March 3, 2010
Legislation proposed to tax and regulate Rhode Island's marijuana
Last week, Representatives Ajello (D - Providence) and Driver (D - Charlestown, Exeter, Richmond) introduced historic legislation that aims to end marijuana prohibition in Rhode Island. In its place, H7838 proposes a set of regulations for wholesalers, retailers, and home growers of marijuana, and levies a tax of $50 per ounce. If passed into law, this act would raise considerable revenue in addition to saving millions in criminal justice expenses.
With a decriminalization bill already under consideration, R. I. now has two proposed alternatives to marijuana prohibition. As we discuss on our alternatives page, tax and regulate is the policy that offers the greater savings and revenue. It is consistent with the way we handle other potentially harmful substances such as alcohol and nicotine (it should be noted, however, that marijuana is far safer than either of those), and allows for regulations such as age limits, driving and heavy machinery penalties, health warnings, and advertising restrictions.
February 16, 2010
Senate commission meets again
Last week, the Marijuana Prohibition Study Commission met again. This time, they invited the public to speak and share their views of marijuana prohibition.
Speaking against changing our state's marijuana laws were representatives from the Barrington Substance Abuse Task Force. Their argument centered around worries that decriminalizing mairjuana would encourage more children to use the substance. This point, however, is not supported by the evidence. A number of studies, listed here, show that loosening drug laws often leads to reduced usage, especially among youth. For example, Rhode Island teenagers use marijuana at a rate nearly double that of their counterparts in the Netherlands, where marijuana has been de facto legal since the 1970s. The threat of criminal penalties simply isn't a deciding factor in the decision of whether or not to use marijuana. Furthermore, the only age limit illicit drug dealers enforce is "old enough to carry cash." The best way to keep kids away from marijuana is for it to be sold on a properly regulated market. Doing so for alcohol proved a much better policy than prohibition, and no one would suggest making alcohol users criminals in order to send the right message to children.
Other speakers demonstrated the absurd waste of limited resources that is marijuana prohibition. Peter Hannon of Providence has been arrested six times for small-quantity marijuana possession over the last thirty years. He's been on probation since the age of 21 and lost out on countless job opportunities, all for being a casual, if unlucky, marijuana user. The number of criminal justice and judicial system resources devoted to this one man over the years is simply ridiculous, and has clearly served no purpose. In a just society, Peter Hannon would not be considered a criminal.
Another speaker, Brett Sincoski of Charlestown, spent three months in prison for failing to attend court-ordered rehabilitation programs - which he couldn't afford -after he was caught with 1/8 of an ounce of marijuana. Even if the Barrington Substance Abuse Task Force is right that using marijuana was a poor decision for Brett, putting him in prison helps no one. We, the citizens, employ the Department of Corrections in order to keep certain people separate from society. Brett is not one of those people. Put simply, here are far better things taxpayers could be doing with their dollars than locking up marijuana users.
The next and final meeting of the commission is scheduled for March 4, at 5 pm in room 212 of the State House. The public is welcome in the audience, thought not again invited to speak.
February 4, 2010
February update: Marijuana decriminalization in sight for Rhode Island!
What an exciting time for Rhode Island! February is shaping up to be an important month for marijuana policy reform, with progress being made every day. I am pleased to report that it looks like our state may see positive changes to its marijuana laws sooner rather than later!
Marijuana decriminalization bill introduced in Rhode Island House
On Tuesday, Representative John Edwards (D - Tiverton) introduced House bill H7137 (), which would make the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana a civil, rather than criminal offense, punishable only by a fine of $150. This landmark legislation would save hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars in criminal justice costs in addition to raising money from the citations. It would keep non-violent offenders from clogging our prisons and go a long way towards ending the failed policy of marijuana prohibition in Rhode Island.
Perhaps the biggest story is the overwhelming support this bill is getting from Edwards's colleagues in the House. The list of 35 co-sponsors includes 33 out of 70 Democrats and 2 out of the 5 Republicans in the House. To all the rimarijuana.org visitors who called or wrote their legislators, urging them to co-sponsor this bill: congratulations on a job well done!
There is one change we hope to see in the final version of the decriminalization legislation: its effect on probation sentences. Rhode Island has the loosest guidelines in the nation for charging its citizens with probation violations. If H7137 becomes law in its current form, vague probation rules would not stop judges from continuing to incarcerate probators for marijuana possession or even testing positive for marijuana in a drug test. These probation violation charges make up a significant portion of the potential fiscal and social savings of ending marijuana probation; we hope Rhode Island legislators realize the importance of making sure that marijuana decriminalization applies to all of their constituents, regardless of their criminal record or probationary status.
