Chris402
Greenlighter
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2017
- Messages
- 14
https://engage.drugpolicy.org/secur...e=1806twc3SITSAHouseTW&cid=70141000000k79IAAQ
They are trying to ban kratom! And other substances that can potentially help people! The link above can help protect kratom.
IT SENDS A MESSAGE TO A REPRESENTATIVE SAYING THIS:
As your constituent, I urge you to vote NO on H.R. 2851, The Stop Importation and Trafficking of Synthetic Analogues (SITSA) Act. This misguided piece of legislation would give Sessions? Justice Department broad new powers to ban synthetic analogue drugs, decide what the sentences should be, and take away the requirement for Congressional oversight that has been in place for 40 years.
This bill will do nothing to address the problem of overdoses related to synthetic opioids like fentanyl. It will just put even more lives in jeopardy and make the drug war even worse. Overdoses are preventable ? the only way to save lives is to stop relying on punitive policies and instead embrace proven health-centered solutions that work.
SITSA will worsen mass incarceration of drug offenders and expand the use of harsh maximum sentences for drug offenses. The bill creates new penalties for thousands of synthetic analogue drugs calling for maximum sentences of 10, 20 and 30 years or life imprisonment. The carve out for possession does not define quantities that would constitute possession and will not prevent many people who possess small quantities or sell drugs to support their own addiction from getting slammed by draconian new penalties in SITSA.
SITSA will punish people who lack criminal culpability and will disproportionately incarcerate low-level drug offenders who did not import or package the drugs, and often are unaware of the chemical composition of the drugs.
SITSA will give the Attorney General unchecked new power to incarcerate drug offenders. It gives the Attorney General new power to apply penalties to any synthetic drug without having to prove the drug is harmful. When new drugs are scheduled, more people are incarcerated under harsh federal sentencing laws.
SITSA overrides the existing process in place for more than 40 years that Congress created for scheduling drugs. Currently the Dept. of Justice must work in collaboration with the Dept. of Health and Human Services to decide whether a drug should be permanently scheduled. The current process requires the Attorney General to obtain sign off from drug experts at HHS as part of the permanent scheduling process. SITSA would take away this step that screens against unnecessary scheduling actions by allowing the Attorney General to proceed without screening from drug experts unless HHS proactively reviews a permanent drug scheduling proposal and rule against scheduling in writing.
In 2015, the House Judiciary Committee received a bill (H.R.3537/114th) containing a list of 200+ drug compounds that the Attorney General wanted added to Schedule I. When FDA and NIDA reviewed this list, only 21 compounds were known to pose a public health risk. Many of the listed compounds were essential tools in research. It is imperative that HHS can prevent unnecessary drug scheduling actions.
SITSA undermines congressional oversight of how drugs are scheduled nearly doubling the length of time that a drug can be temporarily scheduled without congressional or HHS oversight from a maximum of three years allowed now, to more than 5 years. HHS has no authority to screen against unnecessary temporary scheduling actions, exposing more people to incarceration and hindering scientific research at least 5 years.
And SITSA is unnecessary because the Attorney General can already ban synthetic analogue drugs. This was demonstrated earlier this year when the Attorney General used powers already granted by Congress to place illicit fentanyl analogues not already regulated by the Controlled Substances Act into Schedule I for 3 years, allowing time to pursue permanent scheduling through rulemaking. At a congressional hearing last month, Acting Administrator Patterson indicated that this mass scheduling action addressed concern that prosecutors can?t convict people for trafficking synthetic drugs.
SITSA could have devastating impacts on scientific research. Many synthetic analogue drugs share chemical properties with drugs that have known therapeutic uses such as opioids. Under SITSA, once a drug has been added to Schedule A, many of the same hurdles that apply to conducting research with Schedule I drugs will apply to substances added to the proposed Schedule A. These burdens will be costly and time-consuming to the research and host institution(s) and will have a chilling effect on promising research towards the development of opioid addiction therapies and safer medications to treat pain that are desperately needed to help end the ongoing opioid overdose crisis. While SITSA provides some relief for researchers who already have a Schedule I or II registration to proceed with Schedule A research, SITSA does not provide accommodations necessary to ensure researchers can obtain drug samples for research. Commercial manufacturers are not likely to produce Schedule A drugs. Provisions in SITSA intended to ease registration requirements will help little when researchers access the drug material they need to study therapeutic potential.
For these reasons, I urge you to vote NO on H.R. 2851, The Stop Importation and Trafficking of Synthetic Analogues (SITSA) Act. Instead of adopting these punitive policies, it?s time for Congress to save lives by adopting effective health-based solutions. I hope you will prioritize scaling up access to the overdose-reversal drug naloxone and medication-assisted treatment, like methadone and buprenorphine, and resist efforts to expand the use of mandatory minimum sentences and criminalization. We can?t arrest our way out of the overdose crisis. Overdose deaths are preventable and I urge you to do everything you can to help save lives.
They are trying to ban kratom! And other substances that can potentially help people! The link above can help protect kratom.
IT SENDS A MESSAGE TO A REPRESENTATIVE SAYING THIS:
As your constituent, I urge you to vote NO on H.R. 2851, The Stop Importation and Trafficking of Synthetic Analogues (SITSA) Act. This misguided piece of legislation would give Sessions? Justice Department broad new powers to ban synthetic analogue drugs, decide what the sentences should be, and take away the requirement for Congressional oversight that has been in place for 40 years.
This bill will do nothing to address the problem of overdoses related to synthetic opioids like fentanyl. It will just put even more lives in jeopardy and make the drug war even worse. Overdoses are preventable ? the only way to save lives is to stop relying on punitive policies and instead embrace proven health-centered solutions that work.
SITSA will worsen mass incarceration of drug offenders and expand the use of harsh maximum sentences for drug offenses. The bill creates new penalties for thousands of synthetic analogue drugs calling for maximum sentences of 10, 20 and 30 years or life imprisonment. The carve out for possession does not define quantities that would constitute possession and will not prevent many people who possess small quantities or sell drugs to support their own addiction from getting slammed by draconian new penalties in SITSA.
SITSA will punish people who lack criminal culpability and will disproportionately incarcerate low-level drug offenders who did not import or package the drugs, and often are unaware of the chemical composition of the drugs.
SITSA will give the Attorney General unchecked new power to incarcerate drug offenders. It gives the Attorney General new power to apply penalties to any synthetic drug without having to prove the drug is harmful. When new drugs are scheduled, more people are incarcerated under harsh federal sentencing laws.
SITSA overrides the existing process in place for more than 40 years that Congress created for scheduling drugs. Currently the Dept. of Justice must work in collaboration with the Dept. of Health and Human Services to decide whether a drug should be permanently scheduled. The current process requires the Attorney General to obtain sign off from drug experts at HHS as part of the permanent scheduling process. SITSA would take away this step that screens against unnecessary scheduling actions by allowing the Attorney General to proceed without screening from drug experts unless HHS proactively reviews a permanent drug scheduling proposal and rule against scheduling in writing.
In 2015, the House Judiciary Committee received a bill (H.R.3537/114th) containing a list of 200+ drug compounds that the Attorney General wanted added to Schedule I. When FDA and NIDA reviewed this list, only 21 compounds were known to pose a public health risk. Many of the listed compounds were essential tools in research. It is imperative that HHS can prevent unnecessary drug scheduling actions.
SITSA undermines congressional oversight of how drugs are scheduled nearly doubling the length of time that a drug can be temporarily scheduled without congressional or HHS oversight from a maximum of three years allowed now, to more than 5 years. HHS has no authority to screen against unnecessary temporary scheduling actions, exposing more people to incarceration and hindering scientific research at least 5 years.
And SITSA is unnecessary because the Attorney General can already ban synthetic analogue drugs. This was demonstrated earlier this year when the Attorney General used powers already granted by Congress to place illicit fentanyl analogues not already regulated by the Controlled Substances Act into Schedule I for 3 years, allowing time to pursue permanent scheduling through rulemaking. At a congressional hearing last month, Acting Administrator Patterson indicated that this mass scheduling action addressed concern that prosecutors can?t convict people for trafficking synthetic drugs.
SITSA could have devastating impacts on scientific research. Many synthetic analogue drugs share chemical properties with drugs that have known therapeutic uses such as opioids. Under SITSA, once a drug has been added to Schedule A, many of the same hurdles that apply to conducting research with Schedule I drugs will apply to substances added to the proposed Schedule A. These burdens will be costly and time-consuming to the research and host institution(s) and will have a chilling effect on promising research towards the development of opioid addiction therapies and safer medications to treat pain that are desperately needed to help end the ongoing opioid overdose crisis. While SITSA provides some relief for researchers who already have a Schedule I or II registration to proceed with Schedule A research, SITSA does not provide accommodations necessary to ensure researchers can obtain drug samples for research. Commercial manufacturers are not likely to produce Schedule A drugs. Provisions in SITSA intended to ease registration requirements will help little when researchers access the drug material they need to study therapeutic potential.
For these reasons, I urge you to vote NO on H.R. 2851, The Stop Importation and Trafficking of Synthetic Analogues (SITSA) Act. Instead of adopting these punitive policies, it?s time for Congress to save lives by adopting effective health-based solutions. I hope you will prioritize scaling up access to the overdose-reversal drug naloxone and medication-assisted treatment, like methadone and buprenorphine, and resist efforts to expand the use of mandatory minimum sentences and criminalization. We can?t arrest our way out of the overdose crisis. Overdose deaths are preventable and I urge you to do everything you can to help save lives.
