SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
decriminalization
The Verdict Is In: Legalizing Weed Works
Twelve years into states’ marijuana legalization experiment, public support for making marijuana legal nationwide has never been higher.
Mar 31, 2024
It’s been over a decade since Colorado and Washington became the first two states to legalize marijuana for adults. With the benefit of hindsight, it’s fair to ask: Has this policy been successful?
Absolutely. A policy of legalization, regulation, and education is preferable to a policy of criminalization, stigmatization, and incarceration.
Let’s be clear. Legalization didn’t create or normalize the marijuana market in the United States. The market was already here.
But under a policy of prohibition, this market flourished underground—and those involved in it remained largely unaccountable. They didn’t pay taxes, they didn’t check IDs, and they didn’t test the purity of their products. Disputes that arose in the illicit marketplace were not adjudicated in courts of law.
These policies are working largely as voters and politicians intended—and because they’re preferable to cannabis criminalization.
By contrast, under regulation, cannabis products in many states are now available from licensed manufacturers at retail stores.
Cannabis is cultivated, and products are manufactured, in accordance with good manufacturing practices. Products are lab tested and labeled accordingly. And sales are taxed, with revenues being reinvested in the community. Since 2014, retail sales of adult-use cannabis products have generated more than $15 billion in tax revenue.
Most importantly, millions of Americans—many of them young adults—are no longer being arrested for possessing a substance that is objectively safer than either tobacco or alcohol.
According to data compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the annual number of marijuana-related arrests in the United States fell from 750,000 in 2012 to 227,000 in 2022, the last year for which data is available.
In short, these state-level policy changes have resulted in countless Americans being spared criminal records—and the lost opportunities that accompany them—in the past decade.
And contrary to opponents’ fears, cannabis use by teens has not risen in parallel with legalization.
According to data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the percentage of high schoolers who use marijuana actually fell 30% over the past decade. Compliance check data from California, Colorado, Nevada, and other legal marijuana states show that licensed marijuana retailers do not sell products to underage patrons.
Also contrary to some critics’ claims, legalization states have not experienced any spike in either psychosis or mental illnesses.
According to findings published last year in the Journal of the American Medical Association, rates of psychosis-related health care claims are no higher in jurisdictions where cannabis is legal than in those where it’s not. Stanford University researchers similarly reported last year that residents of states where cannabis is legal exhibit no higher levels of psychosis than those in non-legal states.
Legalization is also successfully disrupting the illicit marketplace. According to a 2023 survey, 52% of consumers residing in legal states said that they primarily sourced their cannabis products from brick-and-mortar establishments. By contrast, only 6% of respondents said that they primarily purchased cannabis from a “dealer.”
Many consumers in non-legal states also reported that they frequently traveled to neighboring legal states to purchase cannabis products rather than buying from illicit dealers in their own state.
Twelve years into states’ marijuana legalization experiment, public support for making marijuana legal nationwide has never been higher. To date, 24 states have legalized the adult-use market.
None of these states have ever repealed their legalization laws. That’s because these policies are working largely as voters and politicians intended—and because they’re preferable to cannabis criminalization.
After a century of failed policies and “canna-bigotry,” the verdict is in. Legalization is a success, and the end of cannabis prohibition can’t come soon enough.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Oregon Gov. Kotek to Sign 'Unconscionable' Bill Recriminalizing Drugs
The landmark decriminalization measure passed by state voters in 2020 "now stands as a cautionary tale about the failure to match bold policy reform with competent administration," said one reporter.
Mar 08, 2024
The Drug Policy Alliance's leader expressed disappointment on Friday after Democratic Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek confirmed that she plans to sign legislation rolling back the state's historic measure that decriminalized possession of small amounts of all drugs.
"Today is not the end, just a detour. While I am saddened by today's developments, we at the Drug Policy Alliance will continue to advocate fiercely for an evidence-based, health approach to drugs in Oregon and across the United States," said Kassandra Frederique, executive director of the advocacy group, which is part of the Oregonians for Safety and Recovery (OSR) coalition.
