Cannabis was illegal for a century. It only took a decade to change that. Lester Black

People have interacted with pot for at least 7,000 years, but there's no decade in that stretch that has been better for cannabis than the one we're currently finishing. Pot went from being widely illegal and politically toxic to being a plant that is easily available to millions of adults across the country.

Pot had a really, really good decade.

Pot won by every possible metric, especially its legal status in the United States. In 2009, only 14 states had medical access to pot. Ten years later, an incredible 35 states have medical cannabis in some form, and 11 more (plus the District of Columbia) legalized recreational pot. Only Nebraska, Idaho, Kansas, and South Dakota have no pot access.

Public opinion shifted nearly as dramatically as those state laws. Only 44 percent of people supported pot legalization in 2009, while 54 percent opposed it, according to the Pew Research Center. A 2019 Pew poll shows the numbers flipped: Only 32 percent of people said pot should be illegal, while 67 percent support legalization.

Politicians have also shifted their views on pot. This year's Democratic presidential hopefulsincluding Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Cory Booker, Andrew Yang, and Pete Buttigiegare overwhelmingly in favor of legalization. Even lukewarm centrist Amy Klobuchar supports legalizing pot. Joe Biden is the only candidate against it, although he does support decriminalization.

And even Biden's stance is a remarkable shift from where we were at the beginning of this decade. In the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, essentially every candidateincluding Hillary Clinton and Barack Obamaopposed even the decriminalization of pot.

So who can we thank for turning pot from widely reviled to widely accepted? George Soros and a few of his friends (Progressive Insurance founder Peter Lewis, University of Phoenix founder John Sperling, and Men's Wearhouse founder George Zimmer), who spent more than $70 million bankrolling medical and legalization initiatives for 20-plus years.

According to Jonathan Caulkins, a Carnegie Mellon professor and one of the country's leading experts on drug policy, "The simplest explanation of why marijuana reform happened is that three billionaires decided it should happen and they bankrolled the process for many, many years."

It also doesn't hurt that pot reform appeals to a wide spectrum of political beliefs, from libertarians who want the government out of their business to progressives who want to end the racist war on drugs.

Yeshiva University law professor Ekow Yankah says this is why pot reform is winning. "The core of my argument is that philosophy matters. If you find something where there are a bunch of views that all coalesce around one philosophical position... it makes it much harder to keep it at bay," Yankah told me.

I think both Yankah and Caulkins are correctit's a powerful position when your argument is well-supported theoretically as well as having millions of dollars in support from the ultra-wealthy. But there's one other key aspect that we can't forget when we're talking about the legalization of pot: the plant itself.

Cannabis is incredible. It's one of the oldest crops grown by humans, possibly the oldest medicine our species has ever used. It has a shockingly wide number of varietalsthink about every different type of apple you have ever seen and multiply that tenfold, and you won't be close to the different types of cannabis that exist. It can be made into clothing, buildings, nutritious food, medicine, and a recreational intoxicant. And in a very strange turn of events 100 years ago, the American government decided it was sinful and thus convinced the world to outlaw it, just as scientists were beginning to better understand its powers.

Luckily, it only took a decade to reverse this century-long travesty. The next decade will only prove that we should have normalized cannabis sooner.

More:

Pot Had Its Best Decade Ever - Weed - TheStranger.com

Jesse Jackson

By Jesse Jackson

(TriceEdneyWire.com) Donald Trump is famed for his head-snapping reversals. One day hes taking troops out of the Middle East; the next hes sending more in. One day hes on the verge of an agreement with China on trade; the next hes tweeting about holding off until after the election.

On one thing, however, Trump and his administration have been clear, consistent, coordinated and relentless: waging a war on the poor. Not a war on poverty but a war on the most vulnerable themselves. Despite low unemployment, millions of Americans the Brookings Institution estimates an astounding 44 percent of all workers in the prime working ages of 18-64 struggle to get by on median wages of little over $10 an hour or $18,000 a year.

The working poor face soaring costs of housing, health care, transportation, utilities and, of course, debt all rising faster than their wages. The official poverty rate is far lower than any accounting of the true needs of a family. The National Center for Children in Poverty estimates that the average family needs about twice as much income as the poverty level to meet basic needs. Cruelly, the Trump response to this is to make it worse.

The administration and Republicans in Congress oppose raising the minimum wage and wont even allow a vote on it in the Senate. Now the administration proposes lowering the poverty line over time by pegging the inflation adjustments lower than the actual increase in costs. All programs that help low-wage workers would be affected. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities projects that 250,000 seniors would get less help in purchasing prescription drugs, 300,000 children would lose health care under the Childrens Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

This rule combined with others that the administration has imposed will cost literally millions of low-wage workers to face cutbacks in food assistance. Student loan debt is now $1.5 trillion, primarily loans taken out by the children of middle- or low-income families trying to better themselves through education. Bernie Sanders, running for president, has pledged to eliminate all student debt, paying for it with taxes on the wealthy, and to make all public colleges tuition free. Elizabeth Warren has joined in a plan to eliminate the debt for most students and make colleges tuition free. Trump is reportedly worried that these plans are very popular. His administration is scrambling to respond.

One proposal, as the Washington Post reported, is to cap the loans a student could get in relation to their projected income. Thats right, the Trump plan may call for reducing student debt by cutting the availability of loans to students effectively closing the doors to college to the children of middle- and low-income families. Add to this Trumps most recent plan to take $2 billion out of the Pell Grant program which supports college grants to children from families with less than $50,000 in income to pay for sending NASA back to the moon. The maximum Pell Grant once covered nearly 80% of the cost of tuition, fees, room and board at public four-year college; now it covers less than 30 percent.

This is a program that needs more funding, not less. Trump, of course, brags on his economy and the low unemployment. He argues without evidence that his tax cut is trickling down to workers. What he doesnt realize is that this economy continues to generate jobs that wont support a family. Thats why so-called poverty programs from CHIP to food stamps to public housing to low income heating assistance to Medicaid are so necessary. They give vital support to low-wage workers who do some of the hardest, most taxing jobs in our country. Cuts in student aid, cuts in Pell grants, cuts in food stamps, cuts in the poverty level Trump is putting low wage workers and their families in a box with no way out except down. Our country is paying a very high price for this meanness.

Read the original:

President Trump's War on the Poor - charlestonchronicle.net

As the end of a decade approaches, we take a look at some of the battlegrounds that have defined the human rights struggle over the past ten years.From uprisings across the Arab world and the rise of global protest movements, to the resurgence of the politics of hate, and concerns over the misuse of big data and surveillance technology, the 2010s have opened up new frontiers in the fight for our rights.Politics of demonisation

One of the most disturbing trends of the past decade has been the rise of rhetoric and policies that demonise some of the most marginalised groups in society, including refugees and asylum seekers, religious and ethnic minorities, women and LGBTI people.

Its the common thread that links the persecution of the Rohingya in Myanmar, mass internment of Uighurs in China and the proposed introduction of the death penalty for people who engage in same-sex sexual activity in Uganda. It has also fuelled xenophobic attacks against migrants in South Africa and been the driving force behind U.S. policy to forcibly separate families seeking safety. Meanwhile, it has contributed to the increasing criminalisation of those helping refugees in Europe.

Instead of addressing real problems like inequality, corruption, unemployment and economic hardship, political leaders on every continent are using minority groups as scapegoats for social and economic ills, spreading fake news about them and inciting discrimination, hostility and violence against them.

Social media platforms have allowed these hateful views to flourish largely unchecked. However, such hatred has galvanised activists the world over. Fighting for our human rights has never seemed more important.

The climate emergency

This decade is likely to be the hottest on record- another alarming sign of the climate emergency which is one of the greatest threats to human rights of our age.

Millions of people are already suffering from the catastrophic effects of climate change from prolonged drought in Africa to devastating tropical storms across South-east Asia and the Caribbean, and heatwaves that have set record temperatures in Europe.

Climate change threatens to exacerbate inequalities between developed and developing countries; between different ethnicities and classes; between genders, generations and communities with the most disadvantaged groups hardest hit. It is already having harmful impacts on our rights to life, health, food, water, housing and livelihoods.

All the science suggests that extreme weather will only get worse, unless governments take urgent action to slash carbon emissions within the shortest possible timeframe, through a transition that protects the human rights of disadvantaged groups. However, virtually all governments are failing to put in place effective plans, and there is still resistance from some of the biggest emitters; notably the USA,which under President Trump has started the process to formally exit from the Paris Agreement.

More than ever, we need to stand together to hold our political leaders to account. The Fridays for Future movement, started in 2018 by Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg and her colleagues, shows us that change is possible. We cannot afford to fail.

Violence against women

The struggle to protect women and girls, and others from all forms of gender-based violence, was as hard-fought as ever. Sexual violence continued to be used as a weapon of war, including in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where in one case out of many, more than 300 people were raped in four days by armed men in Walikale, North Kivu. Amnesty International also documented the horrific impact of rape in other conflict zones such as Iraq, Somalia, Darfur, Nigeria and South Sudan.

In many places, the very people meant to keep society safe are the ones attacking women and girls. In Mexico, women reported torture and other forms of violence such as electric shocks to the genitals, groping of breasts and rape with objects during arrest and interrogation by police and armed forces as part of the countrys 'war on drugs'. Homicide rates for women have risen sharply throughout the decade, with Mexican authorities failing to take effective action to solve gender-based violence.

In a breakthrough, the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers adopted the landmark Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence-which Amnesty International was involved in drafting on 7 April 2011. Recently, Sweden and Greece became some of the few European countries who changed their laws to recognise that sex without consent is rape.

One of the most iconic online movements of the decade, #MeToo, brought millions of women together to stand up to sexual violence, harassment and assault. #MeToo has spurred change everywhere from Hollywood studios to remote villages in Nepal and northern Nigeria.

Sexual and reproductive rights

Although some 50 countries have changed their laws to allow greater access to abortion over the last 25 years, sexual and reproductive rights remain contested. One thing that unites all successful campaigns to reform abortion laws has been the bravery of women who speak out and demand the right to decide what happens to their own bodies.

Reproductive rights have come under threat elsewhere. Attempts to further restrict access to abortion sparked nationwide protests in Poland. Near-total bans or laws further restricting access to abortion have been introduced in several US states. President Trumps reinstatement of the 'global gag' rule, which blocks US federal international funding for NGOs that provide abortion counselling or referrals, or that advocate for decriminalising abortion, was a massive blow to womens rights globally. So were the US administrations attempts to remove references to sexual and reproductive health from high-level UN policy documents endorsed by Members States,

From Ireland to South Korea, activists have helped dispel the stigma and secrecy surrounding abortion by sharing their stories. In Argentina and Poland, over a million women have marched to demand that their voices be heard. In the last year alone, legal abortion services opened up in Ireland and is on its way to becoming a reality in Northern Ireland too, after years of campaigning by groups, including Amnesty International. There was more good news in Argentina, where president-elect Alberto Fernndez promised he would move to legalise abortion after taking office in December 2019.

LGBTI rights

No doubt the LGBTI rights movement is more visible than ever before, but progress has been mixed in the past decade. In many countries, LGBTI people are still harassed in the streets, beaten up, arrested and sometimes killed simply because of who they are or who they love.

Consensual same-sex sexual activity is a crime in70 countries, and the death penalty is imposed as a punishment in a number of countries, including in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen. Sometimes, hostility directed at LGBTI people is stoked by their own governments.In Chechnya for example, a state-sponsored campaign led to the abduction, torture and even killing of people believed to be gay or lesbian

There have been a few momentous steps taken this past year. A landmark ruling in India decriminalised consensual same-sex relations, marking a critical milestone in the three-decades-old struggle by LGBTI activists and their allies in India. Taiwan became the first in Asia to legalise same-sex marriage after passing a historic law on 17 May 2019. And Pakistan passed one of the most progressive legislations in the world on transgender rights, becoming the first Asian country and one of the few in the world tolegally recognise self-perceived gender identity.

