U.S. HOUSE OF REPS. APPROVES BILL TO CENSOR AMERICAN CITIZENS

By Drug Policy Alliance

WASHINGTON - December 9 - A little-known provision buried within the
omnibus federal spending bill that the U.S. House of Representatives
approved yesterday would take away federal grants from local and state
transportation authorities that allow citizens to run advertising on buses,
trains, or subways in support of reforming our nation's drug laws. If
enacted, the provision could effectively silence community groups around
the country that are using advertising to educate Americans about medical
marijuana and other drug policy reforms. Meanwhile, this same bill gives
the White House $145 million in taxpayer money to run anti-marijuana ads
next year.

"The government can't spend taxpayer money promoting one side of the drug
policy debate while prohibiting taxpayers from using their own money to
promote the other side," said Bill Piper, Associate Director of National
Affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance. "This is censorship and not the
democratic way."

The provision raises both constitutional and political concerns. Courts
have generally ruled that public transportation authorities cannot legally
discriminate against any political viewpoint. Thus, local and state
authorities could soon be put in an impossible position: if they reject
advertising in support of drug policy reform they risk running afoul of the
First Amendment; but if they accept drug reform advertising they lose
federal money. Civil libertarians warn the provision also sets a dangerous
precedent. Special interest groups could lobby for federal bans on
advertising with pro-life or pro-gun messages, or in support of or against
gay marriage or abortion.

The provisions in the omnibus spending bill are part of a growing
controversy over the use of taxpayer money to influence state and federal
drug policies:

* Court records show that Members of Congress created the federal
government's first anti-drug advertising campaign in 1998 as a way of using
billions of taxpayer dollars to influence voters to reject state medical
marijuana ballot measures.

* In 2000 it was discovered that the White House Office of National Drug
Control Policy used financial incentives to get newspapers and magazines to
editorialize in favor of the drug war and get TV and movie producers to
change their scripts to reflect pro-drug war views.

* Current Drug Czar, John Walters, and his staff have used taxpayer money
to campaign against local and state ballot measures and legislation they
disapprove of. After Walters spent taxpayer money to defeat a 2002 ballot
measure in Nevada, the Nevada Attorney General complained, "The excessive
federal intervention that was exhibited in this instance is particularly
disturbing because it sought to influence the outcome of a Nevada election."

* Earlier this year, Members of Congress tried to give the White House the
ability to spend over a billion dollars in taxpayer money on negative
attack ads against medical marijuana ballot measures and Congressional
candidates that support drug policy reform. Although a public outcry
stopped the legislation, existing federal law may already allow the White
House to use taxpayer money to influence elections.

The Drug Policy Alliance is urging Congress to remove the anti-free speech
provision from the omnibus spending bill, eliminate taxpayer-financed
anti-drug advertising, and prohibit the drug czar from using federal money
to campaign and lobby against reform.

"The drug policy debate is the only one in which federal bureaucrats are
allowed to use taxpayer money to influence how taxpayers vote," said
Piper. "This is a dangerous precedent. Congress needs to enact a firm ban
on using our money in this way, before this becomes the rule instead of the
exception."

www.drugpolicy.org