| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Gaming | VB Image Host | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| Hot Products! | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Buddhist Curmudgeon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 16,796
Grams: 91,121.27 Thanks: 995
Thanked 6,788 Times in 3,136 Posts
| Bush Administration Using Taxpayer Dollars to Interfere With State Marijuana Ballot Initiative DEA claims to be "experts" in policy development, rather than law enforcement Mason Tvert | SAFER | 08/27/2006 DENVER -- According to a report in today's Daily Camera (Boulder, CO), the executive branch's Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) is using federal taxpayer dollars to actively campaign against a statewide marijuana policy reform initiative in Colorado. Statements from the DEA in the report indicate that federal officials are not only committing these acts -- which may well be illegal -- but are doing so aggressively, with the confidence that what they are doing is appropriate. Despite comments from the federal Office of Special Counsel and a professor (quoted in the article) suggesting that federal officials can involve themselves in non-partisan elections without limitation, the law suggests otherwise. The federal Hatch Act specifically discusses non-partisan elections and in two sections specifically proscribes certain activities by federal employees. The Code of Federal Regulations (Title 5, Part 734) covers the Hatch Act. In the definitions section (§ 734.101), the CFR defines a "nonpartisan election" as "(2) An election involving a question or issue which is not specifically identified with a political party, such as a constitutional amendment, referendum, approval of a municipal ordinance, or any question or issue of a similar character." In Section 734.203 (Participation in nonpartisan activities), the CFR specifically provides, "An employee may: [...] (d) Participate fully in public affairs, except as prohibited by other Federal law, in a manner which does not compromise his or her efficiency or integrity as an employee or the neutrality, efficiency, or integrity of the agency or instrumentality of the United States Government or the District of Columbia Government in which he or she is employed." It is clear here that the DEA's actions compromise the neutrality of the agency with respect to the state ballot initiative in question. Finally, the Hatch Act prohibits employees from using their official authority in an inappropriate manner. Section 734.302 provides, "An employee may not use his or her official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election." The CFR does not distinguish between partisan and non-partisan elections in this section, despite the fact that both kind of elections are discussed in the Act. One must therefore assume that it is inappropriate for federal employees to use their official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering in any election. Statement of SAFER Campaign Manager Mason Tvert: "The DEA's employees can do what they want on their free time, but when they are on the clock they are neutral law enforcement officers, and in this case they are in violation of federal laws if they campaign against a state ballot initiative. We are not aware of a situation where federal interference in a state ballot initiative has been so blatant. If this behavior continues, we will ask the Office of Special Counsel to re-examine its position on this specific behavior. "Not only is this another case of our nation's chief executive overstepping his authority, but it is a perfect example of how misguided our federal government's priorities are, especially in terms of its drug policy. Despite the fact that every objective body that has ever looked into marijuana has found it to be less harmful than alcohol, including a DEA administrative law judge in 1988, the federal government increased the funding for the fight against marijuana once again this year and cut funds from youth alcohol education programs and enforcement of underage drinking. "The increased funding for the war on marijuana was even delivered in Denver by our nation's Drug Czar during one of two trips he's made to Colorado since we kicked off this state initiative. Given the fact that alcohol use kills tens of thousands of people each year -- including a couple underage college students in Colorado -- and marijuana use has never killed a single person in history, there is clearly a more useful way our nation could be spending our money. All Americans -- but especially Coloradans -- should be disgusted by these actions of our president and his federal government." -- Contact: Mason Tvert, campaign director, 720-255-4340 |
| | |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |||
| | |||
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
| |
| | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| USA: Hemp Farming Act of 2007 Introduced in Congress | Migz420 | The Drug War Headline News | 2 | 02-15-2007 09:22 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |