Retiring Arizona Prison Watch...


This site was originally started in July 2009 as an independent endeavor to monitor conditions in Arizona's criminal justice system, as well as offer some critical analysis of the prison industrial complex from a prison abolitionist/anarchist's perspective. It was begun in the aftermath of the death of Marcia Powell, a 48 year old AZ state prisoner who was left in an outdoor cage in the desert sun for over four hours while on a 10-minute suicide watch. That was at ASPC-Perryville, in Goodyear, AZ, in May 2009.

Marcia, a seriously mentally ill woman with a meth habit sentenced to the minimum mandatory 27 months in prison for prostitution was already deemed by society as disposable. She was therefore easily ignored by numerous prison officers as she pleaded for water and relief from the sun for four hours. She was ultimately found collapsed in her own feces, with second degree burns on her body, her organs failing, and her body exceeding the 108 degrees the thermometer would record. 16 officers and staff were disciplined for her death, but no one was ever prosecuted for her homicide. Her story is here.

Marcia's death and this blog compelled me to work for the next 5 1/2 years to document and challenge the prison industrial complex in AZ, most specifically as manifested in the Arizona Department of Corrections. I corresponded with over 1,000 prisoners in that time, as well as many of their loved ones, offering all what resources I could find for fighting the AZ DOC themselves - most regarding their health or matters of personal safety.

I also began to work with the survivors of prison violence, as I often heard from the loved ones of the dead, and learned their stories. During that time I memorialized the Ghosts of Jan Brewer - state prisoners under her regime who were lost to neglect, suicide or violence - across the city's sidewalks in large chalk murals. Some of that art is here.

In November 2014 I left Phoenix abruptly to care for my family. By early 2015 I was no longer keeping up this blog site, save occasional posts about a young prisoner in solitary confinement in Arpaio's jail. I'm deeply grateful to the prisoners who educated, confided in, and encouraged me throughout the years I did this work. My life has been made all the more rich and meaningful by their engagement.

I've linked to some posts about advocating for state prisoner health and safety to the right, as well as other resources for families and friends.

until all are free -

MARGARET J PLEWS (June 1, 2015)
arizonaprisonwatch@gmail.com



INDIGENOUS ACTION MEDIA

INDIGENOUS ACTION MEDIA
ANTICOLONIAL zines, stickers, actions, power

Taala Hooghan Infoshop

Kinlani/Flagstaff Mutual AID

MASS LIBERATION AZ

MASS LIBERATION AZ
The group for direct action against the prison state!

Black Lives Matter PHOENIX METRO

Black Lives Matter PHOENIX METRO
(accept no substitutions)

BLACK PHX ORGANIZING COLLECTIVE

BLACK PEOPLE's JUSTICE FUND

PHOENIX: Trans Queer Pueblo

COVID Mutual AID PHOENIX

AZ Prison Watch BLOG POSTS:


Showing posts with label stupid drug war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stupid drug war. Show all posts

Thursday, February 13, 2014

HB 2474: De-felonizing MJ possession reduces harm, but doesn't go far enough.

Marijuana needs to be legalized altogether, before more lives and communities are destroyed by these laws. I think most Arizonans would be astonished to know how many people we have locked up in prison today just for smoking pot on probation - often the probation they were put on for smoking pot so they wouldn't go to prison in the first lace, because Arizonans have long felt prison was inappropriate for MJ possession or use.  With this campaign to legalize, there should be a chance next election for people to fight back against vicious laws and penalities altogether.

Thank you, Represenative Cardenas, for having the courage to do this much, however.

----------from ABC15.com-----------

Lawmaker: Remove felony charge for simple marijuana possession

Posted: 02/11/2014
ABC15.com
PHOENIX - Saying harsh penalties for marijuana use do more harm than good, a state lawmaker wants to remove felony charges for possession without the intent to sell.

“I don’t believe they should go away to prison and face hefty fines and possibly have their civil rights taken away,” said Rep. Mark A. Cardenas, D-Phoenix. “We shouldn’t have people that are being sentenced to long prison terms for simple possession of marijuana.”

