-
6. A Federalist George W. Bush and an Anti-Federalist Barack Obama?: The Irony and Paradoxes behind Republican and Democratic Administration Drug Policies
- University of Arizona Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
174 chapter six A Federalist George W. Bush and an Anti-Federalist Barack Obama? The Irony and Paradoxes behind Republican and Democratic Administration Drug Policies José D. Villalobos Introduction Policy debates concerning the war on drugs often revolve around topics such as combating organized crime, militarizing the U.S.–Mexican border , and employing punitive approaches to substance abuse. Alternatively, scholars, pundits, and the public have also debated the pros and cons of drug legalization—primarily as it pertains to the decriminalization of medicinal marijuana (see, for instance, Cohen 1976; Inciardi 1999; Trebach and Inciardi 1993; Stimmel 1996; Schaler 1998; Boyum and Reuter 2005; Ferraiolo 2007). Therein, policy discussions on drug legalization have focused mainly on sociopolitical, emotional, ethical, and health concerns while largely ignoring questions concerning philosophical views over Federalism ,1 particularly over whether drug policy should be executed at the national versus state level. However, a deeper look at the issue and how politicians have attempted to address it reveals a major irony in the positions taken by liberal and conservative political leaders. Namely, Republicans have clamored to have more federal power given to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and other federal entities to uphold a nationwide ban on marijuana and other drugs, while Democrats have Federalist George W. Bush and Anti-Federalist Barack Obama? · 175 gradually moved toward a position that favors states’ rights to help jumpstart the decriminalization movement, especially in states such as California , Oregon, and Colorado, which have relaxed laws concerning the sale and consumption of medicinal marijuana (Greenwald 2009; Khan 2009). Although it is no surprise that Democrats have taken a more liberal position on drug enforcement and Republicans a more conservative one, what is somewhat unusual is the extent to which Democrats have adopted a states’ rights approach, while Republicans have shunned states’ rights in the process.2 During President Bill Clinton’s two terms, eight states successfully pushed toward decriminalizing medicinal marijuana (see table 6.1). These changes in drug laws sparked debates not only over the policies themselves but also over whether and how the federal government should react to such state-level changes. In the midst of such debates, then-governor of Texas George W. Bush told the Dallas Morning News in October 1999 that he believed the federal government should let each state “choose that decision as they so choose” (Drug Policy Alliance 2006). However, upon leaving the governor’s mansion for the presidency, Bush subsequently flip-flopped on his state-centered philosophy, focusing instead on his role as head of the executive branch in enforcing federal drug laws. Almost immediately, Bush fell in line with his Republican predecessors in continuing the war on drugs by using federal laws to push back against state-level efforts to legalize marijuana use. In doing so, Bush demonstrated a high level of responsiveness to his base of social conservative supporters, as well as to his own social policy preferences, though at the expense of his states’ rights values. Bush’s successor, President Barack Obama, initially took quite the opposite route by calling on the DEA and other federal forces to pull back and allow states to continue the process of decriminalizing the sale and consumption of medicinal marijuana (Greenwald 2009; Schor 2010; see also Khan 2009). Although Obama’s move to allow for more state-level control over medicinal marijuana highlighted his willingness to delegate Table 6.1. Statewide votes for medical marijuana, 1996–2000 State Year Number Yes No California 1996 Proposition 215 56% 44% Arizona 1996 Proposition 200 65% 35% Alaska 1998 Question 8 58% 42% [174.129.140.206] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 06:05 GMT) 176 · Current Strategies and Casualties federal power, he nevertheless remained publicly opposed to the full legalization of marijuana or other drugs for recreational use and has charged the DEA to lead in enforcing that policy realm (see O’Brien 2010; Hecht 2011; Saunders 2011). To clarify its position and goals, the Obama administration released its initial National Drug Control Strategy in May 2010 (recently updated for 2012), which outlined the president’s comprehensive approach to dealing with the various public health and safety consequences caused by drug use (Office of National Drug Control Policy 2010, 2011, 2012). In essence, Obama presented himself as being supportive of state-level drug decriminalization efforts but also concerned about the health and safety issues related to drug use and determined to uphold federal law when it comes to perceived abuse by medicinal marijuana providers. Needless to...