But for many LGBTI people around the globe who have been persecuted, maimed, killed, shamed, set on fire, refused entry into hospitals, shunned, raped and marginalised, there is still a long way to go. Governments must ensure that their rights are protected, and that discrimination on the grounds of real or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity is abolished.

Big Tech and data privacy

The decade took an Orwellian turn with the rise of Big Tech companies, such as Facebook and Google harvesting and monetising our personal data, and the consequent omnipresent surveillance of billions of people posing a systemic threat to our human rights.

While, at the beginning of the decade, we were all lulled into a false sense of security, believing we were simply sharing photos with a few friends, it became increasingly clear that our shared information could be exploited as both a weapon of influence and a means of spreading dangerous disinformation and online abuse. A decade later, the so-called influence industry in the form of social media platforms, internet search engines, data brokers and tech companies analysing our personal data and trading in predictions about peoples interests, characteristics, and ultimately behaviour for marketing and advertising, has become one of the biggest and most sinister societal threats of our time.

We now live in a world where insidious control of our digital lives has far-reaching consequences that go even beyond our privacy - disinformation and information manipulation is a continual battleground, with serious implications on our freedom of opinion, expression and thought. In polls, huge numbers of individuals say they are worried about the influence Big Tech has on their lives, concerned both about data revealing too much about them, and about data being used by state authorities to target them.

It took time for the human rights risks posed by Big Tech to become clear, partly because civil society and tech companies have traditionally worked together to keep the Internet free from state meddling, and by extension from regulation. A classic example is the defence of end-to-end encryption. This work is important. But by seeing the human rights threat as stemming from government surveillance and censorship, we have somehow failed to fully realise the magnitude of the threat caused by Big Techs ubiquitous presence.

As we move into a new decade, it will be governments responsibility to take action to protect us from corporate human rights abuses, including enforcing robust data protection laws and effective regulation of Big Tech, in line with international human rights law.

See the original post:

Human rights battlegrounds of the decade - Amnesty International

David BienenstockDecember 18, 2019

Bernie was a pioneer of cannabis decriminalization, and he introduced the first major legalization bill in Congress. But it that enough in 2019? (AP Photo/Meg Kinnard)

When Bernie Sanders called for national cannabis legalization in 2015, he was the first major party presidential candidate in history to do so.

That was exactly one election cycle ago, but it feels like an eternityparticularly when you consider that today 66% of Americans back this once-radical policy position, as does every Democratic 2020 presidential candidate this side of Joe Biden and Mike Bloomberg.

Sanders has long been out in front of the cannabis curve. But in late 2019, is he still at the forefront of the issue?

In 1968, four years after graduating from the University of Chicago, the Brooklyn-born Sanders moved to Vermont as part of a pronounced back-to-the-land counterculture migration. Still speaking with the thick Brooklyn accent of his youth, he left the big city behind and embraced rural life in a small New England town. He also hung around at hippie communes, demonstrated against the Vietnam War, ran in some heavy socialist circles and wrote articles for the local alternative newspaper.

Sanders clearly experienced the eras legendary cannabis scene firsthandthough only through osmosis. While the budding young politician was no doubt in a lot of smoky back rooms, he didnt often get high.

My hair was long, but not long for the times, he told New York magazine in 2014. I smoked marijuana but was never part of the drug culture. That wasnt me.

Sanders inhaled on just two occasionsand then stopped because I coughed my guts out. Sanders added: Its not my thing, but it is the thing of a whole lot of people.

That last addendum is vitally important, because its what separates Bernie Sanders from the rest of the contenders for the Democratic nomination. He may not smoke weed, but he gets weed culture in a way none of the other candidates can effectively muster. (Okay, except Andrew Yang. That guys definitely down).

In fact, if theres a cannabis equivalent to the which candidate would you most like to drink a beer with trope, its clearly the fired-up old hippie radical whos personal friends with Cardi B. and Ben and Jerry.

Fellow frontrunners Joe Biden (narc) and Elizabeth Warren (square) wouldnt come close.

Bernie Sanders spent much of the 1970s running as a perpetual third-party candidate for Vermont governor and senator. Then, in 1981, at the start of the Just Say No Ronald Reagan era, he was elected mayor of Burlington by just 10 votes after campaigning as a far-left socialist.

For the first time, Sanders held actual political power. And while he didnt make cannabis legalization a top-line issueat the time, only 25% of Americans supported that positionhe quietly set a policy that kept the cops from harshing too many mellows.

When I was mayor of Burlington, Sanders recalled many years later in a Reddit AMA, I can tell you very few people were arrested for smoking marijuana. Our police had more important things to do.

In 1988, Sanders ran for Vermonts single at-large congressional seat. He lost to a Republican, but came back and won two years latermaking him the first independent-party candidate to take a Congressional seat in 40 years. After 16 years in the House, Sanders became a senator in 2007, and has retained his seat by large margins.

During his nearly three decades in Congress hes had to work more indirectly when trying to shape cannabis policylargely because the federal governments cannabis policy has barely budged in all that time.

Back in 1995, a year before California became the first state to approve a medical cannabis law, Sanders co-sponsored a similar groundbreaking piece of legislation. His bill, HR 2618, never came up for a votebut if it had passed it would have provided for the therapeutic use of marijuana in situations involving life-threatening or sense-threatening illnesses, and tasked the Secretary of Health and Human Services with taking all necessary actions to secure and maintain a supply of marijuana adequate for the legitimate medical, research, scientific, and export needs of the United States.

More recently, as federal cannabis legalization has moved from a political pipe dream to a political inevitability, Bernie Sanders has remained a leading voice on the issue. Like many of his 2020 Democratic rivals, hes sponsored or co-sponsored legislation to end federal prohibition, including the Marijuana Justice Act of 2019 and the 2019 Marijuana Freedom and Opportunity Act.

As a presidential candidate hes now gone a step further, releasing a detailed three-step plan for implementing federal cannabis legalization in a way that prioritizes vacating and expunging past marijuana convictions and ensuring that revenue from legal marijuana is reinvested in communities hit hardest by the War on Drugs.

According to that plan, the process would begin with the appointment of an attorney general, Drug Enforcement Administration administrator and Health and Human Services secretary who will all work to aggressively end the drug war and legalize marijuana.

Thenwithin the first 100 days of his administrationPresident Sanders would de-schedule cannabis by executive order, removing it from the Controlled Substances Act entirely. This would not only de-facto legalize, it would also ensure that immigrants and visitors to the United States would no longer be denied entry or deported because of any past connection to cannabis.

After setting the stage for sweeping policy changes, the Sanders plan moves on to focusing on expunging the records of those people whove been arrested for marijuanaincluding allocating federal funds to help automate and expedite that process.

Finally, Sanders plan calls for building an inclusive and diverse legal cannabis industry that creates and sustains well-paying jobs, while sending financial support to communities that were disproportionately targeted for cannabis arrests under prohibition.

As we move toward the legalization of marijuana, I dont want large corporations profiting, Sanders told Showtime talk show hosts Desus & Mero. I want the people whove been hurt the most to be able to benefit.

That focus on bringing economic justice to the cannabis industry includes banning tobacco companies from participating. Sanders would establish a $20 billion dollar grant program to help entrepreneurs of color who continue to face discrimination in access to capital and those seeking to start cooperatives and collective nonprofits as marijuana businesses that will create jobs and economic growth in local communities.

Add to that another $10 billion through the US Department of Agriculture to help make legal cannabis cultivation accessible to people with prior arrests or convictions for growing the plant.

The plan even looks ahead to establishing national organic standards and certification for cannabis, and making sure all workers in the industry earn a living wage.

Maybe Bernie Sanders cannabis plan sounds like pie in the sky to you. Or Big Government run amok. But whatever your politics, if you love cannabis, youve got to show him some respect for waving the legalization flag for so long.

And if youve ever been busted for weed, you know he feels your pain. As he explained to Joe Rogan during a recent appearance on his podcast:

When I first talked about the need to legalize marijuana nationally it was considered a very radical idea, and now its spreading all over the country. And by the way, it blows my mind to drive past billboards from corporations that say Buy Our Marijuana in places where four years ago people were getting arrested for that, and having their lives destroyed.

Veteran cannabis journalist David Bienenstock is the author of "How to Smoke Pot (Properly): A Highbrow Guide to Getting High" (2016 - Penguin/Random House), and the co-host and co-creator of the podcast "Great Moments in Weed History with Abdullah and Bean." Follow him on Twitter @pot_handbook.

Excerpt from:

Is Bernie Sanders still ahead of the curve on cannabis? - Leafly

COLUMBUS, Ohio An influential coalition is again backing an Ohio criminal-sentencing reform bill, after state lawmakers undid changes that caused the coalition to drop their support in the first place.

Ohio officials for Americans for Prosperity and the ACLU said Tuesday theyre again supporting Senate Bill 3, which would reclassify many felony drug possession crimes as misdemeanors.

State senators amended SB3 last Wednesday, folding in elements of another bill that toughens penalties on people convicted of drug trafficking within 1,000 feet of a drug-treatment center. The move was meant in part to attract support from law-enforcement groups who oppose SB3. But in doing so, they prompted ACLU and the AFP to publicly drop their support, with other affiliated groups raising concerns more privately. They feared it would put more people behind bars, and disproportionately impact people in urban areas, contrary to the intent of the law.

So, the Senate Judiciary Committee removed the amendments on Tuesday.

I think it makes sense for everybody to consider these issues separately, and now we can do that again, said Gary Daniels, an ACLU lobbyist in Ohio.

Micah Derry, Ohio director for AFP, said his group still has concerns with other changes to the bill, but is back on board.

Hopefully the committee will pass the bill quickly upon return in 2020 as families continue to be damaged as their loved ones are often sentenced more harshly than an individuals crimes warrant, he said.

Senate President Larry Obhof told reporters separating the bills allowed legislators to consider the issues separately.

I thought it made more sense to let that bill follow its own path, he said.

The AFP and ACLU are part of the backbone of the left-right political coalition that has pushed for policy changes in recent years in Ohio, shifting the state away from a War on Drugs approach toward one that emphasizes treatment and rehabilitation.

SB3s backers say the legislation will help reduce Ohios prison population and help people with drug problems more effectively get their lives back on track.

Opponents, including law enforcement groups and judges, saying say it would eliminate options used to investigate drug crimes and to dont need to force addicts to be accountable to court-mandated treatment programs.

The bill is a top priority by Senate President Larry Obhof, a Republican. Hes said he plans to send the bill to a vote from the full Senate in the new year.

Read more recent Statehouse / Ohio political news:

In dog-bite case, Ohio Supreme Court says dogs dont need past dangerous designation for owner to be charged

Former TimkenSteel CEO Tim Timken opening lobbying and consulting firm

Donald Trump campaign files to appear on Ohio ballot

Former lieutenant governor among Republicans exploring challenging Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan

Gun background checks wont be on Ohio ballot in November 2020, backers announce

Link:

Key groups back in the fold on Ohio criminal sentencing reform bill after amendments removed - cleveland.com

We in the Golden State are delighted that the December Democratic presidential debate is to be hosted in Los Angeles. We welcome the candidates and are happy to share a few things that Californians really want you to know before you arrive.

First, we think its just plain weird that your rules nearly resulted in a stage with just white contenders. The nation is slated to become majority people of color by around 2044 but California actually crossed that threshold in 1998. Were Americas future and we want the field to look more like tomorrow than yesterday.

Second, were deeply concerned about income inequality. In the same way that California has been America fast-forward on demographic shifts our ethnic transformation between 1980 and 2000 mirrors the nations between 2000 and 2050 weve been way ahead on disparity. From being in the middle of the pack in terms of income gaps in 1969, we are now the fourth most unequal state in the union.

Were not proud of that and were hoping the next president can offer some answers. Improving the progressiveness of our income tax system and implementing a wealth tax would help. So would raising the federal minimum wage so we dont stand out as a high-wage island.

Third, we are proud of another fact: that roughly one-quarter of our residents are foreign-born and that approximately half of our children have at least one immigrant parent. We are also more than aware that immigrants contribute around one-third of our states GDP and that our economic problems worsened in the 1990s when we chose to scapegoat immigrants rather than develop strategies to counter deindustrialization.

So wed like you to not just firmly object to the rhetoric coming from the Trump administration but offer a positive agenda for immigrant integration. In our state, nearly 70% of those living without papers have been in the US for more than a decade: they are undocumented Californians. We need to prioritize immigration reform so they and their families can be safe and thrive.

Fourth, were not overly pleased to admit that we led on the over-incarceration binge. Between 1982 and 2008, the state prison population for the US increased by two and a half times but, for California, that number quadrupled. Driving those numbers was a toxic combination of a misguided war on drugs and a deeply embedded set of racist policing practices.

Were ready to make amends and have already passed a ballot measure that defelonized drug use and made it possible for the formerly incarcerated to have some felony convictions reclassified as misdemeanors. You can help by adding your own voice to criminal justice reform and also by making a commitment to promote workforce development efforts that prioritize those re-entering our communities.

Fifth, lets talk about climate change. We believe in it so much that we set our own ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and move to 100% renewable energy. We were already on that course, but the recent mix of raging wildfires and electrical blackouts has sort of sealed the deal on our conviction that this is serious business.

Stop just talking about a Green New Deal spell out what the goals, funding, and mechanisms will be. Make a commitment to ensure that coalminers fare well through a transition, but also to protect farmworkers from increasing heat and address the persistent health issues of fence-line communities as we roll back on refineries.

Which gets to our sixth request: talk about environmental justice. After all, study after study shows that there are disparities in terms of exposures by race and income, and that race is actually a more statistically significant and consistent predictor of disparity than class. Youll be on the right side of the facts climate change is real but so is the climate gap and there are political benefits as well.

Seventh, talk about housing. Yes, we have a particularly acute problem with rent burden and high housing prices here in California, but once again were probably just a few steps ahead of the nation as a whole. While some of the analysis is a bit overblown, its clear we live in a knowledge economy where high-paid professionals cluster and price everyone else out.

The federal government needs to step up its investment and not just in voucher subsidies that get sopped up by private landlords but also in new forms of public or social housing.

Eighth, lay out a vision for the caring economy. By this we mean the share of our population that will need ongoing support from others. Our ethnic shift has dramatically slowed: Californias mix of whites, African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders and others will not change much in the next few decades. But were all getting older.

Ninth, repair geographic divides. California has experienced a growing gap between our coastal and inland regions: in Fresno and Kern counties, for example, household incomes are less than half what they are in San Francisco and Silicon Valley.

The Golden State is trying to close that gap with Regions Rise Together, an initiative that seeks to prioritize investment in areas left behind. You should develop a similar initiative, echoing the Tennessee Valley Authority, a New Deal measure that incorporated a neglected part of America and helped to steady the tumultuous politics of that era.

Tenth, understand that change, no matter how talented you may be as a candidate, never really comes from the top. Our own state is a good example: our turn-around from the fiscal shortfalls that starved our educational system and our social safety net was largely the result of grassroots organizing that pushed our governor to support a progressive income tax.

Dont do what Obama did in 2008 dont fold up the organizing tent after you collect your votes. From the Womens March to Black Lives Matter to immigrant rights activists, America is enjoying a rebirth of social movements pushing the nation to the left.

Heres our final request: stop being scared of big, brave, progressive ideas. The country is in a deep constitutional crisis, riven by rising inequality, and seething with racial anxiety. Its not like weve been making headway with modest proposals. California has been able to push the envelope with bold initiatives on climate, immigrant rights, worker protection and so much more.

The nation is waiting for you to do the same.

Dr Manuel Pastor is a professor of sociology at the University of Southern California. His most recent book is State of Resistance: What Californias Dizzying Descent and Remarkable Resurgence Means for Americas Future

See the rest here:

Welcome to California: 10 things every 2020 presidential hopeful should know - The Guardian

In September 2018, the rapper Mac Miller died of a drug overdose a toxic combination of fentanyl, cocaine and alcohol. Three men were charged with distributing the drugs that allegedly led to his death. In July, Tyler Skaggs, a pitcher for the Los Angeles Angels, died from asphyxia. Fentanyl, oxycodone and alcohol were found in his system, and federal authorities are working to determine who provided the drugs that killed him.

Mac Miller (whose real name was Malcolm James McCormick) and Mr. Skaggs are among the hundreds of thousands of Americans who have lost their lives to drug overdoses. One way the authorities have responded to this crisis is by promoting the use of naloxone a medication used to revive people who have overdosed on opioids and expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder.

But despite the recognition of drug use as a public health issue, some states have also introduced drug-induced homicide laws that put the responsibility of an overdose at the feet of the drug suppliers. In Rhode Island, for example, under Kristens Law a person who supplies drugs to someone who overdoses can be punished with a life sentence.

These laws have been enacted in at least 25 states, while a few more are considering adopting them. They represent a return to the outdated war on drugs approach, which decades of research has shown to be unsuccessful. It instead increases risks for those who use drugs, particularly minority populations and people of color.

Some may see no problem with these laws. Partly because of rhetoric from the Trump administration, people tend to think that the drug supply is controlled by shady cartel figures and ruthless dealers who are stationed on American street corners.

The reality is far more complex. People who supply drugs are often friends or family members of those who overdose and often use drugs themselves. In a national survey, more than two in five people who reported having sold drugs also said they meet the criteria for a substance use disorder. Another analysis of drug-induced homicide news stories, conducted by the Health in Justice Action Lab at Northeastern University, found that 50 percent of people who were charged under drug-induced homicide laws were either friends, caretakers, partners or family members. Drug transactions are not as simple as buyer and seller.

All of this nuance is not captured in existing legislation. In Rhode Island, if someone were to give drugs to a friend in exchange for food or a place to stay for the night, that person could be charged if their friend fatally overdosed. The law criminalizes the exchange of anything of value for drugs, regardless of whether someone is a full-time dealer or merely passing drugs on. In other states, multiple people have been charged in the deaths of people they merely shared drugs with.

Proponents say that because these laws have good Samaritan provisions which protect from criminal consequence those who seek emergency medical assistance at the scene of a suspected drug overdose they will not discourage people from calling 911 to report an overdose. However, while studies have shown that knowledge of good Samaritan protections is associated with a willingness to call 911 in the event of an overdose, people are still afraid to call because of fear they will be charged. In Vermont, the state health department found in 2018 that fewer than 40 percent of people who requested a refill of naloxone reported calling 911. In the likely event that drug-induced homicide laws escalate such fears and prevent bystanders from calling 911, these laws will actually increase the rates of fatal overdose among those they are trying to protect.

A 2018 study of drug users in Baltimore found that those who sold drugs were 69 percent more likely to have witnessed an overdose in the past six months. Given that those who sell drugs are more likely to witness and therefore be in a position to intervene in the event of an overdose, these laws might be especially damaging and counterproductive. Adding a good Samaritan provision to a bill that is aimed to criminalize is hardly reassuring.

Whats more, putting drug users in jail will only worsen the overdose crisis. People who have recently been released from prison are at much greater risk of overdosing than the public up to 40 times greater in some cases. Most jails and prisons across the country do not have medications to treat opioid addiction, which means that when people are released they are especially vulnerable to fatal overdoses.

The war on drugs has hit communities of color the hardest, with Black and Latinx people much more likely to be arrested for simple possession and to receive harsher sentences than whites, despite rates of drug use being similar across all communities. Even with promises from the authorities to pursue a public health approach, racial disparities in drug-related arrests persist. A study conducted in Washington State found that among people who had received treatment for substance abuse disorder, black clients were more likely to have been arrested on substance-related charges compared to white clients. The rate of fentanyl-related overdose deaths has risen most sharply for black and Latinx people, so we can only expect that drug-induced homicide legislation will disproportionately and negatively affect them.

There has been progress: The Massachusetts Supreme Court recently struck down a drug-induced homicide conviction. The court argued that the prosecution did not provide sufficient evidence that Jesse Carrillo knew that the heroin he gave to a fellow student, Eric Sinacori, would cause a deadly overdose. Similar arguments can be made for other cases. Fentanyl has so contaminated the drug supply that it is hard to determine how much control individual sellers have on quality and content. Promoting the use of tools like fentanyl test strips, which can allow people to check their drugs before selling or using drugs, should be promoted. Indeed, when we recently collaborated with other researchers on a study of Rhode Islanders at risk of fentanyl overdose, we found that those with a history of drug dealing were among the most likely to use fentanyl test strips.

Punitive measures threaten the progress we have made on the overdose crisis. They push people into the shadows, increase overdose risk and contribute to racial disparities. If the authorities are serious about treating drug use as a public health issue, then they have to let go of this longstanding fixation on punishment.

Brandon D.L. Marshall is an associate professor of epidemiology at the Brown University School of Public Health, where Abdullah Shihipar is a masters degree candidate.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Read more:

The Latest Failure in the War on Drugs - The New York Times

Philadelphians have at least two things to be thankful for heading into the holidays.

Local indie rockers The War On Drugs announced a pair of holiday shows this week, benefitting the Fund for the School District of Philadelphia.

The second annual "Drugcember to Remember" will take place Sunday, Dec. 29, and Monday, Dec. 30, with the venues to be announced the week before the concerts. It's an opportunity for the group to play in their hometown, celebrate a local cause around the holiday season, and perform in more intimate venues than a band of their stature can usually commit to.

Check out the announcement from the band here.

The 2018 "Drugcember to Remember" raised more than $35,000 for Philadelphia's public schools.The War on Drugs played three sold outshows across Philadelphia at Johnny Brenda's, Union Transfer, and the Tower Theater along with Hop Along frontwoman Frances Quinaln.

The full announcement from the band also offered a glimpse that "more ideas are definitely brewing," followed by an Instagram post sharing a new collaboration with Harrisburgs Little Amps Coffee Roastersand artist and fellow Philadelphia-native Steve "ESPO" Powers.

The specialty Colombia/Nicaragua coffee blend of DrugCember Beans offers tasting notes of milk chocolate, citrus, and caramel apple, with artwork on the packaging by Powers.Its available for pre-order on The War On Drugs webstore and it will on sale at both holiday shows.

All proceeds from the coffee also go directly to the Fund for the School District of Philadelphia.

Fans hoping to attend either show will have to enter a lottery for the chance to buy tickets. Ticket requests (four tickets maximum per person) can be made through the bands website and the lottery will remain open until late Tuesday, Nov. 26. Note that you won't be charged if you aren't selected for the lottery, but a service fee still applies.

More ticketing information is available here.

Follow this link:

The War On Drugs again to host concerts to raise money for Philly's public schools - PhillyVoice.com

Marshall Frank, Your turn Published 2:47 p.m. ET Nov. 22, 2019

Marshall Frank is a retired police captain from Miami-Dade County, author and frequent contributor to Florida Today, part of USA TODAY NETWORK-Florida, which includes The News-Press.(Photo: File)

On Nov. 8, just 70 miles south of the U.S. border into Mexico, drug cartel savages opened fire on three American adults and six children, burning and killing them all. Murder is commonplace. Its not so unusual in Mexico to see bodies hanging from bridges.

Why? Its all about messages.

Its no mystery. Cartels have been killing for years. No matter how many authorities claim they are fighting the drug war, too many here and abroad are beholden to warlords, in fear for their lives and the lives of loved ones, so the carnage continues all for money and drugs.

Mexicos president was criticized recently after he declared a policy of hugs not guns in fighting the drug war. Hes too smart to be that stupid.

Arresting drug chieftain El Chapo was good news, though it accomplished nothing. No more than believing that radical Islamic Jihad is stunted because Bin Laden was killed. Great news, perhaps. Nothing changed. Drugs continue to flow. People die.

