The death of Kelly Thomas and the ongoing trial has been grounded in the stigmas that surround both mental illness and substance abuse. As the defense attorneys continue to blame Kelly for his own demise this week, the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) held a summit in co-ordination with inpatient rehab west palm to once again reiterate that our drug policy should be rooted in neuroscience, rather than just political science.
At the summit Dr. John Kelly, a Harvard researcher and psychiatrist, noted the stigma that surrounds drug addiction, which includes blaming the abuser. He rightly posited that the way we discuss such issues is partially to blame for the lack of progress in truly helping those that battle substance abuse (and I would include those with mental illness as well). He suggested that:
“We need to adopt new language which is more consistent with a public health approach, more accurate…as opposed to the rhetoric and language of the past — the abuse terminology, which is more strongly associated with a war on drugs approach.”
Although I agree with that, I must also point out that it’s not just simply changing the language that will fix our broken drug policy. We also need to address the many funding mechanisms that continue to incentivize focusing the majority of government public safety expenditures on supply-side narcotics enforcement. In other media outlets I have written about how “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” The continued emphasis on changing language by the ONDCP but not funding is reflective of the manipulation that the government uses to ensure that Americans believe that there is no drug war.
This fiscal year, as social programs were being cut across the country, the drug control budget increased $415 million to a total $25.6 billion. That included no decrease for enforcement efforts, and in fact increased the DEA budget by $40.9 million, ensuring spending on domestic enforcement is the highest it’s ever been, at $9.4 billion. Other budget increases included Bureau of Prisons spending that incorporated a $120 million dollar increase for the 51% of federal 
inmates serving time for drug offenses. As a fellow Law Enforcement Against Prohibition speaker pointed out, on a positive note [read sarcasm here] we should acknowledge the 4.6% increase in funding to treatment programs. Although laudable, the lack of emphasis on effective demand reduction programs and an over-reliance on enforcement only strategies does not address the systemic failures of our policy on public health.
No matter how much money we throw at attempting to achieve the impossible dream of a “drug-free America,” all the current metrics provided by our government clearly show that we have failed. No matter how many arrests, convictions, drugs and money seized, the purity level of drugs is at an all time high, the price is at an all time low, and America continues to lead the world with the highest rate of incarceration, illicit drug use and now prescription opioid deaths. Clearly the conversation surrounding the drug war has changed yet from where I sit; it’s still just smoke and mirrors to me.
Ms. Goldstein, great post.
The War on Drugs has not been a failure. It has been a whopping success. No drug warrior was really ever serious about ending drug abuse; what they wanted was (in no particular order):
An ever bigger slice of public revenue
More jails and prisons
More jail and prison guards
More people being told what to do by cops and DAs
Re-election by the rubes
More minorities behind bars
The list goes on.
A serious public policy would have addressed ways to mitigate or eliminate the associated public pathologies of the illegal drug trade: decriminalization.
As to the Thomas matter, it is a scandal to me that some alleged prior drug use was even admitted as evidence since when he was killed by the cops later toxicology indicated he was clean. That’s just courtroom bullshit that was somehow permitted. My fear is that the stigma you mention may actually impress a dumb juror.
People are afraid of industrial hemp and e-cigarettes have no business making public policy at all..
Hi David,
The two sides that benefit with the system as it currently is of course is the criminal justice professionals, and then the cartels and criminals. I will be doing some future pieces on harm reduction and how some law enforcement leadership is changing their policies in spite of opposition by organizations that includes the Chief’s and Narcotic’s Officers.
The rhetoric surrounding the drug war has made it difficult to have the badly needed public discussions that are based on many stakeholders, not just the cops and the DA’s.
Ms. Goldstein is a member of LEAP & on the board of the nefarious organization CCCPR, led by Dale Sky Clarence Jones. Diane panders to Don Duncan & Adele Steph Sherer who are the two most prolific purveyors & both have proven track records of restrictive cannabis permitting in LA & SF.
I know her well & have been becoming increasingly suspicious of her activities. Diane Goldstein is definitely a wolf in sheeps clothing. Only proof otherwise would be her public support of both MCLRA & CCHR 2014 initiatives in California. Just watch her reply with a typical pundits blathering about how it’s not possible. Well, thanks to her activity to date it will be more difficult, but definitely achievable.
You people sure are paranoid and backstabby, what’s up with that? No wonder nothing gets done.
Nice article Diane. What is that picture of with the spotlights?
It’s smoke and mirrors!
oh ok. Don’t worry about Steele. He is a known CI for the DEA. That’s how he wiggled his case for 5 years and got probation. He stole from me when I was hospitalized with intestinal bleeding in 2010.
hahaha
which part is funny?
sorry