last fall, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling
barring Federal officials from prosecuting doctors for their
recommendations.

Just 2 weeks ago, the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian
Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and other mainstream
religious groups supported doctors’ rights to prescribe pot as a when-
all-else-fails treatment for the seriously ill. The best way to thwart
casual use of this drug is to let doctors prescribe it in closely
circumscribed and regulated ways such as the States do.

Now, there are nine States that have passed these laws. The voters
are speaking, and they are doing it more in every State. Just recently
Vermont. Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon,
Vermont, and Washington have enacted State medical marijuana laws.
Because of these State laws, thousands of patients are able to
alleviate their pain and suffering without fear of arrest by State or
local authorities.

The threat of arrest by Federal agents, however, still exists. In the
past, the Federal Government has impeded research on medical use of
marijuana, even though thousands of patients have testified, explained,
and acknowledged that it helps relieve some of the debilitating
symptoms, such as nausea, pain, loss of appetite associated with
serious illness.

Despite Federal admonitions against marijuana, the American people
support medical marijuana and pretty overwhelmingly. Most national
polls show the support around 70 percent.

This amendment is not necessarily about the actual medical purpose of
marijuana, though I know scores of doctors have attested to marijuana’s
medical benefits. In States where medical marijuana is legal, thousands
of licensed physicians have recommended marijuana to their patients.
This amendment is not about legalizing drugs, though some will argue
that it should be.

No. What this amendment is about is States rights. In so many areas
we trust States rights. And I think of us here in the United States
Congress. We allowed States to draw our district boundary lines.

We allow States to set the fee we have to pay to run for office. We
allow the States to create the primary procedures for getting elected
to Congress. We allow the States to fashion Medicaid packages. We allow
States to license doctors to practice. We trust the States to do what
is best for their residents of that State. When it comes to health care
policy or palliative care, the care of alleviating pain, nine States of
the United States have determined that it is appropriate public policy
to allow the use of marijuana as a prescribed treatment.

If Congress respects States rights in so many other areas, why does
it not respect it with regard to medical marijuana?

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prevent the Federal Government
from interfering with state medical marijuana laws. It would end the
DEA raids on medical marijuana patients and caregivers who are acting
in accordance with state law. It would not–let me repeat–it would not
prevent the DEA from arresting individuals who are involved in
marijuana-related activities unconnected to medical use.

Here is the simple question posed by this amendment: Should the
Federal Government arrest individuals who are trying to alleviate their
own suffering or the suffering of others in compliance with state law?

I asked you to act on this on June 4.
We’re asking again, because it looks like a vote may take place on Wednesday or Thursday. A major coordinated effort is taking place to make a victory happen. It can with your help. Representatives need to hear from you now.
The amendment is quite simple. It says that the federal government will not interfere with medical marijuana laws in those specific states that have passed them. Logical. Sensible.
In last year’s article Can Congress Get a Clue, I discussed the Hinchey Amendment that lost then and even some of the bizarre debate on the floor. Last year the amendment failed 152-273, but that was remarkable in that 136 Democrats, 15 Republicans and 1 Independent voted in favor of a medical marijuana bill.
We can do better this year.
There are several options you can take:

• Visit one of the following action sites and follow the instructions to send a free fax or email:
• StopTheDrugWar.org
• Drug Policy Alliance
• NORML
• Even better, just call your Representative’s office directly. Find out their number by calling the Capitol Switchboard at 1-800-839-5276.
• Once you reach your Representative’s office, tell the person who answers the phone that you strongly support the Hinchey/Rohrabacher medical marijuana amendment that will be offered to the Commerce spending bill this week, and that you want your Representative to vote for it. This vote is about whether or not the Justice Department should stop wasting scarce law enforcement resources arresting patients who use medical marijuana in compliance with state law.

