The D'Alliance

Can Heroin-Assisted Treatment Happen Here?

2010-01-21T17:21:00.003-05:00

Those of us in the drug policy reform movement have learned time and again that the most effective solution to a drug-related social problem is often counterintuitive.

One clear example of this trend is heroin-assisted treatment (HAT), an approach to helping otherwise treatment-resistant heroin addicts using well-monitored doses of the drug itself. HAT programs provide a safe place to inject for those users most at risk of contracting a disease or suffering an overdose.

I got to learn more about this harm reduction strategy last night at a DPA-sponsored panel on HAT at George Washington University in Washington, DC. The event featured an international panel of health professionals, researchers, and advocates familiar with the topic.

Donald MacPherson, former Drug Policy Coordinator for the City of Vancouver, spoke about the heroin-assisted treatment program he oversaw in his city. Dr. David Marsh shared his experiences as one of the lead researchers in the North American Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI) trial of prescription heroin in Canada. Peter Reuter, a University of Maryland professor and leading scholar on heroin maintenance, discussed treatment programs in Switzerland and the Netherlands. And DPA Executive Director Ethan Nadelmann spoke about the prospect of implementing a heroin-assisted treatment program or trial in the United States.

DC's Ward 6 councilmember, Tommy Wells, also spoke, and it was heartening to see a DC politician there in support of HAT, as DPA's DC Metro program has been investigating whether creating a HAT pilot program in the District is feasible. Washington, DC has one of the highest rates of HIV/AIDS in the country, and many contracted the disease through injection drug use.

I came away from the panel with an understanding that the most important step we can take to make heroin-assisted treatment a reality in the United States is to change perceptions about the people these programs would help.

Why have other countries been able to institute heroin-assisted treatment programs or trials while the prospect of doing so here in the U.S. still seems so far off? Because in the United States drug users are too often characterized as criminals and unworthy of help. The stigma associated with heroin use in the United States is the main reason HAT is not widely accepted in the U.S. as a viable treatment option.

The key to gaining acceptance for this kind of treatment is combating this stigma and convincing people that saving a life, under any circumstances, is more important than projecting a "tough on crime" image. As David Marsh put it, speaking of his two young grandchildren, "I would never want to say to them that I had the chance to stop people from dying, but I didn't do it because I was afraid it would send them the wrong message."

Read more on heroin-assisted treatment.

Ethan Nadelmann is a Change.org Changemaker

2010-01-13T16:32:00.001-05:00

DPA Executive Director Ethan Nadelmann was chosen by Change.org members as one of the site's Changemakers.

Ethan's selection means that through a series of featured posts, he will have the opportunity to engage the Change.org community in a dialogue about ending the drug war and pursuing smarter drug policies based on science, compassion and human rights.

Check out Ethan's first post, "The War on Drugs is a War on People."

Update: NYC Harm Reduction Pamphlet Will Stay in Circulation

2010-01-07T13:45:00.002-05:00

Housing Works' Diana Scholl tells us that "Take Charge, Take Care," the safer injection pamphlet being distributed by the New York City Health Department will stay in circulation. Read her post on Housing Works' website.

Following an agreement between Health Department and City Council officials, the Health Department will continue to distribute the pamphlet, but it will no longer be available on the internet.

Drug War Proponents Attack NYC Harm Reduction Pamphlet

2010-01-06T12:26:00.004-05:00

A smart, compassionate move by the New York City Health Department to promote safer practices among heroin users has come under fire from drug war proponents. A harm reduction pamphlet called "Take Charge, Take Care" has been called a "how-to guide" for heroin use [NYT], but I can't help suspecting that these criticisms are fueled more by a callous disregard for the health and safety of heroin users than by any real concern that kids in New York City will pick up a pamphlet and decide to start injecting heroin.

The Health Department is acknowledging that no matter what drug control policies are in place, some people will still use heroin, and those who use should be informed so they can do so as safely as possible. The pamphlet advises heroin users to inject with others present so they are not alone if an overdose or some other complication occurs. "Take Charge, Take Care" also promotes safer injection techniques to help users better avoid disease and infection.

The New York Post ran a negative piece on the Health Department publication earlier this week, but readers shot back with three strong, thoughtful letters-to-the-editor in support of the harm reduction pamphlet. Read them here.

