Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Justice Department. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Justice Department. Show all posts

Thursday, August 29, 2013

The grand drug policy experiment!

As someone who's been teaching and research drug policy for years, along with my great friend and colleague Renee Scherlen, I am pretty sure we've both said that no one knows for sure what would happen under a full legalization regime.

That is, if a drug like marijuana were to be legalized, we would not really be able to accurately predict what would happen to rates of drug use, drug abuse, illness, death, etc. But we suspect that use might go up in the short-term (as the drug is suddenly more available and thus easier to get), drug abuse would remain unchanged (because, in spite of government claims to the contrary, a drug like marijuana does not generally lead to abuse), and illness and death would decline (because people would be using a less dangerous drug than say, alcohol). We'd also expect use to eventually level off once the "newness" of legalization fades (but if it does not yet rates of alcohol use go down as people switch to pot, this would be a net gain since the former is much safer than the latter).

But the truth is, it would be an experiment. Call it the grand drug policy experiment.

We don't know what will happen.

And we told our students that this would probably not happen in the United States. And likely not in our lifetimes.

But now, finally, we're going to find out. In the United States, and in our lifetimes!

Because two states recently legalized marijuana. And now, finally, in spite of their claims that they oppose legalization of marijuana, ONDCP, President Obama, and the Justice Department will not interfere with this policy change.

Now legal and soon to be regulated and available to responsible adults ...

Just as you'd expect from a conservative president who respects states' rights as long as they don't deny people their Constitutional rights, Obama's Justice Department will only enforce federal law within the states that aim to reduce harm (including serious crime).

For example, DOJ will still prosecute individuals or entities to prevent:
  • the distribution of marijuana to minors;
  • revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises, gangs and cartels;
  • the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal under state law in some form to other states;
  • state-authorized marijuana activity from being used as a cover or pretext for the trafficking of other illegal drugs or other illegal activity;
  • violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation and distribution of marijuana
  • drugged driving and the exacerbation of other adverse public health consequences associated with marijuana use;
  • growing of marijuana on public lands and the attendant public safety and environmental dangers posed by marijuana production on public lands;
  • preventing marijuana possession or use on federal property.
But not for mere possession or use.

Just as it should be if you believe in liberty.

Now, let's see what happens in this grand experiment.

PS, it's all over the news!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/eric-holder-marijuana-washington-colorado-doj_n_3837034.html

Friday, February 10, 2012

Holding guity corporate criminals accountable

The banks played a major role in the collapse of the housing market AND the collapse of the US economy. One of the best explanations of it is here.

Stated simply, banks loaned money to people they knew could not pay it back. They also created mechanisms for people to make vast amounts of money on the bad loans, knowing the people would default. It was basically a pyramid scheme invented by and that benefited extremely wealthy and powerful people. Meanwhile the rest of us suffer immensely.

The Obama Administration pledged to go after them and hold them accountable. And the FIRST agreement has been reached. Large banks will pay $26 billion to help homeowners right bad mortgages and keep their homes.

States are free to sue for more, and the federal investigation can still produce arrests, convictions, and incarcerations. The story made the front page of CNN:

Conservatives say the $26 billion deal to settle charges of mortgage fraud unfairly rewards those who miss payments; liberals say it doesn't offer enough relief. FULL STORY | WHAT IT MEANS FOR YOU | NEW RULES FOR BANKS

On Fox, it is here:

Feds announce $25B settlement for foreclosure abuse, victims to receive only $2G

No picture, no celebration.

Notice both headlines. Notice the different highlights in the two stories. What explains the difference?