The Big Lie

[vta]

Please join as as we take a look at the war of drugs...or what I like to call The Big Lie


Has the Federal Government Changed Its Policy on Medical Marijuana Enforcement or Just Changed Its Reasons for Continued Interference?

by Kris Hermes, ASA

It would appear that raids by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in medical marijuana states have declined since President Obama’s Justice Department issued its infamous memorandum in October 2009. But, in fact, raids have continued at an alarming pace. For example, in the 16 months since the Obama Administration’s policy change, the DEA has conducted at least 43 raids in California, Colorado, Michigan and Nevada. That’s nearly 3 raids per month on average. Although arrests were not made at all of the raids, President Obama’s Justice Department has seen fit to indict and prosecute at least 24 patients and providers in connection with those federal actions. Can this really be the result of a new federal enforcement policy?

Attorneys for two of the most recently indicted cultivators from Michigan vehemently argue that their young caregiver clients were in full compliance with state law. If that’s true, do these federal actions have more to do with hostile DEA agents and bitter U.S. Attorneys — angry that their decades-long drug war has been narrowed — or are they based on willful deception by President Obama’s Justice Department? Maybe both.

While it could be argued that some of last month’s arrests in Las Vegas, Nevada, which resulted in a total of 15 indictments, was based on the fact that Nevada law does not allow for centralized distribution. And, yet, how are patients supposed to obtain their medicine if they are too sick or lack the skill to grow it themselves? Would the DEA prefer that patients seek out their medicine from the illicit market? And, why should the federal government be able to prosecute violations of state law in federal court, where patients are prevented from using a medical marijuana defense?

Did the American people envision their tax dollars going to such harmful and unnecessary federal actions, especially after a policy was issued claiming that such actions would cease? With popular American support for medical marijuana at more than 80 percent, we think not.

It’s time for the Obama Administration to deliver on its promise to leave patients alone. The DEA must take a hands-off approach to enforcement of medical marijuana production and distribution. Any allegations of local or state law violations should be prosecuted in state court, and not in federal court (i.e. no more federal indictments). In addition, DEA agents should be refusing to assist local law enforcement in raids on patients and providers, period.

Only after the federal government stands down on this issue will states and their localities be able to effectively implement medical marijuana laws passed by the people.

 

[vta]

US Attorney will bust Oakland pot farm despite Holder Memo

By CannaBob on February 4, 2011

Our buddy, Barack, and his hit-man Eric Holder threw us a bone when they said, as long as you guys don’t break your state laws, we’ll leave your medical marijuana alone. Well, they better talk to the U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag who has said that her office will vigorously enforce federal anti-drug laws against illegal manufacturing and distribution of marijuana, “even if such activities are permitted under state law.” Methinks Melinda better have a lunch meeting with Barack and Eric.


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) – The warning in a letter from U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag offered the first clear signal that the Justice Department would not tolerate even city-sanctioned growing operations, despite the Obama administration’s hands-off approach to states that have legalized medical marijuana.

“The department is concerned about the Oakland ordinance’s creation of a licensing scheme that permits large-scale industrial marijuana cultivation and manufacturing as it authorizes conduct contrary to federal law,” Haag wrote in the letter to Oakland City Attorney John Russo dated Tuesday.

Haag’s letter acknowledges an October 2009 Justice Department memo instructing federal prosecutors to avoid going after patients complying with state laws regarding the medical use of marijuana.

But Haag wrote that her office will vigorously enforce federal anti-drug laws against illegal manufacturing and distribution of marijuana, “even if such activities are permitted under state law.“

 

[Captain Ginyu]

So it would appear that we the public, are duped into thinking that DEA has been holding back, while more arrests are made; interesting.

I wonder what would be the rough figure, as to how much in taxes, has the country received thus far, since dispensaries have opened in med states? Anyone have a clue?

 

[kmk420kali]

In addition, DEA agents should be refusing to assist local law enforcement in raids on patients and providers, period.

