OBAMA'S MANY VIEWS ON MARIJUANA
PAUL KRASSNER - During a debate in the Democratic presidential primaries campaign, MSNBC moderator Tim Russert, the claymation journalist, asked the candidates who opposed decriminalization of marijuana to raise their hands.
Barack Obama hesitantly raised his hand halfway before quickly lowering it again. However, in January 2004, when Obama was running for the Senate, he told Illinois college students that he supported eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use or possession. "I think the war on drugs has been a failure, and I think we need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws," he said during a debate at Northwestern University. "But I'm not somebody who believes in legalization of marijuana."
Was Obama now having a time-travel debate with himself? When the Washington Times confronted Obama with that statement on a video of the 2004 debate, his campaign offered two explanations in less than 24 hours. First, a spokesperson said that Obama had "always" supported decriminalizing marijuana, that he misunderstood the question when he raised his hand, and reiterated Obama's opposition to full legalization, adding that an Obama administration would "review drug sentences to see where we can be smarter on crime and reduce the blind and counterproductive sentencing to non-violent offenders."
But, after the Times posted the video on its website, the Obama campaign made a fast U-turn and declared that he does not support eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana possession and use--thereby rejecting both decriminalization and legalization.
What exactly is the difference? The definitions, according to Pot Culture: The A-Z Guide to Stoner Language & Life by Shirley Halperin and Steve Bloom, with a foreword by Tommy Chong: "Decriminalization: When laws governing marijuana are changed to reduce the penalties for possession of small quantities (usually below an ounce) to non-criminal status. The first state to decriminalize was Oregon in 1973, followed by California, New York, Ohio, Nebraska, Minnesota, Colorado, Mississippi, Alaska, North Carolina and Maine."
"Legalization: The complete repeal of marijuana prohibition and removal of all criminal penalties for its use, sale, transport and cultivation. The Netherlands is the only country in the world with such a policy."
Ron Fisher at NORML told me, "Decriminalization is the elimination of criminal penalties for the possession of marijuana, usually by replacing them with a fine (similar to a speeding ticket). Full legalization is a more complex issue that involves U.S. treaties, as well as the law. Legalization would be characterized by taxation and regulation of marijuana.
This is NORML's ultimate goal, but we work for decrim in the meantime for the sake of the 830,000 Americans arrested on cannabis charges each year." And, according to medical marijuana activist Lanny Swerdlow, "Whether Senator Obama has changed his position or not, if he obtains the Democratic nomination for president, then marijuana decriminalization will certainly become an issue in the campaign--maybe a major issue. I'm sure the Republicans will use Obama's videotaped statement supporting decriminalization and will try to paint him as soft on crime, sending the wrong message to children and all the baggage that goes with it. In this day and age, I think that could very well backfire as I really believe that most Americans are not aware, let alone support, ensnaring 830,000 citizens in the criminal justice system for marijuana-prohibition violations at a cost to taxpayers of between 10 and 20 billion dollars a year."
Indeed, a CNN/Time-Warner poll shows that 76% of Americans agree with Obama's original position, not to mention the 48 million who smoked pot in 2007.
http://paulkrassner.com/
20 Comments:
Yes, but hasn't he already shown a penchant for back-tracking when confronted? WHat makes anyone think he'll stand up for decrim (which I don't agree with, btw) when the Republicans really go after him?
I think it's safe to say that any fundamental questions about the drug war issue will not be answered this election cycle.
There's another position that's mid-way between decriminalization and legalization- continuing to forbid the commercial trade in marijuana, while allowing adults to cultivate small quantities for personal use. This policy has a precedent in present laws that allow home brewing of beer and wine.
From the Wikipedia entry on Homebrewing:
"...most states permit homebrewing, allowing 100 gallons of beer per person over the age of 21 per household, up to a maximum of 200 gallons per year. Because alcohol is taxed by the federal governments via excise taxes, homebrewers are restricted from selling any beer they brew. This similarly applies in most Western countries."
( Note that some states of the USA apparently do not permit homebrewing, just as some states and counties continue to prohibit the sale of alcohol- but at least the policy is a matter for individual localities to decide, not the Federal government. Which is fine by me. )
The problem with mere decriminalization is that it doesn't addresss the fact that the decriminalized personal possessors must still obtain their marijuana from illegal sources. That isn't a satisfactory answer, because the most negative impact of using cannabis- both to the individual and to society- is continual contact with the world of career criminals and their associated behaviors. That factor that has only increased over time under Zero Tolerance, through a sort of Gresham's Law of Drug Dealing- the conditions of prohibition advantage career criminals with propensities toward violence and antisocial behavior at the expense of those who aren't willing to compete with violence and antisociality in return, or to risk ruinous legal penalties- people like amateur home growers of small quantities of cannabis. The drug dealers who most adopt the behaviors of career criminals are able and willing to adapt to threats like incarceration- that's part of the key to success in such a field, after all. And as a criminal vocation, the opportunities arising from profiteering through dealing in "substances presently declared illegal" is unmatched.
