Why Is the Center for American Progress Enabling Obama's Drug War Lies?

Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske will speak at the Center for American Progress for an hour tomorrow morning about President Barack Obama’s awful drug control strategy. Here’s how CAP is advertising the event:

Forty years after President Richard Nixon first declared that drug abuse was "public enemy number one," the Obama administration has announced an end to the so-called "war on drugs" approach to drug policy. Recognizing that America will never be able to arrest its way out of the drug problem, the administration's newly announced drug policy strategy shifts away from a law enforcement only approach to a drug policy recognizing that America's drug problem is a public health issue—not just a criminal one. It outlines significant reforms aimed at treating drug addiction as a chronic disease instead of a “moral” failure.

Even though overall drug use is down, and the U.S. prison population declined for the first time in 40 years, more than 7 million people remain under the supervision of the criminal justice system. Of these, more than 2 million are behind bars. Making matters worse, drug-induced deaths now claim more lives than gun violence, and prescription drug abuse has been declared an epidemic. Will these reforms really break the vicious cycle of drug use, crime, incarceration, and rearrest in America?

Members of the Obama administration have been saying the same thing since 2009, when Kerlikowske first told the Wall Street Journal that the “war on drugs” was over: 

"Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country."

Mr. Kerlikowske's comments are a signal that the Obama administration is set to follow a more moderate—and likely more controversial—stance on the nation's drug problems. Prior administrations talked about pushing treatment and reducing demand while continuing to focus primarily on a tough criminal-justice approach.

Three years later, the most controversial thing about Obama’s drug policy is that it’s no different than that of George W. Bush.

Federal drug prosecutions continue apace; federal mandatory minimum sentences are still in effect; the DEA and the FBI are still cracking down on medical marijuana dispensaries and growers; the bulk of the federal drug budget is still dedicated to putting people in cages.

The administration has so few reforms worth touting in the post-drug-war drug war that you’ve probably heard them both several times: It reduced (but did not eliminate) the sentencing disparity for crack cocaine and regular cocaine, and it's encouraged the use of drug courts over regular courts. 

That. Is. It. The Obama administration has not ended the war on drugs. It has not even modestly (certainly not radically) changed its approach to the war on drugs, as evidenced by former ONDCP advisor Kevin Sabet's statement that the 2012 strategy (which CAP claims ends the drug war) is a continuation of its 2010 and 2011 drug strategies.

Not to mention that if Obama was truly doing something novel on drug policy reform, you'd think drug policy folks would be thanking him. Instead, the Marijuana Policy Project called the 2012 report "appalling" and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition said "the president needs to put his money where his mouth is." 

That the Center for American Progress would herald the Obama administration for doing something it absolutely has not done isn't really a surprise. As an institution, CAP’s approach to the drug war is largely dependent on what party is in the White House. Here it is, in 2007, encouraging the Bush administration to do more drug interdiction in Colombia; here it is, in April 2009, calling Bush’s drug interdiction in Mexico a failure: 

It is difficult to see how the U.S. “war on drugs”—first described as such by President Richard Nixon in 1969—has done anything to reduce the power of drug trafficking organizations in the Americas, let alone reduce the demand for drugs in the United States.

A year later, CAP was put in the awkward position of having to defend a Bush policy that it had attacked, but that Obama was continuing. CAP's Michael Werz provided plenty of cover in an interview

Discussions on legalization of "soft drugs" like marijuana in order to weaken the illegal market, or the ban on the sale of weapons to combat smuggling, are problematic for many Democrats in the U.S. and collide with fierce opposition and attacks from Republicans. So [we] "can not expect big changes in the next two years (before the next presidential election)," Werz said.

To recap: The Obama administration has not deviated from the drug war policies of George W. Bush beyond changing (but not eliminating) the sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and regular cocaine. During that same three-year period, however, CAP has graduated from saying that the “big changes” will come in Obama’s second term, to saying that the big changes have already happened. 

