Is Obama Finally Ready to Dial Back the War on Drugs?

Some drug policy reformers who were disappointed by President Obama's first term predicted that his second term would be better. As I explain in my latest Forbes column, they were right—up to a point. Here is how the column starts:
In a 2011 Reason cover story, I explained why drug policy reformers had been bitterly disappointed by President Obama's performance during his first few years in office. With the notable exception of his support for shorter crack sentences, which Congress approved almost unanimously in 2010, Obama had done very little to de-escalate the war on drugs, despite comments prior to his election that led people to believe his administration would be less repressive than his predecessor's.
To the contrary, the feds cracked down on medical marijuana more aggressively under Obama than they had under George W. Bush, even though he and his attorney general, Eric Holder, repeatedly promised the opposite. The administration continued to defend marijuana's status as a Schedule I drug, a category supposedly reserved for substances with a high potential for abuse that have no accepted medical applications and cannot be used safely, even under a doctor's supervision. When the subject of marijuana legalization came up, Obama literally laughed at the idea. Finally empowered to release drug offenders serving sentences that he had said were too long, Obama issued only one commutation during his first term and was on track to leave behind the stingiest clemency record of any modern president.
Some critics of the war on drugs—a crusade that Obama had declared "an utter failure" in 2004—predicted that he would improve in his second term. Safely re-elected, he would not have to worry that looking soft on drugs would cost him votes, and he would finally act on his avowed belief that the war on drugs is unjust and ineffective. As Obama embarks on the third year of his second term, it looks like the optimists were partially right, although much hinges on what he does during the next two years. Here are some of the ways in which Obama has begun to deliver on his promises of a more rational, less punitive approach to psychoactive substances:
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
my co-worker's step-sister makes $74 an hour on the computer . She has been fired from work for nine months but last month her paycheck was $16572 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read Full Report............
????? http://www.netjob70.com
Put it through the uprights, for certainly the administration is going to hold the football in place this time.
Fer fux sake, give it up already. There is no proggytarian alliance.
At most, we can hope for a purely unprincipled, temporary, vague hiatus in the War on State-Legal Pot, as an election year base-goosing ploy.
Let me think. How would doing so affect executive power?
A re-scheduling or better yet de-scheduling Cannabis would be a great first step, even that remains a pipe dream.
No pun intended.
I'll believe it when I see it. The President has always been about words over actions.
He's a run-of-the-mill low-IQ politician. As a senator, any objection to the war on drugs was probably due to disparate impact, a desire to appear hip, and maybe a hint of principle. When he fell into the White House he was too stupid to resist being swept up in the institutional fervor of the war. Some equally unintelligent DEA beuracrat probably swayed him with a few slides and colorful bar graphs.
my co-worker's step-mother makes $82 /hour on the laptop . She has been fired from work for ten months but last month her pay was $13096 just working on the laptop for a few hours. check here........
?????http://www.netjob70.com
No.
He wont be if Conservatives have their way. I dont care if u are a Dem or a Rep, Libertarian or Socialist, if you are a Conservative, you are what is wrong with the USA and the world !!!
The short answer. No.
The longer answer: he will do anything that doesn't seriously impair the drug cartels.