Throw Those Hands Up Already

So tonight I watched a CNBC documentary on Mexico's drug wars.  Not really a lot of new information in there for me, but one thing really got my blood boiling.  A Deputy Secretary for Homeland Security from the U.S. said that legalization was not an option, because "it would be like throwing our hands up and saying nothing can be done."

First, let's assume that that is actually the only message that legalizing marijuana on the federal level could send.  Alright.  So what?  Didn't we learn from Vietnam that sometimes, there is a point at which nothing can be done?  We are throwing good money after bad, and good lives after lives already lost in the war on drugs.  It has been about 30 years since Reagan and his wife began this war, and all we have seen is a steady rotation of the "in" drugs, a shift in production, processing and transit routes.  We show images of eggs that are supposed to be our brains, and fried eggs that are supposed to be our brains on drugs; we arrest kingpins.  We burn fields of coca and marijuana.  We destroy indigenous traditions in South American countries.  And what happens?  Drugs become more expensive as they become harder to get onto America's streets, the drug trade becomes more lucrative for those at the top of the pyramid, and they become more willing to do whatever it takes to make that money, leading to more lives lost.  The international drug trade and the organized crime it supports is the original multi-level marketing scheme, and it is not easily brought down.  These are like Avon or Mary Kay ladies with guns.  Is it such a bad thing to throw our hands up and say there's nothing that can be done?  If we spent that money on education about drugs, job creation, and fixing America's problems, maybe people would not be so desperate to escape their daily lives that they would do anything to get high.

Moreover, though, is the fact that the message sent by legalization would not necessarily be that we were giving up.  The message could, and should, be that after a lot of research and calculated thought, we realized that the policies pursued by our government, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, were wrong.  We've realized that while eradicating narcotics and their trafficking was a noble goal, it is simply too costly to do so.  Literally thousands of lives are lost each year on the streets of America, and in the streets of Latin America, because of our war on drugs.  How many lives has marijuana prohibition saved?  The argument most often used by those who acknowledge marijuana's relatively low health risks is that it is a gateway drug.  Why, though, is marijuana a gateway drug?  Probably because once people have started using marijuana, they are more inclined to go the next step.  After all, they already know dealers, and thus have access to hard drugs.  And they've already crossed the line of breaking the law.  So what's one step further into the realm of illegal drug use?  Well, legalization actually would eliminate both of these factors.  By outlawing pot, we are forcing people who are using a harmless substance (at least relative to alcohol, tobacco, and countless other legal and illegal substances) into a dark, underground world.  We are forcing them to make a choice to break the law, as well as to associate with potentially dangerous criminals.

If (or when) marijuana is legalized, potheads will be going to the corner store to get their fix, not to the corner where they will meet a dealer who also peddles crack, heroin, or meth.  They will have to make a conscious choice to cross the path of the law when progressing from marijuana to more serious, dangerous drugs.

If the government marketing/propaganda machine could convince us that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, certainly they could convince us of the more accurate, and demonstrable, fact that our drug policies are costing more lives than they are saving.  Market it correctly and legalization doesn't have to be  a white flag of shameful surrender.

Either way, are our politicians and old-guard citizens allowing our pride to get in the way of smart decision making?  It's okay to admit that while we may be winning the battles, we are losing the war, and cut our losses.  It's also okay to admit that our policies were more harmful than they were helpful, and our costing our children, and the people of our "allies" lives every day.

Some people argue that marijuana legalization is a slippery slope.  Perhaps they're right.  Gay marriage, the repeal of DADT, and legalization may be the beginning of a slippery slope.  But hey, if we can all live happily doped up on heroin and marrying our donkeys, but still be alive, and know that innocent children are not being gunned down in Juarez or Bogota, maybe it's a slope we should be a little more open to sliding down.

Debunking the Myths on Prop 19

I recently read this article on Proposition 19, and think it is a worthwhile read for anyone who is not sure what they think about Proposition 19.

It debunks and invalidates five of the most common and "strongest" oppositions to Proposition 19 and marijuana legalization.  Not to rehash it, but I think the biggest point is this.

All of the debunked objections could just as easily apply to liquor laws in California and other states.  Yet none of these objections have raised serious issues with alcohol or tobacco.

