The Supreme Court's medical marijuana decision this past June was a minor defeat for the so-called states' rights cause but a major setback for compassion and common sense. It marked one of the few defeats suffered by retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in her long campaign against federal regulation of the national economy and for the enhancement of individual rights. This time, she should have won. Although the decision temporarily halted the conservative assault, it allowed federal authorities to deny a locally grown and marketed drug with proven therapeutic value to people who desperately need it. [continues 623 words]
WASHINGTON — After barely two minutes of debate, a floor amendment was added to the 1996 welfare law that denies food stamps and welfare (Temporary Aid to Needy Families) for life to anyone convicted of a drug felony. It is doubtful that the members of Congress realized a large part of this burden would fall on struggling women and their young children. A study by the Sentencing Project, a research organization based in Washington, estimates that since the ban went into effect in 1996, 92,000 women have been convicted of drug offenses in the states enforcing it. Of these, about two-thirds are mothers, with 135,000 children among them. [continues 421 words]
WASHINGTON--California voters took a giant stride toward a rational drug policy last November when they decided that first-time and some second-time offenders convicted of nonviolent drug use or possession should get treatment, not prison time. Unfortunately, provisions in both state and federal law undercut the goals of Proposition 36 by denying food stamps and CalWORKs (California Work and Opportunity and Responsibility for Kids) to persons who have committed a felony involving drug use, possession and distribution. The sweep of the ban is breathtaking. It makes no difference whether the person has been off drugs for years and is leading a productive life or is currently in treatment, has a family, is sick, pregnant, young or a first-time offender. But states with such bans can opt out of them, in whole or in part; more than half of them have. Efforts are now under way in the state Legislature to add California to the list in order to realize the full benefits of Proposition 36. [continues 800 words]
The Poor Are Not In Fashion. Not only are they ignored, they are continually being subjected to punitive measures that, under the guise of reform, grind them down even more. One of the nastiest of these measures is contained in the so-called Welfare bill of 1996. A floor amendment sponsored by Senator Phil Gramm, whose soft Texas drawl belies one of the meanest spirits in a mean Congress, provided that those convicted of felony drug violations be denied food stamps for life, It swept through the Senate 74 to 24. [continues 688 words]
WASHINGTON--The nation's never-ending war on drugs, that perpetual futility, has always fallen most heavily on poor people. This has usually been the result of discriminatory enforcement or, as with laws against crack and cocaine, an unfair penalty structure. The latest blow, however, has led to a direct attack on the poor. Under a floor amendment, proposed by Sen. Phil Gramm (RTexas), to the 1996 welfare law and quickly adopted, anyone convicted of a felony for violating either a state or federal drug law after Aug. 22, 1996, can never get food stamps again. It makes no difference if the offender is sick, pregnant, a parent of a small child, in a treatment program, has been drug-free for years, is a first-time offender, works or is seeking work, a student or anything else. Nothing the offender can do will restore food-stamp eligibility, and administrators are allowed no discretion. [continues 1112 words]
