Biden's Support for Pot Prohibition Belies His Recognition of the Harm It Causes
Even as he pardons thousands of marijuana users, the president stubbornly resists legalization.

"We have to hold every drug user accountable," Sen. Joe Biden declared in 1989, "because if there were no drug users, there would be no appetite for drugs, and there would be no market for them." The mass pardon for low-level marijuana offenders that the president announced last week suggests how far he has traveled since his years as a gung-ho drug warrior, even as it demonstrates that he remains out of step with the times.
Biden's decision applies to anyone convicted of simple marijuana possession under the Controlled Substances Act or the District of Columbia Code. He said the pardons will help "thousands of people who were previously convicted of simple possession" and "who may be denied employment, housing or educational opportunities as a result."
As an act of clemency, the blanket pardon is massive. But in the context of a prohibition that has generated nearly 29 million arrests since 1965, it looks less impressive. Rep. Dave Joyce (R–Ohio), co-chair of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, notes that "more than 14 million cannabis-related records at the state and local level continue to preclude Americans from stable housing and gainful employment."
Because simple marijuana possession is rarely prosecuted at the federal level, the vast majority of such cases are beyond the president's clemency powers. But Biden's mercy notably did not extend to people convicted of manufacturing or distributing marijuana under federal law, who still languish in prison or carry the lifelong burden of felony records.
The injustice of that situation is especially striking now that most states treat those federal felonies as legitimate business activities. Depending on the jurisdiction, the same conduct that can send someone to federal prison for years, decades, or even life can make someone else a rich and respected entrepreneur.
By himself, Biden does not have the authority to resolve the untenable conflict between state and federal marijuana laws. But despite his avowed transformation from an anti-drug zealot into a criminal justice reformer, he has stubbornly opposed efforts to repeal the federal ban on marijuana.
That position is contrary to the preferences expressed by more than two-thirds of Americans, including four-fifths of Democrats and half of Republicans. The most Biden is willing to offer them is his rhetorical support for decriminalizing cannabis consumption—a policy that was on the cutting edge of marijuana reform in the 1970s.
Fifty years ago, when less than 20 percent of Americans thought pot should be legal, the Nixon-appointed Shafer Commission recommended that "possession of marihuana for personal use no longer be an offense." President Jimmy Carter endorsed decriminalization in 1977, when he told Congress that "penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself."
Half a century later, Biden has finally come around to that position. "Sending people to jail for possessing marijuana has upended too many lives—for conduct that is legal in many states," he said on Twitter last week.
The same thing is true of sending people to jail for growing or selling marijuana, of course, although that is a point Biden refuses to acknowledge. The moral logic of his distinction between simple possession and other marijuana offenses is hard to follow.
Back in 1989, when Biden was keen to show that Democrats could be even tougher on drugs than Republicans, he correctly identified the source of the problem he was fighting: Americans who defied the law by choosing to consume intoxicants that Congress had arbitrarily proscribed. Without those individual decisions, he noted, there would be no black market to suppress.
Now Biden says marijuana use should not be treated as a crime. But if so, how can helping people use marijuana justify arresting, prosecuting, and imprisoning anyone?
There is no satisfying answer to that question. And even as he recognizes the grievous harm caused by "our failed approach to marijuana," Biden has not attempted to supply one.
© Copyright 2020 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
the president stubbornly resists legalization.
Cut the guy a break. He watched Reefer Madness when it came out in 1936.
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I did not ever think it would even be achievable , however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks, easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail.
For more detail visit this article… https://incomebuzz7.blogspot.com/
I just worked part-time from my apartment for 5 weeks, but I made $30,030. I lost my former business and was soon worn out. Thank goodness, [res-01] I found this employment online and I was able to Haz start working from home right away. This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
EXTRA DETAILS HERE:>>> https://onlinecash26.blogspot.com
Indeed. He watched it on his cell phone while driving a truck and taking down Cornpop.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a (ad-11) lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
Just open the link——————–>>> https://smart.online100.workers.dev/
These pardons are political gimmicks. Dems had majorities and didn't bother protecting women nor legalizing pot. And everything they did do was highly damaging. They are a complete failure of a party.
Failure? They have the Presidency and both houses. They are pushing their Green Raw Deal. Gas prices have doubled and they're spending trillions to raise inflation and wipe out the national debt.
Failure?
Protecting women? From what?
Jazz musicians on pot.
"They (dems) are a complete failure of a party." Define "success"?
All parties accept the political paradigm based on the initiation of force, threats, when when become part of the political system. They may claim they want to "change the system" (Libertarians) but how can you use fraud, corruption, to stop fraud, corruption?
Force begets force.
