By Barbara Foss, A sermon delivered to the First Unitarian Universalist Church of Rochester, MN, July 14, 2002.

Two years ago, the General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association selected Alternatives to the “War on Drugs” as the issue suggested to congregations for two years of study, action and reflection. The Commission on Social Witness received initial reports from congregations and districts last year in March and a draft Statement of Conscience was created and distributed to congregations and districts for their feedback. Last month at the General Assembly in Quebec City, additional workshops on Drug Policy Reform were held with speakers from around the US and Canada.

Speakers such as Judge Jim Gray who I referred to in the opening comments and Sanho Tree a fellow and director of the Drug Policy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, DC whose focus is on the issues of racism & poverty and where those intersect the drug issue. He had just returned from southern Columbia where he was traveling with John Stossel who is preparing an ABC news special on Columbia and the drug trade.

At the Plenary session, the general assembly had the opportunity to debate the SOC. Not all UU s agreed with its language and scope. A motion to carry this issue forward for another year of study was rejected and following a brief debate, the Statement of Conscience was approved by the general assembly without further amendment.

Charles Thomas, president of UUDPR in regarding the SOC said “The thing we do best as UU s is pushing the envelope. The stronger the position we can take on this, the more encouragement it gives other denominations.”

So what’s all the fuss about anyway? Aren’t drugs bad?

Isn’t this something that our government needs to protect us from?

And why should I care?

These are all fair questions, and questions that should be asked … And answered. The easy answer is “Yes, drugs are bad.” And “the drug war is necessary.” But as UU s we rarely settle for the easy answer and often find ourselves exploring the grey areas; this is one issue that lacks not for grey areas.

Frances Burford, of the First UU Church of Houston, is one of those who helped convince GA delegates to select the drug issue. She said “This issue encompasses so many other issues that are important to UU s: poverty, racism, militarism, the environment, prison expansion, and civil rights. The drug war violates every one of our seven principles.”

Prohibition
The lessons we learned, or should have learned, from alcohol prohibition in the 1920s & 30s are revealing. Prohibition had the exact opposite effect that was intended. Far from creating an alcohol-free society, it created a black market that led to the rise of organized crime and gave wealth and power to people like Al Capone. Alcohol consumption not only increased, but more potent forms of alcohol were common and more deaths were attributed to alcohol use because content was unregulated. People who never drank before, started drinking. It was an utter failure by every measure.

The same failure is demonstrated today in America’s War on Drugs. I think we’ve all heard the pop-culture definition of insanity … It’s where you keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. Today’s War on Drugs meets that definition exactly. But, people are beginning to recognize that the drug war has not only failed to meet the utopian ideal of a drug-free America, it has in fact created more negative consequences than drug use itself.

Drug abuse and addiction are real problems. But they are health concerns, not crimes. At one of the workshops at GA, Judge Gray said “It makes about as much sense to lock up the actor Robert Downey Jr for his cocaine problem - and he does have a substance abuse problem - as it does to lock up Betty Ford for her alcoholism”.

So how did we get here …. And at what point did our political leaders and policy makers become better equipped to deal with matters of the body and mind, than physicians and mental health care professionals?

History
A very brief history would go back to 1914 when the Harrison Narcotic Act was passed, not to address a drug problem or prohibit use, but to generate revenue.

In 1937, the Marijuana Tax act, which specifically recognized marijuana’s medicinal use and allowed doctors to prescribe it, instituted a cumbersome process of regulation which effectively removed it from the commercial market.

A progression of laws have been passed in the last century further regulating and criminalizing marijuana, opium and cocaine, most with blatently racist elements that served to demonize drug use and incite the public’s fear of African Americans, Mexicans and Asians.

Moving ahead to 1970, Congress passed the Controlled Substance Act which was meant to temporarily label marijuana a Schedule I substance - in the same category as heroin - pending further study. Nixon then appointed a commission, consisting of former Republican governor of Pennsylvania Raymond Shafer, 4 sitting elected politicians (both republican and democrat) and leading addiction scholars. In 1972 the commission issued two lengthy reports. The first one recommended the following:

1. Possession of marijuana for personal use should no longer be an offense [.... but marijuana possessed in public should remain contraband, subject to summary seizure and forfeiture;...] and.