Cardenas authored HB 2474, which would subject those carrying less than 1 ounce of marijuana without intent to sell to a civil penalty of no more than $100. Possession of less than 2 pounds without intent to sell would be a petty offense, while possession of greater amounts would be a misdemeanor.

Currently, possession of up to two pounds is a class six felony, punishable by up to two years in prison and a $750 fine.

The bill would reduce the charge for growing marijuana from a felony to a misdemeanor if the amount is less than 2 pounds.

Cardenas said he was against legalization when he served in the Army and National Guard but that his views changed after taking an Arizona State University class on drugs and justice.

“It took being willing to learn from facts and figures to say, I was wrong,” he said. “Let’s change that. Let’s try to change my corner of the world.”

His bill was assigned to the House Judiciary Committee but hadn’t been scheduled for a hearing.

Cardenas also signed onto a bill that would legalize the recreational use of marijuana. HB 2558, authored by Rep. Ruben Gallego,D-Phoenix, had yet to be assigned to a committee.

While Cardenas is for marijuana legalization, he said “the next best option would be to decriminalize small amounts.”

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery said reducing marijuana possession penalties would undermine efforts by counties to rehabilitate first- and second-time offenders who aren’t facing other charges. Those successfully completing the diversion program avoid criminal records.

“The irony is that if you try to reduce those penalties, you are going to wind up with people who are going to have maybe an ostensibly lower level offense, but they’re going to have more of a conviction record than people who could initially be charged with a felony and be offered diversion and have no record,” he said.
Montgomery said that in 2013, 63 percent of the diversion cases in Maricopa County were for marijuana possession, and 85 percent of those in the program successfully completed it.

Nine other counties have similar diversion prosecution programs, according to the Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys’ Advisory Council.

Montgomery said the idea that Arizona’s prisons are full of marijuana-possession offenders. According to the 2011 Arizona Sentencing Report from the Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys’ Advisory Council, about 95 percent of inmates in Arizona’s prison system have committed multiple or violent felonies.

“If that’s the motivation of this bill, it’s a solution in search of a problem,” he said.

Carolyn Short, chairwoman for Keep AZ Drug Free, a committee that opposed the 2010 medical marijuana ballot initiative, said the idea of reduce sentences for marijuana possession isn’t rational and ignores scientific fact.

“It’s just another way of communicating to kids that its not that big of a deal and it really is a big deal,” she said. “We already have two substances now that are legal, alcohol and tobacco, that are creating damage economically and socially to our society.”

Wednesday, February 12, 2014

AG Holder: restoring civil life for ex-felons part of ending racial disparities.

It's going to take a lot more than this to really respond to the consequences of felonization for people once they leave prison and try to start a new life. But it's impressive how aggressive Holder has been about fighting racial disparities, now in the last year of his likely stay in office. Every week he's talking about ending harsh drug sentencing, telling prisoners in for drug crimes to apply for clemency this year, and so on. He really seems to be trying to address racism, classism, and injustice in the system he administers, where for the longest time there has only been silence or denials when confronted. That's way overdue.

-----------------------------

AG urges restoring voting rights to ex-inmates

KTAR.COM (2/11/14)


WASHINGTON (AP) - Attorney General Eric Holder called on a group of states Tuesday to restore voting rights to ex-felons, part of a push to fix what he sees as flaws in the criminal justice system that have a disparate impact on racial minorities.

"It is time to fundamentally rethink laws that permanently disenfranchise people who are no longer under federal or state supervision," Holder said, targeting 11 states that he said continue to restrict voting rights for former inmates, even after they've finished their prison terms.

"Across this country today, an estimated 5.8 million Americans- 5.8 million of our fellow citizens- are prohibited from voting because of current or previous felony convictions," Holder told a symposium on criminal justice at Georgetown University.

