Ending the War on Drugs: The Moment is Now

When it comes to addressing America's disastrous war on drugs, the Obama administration appears to be moving in the right direction -- albeit very, very cautiously.

On the rhetorical front, all the president's men are saying the right things.

In his first interview since being confirmed, Obama's new drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, said that we need to stop looking at our drug problem as a war. "Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs" or a 'war on product,'" he told the Wall Street Journal, "people see war as a war on them. We're not at war with people in this country."

He also said that it was time to focus more on treatment and less on incarceration.

Earlier this year, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the federal government would no longer raid and prosecute distributors of medical marijuana who operate in accordance with state law in the 13 states where voters have made it legal.

Holder has also said that his department intends to eliminate the outrageous and prejudicial sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine.

And while on the campaign trail, President Obama called for repealing the ban on federal funding for anti-AIDS programs that supply clean needles to drug users.

All positive signs that we are ready to move beyond our failed war on drugs.

But when it comes to putting its rhetoric into action, the Obama administration has faltered.

Just a week after the Attorney General said there would be no more medical marijuana raids, the DEA raided a licensed medical marijuana dispensary in California.

Obama's '09-'10 budget proposes to continue the longstanding ban on federal funding of needle exchange programs.

The current budget is still overwhelmingly skewed in favor of the drug war approach -- indeed, it allocates more to drug enforcement and less to prevention than even George Bush did.

Testifying today in front of the House Judiciary Committee, Holder, in his opening statement, called for a working group to examine federal cocaine sentencing policy: "Based on that review, we will determine what sentencing reforms are appropriate, including making recommendations to Congress on changes to crack and powder cocaine sentencing policy." A working group? Why? As a senator, Obama co-sponsored legislation (introduced by Joe Biden) to end the disparity. What further review is needed?

(To be fair, during questioning, Holder said he and the president both favored doing away with the crack/powder disparity and said that Justice would even consider doing away with mandatory minimums altogether. But why the initial equivocation and the use of the very familiar needs-further-review dodge?)

So the question becomes: is the Obama administration really committed to a fundamental shift in America's approach to drug policy or is this about serving up a kinder, gentler drug war?

And this at a time when the tide is clearly turning. Inspired by the massive budget crises facing many states, and the increase in drug violence both at home and abroad -- leaders on all points across the political spectrum appear more willing to rethink our ruinous drug policies.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has called for "an open debate" and careful study of proposals to legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana. Former Mexican President Vicente Fox has also urged renewing the debate, saying that he isn't convinced taxing and regulating drugs is the answer but "why not discuss it?" Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, pointing to evidence that Mexican drug cartels draw 60 to 80 percent of their revenue from pot, suggested legalization might be an effective tool to combat Mexican drug traffickers and American gangs.

And, in a major shift in the global drug policy debate, a Latin American commission, headed by the former presidents Fernando Cardoso of Brazil, Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico, and Cesar Gavaria of Colombia issued a devastating report condemning America's 40-year war on drugs.

"Prohibitionist policies based on eradication, interdiction and criminalization of consumption simply haven't worked," the former presidents wrote in a joint op-ed. "The revision of U.S.-inspired drug policies is urgent in light of the rising levels of violence and corruption associated with narcotics. The alarming power of the drug cartels is leading to a criminalization of politics and a politicization of crime."

They called for "a paradigm shift in drug policies" that begins with "changing the status of addicts from drug buyers in the illegal market to patients cared for by the public health system."

And in Congress, Sen. Jim Webb has introduced legislation, with co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle, to create a blue-ribbon commission to examine criminal justice and drug policies and how they have led to our nation's jam-packed jails -- now filled with tens of thousands of nonviolent drug offenders.

"With so many of our citizens in prison compared with the rest of the world," Webb wrote in a recent Parade cover story, "there are only two possibilities: Either we are home to the most evil people on earth or we are doing something different--and vastly counterproductive. Obviously, the answer is the latter."

