Uncle Sam Wants You to Oppose Drug Policy Reform
Tomorrow the House Government Reform Committee is expected to consider legislation that would authorize the Office of National Drug Control Policy to sponsor ads opposing liberalization of the drug laws. Although the bill ostensibly prohibits using the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign "for partisan political purposes," there's an exception for "the Director's responsibilities under section 704(b)(12) of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998," which says the drug czar "shall…take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a [prohibited] substance." The ONDCP interprets "legalize" broadly, to include even modest reforms such as reducing penalties for simple possession or allowing marijuana to be used as a medicine.
According to the Drug Policy Alliance, "the provision is so broad it could allow the White House to use almost $1 billion in taxpayer money for partisan political purposes, which may even include government-sponsored attack ads against a candidate who takes a stand in favor of drug policy reform." The DPA's Bill Piper observes, "This would be like the IRS running ads against tax cut proposals and the candidates that support them."
The Marijuana Policy Project notes that the bill also would allow the ONDCP to take anti-drug money away from states that dare to legalize medical marijuana.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"The Marijuana Policy Project notes that the bill also would allow the ONDCP to take anti-drug money away from states that dare to legalize medical marijuana."
So, if my state legalizes medical marijuana, the state gets less money from the feds to prosecute the drug war?
Isn't that win-win?
I hope they do it. ONDCP loses the debates, looks like a bully, and looks bad for spending tax money on political ads.
Please don't throw me in the briar patch!
I used to look at this sort of despicable government excess as the desperate acts which herald a major policy reform. But after 30 years of sinking ever further into the depths of despotism... Well, I'm pretty depressed about it now, but I'll feel better once I get high.
"So, if my state legalizes medical marijuana, the state gets less money from the feds to prosecute the drug war?"
Well, probably not. Your state gets less money for everything else you can think of. Highways are an obvious example. The Feds wouldn't give states money for highways and the like unless they agreed to raise their drinking ages to 21. They all did eventually because they couldn't pass up all that loot.
When it's illegal or unconstitutional for the Feds to force the states to do something, usually they bribe them in this manner.
further into the depths of despotism? yeah cold war, watergate, vietnam, segragation, kent state, pre-internet - the good ole days.
you need to lay off the weed.
At least in the Alcohol Age issue the federal government acknowledged that it was a state's rights issue and resorted to despicable bribery. In this case, they are going to 1) claim that the federal prohibition trumps the state medical marijuana law and 2) withhold money from the state at the same time? Is this some sort of admission or are they just trying to preempt constitutional issues?
Boy, I thought the war on pot was bad before...
Looks like Arizona at least tried to fight back. It seems the Drug Czar was in that state campaigning against their marijuana-legalization ballot issue last year. He didn't, however, file required paperwork as a lobbyist but somehow weasels out because he's a Fed, who is above the law.
http://www.mpp.org/states/site/quicknews.cgi?key=4007
I'm almost convinced that the nameless (not even a pseudonym... please!) poster is Bill O'Reilly.
For instance:
"further into the depths of despotism? yeah cold war, watergate, vietnam, segragation, kent state, pre-internet - the good ole days.
you need to lay off the weed."
Well, lets see- most of the world hates us, Enron and open bribery, 2 wars in 2 years, class warfare, my own Colorado Springs where anti-war protesters were gassed and shot with rubber bullets by the police, being able to see what you read whether its the internet or a library book or even one you bought. Your litany of evils spanned a period of decades, mine only a couple dozen months.
Aren't you even concerned that your tax dollars are being used to subvert democracy?
What have you been smoking?
Jon B - time to get out of the house and meet "most of the world." Cause if they hate us, we must be doing something right.
Jon B - arguing that things are generally getting progressively worse is not going to work with rational people, because you are simply dead wrong. Pretty much everything gets better, all the time.
Arguing that some specific things are going wrong, backed by a reasonable argument, might win you some converts.
PLC,
"everything gets better, all the time."? What have YOU been smoking? (and where can I get some)
What about personal liberty? What about taxes? Every year we get more laws and more gubmint spending. Sure there was some de-regulation back in Reagans time and some tax breaks here and there, but the long term trend line has been, down down down, for at least the past 150 years.
Who really judges their life by how many freedoms they have? The only thing 99.99% of us care about are bread and circuses. So get over it already Jon.
I saw a Nick 'n' Norm anti-legalization TV commercial a month back. (Not one of my better posts, I gotta admit, but you'll get the gist).
I can't say it better than Thomas Jefferson did:
"...to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
I already recognize the ONDCP ads as examples of such sinful tyranny. To think that my tax dollars might now be legally used to enable the McCaffreys and the Hutchinsons of the world to propagandize openly during elections against views I support, is to imagine the death of my country. There's your Drug War -- because it is "war," all is deemed "fair." What garbage.
Controlled Substances Act delenda est.
What did you say it was "would get flushed down the toilet." ?
Jon B and warren -- Every age has its challenges, its problems, its blessings. I don't know how old you are, but I'll bet 25 years from now, when you look back on this time, you'll realize that THESE were the good old days.
Jacob Sullum, please get off our backs, will ya? I work for the DEA, and without the Drug War, I'd be out of a job; my department would be out of money; and a whole host of programs, hardware, and energy would get flushed down the drain.
Let's keep an eye on who votes for or against this!! (Help in this regard will be appreciated!!!)
EMAIL: krokodilgena1@yahoo.com
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://www.PENIS-ENLARGEMENT-MEDICATION.NET
DATE: 12/10/2003 05:19:38
If you're going through hell, keep going.Everybody is a star with the potentiality to shine in the infinite sky of eternity.
EMAIL: krokodilgena1@yahoo.com
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://penis-enlargement-technique.nonstopsex.org
DATE: 12/20/2003 09:32:17
We are the master of
EMAIL: pamela_woodlake@yahoo.com
IP: 68.173.7.113
URL: http://quit-smoking.how-quit-smoking.com
DATE: 01/09/2004 01:57:57
No cause is so right that one cannot find a fool following it.