An example of the level of discourse in our legislature

ThinkProgress reports on a DEA agent -- the chief administrator of the DEA -- straight-up refusing to discuss the comparative properties of marijuana and other drugs (like crack and heroin) in order to avoid conceding that marijuana might not be as bad as those drugs.

POLIS: Is crack worse for a person than marijuana?

LEONHART: I believe all the illegal drug –

POLIS: Is methamphetamine worse for somebody’s health than marijuana?

LEONHART: I don’t think any illegal drug –

POLIS: Is heroin worse for someones health than marijuana?

LEONHART: Again, all the drugs –

POLIS: I mean, either yes, no, or I don’t know. I mean, if you don’t know, you can look this up you should know this as the chief administrator for the Drug Enforcement Agency. I’m asking you a very straightforward question. Is heroin worse for someone’s health than marijuana?

LEONHART: All the illegal drugs are bad.


POLIS:  Is methamphetamine more highly addictive than marijuana?

LEONHART:  I think some people become addicted to marijuana and some people become addicted to methamphetamine --

The whole thing is kind of disturbing to watch.  What we're looking at here is a congressional hearing, at which an officer of the law is actively resisting aiding congress in making decisions.  She's trying to manipulate congress's ability to act by withholding information.

This is the sort of behavior we've apparently come to allow from our law enforcement.  It gives the impression she's less interested in sensible legislation than she is in making sure there are enough laws to keep justifying her paycheck.