The Drug War Gets Worse

Drug cartel members burst into a Juarez drug rehabilation clinic yesterday, lining up patients and executing 17 of them. On the same day, newly appointed ( 2 weeks ago ) deputy police chief Jose Manuel Revueltas, was killed in President Calderon's home state of Michoacan in western Mexico by heavily armed men in two vehicles just a few blocks from police headquarters.

How many Saint Valentine's Day Massacres do we need to witness before we end drug prohibition? I'm not feeling like ranting so here are some current highlights from the drug war:

• 13,000 people have been killed since late 2006
• Obama plans to give $1.4 billion to aid fighting drug cartels (aka, wasting tax dollars and increasing violence)
  
• Ciudad Juarez has become the most violent city on earth.
• In 2009 there have been 4,736 murders in Mexico
• There have been 24,000 arrests in 2009 and the violence still continues
  

SSDP on the radio

UMD SSDP President Irina Alexander and I spoke on Midday with Dan Rodricks on WYPR radio (Baltimore's NPR affilliate - 88.1 FM) last Tuesday, August 25th.

The hour long segment covered the Higher Education Act Drug Penalty, zero tolerance policies, 911 Good Samaritan policies, and the Amethyst initiative.

Listen to us and let us know what you think of our performance!

As the school year begins, your local NPR stations might be interested to hear about your chapter's plans for the year. This could be a great opportunity to raise awareness and build local support for a campus change campaign or one of our national campaigns. You might also inspire sister chapters! Contact your outreach director for help on how to reach out to local media.

Josh Flynn at Towson University near Baltimore listened to us and is now starting a chapter there!

It's time for the children used to justify this Drug War speak up about its failure.

Argentina Decriminalizes Marijuana

I didn't realize it when I left for the first Latin American Conference on Drug Policy in Argentina a few weeks ago (scroll down a couple of posts for more), but the country was on its way to setting a historical precedent in creation of sensible drug policy. While it may not be Portugal or Mexico, the new law is undoubtedly the first step in a new approach for the South American nation.

The Supreme Court announced a UNANIMOUS ruling today that allows for personal use and possession of marijuana by adults in private situations without affecting third parties. It has deemed the current system invasive and corrupt, and a literal violation of constitutional privacy rights.

Of course, most of us realize that any government intervention regarding what we put into our own bodies is a violation of personal privacy. But isn't it nice to see formidable heads of government agreeing?

The court goes on to suggest that (gasp!) treatment for drug addiction is a more viable alternative to incarceration and that resources are better used fighting violent drug traffickers than low-level offenders.

The Chief Cabinet Minister Aníbal Fernández suggested the ruling signifies an "end of the repressive policies of the government against users."

A good day, indeed.

Students for "Sensible" Drug Policy

So we stumbled across this opinion piece on proposed reform of the HEA that would restore financial aid to students with drug possession convictions. The author is in favor of barring aid students with drug convictions.

Here's a breakdown and commentary of my favorite parts of this brilliant piece:

Remember the gigantic bust of students selling drugs this last spring? 75 students were busted selling marijuana, cocaine, and heroin out of several dorms and 5 Frat houses at San Diego State University.

I remember. That was the big drug bust that finally won the drug war wasn't it? Go on, go on...

How many former users, are now to be allowed student loans again, (eligible again because of the progressive Democrat majority)? How many will begin to use drugs while in college? How many convicted users will “relapse” due to the stress of college and grades? Are drug users stable and reliable in the first place? Is it right to make loans to former users going to school when they didn’t care about the importance of keeping a good record in the first place?

Those damn progressives! How dare those "convicted users" get a second chance? Are drug users stable enough to go to school? I can't believe this guy is serious. If I have a few beers with my dinner, am I not "stable" enough to go to work the next day? As you'll see in the new book, Marijuana is SAFER, alcohol causes many more problems to society and to a persons health than marijuana. So you should also support removing aid from those that drink alcohol. And if you can find me one person that isn't technically a drug user, we'll end this whole thing right now... Ok then, I'll keep going.

We have Democrat California Congressman George Miller, and 45 different cosponsors to thank for H.R. 3221; it overturns / reverses sections of the bill passed back in 1998 those sections were intended to keep drug use and drug dealers out of colleges. One has to wonder how the parents will feel about their children sharing a dorm room with a user or dealer.

