Answer Addiction

Tag: Trump administration

  • Attorney General Nom William Barr Says He Won’t Go After Legal Pot

    Attorney General Nom William Barr Says He Won’t Go After Legal Pot

    Despite the fact that Barr would respect state laws in regards to marijuana, some drug policy advocates argued that he should not be made attorney general.

    As the Senate conducted confirmation hearings with President Trump’s nominee for attorney general, most questions were focused on how William Barr would steer investigations into possible collusion between the administration and Russia.

    However, during the confirmation hearings, Barr discussed the need for changing marijuana laws and said that he would not go after states that allow the legal sale of cannabis, a marked change in policy from that of previous Attorney General Jeff Sessions. 

    “I’m not going to go after companies that have relied on the Cole memoranda,” Barr said during the hearings, according to Rolling Stone. “My approach to this would be not to upset settled expectations.”

    The Cole Memorandum was signed in 2013 under President Obama. In it, United States Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole directed federal attorneys not to prosecute marijuana crimes in states that had legalized use. In essence, the memo meant that the federal ban on marijuana would not be enforced in states that had laws legalizing cannabis. However, the memo was rescinded last year by Sessions, who took a hardline stance on cannabis and wanted to stop recreational use in the states. 

    During his hearing, Barr said that it is time for the country to have a more consistent marijuana policy. 

    “I think the current situation is untenable,” he said. It’s almost like a “backdoor nullification of federal law. . . . We should either have a federal law that prohibits marijuana, everywhere, which I would support, myself. . . . If we want states to have their own laws, then let’s get there. And lets get there the right way.”

    Despite the fact that Barr would respect state laws in regards to marijuana, some drug policy advocates argued that he should not be made attorney general. Barr, in the past, has made statements against criminal justice reform and in favor of mandatory minimums that can hurt people with substance use disorder, the Drug Policy Alliance said in a press release. 

    “Trump is appointing someone who has long been a cheerleader for mass incarceration and the war on drugs. It shows the Administration’s true colors and undermines any recent criminal justice reforms,” Michael Collins, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, said. “Senators from both parties should take Barr to task for his appalling views on drug policy and criminal justice, instead of giving him an easy ride like they did with Jeff Sessions.”  

    During the hearings, Barr did acknowledge that strict enforcement of policies, like those he previously supported, “harmed the black community,” according to USA Today. 

    No matter what the outcome of the confirmation hearings, it seems likely that Barr’s policy on drug enforcement and cannabis will be overshadowed by his perspectives on the Mueller investigation, however. 

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Will A Border Wall Help Curb The Opioid Epidemic?

    Will A Border Wall Help Curb The Opioid Epidemic?

    Experts discuss the impact, if any, a new border wall would have on stemming the flow of drugs entering the US through Mexico.

    As the government shutdown continues, President Trump is digging in his heels, insisting that an expensive border wall is essential to national security, in part because it would hamper the flow of opioids into the country. 

    “Our southern border is a pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs, including meth, heroin, cocaine, and fentanyl,” Trump said during a prime time speech from the Oval Office on Tuesday, according to Vox. “Every week, 300 of our citizens are killed by heroin alone, 90 percent of which floods across from our southern border. More Americans will die from drugs this year than were killed in the entire Vietnam War.”

    While it’s true that the number of Americans dying from drug overdoses is shocking, and that most of the drugs consumed in the US come over the Mexican border, it’s silly to think that a wall will stop that flow. That’s because most drugs come into the country via legal posts of entry, usually smuggled in vehicles.

    In fact, the Drug Enforcement Administration has said that only a “small percentage” of drugs are carried over the boarder at illegal entry points, according to The Atlantic. 

    In addition, if a wall was erected, cartels would simply adjust the ways they reach the lucrative US market, according to Elaine Carey, dean of the College of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences at Purdue University.

    Cary told The Washington Post, “Drug trafficking businesses are very nimble organizations. The way opioids flow or any drug or narcotic, it’s from all different ways. Yes, it comes across the border, but it comes through airports, ships, on trucks, too. A wall’s not going to do anything unless you deal with the demand.”

    Without addressing the causes of addiction on American soil, building a wall would do little to diminish availability of drugs, she said. 

    “If we build the wall, demand is still going to be there.”

    If Trump really wanted to reduce the amount of drugs coming into the country, he would be better off investing in additional border security staff than spending billions on a wall, according to Christopher Wilson, deputy director of the Mexico Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

    “A wall alone cannot stop the flow of drugs into the United States,” Wilson told Vox in 2017. “If we’re talking about a broader increase in border security, there could be some — probably minor — implications for the overall numbers of drugs being trafficked. But history shows us that border enforcement has been much more effective at changing the when and where of drugs being brought into the United States rather than the overall amount of drugs being brought into the United States.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Feds Will Prosecute Fentanyl Dealers More Harshly in Baltimore

    Feds Will Prosecute Fentanyl Dealers More Harshly in Baltimore

    The feds are set to crackdown on fentanyl sellers in Baltimore, where there is expected to be twice as many overdose deaths as homicides in 2018.

    As part of the Trump Administration’s tough-on-crime stance, federal prosecutors will begin trying more fentanyl cases in federal court. They will be utilizing stronger resources and mandatory minimum sentences in an attempt to deter people from selling the deadly synthetic opioids in Baltimore, where there are expected to be twice as many overdose deaths as homicides this year. 

    Writing in an op-ed for The Baltimore Sun, US Attorney for Maryland Robert K. Hur said that the tougher tactics will hopefully curb fentanyl sales. As of last week, all fentanyl arrests in Baltimore are being reviewed by federal prosecutors who will decide whether the case will proceed in the state or federal system. This is part of the federal Synthetic Opioid Surge (SOS) initiative.

    “Federal prosecutors will pursue more cases involving fentanyl, bringing federal resources, laws and prison sentences to bear on those dealers who pose the greatest threat to public safety,” Hur wrote. “Word should spread that if you sell fentanyl on the streets, you run a very real risk of federal time.”

    Federal drug charges carry mandatory minimum sentences. Someone convicted of distributing 400 grams of fentanyl will face 10 years in prison; 40 grams will carry a five-year sentence. If the fentanyl is found to be involved in a death, there is a 20-year sentence. Because federal sentences are served in prisons far from home and have no possibility or parole or suspension, they’re seen as more harsh than state sentences. 

    “But criminal enforcement is essential to ending this crisis,” Hur wrote. “We need to target street dealers as well as corrupt pharmacists and medical providers. Treatment and prevention alone won’t stop the sellers, who are driven by profit and greed.”

    Hur shared the story of a 35-year-old woman who died of a fentanyl overdose. Before her death she texted a friend, “I don’t want to [be] this way. I worked and fought too hard to throw it all away. I almost overdose[d] the other night. I don’t know what to do.”

    “Law enforcement organizations know what to do in order to prevent more of these tragedies, and we are resolved to do it,” Hur wrote. 

    Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions first announced the SOS initiative in June, starting the program in 10 districts that were hard-hit by the opioid epidemic. 

    “We at the Department of Justice are going to dismantle these deadly fentanyl distribution networks. Simply put, we will be tireless until we reduce the number of overdose deaths in this country. We are going to focus on some of the worst counties for opioid overdose deaths in the United States, working all cases until we have disrupted the supply of these deadly drugs,” Sessions said in a press release at the time.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Melania Trump Discusses Opioid Epidemic

    Melania Trump Discusses Opioid Epidemic

    During her speech, Trump detailed startling statistics about the opioid epidemic but urged students to look beyond those numbers. 

    First Lady Melania Trump spoke with college students about the opioid epidemic last week, calling the current situation the “worst drug crisis in American history.”

    Trump appeared at a town hall meeting at Liberty University, a Christian university in Lynchburg, Virginia. She appeared on a panel hosted by former Fox News personality Eric Bolling, whose son died of an accidental drug overdose last year. 