2. Casual distribution of small amounts of marijuana [... for no or "insignificant" remuneration ...] not involving profit should no longer be offense.

These recommendations were endorsed by the AMA, ABA, the AA for Public Health, the National Education Association, and the National Council of Churches.

The report further stated:

“The Commission is of the unanimous opinion that marihuana use is not such a grave problem that individuals who smoke marihuana, or possess it for that purpose, should be subject to criminal procedures.”

This was not … the conclusion … that Nixon was anticipating.

His outrage and prejudice are revealed in Oval Office tapes released earlier this year. The commission’s report was suppressed. Congress took no action and marijuana remains classified as a schedule I narcotic to this day which is why physicians in most states are unable to prescribe it to their patients for conditions such as:

cancer, chronic pain, epilepsy and other seizure disorders, glaucoma, HIV and AIDs, MS and other conditions characterized by muscle spasticity, Chron’s disease and other disorders.

Nixon called for an “all out war” on drugs.

Since the Commission issued its recommendations in 1972, …

fifteen million … people have been arrested on marijuana charges.

As a society, we have developed institutionalized anxiety about drug use, and it is not based on science and reason, but rather it is based on racism, prejudice, myth and decades of rhetoric.

Every human society in recorded history has used some type of psychoactive drug … The only exception is the Eskimos who, because of climate, were unable grow drug plants. But time resolved that too when white explorers brought them alcohol. Some Native Americans have traditionally have used peyote in their spiritual ceremonies, and they have had to fight the Supreme Court for their right to do so.

As events have demonstrated, one of the lasting effects of the laws intended to suppress the use of marijuana was the establishment of organizations in countries like Columbia to produce, process, and distribute cocaine which is easier to conceal and much more lucrative. Sanho Tree described this as the “balloon effect”. When you exert pressure on drugs in one area, they will re-emerge (stronger and more dangerous) in another.

In the 1960s and 70s, Columbia’s primary drug of export was marijuana. When pressure was exerted on its distribution, they shifted production to Coca and marijuana production shifted to Mexico and the United States and Canada. And when efforts were undertaken to address the flow of cocaine to the US through Florida, cocaine distribution was simply re-routed through Mexico.

Consider this possibility. Even if we magically destroyed every coca, poppy and marijuana plant in the world, would that translate to success in the drug war? No, because like it or not, there is a demand, and that demand would be met with substitute drugs. And if you think cocaine and heroin are dangerous, just imagine the new crop that will come along; synthetic drugs that are more unstable, more deadly and have far greater environmental consequences than the drugs that occur in nature - in plants.

We know this already … its a regular occurrence in our own community. Meth labs in cars and vans and homes and fields. There’s not only the danger of explosions, but the health of the manufacturers - and their children - is also compromised from inhaling the fumes which have been known to cause harm to the brain, liver, kidneys, lungs and eyes and can cause learning disabilities, emotional and behavioral problems, or even death.

Columbia
Further environmental pollution is attributed to our own government’s chemical spraying in Columbia which affects not only coca, but other legitimate crops as well, like bananas and coffee not to mention jungle flora and fauna. Eradication programs such as this are responsible for contaminating ground water and could have lasting effect on the soil as well as posing significant health hazards to the people of Columbia.

More recently we’ve switched from aerial spraying of toxins to “Tebuthiuron” - a granulated chemical developed by Dow. The chemical pellet can be released from aircraft at much higher altitudes, which resolves the problem with low-flying aircraft being vulnerable to rebel gunfire.

Dow Chemical strongly opposes this application in Columbia, but their patent has expired and other chemical companies can produce it. It is meant for use in “controlled situations” … In this country it is only used as a weed killer on railroad beds and under high-voltage lines, far removed from crops and people. These same safety measures are not recognized in Columbia.

