White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric

By
Thursday, March 18, 2010 at 6:00 am
The Obama administration is changing its tune on needle exchanges and other harm-reduction policies.

The Obama administration has signaled shifts on needle exchanges and other harm reduction policies.

Quietly, free of headlines and fanfare, the Obama White House is toning down the bellicose “war-on-drugs” position that’s defined the country’s narcotics policy for the last 25 years.

Appearing in Vienna last week for the 53rd annual United Nations meeting on global drug policy, administration officials shifted away from the decades-old approach of attacking drug use as a crime to be penalized. Instead they moved toward a strategy of tackling addiction as an illness to be treated, a number of health and human rights advocates who attended the event told TWI.

[Congress1] Drug reformers for years have promoted so-called “harm reduction” measures as a more effective and humane way to treat drug addiction and the diseases that often accompany it — an approach that runs counter to the punitive attitude epitomized by the Reagan administration’s “war on drugs.” And while the Obama White House — behind Gil Kerlikowske, the White House drug czar, and his deputy, Thomas McLellan — remains officially opposed to the hot-button harm reduction language, officials have also conceded that the current strategy isn’t working, advocates say. That sharp break from past administrations has left reformers hopeful that the Obama White House will mark a new era in the nation’s fight against drug abuse — one that prioritizes treatment and prevention above rap sheets and prison time.

“There was virtually no reference to a criminal justice approach,” Allan Clear, executive director of the Harm Reduction Coalition, an advocacy group, said of the U.S. delegation in Vienna. “I’m just so used to being appalled by their behavior … It was very encouraging.”

Deborah Peterson Small, executive director of Break the Chains, another group advocating for drug-policy reforms, agreed, noting a brand new willingness among White House officials to embrace certain elements of the harm reduction strategy. When she spoke about treatment reforms to U.S. drug officials in Vienna in 2008, Small said, the entire delegation walked out on her. “This year it was completely different,” she said. “We finally had a sense that they were listening.”

The comments mark quite a departure from those that drug reformers were making a year ago at the same U.N. event, where the Obama administration killed international efforts to include harm reduction language as part of a U.N. document that will guide the next decade’s global drug policy. Harm reduction refers to things like drug-substitute treatments and clean-needle exchanges — programs being tried (with promising results) in a number of countries to battle the spread of HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis C and other drug-related illnesses. The White House has argued that the broad harm reduction language is “ambiguous” and could include controversial programs the administration doesn’t support, including drug legalization, drug consumption rooms and heroin prescription initiatives.

But there are clear signs that the attitude is changing — and the policies are beginning to follow suit.

With Obama’s vocal support, for example, Congress last year repealed the 21-year-old ban on federal funding for needle exchange programs. And last week in Vienna, not only did the United States endorse a new U.N. resolution promoting access to controlled medicines for legitimate medical purposes (commonly considered to include drug dependency treatments, like methadone for heroin addiction), but it co-sponsored a separate declaration designed to tackle the treatment gap plaguing HIV patients. The latter resolution, while it doesn’t mention harm reduction specifically, references a U.N. technical guide promoting certain harm reduction measures, like needle exchange and opioid substitution therapy. Rebecca Schleifer, advocate for the health and human rights division at Human Rights Watch, said this week that the HIV document represents “the most vocal support” the White House has ever given for HIV-treatment efforts focusing on human rights.

Opponents of needle exchange and other harm reduction measures argue that the human rights groups have misinterpreted the signals coming from the White House in Vienna. “If you read Kerlikowske’s statement,” said Lana Beck, spokeswoman for the Drug Free America Foundation, “clearly there’s nothing there to indicate any change.”

That part is true. The remarks prepared for Kerlikowske — officially the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, or ONDCP — reiterated the administration’s opposition to the broader harm reduction language, arguing that the term “creates unnecessary confusion” and might be misused to “promote drug use.” Still, drug reformers were quick to point out that the drug czar declined to include those passages when he addressed the crowd in Vienna — more evidence, they say, that the U.S. is consciously toning down its traditional war-on-drugs rhetoric.

“Traditional advocates of harm reduction recognized that the United States was a different animal [this year],” Clear said.

The ONDCP did not return calls for comment.