    During the panel, Trump said she has seen how deeply the country has been affected by opioid abuse as she explores the issue as part of her “Be Best” campaign to emphasize emotional wellbeing. 

    “When I took on opioid abuse as one of the pillars of my initiative ‘Be Best,’ I did it with the goal of helping children of all ages. I have visited several hospitals and facilities that are dedicated to helping all who have been affected by this disease — including people who are addicted, babies born addicted and families coping with addiction of a loved one,” she said to the students at Liberty University, according to CNN. “What has struck me with each visit is how this epidemic has touched so many people — whether it is because of personal use, or that of family members, friends, coworkers or neighbors — opioid addiction is an illness that has truly taken hold of our country.” 

    During her speech, Trump detailed the statistics about the opioid epidemic but urged students to look beyond those numbers. 

    “I also believe you have the capacity to not think of this in terms of statistics, but to think of this as a human story and an opportunity to save lives,” she said.

    She added that everyone needs to be aware of the danger of opioids and of how to support someone who is struggling with substance use disorder. 

    “While you may never personally become addicted, the chances of you knowing someone who struggles with it are very high,” she said. “And if you, or someone you know needs help, you need to be brave enough to ask, or strong enough to stand with them as they fight through the disease.”

    Trump also told students that through her “Be Best” campaign she hopes to help kids realize that the actions they take now can affect them for years to come.

    “I saw it as an opportunity to speak with all of you as you enter a critical stage of your lives,” she told students, according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch. “The independence that comes with being a young adult is exciting but overwhelming… I know college is a time of independence. I am here to remind you some of those decisions, though they may seem minor at the time, could negatively impact you for the rest of your lives.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • What Jeff Sessions’ Departure Means For Marijuana

    What Jeff Sessions’ Departure Means For Marijuana

    Sessions’ departure has left some people wondering if President Trump may change his stance on marijuana legalization.

    When President Trump demanded the resignation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions last week many people were alarmed, but proponents for marijuana legalization saw Sessions’ departure as good news.

    “It’s a step in the right direction,” Andrew Jolley, president of the Nevada Dispensary Association, told the Las Vegas Sun. 

    Sessions was staunchly against cannabis, having famously said that “good people don’t smoke marijuana.” During his tenure as attorney general he repealed the Cole Memo, an Obama-era document that acknowledged the Justice Department’s limited resources and instructed US Attorneys avoid prosecution in areas where marijuana was legal in some form, according to Forbes.

    Despite his tough stance, Sessions was not able to do much to target the cannabis industry because of The Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment, an amendment to the federal budget that specifically bars the Justice Department from spending money to enforce a ban on medical marijuana in states where it is legal.

    Following Sessions’ resignation on Wednesday morning, stocks in cannabis companies soared, with the marijuana index rising nearly 14% in two hours, according to Newsweek. 

    Sessions’ departure left some people wondering if President Trump would change his stance on marijuana, perhaps even removing the drug from the list of Schedule I substances with no medical benefit.

    “I think he’s waiting for after the midterms,” Anthony Scaramucci, former White House communications director, recently said.

    During the midterms, Michigan became the 10th state to fully legally recreational cannabis, and medical marijuana programs were established in Utah and Missouri. In addition, polling shows that two-thirds of Americans — including a majority of Republicans — support legalizing marijuana. 

    Sessions was replaced by his former chief of staff, Matthew Whitaker. Although it’s not clear what Whitaker’s stance on marijuana is, during his time as a U.S. attorney in Iowa, he worked to “reduce the availability of meth, cocaine, and marijuana in our communities,” according to his resignation letter from 2009.

    In 2014 when Whitaker was running to represent Iowa in the Senate, he said that he had sympathy for people who received relief from cannabidiol (CBD), and support the states CBD-only medical marijuana law. 

    “Families are going to be positively impacted by what happened in the state Senate,” he said. “And I applaud them for helping those families who need that help.”

