Blogs and Stories
Obama's Demented Drug Policy
Gerald Herbert / AP Photo
As he leaves on a trip to Mexico, the president looks poised to continue the same ruinous drug policies and the same failing tactics in the war on drugs.
When Barack Obama visits Mexico today, the drug war, and the violence it has spawned south of the border, is expected to dominate the agenda. Since 2006, more than 10,000 people have been murdered in Mexico as a direct consequence of the drug trade. This bloody outbreak began when, with the blessing of and funding from the U.S. government, Mexican President Felipe Calderon ordered the Mexican military to aggressively crack down on the drug cartels. Such crackdowns often ratchet up the level of violence, as the elimination of one major drug distributor provokes those who remain to war over his territory. That’s a pattern as old and predictable as Prohibition itself, yet politicians never seem to learn.
The best solution to what’s plaguing Mexico right now is the one topic that will almost assuredly be off the table: legalizing marijuana.
Last month, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Mexico, she expressed gave concern over the escalating violence... and then heaped praise on Calderon's crackdown, promising to support it with more funding and more military hardware. Obama appears poised to say much the same thing. According to a recent preview of his trip in The Washington Post, the president is expected to promise swifter delivery of drug-war aid and increased efforts by the U.S. to stop the flow of American weapons to Mexico. But the best solution to what’s plaguing Mexico right now is the one topic that will almost assuredly be off the table: legalizing marijuana. Marijuana makes up 60 to 70 percent of the Mexican drug trade. Lifting prohibitions on it in the United States would eradicate a major source of funds for the cartels.
But Obama has little patience for such talk. We saw this at the now-infamous (at least on the Internet) town-hall meeting last month, where the president was asked whether he would consider legalizing marijuana to help the ailing economy. The question was the top vote-getter on a White House Web site set up in the spirit of making the president accessible to the public. But Obama dismissed it with a one-word answer, then derided the very online community that raised half a billion dollars for his campaign as a bunch of half-baked morons.
The incident offended many former Obama activists, yet other supporters have chided those upset by his answer by pointing out that Obama has never supported marijuana legalization. That’s true. But it also misses the point. The drug-reform community rallied behind Obama’s candidacy because in the past he has taken thoughtful, nuanced positions on the issue. Consider this video, from 2004:
Obama's curt response last month was a striking departure from that video. It didn't take long for him to go from a thoughtful drug-war critic to a typical Beltway drug warrior.
To answer the question Obama batted away, Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron estimates that legalizing all drugs would produce a net boon of $77 billion per year to government alone, much of it in savings on enforcement and incarceration. That's not accounting for the money from the sale of drugs that, under a legalized system, would go to the above-ground economy instead of to cartels and crime syndicates. Miron estimated in a 2005 study that if we were to only legalize marijuana, the savings to government would be $10 to 14 billion, a figure endorsed by 530 other economists. Obama's callous dismissal of the question—as if serious people didn't even require an explanation—wasn't warranted.
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Why America Must Learn to Bow
Martin Jacques is the cofounder of the UK think tank Demos, writes a regular column for The Guardian, and is a visiting research fellow at the London School of Economics Asia Research Centre. His new book, When China Rules the World, is available now.
Going Rogue: The Index
Christopher Buckley's books include Supreme Courtship, The White House Mess, Thank You for Smoking, Little Green Men, and Florence of Arabia. He was chief speechwriter for Vice President George H.W. Bush, and is editor-at-large of ForbesLife magazine. His new book is Losing Mum and Pup, a memoir. Buckley's Daily Beast column is the winner of an Online Journalism Award in the category of Online Commentary.
Dogs in a Deadly Crossfire
Radley Balko is a senior editor for Reason magazine, and maintains a blog at TheAgitator.com.
Does Wal-Mart Make You Skinny?
Radley Balko is a senior editor for Reason magazine, and maintains a blog at TheAgitator.com.
Did Obama Wimp Out on a Rape Case?
Radley Balko is a senior editor for Reason magazine, and maintains a blog at TheAgitator.com.
Although the issue of legal marijuana is debatable, I think now is hardly the time to pressure the Obama administration which has enough on its plate as it is.
Anyone who thinks the battles in congress over the legalization of a marijuana are going to be short even if they do succeed is totally naive. The actual implementation would be held up by state battles over taxes, age restrictions and so on as well. Full implementation would come long after any of the argued effects on the economy and current drug war in Mexico would have the claimed effect.