Would a Pitbull relinquish it's grip on a free steak??
I think not--
Until it is more profitable to leave a person alone for weed....it will be more profitable to bust them--
That is their thinking...there is no "Reasoning" against that--

 

[Koroz]

So it would appear that we the public, are duped into thinking that DEA has been holding back, while more arrests are made; interesting.

I wonder what would be the rough figure, as to how much in taxes, has the country received thus far, since dispensaries have opened in med states? Anyone have a clue?

There was an interview in a showtime special where Richard Lee said he was spending I think 300k on state, and 600k on federal level (those might be a bit off) and he was still getting raided.. yet they don't ever arrest him he just has his shit taken (pot, computers, money).

This interview looked like was from the mid 90's so I am sure things have changed for him lately, but I would imagine taxes are close to those numbers which tells you the kinda business they pull in.

Ill try and find the name of the documentary, I can't remember which it was.

 

[David762]

The DEA is data-mining during raids ...

The DEA is data-mining during raids ...

There was an interview in a showtime special where Richard Lee said he was spending I think 300k on state, and 600k on federal level (those might be a bit off) and he was still getting raided.. yet they don't ever arrest him he just has his shit taken (pot, computers, money).

This interview looked like was from the mid 90's so I am sure things have changed for him lately, but I would imagine taxes are close to those numbers which tells you the kinda business they pull in.

Ill try and find the name of the documentary, I can't remember which it was.

The DEA is data-mining during raids ... these days. Often there are no arrests made (or no criminal cases built). Assets are seized, imho, as much as a legal harassment as asset forfeiture -- WTF are the Feds going to do with lighting, hydro & ventilation systems? But one thing that the Feds always (always) do is seize all the victim's records: computers, hardcopy book-keeping, patient lists, doctor rec lists, vendor lists, etcetera. Look at what the DEA is doing in Michigan regarding their lawsuit to get lists of patients, in direct conflict with Federal HIPPA law privacy -- if it isn't medicine, then they aren't patients only drug addicts (their mentality).

It's not as if the Feds are merely researching the extent of the economic impact that their re-legalization of cannabis would have -- LOL. They are building an intel bonanza of the entire network of suppliers & customers, of equipment sources & enabling physicians. I rather doubt that the Feds are building an awesome Valentines' Day greeting card list. At some point, the DEA will make use of the data collected, and it will be the equivalent of a knife in the back from Obama and Holder -- a Valentines' Day Massacre.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the Feds are building up to, only citizens with eyes wide open and a sense of history.

 

[Koroz]

The DEA is data-mining during raids ... these days. Often there are no arrests made (or no criminal cases built). Assets are seized, imho, as much as a legal harassment as asset forfeiture -- WTF are the Feds going to do with lighting, hydro & ventilation systems? But one thing that the Feds always (always) do is seize all the victim's records: computers, hardcopy book-keeping, patient lists, doctor rec lists, vendor lists, etcetera. Look at what the DEA is doing in Michigan regarding their lawsuit to get lists of patients, in direct conflict with Federal HIPPA law privacy -- if it isn't medicine, then they aren't patients only drug addicts (their mentality).

It's not as if the Feds are merely researching the extent of the economic impact that their re-legalization of cannabis would have -- LOL. They are building an intel bonanza of the entire network of suppliers & customers, of equipment sources & enabling physicians. I rather doubt that the Feds are building an awesome Valentines' Day greeting card list. At some point, the DEA will make use of the data collected, and it will be the equivalent of a knife in the back from Obama and Holder -- a Valentines' Day Massacre.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the Feds are building up to, only citizens with eyes wide open and a sense of history.

I think this was the same documentary that went into how the DEA/CIA used the market in LA to distribute its seized coke from Columbia to fund the resistance fighters there when they were trying to overthrow the government.

