|
|
|
Drug WarRant
 |
Saturday, February 14, 2004 |
Canadian Decrim Bill Reintroduced
The Canadian federal government reintroduced a marijuana decriminalization bill on Thursday. The text of the bill is here.
The bill provides for fines if the amount of marijuana is 15 grams or less (and smaller fine for 1 gram or less). Possession of up to 3 plants would also be handled through fines. Anything more than 3 plants or 15 grams would be subject to criminal/prison penalties.
There are also a number of additional factors that can increase fines (being near a school, driving a motor vehicle, etc.)
The bill also protects the information about these fines. It makes it a prosecutable offense to give information about fines to a foreign government. (In other words, if you get fined for possession of under 15 grams, it would actually be against the law for officials to tell the United States government that you had a marijuana offense.)
The bill has a ways to go, and there is expectation that the House of Commons may wish to reduce the amount from 15 grams to 10 grams.
Update: Got some info on the actual fines involved. $500 for up to three plants, and from $100-$400 for possession of up to 15 grams of pot.
9:11:27 AM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Thursday, February 12, 2004 |
Now that I've got your attention... A post by Randy Barnett at the Volokh Conspiracy led me to his fascinating paper in the Cato Supreme Court Review: Justice Kennedy's Libertarian Revolution: Lawrence v. Texas (pdf)
In it, Barnett posits that Lawrence v. Texas, as Justice Kennedy wrote the ruling, is not so much about privacy as it is about liberty.
Although he never acknowledges it, Justice Kennedy is employing
here what I have called a ''presumption of liberty'' that requires
the government to justify its restriction on liberty, instead of requiring
the citizen to establish that the liberty being exercised is somehow
''fundamental.'' In this way, once an action is deemed to be a proper
exercise of liberty (as opposed to license), the burden shifts to the
government....
9:42:54 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Go Chicago Sun Times!
Powerful editorial yesterdayl: NOTHING CRIMINAL IN HEALING HERBS
Should patients suffering from severe ailments -- AIDS, cancer, glaucoma -- have access to medical marijuana which, often alone among available medicines, can alleviate their suffering? Or should they be liable to arrest and prosecution like any other drug user?
Few issues cut so wide a gulf between the federal government and the states. The feds are anti-pot, period. Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington have passed laws exempting the very ill, often terminally ill, from facing jail. Now Illinois may join them. A medical marijuana bill introduced into the General Assembly would exempt patients who have a doctor's prescription from prosecution. It deserves full debate and then swift passage.
Use of medical marijuana is only controversial to the feds -- responsible medical organizations such as the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of HIV Medicine, the New England Journal of Medicine and the American Nurses Association support it, as do countless doctors. "It is pointless and cruel," said one Chicago physician, "to threaten the sick with arrest and jail simply for trying to feel better." The sufferings of thousands of sick Illinois citizens demand that we cast off punitive and wrong-headed notions about marijuana and pass this bill without delay.
Kind of makes you wonder if this might actually be possible in Illinois. After all, Illinois legislature passed industrial hemp legislation 3 or 4 years ago, which only failed because then Governor Ryan vetoed it under pressure from then Drug Czar McCaffrey. And Illinois already has a medical marijuana law on the books since 1978 - it just never had the legal authority to be implemented.
Will Illinois be the next medical marijuana state?
7:23:57 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, February 10, 2004 |
HEA Action Alert
From the good folks at Students for a Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP)
As you know, since its inception, SSDP has campaigned against a 1998
amendment to the Higher Education Act that denies federal financial aid to
anyone convicted of a drug-related offense, no matter how minor. This
provision is counter-productive and causes enormous harm, particularly to
minority students and middle-class and lower-income students who can't
afford the high cost of college. Department of Education data indicates
that more than 128,000 students have been adversely affected by the
provision.
H.R. 685, a bill in Congress that would repeal the provision has the
support of sixty-five Representatives, and now nine Presidential
candidates have spoken out against the provision. A national coalition
has formed to fight for repeal of the provision. Allies include the
United States Student Association and the American Council on Education.