Legal Drugs
No examination of our drug policies would be complete without taking a look at two of the legal and socially accepted drugs in our society today - alcohol and tobacco. According to recent statistics, over 100,000 people die from alcohol use and over 400,000 die from causes attributed to tobacco. In 1988, the Surgeon General C. Everett Koop presented a report that put nicotine in the same category as the most addictive illegal drugs, labeling it as the chief single avoidable cause of death in our society. In fact, deaths attributed to tobacco use, exceed the deaths from alcohol, suicide, homicide, AIDS, cocaine, heroin and motor vehicles - combined.

If we were really serious about saving lives, wouldn’t we make tobacco products illegal?

Terrorism
In the weeks following September 11th, the government and drug war proponents were quick to lay the blame for the terrorist attacks on drug users, always a convenient scapegoat. But profits from the sale of other goods that we purchase also support terrorism and extremist groups, like diamonds from Sierra Leone and Tanzanite from Tanzania, not to mention oil. But there was no similar criticism for those who purchase jewelry or drive cars. It’s easy to blame drug users, but it’s not an argument that holds up to critical analysis.

I agree absolutely that terrorism is funded by the sale of illegal drugs. But the market for drugs - a market that has and always will exist - will be satisfied. The extraordinary profits from the sale of illegal drugs are only possible because drugs are prohibited. The drugs themselves - literally piles of leaves - have very little value. It is prohibition that gives these drugs their value. If all drugs were regulated … like alcohol and tobacco and Rx medications, the black market that funds terrorism would be dealt a devastating blow. It is not drug users who give profit to terrorists; it is prohibition.

Prisons/Costs
Our nation’s drug war budget is now around $20 Billion/year, up from only $101 Million in 1972 when Nixon started the Drug War.

This $20 billion a year budget does not include the added cost to state and local governments - and their taxpayers - to support the mushrooming prison population due primarily to the drug war, including mandatory minimum sentences and the incarceration of non-violent offenders.

The prison statistics are alarming; the personal stories, nothing short of tragic.

The United States of America now has the distinction of incarcerating more of its citizens than any other country in the world, recently surpassing Russia, South Africa, Indonesia and Ukraine. More people are sent to prison in the United States for non-violent drug offenses than for crimes of violence. Worse, minorities are arrested, prosecuted and sentenced for drug-related crimes at much higher rates than whites even though drug use among racial groups is proportional.

In the last 15 years, California has built 20 new prisons, a trend that is repeated throughout the country. It is a growth industry, thanks to the drug war.

For years, California State Assemblyman Pat Nolan consistently spoke and voted in favor of longer and longer sentences for all drug offenses. However, after serving a two-year prison sentence himself for political corruption, he announced publicly that he had changed his mind once he had seen the results of that policy with his own eyes. Nolan saw large numbers of people in prison who simply should not have been there. He summarized his conclusions this way: “We should reserve our prison space for people we are afraid of, instead of people we are mad at.”

The RAND Corporation, a respected and conservative “think tank” released a study in 1994 that found that drug treatment is between 7 and 23x more cost effective than domestic law enforcement , border interdiction and crop substitution programs.

And yet many people who do seek treatment for their addiction are turned away because there is insufficient funding of treatment options.

Dollar for dollar, we have the least effective drug policy that we could possibly have.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to sell the message of a “drug free” America to our youth. They see for themselves that adults smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol. They see their peers medicated on ritalin and other prescription drugs. They see athletes involved in controversies over steroid use. They see endless TV ads promoting prescription medications. They see that many of our politicians and their family members have had their own experiences with drugs, and the law.

The son of US Rep. Randy Cunningham (of CA) was arrested for flying into Massachusetts with more than 400 pounds of marijuana - an amount not typically considered consistent with personal use. Rep. Cunningham, who had supported the death penalty for drug traffickers, made a plea for leniency for his son. Prosecutors agreed and sentenced him to boot camp and a half-way house.

Why are these people allowed their own youthful indiscretions and compassionate treatment, while others (the poor, racial minorities, those without connections) must pay dearly with loss of freedom, loss of property, loss of their livelihood and the destruction of their families?

Drug abuse and addiction produce human casualties … There is no argument. But the current Drug War does nothing to improve the situation, but rather it increases the harm to individuals, their families and society as whole and has not met any of the most important objectives — saving lives, keeping drugs out of the hands of children, and treating those who are addicted.