When things got to hot they busted their contact who was buying the coke from them and turning it into crack and put him in jail and the subsequent cover up of the whole thing after. It was a really well done documentary.

It might be the one I link, but there were a couple they were airing and I don't remember exactly: http://americandrugwar.com/

 

[pearlemae]

I see it as working both sides of the street. Lip service to the medical users lulling them into a false sense of security and hey lets not make waves. Meanwhile the busts go on. Well, the Prez is also owing to the industrial prison complex,Campaign funds anyone, they need a constant supply of new slaves, as the work force comes and goes. Think about it, America has passed China in the number of people in prison, stats show the largest part of the populations are drug arrest/convictions. Prisons for profit are in all aspects of american manufacturing and call centers. Hey the guy you ordered your lights from might just be in the slammer for doing what you are. Think about it.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

43 raids in the 2+ years obama has been in office. shit thats like 1 day of raids under bush....

and his initials are BHO....

 

[vta]

Author: Thomas Ravenel

DRUG PROHIBITION VIOLATES LOGIC -- AND CIVIL RIGHTS

No matter how bad you might think illegal drugs are, drug prohibition ( the War on Drugs ) makes it infinitely worse. We must, again, repeal prohibition, not for drug users but for all Americans who are forced to endure the violence, street crime, erosion of civil liberties, corruption and social and economic decay caused by prohibition.

Drug abuse is a medical, health care and spiritual problem, not a problem to be solved within a criminal justice model. What historical precedent is there to recommend our current prohibitionist policy? Isn't history abundantly clear about such foolishness?

During the 1800s, drugs were legal and could be bought in grocery stores and pharmacies. The temperance movement was started to stop what was considered a menace to society -- alcohol, not drugs. Americans learned in the 1920s that prohibition was far worse than alcohol as it created crime, corruption, drive-by shootings and organized crime. Isn't it time we relearn that lesson and end the madness?

Before alcohol prohibition passed, its sponsors predicted jails would empty. Yet after passage, crime exploded and prisons overflowed. Before passage, the homicide rate was declining, and after, it exploded. During prohibition, alcohol use went up, not down, especially among teens.

We know, not from intuition but from history, that when we end drug prohibition, crime, murder, inner city decay, corruption, and waste of lives and national treasure will all dramatically decline as it all mercifully did after the repeal of alcohol prohibition.

Prohibition creates the black market and is thus responsible for all the problems related to the black market, like high drug profits to dealers, drug gangs funded by those profits, shootouts over turf, addicts who steal to pay for expensive black-market drugs, children selling drugs because they are subject to lower penalties than their adult comrades, police corruption, the creation of a criminal subculture in the inner city, and the jailing and criminalization of large numbers of young minority males.

Ask yourself, what was the original goal of prohibiting drugs. Was it to reduce use, protect the kids or reduce crime? By every metric, it has failed spectacularly. Prohibition doesn't protect our youth. Three national surveys reveal it's far easier for teenagers to buy illegal drugs than alcohol. Liquor stores check IDs, drug dealers don't. Recently, when drugs were decriminalized in Portugal, teen drug use went down.

Also, when the government bans one substance, many just substitute with drugs that are far worse. In the 1600s, China banned cigarettes and people switched to opium. In 1914, the Harrison Act banned cocaine, opium and morphine so many switched to heroin. Now, for example, in substitution of safer, plant-based drugs, users manufacture deadlier drugs like crystal meth with ingredients bought at Walgreens.

Drugs don't cause crime, the illicit nature of drugs does. How often do Anheuser Busch and Jack Daniel Distilleries have shootouts with innocent children being killed in the crossfire? Of course it never happens, because these companies deal in legal commerce and resolve conflicts through the courts, not through shootouts.