Now into his fifth year as attorney general and hinting that this year might be his last, Holder survived political controversies that, early on, placed him on the defensive. Now, he is doubling down on the kinds of issues that have long held his interest during a career in law enforcement- prison overcrowding, overly harsh mandatory drug sentences and school disciplinary policies that he says push kids into street crime.

Congress used to be the place that highlighted Holder's problems, including a plan to try terrorists in New York City and the failed Justice Department investigation of gun smuggling in Arizona that ended in the death of a border patrol agent.

Now, Holder is talking about partnering up with conservative lawmakers like Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who shares concerns such as mandatory minimum prison sentences that can put away low-level drug offenders for decades. On Tuesday, Holder took note of the fact that Paul was to be a participant in the criminal justice symposium later in the morning.

On a topic with racial overtones, Holder said 2.2 million black citizens, or nearly one in 13 African-American adults, are banned from voting because of these laws, and he said the ratio climbs to one in five in Florida, Kentucky and Virginia.

"Although well over a century has passed since post-Reconstruction states used these measures to strip African-Americans of their most fundamental rights, the impact of felony disenfranchisement on modern communities of color remains both disproportionate and unacceptable."

The 11 states identified by the Justice Department as restricting voting rights of former inmates are Arizona, Florida, Alabama, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, Wyoming, Tennessee and Virginia.

In Iowa, action by the governor caused the state to move from automatic restoration of rights following completion of a criminal sentence to an arduous process requiring direct intervention by the governor in every individual case, Holder said.

"It's no surprise that, two years after this change- of the 8,000 people who had completed their sentences during that governor's tenure- voting rights had been restored to fewer than 12," the attorney general added.
Reaction was swift. In Iowa, the governor's office disputed Holder's figures, saying that in 2013, the voting rights of 21 individuals were restored. No applications were denied, and seven applications are pending, the governor's office said.

Iowa Republican Gov. Terry Branstad "believes that when an individual commits a felony, it is fair they earn their rights back by paying restitution to their victim, court costs, and fines," said Jimmy Centers, the governor's spokesman. Centers said Branstad has no plans to change the current process and that too often, victims are forgotten.

Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley said if a prisoner has served a sentence and is a productive citizen, "I believe the people should have their rights." Those convicted of most felonies in the state can apply to the parole board to get their voting rights restored once they have finished their sentences and probation and paid all fines and restitution.

If Holder has been on an aggressive streak, it's by design.

A year ago, he ordered up a review to find areas in the Justice Department's mission that needed change.
The first results became public last August, when Holder instructed federal prosecutors to stop charging many nonviolent drug defendants with offenses that carry mandatory minimum sentences. He said long mandatory terms have flooded the nation's prisons with low-level drug offenders and diverted money away from crime fighting.

A month ago, Holder joined Education Secretary Arne Duncan in pressing the nation's schools to abandon disciplinary policies that send students to court instead of the principal's office. The two Cabinet officials said "we have found cases where African-American students were disciplined more harshly and more frequently because of their race than similarly situated white students."

Then over the weekend, Holder applied a landmark Supreme Court opinion to the Justice Department, declaring same-sex spouses cannot be compelled to testify against each other, should be eligible to file for bankruptcy jointly and are entitled to the same rights and privileges as federal prison inmates in opposite-sex marriages.

His call for restoring voting rights for ex-prisoners are part of what the attorney general calls his "Smart On Crime" program.

On Tuesday, Holder said that because of state laws that restrict former inmates' right to vote, about 10 percent of Floridians and 8 percent of people in Mississippi are disenfranchised. Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood said it would require voters to change the state's constitution.

On the positive side, Holder said 23 states, including Nebraska, Nevada, Texas and Washington state, have enacted recent improvements and Virginia has adopted a policy that automatically restores the voting rights of former prisoners with nonviolent convictions. The Virginia policy was carried out by order of the governor, but Holder said legislation is needed to make permanent change.