This whole "lets criticize Obama for everything he is not doing immediately" mentality is driving me nuts. He has more on his plate right now than any president in my lifetime has ever had. Why are we insisting on adding stuff that can wait a year or two.
That's right.
It will just be exploited as another weapon for the right-wing traitors to bludgeon him with.
Once the economy clears up, he'll have the political capital to address such things.
Change isn't immediate? Go figure. I don't think its about criticizing him for not handling everything people would like him to, but rather that, given the opportunity to prove himself as an agent of change in a certain area, he instead continued policy that has, as of yet, not ever been successful.
I doubt many right-wingers will throw a fit that Obama has spoken out in support of continuing the, sigh, war on drugs. It would take American, not Mexican, deaths for many of them to do so.
In response to ElLamer;
1- It didn't take that long when they repealed alchohol prohibition.
2- The states see a new source of revenue and they will waste no time in coming up with a tax schedule.
3- The feds will pressure for 21yo for access just like they do for alchohol.
4- The mexican cartels aren't going anywhere as long as their "product" is illegal and a demand exists. They'll still be here in a hundred years if thats how long it takes for us to wise up.
5- The demand has always and will always exist. It's human nature, law or no law, consequences or not, users will get their drugs.
The "War On Drugs" is an utter and miserable failure costing the United States $77 Billion a year, clogging the judicial system, overcrowding prisons, and fostering a contempt for the law. The time to end this insanity has come and the politicians need to start to discuss real, winnable options no matter how unpopular they may be to certain constituents.
Repeal drug prohibition, tax, regulate.
I couldn't have said it any better. I honestly appreciate your views. Thank you.
It's not the fact that Obama isn't turning the current condition of the country around on a dime, its the fact that he is blaintly changing his views and opinions on a dime. Yes, the president does have a lot of issues to face that is the very correct, but that does not excuse him from shrugging off issues Americans are truely concerned about.
The drugs in Afghanistan issue is pretty interesting. I would like more info on it. Someone should do a piece on it. The idea that just because it failed in south America it will fail in Afghanistan is kind of a stretch. There are two very different situations.
Regional warlords in Afghanistan have funded themselves with drug money for decades and anti American sentiment is pretty understandable seeing as something like 20 of their population was killed somewhat in conjunction with CIA activities there. It obviously wasn't all our fault but seeing as two thirds of the population can't even read its not surprising that some come to the conclusion CIA give money guns -> lots of people die -> America bad.
So the whole idea there, as far as I can see it from all the tough talk and talking points of the last administration. Is to crack down on the drugs and warlords, teach the people to read and give the pro America parts of the population the examples they need to convince the rest that we are not that bad.
So if cracking down on the drugs is the wrong option what is the right one? Its kinda half assed to say "it didn't work in south America" problem solved.
sorry typo "... something like 20 of their population..." should read "...20% of their population..."
There has been plenty written about the Afghan drug situation. And a lot said in the congress. And there are solutions other than escalation of more of the same.
Solutions:
Poppy for Medicine
http://www.poppyformedicine.net/
Swiss heroin model reporting benefits
http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/Swiss_heroin_model_reporting_ benefits.html?siteSect=105&sid=7032610&cKey=1157366472000
America needs to get control of the opium without disrupting the fragile Afghan agriculture based rural economy. Poppy for medicine
describes a system for doing that.
The other part of the problem is the huge, and growing, population of addicts. The Swiss heroin prescription program has been successfully getting addicts off the streets and out of crime and the drug dealing business to new young potential users for economic sustenance.
Prohibition is "creating chaos and instability"
The Congressional Research Service released a report on the relationship between the war on drugs black market economy and terrorism.
'Illicit Drugs and the Terrorist Threat: Causal Links and Implications for Domestic Drug Control Policy'
"The international traffic in illicit drugs contributes to terrorist risk through at least five mechanisms: supplying cash, creating chaos and instability, supporting corruption, providing "cover" and sustaining common infrastructures for illicit activity, and competing for law enforcement and intelligence attention. Of these, cash and chaos are likely to be the two most important."
alQaida has also been using heroin as an asymmetric weapon against the west. Sen. John Kerry told reporters in 2001, as the World Trade Center and Pentagon still smoldered: "That's part of their revenge on the world," Kerry said. "Get as many people drugged out and screwed up as you can." 21 Sept. 2001
bin Laden has this weapon to use on western children thanks to the drug war prohibition policy prohibits regulated adult supervision and instead keeps heroin in a criminal controlled lawless black market anarchy.