Did anyone argue in 1914 that we must ban cocaine because addicts were causing a crime wave by stealing money to buy cocaine for $100 a gram? No, because cocaine was legal and cheap. When heroin was legalized in Switzerland, use did not go up but property crime went down 60 percent. It so happens that countries with the most prohibitive anti-drug laws happen to have the most drug use. In Holland, where marijuana is legal, 22.6 percent of the population has used it, but in America 41 percent have used marijuana.

Prohibition is a violation of our civil rights. The Ninth Amendment states that by enumerating some rights the government in no way limits other rights that are too many to enumerate. This is recognition of our unalienable rights, which pre-exist governments.

Prohibition has transformed the land of the free into the land of lock everybody up. America incarcerates at five times the world rate. Are we five times more evil than the rest of the world?

One might ascribe these disgraceful figures to differences in culture and safety. Think again. Canada is similar to us culturally, and yet we incarcerate eight times the rate it does, and it is rated the eighth safest country on earth. America is 83rd. Has all that incarcerating helped? America is No. 1 in illegal drug use!

President Lincoln said, "The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly."

If drug prohibition were strictly enforced, 85 percent of the population over 47, including three presidents, would do prison time. But that kind of enforcement would lead to repeal. So what is done to keep the gravy train rolling? Target the poor and the voiceless, mostly young minorities. America incarcerates blacks at a rate five times that of South Africa during apartheid!

Yearly in America, 435,000 people die from cigarettes, 85,000 from alcohol, 365,000 from obesity and poor dieting, 75,000 from prescription drugs and 34,000 from automobile wrecks, 2,300 from cocaine and zero from marijuana. About 11,000 die from all illegal drugs combined, with many of these deaths the result of a lack of quality control in the black market.

For every user who dies from the intrinsic effects of cocaine, 20 die from heroin, 37 from alcohol and 162 from cigarettes, according to researcher James Ostrowski in a study prepared for the Cato Institute. Thus, we're incarcerating people three and four times longer than murderers for selling consenting adults a drug that's 162 times less deadly than cigarettes!

In the past, our inability to tolerate different religions led to eternal religious wars. The correct solution to those wars was to decree "freedom of religion." Can a similar lesson be drawn from our current experiment with intolerance to personal freedom?

Drug prohibition is our government's most destructive policy since slavery. Prohibition doesn't make us drug-free, just unfree.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

NEVER REGISTER WITH ANY GOVERNMENT! government registration is basically the same thing as putting on the star of David in nazi Germany. It makes you easy to identify and then terminate.

 

[Preacher]

I'd wager the bullshit defiant DEA raids would come to a full stop in a big hurry if our asset seizure laws were altered to fit the "innocent until proven guilty" myth or abolished outright. Raids are going to keep happening as long as someone's netting a profit.

 

[OsWiZzLe]

shady

 

[mean mr.mustard]

I'd wager the bullshit defiant DEA raids would come to a full stop in a big hurry if our asset seizure laws were altered to fit the "innocent until proven guilty" myth or abolished outright. Raids are going to keep happening as long as someone's netting a profit.

I believe it was you who agreed with me on this point previously.

I've seen it as plain as the nose on my face.

I'm very curious what progressive laws involving forfeiture pass anytime soon... the entire system wines and dines each other.

On our dime.

 

[Hydrosun]

So it would appear that we the public, are duped into thinking that DEA has been holding back, while more arrests are made; interesting.

I wonder what would be the rough figure, as to how much in taxes, has the country received thus far, since dispensaries have opened in med states? Anyone have a clue?

Come on they've got 24 inditements for some of us bad guys. Does it really matter if they end up spending $24MM to do it? After all that will dramatically change the available supply of cannabis.

Off to hit the bong

 

[vta]

Author: Paul Armentano
Note: Paul Armentano is the deputy director of NORML (the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws), and is the co-author of the book Marijuana Is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People To Drink

POT MAY BE INSTRUMENTAL IN COMBATTING CANCER, MS AND OTHER DISEASES BUT THE GOV'T REFUSES TO FUND THE NECESSARY RESEARCH

A Review of the NIH Website Shows That U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse's Kibosh on Medical Marijuana Trials Continues Unabated.