Kentucky is studying a proposed constitutional amendment that would put on the state ballot the question of whether to automatically restore voting rights for certain felons who've completed their sentences and probation. Championed by a Democratic lawmaker, the proposal also has drawn support from Republicans, including Paul.

A measure introduced in the Wyoming Legislature would allow restoration of voting rights for non-violent felons at the end of their parole and probation or sentence. State law lets people who have been convicted of a single nonviolent felony seek restoration of voting rights once they've waited five years after they served their sentence.

Nebraska restores voting rights to felons automatically, two years after they've finished their prison sentences and any parole or probation.
___
AP reporters Catherine Lucey in Des Moines, Iowa, Brett Barrouquere in Louisville, Ky., Ben Neary in Cheyenne, Wyo., Phillip Rawls in Montgomery, Ala., Jack M. Elliott in Jackson, Miss., and Grant Schulte in Lincoln, Neb., contributed to this report.

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

PIMA county revelation: Drug treatment works better than prison!

This new, grant-funded program giving addicts alternatives to prison is fine and dandy, but why is it"news?" We've known this for decades: Treatment works for drug offenders; prison doesn't. No news there.

 And why does the county only do it with grant money, if $30K can be saved for every person who goes through it instead of prison? It  sounds like even though there's a 70-75% success rate, they will drop it and go back to wasting money sending addicts to prison (where only 4% will get ANY kind of drug treatment)  if they don't get more grants. GRR!!!
 
An even better solution would be to end the war on drugs and make health care (and thus drug treatment) accessible to all when needed - that would save a lot of lives and money right away...

----------------------


Rehab, not prison proves successful for some drug offenders, County says

Posted: Sep 20, 2013 3:52 PM Updated: Sep 20, 2013 4:37 PM  
By Paige Hansen PIMA COUNTY, AZ ( Tucson News Now) - 
 Pima County leaders are touting the benefits of a program that keeps some drug offenders out of prison. It is part of the changing attitude towards non-violent drug offenses.  U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder recently announced he is expanding a federal effort to keep non-violent drug defendants from getting long prison terms.

The people behind the local program say Arizona's first "Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison" program or DTAP, is getting results, better than what they expected. A three-year grant to fund the program is up at the end of the month, and now the search is on for more funding to keep it going. One of the arguments for keeping, and expanding DTAP is that it costs less to put these sorts of offenders through a rehab program than it does to put them behind bars.

"Of course, it takes money to save money so we have to have the money to put into this program: $10,000 per participant to save $40,000," Amelia Cramer, the chief deputy Pima County attorney said. "It's going to cost Arizona taxpayers one way or the other."

According to a report conducted by an independent agency, Pima County spent at average of "approximately $10,000 to rehabilitate an individual DTAP participant who succeeds in the program, compared to a cost of more than $40,000 if that same individual had been incarcerated for the average sentence of two-and-a-half years," according to a news release sent by the county.

Michael Kennedy, 45 years old and a Tucson native says he has been to prison five times and started using drugs when he was 13 years old.

"People like me don't do what I do," Kennedy said of his subsequent recovery and graduation from the DTAP program. "People like me end up dead or in prison for the rest of their life."

Kennedy qualified for the DTAP program because he is a multiple-time offender, charged with a drug-related offense with no history of violent or sexual crimes. Kennedy says in the past, he would go to prison, get clean, then end up back to square one upon release.

"Then I get out," Kennedy said after saying he would use his time in prison to get off drugs. "I know that drugs is my problem so I get a job and I try to be a normal person, a productive person but yet I haven't dealt with what the problem is. The problem is me."

Kennedy said he started using drugs to feel better about himself. He says it started with weed, then coke and finally, heroin and meth. His addiction fueled his life of crime, he said. Kennedy said he stole for drugs and money.

"I should be dead, or I should be in prison for the rest of my life," Kennedy said. "And I'm not. Thank you God, thank you."

After years of living a life of crime, Kennedy says he is thankful for "normal." He says he has a job at a local car wash, pays taxes and has been sober for two years, seventeen days and counting.