You can also check out DPA Communications Specialist Anthony Papa's defense of "Take Charge, Take Care" on Counterpunch.

Marijuana Reform Momentum Grows

2009-12-12T17:03:00.006-05:00

A new poll by Angus Reid confirms that the support for marijuana tax and regulation is indeed growing. The poll, sampling 1004 American voters, found that 53% of those responded believe that marijuana should be legalized. This is a nearly 10 point increase from a poll conducted by Gallup (look at the title of the poll) a couple of months ago found that 44% favored marijuana legalization. Among other questions conducted by Angus Reid, the poll also found that 68% of respondents believe that the war on drugs is a failure -- but 8% of Republicans and, interestingly, 11% of Democrats believe it to be a success.

The issue with these polls is that they are not properly nuanced. Neither poll (Angus nor Gallup) offered marijuana legalization specifics; they just simply asked the question if marijuana should be legalized. It may be the case that if a more detailed question was asked -- such as asking if treating marijuana with the same regulations as alcohol and cigarettes with age and place restrictions introduced -- may garner even more support of lifting marijuana prohibition. It would also be interesting to ask whether the respondents had smoked marijuana themselves, knew anyone who smoked marijuana, or ever been arrested for marijuana possession. So if anyone wants to know these answers and more, please send me $15 grand to hire a pollster -- it is tax deductible and the end of the year is approaching fast.

The poll also measured responses to the legalization of other drugs; the results are not too surprising:

Victories for Drug Policy Reform

2009-12-09T17:42:00.002-05:00

Reformers are set to record some major victories in the fight to dismantle the failed war on drugs. Here's a rundown:

Congress is expected to pass an omnibus spending bill that includes

a provision eliminating the ban on federal funding for syringe exchange programs, a policy that has undermined disease prevention efforts for decades and resulted in tens of thousands of people contracting HIV/AIDS or hepatitis C.
language ending restrictions preventing Washington, DC from implementing the medical marijuana imitative voters approved way back in 1998.

The Drug Policy Alliance has been working for years to achieve these reforms, and the fact that these changes are imminent shows that Congress is finally starting to change it's thinking on drug policy issues.

Progress is also happening on the state level. New Jersey is on the verge of ending mandatory minimum sentencing for some nonviolent drug offenses and becoming the 14th state to legalize medical marijuana.

New Jersey's progress comes after Rhode Island's elimination of mandatory minimums, Maine's approval of a medical marijuana distribution system, and New York's repeal of the draconian Rockefeller drug laws.

Want more reasons to celebrate? Read "10 Signs the Failed Drug War Is Finally Ending" by DPA's Tony Newman.

Reflections on Reform Conference 2009

2009-11-24T10:06:00.002-05:00

This month in Albuquerque, NM I attended my first International Drug Policy Reform Conference (I'm in my sixth month as a member of the Drug Policy Alliance staff). I expected going in that the conference would give me a more comprehensive sense of where the drug policy reform movement is headed, but I wasn't quite prepared for the degree to which the conference would reshape the way I conceptualize my own activism and how my position in the drug policy reform movement connects me to other social and political movements.

Attending the conference helped me gain a new perspective on something I've been thinking about for years now- how do all the causes within the so-called "progressive movement" overlap? How can we better facilitate coalition building within a movement comprised of individuals with a myriad of different passions, motivations, and ideologies. And how can we change attitudes within the movement to alter the power hierarchies that so often marginalize people based on gender, race, socioeconomic status, and various other factors?

My time at the Reform Conference didn't provide me with neatly packaged answers to these questions. While I was impressed with the diversity of the conference participants, there were times when the inequities within the reform movement became very clear. As in every progressive movement, there is discrimination and marginalization within the drug policy movement. Even at the conference, for example, an honest, wide-ranging discussion of gender was relegated to a couple panels and remained largely absent from the major plenary sessions. So much of the decision-making power in the reform community still lies with a largely white male elite.