It was nearly two years ago when the Obama White House issued it's 'Scientific Integrity' memorandum stating, "Science and the scientific process must inform and guide decisions of my Administration." Those of us involved in marijuana law reform welcomed the memo - which came just months after the American Medical Association called for "facilitating ... clinical research and [the] development of cannabinoid-based medicines" - and we hoped that it would stimulate the commencement of long-overdue human studies into the safety and efficacy of medical cannabis.

Those hopes were snuffed, however, when a representative from the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse ( NIDA ), the agency that oversees 85 percent of the world's research on controlled substances, reaffirmed their longstanding 'no medi-pot' policy to The New York Times. "As the National Institute on Drug Abuse, our focus is primarily on the negative consequences of marijuana use," a spokesperson declared in 2010. "We generally do not fund research focused on the potential beneficial medical effects of marijuana."

A review of the U.S. National Institutes of Health website clinicaltrials.gov shows that NIDA's kibosh on medical marijuana trials continues unabated. Though a search of ongoing FDA-approved clinical trials using the keyword 'cannabinoids' ( the active components in marijuana ) yields 65 worldwide hits, only six involve subjects' use of actual cannabis. ( The others involve the use of synthetic cannabinoid agonists like dronabinol or nabilone, the commercially marketed marijuana extract Sativex, or the cannabinoid receptor blocking agent Rimonabant. )

Of the six, two of the studies are already completed: 'Opioid and Cannabinoid Pharmacokinetic Interactions' and 'Vaporization as a Smokeless Cannabis Delivery System,' both of which were spearheaded by researchers ( primarily Dr. Donald Abrams ) at the University of California at San Francisco.

The four remaining studies are still in the 'recruitment' phase. Of these, only two pertain to the potential medical use of cannabis: 'Cannabis for Spasticity of Multiple Sclerosis,' which is taking place at the University of California at Davis and is likely the final clinical trial associated with the soon-to-be-defunct/defunded California Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, and 'Cannabis for Inflammatory Bowel Disease,' led by researchers at the Meir Medical Center in Israel.

Of the remaining studies, one focuses on the detection of cannabinoids and their metabolites on drug screens, while the other, entitled 'Effects of Smoked Marijuana on Risk Taking and Decision Making Tasks,' seeks to establish pot-related harms - hypothesizing that subjects "demonstrate poorer decision-making abilities and increased risk-taking behaviors" after smoking marijuana.

So much for the AMA's demand for clinical cannabis research.

By contrast, preclinical ( animal ) trials assessing the therapeutic efficacy of cannabinoids are occurring at a record pace. A keyword search on the search engine 'PubMed' using the term 'cannabinoids' yields over 1,300 published papers in 2008, some 1,700 papers in 2009, and another 1,200 last year.

While many of these studies highlight the ability of cannabinoids to manage a wide range of symptoms, even more intriguing are the results indicating the potential of cannabinoid intervention to halt the development of serious diseases, such as cancer, diabetes, Lou Gehrig's disease, and multiple sclerosis. Nevertheless, without abrupt changes at the highest levels of government - changes that do not appear to be forthcoming despite this administration's public demand for 'scientific integrity' - scientists will indefinitely lack the human follow up data necessary to adequately answer societal questions regarding cannabis safety, efficacy, and proper dosage.

'Change we can believe in?' Not when it comes to studying pot.

 

[wiseone]

So I click on the link given for the drug war vid and watch the trailer.
Up pops Bush......
Thanks for helping me barf up my dinner.

 

[vta]

Drug Czar: Medical marijuana a “gateway for legalization”

By "Radical" Russ Belville

Gateway Gil - The Man With the Flaming Pants!