The program is designed to reduce drug addiction and drug-related crime in Pima County. Cramer says going into the grant nearly three years ago, they anticipated a 40-percent success rate. The program turned out to be successful 70 to 75-percent of the time, Cramer said. 

The grant runs out at the end of the month but will continue in a smaller capacity until the county finds out whether it will be eligible for more funding either from the state or federal government. 

Pima County was funded for three years through one of 28 grants awarded nationwide by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Justice.

Copyright 2013 Tucson News Now. All rights reserved.

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Weed and War: We Were Wrong.

Stepping out a little further on my limb of late, perhaps, but this seemed appropriate to post, since there's a petition to get medical marijuana on the AZ ballot for 2010. Here's the DOJ's Drug Threat Assessment on pot in Arizona, by the way - just for some balance. Hightower knows his stuff, though. I think a good case can be made for  decriminalization of things like pot, and I'd like to see tougher regulations on the pharmaceutical industry for the toxic waste they push on children in this country.

 -------

The War on Weed: Marijuana Is Basically Harmless -- The Monumentally Stupid Drug War Is Not

By Jim Hightower, Hightower Lowdown
Posted on November 23, 2009, Printed on November 25, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/144115/

You might remember Robert McNamara's stunning mea culpa, delivered a quarter century after his Vietnam War policies sent some 50,000 Americans (and even more horrendous numbers of Vietnamese) to their deaths in that disastrous war. In his 1995 memoir, the man who had been a cold, calculating secretary of defense for both Kennedy and Johnson belatedly confessed that he and other top officials had long known that the war was an unwinnable, ideologically driven mistake. "We were wrong," he wrote, almost tearfully begging in print for public forgiveness. "We were terribly wrong."

Yes, they were, and so are today's leaders (from the White House to nearly all local governments), who are keeping us mired in the longest, most costly, and most futile war in U.S. history: the drug war. As one adamant opponent of this ongoing madness put it, "I cannot help but wonder how many more lives, and how much more money, will be wasted before another Robert McNamara admits what is plain for all to see: the War on Drugs is a failure. Americans are paying too high a price in lives and liberty for a failing War on Drugs, about which our leaders have lost all sense of proportion."

That was no ex-hippie stoner expressing himself through a haze of herbal smoke. It was America's "Uncle Walter," the journalistic icon Walter Cronkite, calling earlier this year for a new truthfulness and sanity in American drug policy.

The drug war is rife with major failures and absurdities, including the rise of a vast, murderous narco-state within Mexico, caused by U.S. consumer demand for drugs outlawed by our government; Plan Colombia, a secretive, multibillion-dollar U.S. military operation started by Bill Clinton in 2000 to eradicate coca production in that country, which now produces 15% more coca than it did before the plan was launched; the racist and grossly unjust sentencing disparity, established by lawmakers in the 1980s, between crack-cocaine users (mostly black) and powder snorters (mostly white); and the ridiculous refusal by pious federal authorities to allow our farmers to grow hemp--a useful, profitable, sustainable, and historic crop (see Lowdown, May 1999).

Here we focus on one particular piece of policy insanity that has afflicted our country for nearly 100 years and was foisted on us by political demagogues, power-hungry police agencies, fire-breathing preachers, fear-mongering media moguls, self-appointed moralists, and other forces of ignorance and arrogance. Thanks to them, America is mired in--get this--a war on a weed. Marijuana is the foe, and after a century of battle, the weed is winning!

A painful price
In 1914, newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst mounted a yellow-journalism crusade to demonize the entire genus of cannabis plants. Why? To sell newspapers, of course, but also because he was heavily invested in wood-pulp newsprint, and he wanted to shut down competition from paper made from hemp--a species of cannabis that is a distant cousin to marijuana but produces no high. Hearst simply lumped hemp and marijuana together as the devil's own product, and he was not subtle about generating public fear of all things cannabis. As reported in the August issue of Mother Jones magazine, Hearst's papers ran articles about "reefer-crazed blacks raping white women and playing 'voodoo satanic' jazz music."

