Waiting for election results can be an agonizing experience
for those whose emotions and interests are invested in the outcome. Imagine the
anxiety then of those awaiting news of the 20 pro-marijuana ballot initiatives
that were decided on November 2nd. Groups of activists gathered
together looking for comfort, camaraderie, and Cool Ranch Doritos: “What if the
initiative doesn’t pass? Shit, they know, THEY KNOW! Wait, did you hear
that?!” “Calm down, man. You gotta put your trust in the few mechanisms for
direct democracy that we have. Y’ever wonder if maybe we’re just a mechanism
for another planet’s political system, and they make decisions using
us as an experiment?” “Dude, I finally get Radiohead’s Kid A.”
With 17 of the 20 initiatives approved, those pot pioneers
had good reason to break out their Devil Sticks in celebration. Montana is now
the 11th state to allow medical marijuana, effectively changing the state motto
from “Gold and Silver” to “Acapulco Gold and Silver Haze.” Alaska and Oregon
both had progressive initiatives for marijuana reform which, despite being voted
down, demonstrate the willingness of some states to address the issue. These
states are blunt about having this be a joint decision.
America’s policies towards drugs have all the coherence and
reason of a coked-out Whitney Houston. Ever since the first settlers were
required by colonial law to grow hemp, drugs have been controversial. Hemp was
the main crop for George Washington and was also grown by Thomas Jefferson at
Monticello – “Jesus, Sally…I’m so stoned. Look how funny my wig is! Here, you
put it on and take a hit. Hey! Only 3/5ths of a puff for you!” Making a case
for legalizing marijuana in The Argus is like making a case for
depression and tubs of ice cream on the Oxygen Network, but there is much
more to our relationship with drugs than the marijuana debate. How do
legislators and the FDA separate the good drugs from the bad? In the
President’s case, he tries them out first. For most drugs, though, the data has
disturbing implications. Drug abuse violations are the top cause for arrest,
numbering 1,678,200 in 2003. The number of inmates incarcerated for drug
offenses has risen by 88,800 since 1983. From 1995 to 2001, the number of white
inmates who committed violent crimes rose at a greater pace than that of blacks,
however, the number of black inmates convicted of drug charges increased by 23%,
a much higher percentage than that of whites. The decision of cops to make
being black “probable cause” could be responsible, but the money and politics
explain a lot more.
Drug laws disproportionately affect black communities.
“That’s ‘cause they’re criminals who spend their money on drugs,” says the
racist. “Then they go and rape white women in skits before Monday Night
Football and I have to tell on ‘em to the FCC,” he, for some reason, adds. The
fact is, police attention is concentrated in black communities in urban areas.
Despite the fact that Missouri alone had 2,680 methamphetamine labs in 2003, a
meth offender (who has a 3/4 chance of being white) is three times more likely
to be on probation or parole than in prison.
The key ingredients in meth are also found in many cold
medications. Because of this, congressional bills have been proposed to track
people who purchase cold pills in bulk. These bills are almost always defeated,
which brings up the key factor in our schizophrenic relationship with drugs:
money. This year, drug companies donated $13 million to political campaigns,
2/3rd of them Republican. So, if a drug law doesn’t keep
impoverished minorities in jail, you can count on it benefiting the drug
companies. Roughly 27,000 people have died from heart attacks or strokes after
taking Vioxx, which only recently has been recalled. It isn’t conspiracy
theorist bloggers claiming that the FDA is in the pocket of drug companies like
Merck; Sen. Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, called the
relationship between the FDA and drug makers “far too cozy” and accused the FDA
of ignoring warnings from its own scientists.
Meanwhile, the FDA just issued a warning against RU-486,
also known as “the abortion pill,” because two women have died from
secondary infections after taking it. Two deaths that are loosely and
inconclusively linked to the pill earned it a warning, while nothing was done
until 27,000 were dead from Merck’s product. You might be thinking that the
pressure from the Christian Right shouldn’t be enough to overpower the campaign
contributions from the drug companies. Usually that might be the case, but
RU-486 is produced by a French company that cannot make campaign contributions.
The Christian Right’s influence can also be seen in state laws that allow
pharmacists and nurses to refuse to give a patient contraception if they
consider it unethical. Several instances have already occurred in which medical
workers have refused to give women emergency contraception (EC), even, on at
least one occasion, after the woman had been raped. The FDA, also cozy with the
fundies, overruled its own panel of experts and scientists to prevent EC from
being available over-the-counter.
To enter into the drug debate, rationality and concerns
about civil liberties must be shed. Unless you have vast pools of wealth to
donate or you have a direct line of communication with Jesus or you have a new
strategy for suppressing poor minorities, your opinion won’t matter much. The
marijuana initiatives on the ballot show that there is progress being made, but
the root of the problem is so deep and twisted that it will take much more to
strike at it, much more to expose the seeds and stems of the schwag that is
America’s drug policy.
LISTEN TO THE AUDIO