There are some who have suggested that domestic wars would be over if drugs were legalized. Hmm. Interesting thought. In fact, there is an organization called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) in which present and former police officers have banded together to further that idea. Crushing black markets via legalizing puts a new face on the situation. It might be worth thinking about this. LEAP is an organization of criminal justice communities who oppose the "War on Drugs" to be replaced with a system of legalized regulation as more efficient in dealing with drug use, abuse and addiction.

According to the Drug Policy Allowance,the U.S. spends $47 billion a year fighting the lost drug war. In 2018, that translated to 1.6 million drug arrests. Thats a lot of court dockets and prison cells. Over 200 thousand people have been killed in Mexicos drug wars since 2006.

Whatever happened to the old adage about doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results? Why dont we have leaders who think outside the proverbial box?

Black markets drive crime rates, in many modes, not just drug wars.

Does anyone really think that keeping prostitution illegal is going to stop prostitution? The black market has been driving prostitution for centuries. The worlds oldest profession is doing just fine under the radar, where police do their share of expanding criminal records and jail terms. If a hooker gets lucky she can opt to become an informant for other crimes. Las Vegas has the right idea. Legalize, license, tax, zone and medically control. It works fine in Nevada. Why put people in jail? What good does that do, America?

If former presidential candidate Beto ORourke had his way with criminalizing the sale and ownership of firearms, he would have created the mother of all black markets. He should be the poster boy for naivety. Americans may tolerate some form of firearm regulations, but they would never cede to erase Amendment 2.

What happened when Uncle Sam restricted the consumption of alcohol during Prohibition from1920 to 1933? The black market thrived while people drank themselves silly. Organized crime was in seventh heaven, thank you Congress. It was another failure in trying to control what cannot be controlled in a free society.

If we made all abortions illegal, wed spark another black market where novices and butchers conduct the procedures in animal vets and backroom parlors. Thats the way it was prior to Roe v.Wade. I know. I was there.

Some behaviors simply cannot be legalized. Like it or not, deterrents are necessary in order to control and prevent dastardly activities such as child pornography, sex trafficking or slavery. But if we didnt need to deploy 800,000 cops in the U.S. to fight unwinnable crime wars, wed have far less than 2.2 million people wasting away in prisons, therefore creating a windfall of savings to the taxpayer.

Perhaps if we diverted the gigantic cost savings from eliminating drug wars into programs that aid and treat drug addicts and the mentally ill, tax money would be better spent. We might actually safe lives.

Marshall Frank is a retired police captain from Miami-Dade County, author and frequent contributor. Visit marshallfrank.com.

Read or Share this story: https://www.floridatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/11/22/want-win-war-drugs-consider-legalizing-them/4273259002/

See the original post here:

Want to win War on Drugs? Consider legalizing them | Opinion - Florida Today

Rarely do we get the chance to right the wrongs of the past. But Rhode Island has an unprecedented opportunity to do exactly that in legalizing marijuana. Marijuana criminalization has been the tip of the spear in the disastrous War on Drugs. A drug whose criminalization ravages communities and overstuffs prisons is now set to make a few wealthy business owners even richer. Will Rhode Islanders demand that our state right a grave wrong, or will we simply let a few cash in on decades of injustice?

Right now, there are still tens of thousands of Rhode Islanders with marijuana charges on their record; convictions have disproportionately impacted people of color. The ACLU notes that black Rhode Islanders were 2.6 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than their white neighbors, despite similar marijuana usage rates. These convictions prevent people from accessing jobs, housing, education, and other pillars of stability. In 2017 alone, nearly 600,000 people across the country were arrested for marijuana possession, and nearly half of those arrested were people of color. While some Rhode Island elected officials have championed this issue for years state Representatives Scott Slater, Anastasia Williams, and Marcia Ranglin-Vassell, Senator Joshua Miller, and many others our state has been too silent for too long on the need for equity and the need to repair the damage so wantonly perpetrated.

In 2018, the state passed an important law to fast-track record expungement of criminal records, but the process remains expensive, cumbersome, and complicated. In short, people with fewer resources will have less access to this remedy. Instead, the state must do the equitable thing: administratively expunge records from the back end so people can build lives for themselves after surviving a harm in which we were all complicit.

As the new economy develops, state leaders must ensure that impacted communities have meaningful access. The financial capital and connections necessary to open a dispensary often present insurmountable hurdles for many people who might want to plant their feet in the lucrative industry. Responsively, the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission instituted a Social Equity Program, intended to give people wronged by the drug war access to the new economy

Although not quite a silver bullet, this program begins the process of acknowledging the duplicity of allowing well-connected entrepreneurs to capitalize on decades of destruction. While the revenue generated from legalization is slated to go primarily to the General Fund, it is imperative that the state reinvest those dollars in the communities torn apart by criminalization.

Within our lifetimes, we may not again have the opportunity to meaningfully repair historical harm. Lets ensure that we do just that: Clear the records, support access, and reinvest where it matters most.

Jordan Seaberry is director of Public Policy and Advocacy at the Nonviolence Institute. Annajane Yolken is executive director of Protect Families First.

See the article here:

A way to right a drug war wrong - The Boston Globe

The Justice Policy Institute has released a report, Rethinking Approaches to Over Incarceration of Black Young Adults in Maryland. In the report, the institute found that 70% of Marylands prison population in 2018 consisted of young black men. That number is significantly high considering that African-Americans only make up 31% of the states population.

Data gathered from Marylands 2016 Justice Reinvestment Act showed that 58% of all prison admissions were for nonviolent convictions, with the most common offense being possession with the intent to distribute narcotics.

Last summer, the Court of Appeals opened up in the drug case ruling of Michael Pacheco v. State of Maryland, with a line from Bob Dylans song the times they are a-changing. The decision in that case came a little more than six months after Baltimore City States Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced that her office would no longer be prosecuting marijuana possession cases.

This trend is not just happening in Maryland but across the United States, as we start to rethink how we view drugs laws and consider what the road ahead looks like in order to reverse the negative impacts that have plagued so many communities. So, as our views on drug laws continue to change, shouldnt the classification of our drug-related crimes?

The negative image of drugs was largely shaped by President Nixon during an address that he gave in 1971 when he declared drug abuse as public enemy No. 1. Now, over 40 years later, statistics show that the laws that were enacted to deter the sale and usage of illegal drugs have not worked.

This year, in President Trumps 2020 budget, the country is slated to spend approximately $1.8 billion on the investigation, enforcement, prosecution and supervision of individuals charged and convicted with drug-related crimes. The toll of Americas drug budget and laws on this countrys human capital is unsurmountable. The Drug Policy Alliance organization suggest that an estimated 1.6 million arrest are made nationally each year for drug-related offenses.

In 22 states, the possession of marijuana has either been legalized or decriminalized to a civil penalty, as marijuana dispensaries are popping up in communities that were once staunch proponents of tough-on-drug laws.

Recently, citizens and legislators in Alaska, California, Connecticut, Oklahoma and Utah successfully used the legislative process or voter referendums to reclassify drug possession from a felony to a misdemeanor crime.

Now, as we continue to rethink how we view drug laws, it is important for us to understand how the two dominant schools of thought around crime and punishment play into the penalties associated with crimes.

The utilitarian thought is that punishment should be used as a means of deterring wrongdoing, while the retributive belief is that offenders should be punished because they deserve to be. In many states, when you look at existing drug laws the punishment isnt scalable to the offense committed.

For example, in Maryland wearing or transporting an illegal handgun on your person or in your vehicle is a misdemeanor, while the distribution of narcotics carries the same penalties as violent crimes such as burglary, robbery and aggravated assault.

Many will disagree with the thought of reducing the criminal classification for the distribution of drugs, but why should the penalties for a nonviolent crime be so detrimental to a persons life?

During my years as a police officer with the Baltimore Police Department, I participated in hundreds of drug arrests. Others like myself, bought into the war on drugs agenda under the guise that enforcing these laws was critical to ensure public safety, but looking back on it we were all just prisoners of the moment.

We never thought about the collateral damage being done to the individuals or communities that these laws were enforced in, or how a felony charge or conviction could be a death sentence for someones future. And while most states have ban the box laws and other temporary protections in place to shield a persons criminal history, when it comes to employment, housing and certain financial information, the reality is that theres still a stigma attached to being a felon in this country.

So, as our elected officials plan to make their way to Annapolis in less than two months to participate in the 441st meeting of the Maryland General Assembly, we need to encourage them to not only continue the conversation on decriminalization, legalization and reducing the penalties for marijuana and other drug possession charges; we must also start to rethink the outcomes for those charged with drug distribution.

Yes, this will be an uncomfortable conversation for some, but when you start to understand the plight of many communities where African-Americans and Hispanics are fighting for survival, then youll realize that a bad decision in your youth shouldnt be a conviction on your life.

SAMUEL JOHNSON JR.

The writer is a former Baltimore City police officer and Maryland courts judicial officer with more than 14 years of experience in local and state government.

Did someone forward this to you?Get your own daily morning news roundup in your inbox. Free. Sign up here.

Original post:

Opinion: Changing the Rules on Drug Laws - Josh Kurtz

The Nightcrawlers 10pm, National Geographic

After Rodrigo Duterte was elected president of the Philippines in 2016, he swiftly began his war on drugs. In the years since, some 25,000 people have been killed, labelled as drug runners or dealers. With many of these killings occurring on the street and by masked gunmen, this documentary follows a group of photojournalists seeking to expose the true cost of this violence. It is a gripping real-life neo-noir on the heartbreaking human consequences of political bluster. Ammar Kalia

This film tells the shocking story of the 1979 raid on the Islamic holy site of Mecca by radical preacher Juhayman al-Otaybi, who held almost 100,000 pilgrims hostage and killed hundreds in the ensuing battle. With archive footage, it is an eye-opening account of a somewhat forgotten history. AK

You wouldnt trust any of these numpties to walk your dog, let alone run your business. And even if there is an entrepreneurial whiz hiding, how could we tell from Lord Sugars tangential tasks? This week, it is full steam ahead for a corporate awayday onboard the Belmond British Pullman train. Ellen E Jones

Tragedy struck in October 2018 when a Boeing 737 crashed into the Java Sea and all 189 onboard were killed. This March, an Ethiopian Boeing 737 also crashed, killing 157 people. This doc investigates what went horribly wrong in both cases and examines the future of the company. AK

Prof Alice Roberts is a powerhouse of enthusiasm as she heads west to dig out precious artefacts at a secret Cotswolds location. There are archaeological puzzles on Salisbury Plain and on the Welsh coast, where medieval bones are found. The scenery is beautiful and the discoveries are fascinating. Hannah Verdier

This new two-parter compiles UK-focused stories about extreme calls to emergency services. Talking heads and news footage help contextualise each incident including the Finsbury Park van attack in 2017 but it is the composure of the 999 call-handlers that stands out amid the chaos. Graeme Virtue

The Departed (Martin Scorsese, 2006) 11.30pm, ITV4With Martin Scorseses The Irishman on release, here is an earlier slice of his mobster mayhem. Jack Nicholson makes his debut for the master with a showboating performance as the Boston gangster Frank Costello; Leonardo DiCaprio and Matt Damon also star in this brutal remake of Infernal Affairs. Paul Howlett

International Tennis: Great Britain v Netherlands 10am, Eurosport 1. Group E Davis Cup finals match at the Caja Mgica in Madrid.

Tennis: Croatia v Spain 5pm, Eurosport 1. Group B Davis Cup tie in Madrid.

International Cricket: New Zealand v England 9pm, Sky Sport Main Event. First day of the Test series at Bay Oval in Tauranga.

Go here to read the rest:

TV tonight: a heartbreaking look at Rodrigo Dutertes bloody war on drugs - The Guardian

The War On Drugswill return next month for the rock bands first public performances in a year when they regroup to host their third annual DRUGCEMBER TO REMEMBER benefit concerts at the end of December.

Related: The War On Drugs Wins Over The Hollywood Bowl [Videos]

The two nights of music will take place in Philadelphia, PA on December 29th and 30th, although details of the exact locations werent included with the bands announcement on Wednesday.Proceeds from both concerts will go to benefit The Fund for the School District of Philadelphia. The band noted with the announcement that they successfully raised $35,000 for the same cause at last years performances.

The War On Drugs have taken all of 2019 off from performing, as the band spent much of 2018 on the road in continued promotion behind 2017s A Deeper Understanding. The 2017 studio album marked another successful release from primary songwriter/singer/guitarist Adam Granduciel, as it reached the top 10 onBillboard200 Chart in the United States, a notable rise from 2014s Lost in the Dream, which peaked at No. 26.

As of Wednesday, the band has no performances scheduled for 2020, but fans should stay on the lookout for possible announcements coming closer to the end of the year.

Tickets for the two DRUGCEMBER TO REMEMBER shows will be available only via anexclusive ticket request confirmation process, which is now open for submission here.

See original here:

The War On Drugs To Return For Annual 'Drugcember To Remember' Philadelphia Benefit Concerts - Live for Live Music

The cartel members showed up in this verdant stretch of western Mexico armed with automatic weapons and chainsaws.

Soon they were cutting timber day and night, the crash of falling trees echoing throughout the virgin forest. When locals protested, explaining that the area was protected from logging, they were held at gunpoint and ordered to keep quiet.

Stealing wood was just a prelude to a more ambitious plan.

The newcomers, members of a criminal group called the Viagras, were almost certainly clearing the forest to set up a grow operation. They wouldnt be planting marijuana or other crops long favored by Mexican cartels, but something potentially even more profitable: avocados.

Mexicos multibillion-dollar avocado industry, headquartered in Michoacan state, has become a prime target for cartels, which have been seizing farms and clearing protected woodlands to plant their own groves of what locals call green gold.

Avocado groves carved into the hillside outside the city of Uruapan, where cartels have evolved beyond drug trafficking and now prey on the avocado trade.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

More than a dozen criminal groups are battling for control of the avocado trade in and around the city of Uruapan, preying on wealthy orchard owners, the laborers who pick the fruit and the drivers who truck it north to the United States.

The threat is constant and from all sides, said Jose Maria Ayala Montero, who works for a trade association that formed its own vigilante army to protect growers.

After seizing control of the forest in March, the Viagras announced a tax on residents who owned avocado trees, charging $250 a hectare in protection fees.

But they had competition. Rivals from the Jalisco New Generation cartel wanted to control the same stretch of land and residents were about to get caught in the middle of a vicious fight.

In May, a convoy of pickup trucks loaded with Jalisco fighters raced into the woods and an hourlong gun battle broke out.

Juan Madrigal Miranda, a 72-year-old professor who runs a small nature center in the area, cowered on the floor of his small cabin as bullets flew overhead.

His fear eventually gave way to anger at the growing power of the criminals, 10 of whom died in the forest that day.

Around the country, the cartels want land, forest and water, Madrigal said. Now they are fighting for the keys to life.

Juan Madrigal Miranda lives in a forest outside Uruapan that is contested by two Mexican cartels.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

::

Homicides are at an all-time high in Mexico, which has long been home to the worlds most powerful and violent narcotics traffickers. Yet much of the killing today has little to do with drugs.

Organized crime has diversified.

In Guanajuato state, the homicide rate has nearly tripled over the last three years as criminals battle for access to gasoline pipelines, which they tap to steal and sell fuel.

In parts of Guerrero state, cartels control access to gold mines and even the price of goods in supermarkets. In one city, Altamirano, the local Coca-Cola bottler closed its distribution center last year after more than a dozen groups tried to extort money from it. The Pepsi bottler left a few months later.

In Mexico City, bar owners in upscale neighborhoods must pay taxes to a local gang, while on the nations highways, cargo robberies have risen more than 75% since 2016.

Compared with drug trafficking, a complex venture that requires managing contacts across the hemisphere, these new criminal enterprises are more like local businesses. The bar to entry is far lower.

This new approach to organized crime was pioneered by the notorious Zetas cartel and spread in response to the governments 2006 declaration of war on drug traffickers.

Mexican forces, with strong U.S. support, focused on capturing or killing cartel leaders. But that strategy backfired as the big cartels fractured into smaller and nimbler organizations that sought criminal opportunity wherever they could find it.

For many of those smaller groups, its far easier to just prey on local populations, said Falko Ernst, a Mexico-based analyst with the International Crisis Group, which promotes nonviolent solutions to conflicts. Its a myth that its only about drugs.

The entrance to Tancitaro, an avocado-growing hub in Mexico that created its own vigilante police force protect the local avocado trade.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

In Michoacan, where there have been dozens of cartel splits over the last dozen years, organized crimes invasion of the avocado industry is a microcosm of what is happening elsewhere in the country and a potent illustration of how the government has unintentionally fueled more violence.

Many people here now long for the early 1990s, when just one family trafficked drugs through the region and the state was largely at peace.

::

The Valencia family was known as a benevolent force.

It built churches, gave money to the sick and averted violence by paying local authorities to ensure easy shipment of marijuana, heroin and cocaine to the United States.

But by 2000, trafficking groups from other parts of the country had grown envious of the Valencias, in particular their control of the Lazaro Cardenas seaport on Michoacans Pacific coast.

The Gulf cartel, based in the eastern state of Tamaulipas, went to battle with the family, sending in its paramilitary force, the Zetas.

Formed in the late 1990s by deserters of an elite Mexican army unit, the Zetas embraced a new philosophy when it came to the drug trade. Instead of simply controlling strategic points along drug transport routes, they sought to minimize risk by also commandeering businesses along the routes.

In Tamaulipas, that meant taking over the sale of stolen gasoline and the smuggling of migrants. In Michoacan, the Zetas partnered with locals to put the Valencias out of business and then began extorting money from cattle ranchers and lime farmers.

The local partners eventually rebelled, denouncing the Zetas as thieving outsiders while also adopting their predatory tactics.

Uruapan was in many ways ground zero for the Mexican drug war. Now cartels are evolving beyond drug trafficking.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

In 2006, members of a group that called itself La Familia Michoacana burst into a crowded nightclub in Uruapan and rolled five severed heads onto the dance floor a message to the Zetas and a turning point for a nation not yet accustomed to such barbarity.

The groups methods helped it win control of the state, but they also provoked President Felipe Calderon to send in several thousand troops, the opening salvo in his national fight against cartels.

The government strategy failed to end crime and violence in Michoacan, and in some ways only made things worse.

The Viagras, for example, probably wouldnt exist today if not for the states interventions.

Originally part of La Familia and later the Knights Templar cartel, which emerged in 2011 after the government crackdown, the Viagras later joined a government-run rural police force designed to topple the cartels.

When that force was disbanded, the Viagras lost their paychecks. But they still had their weapons and military-style training, so they returned to crime.

At the same time, another important change was transforming the state: Americans were falling in love with avocados.

Between 2001 and 2018, average annual U.S. consumption increased from 2 pounds per person to nearly 7.5 pounds.

Workers sort avocados at a factory in Tancitaro, Mexico.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

Michoacan, whose plentiful rain, sunshine and rich volcanic soil make it an ideal place to grow the fruit, was uniquely positioned to capitalize on its rising popularity. It is the only state in the country allowed to sell to the United States, which banned avocados from Mexico until 1997 over concerns about pests.

As exports of Michoacan avocados boomed on their way to $2.4 billion last year luxury housing developments and car dealerships sprang up in Uruapan and elsewhere as huge swaths of forest were cleared to grow more.

And the increasing number of criminal groups all wanted a piece of the action.

::

On a recent chilly morning at a large farm a few hours outside Uruapan, dozens of avocado pickers sipped coffee around a crackling fire, preparing for a grueling day.

Scaling trees and clipping avocados pays much better than many jobs in Mexico $60 a day compared with the $5 minimum wage but it increasingly comes with serious risks.

Mayco Ceja, a slight 28-year-old who spent his childhood in California, said the dozen-man team of pickers that he leads was recently summoned to a farm that turned out to be run by gang members.

They came at us with pistols, he said. They forced us to pick for seven hours and didnt pay us.

Pickers harvest avocados outside Tancitaro, Mexico.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

Avocado picking is well-paid by Mexican standards, but it is an increasingly dangerous job.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

On other occasions, gangs have barred his team from working in order to create a scarcity in supply, which raises the profits for cartel-controlled groves.

Before the Valencia family trafficked drugs, it grew avocados, and it is an open secret here that for decades criminals have used avocado farms to launder money. But never have the lower rungs of the industry been so vulnerable, with multiple gangs extorting cash from small-time growers and state officials recording an average of four truckloads of avocados hijacked each day.

One driver, who was heaving 45-pound crates of avocados into a tractor-trailer, said that in the last six months he has been held up twice by armed men who forced him to drive to a safe house and unload there.

He was too afraid to give his name. Theyll come to your house and shoot up your whole family, he said. Kids included.

Last year, 1,338 people were killed in Michoacan, more than any year on record. This year has been even deadlier, with 1,309 homicides through October, putting the death toll on track to top 1,500.

Security has become so tenuous that in June a group of avocado producers bought ads in several national newspapers warning of an irreparable impact to the industry unless officials address the problem.

In August, the U.S. Department of Agriculture temporarily suspended its avocado inspection program in a town near Uruapan after threats to some of its employees. Local media reported that one inspector had been carjacked and another group of employees subjected to intimidation after they canceled a farms certification.

Michoacan exports $2.4 billion in avocados each year.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

Eduardo Moncada, a political scientist at Barnard College who is writing a book in part about extortion in Michoacan, said the avocado trades relationship with organized crime varies dramatically across the region, which makes it difficult for authorities and citizens to navigate.

When you dont know who controls what, it becomes much harder to live your daily life, he said.

Many here had high hopes for President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who took office a year ago and declared that Mexico was no longer at war with cartels. But besides vowing to fight poverty and shift security duties from the military to a newly created civilian National Guard, he has yet to articulate a new plan to curb violence.

There is an abject absence of law enforcement strategy, said Vanda Felbab-Brown, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. If youre going to say what does not work, you have to say what will work.

In the meantime, avocado producers in Michoacan are taking their own drastic measures.

After gangsters burned down two major packing plants and kidnapped the 16-year-old son of another prominent packer several years ago, producers in the municipality of Tancitaro, a major avocado hub an hour and a half from Uruapan, rose up.

Working with the local avocado trade association, the producers armed their own civilian police force, built guard towers at the entrances to every town and orchestrated a takeover of the municipal government by ensuring that only one mayoral candidate theirs was on the ballot.

A tower used for protection and defense against organized crime in Tancitaro, Mexico.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

Members of an armed police force patrol in Tancitaro, Mexico.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

The strategy has been criticized as a dangerous experiment in frontier justice. Yet the government has not intervened, and for now, the efforts appear to be working.

Its safe here now, said Diana Flores Murillo, the sister of the 16-year-old who was kidnapped.

Now the director of finance at her fathers profitable company, she arrives safely to work each day in a shiny red Jeep and new Gucci sneakers.

::

Madrigal, the ecologist, was so angry after war broke out in the woods in May that he went to state authorities to complain about a cartel takeover of the forest.

Instead of helping, he said, state police officers broke into his home when he was not there, overturning furniture, stealing gardening tools and leaving him a warning note to stay silent. State police officers did not respond to requests for comment.

He fought back by filing a complaint with the states human rights commission and taking the story to local journalists.

The worst-case scenario is that they decide Im making too much noise and they kill me, he said.

In the forest, the felling of trees continues. So does the cartel war.

One morning in August, residents in Uruapan awoke to a grisly scene.

Be a patriot, read a banner draped from a highway overpass and signed by the Jalisco New Generation cartel. Kill a Viagra!

Dumped nearby were 10 corpses, some of which had been dismembered. Nine more bodies hung from the bridge seven men and two women strung up for the whole town to see.

Cecilia Sanchez of The Times Mexico City bureau contributed to this report.