I understand that drugs continue to be a political hot potato, fueled by what the Latin American presidents described as "prejudices and fears that sometimes bear little relation to reality." And I can easily picture some on the president's team advising him to keep the issue on the backburner lest it turn into his "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

But the cost of the drug war -- both human and financial -- is far too high to allow politics to dictate the administration's actions. Indeed, with all the budget cutting going on, how can anyone justify spending tens of billions of dollars a year on an unwinnable war against our own people?

Change won't be easy. The prison-industrial complex has a deeply vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Which is why we need to keep the pressure on the president and his team to follow through on their drug policy promises.

As with the regulation of Wall Street, real reform of our nation's drugs policies won't happen without someone in the administration making it a top priority.

The jury is still out on Kerlikowske. His law enforcement background could make him the drug war equivalent of Tim Geithner -- too enmeshed in the system he is tasked with overhauling.

Holder shows more promise. But he'll have to avoid the let's-have-a-working-group-review-decisions-that-have-already-been-decided approach.

As a reminder, I'm planning to send the Attorney General a few copies of This Is Your Country On Drugs, a book out next month on the history of drug use and drug policy in America by our HuffPost Congressional correspondent Ryan Grim. In it, he argues that the goal of U.S. policy should not be to eliminate drugs, but to prevent and treat the addiction and other problems that come with them: "As currently understood and implemented, drug policy attempts to isolate a phenomenon that can't be taken in isolation. Economic policy is drug policy. Healthcare policy is drug policy. Foreign policy, too, is drug policy. When approached in isolation, drug policy almost always leads to unfortunate and unintended consequences."

With three-quarters of the drug offenders clogging our state prisons there for nonviolent offenses -- and a disproportionate number of those young men of color -- the time has come to wage a full-scale war on the war on drugs.

Comments

[Bud]

I have long agreed with the former Latin American presidents who served on the recent Latin American commission:

"They called for 'a paradigm shift in drug policies' that begins with 'changing the status of addicts from drug buyers in the illegal market to patients cared for by the public health system."

It's the only rational way. In fact alcohol should be dispensed that way to alcoholics, which is far more devastating to American culture than drugs. But that would take away a lot of profit so would never happen in America as we know it.

I read a while back about an idea in trying to address the heroin problem. Why not have our government buy up all the poppy fields from farmers in say, Afghanistan? This would be only a small fraction of the cost of war and operations against drug mafias. The poppies could be used for benign purposes as well as processed into heroin for distribution to addicts through the public health system.

A considerable percentage of humans seem to like drugs. I don't like living around speed labs and such where people waste their lives and become like irrational animals. If the public health care system could provide drugs and treatment opportunities then the ones who grabbed the lifeline could be rescued and the ones who were slipping into darkness could be identified and delegated to cultural ghettos in which they would feel most comfortable.

[Jose Castillo]

Wow, hey fellow citizens! Got a problem with the hypocrisy of every administration we've ever had since who knows when? One word for you: CORPORATOCRACY. Oh, and as long as money is synonymous with debt we are enslaved to the Fed. Close down the Fed, begin with a resource-based economy, switch off of fossil fuels to geothermal power, and join The Venus Project! Share this movie with those you love: Zeitgeist. Check out their website, rally the love around you. It's time to reclaim our power over the greed for profit!

[JimRinX]

More pressure? O-tay! Here goes!
Hey, President Barack Obama! End the mother freaking War on Drugs! In particular, make Pot legal; I don't wanna have to take Methadone for pain anymore - and my having quit it twice, by replacing it with Medical Marijuana - which also helped make the 'detox' process much easier - has proven to me that it is not only a Good Chronic Neuropathic Pain reliever, it would also (as anyone who read 'The Emperor Wears No Clothes' knows) once again become an inbvaluable aid to those who are seeking to get of opiates! In fact, certain Heroine addicts I know were very impressed with my having quit Methadone (Note: I've never been a Heroine Addict - I only take Methadone for PAIN!), because they say it's HARDER to quit Methadone than it is to quit Heroine itself!!!
These old partiers would know (Note: I AM, however, also an 'Old Partier'!!!) - and so do I!
Everyone join LEAP.org now - ya' hear?!?

[BillMelater]

Regardless of what the new czar says, the war on drugs IS war upon the American people. Prohibition is not the answer.