For health and human rights advocates, there remains a long way to go. Like any number of emotionally charged issues, drug policy is often dictated more by entrenched ideology than evidence-based rationality. And on Capitol Hill, there remains a strong sense that drug users are criminals to be punished, not patients to be treated. For proof, look no further than the debate over needle exchange. Although a long list of public health organizations — including the National Institute of Medicine, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization and the American Public Health Association — had endorsed needle exchange as an effective way to reduce HIV/AIDS without increasing drug abuse, the politics of Washington kept the ban in place for more than two decades prior to last year’s repeal.

Not that some lawmakers aren’t trying to reform the punitive mindset surrounding drug use. Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), for example, has long-criticized the criminal justice system for packing the nation’s prisons with non-violent drug users. A description of his reform proposal notes that the the war on drugs hasn’t diminished drug use, it hasn’t brought the multi-billion dollar drug industry under control, and it targets minority offenders disproportionately. The system, he says, is “broken, unfair, [and] locking up the wrong people.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the Webb proposal in January, leaving supporters hopeful that Democratic leaders will bring the bill to the chamber floor later this year.

Meanwhile, health and human rights advocates have vowed to continue their push for health-centered drug reforms, encouraged by the tone of a White House that seems ready to place a greater emphasis on treatment, health and human rights.

“That would put us on par with most other countries — like Iran,” Small quipped, “instead of being the leading jailer in the world.”

Comments

24 Comments

uberVU - social comments
Trackback posted March 18, 2010 @ 7:50 am

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by TWI_news: White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric http://bit.ly/deJV6j...


Understanding Government » Blog Archive » The Long Journey Toward Humane Drug Policies
Pingback posted March 18, 2010 @ 12:59 pm

[...] Washington Independent’s Mike Lillis reports on drug policy reformers who are “hopeful that the Obama White House will mark a new era in [...]


wego2health » Blog Archive » How to Cut Your Quit-Smoking Costs
Pingback posted March 18, 2010 @ 1:23 pm

[...] White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric « The Washington Independent [...]


malcolmkyle
Comment posted March 18, 2010 @ 2:07 pm

Based on the unalterable proviso that drug use is essentially an unstoppable and ongoing human behavior which has been with us since the dawn of time, any serious reading on the subject of past attempts at any form of drug prohibition would point most normal thinking people in the direction of sensible regulation. By its very nature prohibition cannot fail but create a vast increase in criminal activity, and rather than preventing society from descending into anarchy, it actually fosters an anarchic business model – the international Drug Trade. Any decisions concerning quality, quantity, distribution and availability are then left in the hands of unregulated, anonymous, ruthless drug dealers, who are interested only in the huge profits involved.

Prohibition has decimated generations and criminalized millions for a behavior which is entwined in human existence, and for what other purpose than to uphold the defunct and corrupt thinking of a minority of misguided, self-righteous Neo-Puritans and degenerate demagogues who wish nothing but unadulterated destruction on the rest of us.


Swami_Binkinanda
Comment posted March 18, 2010 @ 6:21 pm

Try since Nixon, not since Reagan.


chrisjay
Comment posted March 18, 2010 @ 8:27 pm

If the all Teabaggerz are as Libertarian and anti-goverment as they claim, they should be putting the 'decriminalize drug use' message on their signs, right next to the 'get rid of big gubmint' mantra.


katahdin
Comment posted March 18, 2010 @ 8:47 pm

Finally! The War on Drugs has been as much use as the War on Alcohol was.


ellid
Comment posted March 18, 2010 @ 9:26 pm

Good. We need to legalize and tax pot, if nothing else. It's much less harmful than either alcohol or cigarettes.


How and When to Seek Out Prescription Medicine Help | Current Events: mySpot4news.com
Pingback posted March 19, 2010 @ 1:02 am

[...] White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric « The Washington Independent [...]


Get My Husband Back – Here’s What You Need To Do, And Not Do | Wolfs Article Den, all over the world
Pingback posted March 19, 2010 @ 1:08 am

[...] White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric « The Washington Independent [...]


NOT_AXJ
Comment posted March 19, 2010 @ 12:39 am

Would be much better than “It's the birth certificate, MORAN!”.