See more here:

Violence in Mexico peaks as cartels fight over drugs and avocados - Los Angeles Times

Corazon, the recovery coach,says the Cascadia Psychedelic Community, which she founded, is one in a network of more than 100 local psychedelic societies stretching from San Francisco to Norway, Britain, Spain, Holland, Portugal, Hungary, the Czech Republicand even Nashville. At an international conference last year, representatives of those societies traded notes on decriminalization, legalizationand intracommunity challenges, including efforts to guard against sexual abusers operating as therapists.

Closer to home, the Port Townsend Psychedelic Society, which seeks to decriminalize all entheogenic plants and fungi throughout Jefferson County, has already made its case to the local health board, city council, mayor, police chiefand county commission. "So far, everyone has been curious, open-mindedand helpful," says Erin Reading, a member of the campaign.

All in all, says Corazon, were happy to be getting a second or third or 11th chance, whichever it is, to realize the full medical and social potential of psychedelics.

The first chance came serendipitously, in 1943, when a Swiss chemist named Albert Hoffmann accidentally absorbed a bit of lysergic acid diethylamide, a prospective respiratory stimulant he had developed, and experienced apsychedelic trip. Hoffmann went on to synthesize psilocin, psilocybinand other hallucinogens and to hail LSD, his original "problem child," as a valuable aid to meditation and psychotherapy.

In the 1950s and early 60s, psychotherapists reported bracing, even miraculous results using LSD to treat alcoholism, depressionand anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorders. Even Bill Wilson (Bill W.), the co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous, tried it and hailed its potential; Cary Grant announced his 60 sessions with LSD had made him a happy man. Henry Luce, the publisher of Time and Life magazines, and his wife, the conservative icon Clare Booth Luce, were enthusiastic psychedelic samplers and boosters. One of Luces headline writers coined the term magic mushrooms.

Then, what Licata calls bad marketing in the form of countercultural excess and the messianic antics of the psychedelic researcher-turned-showmanTimothy Leary got in the way.

Fantastic, sometimes fabricated tales of LSD-induced suicides and other horrors became media staples. President Richard Nixon, fearing (rightly) that chemically assisted mind expansion might encourage dissent and war resistance, declared the first War on Drugs. Drugs proved handy scapegoats and political cudgels just as they would in the 1980s, when the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations rekindled the war. In the 1972 campaign, Nixons supporters falsely but successfully tarred Democrat George McGovern as the candidate of acid, amnesty [for draft resisters] and abortion.

And so psychedelics joined heroin and marijuana on the federal Schedule I list of drugs with "no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse." Funding dried up and research died for nearly three decades. Studies restarted, quietly, in the late 90s and have accelerated since. Better-controlled formal trials and extensive, if covert, treatment experience have supported the earlier findings.

The new John Hopkins center will explore psilocybins effectiveness at treating opioid addiction, Alzheimer's disease, PTSD, chronic Lyme disease, anorexia, and alcohol use in people with major depression. MDMA (Ecstasy), an amphetamine derivative with effects resembling the classic psychedelics, has proven so effective at treating PTSD in early trials that FDA approval for general use is widely anticipated by 2021.

Contrary to what their Schedule I listing presumes, LSD and psilocybin have in seven decades shown virtually no addictive or fatal overdose potential (though they can trigger severe psychological effects in vulnerable individuals, especially in casual, unguided use). Now these drugs are getting another chance in the courts of politics and public opinion.

But is decriminalization even needed in the relatively liberal, tolerant venues like Seattle where its most likely to succeed?

The rest is here:

Mushrooms, meetups and mainstreaming the movement to decriminalize drugs - Crosscut

Marijuana's momentum has been undeniable in recent years. Last year, we saw Canada become the first industrialized country in the world to legalize recreational cannabis in the modern era. Now, Mexico looks to be just months away from becoming the third country worldwide to OK the sale and consumption of adult-use weed.

We've also seen33 states since 1996 wave the green flag on medical marijuana in the United States. A third of these medical weed states have also passed legislation allowing the consumption and/or sale of recreational pot.

Image source: Getty Images.

And yet, despite two-thirds of the American public favoring some sort of national legalization program, the U.S. federal government continues to classify cannabis as a Schedule I substance. That means it's entirely illegal, is deemed to be prone to abuse by users, and is considered to have no recognized medical benefits. In fact, cocaine has a less stringent scheduling than marijuana, according to the Controlled Substance Act. But the illegality of marijuana is just the start.

Even though the federal government has taken a hands-off approach to state-level regulation, this isn't exactly making life easy for companies in the cannabis space. For one, U.S. pot businesses have limited or no access to basic banking services. Since banks are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the FDIC is a federally created agency, they fear potential financial and/or criminal repercussions if caught aiding cannabis companies. This means limited or no access to everything from loans and lines of credit, to something as simple as a checking account.

In addition, marijuana businesses in the U.S. can be subjected to Section 280E of the tax code. Implemented in the early 1980s to curb cocaine smugglers from writing off their business expenses on their federal income taxes, 280E disallows businesses from taking normal corporate income tax deductions if selling Schedule I and II drugs, save for cost of goods sold. For pot companies and retailers, cost of goods sold tends to be a relatively small percentage of sales, which can lead to exceptionally high effective tax rates for profitable cannabis companies.

However, the House of Representatives wants to change this. All of it.

Image source: Getty Images.

Four months ago, on July 23, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) introduced the Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement Act, or MORE Act, in Congress. The MORE Act is on track to be the first comprehensive marijuana reform legislation set to be voted on in Congress after the House Judiciary Committee voted 24-10 in favor of the bill on Wednesday, Nov. 20. The MORE Act now moves to the next stage of the process, which would be a vote in the Democratic-dominated House. (Note that Democrats have a considerably more positive view on legalizing cannabis than Republicans do.)

If the bill were approved in its current form, here's a brief summary of its key points:

Essentially, the MORE Act ensures that states would have the right to regulate their own industries, but it would allow the federal government to collect their piece of the pie with a 5% tax on legal product. It would also help to right the perceived wrongs of the War on Drugs by helping those most impacted by the federal government's efforts to stamp out drugs use, including cannabis.

The MORE Act already has more than 50 co-sponsors, and it looks to have a very good chance of passage in the House.

Image source: Getty Images.

If the MORE Act were to pass the House, it would then move on to the Senate, where things get considerably cloudier. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is certainly no fan of cannabis and has blocked riders specifically targeting marijuana reform in the past. With McConnell at the helm, cannabis reform continues to look unlikely.

What's more, Republicans have a more adverse view of cannabis than Democrats or Independents. The latest Gallup poll shows that 76% of self-identified Democrats and 68% of self-identified independents support legalizing pot in the U.S., with only 51% of self-identified Republicans on board with legalizing weed. There would need to be strong bipartisan support in the Senate for the MORE Act to pass, and that doesn't seem likely to happen, at least in the way the bill is currently written.

But, interestingly, neither Mitch McConnell nor the more adverse beliefs of the GOP toward cannabis are the biggest concern of the MORE Act. The bill's fatal flaw is actually the establishment of a 5% federal tax on cannabis.

Arguably the biggest hurdle in recreationally legalized states right now is black market marijuana. Illicit producers don't have to wait for cultivation, processing, distribution, or sales licenses to be approved, they don't pay state or federal income tax, and they avoid state, local, excise, and wholesale taxation (depending on the state). If the federal government adds yet another layer of taxation atop legal marijuana, it's only going to make the price disparity between legal and illicit pot even wider.

Image source: Getty Images.

For example, California, the biggest marijuana market in the world by annual sales, applies a state and local tax, a 15% excise tax, and a wholesale tax on leaves or dried cannabis flower, to every pot sale. Mind you, this doesn't include other expenses, such as laboratory testing, that you can count on being added into the final cost of a product by retailers. Now imagine tacking on an additional 5% tax from the federal government. Based on a variety of estimates I've seen, we could be talking about an aggregate tax on legal Californian cannabis of between 50% and 80%, which would make it virtually impossible for legal producers to complete against the black market.

And if you think this worry is all for naught, think again. On Jan. 1, 2018, California opened its doors to recreational weed sales, but only managed $2.5 billion in total cannabis sales last year (that's recreational plus medical). This represents a decline of $500 million from the previous year, when only medical marijuana was legal. Consumers are clearly showing their displeasure with high tax rates, and its players like MedMen Enterprises (OTC:MMNFF) that have suffered the consequences.

Multistate operator and dispensary operator MedMen has been expanding in California rapidly, with the company now sporting more than a dozen locations in the Golden State. The passage of Prop 64 and the opening of retail doors in Jan. 2018 should have allowed MedMen to recognize rapid sales growth and potentially push toward profitability. Instead, MedMen's losses have been astronomical, and the company's sequential quarterly sales growth at its California locations has chimed in at a meager 5% and 10% in the fiscal third and fourth quarters, respectively.

California has shown us what happens when you overtax marijuana, and the MORE Act appears to have ignored that lesson entirely.

Read the original post:

The House Wants to Legalize Marijuana, but the MORE Act Has a Fatal Flaw - The Motley Fool

URUAPAN, Mexico The cartel members showed up in this verdant stretch of western Mexico armed with automatic weapons and chainsaws.

Soon they were cutting timber day and night, the crash of falling trees echoing throughout the virgin forest. When locals protested, explaining that the area was protected from logging, they were held at gunpoint and ordered to keep quiet.

Stealing wood was just a prelude to a more ambitious plan.

The newcomers, members of a criminal group called the Viagras, were almost certainly clearing the forest to set up a grow operation. They wouldnt be planting marijuana or other crops long favored by Mexican cartels, but something potentially even more profitable: avocados.

More than a dozen criminal groups are battling for control of the avocado trade in and around the city of Uruapan, preying on wealthy orchard owners, the laborers who pick the fruit and the drivers who truck it north to the United States.

The threat is constant and from all sides, said Jose Maria Ayala Montero, who works for a trade association that formed its own vigilante army to protect growers.

After seizing control of the forest in March, the Viagras announced a tax on residents who owned avocado trees, charging $250 a hectare in protection fees.

But they had competition. Rivals from the Jalisco New Generation cartel wanted to control the same stretch of land and residents were about to get caught in the middle of a vicious fight.

In May, a convoy of pickup trucks loaded with Jalisco fighters raced into the woods and an hourlong gunbattle broke out.

Juan Madrigal Miranda, a 72-year-old professor who runs a small nature center in the area, cowered on the floor of his small cabin as bullets flew overhead.

His fear eventually gave way to anger at the growing power of the criminals, 10 of whom died in the forest that day.

Around the country, the cartels want land, forest and water, Madrigal said. Now they are fighting for the keys to life.

Homicides are at an all-time high in Mexico, which has long been home to the worlds most powerful and violent narcotics traffickers. Yet much of the killing today has little to do with drugs.

Organized crime has diversified.

In Guanajuato state, the homicide rate has nearly tripled over the last three years as criminals battle for access to gasoline pipelines, which they tap to steal and sell fuel.

In parts of Guerrero state, cartels control access to gold mines and even the price of goods in supermarkets. In one city, Altamirano, the local Coca-Cola bottler closed its distribution center last year after more than a dozen groups tried to extort money from it. The Pepsi bottler left a few months later.

In Mexico City, bar owners in upscale neighborhoods must pay taxes to a local gang, while on the nations highways, cargo robberies have risen more than 75% since 2016.

Compared with drug trafficking, a complex venture that requires managing contacts across the hemisphere, these new criminal enterprises are more like local businesses. The bar to entry is far lower.

This new approach to organized crime was pioneered by the notorious Zetas cartel and spread in response to the governments 2006 declaration of war on drug traffickers.

Mexican forces, with strong U.S. support, focused on capturing or killing cartel leaders. But that strategy backfired as the big cartels fractured into smaller and nimbler organizations that sought criminal opportunity wherever they could find it.

For many of those smaller groups, its far easier to just prey on local populations, said Falko Ernst, a Mexico-based analyst with the International Crisis Group, which promotes nonviolent solutions to conflicts. Its a myth that its only about drugs.

In Michoacan, where there have been dozens of cartel splits over the last dozen years, organized crimes invasion of the avocado industry is a microcosm of what is happening elsewhere in the country and a potent illustration of how the government has unintentionally fueled more violence.

Many people here now long for the early 1990s, when just one family trafficked drugs through the region and the state was largely at peace.

The Valencia family was known as a benevolent force.

It built churches, gave money to the sick and averted violence by paying local authorities to ensure easy shipment of marijuana, heroin and cocaine to the United States.

But by 2000, trafficking groups from other parts of the country had grown envious of the Valencias, in particular their control of the Lazaro Cardenas seaport on Michoacans Pacific coast.

The Gulf cartel, based in the eastern state of Tamaulipas, went to battle with the family, sending in its paramilitary force, the Zetas.

Formed in the late 1990s by deserters of an elite Mexican army unit, the Zetas embraced a new philosophy when it came to the drug trade. Instead of simply controlling strategic points along drug transport routes, they sought to minimize risk by also commandeering businesses along the routes.

In Tamaulipas, that meant taking over the sale of stolen gasoline and the smuggling of migrants. In Michoacan, the Zetas partnered with locals to put the Valencias out of business and then began extorting money from cattle ranchers and lime farmers.

The local partners eventually rebelled, denouncing the Zetas as thieving outsiders while also adopting their predatory tactics.

In 2006, members of a group that called itself La Familia Michoacana burst into a crowded nightclub in Uruapan and rolled five severed heads onto the dance floor a message to the Zetas and a turning point for a nation not yet accustomed to such barbarity.

The groups methods helped it win control of the state, but they also provoked President Felipe Calderon to send in several thousand troops, the opening salvo in his national fight against cartels.

The government strategy failed to end crime and violence in Michoacan, and in some ways only made things worse.

Originally part of La Familia and later the Knights Templar cartel, which emerged in 2011 after the government crackdown, the Viagras later joined a government-run rural police force designed to topple the cartels.

When that force was disbanded, the Viagras lost their paychecks. But they still had their weapons and military-style training, so they returned to crime.

At the same time, another important change was transforming the state: Americans were falling in love with avocados.

Between 2001 and 2018, average annual U.S. consumption increased from 2 pounds per person to nearly 7.5 pounds.

Michoacan, whose plentiful rain, sunshine and rich volcanic soil make it an ideal place to grow the fruit, was uniquely positioned to capitalize on its rising popularity. It is the only state in the country allowed to sell to the United States, which banned avocados from Mexico until 1997 over concerns about pests.

As exports of Michoacan avocados boomed on their way to $2.4 billion last year luxury housing developments and car dealerships sprang up in Uruapan and elsewhere as huge swaths of forest were cleared to grow more.

And the increasing number of criminal groups all wanted a piece of the action.

On a recent chilly morning at a large farm a few hours outside Uruapan, dozens of avocado pickers sipped coffee around a crackling fire, preparing for a grueling day.

Scaling trees and clipping avocados pays much better than many jobs in Mexico $60 a day compared with the $5 minimum wage but it increasingly comes with serious risks.

Mayco Ceja, a slight 28-year-old who spent his childhood in California, said the dozen-man team of pickers that he leads was recently summoned to a farm that turned out to be run by gang members.

They came at us with pistols, he said. They forced us to pick for seven hours and didnt pay us.

On other occasions, gangs have barred his team from working in order to create a scarcity in supply, which raises the profits for cartel-controlled groves.

Before the Valencia family trafficked drugs, it grew avocados, and it is an open secret here that for decades criminals have used avocado farms to launder money. But never have the lower rungs of the industry been so vulnerable, with multiple gangs extorting cash from small-time growers and state officials recording an average of four truckloads of avocados hijacked each day.

One driver, who was heaving 45-pound crates of avocados into a tractor-trailer, said that in the last six months he has been held up twice by armed men who forced him to drive to a safe house and unload there.

He was too afraid to give his name. Theyll come to your house and shoot up your whole family, he said. Kids included.

Last year, 1,338 people were killed in Michoacan, more than any year on record. This year has been even deadlier, with 1,145 homicides through September, putting the death toll on track to top 1,500.

Security has become so tenuous that in June a group of avocado producers bought ads in several national newspapers warning of an irreparable impact to the industry unless officials address the problem.

In August, the U.S. Department of Agriculture temporarily suspended its avocado inspection program in a town near Uruapan after threats to some of its employees. Local media reported that one inspector had been carjacked and another group of employees subjected to intimidation after they canceled a farms certification.

Eduardo Moncada, a political scientist at Barnard College who is writing a book in part about extortion in Michoacan, said the avocado trades relationship with organized crime varies dramatically across the region, which makes it difficult for authorities and citizens to navigate.

When you dont know who controls what, it becomes much harder to live your daily life, he said.

Many here had high hopes for President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who took office a year ago and declared that Mexico was no longer at war with cartels. But besides vowing to fight poverty and shift security duties from the military to a newly created civilian National Guard, he has yet to articulate a new plan to curb violence.

There is an abject absence of law enforcement strategy, said Vanda Felbab-Brown, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. If youre going to say what does not work, you have to say what will work.

In the meantime, avocado producers in Michoacan are taking their own drastic measures.

After gangsters burned down two major packing plants and kidnapped the 16-year-old son of another prominent packer several years ago, producers in the municipality of Tancitaro, a major avocado hub an hour and a half from Uruapan, rose up.

Working with the local avocado trade association, the producers armed their own civilian police force, built guard towers at the entrances to every town and orchestrated a takeover of the municipal government by ensuring that only one mayoral candidate theirs was on the ballot.

The strategy has been criticized as a dangerous experiment in frontier justice. Yet the government has not intervened, and for now, the efforts appear to be working.

Its safe here now, said Diana Flores Murillo, the sister of the 16-year-old who was kidnapped.

Now the director of finance at her fathers profitable company, she arrives safely to work each day in a shiny red Jeep and new Gucci sneakers.

Madrigal, the ecologist, was so angry after war broke out in the woods in May that he went to state authorities to complain about a cartel takeover of the forest.

Instead of helping, he said, state police officers broke into his home when he was not there, overturning furniture, stealing gardening tools and leaving him a warning note to stay silent. State police officers did not respond to requests for comment.

He fought back by filing a complaint with the states human rights commission and taking the story to local journalists.

The worst-case scenario is that they decide Im making too much noise and they kill me, he said.

In the forest, the felling of trees continues. So does the cartel war.

One morning in August, residents in Uruapan awoke to a grisly scene.

Be a patriot, read a banner draped from a highway overpass and signed by the Jalisco New Generation cartel. Kill a Viagra!

Dumped nearby were 10 corpses, some of which had been dismembered. Nine more bodies hung from the bridge seven men and two women strung up for the whole town to see.

2019 Los Angeles Times

Visit the Los Angeles Times atwww.latimes.com

Distributed byTribune Content Agency, LLC.

More:

Inside the bloody cartel war for Mexico's avocado industry - SecurityInfoWatch

When Kevin Allen realized he was sliding back into a familiar pattern of theft and drug use, he sought help somewhere unusual: the Seattle Police Departments West Precinct.

It was 2013 and Allen had been out of prison for about a year and a half, where hed served two years after getting caught selling crack cocaine to an undercover officer. He was homeless, again struggling with bipolar disorder and addiction. Having previously been arrested about 70 times for theft and drug offenses, he didnt want to end up back in handcuffs.

Today, the 61-year-old is a Bellevue College student. Hes studying to become a substance-use disorder counselor, works part-time and has a subsidized apartment. Though his journey hasnt been altogether smooth, in the past year, Allen says, everything has changed.

He credits the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) program, which allows police to connect people like him with case managers and services, rather than leaving them on the streets or cycling through jail.

Birthed here, LEAD has won widespread acclaim and spread rapidly across the country, drawing attention from leaders such as Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren. Seattle has figured out how to end the War on Drugs,New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof declaredrecently.

And now, the Seattle City Council is poised to boost LEAD even more, energizing reformers despite some tension at City Hall over disagreement about how rapidly the program should grow.

Mayor Jenny Durkans proposed 2020 budget includes only a modest increase, but the City Council intends to double LEADs budget next year, while restricting other repeat-offender strategies pitched by Durkan.

The mayor says she hasnt been wholly convinced bystudiesfrom 2015that indicatedLEAD was reducing arrests and saving taxpayer money, nor by metricsthat showthe program is serving hundreds of people. Her representatives say Seattle should proceed cautiously because LEAD lacks updated data on subsequent arrests and clarity about case loads.

We absolutely need diversion programs, Durkan said in an interview. We just want to make sure that as we invest in things, theyre having the outcomes we all expect.

But council members have ranked LEAD among their most urgent priorities, based on evidence like the peer-reviewed studies and enthusiasm for the program among respected criminal-justice reformers. They say bold action is needed to improve safety on the streets, and theyre unanimous in that view, so theyll call the shots on the budget.

We need to continue to support evidence-based tools that are helping the city meet the needs of low-level drug users, sex workers and people who have behavioral-health issues, Councilmember M. LorenaGonzlez said, pointing to backing from cops, prosecutors, public defenders and business owners alike.

The data on arrests and charges that Durkan seeks is actually held by the city, not LEAD, LEAD creator Lisa Daugaard noted, saying the program has been through more rigorous testing and collects better metrics than other approaches. Furthermore, LEAD boosters say some aspects of the program arent easy to quantify. Under its harm-reduction model, participants arent automatically kicked out of the program if theyre arrested again. And case managers aim to get their clients sober and housed, but they also care about helping their clients reach small successes, like obtaining identification.

Allens life didnt change overnight. Though LEAD helped him buy food and clothes and get into treatment, he was in and out of sober houses and was arrested twice on warrants with drugsin his possession, plus half a dozen times for retail theft. He was also arrested in early 2018 for selling a small amount of crack in Belltown and was sentenced to six months in jail.

But as a LEAD participant, Allen received some latitudefrom prosecutors, and his case manager stood by him. Following his release from jail last year, the program supported Allen as he enrolled in school, helped him secure housing and assisted with medical bills related to a recent heart attack.

They just didnt give up, Allen said.

Growing program

Launched in 2011 as a pilot program in Belltownand initially bankrolled by private donors, LEAD is a partnership with the nonprofit Public Defender Association (PDA) that allows police officers to link people involved with low-level drug and propertycrimes and prostitution to social services.The program has since spread across Seattle to Capitol Hill, Pioneer Square and Aurora, been added in Burien and been replicated in more than 30 other jurisdictions, including Portland and San Francisco.

In Seattle alone, the number of people enrolled in LEAD, which also uses King County and private-sector dollars, has soared from about 400 at the end of 2017 to more than 750 today.PDA executive director and LEAD creator Daugaard recentlyreceived a MacArthur Foundation genius grant.

The city has helped make LEADs growth possible, budgeting $2.3 million this year, and the program has been bolstered by cash from a state legal settlement related to people with mental illnesses languishing in jail. LEAD became eligible byserving people with severe and persistent mental health conditions.

Even so, demand is outstripping LEADs resources, bringing Seattle to a crossroads. The council could dramatically increase spendingto serve as many as 1,400 people by the end of 2020, or could take Durkans tack.

In a letter last month to Sally Bagshaw, the councils budget chair, Deputy Mayor Mike Fong acknowledged LEADs popularity. But he said the Durkan administration wants to see even more validation of curbed crime.

We must be able to evaluate the degree to which LEAD is meeting its prime objective of reducing criminal recidivism, Fong wrote. We must have a range of programs.

The mayor in September announced her own $3 million set of strategies to break the streets-jail cycle, including a new homeless shelterand a probation program aimed at moving repeat offenders into treatment,with an assistant city attorney to oversee such initiatives.

Daugaard says LEADs model is proven and warns the program could break down without an adequate budget.

LEAD is not a single tool but rather a framework for coordinating all the available tools to the best effect, Daugaard wrote in a reply to Fong, arguing outcomes depend greatly on whether treatment, services and apartments are available.