[racetoinfinity]

Excellent post on the subject.

We have to put progressive pressure Obama to live up to all his progressive promises on the campaign that he's backing out of now, including this one, but also many others.

It sounds like Ryan Grim thinks holistically. This is the new kind of "second tier" (Ken Wilber's designation for an integral level of seeing and acting) consciousness and policy/action we desperately need now, and it's too rare.

[ChelseaC]

Arianna,
Great story.

Drug use needs to be a medical issue handled by the government to take the profits from the dangerous and violent cartels--putting them out of business.
Medical marijuana is helpful to many ill people--that fact that there are laws against it's use--boggles the mind.
It makes me wonder if Big Pharma indeed has a hand in this somewhere.­..........­..........­..

[JohnThomas]

lastpost

Should we use your "confiscated capital" idea against the folks that sell you your beer or wine? Why not?

[JohnThomas]

gracie99

Since 85 percent of all drug use is marijuana consumption, and since marijuana is not addictive, just what possible benefit do you see in locking up marijuana consumers?

Also, by your logic, since alcohol and tobacco ARE addictive, why aren't you advocating throwing everyone who drinks or smokes cigarettes in jail? It would be GOOD for them, right?

[scottpot]

Marijuana is a medicine. The President, the congress and drug czar are not doctors. The herbs, drugs, and treatments effective for illness should be determined by doctors and patients.
Follow the money.The legal drug and alcohol business would stand to lose if drugs and especially marijuana were legalized.

[lastpost]

Why not use the same power-source that drives the drug dealing culture, to destroy it? A percentage of confiscated capital could act as a reward/inducement, for information culminating in that seizure. Thus each link of the chain would act to imperil the link above it. Converting any potential customer into a possible source of peril.

[gracie99]

While of course marijuana should be legalized, I don't agree with the rest of the article.

It's a potent feel-good FANTASY that drug treatment works to any significant degree, allowing people like to pretend that there are realistic alternatives to the unpleasant business of locking up drug dealers/users.

Tor most drug dealers and users, only jail/prison time and the immediate threat of it seems to have significant impact on their drug habits.

My friend spent over a decade as a homeless, injecting addict in the treatment rather than jail oriented state we lived in. He went through innumerable treatment programs, always relapsing within 24-48 hours of graduation. Over that decade he spent no more than 3 weeks in jail. His life was nightmarish. We both thought he was doomed.

However several years ago he heard that Michigan is a law-and-order state that locks up drug users and low level dealers for extended periods in prison. Desperate, he moved there.

It worked: He's been steadily employed, housed, and free of serious addiction problems ever since. His drug of choice is not commonly available, so he isn't tempted on every street corner. Fear of Michigan's lock-em-up policies provides another effective deterrent.

The ending of the 'war on drugs,' will prove disastrous for many Americans, doing a disservice to us all and destroying the lives of many who could otherwise be saved.

[BelGazou]

i agree with you.

The crime rate has fallen in proportion to the increase in the population held in jails. Apparently, the people who are held in jails are right where they need to be.

The druggies who live in my neighborhood and the druggies that we are on occasion compelled to work with, make life miserable for the rest of us, not because the drugs are illegal but because of the behavior of these people on drugs. (I had to quit one job because of the behavior of my boss, a coke-head; good tenants in my building are being forced to leave because of the behavior of their crack or meth-addicted neighbor, etc.),

I'd like to see non-violent drug offenders put in separate quarters from their more violent counterparts and for them to also complete a drug-treatment program while in prison, run by an organization such as the Phoenx house, as a condition of their sentence.

[OgreDaddy]

Every single time you listen to any public debate about the use of marijuana
there is rarely any distinction between occasional responsible use and abuse.

Prohibitionists are very careful to continue the mantra of use=abuse, ANY use=abuse,
even for those who have always been gainfully employed, highly educated, responsible
citizens who have always been productive members of society.

Many of these same people do not drink alcohol or go out on wild crazy drug binges
as the government would like to have you believe.

To most, it's more like a nightcap after a long stressful day.