Marijuana Prohibition Study Commission hears powerful testimony
Yesterday, three presentations were made to the Marijuana Prohibition Study Commission. First, Rhode Island Public Defender John Hardiman estimated the effects that the decriminalization of marijuana would have on his office. After combing over his statistics, he estimated that small-quantity marijuana possession cases take up approximately the case load of one attorney, for a cost to the state of about $116,000 yearly. However, this estimate does not include cases disposed of at arraignment, which includes the majority of marijuana possession cases. These cases do impinge on the Public Defender's office budget, Hardiman said. Also excluded were probation violators, who as we've discussed would make up a large portion of the savings from marijuana decriminalization. The data for probation violators is simply not tracked in an easily accessibly way, Hardiman said, so it was impossible to include those cases in his estimate. However, he agreed with the importance of reducing the number of probation violation charges, saying that the number of probation violations "crushes our ability to provide service to our clients."
Retired state trooper Joe Osediacz made a brief presentation, bringing to the commission's attention the tax on marijuana that Rhode Island already has in the books. Although this tax has been used in the past to charge those accused of marijuana crimes with tax evasion as well, no revenue has been collected on this tax since 2001, when $4 was collected (as Paul Dion, chief of the state's office of revenue analysis, recalls). This tax demonstrates the impossibility of regulating an illegal market - even if the possession of less than an ounce of marijuana were decriminalized, it is unlikely that Rhode Island would resume collecting this tax. Only by enacting a tax and regulate policy can the black market be eliminated and marijuana sales fully taxed.
Finally, the commission heard powerful testimony from former New Jersey State Police officer Jack Cole, now Executive Director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, an organization of over 15,000 law enforcement officers who believe our nation's war on drugs to be a failed public policy. "A policy of regulation and control...is much more efficient and ethical than a policy of prohibition," Cole said. Although many points were made in favor of decriminalizing marijuana, perhaps the strongest was to note the effects that different policies have on usage rates. According to Cole, before drugs were made illegal in the U.S., the addiction rate was a modest 1.3%. Today, after trillions of dollars have been spent on interdiction and incarceration of drug sellers and users, the addiction rate remains a stable 1.3%. Money well spent? I think not.
Cole also referred to data that shows that state that have decriminalized marijuana have found usage rates go down, especially among teenagers. Although this fact is counterintuitive, it is supported by research which suggests that that neither availability nor fear of arrest is a limiting factor in adolescents' decisions whether or not to use marijuana. For links to the relevant studies, see our section on decriminalization studies. This is perhaps the most important point in the debate surrounding marijuana policy: even if you believe marijuana to be a terrible, wicked substance, you should still support ending marijuana prohibition, because regulation is more successful than prohibition at reducing its use.
Jack Cole also discussed Massachusetts' recent decision to decriminalize marijuana. In addition to providing significant revenue to cities and towns, the measure has freed up law enforcement's resources to pursue violent criminals instead of marijuana users. Cole estimated that in 2009, enough police time was saved in Boston alone to free up the entire year for at least thirteen officers. A similar redistribution of law enforcement resources in Rhode Island would do wonders for our clearance rate.
Marijuana Prohibition Study Commission seeks public input
The next meeting of the commission will be held on Thursday February 11, at 2pm, in room 212 of the State House. The meeting will be open for input from the public; this is your chance to talk to legislators directly about the importance of marijuana policy reform. I urge all of our supporters to show up and speak up! I would also be happy to advise you on how to make your testimony most effective: send me an email at henry[at]rimarijuanapolicy.org and we'll be in touch. Thanks and see you next week!
January 20, 2010
The Marijuana Prohibition Study Commission meets again
Yesterday the Marijuana Prohibition Study Commission met for the second time. In case you weren't there, here is a summary of the three presentations that were made to the commission:
A.T. Wall
Director, Rhode Island Department of Corrections
The Department of Corrections reported to the commission their estimate of the costs that could be saved if criminal penalties were eliminated for small-quantity (one ounce or less) possession charges. Despite Director Wall's preface that the estimates were on the conservative side, their prediction was absurdly low. Many of the commissioners questioned the DoC's misleading methodology, and Senator Miller suggested that perhaps they had been too conservative in their report.
In order to arrive at their savings estimate of 60 beds annually at a cost of $232,000, the Department of Corrections counted only those inmates who were committed only for marijuana possession. This figure overlooks many more prison beds that could be emptied. It does not include individuals who violate their probation with a new marijuana charge, nor anyone who is sentenced to probation for possession of marijuana and then finds themselves in prison due to a technical violation.
At one point, new commissioner Senator Paul Jabour (D - Providence) asked Wall why the per-inmate cost he was using was so much lower than the number he used in his presentation to the budget committee - closer to $40,000 per inmate per year. Wall explained that the per-diem costs per prisoner are actually quite low, and the costs of staffing the housing units make up the majority of the department's budget. Since housing units are larger than 60 beds, they wouldn't be able to achieve the extra savings by closing a housing unit. However, there is one problem with Director Wall's logic. He mentioned that they open and close units throughout the year as the prisoner population fluctuates. If that is the case, wouldn't it stand to reason that reducing the overall number of prisoners would at least allow the DoC to keep housing units closed more often? Savings of $40,000 per inmate would still be realized, if not in the permanent closure of a unit, then spread out over the days when one is temporarily closed.