Pressure from our broad-based coalition has already started to trouble
Rep. Mark Souder, the provision's author. Recently, Rep. Souder
introduced a proposal that he sees as a "fix" to the problems associated
with the provision. While we applaud any efforts to reduce the suffering
caused by this bad law, we know that the only true solution is its full
repeal.
We need you to send this message loud and clear to Congress!
Right now - with reauthorization of the Higher Education Act on the
horizon - is the best opportunity to repeal the drug provision.
ACTIONS TO TAKE:
- FAX YOUR U.S. REPRESENTATIVE AND SENATORS RIGHT NOW and urge them to
support all opportunities to repeal the 1998 Higher Education Act
amendment that delays or denies federal financial aid to anyone convicted
of a drug related offense. Do it free here.Follow-up your fax with phone calls to their offices this THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 12, 2004.
We've been fighting this one for years and it needs to go away! I'm proud to say that the Illinois State University was one of the early ones to pass a resolution condemning this provision.
8:05:50 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Monday, February 9, 2004 |
Illinois testing the medical marijuana waters
Reported in the Quad-City Times:
Cancer and AIDS sufferers as well as Illinoisans suffering from glaucoma, would be able to grow, possess and use marijuana without fear of arrest or jail under legislation just introduced in the General Assembly.
But House Bill 4868's sponsor, Rep. Angelo "Skip" Saviano, R-River Grove, said his motivation in offering the measure is only to educate his fellow lawmakers.
"I'm approaching this with the idea of seeing where everybody lines up on it - law enforcement, the medical community - to see if this would be something feasible or palatable," he said.
As a practical matter, he said the measure probably will not make it to the electronic tote board in the House chamber that records the "ayes" and "nays."
Yes, it's timid (providing political cover), but it's also a good sign and a good start for Illinois. The synopsis of the bill is:
Creates the Medical Cannabis Act. Provides that a person who has been diagnosed by a physician as having a debilitating medical condition and the person's primary caregiver may be issued a registry identification card by the Department of Human Services that permits the person or the person's primary caregiver to legally possess no more than 6 Cannabis Sativa plants and one ounce of usable cannabis. Provides that a person who possesses a registry identification card is not subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denial of any right or privilege, including civil penalty or disciplinary action by a professional licensing board, for the medical use of cannabis; provided that the qualifying patient or primary caregiver possesses an amount of cannabis that does not exceed 6 Cannabis Sativa plants and one ounce of usable cannabis. Amends the Cannabis Control Act to make conforming changes consistent with the Medical Cannabis Act. Effective immediately.
More information available at IDEAL - Illinois Drug Education and Legislative Reform.
9:23:00 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Can Kucinich Count Cause Candid Kerry Communication?
LastOneSpeaks has another outstanding post on the Kucinich/Kerry question for drug policy reformers.
There's plenty of time to close ranks behind the nominee when the fight is against Bush. For now backing this losing candidate [Kucinich] could win some respect for a progressive agenda and drug policy reform.
When it comes to Kerry, she also notes:
To that I'll add that Kerry not only ignored the request from Vote-hemp, but actually publicly promised to respond and then failed to do so. While some would prefer to have seen an "Incomplete" than an "F" by Vote-Hemp, as someone who teaches in college I know there is a point in a student's neglect when an incomplete grade defaults to an "F." However, Senator, there's always the appeal for a grade change. I'd really like to see what you have to say. (Just don't tell my students that I'm easy.)
When it comes to surveys, Kerry seems to be keeping his views close. For years, Project Vote-Smart has been putting together the National Political Awareness Test for candidates at all levels. This is a survey that candidates can use with specific choices, or avoid pre-programmed choices and put in their own issue statements.
This year's survey has some excellent questions regarding the drug war (among many other areas the survey covers)
Candidates are asked whether they would support the following policy initiatives (or they can propose their own):
- Support mandatory jail sentences for selling illegal drugs.
