Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,198 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 2,137,225
Pageviews Today: 2,969,269Threads Today: 698Posts Today: 14,058
10:26 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Narcs Cheer! Stimulus Bill To Fund "War On Drugs"...Would Give Byrne Grant Program $3 Billion Over Three Years

 
Yeah, Whatever
Offer Upgrade

User ID: 473345
United States
01/29/2009 02:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Narcs Cheer! Stimulus Bill To Fund "War On Drugs"...Would Give Byrne Grant Program $3 Billion Over Three Years
[link to stopthedrugwar.org]

As part of the $825 billion economic stimulus bill passed by the House last week, the Democratic Party leadership and the Obama administration included $3 billion for the controversial Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program, which funds multi-agency drug task forces across the country, and $1 billion for the Community Oriented Policing (COPS) program, which will pay for thousands of additional police officers to hit the streets. Drug enforcement lobby groups are pleased, particularly about the Byrne funding, but others predict that any "stimulus" more Byrne grants might provide will be followed long-term drag on state budgets in ways going beyond the federal dollars.

Sen. Harkin and Iowa law enforcement officials at 2004 press conference
In one of the few drug policy-related decisions made by the Bush administration that reformers could cheer, the Bush administration tried throughout its second term to reduce or eliminate funding for the Byrne grants. In so doing, it was heeding the concerns of conservative and taxpayer groups, who called the program "an ineffective and inefficient use of resources." But while the Bush administration tried to gut the program, Congress, still tied to the "tough on drugs" mentality, kept trying to restore funding, albeit at reduced levels.

The Byrne grant program, and especially its funding of the scandal-ridden multi-jurisdictional anti-drug task forces, also came in for harsh criticism from drug reform, civil rights and criminal justice groups. For these critics, the program was in dire need of reform because of incidents like the Tulia, Texas, scandal, where a Byrne-funded task force police officer managed to get 10% of the black population of the town locked up on bogus cocaine distribution charges. Scandals like Tulia showed the Byrne grant program "did more harm than good," the critics wrote in a 2006 letter demanding reform.

Of course, Tulia wasn't the only Byrne-related scandal. A 2002 report from the ACLU of Texas found 16 more scandals involving Byrne grant-funded task forces in Texas, including cases of witness tampering, falsifying of government records, fabricating evidence, false imprisonment, racial profiling, and sexual harassment. Byrne-related scandals have also occurred in other states, including the misuse of millions of dollars of grant money in Kentucky and Massachusetts, false convictions because of police perjury in Missouri, and making deals with drug offenders to drop or lower charges in exchange for cash or vehicles in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

In accord with its own budget-cutting imperatives, and in response to critics on the right and left, the Bush administration again tried to zero out the Byrne grant program in FY 2008. While the program was indeed cut from $520 million in 2007, Congress still funded it at $170 million for 2008. Now, it has folded the Byrne program and the Clinton-era COPS program into the emergency economic stimulus bill, leading to loud cheers from the law enforcement community.

"Safe communities are the foundation of a growing economy, and increased Byrne JAG funding will help state and local governments hire officers, add prosecutors and fund critical treatment and crime prevention programs," said National Criminal Justice Association President David Steingraber, executive director of the Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance. "I applaud the stimulus bill proposed by the House Democrats and press Congress for its quick approval."

"This is very encouraging," said Bob Bushman, vice-president of the National Narcotics Officers Associations Coalition and a 35-year veteran of drug law enforcement in Minnesota. "We think it's a very good sign that this was included in the House bill. The House side was where we struggled in past years. Maybe now the House has listened to us and is taking our concerns more seriously," he said. "We built a broad coalition of law enforcement and drug treatment and prevention people."

Byrne money doesn't just fund the task forces, Bushman pointed out, although he conceded that's where much of the money has gone. "Byrne money goes to all 50 states, and most of them used it for the multi-jurisdictional task forces. Here in Minnesota, we split it between task forces and offender reentry programs and drug courts."

While a answer to just how much Byrne money has gone to the task forces remains buried deep in the bowels of the Justice Department -- part of the problem is that the 50 states are awarded block grants and then decide at the state level how to allocate the funds, and some states are better than others at reporting back to Justice -- observers put a low-ball figure of at least 25% going to fund them, and possibly much higher.

The task forces are needed, said Bowman. "While we are never going to arrest our way out of this, I've seen too much of the damage done by drug abuse, and we need all the help we can get," he said. "Not just for policing, but also for treatment and prevention and drug courts. We need all three pillars, and the Byrne program helps with all three."

