cannabisnews.com: Serving As K St.'S 'Pothead' Lobbyist





Serving As K St.'S 'Pothead' Lobbyist
Posted by CN Staff on March 22, 2004 at 11:29:17 PT
By Elizabeth Brotherton
Source: Roll Call 
For a lobbyist, the first meeting with a Member of Congress is always memorable -- even more so for Steve Fox. As Fox walked into his first meeting in a Congressional office, a staffer greeted him and escorted him to see the lawmaker."The potheads are here," the staffer said. Not the typical greeting for a well-dressed lobbyist in Washington.
But it is what Fox often faces as director of government relations for the Marijuana Policy Project, the largest U.S. organization devoted to reforming laws related to marijuana use. He is the only full-time lobbyist in Washington working to loosen federal restrictions on marijuana use.Fox, a former aide at the Commerce Department, joined the lobbying group in 2002 because he wanted to convince lawmakers that U.S. marijuana policy is unrealistic and even dangerous."The fact is, the laws we have now are extremely harmful," Fox said. "It is seriously harmful to our kids the kind of messages that are going out now."At the Marijuana Policy Project, Fox oversees a staff of nearly two dozen and a $2 million yearly budget funded by donations from 14,000 dues-paying members.Fox believes it is a mistake for children to be taught that marijuana is on par with harder drugs such as heroin and cocaine. He believes that as a result of that indoctrination, teenagers who experiment with marijuana think it is OK to use other drugs.The lobbyist rejects the notion that marijuana is a "gateway" to harder drugs. The majority of marijuana users, he maintains, do not try other substances.Rather, Fox insists that marijuana users are exposed to other substances only because the nation's anti-marijuana policies force them to purchase marijuana from drug dealers."We need to understand that the government is causing the gateway effect," Fox said.Convincing the government of that, of course, is a bit of a challenge.Many lawmakers do not view the issue as something worth discussing, partly because marijuana groups do not have the money to make their voices heard, said Nick Thimmesch, a media consultant for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws."They don't have the kind of money that a lot of corporate interests have," Thimmesch said.He added that lawmakers "just figure this is a grassroots movement at best."But Fox feels that strides are being made ever so gradually. The Marijuana Policy Project recently started a political action committee to support Congressional candidates who support access to medical marijuana for doctor-approved patients.Bruce Mirken, the spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, said the PAC has raised $25,000 and recently handed out about a dozen checks to Congressional candidates, half of whom they believed could potentially become allies. All six refused.Fox said the candidates' refusal to accept the donations was unfortunate."It's just another example of elected officials, even those who have been supportive in the past, being out of touch with the public on this issue," he said.However, five other Members took the PAC contributions. "We gave checks to five good supporters of the issue," Fox said.And the Marijuana Policy Project has received some outside support. Peter Lewis, chairman of auto insurer Progressive Corp., recently gave $340,000 to a 527 account of the Marijuana Policy Project, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Lewis also gave $5,000 to the group's PAC.The problem remains in swaying Members.Fox and other lobbyists say they work hard to battle the preconceived notions most have about marijuana -- and its lobbyists."We are very conscientious here about our image and how people perceive us," said Fox, who is married and has two young children. "While we're educating, we are also fighting the stereotypes."No pictures of marijuana leaves hang in the office of the Marijuana Policy Project, and its Washington-based staff dresses in the business suits typical of most aides on Capitol Hill.Fox also does not like questions about his own personal use of the substance, although he does admit he has smoked marijuana in the past. "It seems like an unfair question from our perspective," he said. "It's something that's better not to get into."Mirken said that Fox "is about as wholesome an American as you will find. He could be on a box of Wheaties."As Keith Stroup, founder of NORML, noted: "The last thing we would need is a long-haired hippie going around to Members of Congress talking about marijuana reform."In his pitch to lawmakers, Fox argues that current marijuana laws are a waste of time and money. He also tries to demonstrate that much of the U.S. public is supportive of marijuana policy reform.But the Marijuana Policy Project faces an uphill climb, especially at a time when the government is controlled by Republicans.Even the organization that runs Washington's Metro system and public buses recently refused to run advertisements that promote change in the government's policies against marijuana usage.The refusal by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority stems from a decision by the Republican-run Congress to cut off federal funding to any local transit authority that displays ads promoting the legalization or medical use of marijuana.The Marijuana Policy Project joined other groups, including the ACLU, in seeking to overturn the law in court, arguing the ban tramples on the First Amendment's right to free speech.Marijuana lobbyists are waging an even bigger battle over the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes.While Fox touts poll numbers indicating public support for medical marijuana, many lawmakers steadfastly refuse to alter the law."For many Members of Congress, the first time they heard of marijuana was during the Vietnam War," said Stroup. "That baggage the issue assumed still lingers for many."Still, Fox believes that progress is being made. Last year, more than 100 House Members voted for a measure that would have prevented the Justice Department from prosecuting medical marijuana patients who are in compliance with state laws.Though the measure was defeated, the 273-152 vote was far closer than expected, according to Fox.Fox thinks more lawmakers would have voted for the legislation if they were aware of the public's backing of the issue. Such floor votes give Fox and other marijuana lobbyists hope that they are slowly making progress."I find it hard to believe that 10 years from now ... we will still be arresting people for marijuana possession," Fox said. Source: Roll Call (DC)Author: Elizabeth BrothertonPublished: Monday, March 22, 2004Copyright: 2004 Roll Call Inc.Contact: letters rollcall.comWebsite: http://www.rollcall.com/MPP: http://www.mpp.org/ACLU: http://www.aclu.org/NORML: http://www.norml.org/CannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #7 posted by kaptinemo on March 23, 2004 at 05:48:57 PT:
When in Rome...
you politick just like they do. And if that means wearing the 21st Century equivalent of toga and sandals, then that's what you do - lest you run the risk of being marked as a 'barbarian'. Which has hurt the majority of us in the past - no matter how wrongly - and continues to hurt us.We've all seen this before: the local TV crew spots 199 people in business suits carrying signs for MMJ, and one guy shows up looking and acting like an escapee from a mental ward, and guess who gets the attention? That one guy dressing and acting weird screws it for the rest of us.You think pols wants THAT in 'their' office? Even though it's OUR office? When dealing with politicians, you have to remember that most of them got to their positions by ascribing to some sort of ideology. The traps of *any* ideology are obvious for those who have the means of both distancing themselves from it and critically dissecting it. But the pols have to dive into it, bathe in it, wear it and eat it to get where they are. And if that ideology includes dress codes, well, you won't get far showing up in their offices looking like both you and what you're wearing were retrieved from a dumpster. We cannabists know the origins of the DrugWar and how racial bigotry has been warped and modified for contemporary consumption into the faux 'public health' basis for maintaining it. We understand all too well it's falseness. But until you can get through their front doors of the pols to show them personally how wrong their misconceptions about us are (by demonstrating-by-appearence that you aren't some landfill reject but another taxpaying concerned citizen) you'll never have the chance to enlighten said pols.Unfortunately, it IS as simple as that.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by breeze on March 23, 2004 at 04:46:41 PT
damn hippies...
I know it is wrong to judge a person by their appearence, you may know this.But have you been to Washington DC? Have you ever been to court?Well, in DC- or in any capital, there are basically ARMIES of suits and ties. Clean cut, sharp dress is the only way that anyone is taken seriously.I hired a firm where one of the attorneys had a pony tail, but he also wore a suit- and he was taken very seriously by "most" attorneys namely because of his association with the firm. This is the situation at all capitals and courts. The clean cut look appeals to most in power, simply because it is a status symbol. The more expensive the suit, the more seriously you are taken. These guys know the difference between a $100 jacket and a $4000 jacket. It seems to be more of a fashion show, but its true. The lawyer with the pony tail wore $3000 suits EVERY SINGLE DAY. This made the difference for him.I had long hair, and i was constantly harrassed by most everyone who did not know me. It was merely a symbol of my youth. But I was stigmatized for it and basically descriminated against because of it. I cut my hair, and it was amazing- I stopped being harrassed. People have a tendency to look for the one thing that makes you different in a negative way, if its not your hair, your clothes, your shoes, your bank account- they will prod you till they find out what is different about you so that they can harrass you. There is also a little bit of history that also adds to the general discrimination against hippies, not all long hairs are easy going lovable people. Charles manson pretty much added the most of the negative connotation to this image, as well as several rock stars who have been known for bad behaviour. Unless you are famous or rich, having long hair is not a good idea- it just begs for trouble to be sent your way- a voice of experience.I would like to have hair down to my ass, but I also know what bs comes with it.Hippies aren't all bad, but it takes one event for a person to attatch a negative connotation with long hair. I was at a hippie show where I saw a dread locked kid walk up to a girl and hit her like a man, he then turned and ran as her nose was trickling blood- his droopy pants tripped him up, he fell and then a bunch of other hippies started pounding him with their sandals and fists. Yea- he was arrested- but it was an awakening moment for many in the crowd who weren't hippies. You do not know a person until you have known a person for a good year or more.So, lawyers, judges, and other people in power see a parade of badly dressed, long hair people before them and connect the attatchment to them that long hair is a reverse status symbol.In the last few years, long hair gave way to shaved heads, and this became a stigma. Unless you lived near a military training base, or you were a cop- short or shaved hair carried a stigma. Believe it or not, some gangs make their people wear one color to distinguish them from other gangs- and so wearing one solid color is not a good idea.Even jewelry carries its signals, just as tatoos, and piercings. People are ignorant, plain and simple- but it is their way of prejudging people from a distance.They associate different things with "stay away, bad buisness"- and long hair is one of them. So, if you look different, have bad breath, walk with a limp, or talk with a significant accent- you are going to be stigmatized, catagorized, and osterized- especially when you are representing a controversial issue, these things triple.While the drug war started as being about race- its grown from that to mean something other than JUST about the color of your skin. Criminal behaviour often times accompanies drug use stigma because the good ol' boy attitude is still in place. The thing is, cut your hair, wear a suit and tie, and watch the difference that you will make in your protests. You have to understand that people in general are observant, they look for the one that stands out of the crowd. It is what I call sheep mentality. You can be a wolf in sheeps clothing but it takes practice. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by E_Johnson on March 22, 2004 at 23:17:37 PT
I was just thinking
Marijuana prohibition has been more about race than about hippies.I hope Keith Stroup isn't telling marijuana lobbyists they can't be black.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by mayan on March 22, 2004 at 17:49:37 PT
Appearances?
It seems that the mess this country is in is largely the fault of clean cut politicians, neatly groomed military brass and corporate executives in suits and ties. Jesus supposedly had long hair, but then again, look what they did to him.The way out...NEWSWEEK: In the Months Before 9/11, Justice Department Curtailed Highly Classified Program to Monitor Al Qaeda Suspects in the U.S.
http://www.911citizenswatch.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=143&mode=thread&order=0&thold=09/11 Profiteering:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/archive/scoop/stories/61/9d/200403221652.3e88a486.htmlMy patience has worn thin: 9/11 victim family member speaks out
http://www.911citizenswatch.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=141&mode=thread&order=0&thold=09/11 Truth Block at NYC Antiwar Demo:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/archive/scoop/stories/03/78/200403221138.4573d8cb.htmlWORLDWIDE 9/11 PHONE, FAX, EMAIL CAMPAIGN:
http://tomflocco.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=1
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by tokenitallup4162 on March 22, 2004 at 16:55:21 PT:
do us hippies need to put on a TIE ???
  how ignorant of a statement," The Potheads are here". now is this the staff at washington dc!!! lets dawn on our ties and pennyloafers. tuck our hair under our hats!!! get out our 69 volkswagon, oh, make sure its painted with red,white and blue stripes, with a flag!!! this time!!! How bizarre our people in congress are becoming. its good to be a vOtEr.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by E_Johnson on March 22, 2004 at 13:12:00 PT
Just one more thought on the subject
Hippies did not cause marijuana prohibition.Proving we're not hippies won't cure it.There is a definite wisdom in dressing carefully to lobby Congress but there is also a thing called internalizing abuse into self hatred.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by E_Johnson on March 22, 2004 at 12:50:34 PT
The sad reality of it all
"As Keith Stroup, founder of NORML, noted: "The last thing we would need is a long-haired hippie going around to Members of Congress talking about marijuana reform."
"The irony of it all -- the long haired hippie -- more despised than Al Qaeda.Oh Brave New World that has such people in it.I feel like flagellating myself on reality TV.(That's a literary allusion, for people who haven't read the book.)
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment