Drug WarRant

Dr. Nora Volkow, director of National Institute on Drug Abuse, regarding the recent Monitoring the Future survey:

The other things that are worrisome have to do with the indicators of attitudes. For example, in the case of marijuana, we have not seen any change. It’s sort of stable. The values are stable — they have not gone down as they have for other drugs. But what is worrisome is not only that we still have 32 percent of twelfth graders having abuse in the past year (which is very high, one in three) but the fact that the attitudes toward the perception of risk for marijuana are actually going down. That is to say there are fewer kids that feel that marijuana is dangerous. And in the case of marijuana, all along the survey, we have shown from the data that the attitudes regarding its dangerousness very much predict the prevalence of its abuse.

But because it’s a drug that is widely available — actually 80 percent of kids state that they can get access to it very easily — when you have a situation like that, where the perception that the drug is easily available, the variable that constitutes the most to whether they will take it or not is the sense of whether the drug is risky or not.

So we’ve been seeing significant decreases in the number of adolescents believing that marijuana is dangerous. We are concerned that if this is not addressed, then we will start [having] an increase in the rate of consumption of marijuana. So that was on of the things that raised an alert flag.

Translation:

We don’t have any way of regulating marijuana use for teens. With cigarettes, we have age limits, but with marijuana, we turned that all over to the black market — and they’ll sell it to anybody. Obviously, law enforcement can’t do shit about stopping the black market in marijuana. Kids can get it easily.

So the only way we can think of to prevent teens from using marijuana is to lie to them about its dangers.

Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, and a whole lot of lies, they’re starting to learn the truth. Somebody must be talking.

We’re in big trouble.

We’ve had some good (and some volatile) discussions in comments recently, particularly over what constitutes drug policy reform and its end goals. This is quite healthy (as long as we avoid the name-calling). We have a number of people who frequent this site with different views both of our destination and our route to get there (and even how we should publicly describe our route to get there).

I’m going to inject LEAP’s Norm Stamper into that discussion, with a particularly appropriate piece over at Alternet: Let’s Not Stop at Marijuana Legalization

Yet, I’m alarmed that the above-mentioned poll showing majority support for marijuana legalization also found that fewer than one in 10 people agree that it’s time to end the prohibition of other drugs.

This no doubt makes sense to some readers at first glance, since more people are familiar with marijuana than other drugs like cocaine, heroin or meth. However, even a cursory study of our drug war policies will reveal that legalizing pot but not other drugs will leave huge social harms unresolved. […]

Marijuana legalization is a great step in the direction of sane and sensible drug policy. But we reformers must remember that we’re working to legalize drugs not because we think they are safe, but because prohibition is far more dangerous to users and nonusers alike.

Read the whole thing — it’s worth it.

Norm’s OpEd very closely echoes my views.

I’m fine with incrementalism. I think medical marijuana, for example, serves us in two ways — on its own merits, and as a stepping stone toward acceptance of marijuana in general. I realize there are others who believe we should instead build and wield the Weapon of Instant Legalization of all things, but I seem unable to make sense out of the blueprints.

I’m not fine at stopping with marijuana. Like Norm, I’m perhaps less interested in the ability to freely shoot heroin than I am in stopping the evils of prohibition. I’m not opposed to regulation, and will accept that to the extent that it makes it possible to virtually eliminate black market harms.

I’m not concerned that we don’t yet have a finalized policy model for each legalized drug. I believe that there’s more than one that is acceptable and meets the requirements, and that these will come with trial and error (probably in the laboratory of the states), but we do have some good blueprints, despite the unwillingness of the “academics” in the U.S. to do their job and actually craft policy options.

Next, while I know some don’t like the word “legalization,” I will continue to use it. Sure, the word can scare people, and our opponents know it and try to demonize us with it. And I understand “framing.” But by avoiding the word, we cede to it that dark power, when in fact, the meaning of the word has nothing inherently in it to elicit fear or shame.

Every time a former cop from Law Enforcement Against Prohibition steps up in front of a Kiwanis Club and says “We need to legalize all drugs, and here’s why…,” the word “legalization” takes a giant step over to our side. When our opponents no long have that word to scare people, what do they have left?

Finally, I understand that we’re in it for the long haul — not just in terms that have to do with continuing beyond marijuana legalization, but because it’s the nature of our fight. The only way we’ll win is by changing people’s minds, one at a time. There’s no wizard who can ride up and wave their magic wand to undo decades of corruption and propaganda. No President is going to step in and tear up the Controlled Substances Act on national TV.

We had a victory this week in Congress on syringe exchange, and I really appreciate the sentiment in this OpEd by Julie Davids at Prevention Justice.

