Democratic Candidates Debate

June 14, Long Beach
My report: http://www.1400ml.com/Candidates_jun07.htm
ABC7 Debate Online: http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=elections&id=5396441

Response from John Kanaley

Peter,

As a law enforcement officer, I am committed to enforcing the laws against possession of drugs. While I am open to suggestions on alternative methods of dealing with the problem, I can say that I have seen the terrible consequences of drug abuse. We do have to come up with something to enhance prevention and provide other ideas of combatting the drug trade. Thanks for the email.

John

Response from George Parmer

Dear Mr. Rashkin,

The War on Drugs is having much the same effect on our society that the Prohibition did. Corruption is rampant here and in most Third World drug producing countries and drug trafficking is a deadly, billion dollar a year business.

There are many things that can and must change quickly, such as the legalization of medicinal marijuana. Sentencing for marijuana possession and the more severe penalties for possession of Crack cocaine over the powder form are a good start. I believe that the U.S.Government may better spend our monies purchasing for destruction, the drugs grown and processed in drug producing countries.

This District is rife with gang activities financed by the drug trade. The" War on Drugs" along with the privatization of our prison system are issues that I will be spending a considerable amount of time addressing when I assume the Districts Congressional seat. I can assure you that I will fight for any and all changes that will benefit my District to the best of my ability.

I am running a bottom-up, grassroots campaign and would appreciate your support, but would like to be kept on your email list regardless of it.

With election day close,I apologize for the slow response. At this time I feel I must personally answer all questions along with the many other activities incumbent upon a candidate during an election. Again thanks for your email and your compassion.

Sincerely,

George Parmer

More responses

Yesterday I received telephone calls from MERVIN EVANS (Dem) and LEROY JOSEPH "L.J." GUILLORY (Rep). Both expressed strong opposition to the failed war on drugs and the excessive use of imprisonment for punishing nonviolent crimes.

In addition, see the thoughtful response from Green Party Candidate DANIEL ABRAHAM BREZENOFF, posted as a comment to the May 4 post below.

To access candidates' web pages, please see http://rrcc.co.la.ca.us/candlist/0996cand/0996_candidate.htm

Response from Herb Peters

Dear Peter,

Thanks for your question on the drug war.

I agree with you that the drug war is a failure. I will work to repeal this bad law.

I agree with you on drugs financing inner city gangs and that these are “victimless” crimes. We could save 60% of our jail space for real criminals – WHEN we get rid of this bad law.

Our former Congress Woman, Juanita–Millender Mc Donald, accused the Federal Government (the CIA) of participation in sales of these “illegal” drugs.

I suspect that the CIA continues to sell drugs – and that the federal government keeps them illegal to keep the prices high.

I share that one of my sons is a drug addict and a “victim” of the drug war. He has been to jail several times; he says the drugs are available in prison!

He is a sick person and needs help – not jail. I have done my best to help him and I pray for him every day.

Herb Peters

Response from Jeff Price

Dear Mr.Rashkin,
Thank you for taking the time to email me, and thank you for caring enough about our community to send me your rather thought provoking question.

It is no secret that the "war on drugs" has failed. As I am sure you are aware, our prison system in California is way over crowded, and a vast number of inmates are in prison because of non-violent drug related offenses. Because of this overcrowding, inmates convicted of violent crimes are being released early. This is not right. I personally believe that if a person chooses to engage in drug use, and it does not harm anyone else in the community, then people should be allowed to do it. Therefore, this is what I believe Congress should do:

1. Legalize drugs. If drugs were made legal, the billions of dollars wasted in the war on drugs could be diverted to serious problems like education, social security or universal health care. Also, if drugs were made legal then it would end the black market funding of gangs and terrorism groups.
2. Provide funds to educate Americans about the harsh realities of drug use and addiction.
3. Become a supplier. I believe that if the drug companies and the FDA worked together to supply the drugs that are commonly found on the streets, instead of someone "cooking" drugs in their basement and risking blowing up themselves and everyone else on their block, then the quality of the drugs could be assured.
4. Establish a federal clean needle program where addicts could inject themselves with clean needles, thus reducing drug related HIV and hepatitis infections.
5. End mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent drug related crimes. Exclude all non-violent drug related offenses from "three strikes" policy.

As far as our prison situation, I believe that we should:
1. Not send people to prison for non-violent drug related crimes.
2. Not send people to prison for non-violent crimes of moral turpitude such as prostitution.
3. End mandatory minimum sentencing.
4. Re-evaluate our "three strikes" policy.
5. Provide treatment, education and counseling as an alternative to prison.

Thank you again for your question. Please know that I am open to hearing your opinions on the subject as well.
Sincerely,
Jeff Price

Letter to candidates

Here is the letter that I am sending to candidates today:

Dear Candidate,

Congratulations on your participation in this extremely important election.

