Decriminalization of Drugs. Radical or Humanitarian?
Oregon’s European approach to their drug problem.
With all of the focus on the presidential election several other pieces of legislation on the ballot flew mostly under the radar. One of these motions was a bill in Oregon which would decriminalize small amounts of hard drugs. People caught with small personal amounts of methamphetamine, heroin, cocaine, oxycodone, and other opiates will no longer be facing jail time. However, possessing large amounts of any of these drugs remains illegal.
Measure 110 was passed in Oregon with nearly 60% of the vote. People caught with such drugs will have the choice of a $100 fine, or submitting to a health assessment by addiction recovery specialists. The state plans to use revenue from the sale of recreational marijuana, which was legalized in Oregon in 2014. Oregon becomes the first state in the United States to pass a measure decriminalizing hard drugs.
The measure will go into effect Feb 1st, 2021.
On the political side of the issue, Democrats regarded the measure as groundbreaking and progressive. Their Republican colleagues did not agree with this assessment, even referring to the measure as, “radical”. The idea behind this measure is to finally have a way to reach out to people struggling with addiction. As it stands currently in all 50 states if you are caught with drugs such as the ones listed in this measure you will most likely find jail time.
While jail time is certainly not something to take lightly, there are other, much more far reaching consequences currently. For many, being caught with hard drugs of this nature means losing almost everything. Thanks to the stigma surrounding addiction and drug use it has become a taboo for landlords and employers. In some cases people can be denied a career opportunity, or even a decent place to live due to a years old simple possession charge. This measure reduces the impact of that charge on a record to a civil violation. Something much like a traffic ticket. You wouldn’t deny anyone a job for speeding 2 years ago right?
There are those that believe that addiction is a choice — I’m sad to say I used to be one of those people. After seeing some of this firsthand, and taking a deep dive into drug addiction and rehabilitation, I am no longer one of those people. After the initial use and the following addiction, choice is no longer a luxury most people have. The problem in the US is we have taken drug users and classified them all as a lower class of citizen. Generally those making that classification have never been in the position to truly see how these things happen. The war on drugs was also a prominent factor in how this stigma was created. Suburban, upper middle class soccer moms were told by the government to fear and banish all things relating to these drugs. In doing so, this alienated those who had already fallen victim to addiction from society. In many cases, this becomes a generational socioeconomic gap that can last indefinitely. Without parents able to function and guide their children through the earliest stages of life, the children too often become victims of addiction; sometimes even as early as age twelve. We should not consider ourselves a first class nation with things like this going on in our backyards. Punishment is required in some situations, but simple possession and addiction require a more costly, less time-efficient approach. You lose the revenue from having people incarcerated, and you have to spend the money from the states budget to rehabilitate them. These, among other reasons is why I believe that it has taken until now for a state to finally give this route a chance. Profit over peoples health is a serious problem in the United States, but that is a topic for another day.
A step such as Measure 110 does not come without precedent. Our friends across the Atlantic in Portugal have also taken such measures. Enduring the same amount of ridicule and speculation at its onset. Fortunately, they enacted this policy almost two decades ago which gives us some interesting data to look into. During the end of the last century, Portugal was enjoying more freedoms than ever. Their authoritarian regime, which was removed in 1976, had locked almost everything out of reach for its citizens. After the fall of this regime Portugal jumped feet first into just about everything, as you would expect a new democracy to do. Unfortunately, this led to a severe drug problem.
The largest challenge the Portuguese faced was undoubtedly heroin. With the country having no real knowledge or resources to deal with the issue, it quickly spiraled out of control. In 2001 Portugal was recording 2,000 cases per year of HIV/AIDS among injecting drug users, the highest in the EU. The Portuguese government felt they had nowhere to turn, with no experience in a drug epidemic of this magnitude. This led them to take the leap that was unheard of at the time and decriminalize every drug within its borders in 2001.
The Portuguese make no distinction in, “hard” or, “soft” drugs so everything from marijuana to cocaine was decriminalized. This move was overwhelmingly denounced by the US who at the time was still in the largest and most expensive stages of the war on drugs. The surprising part comes 10 years later, when drug related deaths plummeted by 50%. The HIV/AIDS issue also rapidly declined over the first 10 years, dropping over 17%. Today in Portugal the story remains largely the same. With overdose deaths in 2016 only amounting to 30. In 2017, new HIV diagnoses due to injecting was just 18. Compare that to 907 in 2000, and decriminalization does not seem as radical as many make it out to.
Oregon should be an interesting study in how a measure such as this will work in the United States. After all, the average US citizen is very different than the average citizen of Portugal. This will be a major test for how the public perceives progressive movements in general. On the left it is already openly accepted. On the right, however, it is considered far left of center and too progressive for most moderates.
I find this interesting mainly for one reason. Generally conservatives prefer that government is small and choice is left up to the states and their people. Conservatives often point out that most people who are leftist are only such because they want others solving their problems and no responsibility. When it comes to this issue, I don’t see how anything could be more about state’s independence and personal responsibility. Oregon has the right as a state to chose to put forward this measure, and its people have the right to vote it into law. When it comes to personal responsibility this is also another major step forward relating to individual freedom. You will not be prosecuted for consumption of hard drugs. If you are caught possessing them you have a choice. Pay the $100 fine, or try to get help. It is important to note that the, “help” in this context is far better than what currently happens relating to jail time. People who want help may finally have an avenue that can do just that, help them to overcome their addiction. Many, if not most families of people with addiction problems simply cannot afford to send their loved one to rehabilitation. In this case, with rehab being state sponsored through the taxation of marijuana there is a much greater ability to reach those in need.
My question to conservatives will be this. If and when the data shows an improvement, will they accept that? Will they accept that an ideal so far from their core values was actually the correct way of going about things? Or, as happens with just about everything, will they find some fringe unsubstantiated statistic to try and justify why it is not working. This is the general path for both right and left on most issues. I only hope that since this is something directly pertaining to the health of Americans struggling with addiction that they can be a bit more open minded.
Ultimately, this approach to the drug problem will come down to whether or not the American public is ready to accept a progressive measure like this one. I hope that if this measure plays out as many expect it to, law makers in every state can come up with similar plans of action. After all, every state is different and it would likely require some tweaking of the measure itself to implement it in other states. As I have said before, empathy and love will win the day. Not hate and Fear.
