Candidates/Races

Ron Paul on Medical Marijuana

Ron Paul shows Giuliani, McCain, and Romney how to talk about medical marijuana without sounding like a monster. Hint: tell everyone you care about sick people. Voters love that stuff.

Ron Paul, supposedly a fringe candidate, seems to understand formerly cherished conservative principles like "states rights" better than any other republican running.

The success of Paul's campaign is yet another demonstration that smart and compassionate positions on drug policy are neither exclusively liberal nor politically suicidal.

Hillary Clinton Pledges Support for Needle Exchange

After hilariously claiming that she needed to see more evidence of its effectiveness, democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton seems to have found the answers she was looking for.* Her campaign has announced support for harm reduction, including needle exchange:

She also supports using U.S. funding to support proven harm reduction efforts - including needle exchange - to help hard-to-reach populations, and will continue to support new evidence-based prevention methods as additional scientific research helps us understand how to best address this epidemic. [HillaryClinton.com]

We've heard similar pledges from Obama and Edwards, and it's likely safe to assume other democratic candidates will toe the line on this one (possibly excluding drug war hall-of-famer Joe Biden).

It's nice to see Washington politicians getting it right on needle exchange. Of course, this is really about whether or not we want huge numbers of people to die from AIDS in the name of drug war politics. We needn't fall to our knees in gratitude when someone understands such an obvious humanitarian concern. Rather, we should be demanding answers from any candidate who hasnât yet spoken out against the federal government's catastrophic ban on life-saving intervention programs.

*By "hilarious," I meant that the mountain of evidence showing that needle exchange saves lives is so huge that I couldn't imagine Hillary Clinton actually had time to read it.

John Edwards Criticizes the War on Drugs

Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards sounds like he's finally ready to discuss the drug war realistically:

Grinnell, Ia. â America needs to reconsider its punitive approach to "the so-called war on drugs," presidential candidate John Edwards said here today.

"We're not going to build enough prisons to solve this problem," he told a crowd of about 800 at Grinnell College.

The former North Carolina senator grinned when a young man sitting behind him on stage asked about drug policy. âOnly on college campuses," Edwards joked before answering.

He said heâs especially concerned about mandatory minimum sentences for first-time drug offenders, which he said should be reconsidered. He added that too few drug offenders get treatment.

"You go to jail, you come out of jail, and a lot of people go right back to the environment that got them in trouble to begin with," he said. "â¦We need to get them the help that they need; if they need education, if they need job training, if they need drug rehabilitation." [Des Moines Register]

This is a big improvement following Edwards's very recent remarks claiming that discussion of marijuana decriminalization "sends the wrong signal to young people."

What happened? It really is kinda nutty to dismiss a puny little reform like marijuana decrim, only to then stand up weeks later and question the fundamentally punitive nature of the drug war on the whole. My guess is Edwards realized he wasn't scoring any points with that tired old "sends the wrong message" nonsense.

The mere specter of our massive criminal justice system -- bloated with non-violent drug offenders -- sends the wrong message to everyone. It's good that Edwards finally worked up the nerve to say so.

John McCain's Awful Response to a Cop Who Wants to End the Drug War

When NH police officer and LEAP speaker Bradley Jardis confronted John McCain last week, demanding an explanation for the ongoing failure of the drug war, McCain's response was just unbelievable:

McCain acknowledges that too many first time offenders are serving time, but he otherwise delivers a defense of the drug war that is as banal and incoherent as any such discussion could ever be. I won't bother to categorically refute the mountainous absurdities contained herein. Instead, I've transcribed McCain's marvelous distinction between drugs and alcohol, which should be etched in stone as a timeless embodiment of the rank idiocy that defines the modern war on drugs:

Look, I've heard the comparison between drugs and alcohol. I think most experts would say that in moderation, one or two drinks of alcohol does not have an effect on one's judgment, mental acuity, or their physical abilities. I think most experts would say that the first ingestion of drugs leads to mind-altering and other experiences, other effects, and can lead over time to serious, serious problems.