Yet, even dismayed by the obvious inequities with in the reform community, I was exceedingly hopeful during my three days at the conference because I realized that, with this gathering, our movement already has in place a forum in which nearly every stakeholder group in the drug policy reform movement is represented. With former and current drug users, cops, family members of overdose victims, research scientists, formerly incarcerated individuals, harm reductionists, students, and so many others gathered in the same building, we have the perfect venue to acknowledge and address serious problems within the movement and to build the unlikely bridges we absolutely need to build to take our efforts to the next level.

The personal stories of the speakers I heard and the people I met gave me a more tangible sense of how the movement to end the drug war intersects with various other progressive causes. Some of these intersections I already understood pretty clearly. It's easy to see how ending the drug war would be a primary goal of the prison reform movement and an essential step toward achieving racial justice. But until the conference, I hadn't full conceptualized how the drug policy reform movement intersects with the reproductive rights movement when women who use drugs face criminal charges or other penalties for choosing to carry their pregnancies to term. I hadn't been able to adequately explain how it intersects with the gay rights movement through a common conviction to end the government's policing of our bodies.

I believe that to change enough minds to succeed in ending the drug war, we need to build coalitions, and not just the obvious ones. We need to build bridges with unlikely allies. If we show the failures of the drug war through enough lenses, we're bound to win over at least some of the people we've been unable to reach until now.

With the Reform Conference, we have a great platform to discuss how our varied personal experiences led us seek the common goal of dismantling the drug war. From there, we can learn from each other how to make our movement stronger by adding more voices to the conversation and moving to the center of the discussion voices that have until now been marginalized.

More from the conference: Watch videos, view presentations and our twitter feed, read the conference program and more.

UK Drug Advisor Sacked for Classifying Drugs Based on Science

2009-11-05T13:27:00.003-05:00

Politics triumphed over science in the UK last week when the head of the country's drug advisory council, David Nutt, was forced to resign after releasing a report in which he and his colleagues classify drugs based on their potential to cause harm rather than the legal classification assigned to them by the British government. The report groups alcohol among the most dangerous drugs and marijuana among the least.

Nutt has said that several members of the council will join him in forming an independent drug advisory group if the government doesn't reverse its position by next week.

The situation in the UK mirrors that of France in 1998, when French health official Bernard Roques released a similar report questioning that nation's existing drug classification system. That report also named alcohol as one of the more harmful substances and placed marijuana on the lower end of the spectrum. The French government made moves to reclassify drugs based on the report's findings, but, following backlash from the alcohol industry, a watered down version of the report became the basis for France's new drug policy.

Nutt's firing is disheartening because it comes at a time when other European countries (see previous posts on Germany and Portugal) are forging ahead with drug policies based on science and a genuine interest in reducing harm.

It will be interesting to see how this story unfolds and, particularly, whether it receives attention in the U.S., because the Office of National Drug Control Policy is currently working on its own three-year drug policy strategy to be released early next year. Will the U.S., like the UK, continue to ignore scientific fact and reinforce the same, failed drug war policies? Or will the new drug czar take a new approach based on science and human rights?

Want to speak out against David Nutt's firing? Join the Facebook group calling for his reinstatement.

More of the Same. Seriously?

2009-11-01T21:29:00.003-05:00

Joint Cause Commercial from Wil Wells on Vimeo.

Along the same vein of stupidity and general unwillingness to have an honest dialogue with ~~anyone who doesn't agree with them~~ youth about drug use, here is a gem of a video from Californians for Drug Free Youth (CADFY).

This "commercial" was released in opposition to California's marijuana tax and regulate bill, which had its first hearing on Wednesday. Note: CADFY's url is www.jointcause.com -- I doubt they even know why I laughed for 5 minutes when I learned that.

Of course, if you are a drug warrior, and base an argumentation on the word "seriously?", you generally make drug policy reformers who engage in science-based policy look even more legit. So to thank them, you can write on CADFY's facebook page.

That's right, drug prohibitionists are now using modern technology to disseminate antiquated ideas.

Always Clean Out Your Bong

2009-10-25T22:09:00.009-04:00

To counterbalance a more enlightened federal policy toward patients and suppliers of medical marijuana, Minnesota's highest court ruled (don't think I've linked to Fox News before) that those who possess bong water can be prosecuted for possessing a narcotic mixture.

A Minnesota woman can be charged for a controlled substance, a first-degree drug crime (25 grams or more of a controlled substance), by possessing 37 grams -- about 2.5 tablespoons -- of bong water that tested positive for methamphetamine.

The decision effectively reverses two lower court rulings that found that charging Sara Peck with 37 grams of methamphetamine-laced water as a first-degree narcotic possession is pretty much crap. The high court (pun very much intended -- although I know plenty of people that make better decisions while high) found that since the drug water counts as a "mixture" under state law, meaning "a preparation, compound, mixture, or substance containing a controlled substance, regardless of purity", Peck can be charged with the higher offense that carries a possible sentence of 7 years 2 months, while a possession of drug paraphernalia carries a $300 fine and a petty misdemeanor conviction that would not be on her record. A narcotics officer testified that drug users sometimes drink or inject the bong water (I really don't know if this is the case for people who use meth, but it doesn't seem realistic).

This decision ushers in the possibility of extracting plea deals by trumping up drug charges. It also, more disturbingly, expands the possibilities of what warrants a drug indictment. Would my blood, since it may contain controlled substances, be subject to supoena? Or my urine? If I set foot on Minnesotan soil, will police be waiting at the baggage gate to arrest my bladder?

This is a clearly terribly worded penal provision, that acts as a exploitative tool by unhinged prosecutors that seek to pile on charges to get convictions. It also may realize the possibility that those who violate parole or probation with a dirty urine could then be charged with possessing a narcotic "mixture".

This is a teaching moment for hygiene: 1) always make sure your bong is clean and 2) pee frequently!

I think we all are SOL regarding the blood issue.

The War Against Dispensaries

2009-10-22T13:03:00.004-04:00

We're all cheering the new federal medical marijuana guidelines that direct prosecutors not to arrest law-abiding patients in medical marijuana states. But of course, it remains to be seen what prosecutors will do with those guidelines.

I just read a piece in which criminal defense lawyer Allison Margolin shines a light on the Los Angeles District Attorney's campaign to shut down dispensaries in her city. The whole piece is worth a read -- Margolin makes a convincing case that prosecuting medical marijuana operators is economically foolish and legally problematic -- but one paragraph in particular jumped out at me. Regardless of whether we think California's dispensaries need more regulation, we would all do well to consider the following:

The media has focused on the fact that dispensaries in LA have mushroomed over the past year, and on the ease with which marijuana users are obtaining recommendations. No one has focused on the fact that the war against dispensaries, is another chapter in the escalation of the drug war, another excuse to send people to state prison, another mechanism to disenfranchise people whose medicine is not respected by law enforcement or the LA District Attorney's office as legitimate.

Newsweek Profiles Ethan Nadelmann

2009-10-16T22:20:00.001-04:00

Newsweek just came out with a profile of DPA's executive director, Ethan Nadelmann. It's a pretty great read. Posted here is the video profile on Ethan.

Major Rockefeller Drug Law Reform Provision Goes Into Effect

2009-10-10T20:58:00.003-04:00

On Wednesday, major provisions of the Rockefeller Drug Law Reforms signed into law in April went into effect: restoring sentencing decisions in most (but unfortunately not all) drug cases, and allowing nearly 1,500 people serving time in prison for B drug felonies under the old Rocky law to petition for resentencing.

It is the first time in 36 years that New York State drug laws place the power of sentencing decisions in the hands of judges, who can now take into account the totality of the circumstances when someone is convicted of a drug offense to fashion the appropriate sentence -- whether it be treatment or other alternatives to incarceration programs, probation, or parole -- and make a prison sentence the last resort.

You can read more about the new provisions that go into effect from DPA's gabriel sayegh here, and get more info (fact sheet) on the reforms here.

This reform of mandatory minimum drug sentencing provisions indicates a real shift that focuses drug abuse and dependence as a health issue, rather than addressing it solely as a criminal justice matter. Although there is far to go, New York can show the nation that while it was the first state in the country to adopt such misguided and racist laws, they can now become a national leader by using effective community-based alternatives to incarceration to address drugs as a public health and safety matter, not a prison one.

Stiletto Stoners and the Drug War

2009-10-02T10:42:00.010-04:00

Much has been made about the new Marie Claire article "Stiletto Stoners" that profiles several successful white women who smoke pot. I am on the fence about this article. On the one hand, it does tap into a readership and highlight a class of people that should be included in the conversation about responsible cannabis use and the need to normalize a behavior that is already...well, normal.