"The recriminalization of drugs in Oregon is happening in a difficult national environment where criminal justice reforms at large are under attack by special interests," she added. "As politicians learn that criminalization will not solve—and will worsen—the problems that Oregonians care about, opportunities to establish a true health-based drug policy should emerge. Despite this setback, the movement to replace drug criminalization with care continues. We won't back down until our communities are healthy."
Our ED @Kassandra_Fred responds to Oregon's return to failed drug war policies. Her vision? We actually ensure people get the resources that they need to thrive. Decriminalization of all drugs is a part of that vision - one part of a tapestry of interventions communities need. pic.twitter.com/ih8n87Eepz
— Drug Policy Alliance (@DrugPolicyOrg) March 8, 2024
Oregon voters passed Measure 110, also called the Drug Addiction Treatment and Recovery Act, by a 17% margin in 2020, and it took effect the following February. The state was the first and only in the country to take the decriminalization and treatment approach, a shift widely lauded by drug policy groups. However, the measure "now stands as a cautionary tale about the failure to match bold policy reform with competent administration," Tim Dickinson wrote Thursday for Rolling Stone.
The Oregon Health Authority "provided inadequate support to the Oversight and Accountability Council, the body responsible for Measure 110 funding allocations," a Drug Policy Alliance memo explains. "This resulted in a significant delay in funding getting to service providers."
"The state failed to provide any training or standardized citation forms to law enforcement, many of whom were opposed to Measure 110," the memo continues. "The state deliberately chose not to advertise the screening hotline to the public. Rather than working to improve Measure 110 and provide real solutions, policymakers caved to a rollback effort bankrolled by business interests and led by the former chief of Oregon's prisons."
"Locking people up for possessing drugs or forcing them into court-ordered programs does not end drug use, but it does increase harms, including death."
In a wide-ranging statement about the end of this year's legislative session, Kotek announced Thursday that "reforms to Measure 110 will start to take shape, as I intend to sign House Bill 4002 and the related prevention and treatment investments within the next 30 days."
"As governor, my focus is on implementation. My office will work closely with each implementing authority to set expectations, specifically in response to the Criminal Justice Center's Racial Equity Impact Statement, which projected disproportionate impacts to communities of color and the accompanying concerns raised by advocates," she said. "House Bill 4002 will require persistent action and commitment from state and local government to uphold the intent that the legislature put forward: to balance treatment for individuals struggling with addiction and accountability."
As OPBdetailed on Monday:
The system created by H.B. 4002 is complex; people found with drugs can be charged with a crime, but there will be multiple paths they might take to avoid conviction. Lawmakers have envisioned a "deflection" system that is meant to be a major step in that direction. Under the proposal, counties that choose to participate would create a way for police to route people caught with drugs to service providers, rather than to jail and the courts system.
So far, at least 23 counties—accounting for the vast majority of Oregon's population—have signaled interest. But what kind of policies they might create is unknown, hinging partly on state funding.
"H.B. 4002 is being touted as a compromise, but we ask at the cost to whom?" Jennifer Parrish Taylor, director of advocacy and public policy at the Urban League of Portland, an OSR member, said after Oregon legislators passed the bill with bipartisan support last week, with a 21-8 vote in the state Senate and 51-7 vote in the House.
"It is an unacceptable compromise when we know that there will be disparate impacts to Oregonians of color," she argued. "It is not enough to monitor the system when we know it is a system that has bias built into it. I fear that we will be back next year, hearing those stories of harm, figuring out how to make our communities whole."
Frederique warned in an opinion piece for The Daily Beast that "this recriminalization is dangerous. We've been down this road before. More than 50 years of evidence demonstrates that locking people up for possessing drugs or forcing them into court-ordered programs does not end drug use, but it does increase harms, including death."