This is what John McCain chose to lead with. This, for McCain, was the strong central point that explains why the drug war is necessary. And it is just so transparently stupid and wrong.*

When the curtain is pulled back, perfect cluelessness is revealed to be the single unifying principle that binds the drug war philosophy together. That is why McCain nearly falls to pieces when confronted by someone with real firsthand experience waging the war he so clumsily defends.

Most drug war supporters are not qualified to discuss this topic even briefly. If you ask them a smart question about the drug war, their answer will come out something like this:

*Update: It's been suggested to me that it is actually necessary to explain that alcohol is a drug. Maybe it is, so here goes: It's a drug. It produces a powerful intoxicated state commonly referred to as "drunkenness," in which one's judgment can become impaired along with the ability to operate heavy machinery.

John McCain ought to know that alcohol is a drug. I think he just wasn't prepared for the question and said the first thing that popped into his head. It is typical for defenders of the drug war to begin their argument by issuing wildly false generalizations.

[Thanks, Micah]

Mitt Romney Recommends Lying to the Kids About Drugs

Mitt Romney thinks it's just awful that Barack Obama has been honest about past experience with alcohol and illegal drugs:

"It's just not a good idea for people running for President of the United States who potentially could be the role model for a lot of people to talk about their personal failings while they were kids because it opens the doorway to other kids thinking, 'well I can do that too and become President of the United States,'" Romney told an Iowa audience today. "I think that was a huge error by Barack Obamaâ¦it is just the wrong way for people who want to be the leader of the free world." [FOXNews]

But, um, you can do drugs and become the President. This has been proven time and again as of late and it's actually a terrible idea to suggest otherwise. Young people need to know that they can make mistakes and still be successful. Heck, young people should even know that drug use is often not a mistake if done responsibly at the appropriate age. The problem with convincing them that drug use ruins your future is that they might believe you and just give up.

Really, there is nothing more harmful and destructive than attempting to educate children about drugs by lying about your own experiences. Young people need someone to talk to. They need to know that you understand, and the best way to create that environment is by being honest. If you do understand, don't pretend not to. That's insane.

The truth here is that Barack Obama's experience with drug use is typical. He experimented, aged out of it, and went on to pursue a rewarding career. There's nothing miraculous or shocking about his failure to become a walking after-school special. Most people don't.

But if Barack Obama has been unlucky enough to get arrested, I doubt we'd even know his name. Indeed, drug use won't disqualify you from a high profile career, but the drug war will crush your dreams every time.

If we want to send children the right message about drugs, let's stop threatening to arrest and ruin them for things so many of us did without consequence.

[Thanks, Tom]

Cowards: Democratic Front-Runners Reject Marijuana Law Reform

Critics of marijuana policy reform are fond of dismissing the idea as a liberal fantasy. Unfortunately, last night's Democratic Presidential Debate revealed that the party's so-called leaders would still rather play politics than stand up for the 800,000+ Americans that are needlessly arrested each year for the world's pettiest crime:

Tim Russert: Senator Dodd, you went on the Bill Maher show last month and said that you were for decriminalizing marijuana. Is there anyone here who disagrees with Senator Dodd in decriminalizing marijuana? [MSNBC]

Clinton, Obama, Richardson, Biden, and Edwards all raised their hands. Only Dennis Kucinich stood with Senator Dodd on this important question. John Edwards was quick on the draw, pulling out the oldest pro-drug war line in the book:

Russert: Senator Edwards, why?

Edwards: Because I think it sends the wrong signal to young people. And I think the president of the United States has a responsibility to ensure that we're sending the right signals to young people.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome once again to the brain-dead world of mainstream drug war politics. It is a peculiar place where we ruin real lives in order to send fake messages. It is a vacant echo chamber in which those speaking the truth are singled out for ridicule, attention seekers spew tiresome incoherencies, and the rest cower embarrassed behind their podiums praying never again to be asked such a horrible thing.

