On paper, Jim Ramstad -- who is rumored to be Obama's choice for drug czar -- looks like the ideal man for the job . He's a recovering alcoholic himself and a Congressman who championed legislation recently passed to provide equal insurance coverage for addictions and other mental illnesses.
To top it off, he's a Republican, giving Obama what looks like a relatively harmless way to make his cabinet more bipartisan. Choosing Ramstad would appear to make a powerful statement about addiction as a medical, not a moral issue.
Unfortunately, Ramstad may be a drug warrior in recovering person's clothing. There is one issue that has consistently separated those who put science and saving lives in front of politics. That is needle exchange programs for addicts to prevent the spread of HIV and other blood borne illnesses.
Even President Clinton now says he was "wrong" when he ignored the recommendations of every scientific and medical organization in the world that has examined the question -- from the AMA to the World Health Organization -- and refused to lift the federal ban on funding.
Needle exchanges have been shown repeatedly to reduce HIV and contrary to the claims of opponents, they help addicts get into treatment.
But Bill Clinton had a drug czar -- Barry McCaffrey -- who said that needle exchange "sent the wrong message," and would make him seem soft on drugs. McCaffrey fought against it and Clinton now says he "regrets" caving in to drug war politics.
While Obama has said that he favors federal funding, the last thing we need is another drug czar to talk him out of it.
Ramstad looks like that person. I am awaiting comment from his office to see if he has changed his position, but his history on the issue isn't good. In 1992, he said, "Federal funds should be used to get people off drugs not facilitate drug abuse...let's support programs that save lives, not destroy lives." By then, dozens of studies from around the world already suggested that clean needle programs not only reduce HIV, but attract addicts into recovery.
When I was injecting drugs in the '80s in New York, when 50% of IV drug users were HIV positive, a friend taught me to use clean needles. She probably saved my life -- she certainly didn't destroy it. I have now been free of cocaine and heroin for 20 years.
But people like Ramstad believe that it would have been better to deny me the information and equipment I needed to protect myself than to risk "enabling" my addiction. And they push this view that risks addicts' lives regardless of evidence that shows that their fears are groundless!
In 1999 -- with the data now overwhelming -- Ramstad voted to prevent Washington DC from using its own money to fund syringe exchange.
DC has the country's highest HIV rate. Not coincidentally, until after that provision was repealed late last year, it had no publicly funded needle exchange. African Americans have been the group most affected by the failure to prevent the spread of HIV amongst IV drug users, their partners and children.
New York, by contrast, started needle exchange relatively early and saw infection rates cut in half over the following years, according to a 1998 study.
Ramstad also -- again, against the evidence -- opposes medical marijuana and supports federal policing and prosecution of providers and patients in the states that have made it legal. These states have not seen the rise in teen drug use that opponents like the Congressman predicted.
The opposite, in fact, happened -- as is the case in countries that have decriminalized marijuana like Holland. The UK's "downgrading" of cannabis offense to a lesser status was also accompanied by a drop in use.
There's simply no evidence that allowing sick people to get needed medication conflicts with helping addicts. Obama has said he does not support these prosecutions -- will Ramstad push him in the wrong direction here, too? In an economic crisis, do we really want to spend federal time and money locking up medical marijuana providers and sick people?
While Ramstad has opposed some interdiction efforts and called for more treatment funding, someone who doesn't even believe that addicts have a right to life if they aren't in treatment is not the kind of recovering person that I want representing me as drug czar.
That's not change, President Obama -- that's more of the same. Don't make the mistake that Bill Clinton did and install a drug czar who will ignore science and push dogma.
While it's great to have a recovering person as an example, just having a disease and talking with others who've recovered the same way you did does not make you an expert. We need someone who knows the science, recognizes that there are many paths to recovery -- and understands that dead addicts can't recover.
Follow Maia Szalavitz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/maiasz
convince the American public that the time is now to begin sane and sustainable policies regarding ALL drugs, not just currently illegal ones. Someone who can help lead us into the restoration of hemp as a viable cash crop to stimulate the local economy as well as help us save the forests, nourish our society, and provide one of the best biofuels we'll ever have. Yes, we should all be allowed to grow
plants on our property and smoke or eat them if we want.
We don't need a warrior. There is enough war, gang violence, racketeering, call it what you want.
We need someone like Rick Steeves to be President Obama's Drug Policy Advisor.
Scientists have absolutely nothing to say about this, and neither do voters.
Look at Massachusetts -- marijuana reform won and so did John Kerry.
Did Kerry look at that result and advocate changing federal law? Heck no.
Kerry sided with law enforcement, against his own voters, because law enforcement lobbies run federal drug policy and the voters can just forget having any influence on Kerry or on Obama at all.