Paul Armentano does a phenomenal fashion review on the flaming pants Gil Kerlikowske, our drug czar, is wearing in the latest interview with The Daily Caller. Gil dodges a question about the volumes of scientific reports on medical marijuana by claiming “there are over 100 groups doing marijuana research, there are several things in clinical trials right now,” when, in fact, there are exactly two clinic trials ongoing.

I want to focus on something else Gil said:

(The Daily Caller) KERLIKOWSKE: What has been made extremely clear is that the legalization community has made it patently clear that marijuana drug is a gateway for legalization. I think they’ve made that intention clear.

Besides the whole “extremely patently clear marijuana drug” syntax, think about what Gateway Gil is saying here.

The legalization community thinks medical marijuana is a gateway to legalization of marijuana.

Medical marijuana is legalization of marijuana, just for a tightly-defined demographic. It’s a second-class, Jim Crow, quasi-legalization, but essentially, it is what those of us in the legalization community consider the bare minimum of legalization: don’t throw me in jail, leave me alone, let me grow and use and maybe even buy and sell cannabis.

Just how do we make this supposed gateway work? We pass medical marijuana laws and suddenly 50%+1 voters in the state vote to legalize for everyone? You got us, Gateway Gil, that’s kind of the plan. We know when cannabis isn’t completely forbidden, when people learn the truth about it, that it is safer than alcohol, that it is not carcinogenic like tobacco, that it isn’t chemically addictive like hard drugs, they begin to realize legalization is a reasonable alternative to breaking down people’s doors, shooting their dogs, and ruining their lives over a weed.

That’s the problem of medical marijuana for Gateway Gil: it provides living breathing visible examples of what legalization could be like. It’s harder to demonize the reefers when you happen to know someone whose cannabis use calms the tremors of their multiple sclerosis enough for them to hold down a graphic design job. It’s difficult to castigate the “black market drug dealers” when you can tour a professionally-run dispensary that pays sales taxes and tests product for impurities and cannabinoid levels. Those police overtime weeding operations you call “drug seizures” sound a lot less frightening when people are regularly exposed to regular-looking people tending beautiful green gardens.

However, there is quite certainly a difference between medical users who need cannabis and social users who want cannabis. Even if marijuana prohibition remains for social use, that in no way changes the need to fight for medical use or the fact that cannabis is a beneficial medicine. Gateway Gil can’t accept that and believes medical marijuana is all a bunch of smoke and mirrors…

KERLIKOWSKE: I think it hides the debate. If you call it medicine, if you call the people using it patients and the people distributing it caregivers, it completely masks the debate. I think that sends a bad message to young people, and I’ve heard that from high-school students we’ve done focus groups with.

Gil thinks this woman, Donna Lambert, and hundreds of thousands of others are faking it to get high.

No, it completely illuminates the debate, considering there are volumes of study on the issue that have settled beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is medical utility in cannabis. Even the American Medical Association admits “smoked cannabis reduces neuropathic pain, improves appetite and caloric intake especially in patients with reduced muscle mass, and may relieve spasticity and pain in patients with multiple sclerosis.”

If high school students are reporting they believe that cannabis is medicine and smoking marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and tobacco, it is because that’s a fact. When is telling our children the truth ever a “bad message”?

KERLIKOWSKE: I think it came back to hurt them in the legalization push in California, where dispensaries are more ubiquitous than Starbucks. They’re on every corner. They’re outside waving signs. I think people got pretty tired of having it jammed down their throats. And it isn’t a constitutional right, the last time I checked.

Well, you’ve just confirmed why you needn’t fear medical marijuana, then, haven’t you? California’s got the most liberal medical marijuana law and you’re saying the ubiquity of it all turned off voters who then rejected legalization. So how can you be afraid that we’re using medical marijuana as a gateway to legalization when it’s been proven to not work? You should be secretly championing us so the public will see for themselves how awful medical marijuana is!

