Reformers Take Drug Policy Via Third Party Charges attempt to reach state

Frustrated by the indifference of the two major parties - if not outright hostility - with regard to ending the drug war decades of age, at least three top leaders of the reform of drug policy have launched attempts to reach positions state as a third-party candidates. In Alabama, U.S. Marijuana Party founder Loretta Nall is by going to the government under the acronym of the Libertarian Party. In Connecticut, the most important reform of drug policy in the state, Cliff Thornton of Efficacy is by going to the government as Green. And in Maryland, Kevin Zeese of Common Sense for Drug Policy is conducting a campaign of unity under the standards of the Green Party, Libertarian and Populist.

Although the chances that any of them are really tough competitions expires, all three told DRCNet that went into this to win - and to show the big games they are at risk of losing votes if they do not deal with the growing public disaffection the war on drugs. And while none of them received the dignity of having their candidacies measured by major opinion polls, everyone expects to break that barrier between now and November.

In Alabama, Loretta Nall is adding figures to a campaign that is already full of remarkable characters - one of the main Democratic challenger, former Gov.. Don Seigelman, will be in court on corruption charges the previous day of next week. Who challenges the Govt. Bob Riley for the indication Desembargador Republican is former Supreme Court of Alabama Roy Moore, who hopes to transform its position against the Constitution and in favor of putting the 10 Commandments in courthouses on a path to the government. Initial investigations show Riley defeating both Moore next week as any of the Democrats in November.

In Alabama, Nall will face two major party candidates to be decided next week - if they get enough signatures to get on the ballot until the previous day, June 6. "Now I'm concentrating all my energy and money in collecting signatures. It will be distressing, "he said. "Republicans and Democrats do not have to collect signatures, but other third parties, and if we get to the polls and we do not reach 20%, the party loses its status and must be reclassified with more firms," ​​he said.

For Nall, it all started with drug policy and the issue remains central to his campaign.
"Drug policy is a huge part of my campaign and I walk away from it. Finally, I started with the police kicking my door knocking, "she said, referring to the small seizure of marijuana made her start in activism. "I work in all my speeches that it is the first thing that speaks in candidate forums. Because the war on drugs is so intrometido, I can relate with all types of issues. "
Nall is working other issues as well, competing as a pro-immigration reform candidate and against the Patriot Act and Real ID Act, but the media are fascinated with their position on drug policy, she said. "People want to know my position on issues like immigration and education, but the reporters always want to ask questions about drugs. The public knows where I am in drug policy. "

Although the acronym attend libertarian, Nall does not fit perfectly. "I'ma libertarian, but not much so. Indeed, I find myself in agreement with the Liberal Democrats more than anyone. I would say that I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative, "he said. "I want our troops from the Alabama National Guard out of Iraq and that resonates - if the rednecks down here are tired of kicking the brown rear Iraqi people, Washington needs to realize," she said. "We also need to return the biodiesel an important issue - we can not afford the $ 2.50 per gallon for the gas business. And we need education reform and Washington out of our classes. "

In Connecticut, Cliff Thornton is by going against the Govt. Republican Jodi Rell and Democratic rival Dannel Malloy, the mayor of Stamford. Things started well, he told DRCNet. "The campaign is going very well, although we have not much money in the coffers," said Thornton. "We have been receiving much attention from the media and very good articles. Since I announced in January, we have about one article a week somewhere in the state. The media like what I'm saying. "

The mainstream candidates are not trying to key issues, Thornton said, and part of his role is to redirect the focus. "I want these people talk about the issues," he said. "How many people are talking about the war in Iraq? How many people are talking about war here? How many people are talking about the issue of race? "
For Thornton, who has made a career of calling for an end to drug prohibition policies, give to the question makes perfect sense. "Drug policy is a big part of my campaign. So I am known. Cliff Thornton and drug policy are not separated. Finally, drug policy relations with all. The issues of transportation and health insurance in Connecticut full are not matters of drug policy, but we're talking again about money. The programs do not happen because we are spending money on war on drugs ".

