Keep Salvia Legal Campaign (& Salvia's legal status)

[divinorum]

I am compiling a list of statistics that will help me out with a section of an argument that I am writing. The main theme of this is something that will appeal to the senators far more than any other argument will, and this argument deals with infrastructure. Imagine how hard it would be to tell salvia divinorum apart from any other plant in the salvia genus. Its not like a cannibus plant which has very distinct leaves, and you cannot outlaw all sage plants, since they are widely used. Besides this imagine the amount of money it would cost to train police to spot this plant, dogs to sniff this plant, money to shut down shops and conduct raids, more jailtime for small time "dealers", and the crime rate soar due to the popularity the plant will gain (and the teens who will turn to it, get caught, and put in jail or fined). This huge amount of money will hit em where it hurts, the wallet. They are already tight with their budget (especially here in Texas) and this argument will definatley get their attention. 

[Paradoxic]

I am compiling a list of statistics that will help me out with a section of an argument that I am writing. The main theme of this is something that will appeal to the senators far more than any other argument will, and this argument deals with infrastructure. Imagine how hard it would be to tell salvia divinorum apart from any other plant in the salvia genus. Its not like a cannibus plant which has very distinct leaves, and you cannot outlaw all sage plants, since they are widely used. Besides this imagine the amount of money it would cost to train police to spot this plant, dogs to sniff this plant, money to shut down shops and conduct raids, more jailtime for small time "dealers", and the crime rate soar due to the popularity the plant will gain (and the teens who will turn to it, get caught, and put in jail or fined). This huge amount of money will hit em where it hurts, the wallet. They are already tight with their budget (especially here in Texas) and this argument will definatley get their attention. 

Great idea, we definitely need this in the document we are writing:
http://www.salviasource.org/forum/salvia-in-general/salvia-divinorum-from-an-practical-and-unbaised-perspective/0/

Genius+ ...just one suggestion, you should try to get as many legitimate references to your claims as possible.

[mconlonx]

I am compiling a list of statistics that will help me out with a section of an argument that I am writing. The main theme of this is something that will appeal to the senators far more than any other argument will, and this argument deals with infrastructure. Imagine how hard it would be to tell salvia divinorum apart from any other plant in the salvia genus. Its not like a cannibus plant which has very distinct leaves, and you cannot outlaw all sage plants, since they are widely used. Besides this imagine the amount of money it would cost to train police to spot this plant, dogs to sniff this plant, money to shut down shops and conduct raids, more jailtime for small time "dealers", and the crime rate soar due to the popularity the plant will gain (and the teens who will turn to it, get caught, and put in jail or fined). This huge amount of money will hit em where it hurts, the wallet. They are already tight with their budget (especially here in Texas) and this argument will definatley get their attention. 

If you look up any of the recent bills or laws, the financial impact statement attached to all of them at the state level inform committees that the financial budgetary impact will be "minimal." Why? BECAUSE ITS NOT A PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! *ahem* But they don't see that--all they see is a tough on crime bill for some new drug that doesn't have a huge financial impact. Win-win situation for them.

Financials have a place in any argument, but it's a weak one when they have State-level budget experts telling them otherwise. Another strategy would be to find drug crimes reports for your own state and research what drug crimes actually cost--in ME, it is over $60k for a successful drug crimes prosecution and that's before the victim even spends a day in jail. Minimal financial impact my ass--and yet that's what the report said. The committee wouldn't have known different if it hadn't been pointed out to them by a member of the public. And all was researched online through available Office of Substance Abuse reports... ironically enough, the office that suggested a ban bill in the first place.

Broad arguments like "how will they ID it?" and the cost of prosecution are less effective than "It costs an average of $62,398 to prosecute a drug crime in this state, why is the budgetary impact considered 'minimal'? Unless there really isn't even enough of a problem to worry about? During the cost analysis, how many salvia crimes were assumed to be prosecuted each year?"

And of course the best place to present arguments and ask questions like this is the most effective place to oppose bans--at committee public hearings.

[mconlonx]

Keeping salvia legal.

Part 1.
"How do I find out if my state is considering a ban?"
"I didn't even know my state was considering a ban and now it's too late..."

The first is a common question, the second is a frequent lament. So how do you keep track of these things?