But on the other hand, in the larger context of the war on drugs, it is a narcissistic piece that highlights the lives of people that are not affected by the consequences of prohibition in the least. It is almost as if Marie Claire is saying SOME people can smoke pot responsibly, principally these well to do white women who appear to be the readership of the magazine, but OTHERS should probably get their lives together before they indulge in something far less harmful that alcohol.

Keep in mind that those that lead lives of privilege smoke possibly unaware that over 850,000 are arrested annually for marijuana, and 90% of those arrests are for possession only. And while every adult should be free to smoke, eat, vaporize, etc marijuana unencumbered or frightened by possible arrest, it still remains that marijuana arrests, like all drugs arrests, are racially screwed. Take New York City for insistence, where 40,000 people are arrested per year for small amounts of marijuana, and 87% of those arrested are people of color.

That being said, it is important to explore every facet of the marijuana conversation, and this is a worthwhile component. Hopefully more people are inspired to start coming out of the marijuana using closet -- and maybe even show his or her face.

And also, the story inspired a pretty great video on Today.

Len Bias law conviction in Wisconsin

2009-09-25T17:07:00.004-04:00

Nineteen-year-old Casey Gogos of Green Bay, WI was convicted yesterday on homicide charges in the death of a 17-year-old who died after overdosing on heroin allegedly supplied by Gogos. He faces up to 52 years in prison.

Wisconsin is one of several states with a Len Bias law, named after the Maryland basketball player who in 1986 famously died of a heart attack after taking cocaine. These laws allow for homicide charges to be brought against individuals who supply drugs that later contribute to the death of another person. (Bias's death also set into motion a host of other drug war measures, including mandatory minimums, crack/powder sentencing disparities and school-zone laws.)

Even though I know these laws exist, and I shouldn't be surprised considering all the political grandstanding that goes into crafting our nation's drug laws, it still shocks me every time I hear about someone being held solely responsible for a death resulting from someone else's uncoerced actions.

Especially mind-blowing is that even people doing drugs with someone who dies of an overdose can be prosecuted. These are often the only people who can call for help, and yet the law provides them with a disincentive to call 911.

Why is the reaction to drug deaths always to find more ways to put people in prison, rather than educating people about how to actually prevent drug deaths?

Marijuana Monday

2009-09-14T19:39:00.003-04:00

Even though ~~I am~~ some people are suffering from a case of the Mondays, there is some great media coverage today about the marijuana legalization debate. Four articles about marijuana legalization from large media publications were published today. Just wanted to let you guys know that these are out there.

AM New York (for those of you who take the subway) has a great front page! article about the dramatic marijuana arrest epidemic that has crowned NYC the marijuana arrest capital of the world. DPA's director or media relations, Tony Newman, is quoted within the article.

Fortune Magazine has a comprehensive story about the medical marijuana dispensaries in California. They ask the question: Is the end of marijuana prohibition among us? DPA's executive director, Ethan Nadelmann, is quoted in the article.

New York Magazine's Mark Jacobson has an excellent piece also about marijuana arrests in New York City, splicing in anecdotes and other pieces of marijuana-related culture in the Big Apple.

The Washington Post provides a nice anecdotal story about the younger generation's views on marijuana legalization. It as also invokes Maryland's little known medical marijuana defense known as medical necessity (2nd post down).

At Least Barney Fife Wasn't Dangerous

2009-09-11T16:03:00.003-04:00

Today's swat-style home invasion is brought to you by the DEA in conjunction with the New York Police Department. (author's note: when I google image searched for "NYPD cartoons", I was reminded of this -- some people are just full of hate.) The New York Daily News reports a botched raid by the DEA, backed up by the NYPD, on a reputed gang boss.

The reasoning behind the raid -- Ruiz's apartment acted as a stash house -- seems highly suspicious. The adage drug sellers try to adhere to (at least in the movies) is "you don't shit where you eat". It makes sense that this would apply to a boss in a violent drug gang. Why would he have his own apartment be a stash house? Methinks it's simply shoddy police work. This is reaffirmed for two reasons: 1) while the DEA was raiding the house, the DEA was actually arresting Ruiz elsewhere in NYC and, more importantly 2) they raided the wrong house!

The warrant listed the wrong apartment, and the article seems to indicate that while Ruiz used to live in the building, he had not lived there for a few years. Instead, the DEA scared the living crap out of a mother and daughter, ages 48 and 19 years old respectively. Not only did the two continually insist while these paramilitary were trashing their apartment that they had the wrong apartment, the NYPD even scrolled through the daughter's pictures on the computer and laughed at the two women on the beach.

The police and DEA eventually left, muttering what I would imagine was the most insincere apology ever spoken in New York. Then again, what would you expect?

What Would Prosecutors Do?

2009-09-05T18:58:00.002-04:00

Below is a Huffington Post piece that Tony Newman, DPA's Media Relations director, wrote about the NYC Manhattan District Attorney's race. At the debate, two of the candidates made some rather revealing statements about past drug use. Tony has a great commentary about the hypocrisy of it all.

Candidates Drug Use Not A Deal Breaker, But Hypocrisy On Issue Should Be!

At Tuesday's debate in the race for Manhattan District Attorney, two of the three candidates admitted to cocaine use. When the candidates were asked if they used any illegal drugs besides marijuana, both Cy Vance and Richard Aborn admitted to trying cocaine in the past.

We seem to have come a long way from when Douglas Ginsberg was bumped from consideration for a Supreme Court position because he had tried marijuana in the 70's. Now it is almost impossible to find a presidential candidate who has not tried marijuana. It has become so commonplace for elected officials to admit marijuana use that the question has progressed to whether candidates have tried an illegal drug besides marijuana.

President Obama broke ground as a candidate when he wrote openly about not only using marijuana, but trying cocaine when he was in high-school. I can't remember a presidential candidate admitting to using a "hard drug". Obama's drug use clearly had no negative impact with voters. I believe his honesty helped him by humanizing him with both young voters and baby boomers. Voters appreciated some straight talk compared to President George Bush refusing to answer questions about his "youthful indiscretions" and Bill "I never inhaled" Clinton. Ironically, the candidate who suffered the most damage from Obama's past drug use was Hillary Clinton, when Bill Shaheen, Clinton's New Hampshire co-chair, had to step down after going after Obama for his past drug use.

Another high-level elected official who admitted to cocaine use and received a public shrug in response was Governor David Paterson, who admitted to cocaine use days after he became governor following Eliot Spitzer's resignation over having patronized a prostitute. Governor Paterson has recently taken heat for a range of reasons, but his cocaine use is notably not one of them.

Now we have two candidates running for District Attorney of Manhattan, one the of the most powerful law enforcement jobs in the country, admitting to cocaine use. I predict it will not be a major issue and it shouldn't be. The reason past cocaine use by Obama and Paterson and Vance and Aborn use has not been a huge problem for them is that they don't have hugely hypocritical political views on substance abuse. All four of these elected officials/candidates have advocated for alternatives to prison for low-level drug offenders. President Obama has stated he wants drugs to be treated more as a public health than a criminal justice issue. Governor Paterson worked for years to reform New York's draconian Rockefeller Drug Laws. Vance and Aborn both opposed the Rockefeller Drug Laws and Aborn is calling for a debate on decriminalizing marijuana.

The problem for voters is when there is hypocrisy. The reason the Spitzer prostitute scandal was so damaging is because he was actively prosecuting prostitution at the same time he was enjoying the services of prostitutes.

Hypocrisy is what bothers me. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is currently running for reelection. When asked years ago if he had smoked marijuana he said yes, and even added that he enjoyed it. Yet under Mayor Bloomberg, New York has the shameful distinction of being marijuana arrest capital of the world. Last year 40,000 New Yorkers were arrested and jailed on low-level pot possession charges. More people have been arrested on marijuana possession charges under Mayor Bloomberg than any elected official in history!

It is encouraging that past drug use by candidates and elected officials are being discussed more openly and voters are less judgmental. What we need now is for voters to punish elected officials who are willing to ruin other people's lives with arrest and incarceration for doing similar things in their lives.