I would like to ask your thoughts on a very important but little discussed subject, the failed war on drugs.

The war on drugs, which has been waged vigorously by Republican and Democratic administrations alike since the 1970s, has had a number of negative impacts with little practical benefits. Drug prohibition funds inner city gangs, ruins lives (not only of those imprisoned, but of their families as well), swells the prison population, and promotes corruption in neighboring countries (thus, in the long run, aggravating immigration problems). What should congress do to alleviate these damaging results of our perpetual, unwinnable war on drugs?

On a related issue, in California, wouldn’t it be better to reduce the prison population than to increase our already-draconian prison capacity by 57,000 new beds, as the recent agreement between the governor and legislature does?

I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on this. Are you committed to perpetuating this failed policy, or do you think there is a better way to deal with the problems of drug abuse?

Thank you,

Peter Rashkin

Questions I'd like to ask the candidates

1. The war on drugs, which has been waged vigorously by Republican and Democratic administrations alike since the 1970s, has had a number of negative impacts with little practical benefits. Drug prohibition funds inner city gangs, ruins lives, swells the prison population, and promotes corruption in neighboring countries (thus, in the long run, aggravating immigration problems). What should congress do to alleviate these damaging results of our perpetual, unwinnable war on drugs?


2. In California, wouldn’t it be better to reduce the prison population than to increase our already-draconian prison capacity by 57,000 new beds, as the recent agreement between the governor and legislature does?


3. The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a report (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-sci-warming5may05,0,4174050.story?coll=la-home-headlines) calling on the world to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming. How aggressive should we be to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Can we rely on technological innovation to prevent widespread disruptive environmental change, or should we aggressively control fossil fuel use by imposing carbon use taxes and mandatory reductions?


4. Is it possible to halt the spread of nuclear weapons, and, if so, what resources should we commit to prevent Iran (for example) from acquiring them? Would it be better to accept, as Einstein and others said at the beginning of the nuclear age, that the genie is out of the bottle? If the latter, would it be better to build a world community in which the use of nuclear weapons is unlikely even if more countries have them? How can US policy promote a safer world? Should the US be upgrading its stock of nuclear weapons, or reducing it?
   


5. What, if anything, should the US do to about the situations in Darfur and Somalia?

Looking for someone to love

(Written April 30)

I’m in the 37^th congressional district, formerly represented by Juanita Millender-McDonald, who died April 22. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has called for an August election to fill her seat, and candidates are expected to begin declaring today (April 30). Apparently there will be a June 26 primary that is likely to decide the election, since this is a safe Democratic seat.

According to today’s Press-Telegram (http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_5782219), State Sen. Jenny Oropeza is favored to win, but there are sure to be a number of other prominent Dems vying for the seat.

Because this is a safe Democratic seat, I’ve really never had the opportunity to vote for a congressional representative. The incumbent is always virtually unopposed. Now there is a rare opportunity to have some input into who will be representing me in the people’s house.

I guess that on a variety of important issues, the candidates will be in broad agreement (me, too). Against the war in Iraq, against global warming, for abortion rights, for immigration reform (but without a serious picture of what that might be).

Against something in Darfur, but probably not certain who or what. Of course I will be looking carefully at their positions to see if any candidate can distinguish herself, but I doubt anyone will.

One issue I expect them to be largely silent about is the failed war on drugs, but if a candidate says something serious about this, I will come on board.

The governor and legislature last week agreed to build 53,000 (or was it 57) new beds to begin to address our serious prison overcrowding. But who are those people in prison? Should they really all be there? How many are there for non-violent drug offenses? Can we afford this? Do we really want to do this?

Just as our experiment in alcohol prohibition gave a huge boost to organized crime, our current drug prohibition finances a crime network that is responsible to so much suffering in our inner cities. Politicians love to attack gangs. I guess they did in prohibition. Why not cut off their main funding source by legalizing drugs.

Drugs can be a serious problem for people who get caught up in them. A small fraction of the resources we spend fighting the war on drugs would go far to helping people who are messed up by drug addiction.

The disruption that our drug prohibition causes in Mexico, Columbia and many other countries is a despicable foreign policy impact of our drug war.

Last and least among these bad impacts of our war on drugs is the personal liberty issue. You’ve heard of the pursuit of happiness, right? I know that’s not a principal of law, but it’s still a first principle. We all think that we should be able to do what we think will make us happy if it doesn’t hurt someone else. Prohibitions fly in the face of this principal and need to be justified by significant public good. I think after more than 30 years of ever-more resources devoted to enforcing drug prohibitions, efforts that have harmed American communities and other countries without producing a significant benefit, we must agree that our drug prohibition project is not justified.

This is what I’d like to see a candidate for congress address, and if one does, I will do whatever I can to help elect that person.