There are 300 people who have been referred but cant be assigned case managers because LEAD is over-subscribed, Daugaard said. Business associations in Ballard, Chinatown-International District, downtown, Pioneer Square and Sodo recently urged the council to expand the program, which maintains neighborhood offices.

LEAD case manager Steve Currys 35clients need varying support, ranging from periodic check-ins to intense assistance, he said. In a single day this month, he helped two clients with medical issuesandjuggled appointments with others in between.

It was overwhelming, Curry said.

Budget plans

Tweaks to Durkans budgetthat cleared the councils budget committee in a unanimous vote Tuesday include an additional $3.5 million for LEAD next year,on top ofthe $2.5 million proposed by the mayor. Seattles spending on the programwould surpass $6 million.

The council is scheduled to pass the 2020 budget Monday, and its increase for LEAD would rank among its most substantive moves in whats been a relatively quiet budget season, politically.

While making the LEAD bump and other additions, the council would redirect millions of dollars from a South Lake Union property sale and trim funding to various Durkan priorities, including her probation proposal, which harm-reduction advocates have criticized as coercive.

The program was also able to secure a $1.5 million grant from the Ballmer Group, which includes a condition that the city commit to funding LEAD to scale by 2023, allowing the program to accept all eligiblereferrals deemed a priority by Seattle police.The council plans to direct the mayors office to lead a study to determine that funding level.

Overall, the increase in funding would allow LEAD to hire 54 more case managers, whereas the program employs only 19 today, and work with 1,400 clients.Case managers would be capped at 25 clients each, down from 44. LEAD also would increase employee salaries to improve retention and the Seattle City Attorneys Office could assign a second prosecutor to the program, according to the council.

Fong said LEAD already has benefited from an unusually rapid ramp-up. Even without the councils add, Seattle is set to spend about three times more money on LEAD than in 2015.

Bagshaw believes now is the right time to bring the program to scale, however, because political resistance to the innovative idea has mostly receded. We know what works, we can invest in it and Ive got the [council] majority to do it, she said.

Whats known

Behind the scenes, LEAD and Durkan representatives have been debating whether evidence showsa substantial increase in spending is justified.

A series of studies conducted by University of Washington researchers in 2015 and peer-reviewed more recently found reductions in jail bookings, prison and felony charges for LEAD participants, compared with a control group, leading to cost savings.They didnt show significant reductions in misdemeanor charges, though Seattle hadnt yet assigned a misdemeanor prosecutor to the program. The researchers found LEAD reduced subsequent arrests by nearly 60%.

The Durkan administration wants to see more recent metrics.Determining appropriate caseloads is complicated because some clients require more time than others, Fong added.

Ultimately, LEAD partners agree additional metrics would be useful and evaluation projects are underway, including a database bankrolled by Microsoft.

However, the programs boosters argue that the costly, scientific 2015 studies remain relevant because LEADs methodology hasnt changed. They also say the ability to produce updated criminal-justice data for Seattle clients lies with the Durkan administration. Results tracked by the county suggest continued success, with most clients enrolled between 2014 and 2017 spending less or no time in jail through 2018.

LEAD cites other data showing the breadth of the programs services: About 560 participants are now considered active, having met with case managers in the past three months, according to LEAD.Case managers have logged 20,000 meetings this year.

LEAD participants about 70% of whom are homeless receive no special access to subsidized apartments. Notwithstanding, 89 obtained permanent housing last year.

In Seattle Municipal Court, 114 clients had their misdemeanor cases coordinated last year by LEADs assistant city attorney, who attended 1,064 hearings.

Ibelieve Im more effective using LEAD, said Heather Aman, the assistant city attorney. I can individualize what Im asking the judge for.

Even more telling is how much officers like LEAD, Gonzlezsaid. The program was supposed to launch in Sodo this year, but cops elsewhere are keeping its case managers too busy for a full roll-out.

Reporter Sara Jean Green contributed to this story.

See the original post here:

Seattle council wants to expand program that keeps low-level offenders out of jail, getting help they need - Seattle Times

Need to know

What is it? XCOM clone based on the Netflix show.Expect to pay $24/20Developer KujiPublisher Curve DigitalReviewed on Intel i5, 16gb RAM, Nvidia GTX 1660Multiplayer? NoLink Official site

I've only watched the first series of Narcos, but I know enough to know that it is a crime show: it features things like police work, with the DEA protagonists capturing Pablo Escobar's lieutenants, finding evidence, etc. Narcos: Rise of the Cartels contains almost none of this, and instead tries to tell the story of the Medellin Cartel exclusively through XCOM style turn based tactical combat. It makes the war on drugs a literal war.

Let's talk about the elephant in the room here: this is a fucked up way to depict police work. In the very first scene of the tutorial, the game asks the player to "bring a gang member in". This involves shooting him repeatedly because this is the only interaction that is available to you (until you unlock grenades). Occasionally missions will have objectives like "obtain some evidence" or "rescue a hostage", but just as often it's "assassinate a cartel leader".

Narcos the TV show was clearly trying to acknowledge the amoral tactics employed by the police, but Narcos the game only really does so via the fact that it contains clips from the show. The fact that you've gunned downed hundreds of people in the street over the course of the game is barely commented on. This is the peril of a 'real world' setting, it invites real world questions.

I'm not against depicting the drug war in a strategy game, but Rise of the Cartels doesn't really intersperse the combat sections with anything but cutscenes and levelling up your troops. It would help if there were some kind of strategy layer between missions showing the police doing actual police work (or the cartels expanding their influence), but even then there would probably be an extraordinary amount of bloodshed even for 1980s Columbia. As it is the most interesting parts of Narcos the showEscobar's attempt at a political career or the wild card element of militant communists M-19just don't fit within the game's narrow framework.

Playing as the Narcos makes things less morally fraught, as you are at least aware that you are definitely the bad guys, however the two campaigns are very similar. Both sides use reskinned versions of the same units, just joined together by different cutscenes and story missions.

The showcase change from the standard turn-based tactics formula is when the game quickly breaks into manually aimed modes for overwatchcalled "counteract"or 'kill shots', which offers a random chance to finish off an enemy on low health. While I can see the logic for adding them, they aren't really satisfying enough for anyone who actually wants a reaction shooter experience, and are far too intrusive for someone who wants hands-off strategy gaming. The most satisfying interactions are the comboing of various moves, which gives nearby allies extra movement, extra actions or extra overwatch shots. It was fun to build a cop/lookout unit that existed purely to run around and cheer his buddies on.

An unfortunate series of mechanics interact here. Every unit can heal one hitpoint a turn by not moving but, in between missions, it costs money to heal a unit up. As a result, the player is incentivised to hang back, slow play, and heal all their units to full before finishing the mission. This isn't helped by the highly defensive AI, which makes roughly the same calculation I just did and spends most of its time standing still and relying on overwatch, sometimes even neglecting to protect the objectives it is supposed to be defending. One thing that reliably gets the enemy to act aggressively is if you leave one of your men standing out of cover, leading to the bizarre strategy of intentionally exposing a sacrificial lamb as a trap to entice the enemy forwards.

There's the bane of any licensed game, an automatic game over whenever anyone who happens to star in the Netflix show gets killed.

It also has the unusual choice to do an "I go then you go" turn based system, but with no restrictions on using the same units over and over, often meaning one or two members of your team will get steadily left behind as there is no mandatory move to catch them up. Finally there's the bane of any licensed game, an automatic game over whenever anyone who happens to star in the Netflix show gets killed, a recipe for frustration.

I've spent most of the last year playing various XCOM-likes, and Narcos isn't the worst, but it isn't impressive either. More importantly there simply isn't enough variety here, once you've played a dozen missions you've seen basically all the tricks the game has, yet it expects you to continue playing with only a few new perks to keep your interest. Ultimately I found myself asking the dreaded question, "Why am I not just playing XCOM instead?"

Read more:

Narcos: Rise of the Cartels review - PC Gamer

People who sell drugs, people who use drugs and people who participate in gang activity have been blamed for the increase in violence in Winnipeg in 2019.

The response from manyhas been calls formore "tough on crime" approaches and an increasein funding for police.

When we are talking about significant public investments, though, shouldn't we be asking about how likely this approach is to reduce the harms from drug use and prevent violence?

How does this approach align with the stated needs and proposed solutions from the communities most impacted?

Police have an important role to play, but what they are doing when they are on the streets matters. Police presence can help prevent violence when it is focused on building relationships in the community, and when active measures to reduce racism in policing are in place.

However, the Winnipeg Police Service has responded to the recent spike in violence by decreasing public access to stations in the north, east and west, and by redirecting officers to general patrol from Project Devote (dedicated tosolving MMIWG cases) and the community relations unit, which focuses on initiatives like the Block Parent Program, Citizens on Patrol, crime prevention, diversity relations and Neighbourhood Watch programs.

We have been in circles and have listened to members of the police speak constantly about the importance of community involvement to prevent crime, and the importance of community supports for people who are struggling so the police don't end up being overloaded.

Well, the plan to redistribute officers will ensure the police continue to be overwhelmed and overworked, with tense relationships in the community, until at least mid-January 2020, when the plan will be revisited.

A police- and criminal justice-focused approach will disproportionately affect black, brown and Indigenous people, those living in poverty, people living in the inner city and, of course, people who use drugs all of whom are traditionally overrepresented in the justice system.

It has been well established that this "war on drugs"-type approach will not increase public safety, prevent violence or reduce the harms from drug use. This approach continues the colonial crisis that has been affecting Indigenous people, which we wrote about in 2018.

Leaving so much of the city and provincial responses to policing alone, refusing services to people who use drugs, and telling people to "just say no" is not going to work.

The World Health Organization Violence Prevention Alliance uses an ecological framework to highlight the interactions between factors at the individual, relationship, community and societal level that result in some people or communities being at a higher risk of violence.

These include factors like adverse childhood experiences, substance use, personal relationships (which may be protective or risk factors), income, unemployment, socioeconomic inequality and the availability of weapons, among others.

The Violence Prevention Alliance recommends 10 scientifically credible violence prevention strategies, including:

We need a better multilevel response and most of these 10 scientifically crediblestrategies are ones we have already worked hard on as Aboriginal Youth Opportunities, as well as 13 Moons Harm Reduction, and along with our partners at Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, Kani Kanichihk and the Manitoba Harm Reduction Network.

In 2018 at the Community Matters Conference (resources and report available here) these organizations worked together to learn about solutions that have worked well in Iceland.

The goal of the Iceland approach is to prevent or delay the onset of youth substance use which also results in reducing crime and reducing harms from drug use. They focus on five key strategies:

The current discourse around violence and drug use in Winnipeg is preventing us from being able to take an Indigenist public health, community-led approach that's rooted in the real causes and needs, as opposed to the perceived causes and fears.

The approaches that youth leaders and community organizers have been shouting from megaphones for since Meet Me At the Bell Tower started eight years ago are aligned with the WHO Violence Prevention Alliance Strategies and are backed by science.

If we continue to attribute the violence to drug dealers and gangs and other stigmatizing discourses, then we will falsely promote the idea that policing and tough-on-crime approaches are the answer, despite limited evidence that they will be effective and substantial evidence that they will cause harm.

If we understand harmful substance use and violence as rooted in societal and community environments that are unequal and unhealthy, with disrupted relationships as a result of colonization, racism and poverty, then we can take a public health and evidence-based approach.

This includes reducing income inequality; investing in community, neighborhood and school environments that promote meaning, belonging, purpose and hope; funding recreation and safe spaces for youth; and resourcing community-led organizations that support kinship, positive relationship building and strong cultural identities.

We are going to do this by listening to people most directly impacted by harms related to drug use and violence, treating violence as the public health concern it is, and working with systems to beef up supports to families so they don't have to live in the circumstances that cause tragedies any longer.

This column is part of CBC's Opinion section. For more information about this section, please read this editor's blog and our FAQ.

Follow this link:

Why the 'tough on crime' approach won't work to end violence in Winnipeg - CBC.ca