Tennessee Blues

Hell yeah!

Dear Mr. President

Respectfully Sir:

OK, fair enough, very funny about what the online community must be smoking - even though some of us organized for your presidential campaign, I can take a joke.

Still, I have to tell you that in the face of the seriousness behind the problems I am unsatisfied by the gallows humor - sarcastic cynicism is a poor substitute for wit.

Getting to the point: the real question behind the push for drug law reform has never been clearly addressed on your part. I think you would agree that US drug policy has failed to serve us well. Interdiction and warehousing has not reduced demand appreciably, and what it has accomplished hasn't been cheap. Doubling down is going to be much more expensive.

I get your position, really...here you are a couple months in office, dealing with a global economic meltdown, working with Federal Reserve and Treasury on re-making the financial sector without shocking the markets any more than they already are, not to mention foreign policy and a budget to try to get passed. I understand that you have a pretty full plate and here comes this crazy hop head scheme to legalize the weed. To help the economy! Well let me suggest, apart from the clear red herring, that there is another way to look at the issues.

Can we just accept the position that sick people take drugs? Why are we arresting people who need to be patients? If there is an epidemic of drug abuse, perhaps it is best addressed by employing education and treatment. I suggest that the millions of people abusing drugs in the US are self-medicating for mental illness, or need education to develop better coping skills. The de Facto leader of the Republican party, Mr. Limbaugh, would certainly agree that his personal challenge with recovery would not have been helped if he were forced to serve prison time instead of treatment.

The US economy is not the focus with my approach, rather it is the underground clandestine economics of the drug trade that need careful and innovative strategy.

Simply put, I suggest putting in place a strategy of economic stranglehold on the drug market. Similar to the idea of "dumping" in a commercial market, I propose letting the economic incentive to be in the drug business fall off by flooding the market with cheap, free product, alongside an aggressive, demand based mental health outreach program.

I don't suggest that one plank of the plan be implemented apart from the others. Simple decriminalization alone won't be as efficacious as it would with a treatment program alongside. What I propose is an approach that shocks the drug gangs and takes out some of their financial foundations. There remains the task of bringing the violent offenders to justice and ending the corruption and criminal enterprises. Perhaps this overwhelming task could be made a little bit easier by pushing the economic lever. Who would pay for something they could grow in their garden?

There is a certain cultural and tribal aspect that has crept into mainstream framing of the decriminalization argument. I think that is unfortunate, and some advocates of reform have allowed themselves to become subject to Cheech and Chong cliched characterizations. Still, who among us has not listened to the music or enjoyed the creative work of an artist who uses cannabis for sacramental or tribal ceremony? I think it is worth considering that this type of tribe is one example of the American individual. The foundation of drug control policy seems to be based upon the establishment of a nanny state trying to force out certain tribal elements in culture. The hard truth is that some people are going to smoke reefer whether it is legal or not. If our goal is to reduce availability to children, then we have failed. America's huge demand, which can be re-framed as unmet mental health need, will keep going as long as we refuse to treat it. And we will continue to fail until demand drops off. As long as there is demand alongside profit motive there will be a willing seller. The appropriate balance to strike is to draw comparisons with alcohol and tobacco prevention measures and move out from there.

What we have now is a 2-headed monster and both heads need to be chopped off. The violent illicit marketplace head can be addressed, in part, through economic engagement. The social head is only going to come off with widespread mental health care availability.

Mr. President, these are the arguments that I would like to see you address. Given the civil liberties aspect that has been disturbing many in the legal community for years, I feel the question has more merit than you have acknowledged publicly. Some may ask if you feel, in your personal experience, had you been arrested and convicted for drug use as a young person, that your life would have turned out as it did? Some are not as lucky as to not get caught and it strikes some as hypocritical to then turn around as chief policy director of the nation and laugh off the concerns of civil libertarians.

Taking a completely different line of reasoning, I urge you to take another look at the medical science in its totality concerning the physiological effects of cannabis. Even if its benefits are only palliative, policy should reflect evidence instead of cultural bias. Please be true to your campaign promise to be guided by science not ideology.

I suggest that the mental health treatment program would put to work a lot of talented MFCC's and MSW's - jobs which also fill certain gender slots.

President Obama, even though I doubt you will ever read this, it is with the hope that somehow a flicker gets through as I can't help but feel that it is only appropriate that we conquer violence and fear through kindness as the world moves closer towards a plowshare awareness.

Peace

Terril Cross: Good Year for the Roses

After getting beat up, Obama comes back swinging

President Obama having had a rough couple days rallies the house democrats in Williamsburg, Va Democratic retreat tonight. Calling on democrats to do what the elections show the public demands, the president is taking his case to the house ahead of conference committee after the senate passes their version of the recovery bill, presumably soon.

President Obama struck a populist tone, calling on his campaign time, referencing the public's basic decency and desire that the politicians are working for their behalf.

Ironically, senate majority leader Harry Reid announced that they will not get through the amendments tonight, despite assurances that they would work through the night. I think this is being held up over 100 billion that a minority of the minority led by Olympia Snowe wants to cut.

Then there's the blue dogs who are sniffing out a lot of what they call pork to dig out of the bill.

The president has stepped up the game by publicly defending such items as federal vehicle upgrades to alternative energy by wondering if 'these people (the critics) are serious' and forcefully saying the election shows the public rejects the worn out arguments that got us here.

Showing high spirits tonight in Williamsburg the president isn't showing any wear, seemingly energized by the battle.

Why Daschle?

When Bill Richardson's commerce nomination was derailed by his involvement in a New Mexico corruption investigation, he dropped out citing his wish to not let his troubles become a distraction.

Tim Geithner's tax avoidance is forgiven, presumably because the treasury job requires a very specialized skill set so badly needed in these troubled times. OK, I'll accept that for now.

Now comes former senator Tom Daschle who is "embarrassed" by his avoiding 120k in taxes. We are now learning that he knew about it at least 2 weeks before Obama tapped him for the nomination. There are at least 4 separate instances of either lobbying or tax avoidance conflicts.

To see Schumer defending his senate colleague on the Sunday programs just looks like more of the same wagon circling. If this had been a Bush nominee, imagine the charges of croneyism.

Even though Daschle would likely be effective on the job, I don't think he's the only one. Daschle should resign.

Michael Steele to head RNC

The first black chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele's acceptance speech doesn't have any indication of a change in the partisan tone of the Grand Old Party.

Peppered through the speech were boasts of party strength, promises to win and to knock over 'foes' and invocations of God's blessing upon his friends and the republican party.

In their insouciant game of superficial copycat, the GOP is making another big mistake by ignoring the trend to get past bitter partisan bickering as we need to get to work on the serious problems staring us in the face. I think it is unfortunate that Steele ignored the job loss, corporate irresponsibility, and growing poverty that we need to work together to solve. It was all about growing the party, which played well to the room. Tennessee Republican Chip Saltsman who made and sent out a holiday CD "Barack the magic negro" dropped out of the race for the seat. Although he did not give a reason, it's pretty obvious that the party got the joke and didn't think it was funny. A cynical person would read this to mean the party elected a black man so they can start winning again. What they don't get is that the election was about a change in direction, that policy needs to reflect the needs of the people. Steele's election is all about what the party needs at this moment.

The RNC motto should be changed to Party First.