Understanding Asset Forfeiture's Impact on DEA Strategies

A group of law enforcement officials sit around a table discussing documents and reports in an office setting.

reported in youarewithinthenorms.com‘

NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., INC., SPIRIT OF REV. IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER R. CLEMENT BS., MS, MBA. HARVEY JENKINS, MD, PH.D., IN THE SPIRIT OF C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., M.B.A., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., EVELYN J. CLEMENT, IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGSWORTH, RENEE BLARE, RPH, DR. TERENCE SASAKI, MD LESLY POMPY MD., CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., RICHARD KAUL, MD., IN THE SPIRIT OF LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, AISHA GARDNER, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NJOKU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS

Diagram illustrating the structure and function of the Mu Opioid Receptor on neuronal cell membranes. — Mu receptor

The article introduces the concept of “Algorithmic Legalized Plunder,” arguing that modern systems, specifically citing the medical RVU system, use complex computer algorithms to enact systematic wealth redistribution, which they describe as a “new tyranny.” These authors draw parallels to Frédéric Bastiat’s 1850 warning against legal plunder by legislation, asserting that artificial intelligence (AI) code has become the contemporary mechanism for this legalized theft.

This algorithmic bias extends beyond healthcare into areas such as credit scoring and school funding formulas, creating systematic disadvantage under the guise of objectivity.

🎭🎭🎭

“..Bastiat posits that the law becomes perverted when it punishes one’s right to self-defense (of his life, liberty, and property) in favor of another’s right to legalized plunder , which he defines as “if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong..”

Algorithmic legalize plunder

🎭🎭

asset forfeiture funding influence the DEA’s strategy concerning pain physician investigations

Asset forfeiture funding significantly influences the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) strategy concerning pain physician investigations by providing a self-sustaining financial engine and creating a robust incentive structure for targeting medical professionals. Based on the sources, the influence of asset forfeiture can be broken down into three main areas:

Infographic depicting Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) statistics and various icons related to investigative focus and asset forfeiture, featuring a silhouette of a person in the foreground.

1. Driving a Shift in Investigative Focus

The need for measurable results and funding streams contributed to the DEA initiating a new front in the War on Drugs focused on prescription painkillers.

An illustrated portrait of Frédéric Bastiat, a 19th-century French economist and political theorist, wearing a formal coat and white cravat, with a neutral background. — Frédéric Bastiat

• The articles presented argue that the DEA’s actions against physicians were driven by flawed policy and a focus on asset forfeiture.

• For example: In 2002, the DEA announced it would reallocate many of its resources from illegal drugs in urban areas to illicit prescription drugs in rural areas to address the emerging opioid threat.

• Then-DEA Commissioner Asa Hutchinson explained that the DEA would work with local law enforcement agencies to use its Asset Forfeiture Fund to help state and local officials finance this new initiative against prescription drug abuse.

• This shift was partly motivated by the DEA coming under heavy criticism from Congress for having no “measurable proof” that it had reduced the illegal drug supply.

• The DEA’s aggressive plan against prescription painkillers, such as OxyContin, utilized familiar law enforcement methods from the War on Drugs, including asset forfeiture.

🎭

2. Creating a Self-Financing Mechanism

The structure of the DEA’s funding streams creates a perverse system that incentivizes ongoing investigations.

• The DEA’s Diversion Control Program is self-financed, which means it is nearly immune from congressional oversight regarding its existence, tactics, or efficacy concerning appropriations.

• The money generated from seizures is split between the law enforcement agencies making the bust, with the remainder going to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Forfeiture Fund, where it is used to coordinate more investigations.

• The DEA distributes the vast majority of asset forfeiture money to state and local law enforcement agencies that assist the agency on drug cases. This is characterized in the sources as a “perverse system” that allows officials to keep the assets of suspected defendants for their own departments.

• This system creates a scenario where doctors must finance investigations of their colleagues, practitioners, or even themselves.

A group of medical professionals and DEA agents in a meeting room discussing investigations, with focus on their documents and expressions of concern.

3. Influencing Target Selection

The availability of physician assets makes them appealing targets, and investigators are explicitly encouraged to pursue forfeiture from the start of a case.

• The 2005 Libby Report highlighted that prescription narcotics are legal and regulated, allowing the DEA to easily monitor the way physicians prescribe them. Unlike illicit drug dealers, most physicians are law-abiding professionals, which unfortunately makes them easier targets for law enforcement.

• A detective involved in drug diversion investigations articulated the financial necessity of targeting physicians for investigation at a 2003 training conference.

• This detective urged agents to “remember that asset forfeiture investigation should begin at the start of your criminal case”.

• Investigators were advised to serve search warrants on doctors’ offices and bank accounts and to seize their contents. If a doctor did not have a sizable bank account, investigators were encouraged to look at their home or office building, arguing these were likely paid for with the proceeds of drug distribution.

• The sources also allege that prosecutors may go after older doctors for more money to grab on forfeiture before the trials.

This system of funding, where seized assets fuel future law enforcement activity, resembles a feedback loop: the seizure of physician assets directly generates the capital used to investigate and prosecute other physicians.