Let's not forget that there are reasons Director Wall might want to mislead the commission. There's no motivation for the Department of Corrections not to underestimate the costs of incarcerating marijuana offenders. After all, saving money on incarceration means less money that Rhode Island taxpayers have to pay to the DoC in exchange for locking people up. Of course Wall doesn't want to see his department's budget cut. As Bruce Reilly points out at rifuture.org, "any erosion of 'Tough on Pot' may put a considerable dent in the 'revenue' of incarcerated people." Even when decriminalization does pass (and it will), the more the DoC downplays their savings, the more revenue they will retain.
Nick Horton
Policy Researcher, OpenDoors (formerly the Rhode Island Family Life Center)
OpenDoors is an organization that works directly with the formerly incarcerated in addition to promoting policies that help them become contributing members of society. Unlike the Department of Corrections, OpenDoors would love to see a world which had less of a need for its services. They see every day the harm that marijuana prohibition causes to individuals and families, and they see reforming our marijuana laws as one of many ways to strengthen Rhode Island's communities.
Horton started his presentation by reviewing the history of marijuana prohibition. As we review on our prohibition page, the dialogue on marijuana prohibition has been anything but informed. The "facts" that were presented to Congress when it decided to make marijuana illegal included such gems as "marijuana makes darkies think they're as good as whites." At the same meeting, a representative from the American Medical Association testified against making marijuana illegal; unfortunately, Congress was more swayed by the Bureau of Narcotic's racist sensationalism. This racism hasn't disappeared, either: Horton showed data confirming that of those arrested for marijuana possesssion, blacks and hispanics are disproportionately incarcerated.
This presentation also amended the Department of Correction's savings estimate. Horton estimated up to 20 or more beds saved over and above Director Wall's estimate of 60. We at RICIMP believe that Horton's estimate is very conservative, and the DoC's is simply misleading. For an example of a less conservative estimate, drug policy research Jon Gettman's 2009 report, Marijuana in Rhode Island (), uses a percentage-based method borrowed from the federal Office of National Drug Control Policy. Using this method to calculate corrections costs of marijuana prohibition, we calculate savings of $10.4 million annually. The true savings (for corrections only) will almost certainly lie somewhere between Horton's estimate of less than $1 million and Gettman's estimate of over $10 million.
Nick Horton also told three stories of individuals who have been incarcerated for marijuana possession. These real examples demonstrate that even with a minimal, entirely non-violent criminal record, marijuana possession can lead to jail time as well as lost job opportunities. Incarcerating these non-violent offenders in close quarters with violent criminals and gang members is surely the wrong way to get their lives back on track. If anything, it's marijuana prohibition, not marijuana itself, that turns some of these people into violent criminals.
Matthew Dawson
Deputy Chief, Criminal Division, Rhode Island Office of the Attorney General
The final presentation came from the Attorney General's office. Dawson quickly made his position clear: marijuana should stay illegal. He also made it clear that he was not interested in facts, but rather ridiculous, groundless assertions. His opening comment, "regular chronic users of marijuana, they are just different than other folk...they don't have the ambition or the desire to contribute to society like others do," is simply not true - many marijuana smokers have made substantial contributions to society. Even if Dawson's claim has some truth, it is quite a leap to take from the fact that someone is not being as productive as they could be to saying that they deserve to spend time in prison. At RICIMP, we agree with Dawson's stated goal of reducing the number of marijuana smokers in Rhode Island; however, we believe that locking people up is perhaps the worst possible way to achieve this goal.
Dawson also disagreed with the Department of Correction's savings estimate, claiming instead that not a single bed would be emptied by marijuana decriminalization. His rationale? He looked over a few files - and here he made a show of a pile of papers he had with him - and found that they all had other crimes on their record. What were these other crimes that prevented these prisoners from being counted as being in jail for marijuana possession? On questioning by the commission, it was revealed that some of these "other crimes" included additional charges for marijuana possession as well as probation violations. Dawson admitted that if someone was on probation for marijuana possession, and then violated their probation by being caught with marijuana, they wouldn't count as being in prison for marijuana possession, but rather for defying a court order to stop using marijuana. "Two different things," Dawson said. Clearly, as Nick Horton pointed out, these people would not be in prison if marijuana were decirminalized, and their beds surely would be saved.
Another outlandish claim made by Dawson is that marijuana use by high schoolers doubled in Alaska when it was decriminalized in the 1970s. Again, this is false, as is explained here. On our alternatives page, we list many studies that demonstrate conclusively that decriminalization does not result in increased use of marijuana, as well as twenty-two nations that have succesfully decriminalized marijuana.
Luckily, the commissioners didn't seem to take Dawson's testimony too seriously. At times, he sounded like a bad caricature of anti-drug propaganda. When Dawson responded to an objection with the non-sequitur, "However, you must remember, drugs are bad," the entire room erupted in laughter.
Attorney General Patrick Lynch is running for governor this year. Since 64% of Rhode Islanders support decriminalizing the possession of small quantities of marijuana, it is clear that he has chosen the losing side of the battle to reform our marijuana policies. Send Lynch a message and let him know that he won't be receiving your vote unless he changes his mind on this important issue.
more front page stories... |