Non-violent resistance, e.g., boycott of coercive politics, doesn't require using coercive politics. It's only logical.
We all laugh at kooky conspiracy theories (i.e., those that others believe), but I have wondered for years just what's behind the stubborn resistance of the federal government to give an inch on pot.
What's the source of the seemingly overwhelming pressure to keep pot illegal? The law enforcement / judicial / prison establishment has a direct interest, but not all that much to lose from a federal perspective (as most activity is at the state level). It doesn't seem to be the voters; in fact, the pressure is strong enough to suppress the natural tendency of politicians to pander to the electorate, Biden's current example notwithstanding. Inertia might be part of it, perhaps, but it doesn't seem like it's enough.
Who cares enough that they would apply so much pressure to squelch pot legalization (or even softening) across such a large part of the federal government (both legislative and executive)? What's going on?
"What’s going on?"
My guess is that although most Americans think pot should be legal, it is an issue most barely care about so congress is not feeling much pressure to change. Police and prison lobbies are well funded and do apply pressure to maintain status quo. Besides, actually doing something...that's not congress' job.
The FBI and other feds got a taste of jackbootin' with alcohol Prohibition and needed a replacement. The timing is not a coincidence; it took a lot of effort to build up all that powerful machinery and it would have been incredibly inefficient to just tear it down and fire all those cops who had just hit their stride with on-the-job training.
Flip flopping is a cardinal sin in politics, while sticking to your guns is a virtue. Most politicians have had these ingrained so strongly in them for their entire careers that it's a hard rut to get out of.
One angle is that if pot is legal and readily available people will self-medicate with it rather than pursue expensive prescription medications. That might or might not work, but I'd wager Pfizer et all don't want to risk losing any ground.
The alcohol industry also hates it. They've got somewhat of a monopoly on legal inebriation and they don't want to lose out.
Those are two entrenched, very wealthy industries that lobby quite a bit.
Don't ignore the biggest interest group in Washington - POLITICIANS. Legalizing pot is giving up some government power, which reduces the power of politicians in office. Most of them became politicians because of excessive desire for power over other people. Even those who won election by promising "smaller government"; no matter what their campaign promises, politicians will oppose giving up government power and seek to increase government power any time they can muddy the issues enough the voters won't throw them out.
And they have plenty of help in muddying the issues, and even pretending to hold positions the exact opposite of what they really did in office - the news media. Journalists not only love big government because they tend leftist, but are another interest group for increasing government power. Government agencies generate more news and issue many press releases so all a lazy journalist has to do is paraphrase the press releases, while an energetic journalist can make a career out of exposing the holes in those press releases.
“What’s the source of the seemingly overwhelming pressure to keep pot illegal?”
Alcohol lobby. Probably Big Pharma, too.
Add in the police and prison unions/interests and the possible reelection impact of being made out to be soft on crime and there is enough money and power at stake to convince a politician to do the wrong thing.
“ Even as he pardons thousands of marijuana users, the president stubbornly resists legalization.”
It’s almost like this was a political ploy to try and shore up support for Democrats going into the election in a few weeks.
Nah that’s too cynical. I should totally give the Democrats the benefit of the doubt that they really do care about drug users in prison. And women’s health. And LGB issues. And the environment.
After leaving my previous job 12 months ago, i've had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me.They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $4500.Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.
Read all about it here.........>>> OnlineCareer1
"The moral logic of his distinction between simple possession and other marijuana offenses is hard to follow."
You can't distinguish between hurting yourself and hurting other people?
You can't distinguish between supplying what other people voluntarily ask for and forcing unwanted busybody morals on them?
If you really believed what you say, you'd want to punish users who didn't squeal on their suppliers, since you think suppliers are a dastardly evil.
Fuck off, hypocrite slaver.
He is the parent of a fucked up drug addict. He would have to take blame for how he raised his kid if he couldn't blame the evil demonweed.
If he were serious about this he could also order all the federal agencies to stop caring about it. No pre-employment tests, no tests on-the-job unless you're operating heavy equipment, etc. He talks about the negative impact pot prohibition has on employment opportunities, why not do this?
He could do that right now with no resistance of any kind, it would actually be an appropriate use of executive order authority. As others have noted, talking about it without actually doing anything is a stunt.
This is one of the better stunts though, it might actually do some good at some point. I don't want to look a gift horse in the mouth, but he could do so much more if he actually understood the problem and cared to solve it.
After leaving my previous job 12 months ago, i've had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me.They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $4500.Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.
Read all about it here.........>>> OnlineCareer1
Really? What "harm" does pot prohibition actually cause?
Well if the Supreme Court wasn't such a hack they'd just rule that the 'feds' have no authority to regulate food and drugs.
F'En Nazi's (National Socialists).