Here's a newsflash: the bill didn't work! The HEA Aid Elimination Penalty did not work to keep drug dealers out of colleges, drugs off our streets or out of children's hands. If it did, students wouldn't be buying drugs or using them at the rate that you quoted: "Of 18 – 22 year old college students illicit drug use was at 37.5% - while non-student use for the same age group was 38.4%" And really, if this prohibition thing works so well, and we've been doing it for decades, why are drug use rates so high? Oh that's right... blame the progressives!

Kris Krane, (executive director) of Students for “Sensible” Drug Policy, (a pro-drug group) called the old law requiring the student to qualify by keeping clean, ”unfair because of double jeopardy” – and that it impacted students of color and low income more than others.

Other than users and legalizers, Adam Wolf, staff attorney for the ACLU and parents whose children began using drugs and lost their student loans over the last decade, would probably support reform.

So now SSDP is a "pro-drug group" and the Sensible in SSDP is in quotations. Gimme a break. I doubt he even read our mission statement. He couldn't have read it before calling us pro-drug. Calling us pro drug is about as ignorant as calling someone that is against the war in Iraq a terrorist.

This guy didn't do ANY research before writing this! Its really kind of funny! I mean, a simple google search of Aid Elimination Penalty bring ups CHEAR - The Coalition for Higher Education Act Reform which, aside from "users and legalizers" includes some of these organizations:

American Bar Association
American Council on Education
United States Student Association
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
United Church of Christ
Building Better Lives for Our Communities and Kids (Building BLOCK)
Center for Juvenile and Criminal Justice
Center for Women Policy Studies
Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice

Oh and about 390 other organizations and 115 student governments including:

Yale University (also has a scholarship program for students that have lost aid)
Brown University (also has a scholarship program for students that have lost aid)
Franklin Pierce University
Columbia University
Dartmouth College
George Washington University

He ends it all with a fine piece of advice for learning about drug policy:

If you’re interested, there’s numbers of others … just go to the DEA website and search university students and drugs …

Brilliant! Why didn't I think of that?

That's all I've got for now.

First Latin American Conference on Drug Policy

Wow. I can’t believe it has been almost two weeks since I returned from my trip to Buenos Aires, Argentina, where the very first Latin American Conference on Drug Policy was held August 7-8. I have finally recovered from my amazing adventures, and I am so motivated for the future of global drug policy. After my visit to Buenos Aires, it has become more than obvious to me that the United States lags far behind much of the world in dealing with drug-related problems. (Perhaps because we “deal with drug-related problems” by continuing the same failed prohibition strategies over and over?) Intercambios, the organization hosting the event, did an outstanding job of bringing some international rockstars together, and providing a space for the discussion of sensible drug policies. (Special kudos to Graciela Touzé and Pablo Cymerman!)

Probably the most inspiring thing to me about this conference was the involvement and investment of major political figures at the table. Drug policy is no third-rail issue in Latin America. The everyday, in-your-face reality of failed policy is too great for them to simply ignore. It's an issue to be discussed. And it's a world where people understand that health problems will never be solved with criminal justice solutions. Incredible!

The conference itself was held in a building of Argentina’s National Congress, and the media was everywhere on the first morning to capture the opening panel, which included the Chief Cabinet Minister, a Supreme Court Justice and a major House Representative (Anibal Fernandez, Eugenio Zaffaroni and Graciela Giannettasio). There is support from former President Nestor Kirchner and current President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner for favorable reform, and our conference packets were complete with a copy of the Commission on Drugs and Democracy signed off on by former presidents in Mexico, Colombia and Brazil.

And the topic of the day in Argentina? Drug decriminalization. Following in the footsteps of Portugal and Mexico, Argentina is primed to unburden itself of thousands of needless crimes each year. Pending an upcoming Supreme Court decision, Argentine citizens may soon find themselves among a world elite of sensible countries.

I truly wonder how our politicians can be so far behind both their own people AND the rest of the world.

Still, this is a sexy topic, and not surprisingly the conference made all the evening news shows and the front pages of major papers. There were even some LaRouche supporters protesting outside. (Same crazies, different language.)

Truly, the quality of speakers was excellent from all over Latin America. Ministers, lawyers and health experts from several countries were in attendance, as were representatives from drug users’ and coca growers’ groups. And of course, I teamed up with my buddy Aram, from Youth RISE to make sure the youth had a space for discussion. (We don't have any SSDP chapters there yet, but the seeds have been planted!)