Shameful and cowardly as their responses may be, the democratic front-runners were clearly sidelined by Russert's cheap hackery. Drug policy is so much more than a yes or no question, and this drive-by shooting approach to the marijuana debate trivializes the issue and obscures any diversity of opinion. I am saddened, but not at all surprised, that this question provoked this response when asked this way.

If we've learned anything from the brutal war that's been waged in our names for far too long, it is that many of our leaders would sooner allow it to continue for decades than speak one word of the truth that stands naked before us all.

With that in mind, I'm asking all of you to do something. Find out when the candidates are speaking in your area and attend the events. Bring friends. Bring a video camera. Dress well and arrive early. Sit where you can be seen and raise your hand high just a moment before they open the floor to questions. Ask whatever you like. Maybe something like this:

Senator/Governor/Congressman _______,

Over 800,000 Americans were arrested for marijuana this year. Some went to jail. Others lost their jobs, lost custody of their children, lost their driver's licenses, lost public housing, lost financial aid for college, the list goes on. Many people think these punishments are more damaging than the drug itself.

What do you think the punishment should be for someone who uses marijuana?

It is one thing to say you don't support marijuana decrim. It is quite another to describe how specifically you would go about destroying the lives of the millions of Americans who enjoy marijuana. Let's find out where they really stand on this issue.

The Truth About Why Republican Candidates Oppose Medical Marijuana

McCain, Giuliani, and Romney have all attracted unwanted attention this week with their pledge to continue the federal government's unpopular war on medical marijuana patients and providers. The question is "why?" Everyone knows mainstream republican politicians are often a tough sell when it comes to drug policy reform, but given massive public support for medical marijuana, their callous position appears politically unwise and thus more difficult to explain.

First, it helps to clarify how narrow and simplistic their argument really is. The McCain/Giuliani/Romney consensus on medical marijuana is grounded in the claim that "other medications" are available and should be used instead. This one argument virtually encompasses the totality of their opposition to medical marijuana. It is their only talking point, which is why they move on quickly to the next topic after saying it.

Still, I don't believe this argument actually tells us very much about their true motivations. When Mitt Romney recommends "synthetic marijuana" to a wheelchair-bound patient, it becomes clear that he understands the medical efficacy of the drug. Indeed, these "other medications" are often derived from synthetic cannabinoids, so the debate is clearly not over whether marijuana has medical properties. We've moved beyond that, thankfully.

At this point, it becomes a question of how patients should be acquiring and administering their medicine. Giuliani and Romney both faltered when the patients they encountered explained that they were allergic to pharmaceutical alternatives to marijuana. If they take these patients at their word, they must then confront the insufficiency of these drugs and recognize the unique predicament in which certain patients find themselves. Perhaps this new information will sink in, but that is all beside the point.

Ultimately, McCain, Giuliani, and Romney have access to all the same facts about medical marijuana as everyone else. Their problem is not a misunderstanding of the issue. They've met and spoken with the patients. They know doctors are recommending it. Their real concerns have nothing whatsoever to do with the medical efficacy of marijuana. They are worried about something else entirely:

"But having legalized marijuana is in my view an effort by a very committed few to try to get marijuana out in the public and to ultimately legalize marijuana. It's the wrong way to go." â Mitt Romney

"I believe the effort to try and make marijuana available for medical uses is really a way to legalize it. There's no reason for it." â Rudy Giuliani

This tells us everything there is to know about opposition to medical marijuana from republican presidential candidates, and for that matter, the Drug Czar himself. The whole anti-medical marijuana machine is merely a conspiracy to prevent the outright legalization of marijuana. Its adherents are fearful that telling the truth about the drug's medical value will pave the way for a shift in public attitudes about marijuana in general. They dread the "marijuana lobby" and will concede nothing to it, even if doing so forces them to take unpopular and transparently flawed positions on medical use.

Cynically, they focus on the role of marijuana legalization advocates in promoting medical access, while ignoring the much larger constituency of medical marijuana supporters who donât advocate recreational legalization. That is why support for medical marijuana from mainstream organizations such as the American Nurses Association and the American Public Health Association is ignored, while the pro-legalization Marijuana Policy Project's position is cited routinely.

Of course, when the truth about medical marijuana becomes a political hostage in the broader legalization debate, it is legitimate patients rather than marijuana activists who suffer the consequences. Fortunately, the rise of internet video has given voters a front row seat in this enduring and increasingly ugly debate. The next victims in the war on medical marijuana may be those candidates who would sacrifice the seriously ill to drug war politics.

When The Drug Czar Says We're Winning The Drug War, It Means Nothing

The insufferable Robert Caldwell at Human Events writes love letters to the drug war. His latest masterpiece begs presidential hopefuls to entice him by sharing their most hardcore drug war fantasies.

Oddly, Caldwell tries to explain the urgency of the matter by claiming that everything's going phenomenally well. His entire argument consists of a tiresome series of Drug Czar quotes. "John Waltersâ¦begs to differ", "Walters offered a slew of statistics", "Walters argued, persuasively", "Walters rightly cites", "Walters notes," and on it goes. The whole thing might as well have been signed by John Walters under the title, "My Awesome Drug War."

Yet, as Pete Guither notes in a helpful new page, it is literally the job of the Drug Czar's office to distort facts in support of the drug war. The GAO even admits it:

Given this role, we do not see a need to examine the accuracy of the Deputy Director's individual statements in detail.

So we really can dispense with the notion that the Drug Czar is available to give us unvarnished assessments of drug war progress. It is, in fact, illegal for him to do that. Asking the Drug Czar how the drug war is going is like asking Colonel Sanders if his chicken is any good.

McCain and Giuliani Say Terrible Things to a Medical Marijuana Patient

Via MPP, battle lines are being drawn on the campaign trail over medical marijuana. Linda Macia of Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana suffers from nerve damage, fibromyalgia, reflex sympathetic dystrophy and degenerative arthritis. She's allergic to other medications and has only found relief through medical marijuana.

You'd think that anyone hoping to become president would show some compassion for this unfortunate woman, but alasâ¦

Notice how McCain turns his back to her the moment she utters the phrase "medical marijuana." Words could not better describe his position. McCain goes on to claim he's seen no documentation of medical marijuana's effectiveness, even though Granite Staters' Stuart Cooper had personally presented him with sound scientific evidence.

Will she have better luck with Rudy Giuliani? Let's seeâ¦

Ouch. Giuliani struggles when she explains that she's allergic to the "other medications" he recommends. He also claims not to have lobbied on behalf of OxyContin, which I guess depends on your definition of "lobbying."

Sometimes we don't get the answers we want. That's what happens when you look to the drug war for answers. But at least we're asking the right questions, and asking them often. Perhaps next time we should ask if they've seen the polling on medical marijuana. Maybe that will get their attention.

PS: Also watch McCain insult a New Hampshire student who asks him about medical marijuana, then apologize to him.

John McCain is Sick of Being Asked About Medical Marijuana

SSDP activist Jon Perri just nailed John McCain over his opposition to medical marijuana. McCain is noticably frustrated about being forced to repeatedly explain his lack of compassion for patients. He belittles Perri, only to subsequently apologize for doing so.

Note how McCain emphasizes his opposition to medical marijuana, but still claims he would not arrest patients. That's sort of the point of the question, Senator.

Cheers to Jon Perri for asking the question smartly and maintaining his composure despite McCain's interruptions. At this pace, one wonders if the Senator will have a complete meltdown the next time this question is asked of him.

Subscribe to Candidates/Races