Massachusetts - 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 Massachusetts 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 House 1 John W. Olver (D) Incumbent NPAT drugs: b,d,e; NPAT Colombia funding: No Answer; Hinchey: Yes/Yes Could be better, but Olver's the only choice and he voted right on Hinchey. US House 2 Richard E. Neal (D) Incumbent NPAT drugs: a,b,c,d,e; NPAT Colombia funding: Yes; Hinchey: Yes/Yes Could be better (particularly on Colombia funding and increased penalties), but Neal's the only choice and he voted right on Hinchey, so a mild endorsement. US House 3 Ronald A. 'Ron' Crews (R) NPAT drugs: a,e; NPAT Colombia funding: Undecided James P. 'Jim' McGovern (D) Incumbent NPAT drugs: b,d,e,g Support extradition and US prosecution of drug "kingpins" who export illegal drugs to the USA. To definitively win the war on drugs, we must end demand here in the USA by fully funding drug treatment, education & prevention.; NPAT Colombia funding: No; Hinchey: Yes/Yes McGovern needs some education, but is far better than Crews. US House 4 Barney Frank (D) Incumbent NPAT drugs: b,d; NPAT Colombia funding: Yes ("I favor aid to Columbia to defend democracy, not eradicacy of drugs"); Hinchey: Yes/Yes Charles A. Morse (I) NPAT drugs: c,e; NPAT Colombia funding: No Frank is the clear choice here. He's been a strong advocate for reforming the HEA drug provision and various medical marijuana issues. A good man on our side US House 5 Martin T. 'Marty' Meehan (D) Incumbent No NPAT; Hinchey: Yes/Yes Thomas P. Tierney (R) NPAT drugs: d; NPAT Colombia funding: No Meehan gets the nod based on the Hinchey amendment US House 6 Stephen P. O'Malley (R) NPAT drugs: b,e; NPAT Colombia funding: No John F. Tierney (D) Incumbent No NPAT; Hinchey: Yes/Yes US House 7 Kenneth G. Chase (R) No NPAT Edward J. 'Ed' Markey (D) Incumbent NPAT drugs: b,e; NPAT Colombia funding: No; Hinchey: Yes/Yes James O. Hall (I) No NPAT Markey's not that great, but failing more information on the other candidates, at least he voted correctly on Hinchey, so he gets the endorsement. US House 8 Michael E. Capuano (D) Incumbent NPAT drugs: b,d; NPAT Colombia funding: No; Hinchey: Yes/Yes US House 9 Stephen F. Lynch (D) Incumbent No NPAT; Hinchey: No/No The only candidate and Lynch is unacceptable. Leave it blank and go home and start planning on running in opposition in two years. US House 10 William D. 'Bill' Delahunt (D) Incumbent NPAT drugs: b,c,d,g Evaluate the effectivness of programs associated with the "War on Drugs" and fund only those programs with demonstrated value.; NPAT Colombia funding: Yes; Hinchey: Yes/Yes Michael J. 'Mike' Jones (R) NPAT drugs: b,c,d,e,g Evaluate all programs in the war on drugs. Eliminate those found to be ineffective, while increasing funding for those that are effective.; NPAT Colombia funding: Yes If this was a school test, I'd swear someone was cheating and copying the other's answers here. Even though they're practically clones on the drug answers, Delahunt did vote correctly on Hinchey as an incumbent, so he gets to stay. Back to main voting guide page.