\ud83d\udc40 Multiple articles and experts have emphasized the racial disparities, surge of arrests, and overall ineffectiveness that will result from recriminalizing drug addiction. We won\u2019t say \u201cWe told you so\u2026\u201d You can see the proof for yourself at https://t.co/MPdGLO5mMQ #orleg #orpol— (@)
Jessica Maravilla, policy director at the ACLU of Oregon, another OSR member, noted that as lawmakers debated the bill, "thousands of us took action and engaged in our democracy—calling and emailing lawmakers and submitting testimony for hearings."
"We asked for real solutions including more treatment, housing, prevention programs, community revitalization efforts, and nonpolice mobile crisis response teams," she said. "The ACLU of Oregon community has deep gratitude for the lawmakers who voted 'no' to the false promises of criminalization in H.B. 4002—and its unconscionable human and other costs to our state."
As Current Affairs' Nathan Robinson concluded while Oregon legislators considered their options last month, "This is not a story about the failure of decriminalization, it's a story about how U.S. politicians, even in a liberal state, seem incapable of addressing any social problem through means other than cruelty."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Marijuana Should Be Descheduled—Not Rescheduled
Reclassifying cannabis from Schedule I to a lower classification (like II or III) won’t bridge the widening gap between state and federal marijuana laws.
Sep 08, 2023
Nearly a year ago, the Biden administration asked the Department of Health and Human Services to reconsider how marijuana is scheduled under federal law.
Under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) of 1970, different drugs are regulated or prohibited according to their placement in five different “schedules.”
The federal government currently puts marijuana in Schedule 1 — the most restrictive level, which it shares with heroin, ecstasy, and other drugs. By definition, substances in this category must possess “no currently accepted medical use” or “accepted safety for use… under medical supervision.”
After a long internal process, the Department of Health and Human Services now recommends removing the drug from Schedule 1. While the explicit details of the recommendation aren’t public, Bloomberg reports that the agency is suggesting moving marijuana to Schedule III.
The HHS recommendation now goes to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which will conduct its own scientific review. In the past, most recently in 2016, the agency has categorically refused to reschedule the drug. We likely won’t know how the DEA will respond for some time.
In the meantime, some observers have lauded the proposed change as a giant step forward. But my own reaction is more restrained.
That’s because reclassifying cannabis from Schedule I to a lower classification (like II or III) won’t bridge the widening gap between state and federal marijuana laws. Simply put, rescheduling marijuana fails to provide states with the explicit legal authority to regulate it within their borders as they see fit, free from federal interference.
To date, 38 states regulate the production and distribution of cannabis products for medical purposes. Twenty-three of these states regulate the possession and recreational use of marijuana for adults. All of these state laws are in conflict with federal marijuana laws — and they will remain in conflict even if the drug is rescheduled.
That’s because Schedule III substances — which include ketamine, anabolic steroids, testosterone, and others — are uniformly regulated by the federal government. Legal access to these substances is limited to those with a prescription from a licensed physician and who obtain the product from a licensed pharmacy.
Currently, no states regulate cannabis this way — nor are they likely to reconstruct their existing laws and regulations to do so. That means citizens and state-licensed operators following the law in legal states will still be violating federal law. And the DEA will still have the same authority it has now to crack down.
A far more productive outcome of the current scheduling review would be to deschedule cannabis — to remove it from the Controlled Substances Act altogether and give states greater discretion to establish their own distinct marijuana policies. That would put cannabis in line with how we treat alcohol and tobacco, two far deadlier substances.
There’s recent precedent for this. In 2018, Congress completely removed hemp plants containing no more than 0.3 percent THC, as well as certain cannabinoids derived from them, from the federal scheduling system.
By contrast, rescheduling fails to provide any federal legal recognition for either the state-licensed cannabis industry or those adults who use the plant responsibly in compliance with state laws.
Descheduling cannabis would remove federal intrusion from state marijuana programs and respect America’s longstanding federalist principles allowing states to serve as “laboratories of democracy.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular