USA - Obama: Decriminalize pot

[moose190]

Link

January 31, 2008
By Jen Haberkorn - DEVELOPING STORY:
For the latest version of this developing story, read tomorrow's editions of The Washington Times or click here.

Last fall during a nationally televised presidential debate, Sen. Barack Obama hesitantly raised his hand and joined with most of his Democratic rivals to declare that he opposed decriminalizing marijuana.

But as a candidate for the U.S. Senate four years ago, Mr. Obama told Illinois college students that he supported eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use or possession, according to a videotape of a little noticed debate that was obtained by The Washington Times.

"I think we need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws," Mr. Obama told an audience during a debate at Northwestern University in 2004. "But I'm not somebody who believes in legalization of marijuana."

Asked about the two different answers, Mr. Obama's presidential campaign said he in fact has "always" supported decriminalizing marijuana as he answered in 2004, meaning the candidate mistakenly raised his hand during the presidential debate last fall.

That position leaves Mr. Obama as the lone presidential candidate among the four leading challengers in either party who supports eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana. Mr. Obama's chief rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Hillary Clinton, opposes decriminalization, Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer said.

On the Republican side, Kevin Madden, spokesman for Mitt Romney, said the former Massachusetts governor is "not in favor of legalization of marijuana, and that includes medical purposes." The campaign for Arizona Sen. John McCain did not respond immediately to questions. But the Marijuana Policy Project, which advocates decriminalization, says both Republicans have told its supporters they oppose that move, including in medical cases.

When asked by The Times about decriminalizing marijuana, the Obama campaign reiterated the candidate's opposition to legalization. "Senator Obama does not believe in legalization of marijuana, but agrees with President Bush that long minimum sentences for first-time drug users may not be the best way to occupy jail space or heal people from their disease," Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said.

The campaign went on to say that, as president, Mr. Obama "will review drug sentences to see where we can be smarter on crime and reduce the blind and counterproductive sentencing of non-violent offenders, and revisit instances where drug rehabilitation may be more appropriate." His campaign later stated that Mr. Obama "always" has supported decriminalizing marijuana.

Mr. Obama's differing answers on marijuana are among a half-dozen conflicts between positions he took while running for Senate in 2004 and those he now articulates while running for president, a review of debate tapes shows. Other conflicts
range from ending the embargo against Cuba to providing health care for illegal immigrants.

The Times obtained video footage of the public debates from a variety of sources, ranging from open sources such as YouTube to political operatives who oppose Mr. Obama's presidential campaign or his Senate bid four years ago in Illinois. Mrs. Clinton's campaign, for instance, recently released footage on its Web site of a 2004 speech in which Mr. Obama spoke about universal health care.

bilde.jpg

(There are also two videos on the web page)

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Interesting article, thanks.
	Good article, thanks for sharing.

[enquirewithin]

Obama is currently ditching all his liberal, realistic views as he gets closer to possible power.

[MrG]

Yeah that happens a lot. It's such a shame that, when a credible candidate comes along who might, just might, maybe this time, out of all the others, represent a sensible approach to drug policy they then start having to appease the right-wing by chugging back on one type of Bud while stomping on another.

[Triple7]

What are the statistics on how many of the black smoke? and how many of the white etc? Is Obama more popular among the black than the white? If yes, what drug policy could get more black votes? Or maybe there is no space for drug tolerance for top politicians?

Does a majority of the American citizens prefer smokers sit in jail? Do US politicans fear the media more than the people? Are their official views and talks made for the media/journalists or for the people?

[Pondlife]

Decriminalization, legalization or any neutral discussion of the War on Drugs is generally seen as a "third rail issue" (i.e. touch it and you die politically speaking). I don't think that all the politicians really believe that the WoD is successful, but I suspect that there are few who want to risk political suicide by challenging the established dogma.

I would guess that Obama is in a difficult position: stay true to your beliefs and risk losing the nomination, or toe the line. That's not a position that I'd like to be in.

However, at the end of the day, I'd rather see someone in power who is likely to open a debate on the WoD when he can, rather than have that person throw his chances away by nailing his colours to the mast early in the race.

[Coconut]

Flip-flopping back and forth. Typical behaviour for a politician - changing their opinions in order to attract more votes depending on which group or demographic they're addressing.

[Mr. Giraffe]

Originally Posted by pondlife

However, at the end of the day, I'd rather see someone in power who is likely to open a debate on the WoD when he can, rather than have that person throw his chances away by nailing his colours to the mast early in the race.

The problem is that they usually end up in a position where they have to take an even harder line on drugs because of their past positions, and because they constantly have to prove that they aren't soft on drugs. Ultimately, only public opinion can change the situation. Politicians follow votes, and there's no votes in being honest about drugs. Not yet anyway. Apparently things still aren't bad enough for people.

[darkglobe]

i'm from the UK but I've avidly been following the presidential campagin thingy over in the US. It's interesting how shoddy their politics can be, most of the time. That's not intended as a sweeping generalisation of American politics, but I have seen a LOT of snakey moves so far (we Brits are used to recognising snakey moves - they do enough over here!).

My girlfriend's father reckons Obama shouldn't be president, because he is black. Not because he is racist, but because he reckons that Obama, representing the black population of America, will make things easier for the blacks, and harder for the whites, in retaliation to the years of unnecessary suffering and opression endured by black people in America.

Now THAT is a fair point, in my opinion. Not saying Obama would do that, though.

I actually watched the videos regarding Obama's pot opinions, and it's interesting to see someone who backs legalisation (albeit in a very roundabout and "im not gonna say anything outright" kinda way).

