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
Loading comments… 
convince the American public that the time is now to begin sane and sustainabl
plants on our property and smoke or eat them if we want.
We don't need a warrior. There is enough war, gang violence, racketeeri
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 Massachuse
Did Kerry look at that result and advocate changing federal law? Heck no.
Kerry sided with law enforcemen
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-j
from wikipedia:
As Drug Czar (1996-2001
A government
Canada prohibits the sale of liquor and beer in super-mark
Banning the sale of seeds(thou
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
Also, your descriptio
"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 therapeuti
When INSTEAD under Taxation The Federal Coffers could be enjoying an Influx of Brand New Revenue, to the tune of at least $31,000,00
Industrial Prison Complex...
More than 800,000 People were arrested in 2007 for Cannabis violations
Isn't cheney a financial benefactor of the Industrial Prison Complex?
Is it Responsibl
DEMAND Holder soften his Positionin
Holder, hopefully has noticed that Public Approval of Cannabis use, both Medical and Responsibl
http://www
Our bodies also metabolize the drug Alcohol as if it were Morphine and I am told the "mother molecule" in Acetaminop
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 consumptio
Tobacco will kill 435,000 this year, 106,000 will perish as a consequenc
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 consequenc
It exists to simply to stop the cultivatio
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.