WASHINGTON — President Obama weighed in Wednesday on the escalating drug war on the U.S.-Mexico border, saying that he was looking at possibly
deploying National Guard troops to contain the violence but ruled out any immediate military move.
"We're going to examine whether and if National Guard deployments would make sense and under what circumstances they would make sense," Obama said
during an interview with journalists for regional papers, including a McClatchy reporter.
"I don't have a particular tipping point in mind," he said. "I think it's unacceptable if you've got drug gangs crossing our borders and killing U.S.
citizens."
Already this year there have been 1,000 people killed in Mexico along the border, following 2008's death toll of 5,800, according to federal officials
who credit Mexican President Felipe Calderon for a crackdown on drug cartels.
But the spillover on the border -- for example, to El Paso from neighboring Ciudad Juarez -- has created a political reaction.
In a recent visit to El Paso, Texas Gov. Rick Perry called for 1,000 troops to protect the border.
Obama was cautious, however. "We've got a very big border with Mexico," he said. "I'm not interested in militarizing the border."
The president praised Calderon, "who I believe is really working hard and taking some extraordinary risks under extraordinary pressure to deal with
the drug cartels and the corresponding violence that's erupted along the borders."
Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., chair of a key subcommittee on border security, will hold a hearing Thursday on Mexican border violence.
"Last week Mexico sent an additional 3,200 soldiers to the border," Sanchez said in a prepared opening statement for the hearing, "increasing the
total number of Mexican soldiers combating drug cartels to more than 45,000."
Sanchez chairs the House Committee on Homeland Security's subcommittee on border, maritime and global counterterrorism.
"It should be noted that over 200 U.S. citizens have been killed in this drug war, either because they were involved in the cartels or were innocent
bystanders," she said. "With those concerns in mind, it is essential that the Department of Homeland Security, along with other relevant departments,
continue to pursue a contingency plan to address 'spillover' violence along our border."
At a hearing this week, Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, who visited Mexico last month as part of a congressional delegation tour, praised the so-called
Merida Initiative -- a drug cartel fighting agreement between the U.S. and Mexico that provides Mexico with $1.4 billion to control drug trafficking.
"From helicopters and surveillance planes to non-intrusive inspection equipment, the U.S. investment is intended to provide the hardware necessary for
the Mexican government to extend its authority to those remote and hard-to-access parts of the country ravaged by the drug trade," said Granger.
That agreement between Calderon and President George W. Bush will be updated, Obama said.
"We expect to have a comprehensive approach to dealing with these issues of border security that will involve supporting Calderon and his efforts in a
partnership, also making sure we are dealing with the flow of drug money and guns south, because it's really a two-way situation there," said Obama.
"The drugs are coming north, we're sending funds and guns south," he said. "As a consequence, these cartels have gained extraordinary power. Our
expectation is to have a comprehensive policy in place in the next few months."
[Edited on 3-12-2009 by Woooosh]Woooosh - 3-12-2009 at 10:13 AM
or not...
"Obama opposes 'militarizing' border"
Mexico's drug war and the risks of crossborder violence deserve top-level attention, President Barack Obama said in an interview yesterday, but it
isn't time to send U.S. troops.
"We've got a very big border with Mexico," the president said. 'Tm not interested in militarizing the border." Last month, Texas Gov. Rick Perry
visited El Paso, Texas -whose neighbor, Ciudad Juarez, has taken the brunt of drug violence that has claimed more than 7,000 lives in Mexico in 14
months - and called on Washington to send a thousand troops or border agents.
"We're going to examine whether and if National Guard deployments would make sense and under what circumstances they would make sense," Obama said. "I
don't have a particular tipping point in mind. I think it's unacceptable if you've got drug gangs crossing our borders and killing U.S. citizens."
Mexican President Felipe Calderón declared a war on drug cartels nearly two years ago, setting off waves of violence as rival gangs fight for turf and
survival. Former President George W. Bush hammered out a deal with Caldero'n called the Merida Initiative, to provide equipment and training to help
Mexico take on the traffickers and weed out corruption.
Obama supports the plan and vows a close partnership with Calderón. He said he'll offer his own "comprehensive policy . . .
in the next few months" to address U.S. drug demand, northbound smuggling, and the southbound flow of cash and guns that have given the cartels what
he called "extraordinary power." Obama noted recent highlevel contacts between U.S. and Mexican officials as a sign of the partnership.