- Expand federally sponsored drug education and drug treatment programs.
- Decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana.
- Allow doctors to prescribe marijuana to their patients for medicinal purposes.
- Increase border security to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S.
- Eliminate federal funding for programs associated with the "war on drugs."
- Other or expanded principles
Unfortunately Kerry (along with Dean and Bush) has not responded (see my chart comparing candidate responses).
According to Vote-Smart:
Senator John Forbes Kerry refused to provide any responses to citizens on issues through the National Political Awareness Test. Senator John Forbes Kerry refused to provide this information when asked to do so on 23 separate occasions by: MSNBC; CBS News; Cox Newspapers; Knight Ridder; National Journal; MTV; New Hampshire Public Broadcasting; Tucson Citizen; St. Paul Pioneer Press; Portsmouth Herald; Nashua Telegraph; Iowa Public Radio; Ames Daily Tribune; Cedar Rapids Gazette; Iowa City Press; The State (SC); WYY Philadelphia; San Jose Mercury News; Geraldine Ferraro, Former Democratic Congresswoman; Michael Dukakis, Fomer Democratic Congressman; Bill Frenzel, Former Republican Congressman; Jim Leach, Republican Congressman; Richard Kimball, Project Vote Smart Presiden
There's still time. Kerry can speak up. But we need to continue to apply the pressure. And one of the ways is by continuing to support Kucinich.
Oh, and don't forget. Republicans should go to the primaries as well and write in Blake Ashby. You should at least make Karl Rove have to go look him up.
8:08:45 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
Sunday, February 8, 2004 |
Odds and Ends
 For an excellent overview of the recent 9th Circuit decision to slap down the DEA's attempt to control hemp foods, see this release from Vote Hemp.
Dallas News has a feature today on the special prosecutor who has been tapped to take on the fake-drugs scandal that involved police and drug dealers conspiring to frame innocent people with drug charges.
Libby at LastOneSpeaks has been following the unfolding story of the North Carolina school drug sting that has swept up a bunch of kids here, here, and here.
Then take a look at this report of expulsions in Pueblo, Colorado, and ask two questions:
- Does expelling that many kids really make marijuana less available? Because it sure doesn't seem that way.
- What are all those kids you've expelled for smoking pot going to do now?
9:19:09 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
Nashville event worth checking out...
If you're in the Nashville area, there's something you should check out next week -- two days of workshops at the library and a public forum at American Baptist College.
In the 1960s the Rev. James Lawson and the Rev. C.T. Vivian provoked and inspired Nashville and the nation as they took part in the civil rights movement. Next week they'll be in town for a special ceremony at the Nashville Public Library.
In addition to looking back, they will look forward as to how the lessons learned in the movement more than 30 years ago can be used now to fight against what many view as a misguided "war on drugs."
They will speak at a public forum, "Challenging the War on Drugs: A Community Conversation" from 9-11 a.m. Feb. 14 at American Baptist College, 1800 Baptist World Center Drive.
If you go, I'd love to get a report on it.
For more information call the library at 862-5804. This is being presented in conjunction with Religious Leaders for a More Just and Compassionate Drug Policy.
I'm always heartened to find religious groups getting involved in countering the destructive war on drugs. It's been difficult for them. They've been led to believe for so long in a simple, yet horribly fallcious equation: government criminal enforcement = cessation of bad activity. Some are starting to realize that they've been selling their parishioners' souls to an enforcement regime that creates new problems without solving any of the old ones.
My dad is a retired minister. He has always been opposed to any forms of intoxicants (including alcohol) and has generally seen drug policy reform (aka legalization) as a way for more people to do drugs. In recent years however, he has begun to question the validity of the enforcement "cure," realizing that it is worse than the "disease."
In addition to Religious Leaders for a More Just and Compassionate Drug Policy, you can also check out Unitarian Universalists for Drug Policy.
8:36:08 PM | drug policy | Related | permalink |
|
|
|
|
|
|