Actually, marijuana was largely unknown in America at the time and little used, but its exotic name and unfamiliarity made it an easy target for fearmongers. The next wave of demonization came in 1936 with the release of an exploitation film classic, Reefer Madness. It was originally produced by a church group to warn parents to keep their children in check, lest they smoke pot--a horror that, as the film showed, would drive kids to rape, manslaughter, insanity, and suicide.

Then Congress enthusiastically climbed aboard the anti-pot political bandwagon, passing a law that effectively banned the production, sale, and consumption of marijuana. Signed by FDR on August 2, 1937, this federal prohibition remains in effect today. Although it has been as ineffectual as Prohibition, the 1919-1933 experiment to stop people from consuming "intoxicating liquors," this ban continues, despite its staggering cost and dumfounding destructiveness. Consider a few facts about America's weed war:


  • It diverts hundreds of thousands of police agents from serious crimes to the pursuit of harmless tokers, including agents from the local and state police, FBI, Drug Enforcement Agency, and U.S. Marshals, Secret Service, Border Patrol, Customs, and Postal Service.
  • By even the most conservative estimate, the outlay from us taxpayers now tops $10 billion a year in direct spending just to catch, prosecute, and incarcerate marijuana users and sellers, not counting such indirect costs as militarizing our border with Mexico in a hopeless effort to stop marijuana imports.
  • Police agents at all levels trample our Bill of Rights in their eagerness to nab pot consumers by conducting illegal car searches, phone and email taps, garbage scrounging, and door-busting night raids.
  • Even people who are merely suspected of marijuana violations and have had no charges filed against them can (and regularly do) have their cars, money, computers, and other property confiscated by police. In a reversal of America's fundamental legal principles, it is up to these suspects to prove that their property is "innocent" of any crime.
  • People convicted of possessing even one ounce of marijuana can face mandatory minimum sentences of a year in jail, and having even one plant in your yard is a federal felony.
  • 41,000 Americans are in federal or state prisons right now on marijuana charges, not counting people in city and county jails.
  • 89% of all marijuana arrests are for simple possession of the weed, not for producing or selling it.

Tidbit: In September, the useful and always vigilant Sen. Russ Feingold revealed that the Justice Department was perverting a dangerous provision in the infamous Patriot Act of 2001 for use in non-terrorism cases.

"Sneak-and-peek" search warrants (based on a liberty-busting provision allowing police agents to break into a home or other private facility and search the premises without the owner's knowledge) were supposed to be reserved for extraordinary investigations into suspected terrorist activity. However, Feingold found that of the Justice Department's 763 requests last year for such searches, only three involved terrorism cases--while 65% of the sneakandpeeks were used in drug-war investigations, including pursuit of marijuana "criminals."

How's the war going?
Hitting yourself over the head one time with a ball-peen hammer could be considered an experiment. Doing it twice, though, would be stupid. And doing it repeatedly is insane.

The war on weeds is insane, for our officials keep sacrificing tax dollars, lives, civil liberties, and their own credibility in a "terribly wrong" and losing effort. They've been whacking us for decades with ever-bigger and more-repressive prohibition hammers, but marijuana availability and use keep going up, not down.

The 2008 survey on drug use conducted by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) shows pot to be popular with millions of Americans. Of those surveyed, 41% admit to having partaken at some point in their lives, 10% enjoyed it in the past year, and 6% use it regularly. These numbers greatly understate the actual level of marijuana consumption, because the survey is taken by federal health agents going door-to-door for in-person interviews. In effect, they're asking, "Have you been consuming an illicit drug--an activity that violates federal law and is punishable by a long prison term?" Many choose to fib.