The time has come to abandon the concept of a “drug-free” America. We need to focus on learning to live with drugs in such a way that they do the least possible harm. This is the same approach we have taken with tobacco and alcohol, with positive results.

There is so much more information that I don’t have time to cover … Like the eco-friendly hemp plant and its unnecessary prohibition, the corruption that occurs at every level due to the money involved in the illegal drug trade, the disparity in sentencing between crack and powder cocaine, the increased crime & deaths - not from drug use - but from turf wars between dealers, and the abuse of and addiction to Rx medications, all but ignored in the drug war.

So what’s the good news? There is some …the good news is …

- individual states are asserting their rights and advancing the will of the people, with the passage of Proposition 200 in Arizona and Proposition 215 in California, both addressing medical marijuana use. Others states that have voter-initiated measures include Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon & Washington.

This could all be done simply by rescheduling marijuana as a Schedule II, or other drug. But with the federal government’s failure to do so, states are responding instead to the people exercising the principle of federalism upon which this country was founded.

- other countries are rejecting America’s “drug war” ideology and adopting alternative policies - such as those outlined in the UU Statement of Conscience - including New Zealand, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Portugal, Great Britain, Germany, Italy and Canada.

- organizations have been formed - like UUDPR - that speak to the failure of the drug war and encourage alternatives. Others organizations include Families Against Mandatory Minimums, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, Mothers Against Misuse and Abuse, Veterans for More Effective Drug Strategies, Religious Leaders for a More Just and Compassionate Drug Policy, Patients Out of Time, and many, many, many more.

- Most important, people are talking about the issue.

Alcohol prohibition was not defeated in 1933 because people who wanted to drink or perhaps were addicted to alcohol protested. It ended because civic leaders, businessmen and parents - many of whom supported prohibition initially - witnessed the harm to individuals and society and spoke out against it. In addition to the public shift in attitude regarding prohibition, with the stock market crash in 1929 and the depression, eliminating prohibition had become a matter of financial survival.

Today’s drug war critics include people like Judge James Gray, William F. Buckley, former police chief of Kansas City, Joseph McNamara, Walter Cronkite, Nobel prize-winning economist Milton Friedman, former Secy. of State George Schultz, Gov. of New Mexico Gary Johnson, former mayor of Baltimore Kurt Schmoke and our governor, Jesse Ventura.

Many attempts have been made to silence opposition to the drug war. It is important that this issue is legitimized and discussed openly.

Charles Thomas, UUDPR president said:
“This is not advocacy of drug use, but it is a judgment of what might be the most effective way of reducing drug-related harm to individuals and to society.”

Before I conclude, I would like to continue the story of Maureen … The young Irish woman - and heroin addict - who was the subject of this morning’s reading. Mike Gray continues the story …

When the Liverpool clinic—one of the last of the old British heroin maintenance programs — was featured on a CBS “60 Minutes” broadcast, U.S. drug enforcers went into convulsions.

The success of the clinic—a 90 percent drop in the local crime rate, zero cases of AIDS, progress in moving people off welfare and into productive jobs—flew in the face of American drug war orthodoxy.

Dr. Marks was warned by friends in the Home Office that the US Embassy was exerting tremendous pressure to shut him down, and in the end it was successful. The 450 patients that Dr. Marks had been serving were kicked into the street …. “Two years later,” said Dr. Marks, “25 of the addicts were dead.”

And what of Maureen the heroin addict with three children who had planned to go to college?

“I saw Maureen the other day,” … said Dr. Marks. … “She was desperate, back to criminality; a lot of her friends are back in prison. She’s on the streets. She saw me in passing and asked if I could take her back on. Her doctor tried to refer her to me, but the Health Authority refused to defray the costs.”

And so the state, in its righteous determination to set everything straight, has managed to teach Maureen … and her children … a lesson. It’s one they won’t soon forget.

I’d like to conclude with this message from president of the Unitarian Universalist Association, the Reverend Bill Sinkford who said:
“The so-called war on drugs is creating violence, endangering children, clogging the criminal justice system, eroding civil liberties, and disproportionately punishing people of color. It’s time, … for a cease-fire.”

AMEN.