Terence McKenna said, “If the words ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ don’t include the right to experiment with your own consciousness, then the Declaration of Independence isn’t worth the hemp it was written on.” As for the Constitution, the Tenth Amendment says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” I looked all through that constitution and could not find any power delegated to the United States to monitor and control what The People ingest. In fact, when it comes to The People, the Fourth Amendment says we have the right “to be secure in their persons… against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

The only reason the right to plant seeds, harvest crops, and ingest herbs wasn’t placed in the Constitution is that even the best educated hemp farmers couldn’t envision a time when it would be necessary to enumerate that right.

 

[vta]

Obama is “all hat no cattle” on treatment vs. incarceration

By "Radical" Russ Belville

Domestic law enforcement: 35.5% of the budget in 2010, 36.5% in 2012. Because we're emphasizing treatment now, don't ya know?

All hat and no cattle, that boy just ain’t real
All boots and no saddle, don’t know how to make a cowgirl feel
Think I’m gonna tell him to pack up his act
And go back where he came from
‘Cause all hat and no cattle ain’t gonna get it done

- Trace Adkins, “All Hat No Cattle”

Remember just last month when President Obama was answering the legalization question from a member of LEAP? Remember his answer?

Well, I think that this is an entirely legitimate topic for debate. I am not in favor of legalization. I am a strong believer that we need to think more about drugs as a public health problem. When you think about other damaging activities in our society [like] smoking, drunk driving, making sure you’re wearing seat belts, typically we’ve made huge strides over the last twenty to thirty years by changing people’s attitudes. On drugs, we have been so focused on arrests and incarceration and interdiction that we don’t spend as much time thinking about how we can shrink demand. This is something that within the White House, we are looking at very carefully.

Moderator asks: Any Ideas?

Some of this requires shifting resources, being strategic as to where it makes sense for us to focus on where we need interdiction. We have to go after drug cartels that are not only selling drugs but are creating havoc, for example, along the US – Mexican border. But also, is there some way for us to shrink demand? In some cities, for example, it might take you six months to get into a drug treatment program. Well, if you’re trying to kick a habit and somebody says come back in six months, that’s pretty discouraging. So we’ve got to do more on figuring out how we get resources on that end of it and also look at what we are doing when we have non-violent, first-time drug offenders. Are there ways that we can make sure that we are steering them into the straight-and-narrow without automatically resorting to incarceration and drug courts and mechanisms like that. These are all issues that are worth exploring and worth a serious debate.

Well, the budget request for 2012 is in and the figures for incarceration and interdiction vs. drug treatment and prevention can be told. In previous budgets, President Obama has maintained the focus on incarceration and interdiction that matched the same focus as his predecessors.

So how has President Obama shifted those resources to shrink demand? How have we gotten resources on the drug treatment end of it without automatically resorting to incarceration?

Treatment dollars went up from 40.3% to 40.7% of the overall $25 billion drug control budget. That’s a shift of 0.4%. I suppose it is a step in the right direction, but at this rate it will be 2036 before treatment is even given an equal focus as incarceration.

 

[Preacher]

Fucking right we should shrink demand! We've halved the percentage of smokers in our population and it sure wasn't by making tobacco too inconvenient to get. What I'm curious about is whether this new idea which is not at all a new idea has been going on/getting funded prior to now with respect to illegal drugs or not.

As for prevention, you're right, this little pittance of an increase in prevention funding seems to be little more than it getting its fair cut of across-the-board hikes. I still have faith though. Like I said before, reason always wins. It's just not too picky about how long it takes to win.

Obama should be on our side- there's no doubt he'd have been smeared right out of politics entirely had he been arrested for the coke he did. But that's just what politics does to people. We saw it with McCain saying torture he actually went through isn't torture at all. Simply being in power seems to be enough to make a person stop caring about how badly he's fucking people.

Edit at below: I'm going purely by memory here but I believe medical weed bills routinely get killed in the House by around 2:1 against. Let's at least pretend to be a democracy, shall we?