What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

White House Vows Drug Policy Shift

vta

Active member
Veteran
By David Corn
Source: Mother Jones

justice Washington, D.C. -- The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy zapped out a press release on Wednesday morning noting that its director, Gil Kerlikowske (aka the Drug Czar) was testifying before a House subcommittee that the Obama administration is implementing a "new direction in drug policy."

From the release: With drug use accounting for tens of billions of dollars per year in healthcare costs, and drug overdoses ranking second only to motor vehicle crashes as the leading cause of accidental death, the Nation “needs to discard the idea that enforcement alone can eliminate our Nation’s drug problem,” Director Kerlikowske said.

“Only through a comprehensive and balanced approach – combining tough, but fair, enforcement with robust prevention and treatment efforts – will we be successful in stemming both the demand for and supply of illegal drugs in our country.

“The forthcoming National Drug Control Strategy calls for addressing our Nation’s enormous demand for drugs by scaling up our public health policy response, integrating treatment programs into mainstream medicine, and recognizing that effective drug policy requires engagement at the community level,” Director Kerlikowske said.

He also noted that ONDCP would continue to work to “break down the silos between the prevention, treatment, and law enforcement communities– and the greatest use must be made of the finite resources at our disposal.”

The statement also pointed out that Obama's 2011 budget request seeks a 6.5 percent boost in funding for drug prevention and treatment programs.

But this new direction will not be heading toward legalization. As its director was testifying, ONDCP's website featured an article by Harvard grad student Viridiana Rios that argues against legalization:

As the situation in Mexico and along U.S. border towns has become desperate, calls for legalization are intensifying. The city of El Paso, Texas, passed a resolution calling for studying the merits of legalization as a means to curb violence, and the Arizona Attorney General has also discussed the option of legalization in front of the US Congress. California is considering a measure in November's election.

Might legalization help the situation? My view is likely no. Any legalization attempt focuses on the marijuana markets which are not the core of the violence problem. It is highly valued drugs such as cocaine or heroin the ones which organized criminals are fighting for, it is these drugs that fund terrorist and criminal groups around the world.

Even in the unlikely scenario of an all-drugs liberalization, it is unrealistic to expect a significant diminishing of the influence of Mexican cartels.

The Obama administration is heeding the calls for drug reform when it comes to prevention, treatment, and harsh criminal enforcement. But with moves to legalize marijuana in California and elsewhere seemingly gaining momentum, the administration's reformers are not in sync with the reformers outside the government.

David Corn is Mother Jones' Washington bureau chief.
 

K.J

Kief Junkie's inhaling the knowledge!
Veteran
Even in the unlikely scenario of an all-drugs liberalization, it is unrealistic to expect a significant diminishing of the influence of Mexican cartels.

Uninformed blabber mouth alert.
 

Tony Aroma

Let's Go - Two Smokes!
Veteran
My prediction on what the "new direction in drug policy" will be -- more of the same, no significant or meaningful changes. They might try using some different language to describe the policy, like instead of "war on drugs" they might call it something like "battle against drug abuse." Anybody want to take bets?
 

DeezyH

Active member
ICMag Donor
My prediction on what the "new direction in drug policy" will be -- more of the same, no significant or meaningful changes. They might try using some different language to describe the policy, like instead of "war on drugs" they might call it something like "battle against drug abuse." Anybody want to take bets?


If you give me 10000 to 1 odds, otherwise I never bet against a sure thing.
 

yesum

Well-known member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
a lot of horseshit right there. what do you expect from your pet monkeys tho.

monkey sees poo, monkey picks up poo and hurls it. remember 'hugs not drugs'? tax dollars well spent friends.

i live in california, and for once am proud of that fact. other than weed being almost legal, there is little i like here. they say cali leads the way in America, hope that goes for weed laws at least.
 

BiG H3rB Tr3E

"No problem can be solved from the same level of c
Veteran
drug-czars-0907-ps07.jpg
 

Cgigantea

New member
My prediction on what the "new direction in drug policy" will be -- more of the same, no significant or meaningful changes. They might try using some different language to describe the policy, like instead of "war on drugs" they might call it something like "battle against drug abuse." Anybody want to take bets?

I think you nailed it. More of the same under a different name.
 

PharmaCan

Active member
Veteran
By David Corn
Source: Mother Jones

drug overdoses ranking second only to motor vehicle crashes as the leading cause of accidental death,

I wonder where they got this and if it is factually true.

It sucks how these bastards lump mj in with all the hard drugs, just to include it in the hard-drug statistics. I wonder how this interview might have gone if the reporter had asked Kerkowski how many people had died from mj overdose?

My prediction on what the "new direction in drug policy" will be -- more of the same, no significant or meaningful changes. They might try using some different language to describe the policy, like instead of "war on drugs" they might call it something like "battle against drug abuse." Anybody want to take bets?

I think you hit the nail on the head, Tony!

PC
 

Preacher

Member
Might legalization help the situation? My view is likely no. Any legalization attempt focuses on the marijuana markets which are not the core of the violence problem. It is highly valued drugs such as cocaine or heroin the ones which organized criminals are fighting for, it is these drugs that fund terrorist and criminal groups around the world.

Even in the unlikely scenario of an all-drugs liberalization, it is unrealistic to expect a significant diminishing of the influence of Mexican cartels.
Wow, normally I have to explain government self-contradictions. In this case all I have to do is quote it. Glad they're making my job easier.
 

cobcoop

Puttin flame to fire
ICMag Donor
Veteran

NHMI

Member
The Obamma administration needs to be obliterated before we have any chance of freedom in the US or legalization/legitimate enforcement of real law, stopping any prosecution lacking a victim. It is pathetic the people have allowed the Govt to legislate personal choices and actually get away with it...
 

Attachments

  • 030410_Chief.pdf
    134.8 KB · Views: 11

Open Eyes

Member
Did not the Obama administration recently announce that the DEA budget is going to be increased? To me this sounds like ore of the same but using different words to same the same thing.

"Only through a comprehensive and balanced approach – combining tough, but fair, enforcement with robust prevention and treatment efforts – will we be successful in stemming both the demand for and supply of illegal drugs in our country."

They reduced the treatment part of the money flow and are going to be spending into the 100's of millions in Afghanistan in eradication efforts. It would not surprise me the least if the CIA is actually now importing Heroin for domestic consumption. Stranger things have happened.

Either they are truly proposing reform and i cant see that with the language that they used or its more of the same and that is more likely.
 

Koroz

Member
combining tough, but fair, enforcement with robust prevention and treatment efforts

So who decides what is fair? NY thought it was "fair" to arrest DOUBLE the amount of 2008 in 2009 for simple possession, they think its "fair" to "trick" people into an arrest by asking for the Cannabis when they know as soon as the person brings the cannabis out of his pocket and into plain site the charge increases from a ticket to a misdemeanor crime.

Is it "fair" that they fly over my apartment every day with FLIR cameras with out a warrent? Is it "fair" that I can, even after paying taxes and working for 25+ years that I can still get arrested for simple possession and have my kids, and life taken from me?

I think the only "fair" enforcement is one that realizes that A) Drug USE isn't inherently bad for society, and B) addiction and drug abuse aren't crimes they are social problems that people need to "treat" with help not be put in a place with real criminals who will prey on them.
 

Tony Aroma

Let's Go - Two Smokes!
Veteran
So, who's ready to pay up?

I just watched our Drug Czar's testimony before the House Committee on Government Reform, and although the new policy is not official yet, it is virtually identical to the old policy. Gotta give Kucinich (the committee chair) credit for pressing the czar. He kept asking for specific data to show the effectiveness of our current drug policy, and the czar could not provide a single statistic to show any successes. In fact, he had no justification whatsoever for his proposed new budget (virtually identical to the current one). He could not say which programs, if any, were cost effective or produced results. He even admitted that if we were to eradicate ALL poppies in Afghanistan, that it would have virtually no effect on heroin use in the US. That sure is money well spent. Interestingly, the other panel members (including Ethan Nadelmann) had plenty of statistics to show what a colossal failure our current drug policy is.

Any bets on who the House Committee will listen to? My money's on the Drug Czar. After all, if something's not working, you stick with it until it does (or until you run out of money).
 

dddownlowww

Member
Even though majorities now favor marijuana in national polls, we still have some oldsters holding on in Congress, and they sure aren't going to start listening to the facts about pot now. We're going to have to suffer through some more bald-faced bullshit, but I think there is something to changing the name. Branding shit matters. I like:

Cannabis is safer

The more we say it, the faster that pool of money dries up.

ddd
 

BiG H3rB Tr3E

"No problem can be solved from the same level of c
Veteran
The Obamma administration needs to be obliterated before we have any chance of freedom in the US or legalization/legitimate enforcement of real law, stopping any prosecution lacking a victim. It is pathetic the people have allowed the Govt to legislate personal choices and actually get away with it...

I love people like this, normally europeans, telling us how could we let them get away with it.....


Last time I checked just about every country in the world is anti-MJ.


...and what is all this anti-obama shit like hes darth vader? Bush obliterated our freedoms, not obama.
 
Top