Although I could not agree more that Obama needs to spearhead a rational discussion on the benefits of legalization, it is unlikely that he will do so before his second term. Our current drug policies are a disaster. It drives me crazy when I hear ignorant Americans trying to scare the public by claiming that legalization will lead to America's children getting hooked on pot and then other stronger drugs, because pot is a "gateway" drug. The same arguments were pushed by people during Prohibition. Is everyone out getting drunk all day because alcohol is legal? People who want to sit around and get high all day already do so, just like the people who choose to sit around and get drunk all day.
What people don't want to admit is that Americans love their substances, whether it's tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, or cocaine. We will NEVER eradicate drug use, and anyone who claims we can is either delusional or a liar. It is the most profitable industry in the world, precisely because our government chooses to spend billions of our taxpayer dollars trying to stamp it out. If we legalized, regulated, and taxed marijuana, which is far less harmful to individuals and society than alcohol, we could cut off a very reliable source of funds for Mexican cartels while simultaneously stimulating the economy and providing much needed revenues for local and state governments.
Wake up America. This is a topic that both parties should be able to agree on.
Both parties can't agree on anything, because one of them is focused entirely on obstruction. If Obama proposed legalizing marijuana, the traitor right would use it as a weapon to bludgeon him with.
Obama should not go for legalization. It goes well beyond him just having a lot on his plate.
The Democrats will not push for legalization, nor should they. If they do, all the hardline Right Wingers will whip up a fury in the key of "See! I told you so! These weakling liberals are soft on crime! They want to flood our towns with dope addicts! etc. etc." When the smoke clears, we'll be back to square one.
Legalization will only happen under a Republican president with a solid reputation for both being tough on crime and good with economic legislation. Only someone like that will be able to push for legalization in a way that could convince the most people on the far Right that the Drug War is simply the days of Prohibition all over again.
Legalization must happen, but we're going to have to wait for another day.
I would not say it must happen. I personally do not use any illegal drugs and don't consider them needed in our society. On the other hand I think the horrendous penalties for drug users are totally stupid, putting self inflicted damage above damage to others is one of the stupidest things there is. I would say to lower penalties for use or possession of small amounts to a small fine like in many European countries would also be an acceptable solution.
Corporate welfare, continuing the Iraq War, advocating kidnapping and torture of civilians, continuation of the drug war failure........Obama is Bush Dark.
Yes, Obama understands that legalizing marijuana would solve long term issues i'm sure, but it's probably not something he can have on his plate during his first term. I wouldn't be surprised if he tried doing that his second term, after he's proven that he understands how to appeal to both sides of the issue, and after he's proven that he's really thought it through.
If the President decides to take this issue one, and it is political game of roulette as the Republicans would make this an incredibly volatile political issue, he should do it in his second term. But he has to win that first....
There are much bigger fish to fry at this time. Down the road, maybe.
As much as I agree that pot should be legal--Amsterdam isn't exactly falling apart, is it?--the far more important issue is the opium in Afghanistan. The answer would be simple were it not for the damnable moralism of the American people. As a first step, we could simply buy the opium. Then once we have put the smugglers at a disadvantage, we could encourage the cultivation of other crops through aid and price subsidies. According to the reports I've seen, most of the farmers would rather grow food, it just isn't profitable enough for them to make a living. Yes, this would cost money, but probably less than sustaining a military effort. Unfortunately, the unwillingness of the American people to support "rewarding bad behavior" will prevent this sensible "butter, not guns" approach from being tried. Have you ever seen a bumper sticker that read "Feed them all and let God sort it out!"?
I think Obama, a man who has done cocaine, should just admit it doesn't kill you immediately or destroy your character. We've now had a string of presidents that have tried drugs, and yet we can't talk about legalizing them.
I think he is being cautious about it specifically because he is embarrassed about having done cocaine. But if it were legal and taxed and kept away from children, you would have less police and crime, and more tax revenue.
I've never tried cocaine, pills, heroin, etc. But prohibition doesn't work for alcohol and it doesn't work for drugs either.
I am for Legalization or at least De-criminalization of marijuana. There is no reason why we should be locking up users of any drug. But we cannot expect Obama to attack this issue right now.
I don't know, this might be the best time to tackle this issue. The violence and insanity spilling over from Mexico is probably the best illustration even to the hard-core opposition that what we have just isn't working. But then again, we are still the hysteria-prone Puritans... our solution is probably going to be "Bigger wall, bigger prisons."
"Stop the appetite for drugs in the U.S."
My response to that was... GOOD LUCK! Americans are about as likely to stop going to church, give up their cars, hamburgers, french fries and guns.