In short, California, take a first step toward ending the failed "War on Drugs," and legalize marijuana.  Vote yes on Prop 19.

Support Proposition 19!

After seeing this article I was briefly duped into opposition of Proposition 19, the California ballot initiative to legalize marijuana.

Several of the points seemed at first like valid counterpoints to Proposition 19, even for those who support marijuana legalization.

First, the argument that this conflicts with federal law about employer's rights and responsibilities to drug test.  Proposition 19 specifically outlaws pre-employment or during-employment testing for THC unless the employer can prove that an employee's performance was performed.  Federal law requires drug testing for certain professions.  Remember that there is a hierarchy of jurisdictions, and that Federal law trumps State law, especially in areas where the Federal government has a valid, Constitutional claim to jurisdiction.  While there are some truckers, train operators, pilots, etc. who do not cross state lines, the majority do, or, during the course of their careers, could.  The professions covered by the Federal requirement are, for the most part, very clearly covered under the Interstate Commerce Clause.  Thus, the contradiction doesn't really exist.  A pilot, driver, or train operator crossing state lines must meet Federal requirements, including drug testing.

Second, taxation and regulation.  While I think that one of the biggest selling points has been the tax and regulate potentials of legalization, I don't think this is what is important.  As a principal, we should have the right to choose what to do to our bodies.  Moreover, the legalization would still raise tax revenue, even without marijuana-specific taxes.  The trade in marijuana, especially in the state of California, is huge.  Even without specific taxes on cannabis, the sales tax revenue alone could greatly help California's budget.

The argument that the smell of marijuana could be offensive, and everyone can have an outdoor 5x5 garden.  The smell of trash and dog poop is offensive.  The smell of curry is offensive to many.  The smell of some other plants, or of compost bins, is offensive.  People will just have to survive.

The argument that this will increase crime, citing recent break ins at medical marijuana growth plots.  This is actually one of the best arguments for legalization.  If marijuana were more readily available, and could by grown by anyone, people would not have the incentive to break into someone else's plot to steal their pot.

I have always been a proponent of supporting a specific policy, not a broad slogan or a general principle.  But legalizing marijuana is the first step.  Let the legislature iron out the details later.  The immediate benefits, from the perspectives of politics, liberties, and economics, far outweigh the negative.  The medium-term benefits of lowering incarceration rates for non-violent drug offenses alone will provide huge economic benefits to the state, especially in a state whose current prison overpopulation was recently ruled to be cruel and unusual punishment.  Californians, vote YES on Prop 19.

Legalize It!

The other day, I saw this interview at Reason on marijuana policy, and it caught my attention.  Could our decades old losing "War" on drugs finally be coming to an end?  With the issue appearing on the ballot in California, and mainstream medical and mental health professionals (even some, like Dr. Fichtner, who have a government background) coming out in support of legalization, we could be there.

Poll numbers show that increasing numbers of Americans support, or at the least, don't oppose, the legalization of marijuana.  In fact, I'm guessing that polls, petitions, and other actions actually underestimate the number of people who strongly support liberalization of drug laws.  Many drug users (especially the stereotypical paranoid pothead) do not publicly support legalization because they don't want their names associated with a taboo subject, and one which could have serious legal, professional, and personal ramifications.

Do I agree with Dr. Fichtner that marijuana legalization is the key to pulling us out of the recession?  Not entirely.

I don't think pot is the next technology or real estate sector.

On the other hand, by legalizing marijuana, we could probably reduce federal and state budget deficits.  Prisons would be less crowded, ICE agents could focus on stopping human trafficking, potential terrorists, and hard drug trafficking.  Local law enforcement agencies would not be paying officers to search high school students' pockets for pot and pipes.

Moreover, the tax revenues generated by adding this product to the above ground market would be huge.  The savings to the average user would also be significant, possibly providing some sort of stimulus spending on the pothead's part.

The lowered medical and law enforcement costs from reduced gang activity resulting from removing the most used illegal substance from the black market would be huge.

Is legalized pot going to save our economy?  Probably not.

Will it help, even a little?  Absolutely.

Is this just one more reason to add to an already long list to support legalization of marijuana and an end to our War on Drugs?  Absolutely.

Californians, potheads and Libertarians everywhere are watching you this November.  Continue to lead the way on this issue.