    However, he added that the state should not establish a medical marijuana program while cannabis remained illegal under federal law. When he was asked whether Congress should legalize marijuana, Whitaker’s opinion wasn’t very clear.

    He said that the federal government “should regulate things that harm people,” like “hard drugs and the like,” but didn’t say whether he thought marijuana fit that description. However, he did talk about the dangers of a black market cannabis trade.

    “I saw the impact of marijuana on our border,” he said. “If you go to any of the counties in Texas where there’s an illegal importation of marijuana, there’s a tremendous amount of violence.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Anti-Marijuana Attorney General Jeff Sessions Resigns

    Anti-Marijuana Attorney General Jeff Sessions Resigns

    “Our hope is the next attorney general will recognize that it is not politically popular to escalate the war on drugs,” said one drug reform advocate.

    Jeff Sessions is out as U.S. Attorney General.

    The former U.S. Senator from Alabama resigned on Wednesday (Nov. 7), a day after the midterm elections.

    “At your request I am submitting my resignation,” Sessions wrote in a letter to the White House. His chief of staff, Matthew Whitaker, will serve as acting attorney general until a permanent replacement is found.

    Sessions’ departure from the Department of Justice is cause for celebration for advocates of drug policy reform.

    “He’s been an absolute disgrace on drug policy. We would welcome any attorney general whose policy ideas would move beyond the 1980s,” said Michael Collins, interim director of national affairs at the Drug Policy Alliance.

    The 71-year-old former Alabama senator’s opinion of marijuana in particular is perhaps best illustrated by this statement he made during a 2016 Senate hearing: “Good people don’t smoke marijuana.”

    He also said in February 2017, “I don’t think America is going to be a better place when people of all ages, and particularly young people, are smoking pot. I believe it’s an unhealthy practice, and current levels of THC in marijuana are very high compared to what they were a few years ago, and we’re seeing real violence around that.”

    Last year, he took aim at sentencing reform, telling federal prosecutors to stop seeking leniency for low-level drug offenders and start seeking the toughest penalties possible, as NBC News reported at the time.

    And in January, Sessions reversed an Obama-era policy—the 2013 Cole memo—that prioritized marijuana cases that presented a safety threat (involving minors, organized crime, etc.) but otherwise left alone U.S. states that have approved marijuana in some capacity. In his own memo, the attorney general called it a “return to the rule of law.”

    But despite Sessions’ anti-marijuana stance, on Tuesday, Michigan became the 10th state to legalize cannabis for adult use, and two others—Utah and Missouri—approved medical marijuana.

    Marijuana policy reform has been winning with each election, and appears more popular than ever.

    “Our hope is the next attorney general will recognize that it is not politically popular to escalate the war on drugs,” said Collins of the Drug Policy Alliance.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • What’s Actually Happened Since Trump Declared An Opioid Emergency

    What’s Actually Happened Since Trump Declared An Opioid Emergency

    Critics say the emergency declaration was more for show than to actually resolve the crisis.

    A year ago, President Trump declared a national public health emergency because of the opioid epidemic, vowing that doing so would streamline responses to a health crisis that killed more than 70,000 Americans last year.

    However, a new report shows that the declaration has led to little change. 

    The report, prepared by the Government Accountability Office, found that the administration has used just three of 17 available authorities that are activated when the government proclaims a public health crisis. These authorities include, for example, waiving certain administrative processes in order to quicken responses in an emergency.

    The Trump administration used one authority to more quickly field a survey of healthcare providers about their prescription practices. The results of the survey will help inform policy decisions going forward, the administration said.

    Secondly, authorities waived the public notice period for approval of two state Medicaid demonstration projects related to substance use disorder treatment, which was intended to speed up implementation of the projects, allowing the states to test and evaluate new addiction-related services delivered through Medicaid.

    Finally, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) increased support for research on opioid use disorder treatments and gave out information on opioid misuse and addiction.