If law enforcement was pleased, that wasn't the case with civil rights, taxpayer, and drug reform groups. They said they were disappointed in the restoration of funding under the auspices of the economic stimulus bill, and vowed to continue to try to either cut or reform the program.

"We're working on a letter to Congress about the Byrne grants right now," said Lawanda Johnson, communications director for the Justice Policy Institute, one of the organizations that had signed on to the 2006 DPA letter. "The Byrne grant program is not an effective use of funds for preserving public safety or stimulating the economy. The only way you will get an economic boost from this is if you own stock in Corrections Corporation of America," she laughed, grimly.

"With so many smart people working on the budget and the stimulus package, you would think they would understand that the states are looking to reduce their prison populations and change those policies that have jailed so many people," said Johnson. "To then turn around and have the federal government invest $4 billion in more police and more grants seems paradoxical. It's just going to jack up the spending for states and localities, and they are already struggling."

"We oppose the wasteful economic stimulus bill and we oppose the inclusion of the Byrne grants in it," said Leslie Paige, spokesperson for Citizens Against Government Waste, one of the conservative taxpayer groups that has opposed the grants for the past several years. "If there is going to be government spending, the least you can do is make sure the money is going to have a long term positive impact on the economy."

"This is disappointing, but not surprising," said Bill Piper, national affairs director for the Drug Policy Alliance. "This reverses Bush's cuts in the program and restores funding at even higher levels. At the same time Congress and the Obama administration are expressing great concern about racial disparities and over-incarceration, they keep trying to fund this program, which will only stimulate more arrests of more nonviolent drug offenders," Piper noted.

"The Democrats are framing this as helping in these tough economic times, but the people who will be arrested will end up in state prison, and the states will have to pay for that," Piper pointed out. "The states may well end up paying more in the long run. It's far from clear that this will stimulate the economy, but what is clear is that it will stimulate the breaking up of families and decreasing productivity and tax revenues, especially in communities already devastated by the impact of over-incarceration."

Killing funding outright is unlikely, said Piper. "I don't think there's any way we can stop this from being included because the support for it is strong and bipartisan," he said. "No one wants to go up against the police. Our real hope is that later in the year we can put some restrictions on the program, which is what we've been working on. Instead of trying to cut it, we can try to use it to encourage state and local law enforcement to change how they operate. They're so addicted to federal funding that they may do just about anything, such as documenting arrests or having performance measures."

Bushman and the rest of law enforcement aren't resting easy just yet. "The funding has to survive hearings and make it into the final appropriation," he noted. "This is not a done deal yet."

But it looks like Congress is well on the way to funding three more years of Byrne grants at $1 billion a year, the highest level of funding in years. And don't forget the 13,000 new police officers to be funded for the next three years by the COPS program. If Congress and the cops have their way, we can look forward to more drug busts, more prosecutions, more people sentenced to prison, and a greater burden on already deficit-ridden state budgets.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 461588
France
01/29/2009 03:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Narcs Cheer! Stimulus Bill To Fund "War On Drugs"...Would Give Byrne Grant Program $3 Billion Over Three Years
LOL "CHANGE"

The only "change" is that you're being fucked in the ass by a bye bye now instead of a honkey.
Guns n' God

User ID: 536602
United States
01/29/2009 03:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Narcs Cheer! Stimulus Bill To Fund "War On Drugs"...Would Give Byrne Grant Program $3 Billion Over Three Years
Good! At least some of the money is being well-spent.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 564059
United States
01/29/2009 03:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Narcs Cheer! Stimulus Bill To Fund "War On Drugs"...Would Give Byrne Grant Program $3 Billion Over Three Years
We don't need no more stinkin cops




Somebody let AlGore Know.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 603603
United States
01/29/2009 03:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Narcs Cheer! Stimulus Bill To Fund "War On Drugs"...Would Give Byrne Grant Program $3 Billion Over Three Years
more proof that these pieces of rancid feces that run this country are just doing whatever the fuck they want, regardless of what the voters want. If you people who care about the future of this country (I don't, I'm just here to undo karma) actually wanted to change things, you'd go into the house with fully automatic weapons and take your country back.

order is better then chaos, which is why all the corrupt parasites on top of the current system must die, the mexican border must be sealed, drugs must be decriminalized, with cops/military allowed to be sent into the ghettos to cleanse.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 603603
United States
01/29/2009 03:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Narcs Cheer! Stimulus Bill To Fund "War On Drugs"...Would Give Byrne Grant Program $3 Billion Over Three Years
TPTB are actually descending us into chaos, in order to establish even more order, although order on the law abiding.

Only order on the criminals need be established, and they are also the criminals.
Normal Is Subjective

User ID: 603632
Canada
01/29/2009 04:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Narcs Cheer! Stimulus Bill To Fund "War On Drugs"...Would Give Byrne Grant Program $3 Billion Over Three Years
Good! At least some of the money is being well-spent.
 Quoting: Guns n' God


Tip: do basic research before the knee-jerk opinion; the "war on drugs" is an industry and has been since Nixon:

Economic Consequences of the War on Drugs
Compiled by Anonymous, Drug Policy Alliance. 2002.

How much does the drug war cost American taxpayers?

$40 billion per year and climbing. In 2000, the National Drug Control budget exceeds $18 billion(1) and the states will spend upwards of $20 billion more.(2) This is a dramatic increase since 1980, when federal spending was roughly $1 billion and state spending just a few times that.(3) Between FY1991 and FY2000 more than $140 billion(4) has been spent at the federal level to curtail drug abuse, yet drugs remain cheap, easy to obtain and with higher purity levels than before the war on drugs was initiated.

What competes with the drug war for budget money?

Education. Because prisons and universities generally occupy the portion of a state's budget that is neither mandated by federal requirements nor driven by population, they often must "fight it out" for funding. As state governments sink millions into corrections to house America's exploding population of incarcerated drug law violators - now nearly 500,000 nationally(5) - education loses.

* From 1987 to 1998 state spending on corrections increased by 30% while spending on higher education decreased by 18.2%.(6)
* State prison budgets are growing twice as fast as spending on public colleges and universities.(7)

By the government's own standards, are we winning the drug war?

No. Despite the exponential growth in spending on the drug war, illicit drugs are cheaper and purer than they were two decades ago,(8) and continue to be readily available. In addition, according to White House estimates, 57% of Americans in need of drug treatment do not receive it, in spite of its proven cost effectiveness in reducing drug use.(9)

* Between 1981 and 1998, the price of heroin and cocaine dropped sharply while their levels of purity rose.(10)
* According to a 1999 survey by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, drugs continue to be widely available to America's high school students. Almost 90% of twelfth graders participating in the survey said that marijuana was "very easy" or "fairly easy" to get, over 47% said cocaine was "very easy" or "fairly easy" to get and more than 32% said that heroin was "very easy" or "fairly easy" to get.(11)

What has been proven to be the most cost effective method of decreasing drug abuse and related societal costs?

Treatment.

* A study by the RAND Drug Policy Research Center found that treatment is 10 times more cost effective than interdiction in reducing the use of cocaine in the United States.(12)
* The same study found that every additional dollar invested in substance abuse treatment saves taxpayers more than $7 in societal costs, and that additional domestic law enforcement costs 15 times as much as treatment to achieve the same reduction in societal costs.(13)

Who really profits from drug prohibition?

Organized Crime. According to the United Nations, drug trafficking is a $400 billion per year industry, equaling 8% of the world's trade.(14) By empowering organized criminals with enormous profits, prohibition stimulates violence, corrupts governments at all levels, and erodes community order.

Arms manufacturers, the prison industry, and other special interest groups.

* Anti-drug aid to other nations often comes in the form of military assistance. This year's National Drug Control Budget, for example, includes $452 million to provide Blackhawk helicopters to the Colombian military to fight coca cultivation.(15) Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., the exclusive manufacturer of the helicopters, lobbied heavily in favor of an escalation of aid to Colombia.(16)
* With the overall prison population at roughly 2 million, nearly 500,000 of whom are drug law violators,(17) federal and state governments have been forced to build an ever increasing number of prisons to house what former drug czar Barry McCaffrey has called "America's internal gulag."(18)
* Drug testing is a lucrative industry with a strong interest in perpetuating drug war hysteria. It is estimated that the United States spends $1 billion annually to drug test about 20 million of our workers,(19) in spite of research demonstrating the high cost and low effectiveness of this assault on American privacy.(20)

Corrupt Law Enforcement.

* A 1998 report by the General Accounting Office notes:
…several studies and investigations of drug-related police corruption found on-duty police officers engaged in serious criminal activities such as (1) conducting unconstitutional searches and seizures; (2) stealing money and/or drugs from drug dealers; (3) selling stolen drugs; (4) protecting drug operations; (5) providing false testimony; and (6) submitting false crime reports.
* The same study found that on average, half of all police officers convicted as a result of FBI-led corruption cases between 1993 and 1997 were convicted for drug-related offenses.(21) [link to www.drugpolicy.org]
[link to www.google.com]
I thought I'd beat the inevitibility of death to death just a little bit.





GLP