So what to talk about Thornton? "I definitely talk about what we did in Hartford and the document was the result of that," he said, referring to last fall's symposium that brought together political leaders and law enforcement, public health experts and reformers drug and positions of progressive drug policies that resulted from that conference. "I also say that cannabis should be legalized, we should have heroin maintenance and drug use should be stigmatizing. This is a public health problem, not a law enforcement problem. "
He also talks about the crime. "We had 16 shootings since last Wednesday," he observed. "They are saying they are not directly related to drugs, but these people are drug infested areas. We must ask how many of these kids who committed these shootings had parents in prison or drug trafficking. How many police were constantly harassing people? "He said. "The mayor and police chief are talking the same old stuff, but you can not keep making the same failure again and again. We have been in the drug war for a century and just keep doing the same thing and getting the same results. How can we expect things to change if we keep doing the same thing? "
Thornton is competing as well as advancing Green and the pattern of drug policy, he also wants to return the Greens a viable alternative in Connecticut. "As reformers of drugs, we are ahead of the local party people," said Thornton. "The Greens failed to make the press pay attention, but I know how to get the press." If he could well be as successful in raising funds, he said. "We are not so good at it, we have just about $ 30,000."

Thornton acknowledged that his prospects of winning were slim, but he said he hoped to look good. "I want to garner between 10% and 25% of the vote in November. The important thing is to show that you can lead and win with the reform of drug policy, "he said.

In Maryland, Zeese, a veteran of the presidential campaign of Ralph Nader in 2004, is facing the concurrientes Democrats, Dip. Ben Cardin and former NAACP head Kweisi Mfume of, and the Republican candidate, Lt. Gov. Michael Steele, in the dispute to succeed the resigning Sen. Democrat Paul Sarbanes. Early polls show Cardan beating Steele by 10 points, while the dispute is heated Mfume versus Steele today. In a tight competition, the application of Zeese can make a difference.

"I'm competing around the issues of peace, justice, democracy and prosperity, and the issue of drug policy comes under the justice," said Zeese. "Whenever I mention. Maryland has always mentioned that law enforcement system more racially unjust. From our prisoners for drugs, 90% are African American. This is selective repression and also saw that when Maryland became one of the first states to be prosecuted for racial discrimination black drivers, "he said. "But this is a question that really arises only with African-American public. With white audiences, that's probably more negative than positive. "

Except, perhaps, on college campuses. "The reform of drug policy resonates well in the campuses," he said. "When I address an audience, always ask them what they want to talk. Almost always, is the Patriot Act, Iraq, debt, corporate power, but on college campuses, they always want to talk about the war on drugs and want to talk on the Grass. "

For Zeese, the campaign is much broader than drug policy. "I focus a lot in the war on Iraq, the divide between rich and poor and the corruption of our political system," he said. "I talk about how people do not feel represented and give the temos conmunes on issues of justice, civil liberties, the Patriot Act and the war on drugs, but the two big issues are war and peace and rich and poor. "
Zeese rejected the notion that third party candidates are "spoilers" or candidates with no chance of winning that can prevent others from winning and he attacked the reform movement of drug policy for not backing his campaign. "I am always amazed with the reformers of drugs that support Democrats who support the war on drugs," he said. "We complain about the cowardly Democrats and vote on them. It's really stupid that the reformers of drugs are the Democrats going to be their saviors. They are voting in people who do not want to put your friends and family in jail. Does anyone can point me in the Democratic Party leadership in the reform of drug policy? The reform movement of drug policy is showing its level of political maturity by not getting involved in this dispute, "he said. "If you want to talk about 'spoilers' for the reform movement of drug policy, the 'spoilers' are the two major parties."

Zeese has no illusions about their prospects. "Winning would be very difficult, but that's about it, and it is as if you were pushing boulders uphill. It's a constant battle to be taken seriously, "he said, noting that he is starting to get some media attention. "I'd like to win this battle, but I think it would be successful if you could create a three-way dispute that is included in the surveys and debates and my impact on the dispute is clear," he said. "If I go out well, that will signal that the parties are out of touch with voters."