First is keeping in touch with media in your state. If you hear of a salvia story, track down the source. If there is online content to match with a comments page, post opposition and pro-salvia arguments there. Write a letter to the editor or producer of the piece and explain your dismay over the dismally unresearched reporting and blatant misrepresentations of the piece. If they dragged a State Representative or Senator into the story, send a letter to the politician explaining why a ban is a bad thing to support... like the fact that they were duped by media hype over something that isn't even an issue in their state. Or the fact that it is not the slam-dunk tough on crime drug issue they might think it is--there will be vocal and very persuasive opposition. Many approaches and points to include in this correspondence which might help nip a ban bill in the bud. Seemed to work in MA last year.

Second: online resources. Go to your [state].gov website and look for the legislative branch. If you surf around there, you'll find online bill search engines, usually searchable for keywords. Search on Salvia and see if you get any hits on pending legislation. If you do, there's usually a bill history attached which will let you know where the bill is at, who is considering it, what committee it is going to or has been through, and sometimes even when public hearings will be held. And of course Google--seach on "salvia [your state]" and you're bound to find any news articles or Bills being considered. Do this search on the state site and google at least once a week and you won't be surprised by a bill. C'mon, 15 min doing online searching--how tough is that and is entheogenic freedoms worth it?

Third: your own Rep. Call your Rep or the statehouse and ask if there's a salvia bill in process. If not, ask to be advised if one does come up. It's a long shot, but worth it because it establishes you with your rep and will increase your comfort level when talking to politicians. Email will work for this as well. Never get angry at your own Rep, no matter what their stance--you need them in your corner and they need to hear that an active constituent is not in line with their views. In ME, the Pol who sponsored the bill would not initially consider regulation of sales instead of a ban, but after corresponding with him and meeting him at public hearing, he changed his tune and accepted compromise when called out on the carpet by the committee.

Fourth: network online. Join forums, boards, tribes, and groups with salvia or entheogens as a common interest. If you hear of a looming ban, spread the word as far as you can. If enough people do this, bans and media hype for them will be caught early, when there's still time to do something about it.

How hard or scary is any of this? Not very. Just that you have to remember to do it if you care enough to stay on top of salvia legislation and entheogenic freedoms in your state.

But let's say you just searched and came up with nothing--no bill pending in your state. What now? Keep searching, stay on top of it. That's the passive route. If you want to get pro-active about it, start talking regulation to your rep.

Part 2.
Regulation as a pro-active step against prohibition.
[to be continued]

[mconlonx]

Keeping Salvia Legal

Part 2
Regulation as a pro-active step against prohibition.

Many of you don't believe anyone should have any say about what you consume except yourself. For those of you with staunch and unwavering belief like this, this suggested course of action is not going to be palatable. But there are good reasons for it.

Salvia shouldn't be even regulated, but that's just now how modern culture works right now. Lots of things are regulated including most of the stuff you eat. Most regulations are innocuous (or ineffective, like the FDA) and designed to protect the general population from really nasty stuff. Others are moral calls, like regulating tobacco, alcohol, and pharmaceuticals. And then there's the draconian and ultimately futile act of prohibition, which is what happens when substances are scheduled. In all of this, there has to be some kind of compromise. Ban proponents want to completely outlaw it, we'd rather it remained completely off the books. Regulation is a sane course of action, considering where we're at right now.

It would also allow us to control the debate and language of the debate for a change. Most of the stuff we have to argue with is very reactive--by neccesity since it's usually spurred by radical action. Unfortunately, it gives them a chance to demonize salvia, like the right did with their language of "partial birth" abortions. It's all about who controls the debate and right now we are zero for many.

And keep in mind that the basic argument against salvia is "the kids." Teens are doing this, dontchaknow, just take a look at the YouTube vids on teh interwebz. Prohibition of salvia basically boils down to people freaking out that the kids are going to trip. Take that away from them and what do they have to argue with? NOTHING! No demonstrable problem with salvia otherwise.

So why not regulate sales to 18+ like CA and ME? Regulation is tolerable to most, except the real nut cases on either end of the spectrum. Rational parents and lawmakers like it because something is being done to keep the kids off drugs. Users like it because it keeps it legal. Codifies regulation in law, actually. Those stridently against drugs and those who think you should be able to use anything won't be happy, but both can hopefully see it as a partial victory. In both ME and CA, both sides claimed victory when regulatory bills passed.

