Drug WarRant

I’ve got a group of extremely talented friends (and former students) who have been involved in a massive film/real life/social media project called “I Made America.” Check out their entire video series – it’s wonderful. The idea is that six founding fathers are kidnapped and brought back through time to the present to be used for nefarious political purposes. They rebel and go off on their own, adapting to modern society (Jefferson becomes a singer-songwriter). Not only are they making a video series, but they show up in public in character at various events (at Bulls games, parties, ice skating, opening bank accounts, etc.). I highly suggest you follow them and watch some or all of their videos (both the actual series, and the extra ones).

Here, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson discuss 420 while listening to Newt Gingrich.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4j2TPZGpBC0

Rafael Lemaitre, the communications director at ONDCP has started adding #Reform to a lot of his tweets, as though calling what they’re doing “reform” makes it so (sort of like saying they’ve ended the “war on drugs” makes that true). It’s ironic that ONDCP wants in on our label (obviously to try to take it over).

The pathetic nature of the attempt makes me think of this scene from “Oh Brother, Where Art Thou.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VGV66GzsKw

Two articles that help emphasize the importance of the recent Summit of the Americas in Cartagena.

Douglas Haddow’s OpEd in the Guardian is a must-read: Did Cartagena mark the beginning of the end of the war on drugs?

But while lurid tales of secret service agents behaving like hirelings on a piss-up tour make for tasty headlines, the summit could well be remembered not for its failures, but as the beginning of the end of the war on drugs.

The significance of what transpired over the weekend cannot be overstated: in years past, we’ve seen countless instances of former leaders, judges and law enforcement officers coming forward to argue the case for international drug policy reform, but this is the first time we’ve seen sitting governments openly discussing ending the war on drugs in a diplomatic setting. […]

If we view Cartagena within the framework of a traditional war, what we have witnessed is the first draft of an armistice. The problem with the drug war, and the reason why it has taken so long for reformers to gain any traction, is that it has remained a niche issue due to its deeply classist nature. In a global context, developing nations endure the violence while the developed subsidise it, through both consumer demand and law enforcement funding. Within the developed countries a similar formula is reproduced; with poor neighbourhoods and demographics taking the place of their nation-state equivalents.

The corrosive results of this arrangement are obvious to anyone who has been paying attention. […]

The shift in language at the Cartegena summit presents a rare opportunity for a global policy renaissance that would have profound implications on how citizens relate to their governments.

Powerful stuff.

Also of interest, Coletta Youngers writing at Foreign Policy in Focus: Drug-Law Reform Genie Freed From Bottle at Summit of the Americas

The lasting legacy of the Cartagena summit, however, will likely be the beginning of a serious regional debate on international drug control policies. With the apparently adept leadership of Colombia’s President Juan Manuel Santos, the issue was discussed at a private, closed-door meeting of the presidents – according to press accounts, it was the only issue discussed at that meeting – and Santos later announced that as a result of the presidents’ discussion, the Organization of American States (OAS) was tasked with analyzing the results of present policy and exploring alternative approaches that could prove to be more effective. A topic long considered taboo – the U.S. “war on drugs” – is now being seriously questioned and debate on new strategies – including legal, regulated markets – is officially on the regional agenda.

The significance of this development cannot be underestimated. For years, Washington has used its economic and political muscle to squash any dissenting opinions from Latin American governments. Academics and other experts who proposed alternative policies were ostracized as “legalizers,” even if that is not what they were proposing. The “L” word could not even be mentioned in official circles. In fact, the present debate is not about outright legalization per se but rather legal, regulated markets. Administration officials, nonetheless, continue to misconstrue the issue. At the summit, President Obama said that drug traffickers could “dominate certain countries if they were allowed to operate legally without any constraint.”

Now, Latin American governments have turned the tables, taking on a leadership role in considering alternative policies.

Considering the Drug Czar famously said: “Legalization is not in the president’s vocabulary, and it is not in mine,” both of them seem to be using it an awful lot lately.

As Scott Morgan notes: We’re Winning Any Time the President is Forced to Say the Word “Legalization”

ONDCP calls new drug control strategy a “revolutionary shift” in policy.