Maryland's Medical Marijuana Law Lacks Substance

2009-09-04T13:45:00.003-04:00

I was pleased to hear some refreshing news come out of Montgomery County, Maryland last week - judges in two medical marijuana cases handed down light sentences to patients convicted on possession charges.

William York walked out of the courthouse with a $100 fine, and Winnie Gesumwa had her fine waived, due to Maryland's medical marijuana law, which caps the sentence for marijuana possession at a $100 fine if defendants can prove they use the drug for medical purposes.
While assuring, theses rulings have also drawn attention to the tremendous shortcomings of the Maryland law, particularly its ambiguity and lack of essential protections for patients and caregivers.

The Darrell Putman Compassionate Use Act does not require the state to maintain a registry of medical marijuana patients, a resource that would help keep people using the drug for medical purposes out of the criminal justice system. The law contains no safe access provision, so patients still have to buy marijuana off the street rather than from dispensaries. And if patients are prosecuted for possession, they have no recourse to seek refunds for legal fees.

Essentially, the law is useless to most of its intended beneficiaries.

Currently, the sentences meted out to Maryland's medical marijuana patients convicted on pot charges depend entirely on the legal representation available to them and the individual judges assigned to their cases. Those who've received fines have generally benefited from lawyers familiar with medical marijuana law and capable of mounting a trenchant argument that marijuana is a medical necessity for their clients. They've also been lucky enough to have their cases heard by judges willing to show leniency toward medical marijuana patients. Not all judges are, and lawyers knowledgeable about the Compassionate Use Act are hard to come by.

Without a law that clearly outlines protections for patients and caregivers, these inconsistencies in sentencing will continue, but the Maryland legislature has been maddeningly hesitant to improve the current law. Last year, legislators failed even to pass a bill that would have created a taskforce to assemble a set of best practices for medical marijuana law that could guide reforms in Maryland.

There's a good chance another taskforce bill will be introduced this fall, and I hope lawmakers will reconsider. It's a small step toward much needed reforms, but a step forward nonetheless. Maryland owes its medical marijuana patients a law with some substance.

Argentine Court: Prison Time for Marijuana Possession Unconstitutional

2009-08-25T16:48:00.005-04:00

Argentina's Supreme Court ruled today that imprisoning people for possessing small amounts of marijuana is unconstitutional. The seven judges rule unanimously, stating:

"Each individual adult is responsible for making decisions freely about their desired lifestyle without state interference. Private conduct is allowed unless it constitutes a real danger or causes damage to property or the rights of others."

The ruling follows Mexico's decision to decriminalize drug possession for personal use less than a week earlier.

After the ruling, Argentina's Cabinet Chief Anibal Fernandez celebrated the end of "the repressive politics invented by the Nixon administration."

I'm looking forward to seeing how Argentina's drug laws change in the wake of this ruling. It's heartening to see another country denouncing the imposition of U.S. drug war policies on the rest of the world.

Mexico Decriminalizes Possession of Small Amounts of Drugs

2009-08-21T12:26:00.011-04:00

On Thursday, Mexico decriminalized possession of small amounts of drugs for personal use. But don't start celebrating that common sense and the freedom to put things into your body absent harm to others was the rationale for drug decrim within our southern neighbor's borders. Nope. It's simply that since the U.S. demand for drugs from Mexico has fueled unprecedented cartel violence there, arresting and prosecuting people for small amounts of drugs is just simply a stretch of U.S. complicity of human rights abuses finite resources.

After all, there have been over 11,000 drug-related deaths since 2006 -- 7,500 since the beginning of 2008 -- sparked by several cartels not only fighting the country's police forces, but also fighting amongst themselves to gain more control of the drug trade.

Now, it's apparent that this act by the Mexican government which, by the way, was also passed by the Mexican Legislature in 2006 only to be buried under pressure by the U.S., won't stem the violence by the cartels because the criminalization that drives black market profit (mostly from U.S. demand) will remain.

But it is telling that the Mexican government recognizes that criminalizing small amounts of drugs for personal use is an ineffective policy that takes vital resources away from dealing with the cartels -- although combating cartel violence will continue to be ineffective because ONDCP won't even consider marijuana tax and regulation, even though marijuana continues to be the cartels' #1 moneymaker. Portugal has decriminalized drugs for almost ten years, and by many measurements this policy has produced decreased drug use and increased treatment admissions.