The fear campaign that continues always resorts to the extreme where their
example is clearly out of control, hell bent on getting as messed up as humanly possible.

We all know those people and they do need help.

Contrary to everything they are trying to tell you, marijuana is NOT addictive.
You may like having it around, but you can easily walk away from it at any time.

The worst DRUG I have ever encountered in my life is Cigarettes.

I rarely drink alcohol in any form. I'd rather drink iced tea or coffee. My other weakness.

I'm glad I have the experience and wisdom to direct my children so that they know
what will harm them and what will not.

[dsws]

The real percentage in favor of legalization is probably about 40%. Having the politicians in Washington DC try to lead on this would make it a polarizing wedge issue. Better to support Libertarian candidates who make it their top issue. That's the traditional role of third parties, to take issues that have significant support from the public but none from either major party, and bring those issues into the political process. Minor-party candidates don't get a lot of press coverage, but they do get more than issue advocacy groups deemed "fringe" by the MSM, and more importantly it does increase rapidly with the amount of money they raise.

A higher percentage of liberals favor legalization than conservatives: more than two to one, according to the top google hit, http://www.gallup.com/poll/19561/Who-Supports-Marijuana-Legalization.aspx. Those numbers aren't up-to-the-minute, but I doubt it's changed all that much. So it would be polarizing.

[dlo2]

Excellent treatment of this issue, Arianna. Instead of demonizing the use of drugs, we need proactive measures in insuring America's employment, sufficient health care access, pain management for chronic issues, stress management access with acupuncture, herbs, massage, etc., better mental health options for the highly stressed or emotionally ill (often exascerbated by human stressors)...in short, enabling Americans to survive these very difficult human times.

The Santa Monica court system, by the virtue of one very far sighted judge, back in the mid '90s had a diversion option for those charged with misdemeanor and felony drug charges. Accused individuals were able to go to counseling and acupuncture clinic set up just for this purpose and it was very successful for both the courts and the individuals because it provided an very good alternative to the already overcrowded prison system. Still, in this era, we are seeing the return of the cocaine era of the '80s which is worrisome as I saw some of our brightest and best professionals deteriorate under the influence of cocaine back in that era. Teach resilience to our young in schools, temples, churches, youth groups...offer mind/body classes so that our children and teens can recognize that their own brains can manufacture every chemical known to humankind naturally and gently...insure that alternative health become part of the medical model for all Americans so that there is an nurturing integrative approach to maintaining health and treating illness.

[amchitka7]

The drug problems are costing this country billions. The cost of taking care of drug addicts. Our government must take total control of our borders. If the needs call for the use of the military.Use them. The drug problem will destroy this country. What will we have for our grand children. Nothing. We have a congress who works for the special interests. I think it's time for term limits. For members elected to congress.

[wolfdogNM]

It would cost far less to send drug addicts to 6 to 12 month rehab programs then to send them to prison for 10 to 20 years for some petty distribution charges. It would also be better to not break up families because of such issues like the system now does too often. Every time someone is locked up in prison, or a child is sent to foster care, it costs the tax payers big bucks to do so. Also, if people are locked up, how can they pay their taxes? They can not, for they are in prison being a tax burden instead.

As for the borders, not all drugs are even smuggled into the country. Also, if all the cocaine and heroin were blocked form coming into the country, the drug dealers would just replace the heroin with synthetic narcotics like fentanyl, and the cocaine users would have to switch to amphetamines.
As for marijuana, it is already being grown within the USA, anyway. Thus, blocking outside supplies with out addressing the internal demand will NOT WORK.

[JohnThomas]

No. It is the monstrous fraud of prohibition that is costing this country billions. 85 percent of all illegal drug sales is marijuana trade. Marijuana is not addictive. Its consumers don't need taking care of. In fact, they are working hard taking care of their families and their communities. What we do on the borders will make no difference. More enforcement just means higher prices which draws more people into the black market. Why do you fear a plant that every major study has shown is non-addictive and far less harmful than alcohol? Mankind has been consuming marijuana, and the much more harmful alcohol for at least 3 thousand years. Somehow all those grandchildren thrived. 8^)