    The Department of Health and Human Services said that more authorities haven’t been used because many of the abilities enabled by the state of emergency declaration are not applicable to the opioid epidemic. Instead, they are designed for response to infectious diseases or natural disaster. 

    “HHS officials determined that many are not relevant to the circumstances presented by the opioid crisis,” the report reads. However, the potential for additional responses will be reviewed. “Officials told GAO they will continue to review the authorities as the opioid crisis evolves and in the context of HHS’s other efforts to address the opioid crisis.”

    Still, critics of the administration say that the fact that so few resources have been utilized shows that the administration’s declaration was more for show than in hope of solving the problem. 

    “Communities are desperately in need of more help to address the opioid epidemic. President Trump, as this report shows, has broken his promises to do his part,” Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said in a statement reported by Vox. “I’ve asked this administration time and time again to show what actions they are taking to meaningfully address this crisis. No response. To me, it looks like empty words and broken promises. Hand-waving about faster paperwork and speeding up a few grants is not enough — the Trump Administration needs to do far more to stop the opioid epidemic.”

    Disqus comments

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Is The White House Waging A "Secret War" On Marijuana?

    Is The White House Waging A "Secret War" On Marijuana?

    The administration’s Marijuana Policy Coordination Committee may be responsible for hindering marijuana legalization. 

    Trump has said in the past that he supports states’ rights to establish their own marijuana policies—yet according to a report by BuzzFeed News, administration officials are waging a “secret war on weed” to push back on support of marijuana legalization across the country.

    Rolling Stone says the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) confirmed the existence of the Marijuana Policy Coordination Committee, but “stopped short of confirming” that the goal of the coalition of federal agencies was to shed a negative light on marijuana legalization.

    Members of Congress confirm that the White House’s actions contradict what Trump has said about marijuana policy—leading them to wonder: “Is there someone within the Trump administration directing a negative marijuana message?” as a senior congressional staffer put it.

    “Every time I speak to someone in the administration, despite what the president has said, they tell me it isn’t happening. My question is, who is in charge over there? It borders on ridiculous,” Rep. Tom Garrett of Virginia told Rolling Stone.

    On multiple occasions, Trump has said that he supports a state’s right to choose how it handles marijuana policy. “In terms of marijuana and legalization, I think that should be a state issue, state-by-state,” he said at a 2015 campaign rally in Sparks, Nevada.

    “The president is right on this issue,” said Garrett. “The gatekeepers need to do their job, not undermine good policy.”

    Some point to U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions as the main force within the administration that’s fighting marijuana policy reform. “I’ve discussed marijuana policy with senior White House officials, cabinet members and the president,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida. “My personal assessment is that the attorney general is the problem.”

    Jeff Sessions is notoriously anti-marijuana. The 71-year-old former senator from Alabama—who once said “Good people don’t smoke marijuana”—has made it a point to enforce, and enhance, the federal prohibition of marijuana.

    “I don’t think America is going to be a better place when people of all ages, and particularly young people, are smoking pot,” the attorney general said in February 2017. “I believe it’s an unhealthy practice, and current levels of THC in marijuana are very high compared to what they were a few years ago, and we’re seeing real violence around that.”

    In response to Sessions’ renewed “war on drugs,” bipartisan legislation has been introduced in the Senate to protect state marijuana policy.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Bill Targeting Opioids Sent By Mail Up For Senate Vote

    Bill Targeting Opioids Sent By Mail Up For Senate Vote

    The STOP Act will require the U.S. Postal Service to collect electronic data on packages being shipped into the country.

    The Senate will likely pass a bill this week that aims to reduce the number of fentanyl shipments coming into the country via the U.S. Postal Service (USPS). 

    The STOP Act, which stands for Synthetics Trafficking and Overdose Prevention, will require the postal service to collect electronic data on packages being shipped into the country, including the sender’s and recipient’s addresses and the contents as described by the sender.

    Right now, only private courier services like FedEx, UPS and DHL require this information, which means that people can send opioids through the postal service and be virtually untraceable. 

