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.