Thursday, January 27, 2005

Embarrassing From an audit of the Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff's Office (Louisiana): The Sheriff's Office's DARE Scholarship fund had $8,978 in "inappropriate expenditures" including $181 in liquor expense at a $595 dinner party for 25 people, according to the audit. [Thanks to Herb] 8:47:44 PM | drug policy | Related  | permalink | comment []

Stuff to read King County Bar Association (Seattle) Calls for Legal, Regulated Drug Markets In a resolution adopted Wednesday, the King County Bar Association (Seattle) has declared war on prohibition. The KCBA called for "a new framework of state-level regulatory control over psychoactive substances, intended to render the illegal markets for such substances unprofitable, to restrict access to psychoactive substances by young persons and to provide prompt health care and essential services to persons suffering from chemical dependency and addiction, will better serve the objectives of reducing crime, improving public order, enhancing public health, protecting children and wisely using scarce public resources, than current drug policies." Radley Balko: Drug War Shrinking Bill of Rights. Great piece by Radley as always (and one of my huge pet topics), but Alaskablawg has an interesting point. Personally, I think they're both right. There is a two-tiered system, and the drug war has been eroding rights across the board. (For example, I loved how Ashcroft, et al, said he needed tools to fight terrorism that were already available to fight the drug war -- then when he got them, they got used to increase the ammo in the drug war.) Also at Fox News, Marijuana Lobby Grows in Sophistication. It's an interesting piece from the standpoint of talking about some of the reform efforts, but it's badly flawed. The article treats marijuana reform as almost entirely a "marijuana rights" movement, without considering the anti-prohibition, anti-drug war aspects. Some others have already discussed this lame-brained scheme to drug test all elected officials in the state of New Mexico. While it's fun to think of it in terms of putting the shoe on the other foot, drug testing is still a bad idea. This bill is unlikely to go anywhere, because forcing elected officials to pass a drug test has been declared unconstitutional, and I doubt that their "out" of allowing an official to refuse with a published letter will save it. I'm hoping the day will come when we can drive most of the drug testing companies out of business. I've been fortunate enough to be able to stick to my resolve of never agreeing to drug testing for work. I don't know if I could keep up my principles if I needed to work at Wal-Mart to eat, but I like to believe that I would. Update: Ben reminds me in comments that the case declaring drug testing unconstitutional was for "candidates" for office, not elected officials. [Oh, and thanks to Scott, as always, for great leads.] 7:43:35 PM | drug policy | Related  | permalink | comment []

Idiotic Editorial The News-Hearld, which purports to be "serving Northeast Ohio" has this drivel to offer: Mention the word "war" and you can easily start one of your own. Nationally, the topic is as controversial and as volatile as any in our vocabularies. But there is one war that is neither controversial nor likely to start an argument. It is one that every one of us should be waging constantly, without ever letting up, because it is too important to the future of our country and to the good health of our citizens for us ever to relent. That is the war on drugs, particularly as it applies to teenagers. [emphasis added] Um... Excuse me... Earth to editorial staff... Every aspect, every battle in the war on drugs is important. Every step and every involvement to keep kids from experimenting is critical. The war on drugs, especially as it applies to teenagers, is one we cannot afford to lose. Pursuit of the war must be relentless. Any parent who is not doing his or her part to keep kids drug free contributes to the problem. Winning the war must be one of our No. 1 national priorities. Sorry to inform you, but not only is the war on drugs not uncontroversial, but it's already been lost. It's because people like you waged the issue as a relentless war that teens are in danger - from violence, ignorance, loss of rights, uncontrolled drugs, and criminal elements. If you support prohibition, you are part of the drug problem. 7:02:53 PM | drug policy | Related  | permalink | comment []

Stop Government Propaganda Act Link: In response to continued revelations of government-funded "journalism" -- ranging from the purported video news releases put out by the drug czar's office and the Department of Health and Human Services to the recently uncovered payments to columnists Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher,who flacked administration programs -- Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) will introduce a bill, The Stop Government Propaganda Act, in the Senate next week. ... The Stop Government Propaganda Act states, "Funds appropriated to an Executive branch agency may not be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States unless authorized by law." ... According to a release, publicity or propaganda is defined in the bill as: news releases or publications that do not clearly identify the government agency responsible for the content; audio/visual or Internet presentations that do not identify the responsible government agency; any attempt to manipulate journalists or news organizations; messages created to aid a political party or candidate; messages with a "self-aggrandizing" purpose or "puffery of the Administration, agency, executive branch programs or policies or pending legislation"; and, finally, messages that are "so misleading or inaccurate that they constitute propaganda." [emphasis added] Durbin and Corzine have also signed on, and they're looking for some Republican co-sponsors. There have been provisions in the past that supposedly prevented much of this, but it has had very little in the way of teeth. This bill would actually provide some liability for agency heads that authorized propaganda. The interesting thing is with the ONDCP. By my view, the entire agency is in violation of the Stop Government Propaganda Act merely by showing up at work. Their perspective, however, is that they are "authorized by law" to be distributors of propaganda -- that it's an essential part of their charge. (for more on their back and forth in this area with the GAO, see the GAO report that found their covert VNRs illegal - pdf). 6:45:38 PM | drug policy | Related  | permalink | comment []