Obama, to me as a British outsider, seems the right candidate. I don't like Hilary clinton simply because of her hubby. Can't remember who else there is. Over here it's all about Obama/Clinton.

As you can probably tell I'm not au fait with US politics (or politics in general) but anything is better than George "Breezeblock for a head" Bush. George W.* Bush.

(*wanker)

[Mr. Giraffe]

Originally Posted by darkglobe

My girlfriend's father reckons Obama shouldn't be president, because he is black. Not because he is racist, but because he reckons that Obama, representing the black population of America, will make things easier for the blacks, and harder for the whites, in retaliation to the years of unnecessary suffering and opression endured by black people in America.

Now THAT is a fair point, in my opinion. Not saying Obama would do that, though.

Actually, that's pretty much exactly the opposite of fair. It also assumes that there is a switch somewhere which the president can flick from its current 'white man watching black men drowning and not giving a shit' to 'black man standing on white man's neck in order to advance race interests'. Even if Obama could change America's racial attitudes (which he couldn't), it's not a zero sum game - if black people were better off, everyone would be better off. Ditto any skin colour, I imagine.

To presume that Obama, being black, will tilt the whole damn system in favour of the black man is surely racist on quite a profound level?

[cra$h]

If he does become president, he'll be scared to do anything that involves civil rights unless it benifits the whole population. and knowing the way that part of the white population would react to a black president would be complete chaos. there would be a huge klan uprise like no one under 80 has ever seen. I'd hate to say it, but Obama being president would be complete chaos for a while, but once America looks past skin, we'd have a good president.

[TDIDriver]

I don't want the U.S. government just to decriminalize marijuana.
I want full commercialization of this product including taxation and, standardization. Just like beer, alcohal and tobacco. This would add thousands of jobs to the US economy and at the same time broden the national tax base.

Secondly...I fed up with paying millions of dollars in jail costs for putting otherwise harmless individuals in prison for years. The prison cost for marijuana offences alone run into the millions of dollars yearly...year after year after year...and for what?

Lastly...save the scarse prison resources for serious offenders....pedofiles...perves...murders..

[purplehaze]

Originally Posted by TDIDriver

I don't want the U.S. government just to decriminalize marijuana.
I want full commercialization of this product including taxation and, standardization. Just like beer, alcohal and tobacco. This would add thousands of jobs to the US economy and at the same time broden the national tax base.

Secondly...I fed up with paying millions of dollars in jail costs for putting otherwise harmless individuals in prison for years. The prison cost for marijuana offences alone run into the millions of dollars yearly...year after year after year...and for what?

Lastly...save the scarse prison resources for serious offenders....pedofiles...perves...murders..

Absolutely, that would be great. I think that on the presidential voting forms there should be text clearly saying that this president is planning to legalize this or that. That way everyone voting would have a clear understanding they were voting on a power hungry leader. I think there should be choice's for everything, like with the presidential votes i think voters should be able to vote for what they want in the U.S. not only voting on a leader who wants it. Like if you wanted pot legalized you check a box, and if the majority does then it gets legalized.



And for the black racist comment about obama, the U.S. does not segregate, there's no law's saying that based on race you get this or that, its all or none, you cant just say black people can have government funding without every race having government funding. This applies in any law, all race's are equal and receive no special treatment based on racial background.
Except for the indians they can smoke pot legally somehow, but they still have the same laws, something to do with when the country was stolen from them and they were put on reservations they now can smoke pot legally if there like so much % indian.

[Jacco]

It's shameful to hear the progressive, liberal, in-the-now Democratic party moving so far away from civil libertarianism. Many voters continue to support the Democrats for these reasons.. apparently they haven't realized that they're giving power to a party too cowardish to stand up for civil principles. Vote independent!

[FuBai]

Originally Posted by The Barack Obama Campaign

...that long minimum sentences for first-time drug users may not be the best way to occupy jail space or heal people from their disease

You think?

One almost has to laugh at just how grudging and cautious the statement is, but none the less a step in the right general direction.

[Coconut]

I'm not so sure. It sounds like a very middle-ground statement to me, so he can sap votes from moderates on both sides of the drug war, also making it easy to change his mind later on.

[baron samedi]

TBH even if hes only proposing decriminalization rather than out and out legalization, it still makes him by far the best candidate from an anti-prohibition point of view. After all even in countries like netherlands, india, canada etc cannabis has never achieved full legal taxable status. If the world in general is going to relax drug laws it probably needs the US to make the first steps, for better or for worse.
Anyway SWIM would vote for him simply for the fact that he consistently opposed the war in Iraq. Whatever Iraq was like before the war, it was still effectively an illegal invasion of a sovereign state, justified on wholly false premises, which has caused a massive loss of innocent lives, so he's the man for me!

[Greenport]

Unfortunately, even though marijuana decriminalization may be 'the' hot-topic issue for us, most candidates honestly could really give a shit less. I don't think there will ever be a president who is outright in support of pot (note I say PRESIDENT -- there of course could be candidates who will be, but I don't see them winning.)

[Nature Boy]

At the VERY least they should be growing industrial hemp on the reason that it's more economical. Being a industrial and agricultural juggernaught, it seems as though the United States internally sports a thinly threaded balance of power similar to Otto von Bismarck's juggling of the European states over a hundred years ago. Perhaps they can't afford to allow whatever industries that dominate right now to change. This problem is closely tied with the Federal Reserve which has become a tight-rope without a safety net supporting the entire economy.