Even more impressive than the speakers, the conference itself was co-sponsored in part by the British and Dutch Embassies. There was a reception at the Dutch Embassy on Thursday evening, and I was invited to attend with all the conference speakers and organizers. It was, shall I say, “fabulous”? I tried to imagine all of these same important people at a reception in the US, celebrating sensible drug policy, but it seems like I will at least have to wait until Kerlikowske gets a dictionary. I sort of tongue-in-cheek asked the British Ambassador why the US Embassy wasn’t represented there with the other two. And in a truly British and diplomatic way, she explained that although they weren’t co-sponsors, the US Embassy had shown interest in and support of the conference. I think she may have been being polite, but I’m not going to let that stop me from encouraging them to be co-sponsors next year.

In any case, I was grateful to meet and mingle with all the good people working on these issues throughout Latin America - truly inspirational. The experience opened my eyes and helped me to appreciate the different approaches taken and perspectives held by not just one country, but an entire region of countries and cultures, all working toward positive change. I met so many amazing people I can't count them. But I would be remiss to not mention meeting legislator Elsa Conde Rodríguez. She is the woman who is responsible for introducing the Mexican drug decriminalization bill that just became official this week. (Raise your hand if this woman is your hero. Props to Elsa!)

So yeah. You can see why it took me some time to recover. I didn’t even mention all the other fantastic things I got to do in the meantime.

But in case it was in question - yes, I recommend a trip to Argentina.

Trey No Longer Down With Disease

Aside from setlist highlights, crunchy lot stories, and the occasional bitch & moan about hearing DWD at Shoreline and The Gorge, there's one thing that phish fans keep bringing up: Trey is sober. And they can hear it.

After being arrested on DWI and drug possession charges back in 2006 in New York, Anastasio was sent to drug court. Drug courts are a cost effective alternative to jail that produce lower recidivism rates than lengthy prison sentences. They're also more humane and aim to help people overcome drug addictions through substance abuse treatment and community service.

Anastasio recently graduated from the drug court program and is touting its effect on his life.

"I've been sober for two-and-a-half years," he says to applause. "My children are happy. In August, my wife and I will celebrate our fifteenth wedding anniversary. My band is back together with a sold-out tour. And in September I'll play a solo concert at Carnegie Hall with the New York Philharmonic."

He's also talking about the failure of the prison system for non-violent drug offenders.

Anastasio saw it first-hand when he missed an appointment and was sent to jail for two days. "I can tell you that behind bars there was rampant drug use," he says. "What's more, the people I met there spent their time blaming judges and lawyers for their circumstances. Not in drug court. In drug court, full responsibility rest with you and you alone."

If even Trey Anastasio can see that the drug war has failed so badly that we can't even keep drugs out of our jails and drug courts are proven to work at reducing spending, drug use, and crime rates, why aren't drug courts the staple? As usual, Ryan Grim hits the nail on the head.

Despite their proven effectiveness over the past two decades, drug courts have had to compete for dollars with the prison industry, and when it comes to lobbying might, the drug courts are outgunned. Despite the expense and ineffectiveness of locking people up, the U.S. continues to do it at rates higher than any other nation. Nationally, more than $60 billion was spent locking people up last year. States spend $65,000 on prison construction per inmate and another $23,876 annually to take care of the prisoner, according to the Pew Public Safety Performance Project.

While drug courts aren't a magic bullet, Anastasio is lucky to have been sent to drug court instead of prison and it's certainly admirable that he is speaking publicly about overcoming an addiction and his support for the program.

Mexico Decriminalizes Drugs

That's right:

MEXICO CITY — Mexico enacted a controversial law Thursday decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana, cocaine, heroin and other drugs while encouraging free government treatment for drug dependency.

The law sets out maximum "personal use" amounts for drugs, also including LSD and methamphetamine. People detained with those quantities will no longer face criminal prosecution when the law goes into effect Friday.

This, of course, is great news. It means that Mexican citizens will no longer be imprisoned simply for choosing to put something into their bodies without harming anybody else. And if they get hooked on drugs, the government will provide treatment. It appears that Mexico is moving in the direction of a more humane way of dealing with drug use and drug users.

Still, decriminalizing drugs does absolutely nothing to stop the violence and corruption that is caused by drug prohibition. The only way we can take billions of dollars out of the hands of cartels is the same way we put Al Capone out of business in the 1930s. End prohibition and regulate drugs.

Obama: Better than Bush on drug policy, but by how much?

SSDP alum and current law professor, Alex Kreit, has a great piece on the American Constitution Society's blog, entitled "Assessing the Administration’s Evolving Drug Control Policy.". Here's a taste:

...for all the administration's faults, when one looks at the overall picture, I honestly don't think it would be hyperbolic to say that when it comes to federal drug policy, there has been more progress this calendar year than there was in the previous 25 years combined.