Get in touch with your representative. Have the texts of the ME law and CA bill on hand to send to them. Even OK would be okay. As a constituent ask if they'd be willing to sponsor an anti-drug bill for you. Give them the outline, and break it down for them--prohibition is tricky with vocal opponets across the political spectrum, but regulation is something the middle of both sides can live with. And it addresses the greatest outcry about "The Kids." Give them a good argument, show them exactly how it would make them look good, especially compared to the embarassment of many other ban bills which have died in committee.

As far as I know, no one's tried this, but it certainly would be a valid approach worth considering.

If you wanted to be proactive in your state where currently salvia is still legal. You can keep skating by as more and more states fall, but that's what causes larger, Federal bans--happened again and again, look at the history of alcohol, cannibis, LSD, and MDMA. Send the Feds a message--regulation we could live with, prohibition is less than useful.

Is salvia still legal in your state with no bills pending? Contact your rep and see if you can initiate interest in a salvia regulation bill.

Part 3
Uh-Oh, a ban bill's been introduced in my state--what can I do now???
[to be continued]

[divinorum]

Well after fifteen minutes of searching my Texas Legislature website and finding all bills concerning Salvia D. I have found out that almost all of the bills drafted (save three) would just prohibit sales under the age of 18. These have some support behind them, but have not been passed. The other ones would schedule it to either a level two or three, but these have less support. You were right, they say something about how it would not hurt fiscally, which it would but they just want to pass their bill. Anyway, these probably wont pass, and are currently in limbo. The others, with some letters of support from us, will pass. Take them away from kids, then there is no reason for it to stay illegal. Anyway, besides this I wrote most of my paper with stats and such (from reliable sources) that shows that even though they say it will cost little money (lies), it will cost some. Although this is just one small part of a huge argument that we have. We can also talk about how its chemical structure, and receptor interactions are completely different than that of LSD (or almost all other hallucinogens), its legitamacy as a house plant, level of danger, etc. Remember, if we organize this in a logical and intelligent manner, then we have a stronger argument then they do. I like all the suggestions made on here, and as soon as I hear complaints about Salvia here in Texas I will be sure to voice a reasonable opinion wherever the complaint may arise. 

[DrYRHead]

I'd rather see them just card people. If it were made totally illegal, it would then be left up to the street level drug dealers to sell, and those people DO NOT CARD kids. Thus, it the political types, cops and the media are worried because "kids are doing it", making it illegal will insure that the kids can get it even easier.

[mconlonx]

I'd rather see them just card people. If it were made totally illegal, it would then be left up to the street level drug dealers to sell, and those people DO NOT CARD kids. Thus, it the political types, cops and the media are worried because "kids are doing it", making it illegal will insure that the kids can get it even easier.

Awesome argument for regulation instead of prohibition. Check stats in your own state, but chances are that you can lean on cigarette statistics to back this up.

[mconlonx]

Keeping Salvia Legal

Part 0:
Introduction--why YOU should oppose salvia ban bills

"A bill has been introduced in my state, I guess it's all over."
"What possible difference can I make now that a ban bill has been introduced? You know They're just going to ban it."
"I'm into entheogens, but not salvia particularly--my sacrament of choice is still legal/illegal, why should I care?"
"I hear a Federal ban is in the works right now with the DEA studying Salvia with an eye toward scheduling it--the States don't really matter."

If you're reading this here, you already have a great reason to not want Salvia prohibition to take effect, either in your State or Nationally. And yet bans have passed in many states and there's rumors of renewed Federal interest. This leads many to believe that the fight to keep salvia legal is as hopeless as other efforts have been in the past. But it's simply not so--Salvia simply cannot be significantly compared to any of the traditionally scheduled hallucinogens in either effect or chemical makeup, and socially, aside from media hype, there is no demonstrable problem with salvia. In fact, whenever bans are opposed, they fail. Think about that for a moment. More ban bills have failed than have passed; Salvia is still legal in more states than it's been banned. The history of Salvia ban bills is squarely on the side of those who wish to keep it available--every time a ban bill has come up and there has been opposition at committee public hearings, ban bills have failed. Every. Time.

And yet, ban bills keep passing; people keep NOT attending committee public hearings to simply speak out against bans and take the time to refute the unfounded media hype being foisted off on otherwise ignorant committee members. If no one tells them different, if no one opposes a ban, why should they think it's any less pernicious than the pro-ban side says it is, why should they think that anyone opposes a ban when no one shows up to do so?

The arguments are all on our side. There is no demonstrable salvia problem out there--no police-reported salvia-related crime wave, no superintendents reporting this new scourge in the schools, no substance abuse treatment center admissions, no emergency room admissions, nothing out there except handfulls of poison control center calls which are barely a blip on their radar. It's not a party or social drug. It's not particularly fun. It has a history of religious use and is currently being scientifically researched for possible analgesic, anti-depressive, or even anti-addictive properties. It doesn't meet scheduling guidelines, and the DEA has yet to schedule it. Where's the problem???

On the other side, their arguments boil down to three things: Hallucinogens are bad, kids on YouTube, and "Legal LSD/Marijuana!" marketing claims. These are easily dismissed--if you are banning Salvia because it is a drug and it is therefore bad, what about real problems like teen access to parents' pharmaceuticals, dextromethorphan abuse of OTC cough medicines, Benadryl, nutmeg, aerosol whipped cream, and any number of other plants and products out there currently being abused at measurable rates--why does Salvia receive special treatment when these other, more demonstrable problems are left alone? YouTube vids--are you kidding me??? Unsubstantiated internet video being provided as some kind of evidence? And of course the marketing claims of unscrupulous sellers looking to move product--again, doesn't pass the straight face test at all. When called on such tactics in public, the pro-ban argument looks extremely weak, and committees realize they are being played for fools by their own officials. No one likes that...

There are all kinds of examples out there of bills which have quietly died in committee, maybe because committee members who actually do research find out that bans are bogus. There are also examples out there of people who fought bans and won. In OR in 2007, two people showed up at committee public hearing to oppose a ban and the bill died in committee. In CA in 2007, people opposed a ban at public hearing and the bill was amended from complete prohibition to regulation of sales to 18+. In ME in 2007, two people spoke out against a ban at public hearing and the bill was amended to regulation of sales to 18+, and signed into law that summer. The people who spoke out in ME and OR were nobodies--not doctors, scientists, sociologists, drug specialists or anything like that, just normal, everday people, citizens sticking up for their rights. And winning.

The quotes at the top of the page indicate some of the resistance I've come across. The trouble is that thoughts like this are self-defeating--and if you don't oppose something and it passes, it only reinforces that thought. I don't understand this at all--the recent history of salvia legislation proves that when bans are opposed, they are defeated. Every single time.

And the state bans most definitely matter. Look at the history of prohibition in the States. Every single time something has been banned, it has started with local and state bans. Alcohol at the turn of the last century, cannabis in the early 1900s, LSD in the 60s, MDMA in the 90s--first state bans, then Federal bans as a response to perceived interest and popularity. They guage acceptance of prohibition on the state level first... which is exactly what's happening with Salvia.

Again, if you're reading this here, you probably have good reason to be concerned about Salvia legality in your state. But the argument to keep Salvia legal is bigger than that, even--it is currently the very frontline in the fight for entheogenic freedom. And it's good that it is, because it is so easy to defend and with current communication, easy to spread word before it's too late. Salvia is an oddball because it doesn't have all the easily recognizable, supposedly dangerous effects of currently scheduled hallucinogens. Also, the vehemency with which ban supporters attack it, misrepresenting it to committees, buying into the artificial medial hype surrounding it when put on the spot by lazy or sensationalistic reporters. It makes it easy to defeat during the committee public hearing stage. And if regulation is implemented, it could provide a precedent and tangible example of regulation of a psychoactive that works--it's not a problem before regulation, it won't be after, so use that as ammo showing that regulation works. Turn their own arguments, reasoning, and figures against them.

Couple of last thoughts on why you should fight bans: no one else will do it for you, nothing bad is going to happen if you oppose them in public. No one will  fight it for you. MAPS, CCLE, DPA, LEAP, Daniel Siebert--none of these people are going to magically show up to defend salvia in your state. Hell, they probably won't even respond to you if you approach them about defending salvia in your state. Vendors won't show up, so don't count on them, either. It's up to YOU in your state to defend your current right of unrestricted access to salvia. The correct time and place to do this is the committee public hearing--this is the only thing proven over and over again to work. Sign petitions, send emails and letters, call your rep, support drug decrim orgs, but for the heaven's sake, above anything else you do, be sure to show up and oppose a ban at public hearing. Without any prep at all, you will know 99% more than anyone else in the room about salvia, and with about as much work as you might put into a high school term paper, you will be a freakin' expert.

Of course standing up for something like this is scary. Won't people think I'm a "druggie?" Nope. Currently access to salvia is a right. They are trying to take it away. It unfortunately falls withing the purview of currently socially unacceptable use, but if you don't care what people think about you, there's nothing anyone can legally do about you merely exercising your democratic right to oppose legislation. But some people have certain situation where even the possibility of that minimal exposure is not a rist they're willing to take. Understandable, certainly, but keep in mind that if you think you can't speak out against onerous legislation, they've already won a lot more than just this battel...

Salvia ban bills can be defeated. Current history proves this over and over again, and yet the media will use language designed to promote the opposite: "Already, 6 states have passed salvia ban bills, with more in the works" instead of "Although some states have passed ban bills, most haven't and more bills are defeated than have ever passed." Why buy into that when you know different? Defeating a ban bill takes a day off from work or school, travel to your state capital for a day, and about as much research as a high school term paper. What's salvia and your entheogenic freedoms worth to you?

Salvia bans fail more than they pass.

Salvia bans fail every time there is even a bit of opposition at public hearing.

Salvia bans pass ever time there is no opposition at public hearing.

No one will stand up at the public hearing in your state unless you do.

[Sea Mac]

I took these steps in CA and they worked!

Here is the Letter I Mailed:
http://members.cox.net/sageseeds/ab259o.html

And shortly after that the text of the proposed law was changed!

Here is one more economic reason to persuade lawmakers in favor of 'regulation to minors' VS. 'making everyone that touches it a felon' ...


• For every person incarcerated for growing plants: that state loses a taxpayer and must spend more tax Funds to house and feed them in punishment. You reduce the available income to the government while requiring an increase of funds expenditures at the same time: a double hit to the states economy every time an innocent gardener is persecuted for growing harmless plants in this latest "Witch Hunt" ...

[DrYRHead]

Ya, I think that it would be better for the law to just require vendors to card people to make sure they are over 18 y/o and have people pay sales tax on it. Making it a felony would just cost them taxes instead.

[Madmax]

Rest assured that the forces of nannyism will surely criminalize salvia eventually, but much like opium poppies your average Barney Fife cop wouldn't recognize a salvia plant if it bit him on his his highly polished behind. You can't fight stupidity, but you can apparently legislate it. Even if every state succumbs to the knee jerk reaction of criminalizing salvia just because others are doing so those who grow them will remain undetected unless caught with some finished product. Unless or until the use of salvia expands significantly the companies who produce drug testing kits won't have enough demand for detection devices to make it worth the bother from their own point of view, and I don't personally know anyone who wants to fly with the gods on a daily basis.

[DrYRHead]

I do not see Salvinorin A as ever becoming part of the routine drug screen panels. First of all, the dose is so small it would be too hard to look for, and second the us of SD is just not wide spread enough to warrant such. The same is true of LSD, for it is also too small in dosage to be readily found in urine or blood.

[mconlonx]

"Rest assured that the forces of nannyism will surely criminalize salvia eventually"

Respctfully, Madmax: Fuck off.

The forces of nannyism can try to criminalize salvia, but they fail whenever people speak out against such actions. People are less inclined to speak out against criminalization with people like you saying things like this. I appreciate where you're coming from and wouldn't try to dissuade people from stocking up and getting live plants while they can, but this is a defeatist attitude that simply is not completely true. While the forces of nannyism will continue to attempt to criminalize salvia, they are aided in their efforts by salvia enthusiasts who do not speak out against bans... and those who discourage others from doing so.

Rest assured that bans fail whenever there is public opposition. It is only the apathy and ignorance of salvia enthusiasts that allow bans to sail through state legislatures.

[Paradoxic]

"Fuck off" is tough to say respectfully, lol. But no, I'm all with you mconlonx. The truth is that it isn't very difficult to oppose a ban successfully, and it has been done. Salvia has an exceptionally strong case for staying legal or at least mostly legal--all it takes is a little civic engagement.