Kentucky - U.S. Senate and House Candidate Endorsements based on drug war policy reform Note: This is an old Voting Guide. Go to the New Drug WarRant.net Voting Guide Make a difference in Kentucky Drug WarRant is providing information to help you make decisions on voting and supporting candidates. Be aware that the information provided here ONLY relates to drug policy reform, and there are other reasons to vote for a candidate. However, drug policy reform is a critical issue, and one that is too often neglected by candidates, unless the voters make it critical. Below each candidate, you will see information about their drug policy reform views and/or voting record. (see the criteria at right for definitions). A red check mark is a Drug WarRant endorsement. A vote for them will be a vote for drug policy reform. In some cases there may be multiple good options. In other cases, there just isn't a good candidate. More endorsements will come as the election nears. If you have additional information about a candidate's drug policy positions, please contact Drug WarRant. If you don't know your district, go to Project Vote Smart and enter your zip code to find out your district and detailed information on all the candidates. Criteria 1. The National Political Awareness Test (NPAT) asks candidates which items they will support if elected. Not all candidates have answered the questionaire. For the purposes of Drug WarRant's endorsements, we have focused on the following specific items from the NPAT: NPAT Drugs: Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding drugs. 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 United States. Eliminate federal funding for programs associated with the "war on drugs." Other or expanded principles For the purposes of endorsement, clearly the most important areas are "c, d, and f." A candidate with all three is gold. Selection "a" is a negative factor (although some consider this only for violent or major drug dealers). Selection "e" should be negative, but is confusing. There are some candidates who have an enlightened view of drug policy, who still choose "e" simply because of the heightened border concerns since 9/11, so there may be more involved in that response. At a minimum, a candidate should have chosen "d." The choice of "c" and/or "f" add greatly to their attractiveness. NPAT Colombia funding: Should the United States increase its financial support to Colombia to combat "the war on drugs"? "No" is the preferred answer here (at a minimum -- in fact, the answer should be to reduce funding, rather than just not increasing it). It is possible that someone could claim they are for increased funding to Colombia, but not for spraying or military purposes, but rather humanitarian purposes -- this seems a stretch, however, so I am looking for a solid "No" here. 2. The Hinchey Amendment. The incumbents have had two opportunities (2003/2004) to vote on an amendment that would stop the federal government from interfering with medical marijuana in states where it is legal. There was no legitimate reason to vote against this (and it was a bipartisan amendment), so a "no" vote is generally an indication of ignorance, or being in the pocket of the drug warriors. The proper response is: "Hinchey: Yes/Yes." 3. Other criteria. Where there is useful information from campaign web sites or news reports, those details are added here. If you have additional information (preferably with links), please let me know. US Senate Jim Bunning (R) Incumbent No NPAT Frank Daniel Mongiardo (D) No NPAT Mongiardo doesn't appear to be much of a prize -- he's in favor of increasing the drug war in going after Meth. However, his medical background makes incremental change in such areas as medical marijuana seem more likely. As far as Bunning, I'm not sure that even he knows what he believes right now. Vote for Mongiardo, but don't expect too much. US House 1 Billy R. Cartwright (D) No NPAT Edward 'Ed' Whitfield (R) Incumbent No NPAT; Hinchey: No/No Not much information here. All you can do is vote against the incumbent, who voted in favor of continuing the federal harrassment of medical marijuana patients. Go with Cartwright. US House 2 Ron Lewis (R) Incumbent No NPAT; Hinchey: No/No Adam Smith (D) No NPAT Not much information here. All you can do is vote against the incumbent, who voted in favor of continuing the federal harrassment of medical marijuana patients. Go with Smith. US House 3 Tony Miller (D) No NPAT Anne Meagher Northup (R) Incumbent No NPAT; Hinchey: No/No George C. Dick (L) NPAT drugs: c,d,f,g I would end drug prohibition immediately.; NPAT Colombia funding: No Corley C. Everett (Write-In) NPAT drugs: a,e; NPAT Colombia funding: Yes This is a tricky one. Miller looks to have a good chance to unseat drug warrior Northup, which sounds great (and would be a fairly good reason on its own to vote for Miller), yet I have found no real evidence the Miller would be significanly better. Dick, on the other hand, is a strong Libertarian candidate who has gotten some visibility in a number of areas. His drug policy is far better than any of the other candidates, and he gets the endorsement. US House 4 Nick Clooney (D) No NPAT Geoff Davis (R) No NPAT Michael E. Slider (I) NPAT drugs: b,c,d,g More of our penalties should be based on restitution to the individuals harmed, not long jail sentences which offer no reform and cost the taxpayers millions; NPAT Colombia funding: No Not enough information to make an endoresement here. US House 5 Harold 'Hal' Rogers (R) Incumbent No NPAT; Hinchey: No/No Don't vote in this race. Then go home and start planning to run for the office in opposition in two years. US House 6 Tom Buford (R) No NPAT Albert Benjamin 'Ben' Chandler (D) Incumbent No NPAT; Hinchey: --/No Stacy C. Abner (Constitution) NPAT drugs: c,d,e,g Once again we have inherent problems associated with drug use/abuse; decreasing the use abuse starts @ home and local levels.; NPAT Colombia funding: No Mark A. Gailey (L) NPAT drugs: c,d,f,g I support continued access to ephedra, medicinal marijuana, and all nutritional supplements. I oppose forced pharmacological and anti-viral experimentation and forced vaccinations upon civilians and military personnel; NPAT Colombia funding: No Back to main voting guide page.