Why President Obama Should Consider Decriminalizing Pot

By: Tonyaa Weathersbee

Maybe he thought it was a trick question.
After all, when Barack Obama was running for president, his candor about smoking pot and snorting cocaine as a teenager induced all sorts of salivation in his opponents.

They thought that Obama had unwittingly handed them a stereotype that would work to their advantage; that the idea of a black man who might be a closet Muslim who might be a closet druggie occupying the White House would be too frightening for most voters.

They thought wrong.

So when online questioners recently peppered President Obama about the prospect of legalizing marijuana as a means of bolstering the economy, it didn’t shock me that he tried to laugh it off.
“I don’t know what this says about the online audience,” Obama said, as people who were gathered in the White House East Room for the online event laughed.

Then Obama got serious. He said no. He said that legalizing marijuana was not a good strategy for growing the economy.

He might want to rethink that.

Sure, legalizing marijuana won’t save General Motors. But legalizing (or at least decriminalizing) pot would be a first step toward salvaging black communities that have been ravaged by this failed experiment that is the War on Drugs.

True, marijuana hasn’t been as devastating to our communities as the crack cocaine that is sold on corners – and is oftentimes the drug behind the violence and savagery that has turned our comfort zones into war zones.

But the one overwhelming characteristic the drugs do share is one of economics.

Why President Obama Should Consider Decriminalizing Pot....

RULING TO AFFECT BLACK PRISONERS

In a long awaited decision, the U.S. Sentencing Commission voted unanimously last week to retroactively reduce prison sentences for people convicted of crimes related to the possession and sale of crack cocaine.

Preliminary estimates are that as many as 20,000 inmates - most of them poor African Americans - could be released from federal prison within the next few months.

For nearly 20 years, civil rights and other activist groups have been demanding a reduction in the federal sentencing guidelines as they relate to the possession and sale of crack cocaine because of the so-called 100-to-1 disparity.

Under the old guidelines, a person convicted of possessing just 50 grams of crack cocaine faced a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence while it took possession of 5,000 grams of powdered cocaine to receive the same sentence.

Activists argued that the sentencing disparity amounted to racial discrimination because crack cocaine was primarily used in low-income predominantly Black areas while powder cocaine was disproportionately used by middle to upper income suburban whites. The facts tended to support theie argument. For example, the most recent government figures show that roughly 85 percent of all federal inmates incarcerated for crack cocaine offences are Black. The Bush administration was opposed to the sentencing reduction but liberal Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy said he welcomed the 7-to-0 vote by the Sentencing Commission.

The new procedure for freedom will involve federal inmates having to file petitions requesting that their sentences be reviewed in light of the new ruling. It could be several months before inmates are actually freed.