Marijuana is less addictive than tobacco. And for that reason, people are less likely to use as much. You don't see anyone getting as worked up about the tobacco lobby and cigarettes on every drugstore shelf.
Politically the poor man doesn't have the time. Give him a break... but this whole issue is so stupid. We are destabilizing a neighboring nation and imprisoning our own people over a drug that is less harmful then alcohol. There are times I will never understand how we ever managed to ever become a super-power when we are so often obtuse.
I am against marijuana personally. It is a lazy man's drug and I find it repulsive. YET, I completely believe legalizing it would be key solution to cartel issue. I am looking at it like a business. No solution will ever be made because it is about popularity vote..
I am against marijuana personally. It is a lazy man's drug and I find it repulsive. YET, I completely believe legalizing it would be key solution to cartel issue. I am looking at it like a business. No solution will ever be made because it is about popularity vote..
I am against marijuana personally. It is a lazy man's drug and I find it repulsive. YET, I completely believe legalizing it would be key solution to cartel issue. I am looking at it like a business. No solution will ever be made because it is about popularity vote..
Corporate interests have been holding prohibition in place. Political parties who kowtow to these interests won't want to step on any toes, whether they are Republican or Democrat. However, since the dam has burst with regard to a public discussion of this issue, all the old rules are out the window.
Lies and propaganda (the matrix which nurtures prohibition) cannot stand in face of the truth. We have the internet now, and the eviscerated mainstream media is scrambling to catch up. The truth is, 5 years ago, you would not have seen an article like this one.
The days of marijuana prohibition are numbered, and it won't fall on the shoulders of this president or any other. The people will move this agenda ahead, and the politicians won't be able to stop it.
The world wide web has given (as they used to say) "Power to the people!"
I couldn't have said it better, Brinna.
The time is past for blaming one or hoping another will fix things.
People in St. Louis City are mounting the Sensible Sentencing Initiative. It is a small step in the right direction. More info at greenliberty.us.
Brinna:
well expressed and reasoned
I'd always had the feeling that logic would never prevail in this fight, and by that, I mean logic related to the unjustified incarceration of so many non-violent "criminals". It seemed to me that what always got politicians thinking seriously were sounds business models.
Since 2000 or so, there has been an influx of thoughtful commentary and economic reflection on legalizing not only marijuana but all drugs, and when this all began, I hoped that the economic reasons for ending the War on Drugs were finally being presented in a manner that policy makers could appreciate.
Progress has been made, I suppose, but Obama's nonchalant dismissal of the issue was disrespectful and reminiscent of the blindness and de facto rejection of reason I'm sure most of us hope left with the previous administration. Still, I find it difficult to believe that President Obama's true opinion echoes his clumsy handling of questions in this case. My gut reaction is that he would like to see some changes in the Drug War, though perhaps not as many as I feel are necessary. The fact that he lacks the resolve to state these views publicly now that he is the Commander-in-Chief is certainly regrettable.
The bottom line here is that there is no logical, intelligent reason to continue marijuana prohibition (or any drug prohibition, for that matter). If you're not willing to legalize all drugs, though, most of us should be able to agree that striking marijuana laws would be nothing but beneficial to the state of the nation as well as a sensible step toward eradicating needless incarceration of otherwise law-abiding citizens.
WHAT'S ALL THE HUBUB? THIS IS JUST HOW FOLKS DOWN MEXICO WAY SORT THINGS OUT. I USED TO HAVE A GOOD FRIEND FROM WEST VIRGINIA. HE TOLD ME FAMILIES AROUND THERE SETTLED DISPUTES BY ROLLING BOULDERS DOWN ON EACH OTHERS HOUSES. BESIDES, WHAT'S GOING ON NEAR THE BORDER ISN'T EVEN ABOUT DRUGS; IT'S ABOUT MONEY, LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY. AND THAT IS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS NATION'S FAILED DRUG POLICY WHICH IS IN OBVIOUS VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Let's face it -- Obama is spineless and gutless. He won't stand up to the Wall St. banks. He won't stand up to the military industrial complex and end the war in Iraq. Today he admitted he won't be able to reinstate the ban on assault weapons -- after 50 people died in gun violence in the last month or so, in this country -- forget about Mexico. He won't prosecute the thugs qwho carried out Bush's torture policies. This guy won't stand up for anything but Obama. Legalize pot? He certainly isn't doing anything that makes sense. It makes me sick that I donated money to this dorky creep's campaign. From here on out, I will vote for Green Party candidates and where none are running I will write in Porky Pig.