Bill Clinton said NOT lifting the federal funding ban on syringe exchange was one of the biggest regrets in his presidency. But he didn’t fess up to that till he was safely out of the White House.

Barack Obama pledged to lift the ban. Then pointedly didn’t publicly work to do so, even when his imprimatur could have given a much-needed margin of safety for congressional efforts.

But who really did work to lift the ban? People with HIV, drug users, harm reduction leaders and their allies. Long-time and brand new AIDS activists who took to the streets and the halls of Congress and the plaza of HHS and the UN for decades at this point, including those who got arrested in the Capitol Rotunda in one of the first acts of civil disobedience against the Obama Adminstration. Organizers and policy wonks who counted the votes and worked hand in hand with grassroots activists to persuade and convert legislators. Religous people who spoke up about what faith and redemption and compassion really means. AIDS service and prevention providers and drug treatment people and harm reduction counselors and people in recovery, and people in and out of recovery, who spoke up about their lives and their work.

And because of all this – not because of the political cowardice of those who knew they were doing the wrong thing by allowing the ban to persist but who time and again shrank in the face of ideological opposition – the ban will now be lifted.

We’re in it for the long haul.

It’s Monitoring the Future time again. That annual release of the study of teens and drug use, where the ONDCP goes to great lengths to cherry-pick the results to show:

1. The drug war is working.
2. There are serious problems (not the result of the drug war) that require more drug war.

Smoking marijuana is becoming even more popular among U.S. teens and they have cut down on smoking cigarettes, binge drinking and using methamphetamine, according to a federal survey released Monday. […]

The increase of teens smoking pot is partly because the national debate over medical use of marijuana can make the drugs seem safer to teenagers, researchers said. In addition to marijuana, fewer teens also view prescription drugs and Ecstasy as dangerous, which often means more could use them in the future, said White House drug czar Gil Kerlikowske.

Ah, yes. It’s our fault.

The “continued erosion in youth attitudes and behavior toward substance abuse should give pause to all parents and policy-makers,” Kerlikowske said.

“These latest data confirm that we must redouble our efforts to implement a comprehensive, evidence-based approach to preventing and treating drug use,” Kerlikowske, the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, said in remarks prepared for his Monday speech at the National Press Club in Washington.

Now, let’s take a look at the simple facts.

To me the big story is that high school seniors are now more likely to smoke pot than smoke cigarettes.

Interesting. Cigarettes are legal, yet with legal age restrictions and fact-based education about the harms, we’ve managed to decrease the use of cigarettes.

Marijuana is illegal, and despite turning over all controls to criminals and using lie-based education about the harms, we’ve managed to increase the use of pot.

Wonder if there’s a lesson there, somewhere…

$2 Billion for the DEA. Yeah, that’s with a “B.” Jeralyn at TalkLeft has coverage of the 2010 appropriations bill.

While there is prevention money in the bill, there’s also a lot of funding for the War on Drugs.

Combating Illegal Drugs: $2 billion, $81 million above 2009, to combat illegal drugs through the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). These funds will provide for 128 new DEA positions to help stop the flow of illegal drugs across the Southwest border and to investigate, disrupt and dismantle major Mexican drug cartels.

Universities are laying off teachers and the DEA is looking at 128 new positions.

Read the rest of Jeralyn’s post to see how much more is being spent on the drug war throughout the various agencies.

The ONDCP talks about how important it is to focus on treatment rather than incarceration or supply side, but when it comes to the dollars, forget it — too many people profit off the war.

Have at it! After reading names at Winter Commencement this morning, I’m heading up to Chicago to see old friends and some shows.

Pain.com has a point-counterpoint on whether FDA should approve medical marijuana. Bruce Mirken of MPP wins handily. Theresa Hong has the counterpoint.

Tanya Treadway’s Unconstitutional Vendetta by Jacob Sullum is an update on the legal harassment of Siobhan Reynolds (advocate for pain doctors).

The heroin and cocaine trade: clear on the problem – unclear on the solution. Transform points out what I have long felt about our drug policy academics.

What is lacking, however, is any comment or analysis of the fact that it is very specifically prohibitionist policies (combined with high, and growing, demand) that fuel this extraordinary price inflation. There is also no mention of the fact that there are parallel legal markets in both coca/cocaine and opium/heroin (for medical and other legal uses) that do not demonstrate this same dynamic, and do not feature any criminal activity whatsoever, at any point in the production and supply chain.

Instead, Kilmer and Reuter’s piece “argues, rather lamely, that ‘Answers are hard to come by in the quest to fight drugs‘”

Scott Morgan and Flex Your Rights have been working hard on the sequel/update to the very useful “Busted” video. Here’s a preview of the upcoming 10 Rules for Dealing with Police.

DrugSense Weekly – a weekly review of the most interesting or relevant articles in the press and on the web related to drug policy reform.

Drug War Chronicle – weekly update of drug war news and analysis from Stop the Drug War.org.

Scott Morgan calls this “the worst anti-marijuana editorial I’ve seen in awhile” and I’d have to agree. This is from Dustan Call, News Editor of The Clarion Online, a first amendment publication of Citrus College, Glendora, Calif.

My opposition to the legalization of marijuana for recreational use is not about politics, proven facts, or calculated data. It is about morals.

At least he’s up front about it. Morals, not facts, are driving his opposition.

Those that say there is nothing wrong with non-medical marijuana, let alone legalizing it for recreational use, in my mind have low morals.

Morals play a critical role in the strength of our nation. Morals prevent us from allowing fanatical and harmful practices to becoming acceptable or non-punishable under law; practices such as molestation, abortion, slavery, underage drinking, child abuse, communism, and torture.

While legalizing marijuana may not be on the same level as murder or sexual crimes, that does not lessen the wrongfulness or the immorality of the issue. […]

Morals are what set the United States of America apart from governments of countries such as China, South Korea, Cuba, Iran, Sudan and many others. Allowing such a disregard for morals will be the downfall of our nation.

I assure you that unfathomed repercussions would occur as a result of legalizing marijuana. It will take us one step closer to becoming like the countries that we are working so hard to prevent from causing harm to the world.

I usually enjoy taking these apart, but there’s hardly anything here worth dismantling. It’s gibberish. Of course, there’s the obvious fact that he doesn’t know North from South Korea, and the question of whether it was legalizing marijuana that made countries like China, Cuba, Iran, and Sudan so immoral in his view.

I guess what I would like to ask him is, “What is more likely to send us down the path of China, Cuba, Iran, and Sudan? Participating in torture, extraordinary rendition, secret trials, and spying on citizens, OR legalizing marijuana for recreational use?”

By the way, Dustan lets us know where he developed his unique views. In D.A.R.E.

Armstrong Williams gets all bent out of shape when he learns that some children have been given marijuana to treat severe ADHD. [Which, by the way, has been very effective.]

California doping our youths

I was horrified to read recently that it is increasingly common in California to treat children diagnosed with Attention- Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) with marijuana. […]
Truly, this is horrifying. ADHD is described as a neurological disorder that prevents children from focusing on a specific task. In essence, people with ADHD have difficulty with self-regulation and self-motivation, owing to problems with distractibility, organization and prioritization.

Notably, these are the same functions that are most impaired by marijuana use. Get it? Pot actually exacerbates the problems with attention, memory and concentration that you want a treatment for ADHD to alleviate.

Here, Armstrong clearly shows why he is a talk-show host and not a doctor or scientist or someone who actually… knows things. As Bruce Mirken notes, “we know that the brains of ADHD patients don’t work like those of normal people — which is why stimulants like Ritalin have a calming effect, the exact opposite of their effect on most of us. ”

Armstrong then goes on for paragraph after paragraph to denounce the idea of drugging kids with ADHD given that it’s a questionable diagnosis, and that parents should be disciplining their children rather then medicating them, and on and on, all referring to marijuana.

Where has he been the past 20 years? We’ve been doping kids with ADHD with lots of drugs — much more dangerous ones than marijuana — and some have died from them. If we can replace one of these with marijuana effectively, then it’s a net gain.

And yes, we need to study this more, but in the meantime, N of 1 trials are perfectly acceptable with a relatively safe drug like marijuana.

I’m not familiar with Angus Reid Global Monitor, but here’s another poll, this one showing a majority supporting marijuana legalization, but also showing that we’ve got a long way to go to educate people about legalizing other drugs.

Full poll results here, including the fact that 68% believe the “War on Drugs” has been a failure.

Results of Executive Business Meeting – December 10, 2009

S. 714, National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2009 (Webb, Graham, Leahy, Hatch, Schumer, Durbin, Cardin, Whitehouse, Franken, Specter)
Held Over

I had missed this news earlier this week.

6 co-sponsors in the State House are introducing a bill that will legalize marijuana for adults over the age of 21. The bill will also utilize the existing mechanisms in place for regulating wine and hard liquor to establish a distribution system that makes our existing state run liquor stores the sole distributor. One thing that’s not clear yet is whether there will be any limit on people growing plants for themselves.

Interesting development. Probably not the plan I would have chosen, but this is the great thing about the states being able to try things. If the Feds can be pushed out of the way, we can learn things from each state and the models they choose.

To stay experimentation in things social and economic is a grave responsibility. Denial of the right to experiment may be fraught with serious consequences to the Nation. It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country. – Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, 1932

Lee Rosenberg at HorsesAss has a nice discussion about the case for regulation.