Still, one wonders whether the changes will be limited to narrow and specific issues like needle exchange funding or crack vs. powder sentencing, or whether the administration will seek more fundamental change.

By all measures, our current drug strategy has failed. It has been chiefly responsible for the explosion in our prison population and costs taxpayers billions each year. Yet, more than three times as many teenagers have tried marijuana in the United States than have in the Netherlands. And more kids say it is easier to buy marijuana than alcohol.

If we hope to get ourselves out of this mess, reforms on no-brainer issues like needle exchange, sentencing reform, and medical marijuana are a good start. But, ultimately, in order to dig ourselves out of the mess the failed "war on drugs" strategy has caused, we'll need to change our entire strategy to the problem of drug abuse.

Go read the whole thing.

The Drug War is Over!

In today's Washington Post:

Law enforcement officials announced criminal drug-trafficking charges Thursday against 43 people in the United States and Mexico, including suspected leaders of prominent cartels in a country that has been plagued with gun violence.

[...]

The indictments "demonstrate our unwavering commitment to root out the leaders of these criminal enterprises wherever they may be found," said U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.

Awesome. All the evil doers have been defeated. No more drug abuse and no more drug trade violence now, right?

Let's call up George W. Bush and see if we can borrow his banner:


In all seriousness, this is very BAD news for the people of Mexico. All it means is that several very lucrative job openings have been created in a multi-billion dollar industry, and the job application process involves lots of bloodshed.

Trying to stop cartel violence by arresting cartel leaders is like trying to save the Titanic by punching more holes in it.

The Drug War Makes Us Stupid

A few days ago, SSDP's ED Micah Daigle received this email:

Dear Micah,

I think personally it is absolutely disgusting that you would have a story on Rachel Hoffman that comes to her defense. She was everything that was wrong with this situation. She was helping the war on drugs. I don't care how the police twisted her mind and told her things. The simple fact was she was an under cover informant. To support someone who helps ruin peoples lives is something that is supported by SSPD? Things like this are the sole fact I believe there are huge holes in your organization and truly no firm stance on any one subject. These reasons are the reasons are dismembered the chapter I started at Northern Illinois University. Please try to think about what you are supporting and who. YOU GUYS ARE SUPPORTING AN UNDERCOVER AGENT.

A concerned citizen

Micah shared the email with me and needless to say, it infuriated me at first. But then I realized that this is the mentality our drug policies produce. Here is someone who supports the reform of marijuana laws writing to us that SSDP is wrong because we supported Rachel Hoffman's family in what I consider to be one of the worst drug war tragedies to ever occur.

So what if she became an informant? She should have never been put in that position in the first place. Rachel Hoffman didn't have some cooked up plan to start putting people behind bars and the 2 murderers that she did agree to help arrest weren't her friends. She was scared and confused and being threatened with a jail sentence.

Rachel was not "everything that was wrong with this situation." Maybe the author of that email hasn't heard the story so I'll remind him of everything that went wrong with Rachel's situation:

1. Marijuana is illegal.
2. Non-violent drug offenders face jail time.
3. Police waste resources, tax dollars, and man hours on people like Rachel Hoffman
4. The police department asked Rachel to purchase 1,500 ecstasy pills, 2 ounces of cocaine, and a handgun (which was contrary to department policy as it opened the opportunity for the suspected criminals to explain the presence of the gun), using $13,000 cash in a buy-bust operation.
5. The police knew the criminal history of the men she was supposed to meet.
6. The police lost track of Rachel during the sting.
7. She was murdered with the handgun the police sent her to purchase.

So go ahead and talk the talk. Maybe you've even walked the walk. But to truly comprehend both effective drug policy and personal liberty, you'll need to realize that the drug war has turned you into the same type of monster that it has turned the police department that blamed Rachel for her own death. You're the same as gang members and drug cartels that kill each other for snitching. You're mentality is the same as the 2 men that murdered her.

This is a human being. A human life. And yes, she did turn informant and that would have put 2 men behind bars. Two murderers behind bars that quite frankly belong right where they are.

Furthermore, Rachel's death spawned the creation of the Rachel's Law in Florida which "requires law enforcement agencies to (a) provide special training for officers who recruit confidential informants, (b) instruct informants that reduced sentences may not be provided in exchange for their work, and (c) permit informants to request a lawyer if they want one."