The way to strike at the root of that societal problem is to remove as much of the customer base from the drug dealers as possible- which could be easily achieved in the case of marijuana, simply by allowing the cultivation of a few plants by a household. ( It certainly helps that as a cultivar, cannabis is less toxic than many house plants, much less tobacco.)
As for the other alternative, legalization- it's unnecessary, overly complicated to enact as law, and a political loser. Inevitably, working out the policy would involve a complex and fractious snarl of government bureaucracies, agencies, and lobbies- the FDA, the IRS, the insurance companies, various medical lobbies and their lawyers, and, of course, the private interests of corporate profiteers seeking to take over from the illegal dealers. A can of worms. And assuming that it could be worked out, the legal market could always be undercut by home cultivation- which I cynically suspect would remain illegal under any "legalization" program promulgated by the Federal government. Entirely possible that "legalization" would be a net loss, given that fact. If fact, I'm frankly sympathetic to some of the objections raised by opponents of the legalization of marijuana as an item of interstate commerce. I'm frankly worried that the legal "commercialization" of marijuana would probably look awfully foul in the hands of a government-licensed corporate oligopoly- especially if it simply followed along with the disingenuous propaganda campaigns presently pursued by the alcohol industry, and the psycho-pharmaceutical industry.
So I understand Barack Obama's indecision, when Tim Russert posed that question in one of the debates. As long as consideration is limited to the usual alternatives to the status quo of continued Federal criminal prohibition- "decriminalization or legalization"- workable reform of the laws against pot is very difficult to explicate and defend.
What's needed is a way to allow adults to have access to this relatively non-toxic natural plant substance if they want it, while removing the money factor out of the equation as much as possible. That money is healthier as a windfall return of surplus income to individuals than as "tax money", anyway- healthier for the individual, the economy, and for a government that shouldn't be encouraged to become reliant on peoples drug consumption habits for its funding. And the way to do that is to allow home growers to cultivate a few plants to provide themselves and their adult friends with a reasonable amount of marijuana for their own use, while continuing to prohibit their ability to stockpile huge quantities, or to sell it. Marijuana can be grown easily and cheaply all over the country- preferably in small garden plots or window boxes, outdoors in the sunshine, where it belongs.
[ note: I'm roughly as sick of high-dollar profiteering "compassionate caregivers" as the DEA is, at this point- opportunists taking advantage of medical marijuana laws to grow and deal in huge quantities of herb at $400/oz. They threaten to ruin it for the people who obtain the most benefit from it. ]
The personal-use cultivation reform won't solve every problem associated with cannabis use, but it will solve the big ones. To name one important consequence: while teenagers will undoubtedly sneak marijuana from their pot-using parents and share it with their friends just as many have traditionally done with beer and alcohol, they will no longer be recruited as foot soldiers in the retail end of the Underground Empire of the illegal drug trade inspired by Zero Tolerance, which is how matters have been playing out for around the last 40+ years.
Finally, this sage advice isn't original with me- support for legalized possession and private cultivation of small amounts of marijuana by adults was endorsed as far back as the Shafer Commission, a blue-ribbon panel picked in the early 1970s by then-President Richard Nixon- who thereupon tore up the report; and the same policy reform was also supported by an expert panel of the National Academy of Sciences in 1982, who delivered their findings to President Ronald Reagan- who thereupon tore up the report...
Tune--"_The Deil cam' fiddling through the town._"
[Composed and sung by the poet at a festive meeting of the excisemen
of the Dumfries district.]
I. The deil cam' fiddling through the town, And danced awa wi' the Exciseman, And ilka wife cries--"Auld Mahoun, I wish you luck o' the prize, man!" The deil's awa, the deil's awa, The deil's awa wi' the Exciseman; He's danc'd awa, he's danc'd awa, He's danc'd awa wi' the Exciseman!II. We'll mak our maut, we'll brew our drink, We'll dance, and sing, and rejoice, man; And mony braw thanks to the meikle black deil That danc'd awa wi' the Exciseman.III. There's threesome reels, there's foursome reels, There's hornpipes and strathspeys, man; But the ae best dance e'er cam to the land Was--the deil's awa wi' the Exciseman. The deil's awa, the deil's awa, The deil's awa wi' the Exciseman: He's danc'd awa, he's danc'd awa, He's danc'd awa wi' the Exciseman
" Champagne don't drive me crazy,
cocaine don't make me lazy.