    Illicit fentanyl can be easily made in China and shipped to the United States, since a small volume is immensely powerful and profitable. 

    “We are being overrun with fentanyl,” Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who led an 18-month study of illegal imports, told the New York Times. “It is 50 times more powerful than heroin. It is very inexpensive. It is coming primarily from China and coming primarily through our U.S. Postal Service, if you can believe it.”

    In addition to requiring that the postal service gather additional information on packages, the bill would make is possible for the government to levy fines to the postal service if it does not comply. The postal service would also have the authority to block or destroy packages that have not been properly identified.

    Right now, the postal service must “obtain a warrant to inspect the contents of suspect parcels,” according to William Siemer, acting deputy inspector general of USPS, who testified before Congress this year.

    President Trump supports the measures, taking to Twitter to voice his enthusiasm. 

    “It is outrageous that Poisonous Synthetic Heroin Fentanyl comes pouring into the U.S. Postal System from China,” he wrote last month in a tweet. “We can, and must, END THIS NOW! The Senate should pass the STOP ACT—and firmly STOP this poison from killing our children and destroying our country.”

    The STOP Act has been languishing after it was introduced nearly 18 months ago, allowing shipments of opioids to continue. However, the House passed a similar initiative over the summer, prompting the Senate to move on the issue.

    In addition to addressing the dangers of opioid shipments, the bill would also expand access to treatment for infants born dependent on opioids, implement more stringent packaging requirements for some medications, and accelerate research into non-addictive painkillers that could potentially replace opioids. 

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Canadians More Worried About Trump Than Legal Marijuana

    Canadians More Worried About Trump Than Legal Marijuana

    A new survey explored Canadians’ feelings on topics ranging from Trump and national health care to housing, climate change, and cannabis legalization.

    When it comes to the issues that worry Canadians, the impending legalization of marijuana is keeping fewer citizens awake at night than Donald Trump.

    That’s among the findings from a new poll from Abacus Data, which surveyed 1,500 Canadians about their political choices and concerns as they approach the 2019 federal election.

    Nearly half of participants said that they were “extremely concerned” about the U.S. president, while just 18% gave the same response about cannabis legalization. 

    Abacus Data conducted the survey online with 1,500 Canadians aged 18 and over from August 15 to 20, 2018. In regard to the federal election, respondents echoed statistics recorded earlier this year, with Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party netting 37% of the potential vote and Conservatives earning 33% of the vote.

    Trudeau was viewed in a positive light by 43% of participants, and 41% believed that the country was moving in what they viewed as the right direction.

    In regard to political issues concerning Canadians, Abacus Data listed nine topics, ranging from Trump and national health care to housing, climate change, border crossings and cannabis legalization.

    Responses were somewhat varied according to demographic and political affiliation: voters under the age of 45 listed climate change and housing affordability among their top concerns, while those over 45 ranked health care and affordable housing as second and third of their most pressing issues.

    Climate change and health care also saw high numbers from liberal voters, while conservatives leaned towards border crossing and debt among their top three concerns.

    However, there were two factors which received a near-unanimous response across age and party lines: Donald Trump was listed as the top concern for voters both under and over 45, as well as with liberals and supporters of the New Democratic Party (NDP).

    Trump also topped lists for voters in major cities and smaller communities, and among respondents from specific territories like Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta. Only conservative voters listed Trump at a lower position on their lists, where he placed 5th, while border crossing was given as their most pressing concern.

    Demographics were also largely in agreement in regard to cannabis legalization, which was listed last among the nine issues for voters under and over 45 years of age, liberals and NDP voters, big city residents and those in smaller communities.

    Again, conservatives placed cannabis higher than other groups, but even in that demographic, it was ranked relatively low at 6th out of nine, below health care, housing and even Trump.

    As High Times noted, the response to cannabis legalization echoed similar results from polls in 2017 that found that 68% of adults favored legalization, and in 2018, where 42% of adults voted in the positive for legalization.

    View the original article at thefix.com