By Peter Stevenson
As Vermont debates the merits of legalizing marijuana in the face of an opiate addiction epidemic, consider these pertinent points. First, our current crisis is due in part to a long-established policy which is a proven failure. Any successful drug policy would result in the following situations: the increase in cost, the decrease in purity and the decrease in availability of the drug concerned. As to cost, if an opiate addict switches from pills to heroin there is a clear decrease. As to purity, there are plenty of stories of addicts overdosing on fentanyl (itself a product of drug war policies) so one must conclude at best that purity has stayed the same or increased. As to availability ... well, I probably don’t need to tell you it that has increased dramatically. Death by opiate overdose climbed to nearly 47,000 – eclipsing death by gunshots or car crashes – and the politicians cry that we must do something when in actuality we must undo something, namely the failed policies of the drug war.
The effects of criminalizing the drug trade led to some dangerous consequences for society, namely by creating a lucrative black market where there is a greater tendency for a user or addict to enter the underground market through dealing, prostitution or property crime to finance their habit. Other addicts might be faced with the horrible choice of whether to feed their habit or their children or pay the rent. These dangers pale in comparison when you look at hazards of official corruption. The illicit profits of the transnational drug trade fund terrorist and criminal organizations whose power often trumps that of their home countries. To date, the U.S. has spent $7.6 billion in anti-drug efforts in Afghanistan. The New York Times recently covered the Afghan government’s complicity in the opium trade: “Multiple visits to Afghan opium country over the past year and extensive interviews with opium farmers, local elders and Afghan and Western officials laid bare the reality that even if the Western-backed government succeeds, the opium seems here to stay” (NYT, 2/15/16).
As Afghanistan continues to have record-breaking opium harvests much of its conversion to heroin takes place in neighboring Pakistan, a country whose status has been labeled as teetering on narco-state, which is disturbing as they have the bomb. In Afghanistan, the opium-producing areas under government or Taliban control kick money up the chain of power. The Taliban is effectively a drug cartel. The recent capture of Taliban governor Mullah Rashid took place as a result of a drug raid. One other country that should be of concern is Mexico, our third largest trading partner. The cartels are arguably more powerful than the Mexican government itself and having a narco-state for a neighbor is a national security threat. Nevertheless, right here in Vermont we had the case of a Colchester police officer, Tyler Kinney, who became addicted and gave guns and drugs from the evidence locker to a multi-felon addict to sell on the streets of Burlington.
Some ask, “Why take up marijuana legalization when Vermont is struggling with an opiate crisis?” To those folks I say look at Holland, which has effectively made marijuana use boring and passé to its youth. Holland has the lowest incidence of youth heroin use in all of Europe. Or Portugal, which legalized possession of all drugs (depending on quantity) and saw an overall decrease in drug use. Not that police shouldn’t have a role to play; their slogan “protect and serve” might be better fulfilled if every patrol car could act as a rolling needle exchange. Considering all the criminal justice resources that would be spared by not having to deal with the drug issue, police could focus more on the types of crimes that leave victims behind. I gather there are some 20,000 untested rape kits sitting in evidence rooms throughout the country. Unfortunately, in Vermont – the land of “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” – we have an embarrassingly anemic response to the 55 percent of Vermonters who favor outright marijuana legalization in the form of a bill that might be tailor-made for failure if it ever passes in the first place.
What should be apparent at this point is that it is possible to be against marijuana use but favor its legalization without being conflicted. All of this mess could be cleaned up if the FDA would reclassify marijuana. Marijuana is currently classified as schedule 1 or more dangerous than heroin that, as schedule 2, is used in medicine for pain. If the regulations were rationally applied then marijuana would be schedule 3 and tobacco would be schedule 1. Marijuana is arguably safer than alcohol and should be treated as such. Our current efforts at “reforming” marijuana law in Vermont are destined for failure due to the highly restrictive environment proposed for its manufacture or distribution. Any successful legalization policy should deal a blow to criminality and nothing thus far proposed will affect the black market. Finally, when it comes to marijuana law reform there are two groups who have an inherent conflict of interest and whose testimony against loosening the reins should be taken with a grain of salt, namely the drug treatment community and law enforcement. I believe there are members of the treatment community who would willingly maintain some of the bogus stigmas and stereotypes about marijuana use if there were a paycheck in it. As for law enforcement, despite a growing national trend in favor of relaxing marijuana law in general and a handful of states and D.C. legalizing it, marijuana arrests are at an all-time high. There are some in law enforcement who get it when it comes to drug policy. Unfortunately, many wait to retire before they share their thoughts. One valuable resource on failed drug policy from the law enforcement perspective is LEAP or Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.
Stevenson lives in Waitsfield.