Last Friday, for instance, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff met with counterparts in Mexico and offered more intelligence and
surveillance, and training based on lessons learned against insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Also yesterday, Obama named a new national drug czar, Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske. Bush gave the post Cabinet rank, and Obama removed that
designation, bristling at the suggestion that means he isn't as serious about fighting drugs.
"The implication was somehow that I think we should weaken our drug laws. That's never been my position," Obama said in the interview, vowing better
funding for addiction treatment.
"We do have to treat this as a public health problem, and we do have to have significant law enforcement," he said. "If we can reduce demand,
obviously that allows us to focus more effectively where interdiction is needed." Obama also rejected the push by some southern Republicans to end
Justice Department oversight of election procedures.
"You don't just leave it up to the states to self-correct," he said, defending the reasoning behind the Voting Rights Act, a Lyndon Johnson-era civil
rights reform. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this year on the validity of a key section that requires states with a history of Jim Crow
practices, such as literacy tests and poll taxes - including Texas and its counties and cities - to "preclear" redistricting plans and even minor
adjustment to polling sites.Bajahowodd - 3-12-2009 at 11:40 AM
I wonder if some sort of a bi-national covert ops force would help. Uniformed personnel at or near the border sends the wrong message.
As for the seeming downgrade of the drug czar post, I think it's a step in the right direction. "War" on drugs. Indeed.
Send in the Marines
CaboRon - 3-12-2009 at 12:10 PM
It time for Gomer to step in .....
David K - 3-12-2009 at 05:29 PM
Too funny... first he insults the British with the lame gift of some movies to the PM... now this.cantinflas - 3-12-2009 at 06:24 PM
Ya to bad he does not have the style ,class and international detante of GWB.comitan - 3-12-2009 at 07:57 PM
Looks like some of you are part of the problem, status Quo!!! Drastic problems take drastic solutions.DENNIS - 3-12-2009 at 08:05 PM
Maybe the Minutemen should just open the trunks of their cars. I'm all for it. Lock'n load. The world needs to know where our USA begins.comitan - 3-12-2009 at 08:49 PM
Dennis
Not vigilantes, We're pulling our troops out of that god forsaken place called Iraq, put 170,00 on the border then see where the dope goes.DENNIS - 3-12-2009 at 09:23 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by comitan
Dennis
Not vigilantes, We're pulling our troops out of that god forsaken place called Iraq, put 170,00 on the border then see where the dope goes.
I agree, Wiley. I hope they can bypass all the other nonsense in the Middle East and come home. It's time we attended to homeland security at home.
My comment on the Minutmen was only desperation, not reality.oldlady - 3-13-2009 at 05:06 AM
Charlie Rose interviewed Mike Mullen last night. I saw the second half. Asked about the Mexican violence Admiral Mullen said he had been in Mexico
City last week meeting with Calderon's top military people. He didn't elaborate a lot, wouldn't have expected him to. But, when asked if he thought
Mexico would become a failed state his reply was, "Not even close."
BTW....Mullen's biggest concern is the nonsense in the middle east, specifically Pakistan.
A solution to the border problem
CaboRon - 3-13-2009 at 12:02 PM
Just two little words ....... Carpet Bombing
Here is the dog pic to make this a real Nomad post
DENNIS - 3-13-2009 at 02:16 PM
Woooosh - 3-13-2009 at 02:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by comitan
Dennis
Not vigilantes, We're pulling our troops out of that god forsaken place called Iraq, put 170,00 on the border then see where the dope goes.
How much weed goes north for sale to other illegal Mexicans in the USA? They make it sound like all the drug consumers are legal citizens of the USA-
I'll bet it's a good percentage.mulegemichael - 3-13-2009 at 03:05 PM
i gotta feeling that the MAJORITY of the northbound pot ends up in the hands of U.S. citizens...i gotta REAL strong feeling..comitan - 3-13-2009 at 03:39 PM
It doesn't really make any difference who it goes to its USof A's obligation to stop itWoooosh - 3-13-2009 at 03:55 PM
Can Marijuana Help Rescue California's Economy?
Time magazine piece: "State revenues would be derived from a $50-per-oz. levy on retail sales of marijuana and sales taxes:
[Edited on 3-13-2009 by Woooosh]CaboRon - 3-13-2009 at 06:37 PM
Marijuana Can Rescue California's Ailing Economy
Could marijuana be the answer to the economic misery facing California? Democratic State Assembly member Tom Ammiano thinks so. Ammiano introduced
legislation last month that would legalize pot and allow the state to regulate and tax its sale - a move that could mean billions for the
cash-strapped state. Pot is, after all, California's biggest cash crop, responsible for $14 billion in annual sales, dwarfing the state's second
largest agricultural commodity - milk and cream - which brings in $7.3 billion annually, according to the most recent USDA statistics. The state's tax
collectors estimate the bill would bring in about $1.3 billion in much-needed revenue a year, offsetting some of the billions in service cuts and
spending reductions outlined in the recently approved state budget.
"The state of California is in a very, very precipitous economic plight. It's in the toilet," says Ammiano. "It looks very, very bleak, with layoffs
and foreclosures and schools closing or trying to operate four days a week. We have one of the highest rates of unemployment we've ever had. With any
revenue ideas people say you have to think outside of the box, you have to be creative, and I feel that the issue of the decriminalization, regulation
and taxation of marijuana fits that bill. It's not new, the idea has been around, and the political will may in fact be there to make something
happen." (See pictures of stoner cinema.)
Ammiano may be right. A few days after he introduced the bill, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that states should be able to make their
own rules on medical marijuana and that federal raids on pot dispensaries in California would cease. The move signaled a softening of the hard-line
approach previous administrations have had to medicinal pot use. The nomination of Gil Kerlikowske as the head of the Office of National Drug Control
Policy may also signal a softer federal line on marijuana. If he is confirmed as the so-called Drug Czar, Kerlikowske will bring with him experience
as police chief of Seattle, where he made it clear that going after people for posessing marijuana was not a priority of his force. (See a story about
the grass-roots marijuana war in California.)
California was one of the first states in the nation to legalize medical marijuana in 1996. Currently, $200 million in medical marijuana sales are
subject to sales tax. If passed, the Marijuana Control, Regulation and Education Act (AB 390) would give California control of pot in a manner similar
to alcohol, while prohibiting its purchase to citizens under age 21. (The bill has been referred to the California State Assembly's Public Safety and
Health Committees; Ammiano says it could take up to a year before it comes to a vote for passage.) State revenues would be derived from a $50 per
ounce levy on retail sales of marijuana and sales taxes. By adopting the law, California could become a model for other states. As Ammiano put it:
"How California goes, the country goes."
Despite the projected and much-needed revenue, opponents say legalizing pot will only add to social woes. "The last thing we need is yet another
mind-altering substance to be legalized," says John Lovell, lobbyist for the California Peace Officers' Association. "We have enough problems with
alcohol and abuse of pharmaceutical products: do we really need to add yet another mind-altering substance to the array?" Lovell says the easy
availability of the drug will lead to a surge in its use, much like what happened when alcohol was allowed to be sold in venues other than liquor
stores in some states.
Joel W. Hay, professor of Pharmaceutical Economics at USC, also foresees harm if the bill passes. "Marijuana is a drug that clouds people's judgment.
It affects their ability to concentrate and react and it certainly has impacts on third parties," says Hay, who has written on the societal costs of
drug abuse. "It's one more drug that will add to the toll on society. All we have to do is look at the two legalized drugs, tobacco and alcohol, and
look at the carnage that they've caused. [Marijuana] is a dangerous drug and it causes bad outcomes for both the people who use it and for the people
who are in their way at work or other activities." He adds: "There are probably some responsible people who can handle marijuana but there are lots of
people who can't, and it has an enormous negative impact on them, their family and loved ones." (See pictures of Mexico's drug wars.)
In response, retired Orange County Superior Court Judge James Gray, a longtime proponent of legalization, estimates that legalizing pot and thus
ceasing to arrest, prosecute and imprison non-violent offenders could save the state an additional $1 billion a year. "We couldn't make this drug any
more available if we tried," he says. "Not only do we have those problems, along with glamorizing it by making it illegal, but we also have the crime
and corruption that go along with it." He adds, "Unfortunately, every society in the history of mankind has had some form of mind-altering, sometimes
addictive substances to use, to misuse, abuse or get addicted to. Get used to it. They're here to stay. So, let's try to reduce those harms and right
now we couldn't do it worse if we tried".
Read: "An American Pastime, Smoking Pot"DENNIS - 3-13-2009 at 06:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Woooosh
[How much weed goes north for sale to other illegal Mexicans in the USA? They make it sound like all the drug consumers are legal citizens of the
USA- I'll bet it's a good percentage.
Who cares? More variables just cloud the issue.Packoderm - 3-13-2009 at 09:12 PM