A little history lesson for those that think Clinton was any different from Bush on drug policy. McCaffrey was a complete jerk, lying to the public about drugs and drug policy, opposing medical marijuana on false grounds, opposing meedle exchange, blocking medical marijuana research-just like Bush and his drug czar Walters.
from wikipedia:
As Drug Czar (1996-2001), McCaffrey was instrumental in negotiating a deal to place anti-drug messages in prime time television shows without acknowledging that these messages were paid for by his Office.[3] This created quite a scandal when it was revealed in Salon.com.
A governmental cannabis program would earn the U.S. and in turn Canadian(They are only waiting for the U.S. to legalize first) to earn tens-of-billions of dollars in new revenue. It can also be easily controlled, by using the same methods the Canadian government uses to control it's alcohol distribution.
Canada prohibits the sale of liquor and beer in super-markets, convenience stores and many of the other places you can usually find them in the U.S. You can only pretty much only buy beer from "The Beer Store" and Liquor from "LCBO" both under the strict regulation by the Canadian government. This method could easily be used to control the distribution of Cannabis to consumers who would much rather have the easy access to it, keeping street sales illegal, just as it is Illegal to sell alcohol on the street.
Banning the sale of seeds(though I believe they should be sold to medical-patients), and growing only female plants(No seeds) would keep underground operations from even being able to produce illegally grown cannabis driving up the prices, making them unable to compete with the cheaper prices of the legal, therefore detering consumers even more from illegal purchases.
Not to mention the jobs created to run the government owned crop fields as growing the plant takes much care to grow a crop, and other jobs involved in the regulation, packaging, delivering and distributing and selling.
Also, your description of the situation in Canada is only valid for Ontario specifically. In Quebec and several other provinces, beer and wine can be purchased at corner stores or markets. Alberta even has privately run liquor stores.
"Don't make the mistake that Bill Clinton did and install a drug czar." Period.
It's time for some logic and reasonable attitudes to prevail and lets STOP THIS RIDICULOUS "WAR" ON "DRUGS"! It's sickening that people have their lives ruined for using a therapeutic plant just because some others don't prefer the use of that plant themselves. I'm sure the greatest motivator is that the "war" on "drugs" makes lots of lucrative positions for the undeserving.
When INSTEAD under Taxation The Federal Coffers could be enjoying an Influx of Brand New Revenue, to the tune of at least $31,000,000,000.00 Annually.
Industrial Prison Complex...there is Additional costs of housing those caught with cannabis to the tune of Another $2800.00 Per Month, Per Prisoner....And the Prisoners get to Work, making jeans, telemarketing etc for Less than $1.00 per hour...the Prison Industry then Keeps up to 80% of the Prisoners earnings to allow for Rm and Board....in Addition to the $2800.00.
More than 800,000 People were arrested in 2007 for Cannabis violations, 79% of those arrests are for simple possession.
Isn't cheney a financial benefactor of the Industrial Prison Complex?
Is it Responsible, in this post 9-11 era to be wasting resources on searching for those people who choose to use a Plant for enjoyment not to mention the Heartless persecution of those in Medical need?
DEMAND Holder soften his Positioning on Cannabis or he will Not get confirmed....IF they do not listen to us...then WE fire our reps for failing to perform the normal, basic duties of their jobs....Representing Us and Our wishes!
Holder, hopefully has noticed that Public Approval of Cannabis use, both Medical and Responsible Adult use is Greater than 70% and will, instead invest his budget dollars into going after actual Dangerous Drugs...to Actually Make us Safer.
http://www.mpp.org/library/widespread-support-for-medical-marijuana-throughout-the-country.html
Our bodies also metabolize the drug Alcohol as if it were Morphine and I am told the "mother molecule" in Acetaminophen is DDT. All drugs are dangerous.
There Is no such thing as a "Safe Drug" no matter if it is a cigarette, a beer, an aspirin or a cup of coffee.
All drugs should be evaluated by the Same Standard. Education about the drug one considers consuming will lead to folks making informed decisions Before consumption, thus leading to "Harm Reduction".
Tobacco will kill 435,000 this year, 106,000 will perish as a consequence of Alcohol consumption, 106,000 PLUS will perish asfter experiencing an "adverse reaction" to prescription drugs After taking them properly and as prescribed.
Cannabis has never killed anyone from an overdose. You would literally have to consume 1500 pounds of it w/in 15 minutes to realize a fatal dose. However there are fatalities realized as a consequence of the Laws, Rules and Policies that govern its use.
It exists to simply to stop the cultivation of hemp and the medical use of cannabis. Check it out and see if you agree.
We must speak out if this is to end.
Legalize drugs and watch the drug cartels disappear overnight.
The violence and killings disappear in days.
BUT we will never do it because there is just too much money invested in making as many Americans criminals as possible.
change?
fat chance.............................
Google- DEA corruption and federal drug corruption.
You will see who the criminals are.
I have been there [2 years for gardening my own medicine]. Unless you have been there you will never know how corrupt the DEA and federal justice system really is.
How do they get away wit it? Who are you going to believe me [an ex-convict of some high up government official?
I know the government official is the one who belongs behind bars.