Well, say Washington's die-hard weed warriors, it's really about protecting America's youth, deterring them from the evils of pot. Good luck with that. Ask practically any teenager, and you'll learn that marijuana is readily available to them -- in a 2005 survey, 85% of high-school seniors said it was "easy to get." Because kids don't need an ID to get an ounce of pot, it's even easier to get than alcohol, which is a regulated drug. Last year's HHS drug-use survey found that 15% of 14-to-15-year-olds have taken tokes, as have 31% of the 16-to-17-year-olds. By age 20, 45% of adolescents have tried marijuana.

Tidbit: After the Bush regime pushed through a $1.4 billion anti-pot ad blitz, a study found that the campaign had backfired, increasing first-time pot use among 14-to-16-year-olds. The White House buried the study--and kept funding more ads.

One educational contribution made by the weed war is that it exposes the depths of nincompoopery at the highest levels of authority. The page-one quote we cite from Nixon, who first coined the phrase "war on drugs," sets the nincompoop bar awfully high, but that has not kept various officials from trying to top it. One challenger was John "MadDog" Ashcroft, George W's attorney general. At 6 a.m. on February 24, 2003, an array of federal agents stormed the homes of three California small-business people who owned glass-blowing firms. The charge? Conspiracy to sell drug paraphernalia. Among the products made by these artisans were glass pipes, which--gasp!--could be used for smoking pot. Three dozen glassblowers were nabbed that day in a nationwide sweep that the feds dubbed Operation Pipe Dreams. Unbelievable, but true. In a tone straight out of Reefer Madness, Ashcroft himself declared that "the illegal drug paraphernalia industry has exploded" across America.

Marijuana prohibitionists have produced absurdity after absurdity, failure after failure, but none of those in charge are called to account. They've been allowed to perpetuate their policies through a combination of money, myths, and political intimidation.

MONEY.
Like military industrialists, the prohibitionist establishment has created a steady flow of tax dollars into every congressional district, building a local support base that is hooked on what amounts to free money. Few police chiefs, school superintendents, or city managers want to cut off their piece of the cash, even if they admit privately that years of funding have not put them anywhere close to victory. Ironically, the lack of progress is used to demand more funds.

MYTHS.
Over the years, the anti-reefers have cemented myths (a.k.a. lies) in the popular culture to demonize the product--including sensational claims that marijuana is more addictive than cigarettes, causes lung cancer, leads users to heroin, produces schizophrenia, and makes your teeth fall out. Such claims are ludicrous and have been soundly refuted by numerous independent scientific studies, but the media rarely covers these uncolorful truths.

While marijuana cannot be said to be completely harmless--what product is?--neither is it the dangerous bugaboo it is portrayed to be. As a typical scientific study concluded in 2002, "The high use of cannabis is not associated with major health problems for the individual or society." Indeed, it poses nowhere near the health dangers of alcohol--yet no one proposes to destroy breweries or imprison people for drinking martinis.

INTIMIDATION.
Truth aside, prohibitionists have been able to intimidate most reform-minded politicians with the simple threat to brand them as soft on drugs. Well, gosh, say potential reformers, it's a shame that tens of thousands of Americans who've done no harm are in prison and that our public treasury and liberties are being squandered by this stupid drug war, but I don't need the grief of trying to oppose it. Thus, our country continues to have a policy that does far more harm than marijuana itself can ever do.

A change is coming
In May, I received an email from a 20-year-old student at the University of Michigan. He made this concise and cogent argument against marijuana prohibition: "If the government trusts society to use alcohol responsibly, it is idiotic to assume citizens are somehow incapable of responsible use of cannabis. Marijuana is not used only by hippies; it is used by doctors, writers, lawyers, musicians, college students, even presidents."
Right. And it appears that public attitudes are finally evolving from strict, authoritarian, and morally pious Reefer Madness-style disapproval into a rational, nondestructive, controlled acceptance that is at the heart of this student's position.