MattZ
Comment posted March 19, 2010 @ 1:52 am

Addiction as illness. It's about time the growing prison population was spared. Too many in jail . . .
MZ


dewey
Comment posted March 19, 2010 @ 3:06 am

legalize pot right off the bat billions to be made by taxing this.not only can you smoke it you can can make bio fuels from this plant to run cars ,trucks, industries will have a cheaper power source. clothes levi's jeans years ago where made from hemp.and now other clothes are still made from the plant. this was a legal drug until prohibition when the government made it illegal to have just like booze. but when it ended and they legalized booze again they didn't take into account pot and pot is harmless. does anybody no of a case where someone o.d.ed on pot? never has happened booze kills many people every day! legalize weed make the money on the tax off of it and start also saving some lives from the medical part of this plant. it's way over due people. we sure could use the money for a lot of things maybe an extension of unemployment for the long term unemployed. they say they don't no where to get the money from for the long term unemployed maybe this is an answer to their problem?


katahdin
Comment posted March 19, 2010 @ 3:54 am

We should also legalize the growing of hemp. It would be a renewable resource to use for paper and clothing. Good for the farmers, the environment, and the forests.


BobF
Comment posted March 19, 2010 @ 4:39 am

This story is nothing more than public relations propaganda. Obama says it himself with his refusal to legalize and regulate drugs.

Does the individual own themself or are citizens of this country property of the state? It is a yes or no question with crystal clear implications for drug policy.

Individuals who own themselves get to decide what chemicals they put into their own body. If the citizens are property (ie slaves) of the state then the state gets to decide what chemicals the citizenry is allowed to put into their bodies.

What is it Obama, are the citizens property of the state? If not stop treating them as such and legalize and regulate drugs. The truth is the elite see the citizenry as property, as slaves, of the state, they just won't openly admit that to the public.


ajm8127
Comment posted March 19, 2010 @ 11:43 am

Well said.


houseofnumbers
Comment posted March 19, 2010 @ 6:19 pm

View the new documentary “House of Numbers” to see why questions about this must be raised and deeper issues about HIV and AIDS need to be discussed. Lives are at risk, and this is the first documentary with the worlds foremost authorities highlights the scientific problems with HIV testing, science, statistics, and why there is no cure. If sheds new light on a misunderstood phenomena. GO to bit.ly/bGwuST to see the trailer.

Truth about AIDS as told by Dr. Luc Montagnier. AIDS can be reversed. Nutrition is the answer. bit.ly/bGwuST


John Stone’s Transformation: Back From The Dead | Victor Theriault MD
Pingback posted March 20, 2010 @ 10:26 pm

[...] White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric « The Washington Independent [...]


Beds for Ted | Victor Theriault MD
Pingback posted March 20, 2010 @ 10:48 pm

[...] White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric « The Washington Independent [...]


don’t do drugs | Victor Theriault MD
Pingback posted March 20, 2010 @ 10:49 pm

[...] White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric « The Washington Independent [...]


Was supposedly getting off drugs Obamas biggest accomplishment? | Victor Theriault MD
Pingback posted March 20, 2010 @ 10:50 pm

[...] White House Shifts Away From ‘War on Drugs’ Rhetoric « The Washington Independent [...]


Childer
Comment posted March 28, 2010 @ 10:57 pm

Good for them! Using drugs really is a matter of personal choice, not an excuse for the nanny state to lock up literally millions of people. Drugs are bad but the cure has been worse than the disease.


North Capitol Street » Blog Archive » Drug Czar: ‘War on Drugs’ Largely Unsuccessful
Pingback posted May 12, 2010 @ 6:23 pm

[...] that’s dictated the nation’s drug policy for decades. Attacking the problem from a public health standpoint, Kerlikowske argued, “seems to make a lot more [...]


Is drug addiction similar to alcoholism? « Later On
Pingback posted May 13, 2010 @ 3:02 pm

[...] Mike Lillis in the Washington Independent: Quietly, free of headlines and fanfare, the Obama White House is toning down the bellicose “war-on-drugs” position that’s defined the country’s narcotics policy for the last 25 years. [...]


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.