By Gustavo Arellano
By R. Scott Moxley
By Alfonso Delgado
By Courtney Hamilton
By Joel Beers
By Peter Maguire
By Charles Lam
By Charles Lam
Last week, you may have noticed Dana Rohrabacher’s chubby, smirking face leaning into news photographs of Nancy Reagan and President Barack Obama at a White House signing ceremony. The images signified the ongoing absurdity of Washington, as well as the hypocrisy of our often-clownish, 11-term Huntington Beach/Long Beach congressman who first won election in 1988 partly by arguing the dire need for term limits. Of course, conservatives continue to hail President Ronald Reagan’s campaign themes: The federal government is too wasteful, constantly expanding into areas best-suited for private action and managed by bureaucrats determined to hold unnecessary hearings and write unnecessary reports.
“Government does not solve problems,” Reagan once said. “It subsidizes them.”
Given all of that, what did the leaders of both major political parties—including Reagan disciple Rohrabacher—decide is the best, most efficient way to celebrate what would be the dead president’s 100th birthday next February? Despite trillions of dollars in debt, numerous states on the brink of financial collapse and two ongoing overseas wars, they created an 11-member Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission. The government entity, which will have as-yet-unquantified access to our tax dollars, will hire a staff as well as “experts and consultants,” pay unspecified travel expenses, lease office space, hold hearings, take testimony and write reports, according to the congressional bill signed by Obama. The commission is directed to “provide advice and assistance” to other “federal, state and local agencies as well as civic groups to carry out activities to honor” the occasion. Indeed, the birthday-party commission was given a power that used to annoy the 40th president: The commission itself has the sole power to decide when it should disband.
Does any of this disturb Rohrabacher, a former Reagan speechwriter who in the past has rarely missed an opportunity to tout his old boss’ principles as his own? He did not respond to calls for comment. If he had, I’d have asked him if he thought Reagan would have wanted a federal bureaucracy created for one of his birthdays.
SHOULD CALIFORNIA OPEN SHOPS SELLING POT AND HEROIN?
Give Jim Gray big points for moxie. The retiring Orange County Superior Court judge recently gave himself an impossible task, at least by conventional-wisdom standards. Gray, a silver-haired conservative Republican, brought his pro-marijuana and heroin-legalization message to a lunchtime group of about 50 local senior citizens with the League of Women Voters.
“Drugs are here to stay,” said Gray, a 1971 USC law-school graduate who was appointed to the bench by Governor George Deukmejian in 1989 after working as a prosecutor and defense attorney. “Let’s recognize this fact, and instead of moralizing it, let’s legalize it.”
The assertion didn’t provoke gasps or hissing. Most of the crowd continued to look on, expressionless. A few picked at their desserts with noisy forks.
“Let’s treat marijuana like alcohol,” he said. “Let’s regulate it, control it and tax it.”
Gray’s crowd remained silent; in a nearby restaurant room, a gathering sang “Happy Birthday.”
Gray finally scored. Several members of his audience laughed and shook their heads in agreement. “That’s right,” one woman said.
Actually, it’s not surprising that Gray took his message to this crowd, if for no other reason than for the past 17 years, he has lobbied everyone else, including the ACLU, California Young Republicans, OC Weekly and Fox News. He says his message (“Drug Prohibition: Worst Policy Since Slavery and Jim Crow”) is nonpartisan and is “the most critical issue facing our nation today.
“That sounds like an exaggeration, doesn’t it?” he continued. “But it isn’t. The so-called War On Drugs is stupid. It isn’t working. In fact, we couldn’t find a worse policy if we tried. We’re perpetuating a failed system.”
Based largely on his experience as a judge, Gray argued that if a state of California monopoly sold marijuana (and potentially other narcotics such as heroin and PCP) at stores, the tax revenue would be enormous, teenagers would have a more difficult time obtaining it, usage would decline, and “the winners in the War On Drugs”—the drug cartels, police agencies, gangs, prison builders, guard unions, politicians and government bureaucracy—would lose billions of dollars annually.
“We’ve glamorized marijuana because it’s illegal,” said Gray. “We’re actually driving more people to drugs.”
If he were “King Gray,” he said, he would cut the price of an ounce of marijuana by 50 percent and add a $50 tax. He calculated his plan would translate into at least a $2.3 billion annual saving to the state. He’d also prohibit the government’s drug shops from advertising.