The 2012 National Drug Control Strategy (pdf)

A Drug Policy for the 21st Century by R. Gil Kerlikowse at Huffington Post.

Guest Blogger Kevin Sabet says “Wake Up and Grow Up” at Phoenix House

ONDCP Communications Director Rafael Lemaitre on Twitter

By the Numbers: ZERO: Number of times the phrase “War on Drugs” is used in the President’s National Drug Control Strategy #DrugPolicyReform

Obama Drug Policy Strategy charts new course in drug policy: Rejects false choice between a “war on drugs” and “Legalization” #Science

Cops Slam Obama for Same Old “Drug War” Budget from Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

“New” White House Drug Control Strategy: New Rhetoric, Same Failed Policies by Bill Piper at Huffington Post

Drug reformers slam Obama for ‘prioritizing low-level arrests’ by Stephen C. Webster at Raw Story

Here’s a headline the ONDCP probably wasn’t expecting:

White House criticizes U.S. drug policy

…

Keeping in line with the ONDCP “revolutionary shift,” I’ve decided to make a revolutionary shift in my diet to lose some weight. So I’m replacing chocolate cake with carrot cake. That should do it, right?

If you’re in my area (central Illinois), stop by on Friday for the 10th annual HempFest, sponsored by the Illinois State University chapter of Students for Sensible Drug Policy. I’ll be speaking at 6 pm.

Should be a great time. Details here.

Hardball with Chris Matthews. Chris did a nice job of putting President Obama on the spot regarding the drug war in questioning down in Cartagena. He shows that exchange, and then has a discussion with Ethan Nadelmann and Kevin Sabet. (I don’t really like to start my day with Kevin, so I haven’t watched that part yet.)

Al Jazeera Counts the Costs of the war on drugs. A 40- minute program from Sunday on the costs of the war on drugs, featuring interviews with the president of Guatemala, Otto Peres Molina; Kevin Sabet, formerly of the US Office of National Drug Control Policy; Armando Santacruz of the Mexican NGO Mexico United Against Crime; and Danny Kushlick, head of external affairs at Transform Drug Policy Foundation.

Unspeakable Harm Reduction – a new video by the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, confronting the UNODC’s unwillingness to address even the words “harm reduction.”

Is it a sea change? Certainly we don’t expect reform to come from the top down — it’ll take an overwhelming revolt by the population to overcome the governmental self-interest. And the U.S. is firm in its resolve to keep the drug war going unchanged.

And yet, we have a huge number of leaders of Latin American countries blatantly calling for a discussion of legalization, and the two hard-line prohibitionists in the Western Hemisphere — Canada’s Stephen Harper and U.S.’s Barack Obama actually felt the need to express these thoughts this weekend:

Harper: “I think what everyone believes and agrees with, and to be frank myself, is that the current approach is not working, but it is not clear what we should do.”

Obama: “I think it is entirely legitimate to have a conversation about whether the laws in place are ones that are doing more harm than good in certain places.”

Apparently President Obama told the other nations of this hemisphere that legalization is not a “silver bullet.” I’m sure it made the translators wonder if the President of the United States actually understands the English language.

When something is not a “silver bullet,” that means that it isn’t a one-shot quickie solution to everything, not that it isn’t something worth doing. Nobody was talking about silver bullets except the President, and he’s now implying that we shouldn’t do something to change what’s going on unless it’s a silver bullet.

Well what does that say about American exceptionalism, anyway? When our revolutionary soldiers were told that the British were coming, did they say, “Well, shoot. We don’t have any silver bullets. Guess there’s nothing we can do about it.”? Of course not.

And it’s not like the President has been dispensing many silver projectiles himself. Take a look in Afghanistan. He’s shooting blanks.

Even worse, the silver bullet is a really bad analogy to use when talking about a situation where tens of thousands of people have died because of our bad policies. We need less bullets of all metallic varieties, and legalization actually reduces the bullets.

Put your gun away, Mr. President. What we need now is brains, not bullets.

So, Obama had to convince the other countries in the hemisphere that he knows what’s best for them when it comes to international policy related to drugs.

I’m guessing this wasn’t part of his strategy…

Secret service agents sent home after Colombia prostitution allegations
Members of president’s security detail recalled from Cartagena following claims of heavy drinking and use of prostitutes