With less than two months left before the next U.S. president is elected, ScienceBlogs wanted to dedicate a space to campaign politics. A Vote For Science is a group blog that will focus on the candidates' science policies. It is 
An Op-Ed by Senator Orrin Hatch (R; Utah) in the Miami Herald objects to the fact that President Obama chose to downgrade the head of the ONDCP (Seattle Police Chief R. Gil Kerlikowske is the Obama nominee) from the Cabinet to a "presidential appointment in the Executive Office of the President".
The ONDCP's principal purpose is to establish policies, priorities and objectives for the nation's drug control program. The goals of the program are to reduce the use, manufacture and trafficking of illicit drugs, as well as drug-related crime and violence and drug-related health consequences. To achieve these goals, the drug czar is charged with setting the national strategy.By downgrading this important strategic position, the president effectively cuts this position's authority off at the knees. The result is the drug czar lacks the clout to speak directly to the president and attend cabinet meetings with the secretary of Homeland Security and the attorney general.
Okay, as you can probably tell, I have a lot of homer interest in things related to substance abuse and dependence. My professional work is only indirectly related to public policy issues but nevertheless it is hard for me not to have some interest in policy. Certainly, my appreciation for the scope of our many problems related to drug abuse, including the hidden masses of people who struggle along with addiction without blowing up, is better than average.
But still. I watched the Presidential campaign last year with an eye for the drug-abuse policy stuff. In the end I was happy that it was such a minor part of the campaigning. Drug abuse is most certainly a problem. But we have other ones too...and it is no crime for a Presidential administration to place a primary focus elsewhere. I think the voting public's failure to agitate for more explicit statements from Obama (and McCain and Clinton..) on various drug-policy issues shows that they agree as well.
Ultimately, I think it is perfectly okay to downgrade the Drug Czar's clout and standing. Just so long as he has some productive role and manages to listen to the science...unlike the last guy. It is a fair trade to lose Cabinet status if the ONDCP stops generating idiotic positions such as the one against using opiate antagonists to rescue over-dosed heroin users. The family and friends of people like this poor soul would appreciate a saved life a lot more than some poorly-supported handwaving about "encouraging drug use", wouldn't they?
Politics
Medicine & Health
Comments
I think downgrading the office is smart. At cabinet level the tendency is to keep the focus 'up-to-eleven', to run it as a war against an existential threat.
Handled at a lower level the facts become much clearer. Drugs are a problem but but not an existential threat. Our resources are not limitless. Which might lead to a change from a prohibition and elimination strategy to a management and harm-reduction strategy that will make the most of the limited resources we have.
Posted by: Art | March 27, 2009 3:35 PM
Just read your post about the not wanting to release Narcan to OD rescue programmes, and all I can say is, WTF?
The only ONLY issue with Narcan availability on a wider scale I can see would be the one we sometimes get in the ED when the person who OD'd wakes up, and starts yelling "You ruined my buzz!"
Looks like some of these drug-war types are so ideologically anti-drug that they have stopped seeing the actual goal: get people back into society in whatever capacity they can function.
Posted by: red rabbit | October 21, 2009 7:22 AM
I watched the Presidential campaign last year with an eye for the drug-abuse policy stuff.
Posted by: kilo aldirici | October 23, 2009 6:49 AM