Such conservative icons as Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, Jr., and George Schultz have been unabashed advocates of rethinking pot prohibition. The mayor of New York City, the governor of California, and rising numbers of politicos between the two coasts no longer fear owning up to a pot past. Also, we've now elected three presidents in a row who were known tokers in their earlier days. (In admitting the deed, they progressed from Clinton's slippery "I didn't inhale" to Obama's candid "I inhaled. That was the point.")
Several TV shows, including the widely acclaimed "Mad Men," portray characters using marijuana as matter-of-factly as those sipping wine. One hit show, unblinkingly titled "Weeds," is about a suburban pot-dealing mom. Another indicator of marijuana's movement into the cultural mainstream is the emergence of "stiletto stoners." Featured on the "Today Show" and in popular magazines, these are successful professional women who unapologetically prefer to wind down after work with a joint instead of a Cosmopolitan.

Public-opinion polls are also reflecting this major shift in attitudes: 55% say possession of personal amounts of marijuana should not be criminal (Gallup, 2005); 78% support doctor-prescribed medical marijuana (Gallup, 2005); 51% say alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana and only 19% think the opposite (Rasmussen, August 2009); more than 75% say the drug war is a failure (Zogby, 2008); and 52% say marijuana should be legal, taxed, and regulated--while only 37% disagree (Zogby, May 2009). As attitudes are changing, so are repressive laws. Pushed by grassroots activists (and basic logic), state and local governments have begun walking step by step away from the weed war. Since 1996, 13 states--from Rhode Island to Alaska--have passed laws (most by majority vote in initiative elections) to allow the growing and distribution of doctor-prescribed marijuana for medical purposes.

More recently, a move has been sweeping the country to decriminalize the mere possession of marijuana --a small fine might be issued (like a traffic ticket), but there are no criminal penalties. Pot possession is no longer criminalized in 13 states: Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi (!), Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Oregon.

Other changes include initiatives passed in Albany, Denver, Missoula, Seattle, and the state of Oregon mandating that police make pot possession and public consumption one of their lowest enforcement priorities. Drug reformers are also succeeding in Louisiana, Michigan, New York, and Washington state to scale back the harsh mandatory sentences for marijuana violations.

The most recent move is for outright legalization. The concept here is straightforward: treat marijuana the same as we do booze--i.e., turn its production, sale, and consumption into activities that are legal, regulated, and taxed.

This approach is particularly attractive to cash-strapped cities and states that are continuing to lay out billions of tax dollars annually to surveil, catch, prosecute, and incarcerate marijuana cartels, street dealers, growers, and users. Under pot-reform laws, officials could take the exorbitant profit and violence out of illicit black-market weed by legalizing it and then turn it into a revenue producer by collecting taxes on it. Marijuana is, after all, a big business. The Office of National Drug Control Policy says that Americans spend $9 billion each year on pot coming from Mexican cartels, as much as $10 billion on that smuggled in from Canada, and $39 billion on that provided by (surprise!) U.S. suppliers.

Tidbit: It's not widely publicized by the U.S. Agriculture Department, but marijuana is America's largest cash crop--topping the value of corn and wheat combined. A 2005 analysis by Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron found that legalization would generate $7.7 billion a year in enforcement savings for local, state, and federal taxpayers, while producing annual tax revenues of $6.2 billion. Numbers like these have caught the attention of such officials as California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who says legalization should be considered seriously.

With the public, the cities, and the states on the move, even Washington has had to wake up and smell the tell-tale herbal smoke of change wafting across the country. From President Obama to maverick Republican Ron Paul, there is at least talk of reform emanating from the Capital City, and that talk is likely to grow stronger as more and more officials learn that it's not just Cheech & Chong demanding change.
 -------------------------------

We'll leave the last word of this Lowdown issue to Rep. Barney Frank, who is sponsoring a bill to decriminalize marijuana possession: "I now think it's time for the politicians to catch up to the public. The notion that you lock people up for smoking marijuana is pretty silly."

Jim Hightower is a national radio commentator, writer, public speaker, and author of the new book, "Swim Against the Current: Even a Dead Fish Can Go With the Flow." (Wiley, March 2008) He publishes the monthly "Hightower Lowdown," co-edited by Phillip Frazer.
© 2009 Hightower Lowdown All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/144115/