(Note: Hinchey/Rohrabacher is pronounced Hinch’-ee/Roar’-bocker)

I saw this man drying cocaine in a soccer field in the middle of town… and then I saw this man bartering his cocaine base for toilet paper and food in this grocery store…

If you want to get a snapshot of Columbia and what cocaine means there, you need to see this flash movie at National Geographic.
Take a few minutes and do it. And then ask yourself if our policies of spraying crops and providing military hardware and assistance makes any sense at all.

It’s like, the isolation is so big, that the people had to come up with a new currency. Cocaine.

With that headline, you might think I’m trolling for search engine traffic, but I do have a point. Via the Volokh Conspiracy, I’ve learned of an article a month ago by Glenn Reynolds titled Teen Sex and Media Hype. While the thrust of the article is about teen sex, much of it is directly translatable to teen drug use.

Once, teen-agers weren’t a demographic: They were adults-in-training. They worked, did farm chores, watched children, and generally functioned in the real world. They got status and recognition for doing these things well, and they got shame and disapproval for doing them badly.

But since sometime in the mid-20th century, the role of teen-agers has been different, as a recent article by Thomas Hine in American Heritage magazine points out:

Young people became teen-agers because we had nothing better for them to do. High schools became custodial institutions for the young. We stopped expecting young people to be productive members of the society and began to think of them as gullible consumers. We defined maturity primarily in terms of being permitted adult vices, and then were surprised when teen-agers drank, smoked, or had promiscuous sex.” …

… Unfortunately, the most common response we see to reports of teen-age sex is to further infantilize teens. This serves the interests of nanny-state advocates who want to infantilize everyone, and of those who believe that coercion is the only path to virtue. When this approach fails, as it is sure to do, that will justify still more coercion. (Abstinence programs, the U.S. News story reports, make teens more anxious to retain “technical” virginity, but often via riskier practices like anal sex.)

I recommend a different approach: If we want teen-agers to be more adult, in their virtues as well as their vices, we should try treating them more like adults.

Treating them like adults. What a concept. It’s an interesting article, and I don’t know that I agree with everything Reynolds says, but the core principles seem sound. We even move the “targets” of “maturity” back (like moving the drinking age to 21) encouraging further rebellion. Would be an interesting debate topic.

In today’s Salt Lake Tribune comes a story that makes me do something truly rare …
…praise the government for something they’re doing in the drug war.
Now, before you get all concerned for my mental health, I’d better point out that the good thing the government is doing came about by accident.
Brigham Young University professor Douglas McKinlay had his advertising class work on developing new ads. He contacted Ogilvy & Mather, who gave them the anti-drug creative brief “‘just for fun’ and to nurture new talent.”
The homework assignment, which called for a positive anti-drug message, impressed Ogilvy & Mather (and the Drug Czar’s office) so much that they’re going to go with the ads in a special “Scan Me” campaign to start soon.
Here’s an example.

BYU students wrote, designed and produced a series of ads, such as this one. The text reads, “You scan me: You think I’m just another pot-smoking teenager. Well, you are wrong. I’m an artist, a therapist, and the last time I took a hit was in kickboxing. Drugs aren’t me. My life. My decision.” (Courtesy of Brigham Young University)

Note that this ad is positive, affirming, and gives the power to the young person. No preaching, no lies.
Compare this to the usual advertising approach: “smoking pot supports terrorism,” “smoke pot and you’ll kill your little brother,” “this is your brain on drugs,” etc., in addition to the government’s approach in other ways — everything from imprisonment, denying financial aid, denying extracurricular activities or olympic sports, searching everybody, shooting down airplanes, demanding urine, … turning the country into a police state.
I have no objection to the government encouraging people not to use drugs. A positive ad is what I want to see. In fact, positive messages are the best way to reduce drug use. Of course, the federal government is not likely to do it well — this case in point shows that they can only do it by accident. It says something about the blindness of federal drug policy, that it took a bunch of college students in class to finally come up with a good ad.
You want some good drug policy? Legalize marijuana and take one tiny portion of what we spend on prohibition to run ads like these.
My life. My decision.