Innovative drug policies implemented by our neighbors to the north, including supervised injection facilities and heroin maintenance programs, are now bolstered by decrim from the south. The mighty U.S. drug policy machine is now surrounded by some alternative approaches (how some of these approaches are implemented remains to be seen) from two countries that suffer their greatest casualties, and attempts to change their prohibition-based course are largely undermined because of, U.S. drug policy.

The next move is ours.

Study Backs Heroin Maintenance Treatment

2009-08-20T15:52:00.004-04:00

If the government is looking for a way to cut spending, reduce crime, and save lives, a new study published in the New England Journal of Medicine has the answer. Unfortunately, it's probably not the kind of answer most politicians will even consider.

The Canadian study shows that prescription heroin is an effective treatment for addiction when all other treatments, including methadone maintenance, fail.

Participants in the study, all heavy users who had not responded to other treatment methods, were divided in two groups with one group receiving methadone and the other receiving diacetylmorphine, the active ingredient in heroin, over a three-year period. The patients who received heroin were more likely to stay in treatment, and they cut back on illicit drug use at a higher rate than the methadone recipients.

The study shows that in addition to effectively curbing drug use in a population previously written off as a lost cause, prescription heroin treatment prevents crime because users are less likely to look for drugs off the street. And locking fewer people up for drug-related offenses saves a lot of money.

Opponents of heroin maintenance programs now have to come face to face with concrete proof that prescribing heroin does not, as they claim, encourage drug use. But doctor-prescribed heroin doesn't sell well, which is why no matter how many studies come out, we need to work toward an ideological shift on drugs and drug use if we want to bring heroin maintenance programs to the U.S.

A Warped Vision for Afghanistan

2009-08-07T16:06:00.006-04:00

There's a good article in last Sunday's New York Times about how eradication of the opium crop in Afghanistan is displacing poor farmers and their families and sending them deeper into poverty. Meanwhile, opium production is thriving in areas with a heavy Taliban presence.

"...the crackdown in the country's far north is unlikely to stop the flow of opium and money to the Taliban in the south. In Zabul - the home province of Taliban spiritual chief Mullah Omar - poppy production grew by 45 percent last year.

Helmand province, a Taliban stronghold, grew so much opium last year that if it was a separate country, it would rank as the world's top opium producer, according to Gretchen Peters, author of "Seeds of Terror," on how the Taliban is bankrolling itself through drug smuggling...

Poppy fields in Taliban areas are so dangerous that eradication teams comb them for bombs before trying to destroy them. Last year 78 government agents were killed trying to destroy fields in the south. By contrast, the worst they faced in [the northern province of] Badakshan was crying farmers."

On a related note, I was just reading this horribly uncritical article from CBS about Colombian Special Operations Forces joining U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

The article quotes a "top U.S. official" as saying, "The more Afghanistan can look like Colombia, the better."

How's Colombia looking these days?

Drug war violence and chemical spraying of coca fields have led to Colombia's enormous internally displaced population, the second largest in the world behind only Sudan. Chemical spraying, in addition to decimating the fields of poor farmers and forcing them away from their homes, is also poisoning civilians and contaminating food in rural areas.

The world U.S. officials are envisioning through the lens of the drug war is truly terrifying.

Cannabis iPhone App

2009-08-03T15:56:00.001-04:00

The good folks at Ajnag (that's ganja spelled backwards), an online forum catering to the marijuana-reform community, have produced an iPhone App that helps patients track down cannabis buyer's cooperatives near them.

If you live in a state that has legalized the use of marijuana for medical purposes (like California and 13 others), this app will be incredibly useful to you. If you are not as lucky, the app also gives you tips on how to advocate for medical marijuana reform laws in your state.

Open Letter to Congress on Ending the Drug War

2009-07-30T14:16:00.001-04:00

I came across this commentary recently and thought I'd pass it on. In his open letter to Congress, Carmen Yarrusso gives a compelling four-part argument against drug war policies and explains why a comprehensive overhaul of this country's drug laws is absolutely imperative. Click here to read the letter and pass it on to your members of Congress.