It ain't nobody's business but my own.
Man, I don't care what'n the world that you do,
long as you do what you say you goin' to.
It ain't nobody's business but my own."
Until recently one might read for free online a particularly cogent treatise by Peter McWilliams (Ain't Nobody's Business But My Own) explaining what we've all sensed , that laws against consensual crimes are contrary to the very essence of personal freedom, therefore unconstitutional , and really are the foot-in the-door route to totalitarianism.
One may still read Peter McWilliams's book for free online. Go here: http://www.petermcwilliams.org/
It is a rather insightful work, and although I do not agree with all of it, I agree with most of it, and I certainly think it is well worth a read.
what are you so afraid will happen if we simply remove the laws against this plant? Can potheads really be more dangerous to themselves or others than drunks? More importantly, why are advocates of the medical use of this plant completely ignoring their best allies: those at the front of the hemp revolution.
Some industrial potential for hemp may be a bit over hyped, but the potential for this plant is still tremendous. I am a mechanical engineer and have been studying this plant's industrial uses for years and have become certain that legalizing cannabis cultivation would go a long way towards helping our environment and our economy (not to mention give me tons of new job opportunities.)
Supporters of the cannabis plant need to come together and promote a simple, logical and just solution to our failed war on drugs; not just argue over who's part of the issue is more important.
Think about it this way: it is our law against smoking pot that keeps third-world countries producing cotton instead of hemp, which leaves them with worthless topsoil and contaminated groundwater after just a few years.
Our failed drug war continues to cripple and corrupt governments in Mexico, Columbia, the U.S. and more; the black market we have created fuels terrorism around the globe as it undermines the credibility of our entire justice system. I could go on for days, but the point here is not to trivialize this issue.
Cannabis needs to be a major topic of debate in the upcoming election, the various supporters of reform being on the same page gives us all a much better chance of being heard. I believe the answer is as simple as publicly supporting the efforts of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition(www.leap.cc); putting the spotlight on them gives us credibility and consensus on policy reform, their representatives are even available for public speaking.
Sorry if I offended anyone, but I would be curious to know what you thinks about this idea.
Sure, go ahead and legalize it. Then we will have people crashing their cars into innocents left and right, we will have doctors getting stoned before performing major surgeries, we will have judges and juries stoned while they decide the fate of people's lives, we will have police officers so stoned that they can't perform their jobs of keeping us safe and arresting the lawbreakers, we will have bank tellers so stoned that they can't accurately account for our money, we will have mothers so stoned that they can't properly take care of their children....do I seriously need to go on? Did you ever stop to think that maybe what might be keeping some of these people from doing this now is the fear of being caught? I don't enjoy being around people who are high and who continuously get high because they get so stupid they can't carry on a conversation. I live in reality and I expect everyone else I come in contact with on a daily basis to do the same thing.
Anonymous said: "Then we will have people crashing their cars into innocents left and right, we will have doctors getting stoned before performing major surgeries, we will have judges and juries stoned while they decide the fate of people's lives, we will have police officers so stoned that they can't perform their jobs of keeping us safe and arresting the lawbreakers, we will have bank tellers so stoned that they can't accurately account for our money, we will have mothers so stoned that they can't properly take care of their children....do I seriously need to go on? Did you ever stop to think that maybe what might be keeping some of these people from doing this now is the fear of being caught?"
That is what regulation is for. A surgeon will not get high before a surgery, because if they did, they would lose their license because of malpractice. You don't worry about these things with alcohol, and from what I have seen, people can function much better while stoned then when drunk.
"Sure, go ahead and legalize it. Then we will have people..."
You are an idiot, before posting next time, do some reading on marijuana.
I think that there should be legalization of marijuana. Some smokers use it for a positive source to reach nirvana. Some smokers use it to become more in touch with there artistic edge. The inhale of the precious herb is a miracle breathe of fresh air. It has personally brought me closer to God. FUCKING LEGALIZE IT !
God said, "Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of all the earth.…To you it will be for meat." … And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. (Genesis 1:29-31)
If you believe in God, LEGALIZE IT!
God said, "Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of all the earth.…To you it will be for meat." … And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. (Genesis 1:29-31)
If you believe in God, LEGALIZE IT!
the u.s. government would tax people for masturbation if they could....And yes, the comment about car crashes and doctors and moms...? it would be a good idea to practice "critical thinking"
I think the Medical marijuana should be legal. Our Surgeon General has just said she feels it should be made legal also with 125,000 of the worlds leading doctors behing her findings, I say foll ow the will of the People as it should be, Not just 1 man that needs IMPEACHED
Dave
Ok..... I cant see why we should have to pay anywhere from 10 to 20 billion dollars of are tax money a year on people in jail for stupid crap like simple possession charges when it comes to weed. Oh and this stupid war on drugs they can fight it for as long as they want but in the end no matter how long it takes I think weeds going to be legal in the U.S. I cant see why someone should get locked for trying to relax, now I looking at this as a rec./social smokers point of view I mean it's pretty much the same thing as sitting back and drinking a beer except you don't get all angry and want to fight every body, and your still capible of doing every thing you can do when your not high like drive for instance. and I think that if its legal to brew your own beer you should be able to grow your own pot. I mean you hear all this good stuff about it like oh its in the bible and and the medical stuff its used for but I can't really think of any negative sides to it right now besides drug dealers but oh we can eliminate that to if we're able to grow it. And plus it can be used for a raw material I feel that if its has all these good purposes and God put it on this earth knowing that we were going to smoke it and use it for other things cause remember god already knows everything thats going to happen, then how bad can it actually be honestly. I just think that one of the major issues with legalizing it is that all the beer and cigarette companys that the government can tax are going to lose bussiness on something that they can't really tax but I don't know about you but I would rather make weed legal and lose money than paying all that tax money for all those people in jail for weed. Thats just my oppinion and I don't care if you like if or not Im just tired of all these up tight people making such a big deal outta wee.
My views on Marijuana are the same as all the 830 thousand people in jail for possession. If the government wants to end the war on drugs then legalize it already so it can end. I'll say this though: The farmers that are left in the united states could grow and cultivate Marijuana for the government. Instead of taxing cigarettes and uping the price all the time (losing business because people can't afford 1 pack) they could put Marijuana on the market and tax IT. Also, tobacco kills, Marijuana helps thousands of people with eating disorders, with cateracts, and with many different medical issues. Cigarettes can't do that. Plus with cigarettes, the government is KNOWINGLY KILLING everybody in the WORLD, whereas marijuana helps people relax, or for some, like my husband, gives them more energy and helps them focus and think more clearly. Marijuana is a great herb for relieving stress. Believe it or not, there will be less suicides if marijuana was legal and available for the public. Farmers wouldn't have to be forced to sell their livestock and their land, just to make some money so they can survive. Farming is what they know and it's how they've made a living their whole lives and they are being forced to sell their land and livestock so they can continue to survive. And because of that, there will be no more farmers left in the world if this continues. Thanks to farmers, we have the natural beef and pork and chicken and all this other great food and don't have any chemicals in them from fertilizer. Allowing farmers to grow and cultivate marijuana for public use will help them survive and continue to thrive where the do now and it would definatly help the economy. If marijuana was legal, there wouldn't be so many homeless people and people on wellfare or on foodstamps because their job doesn't pay them enough to afford enough food for themselves and their families. And the dealers that are selling illegally should be able to get a license to sell marijuana if it's legalized, that way they can grow it themselves and sell it to their customers. The people who frown upon these comments and blogs made by many Americans, don't know what they are missing out on, and they probably haven't tried marijuana, and if they have, it was probably years ago and everybody's likes change over the years. I know mine did. The first time I tried pot at 15 I didn't like it because it burned my throat and a few years later when I decided to try it again, I loved it. It helps me relax and it definatly helps with my cramps and excrutiating pain I get every month when I go through my monthly cycle. So in turn: LEGALIZE MARIJUANA ALREADY!!!!!
Who cares what he says NOW, he's gonna say whatever gets him elected. Then after he's elected he can do whatever the hell he wants. I think he really does believe in decrim. but he can't admit it while he's running for Prez. Once he's elected I'm sure he'll have no problem supporting it.
Who cares what he says NOW, he's gonna say whatever gets him elected. Then after he's elected he can do whatever the hell he wants. I think he really does believe in decrim. but he can't admit it while he's running for Prez. Once he's elected I'm sure he'll have no problem supporting it.
Who cares what he says NOW, he's gonna say whatever gets him elected. Then after he's elected he can do whatever the hell he wants. I think he really does believe in decrim. but he can't admit it while he's running for Prez. Once he's elected I'm sure he'll have no problem supporting it.
Post a Comment
<< Home