Thus, it would seem that, Obama, by virtue of his candidness, would not at this time be permitted to fully serve as a member of Biden’s White House staff.
This kind of thinking - that past marijuana use is a reasonable basis for excluding someone from performing government service that they would otherwise be highly qualified for - seems outmoded, or “Neanderthal”, as Biden himself might say.
If this standard is to be continued going into the future, it would seem that it won’t be long before only neo-Puritans and liars will be eligible to serve in government, at least as White House staffers.
Yes, this is bullshit that his administration would even go there since they only won by 45000 votes in 3 key states and almost did not take the Senate. Why piss off people who helped vote you in?
The article I read, that was linked to on the now-closed thread, was clear that only a few people were let go (due to more than just past pot use - including the particular job position). Most of the past pot users were not affected.
Nothing says that only past pot smoking was why they were let go. It could be that they lied about it, that they faked their test and were caught, that they were in jobs with zero-tolerance, etc. These aren’t going to be public information. It’s easy for someone to claim that’s the only reason they were let go. Again, only a few were let go.
The article in the OP did mention that pot use is still illegal on the federal level and it can affect security clearances.
Even without the security problems, having staff break federal drug laws is poor optics at the very least.
Only a few were let go, but other people are under review, thus suspended or working remotely. How many are affected is unclear, but the Daily Beast article (which is the one that initially reported the story) in the now-closed thread says “dozens”. That article also notes that it is not known how many were disqualified prior to being hired.
[emphasis added]
This is a key point. It’s also not clear what “past marijuana use” actually means. It’s going to vary from case to case. If it’s “I smoked a joint once in college”, it’s silly to deny employment over that. But if it’s “I was a habitual marijuana user and got stoned almost every night for the last 10 years, but I quite the day before I started work”, that’s kind of an issue.
When I was involved in security clearance investigations*, the general rule of thumb was that occasional drug use in the past was not a bar to a clearance or enlistment, although it might require additional investigation. Habitual use, and use within the last six months, were red flags and usually would result in unfavorable action (denial of clearance or even separation from service).
*To be clear: I did not conduct such investigations myself, but I processed the initial clearance applications in my Army Reserve unit and reviewed the results, and was in fairly frequent contact with investigators.
…and/or giving Biden a pass on things that are BS because they are overjoyed that he won the last election (which I am). But BS is BS. And, as said upthread, and by others quoted in the Daily Beast article, this policy serves no purpose other than to exclude qualified people and alienate younger voters, both from voting and from politics in general.
The new Biden White House had a chance to junk this self-harming and outdated pro forma practice once and for all, but apparently missed it.
I don’t think that is fair. At this point, letting someone go for marijuana use is stupid and very dated. Something I would expect from a Conservative Republican Whitehouse but not from a Democratic or moderate Republican’s Whitehouse.
As @running_coach pointed out upthread, marijuana possession and use is still a Federal crime. Marijuana is still classified as a Schedule I drug. That law may well be “outdated”, but it’s still the law.
President Biden has a lot on his plate. Marijuana decriminalization at the Federal level may, or may not, eventually get some serious attention from his administration. But until then, violations of Federal laws, even the “outdated” ones, are not just reasonable grounds for terminating employment in the White House, they’re pretty much no-brainers.*
*Note that as I mentioned upthread, it’s not clear to me what “past marijuana use” means in these specific cases. If someone was dismissed for marijuana use ten years ago, I agree that’s stupid. But it if it’s for habitual, recent use, which again is still a Federal crime, it’s more than reasonable.
If only someone in the executive branch had the power to pardon people for violation of federal laws. Show some leadership Mr President. Why throw supporters under the bus?
Resulting in cries of “favoritism” and “tolerating drug use”, etc. I think the Federal drug law violation is a no-brainer in the situation. You can’t allow openly breaking laws by anyone working in The White House. That’s just handing a big old bag of candy to the Idiot Right.
We just spent four years having a president who didn’t give much of a shit about abusing executive powers to help his otherwise unqualified pals obtain federal employment. I support federal decriminalization, but Biden should not be expected to make end-runs around federal law because it is convenient for him, especially where sensitive national security positions are involved.
…or not prosecute/punish them in the first place…Oh, wait. That’s what’s happening now. The Federal Government could crack down on states that have legalized marijuana, and/or go after people in those states who buy, sell and use it. But they don’t. When the first states legalized it (and I will forever be proud and grateful that I able to cast one of the votes that did so), the Feds under Obama took a hands off approach. Despite everything I despise about Trump, his admin continued in that way. And unless something really bizarre happens, Biden will too. So it is a Federal law that has not been and is all but certain not going to be enforced - hence, in effect, no Federal law at all. In actual Federal effect, it seems to survive only as a discriminatory employment practice.
Not only that, but it is up to the President who can get a job in the White House and who can get security clearance, regardless of anything in that person’s past or present. Trump made that abundantly clear. His granting of jobs and clearances, in blatant override of recommendations to the contrary, made a statement. That statement was “FU. I will do what I want.”
Biden likewise had (still has?) a chance to make a statement with this. His statement could be “Let’s stop all the malarkey around marijuana.” But so far, he’s chosen not to make it.
Sure, there may be bigger fish to fry (or bake, as it were). But this is an easy one, and, for reasons that have been mentioned about how it will go down with younger people and, in my estimation, rational people all around, little fish like that probably matter more than it might seem.
I think it’s the flipflop. They PTB said it wouldn’t be a problem, then changed their minds. For whatever reason. Hey let’s look at VP Harris😎. She admitted it no?
This isn’t anything I’m even concerned about, unless they raid all the brownie supply.