Can't find what you are looking for? Try my
Search Page
In the recent elections more drug reform initiatives lost than won. Why those defeats occurred is the subject of much debate among drug war "hawks" and drug policy reform advocates. Nevertheless, there are few who would fail to include the role of an organized opposition spearheaded by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and its director, drug czar John Walters.
Walters crisscrossed the country in the months leading up to the elections, making stops in states such as Arizona, Michigan, Nevada and Ohio to campaign against reform efforts. Now the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) is charging Walters with violating federal and state election laws.
In a press release preceding a recent press conference on, MPP executive director Rob Kampia said, "During the fall campaign, John Walters declared war on the law and war on the truth. Today, on behalf of US taxpayers - including the 5,000 who contributed to our campaign - we are declaring war on the drug czar for his illegal and dishonest activities. In filing this official complaint, we are calling for the removal of John Walters from office for gross violations of the Hatch Act."
The Hatch Act bars federal employees from carrying out certain campaign-related activities.
"Walters has committed numerous crimes against the taxpayers," Kampia added. "He used his official authority to affect the outcome of the Question 9 election, as well as other state drug policy initiatives, in plain violation of the Hatch Act. Because none of this activity was properly reported as campaign contributions, he is in equally plain violation of Nevada campaign finance laws. Walters conducted a campaign of lies against Question 9, using the taxpayers' money to spread misinformation."
In Nevada, where MPP and its affiliate, Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement (NRLE) promoted a marijuana legalization initiative, Walters visited twice, once in July and once in October, just weeks before the election. During the latter visit, Walters said in a widely reported speech, "This is a con, and it's insulting to the voters of the state in which it is presented. We have a momentous decision in this state. We saw the problem that marijuana was massively underestimated in the public mind and if we didn't do anything it would grow. That's why I came."
"This is the most extreme ballot issue they've done so far," Walters continued, calling the measure's backers "misguided people who have a lot of money and decided to make this state a guinea pig." Referring to a pro-marijuana reform television ad featuring a retired Las Vegas police officer, he told reporters: "You probably know some goofballs in journalism, too."
In response to these charges by Walters, the Drug Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet) countered in an editorial, "While Walters complained about wealthy backers of the initiative, he and his office were not lacking in funds to throw at the campaign. Jet travel isn't cheap, and neither is the anti-marijuana advertising campaign his office directs. Budgeted at $180 million this year, the ad campaign was in full swing throughout the run-up to the election, treating Nevada voters (and everyone else) to messages about marijuana and terrorism, marijuana and gang shootings, and marijuana and accidental shootings. The taxpayers' money was being used to finance an electoral campaign against the Nevada initiative."
Putting this argument to the legal test, at a Wednesday press conference, MPP announced it will file a formal "complaint of possible prohibited personnel practice" with the federal Office of Special Counsel, charging Walters with violating federal law by using "his official authority and influence for the purpose of ... affecting the result of an election" - namely, the election that included Question 9, MPP's Nevada marijuana initiative.
MPP also used the occasion to publicly release a letter to the Nevada Secretary of State's office charging that Walters violated state campaign finance laws by campaigning against the initiative without properly reporting his activities to the state.
Walters argues the ONDCP's position this way: "The principal purpose of ONDCP is to establish policies, priorities, and objectives for the Nation's drug control program. By law, the Director of ONDCP also evaluates, coordinates, and oversees both the international and domestic anti-drug efforts of executive branch agencies and ensures that such efforts sustain and complement State and local anti-drug activities." Walters believes that his campaign efforts fall squarely under these guidelines; the drug law reformers don't, charging that "there is nothing in that language about trying to shape electoral campaigns about drug policy issues."
Article posted on About.com 12/13/02