I always knew that Obama would not be a drastic reformer (his sheer lack of experience precluded the possibility), but I am disappointed by the pattern of political inertia that his administration is increasingly displaying. He says a lot of good things, but his (often puzzling) actions belie them directly.
I've seen conspiracy theory-esque sites that claim Obama was already involved with secret power groups (Bilderberg and the like) before the election. Considering the surprising extent to which his presidency is now looking like an extension to that of his predecessor, George W. "Skulls & Bones" Bush, those claims don't sound so kooky after all.
Plus ça change, I suppose.
I only have one question. When some pothead teen from around the block runs a stopsign and kills your three year old riding in the backseat of your car, how are we going to determine the pothead's level of intoxication to determine if it was an accident, or gross irresponsibility? We don't have any decent test that I know of. If pot is legal, people will smoke and drive, and some unfortunate people will die. It's no worse than DWI, but we can't measure it. Solutions??
This is by far the most ignorant post on this story, for several reasons. First, your comment assumes that without legalization, no teen will be have access to marijuana and will therefore not be in a position to run a stop sign and kill your three year old. People who want marijuana, including middle- and high-school kids, and probably a fair amount of elementary school children, have no problem getting it.
Second, a breathalyzer test, which is used to test the level of alcohol that travels through your digestive tract, operates by calculating a person's level of intoxication via a breath sample. Your comment assumes that it would be scientifically impossible to determine the level of THC in a person's system by the same means. If marijuana were legal I feel supremely confident some entrepreneur would develop a simple breath test which would measure "the pothead's level of intoxication."
And finally, your attempt to link legalization to the safety of small children is transparent and pathetic. Why do prohibitionists always resort to scare tactics? "If we legalize pot, your 3-year-old is going to die because some pothead is out running stop signs while he's driving high!!!" Nobody is suggesting we legalize marijuana and place no restrictions on it. It should be regulated the exact same way that alcohol is regulated. I'd even be in favor of regulating it the same way we regulate pseudoephedrine products: you must present a license or other government-issued ID to purchase it.
It's time we have a rational discussion on the subject without resorting to trying to scare people with reefer madness propaganda. American adults should be able to enjoy a joint in the comfort of their home, or in a coffee bar somewhere, followed by either a cab home or the passage of a sufficient amount of time so they can legally operate their vehicles in a safe and responsible manner. If they choose to get high and drive, then they should be punished if they are caught.
That said, the number of low level drug runners, dealers, and their ex girlfriends in prison on the taxpayers dime is insanity. We're all paying to keep them there, and wasting their mostly productive lives. They could be going to school, working, paying taxes and contributing to society. I think we could release 40% of the people in our jails without any serious impact on crime. We could then spend the money saved on social programs creating futures for them and the next generation of slackers, and make a real difference in society.
Worrying about the right wing reaction and what the political impact will be on decriminalization of marijauna is not change. People are dying everyday because of an unnecessary prohibition of a plant that grows in the ground and does not need to be altered in anyway to enjoyed by millions if not billions of people. The profits are there because there is a massive demand for something we could all just grow ourselves. People are dying because of politics and stupidity.Keeping Marijauna illegal is nothing short of complete insanity and I am rapidly losing respect for the Obama administration if they don't directly address this issue immediately.
I could not agree more that we need to address the issue. When I hear that people who use drugs are supporting terrorists, I just sigh and shake my head. People who support the prohibition of drugs are supporting terrorists. If we were to legalize all drugs tomorrow, and have them in dispensaries available to anyone who can purchase them, we would drive the price down so low that drug cartels would abandon the business. If you take away the profits, which currently are obscene, you take away all motivation to engage in the trafficking and sale of the drugs.
Crikey, are all you wowsers completely ignorant of the Portuguese solution? Hint: Glenn Greenwald. Y'all keep babbling the same Chicken Little 'the sky will fall!' rubbish when empirical real world evidence is available.
Secondly, the Obama administration is more than the man. How much time would it take for the man to make one simple statement: "OK, study the Portuguese data and initiate a rational policy" and delegate the authority (but not the responsibility). Does the CEO of an auto company spend his time on the assembly line? Sheesh.
I think we should cut some slack for the President. The demographic most resistant to legalizing is Black women, and he has been listening to them. They hate drugs because they have seen the damage caused by the drugs. Yeah, I know, it's caused by prohibition, not by drugs, but that idea hasn't been sold yet in the Black community. Figure out how to sell it there, then we can move ahead.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.