Marijuana legalization: Obama opposition too selective

When Latin America talks of legalizing drugs, Obama officials speak up. What about ballot measures in Colorado and Washington Sate to approve marijuana legalization?

Carlos Julio Martinez/AP Photo
A police officer walks among seized packages of marijuana in Cali, Colombia, last month. Colombia and other Latin American nations may discuss marijuana legislation at a coming Summit of the Americas.

Voters in two states, Colorado and Washington, will be asked this November if they want legalization of marijuana. Similar ballot measures are being pursued in a few other states. If approved, these initiatives would mark a dramatic first for America.

So what does President Obama have to say about these state challenges to federal antidrug policy?

Silence, so far.

Yet two of his closest officials have lately been quite eager to speak out against the mere talk of pot legalization in other countries.

Last month, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano told Central American leaders that legalization “is not the way” to stop drug trafficking. And on a visit to Mexico on Monday, Vice President Joe Biden repeated the message, saying legalization in the region would create more problems than it solves, such as an increase in drug addiction.

These warnings by Obama officials may be aimed at a drive by Guatemala’s president, Otto Pérez, to rally Latin American leaders around the idea of legalizing drugs as a way to undercut the profits of powerful drugs cartels. The conservative ex-general has already gained some support in the region after he first floated the idea in January.

The Obama administration seems to want to dampen the effort quickly. The issue could come up at next month’s Summit of the Americas in Colombia. If so, Mr. Obama may be forced to take a very public stand on legalization just as the 2012 campaign is heating up. During his first presidential campaign, he deflected questions about legalizing cannabis.

Once in office, Obama did eventually launch a crackdown on many dispensaries of “medical” marijuana in the 16 states that allow such use. The main reason? A lot of the pot, especially in California, was being diverted around the country for resale to recreational users. Meanwhile, the administration only quietly released an official stance against legalization.

During his visit to Central America, Mr. Biden seemed sympathetic to the region’s frustration with drug cartels and their violence. He said a debate over legalization is understandable “in societies that don’t have the institutional framework and the structure to deal with organized, illicit operations.”

Did the vice president mean to imply that the United States does have the “institutional framework” to deal with illicit drug sales? If so, why does marijuana use only rise?

The administration needs to step up and make a strong case against legalization in the US in order to counter a well-financed, well-organized pro-marijuana effort. One argument is that the cartels would actually welcome legalization, in the same way that US casino owners have welcomed state gambling lotteries. To drug dealers, the more addicts the better.

Biden did say a debate in Latin America about legalization would help “lay to rest some of the myths that are associated with the notion of legalization.”

How about he and Obama start to challenge those myths in states like Colorado and Washington?

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.