Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

White House Czar Calls for End to 'War on Drugs'

Posted by , AlterNet at 7:00 AM on May 14, 2009.


In his first interview since being confirmed, Gil Kerlikowske called the bellicose language a barrier to dealing with the nation's drug issues.
drugczar

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Rights and Liberties in your
mailbox!

 

The Wall Street Journal reports

"The Obama administration's new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting 'a war on drugs,' a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use."

In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation's drug issues.
"Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country."

Mr. Kerlikowske's comments are a signal that the Obama administration is set to follow a more moderate -- and likely more controversial -- stance on the nation's drug problems. Prior administrations talked about pushing treatment and reducing demand while continuing to focus primarily on a tough criminal-justice approach.
The Obama administration is likely to deal with drugs as a matter of public health rather than criminal justice alone, with treatment's role growing relative to incarceration, Mr. Kerlikowske said.

As the WSJ points out, the drug czar "doesn't have the power to enforce any of these changes himself;" moreover, Kerlikowske told the WSJ that he has not yet "focused on U.S. policy toward fighting drug-related crime in other countries." Still, "Mr. Kerlikowske plans to work with Congress and other agencies to alter current policies."

Read the rest of the WSJ article here.

Digg!

Tagged as: drugs, barack obama, war on drugs, wall street journal, gil kerlikowske, white house office of nat


Is It Cruel and Unusual to Sentence Teens to Die In Prison?
The Supreme Court is hearing two cases today that will affect the fate of more than 2,500 people sentenced to life without parole as teenagers.
Post by Liliana Segura. November 9, 2009.
Students Who Exposed 30-Year-Old Wrongful Conviction Being Targeted By Chicago DA
It's shocking that the state would rather keep an innocent man behind bars than admit a mistake.
Post by Ari Berman. November 9, 2009.
The Ugly Politics of Mass Killings
Where's the liberal cover-up?
Post by Steve M.. November 7, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
It's all hot air until drugs are legalized.
Posted by: rancespergl on May 14, 2009 7:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is hard to fathom how many years and how many lives have been wasted.

Not because of drug use but because of drug policy.

A nation's shame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet...
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on May 14, 2009 9:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
with Obama it's all a game of semantics there will be no change in tactics, just a warm fuzzy name change following the example of ending the global war on terror by re-branding it "Overseas Contingency Operations". The war on drugs will now be known as "Homeland Contingency Operations"...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "Homeland" Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: "Homeland" And Czar too. Posted by: sasquuatch55
Oh Wow A Brand Name Switch....
Posted by: mikeblack on May 14, 2009 9:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All it sounds like to me is he's talking about a switch of the name. Granted, that does wonders to the gullible public (best example nobody but the rich giving a crap about the "estate tax", but then when Republicans re-named it "the death tax" everybody freaked out.) So who cares if they drop the name, that's an empty gesture. Keep in mind a few months ago they announced plans to step up fighting drug gangs in Mexico, so that's a war on drugs no better than what they‘ve ravaged South America with for 20 years. I don't think this is any better than Obama dropping the Bush terms of the War On Terror but doing absolutely nothing to stop it. Who cares.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh Wow A Brand Name Switch
Posted by: mikeblack on May 14, 2009 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All it sounds like to me is he's talking about a switch of the name. Granted, that does wonders to the gullible public (best example nobody but the rich giving a crap about the "estate tax", but then when Republicans re-named it "the death tax" everybody freaked out.) So who cares if they drop the name, that's an empty gesture. Keep in mind a few months ago they announced plans to step up fighting drug gangs in Mexico, so that's a war on drugs no better than what they‘ve ravaged South America with for 20 years. I don't think this is any better than Obama dropping the Bush terms of the War On Terror but doing absolutely nothing to stop it. Who cares.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh Wow A Brand Name Switch Posted by: Love Me, I'm a Liberal
This isn't a war its a police action.
Posted by: aahpat on May 14, 2009 2:40 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This isn't a war its a police action.

Haven't we heard this before?

The only change we can expect from the Obama administration is a change in semantics and rhetoric. Otherwise they are increasing spending on the drug war, escalating enforcement and militarizing the Mexican border Drug War.

By disassociating themselves with the term 'war on drugs' the Obama Administration is admitting that the drug war has accumulated a top heavy load of negative political connotations that Obama does not want to be associated with. At the same time Obama's actions, such as increasing a supplemental appropriation request by more than half a billion for Mexico, three billion dollars to reinvigorate the discredited drug task force grants, sending troops into the Afghan poppy fields to fight the Taliban, reneging on needle exchange policy and not stopping medical pot raids as promised, are all rapidly escalating and militarizing the the war on drugs policy.

It is the height of duplicity and ultimate in cynical moral depravity for the Obama to think that they can simply change the name, re-brand the war on drugs, and everything could just continue on as normal with this four decades long undeclared civil war.

Obama's Quagmire on the Rio Grande

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This isn't a war its a police action.
Posted by: aahpat on May 14, 2009 2:42 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This isn't a war its a police action.

Haven't we heard this before?

The only change we can expect from the Obama administration is a change in semantics and rhetoric. Otherwise they are increasing spending on the drug war, escalating enforcement and militarizing the Mexican border Drug War.

By disassociating themselves with the term 'war on drugs' the Obama Administration is admitting that the drug war has accumulated a top heavy load of negative political connotations that Obama does not want to be associated with. At the same time Obama's actions, such as increasing a supplemental appropriation request by more than half a billion for Mexico, three billion dollars to reinvigorate the discredited drug task force grants, sending troops into the Afghan poppy fields to fight the Taliban, reneging on needle exchange policy and not stopping medical pot raids as promised, are all rapidly escalating and militarizing the the war on drugs policy.

It is the height of duplicity and ultimate in cynical moral depravity for the Obama to think that they can simply change the name, re-brand the war on drugs, and everything could just continue on as normal with this four decades long undeclared civil war.

Obama's Quagmire on the Rio Grande

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Its the right time to right all the wrongs
Posted by: EJLima on May 15, 2009 5:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
done by the police and the prisons to the VICTIMS of of this cruel war on us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

labels are keen, right?
Posted by: luzmejor on May 15, 2009 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
New, improved, healthy products!

Unborn, preborn, the torture, the murder of children in utero!

Welfare queens, dirty little welfare cheats, etc.

The 'war' on drugs.

These phrases are the brain children of the politics of hate and greed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A pogrom by any other name
Posted by: aahpat on May 15, 2009 7:41 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what does the Drug Czar want us to call it? The Pogrom on drug consumers? Obama Re-branding the "War on Drugs" - Pogrom?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEMOCRACY SEEMS TO CHANGE SO SLOWLY THAT PATIENCE IS EXHAUSTED
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on May 15, 2009 5:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
almost completely before any change seems visible. We seem to sit and look at the carnage for so long before any action happens. Would you trade for a dictatorship? Harry Truman consistently answered that the solution to most problems was more democracy not less. We really do need campaign finance reform. I really do believe that the sluggishness is caused by antidemocratic forces.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]