UPDATE: Read about Kerlikowske's visit to CAP. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • JW||

    Why Is the Center for American Progress Enabling Obama's Drug War Lies?

    Because they're craven, mendacious fucks and little more than a front for the DNC?

  • Gladstone||

    Word. Also why would Obama want to end the WOD when they support the the War on Tobacco, The War on Fat, etc.?

  • ||

    Question answered. Next?

  • Hugh Akston||

    This. Progress doesn't mean "movement toward a society characterized by less suffering and more prosperity." It means "vote TEAM BLUE sheep!"

  • ||

    Master Shake: Oh, you never heard of a check before? Oh, me so sorry. Maybe you're in the wrong business, and maybe immigration would like to know about this.

    Clerk: Good, 'cause you know what? I'm American.

    Master Shake: Well I'm not, but when I become one, maybe then I'll legally buy a weapon and we won't have to vote you out of office, will we scumbag?!?

  • ||

    ... Center for American Progress ...

    It's a Center, and it's in America.

    That gives it one up on the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

  • Gladstone||

    Why Is the Center for American Progress Enabling Obama's Drug War Lies?

    Because their idea of American Progress is similar to Obama's?

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Yet another entry for the very very thick file entitled "But the two political parties are soooo different!"

  • Old Mexican||

    As an institution, CAP's approach to the drug war is largely dependent on what party is in the White House.


    Which should be no surprise, as pretty much all post-modernist fuckers determine their ethics by looking at whose butt sits on the presidential/premier's chair.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    The Center for American Progress enables Obama's lies on everything else, so why should this be any different?

  • Broseph of Invention||

    It's "not just a criminal one" - so it still is a criminal issue, but now the state gets to apply its superior problem solving skills to the additional health aspect as well! No job AND no dignity!

  • ||

    The administration ... reduced (but did not eliminate) the sentencing disparity for crack cocaine and regular cocaine

    The "Administration" did this? Really? And it wasn't a near(?) unanimous act of Congress?

    FFS Riggs, why so eager to give them this credit? I smell a Weigel.

  • Enough About Palin||

    GOD DAMN YOU TO HELL!

  • John Thacker||

    The "War on Drugs" is over in exactly the same way as the "War on Terror" is.

    I.e., they're going to change the name but continue all the policies.

  • Enough About Palin||

    The KMAOD.

  • ||

    Teh War for teh Childrenz?

  • SIV||

    Why can't progressives just be satisfied with their "War on Christmas"?

  • Hyperion||

    You mean Winter Holiday, right, comrade?

  • Enough About Palin||

    Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske will speak at the Center for American Progress for an hour tomorrow morning about President Barack Obama's awful drug control strategy and then go out for drinks.

  • Anomalous||

    CAP is the Center for Anal Prolapse.

  • Hyperion||

    Hmm, let's see, Center for America Progress... Progress, as in progressive? Yes, as in progressive. Why would progressives be against the WOD? They are the original drug warriors afterall, they are the ones who pushed through prohibition of alcohol. So why are we asking why they are not anti-prohibition? They were never anti-prohibition.

  • chris3145||

    so whats the government plan for people like me who responsibly use and enjoy cannabis?..... Jail
    Am wondering something else I've been using cannabis for 17yrs; when am I supposed to move on to heroine? Cocaine?
    when am I supposed to get these respiratory illnesses I keep reading about? Like a cough?
    I fight mixed martial arts so someone please tell me when am supposed to get lethargic and unmotivated?
    wish I was as unmotivated as, steve jobs, sir richard branson, ted turner, michael phelps, or mayor bloomberg.
    Prohibition of cannabis has nothing to do with kids, health or society its about the need to control and limit options and vises to a pre-approved list. That's not freedom the tyranny.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I fail to see how forcing people into treatment programs under threat of jail is much better than just putting them in jail.

  • ||

    Because then, just like with income taxes, they have a choice. It's voluntary!

  • ||

    You fail to see it because you arent cashing all the additional checks this will bring in for the court, the cops, and the treatment centers.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement