Days after the attacks on the World Trade Center, William Martin, the Harry and Hazel Chavanne Senior Fellow in Religion and Public Policy and Chavanne Emeritus Professor in Rice’s Department of Sociology, spoke to a gathering of Rice University students, faculty and staff. These are his remarks.
The Texas House of Representatives is considering House Bill 3256, which would legalize syringe exchange programs (SEPs) as a means of reducing the transmission of infectious and communicable diseases among people who inject drugs. On April 25, William Martin, director of the Drug Policy Program, appeared before the Texas House Committee on Public Health to testify in support of HB 3256. Martin also authored an op-ed in TribTalk supporting the establishment of SEPs.
Despite right-wing pushes for the annexation of a significant portion of the West Bank, support remains for a two-state solution to the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yair Hirschfeld, fellow in the Center for the Middle East, analyzes Israel's political environment in this post on the Baker Institute Blog.
Drug policy has experienced an interesting shift recently. Along with legalization of medical and recreational marijuana, many states are also reducing penalties for nonviolent drug offenses and placing greater focus on treatment for drug users. The emphasis on treatment and rehabilitation for drug users is the result of many factors, including recognition that the drug war has not reduced drug use, a desire to reduce the prison population and save money, and a surge in the rate of overdoses from opioid and heroin use. What remains to be seen is whether the current popularity of drug treatment will become a more permanent feature of drug policy. In this Baker Institute Viewpoints series, five experts on drug policy examine the question, “Is the current emphasis on treatment in drug policy a short-term trend or is it here to stay?”
Katharine Neill Harris, William MartinDecember 19, 2014
On May 22, the House of Representatives passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, which specifies the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense and sets the policies under which money (somewhat in excess of $600 billion) will be spent on our country’s defense. However, an amendment added to the bill will keep the Department of Defense from preparing for or performing any military activities that include any construction related to climate change.
Speaking from the historic steps of Old North on the Georgetown University campus on June 25, 2013, President Obama unveiled a detailed plan to address the causes and impacts of climate change. In his words, the president promised, “I’m directing the Environmental Protection Agency to put an end to the limitless dumping of carbon pollution from our power plants, and complete new pollution standards for both new and existing power plants.”
Not quite a year later on June 6, 2014, Gina McCarthy, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, responded by proposing “state-specific rate-based goals for carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector, as well as guidelines for states to follow in developing plans to achieve the state-specific goals.”
The recently released National Climate Assessment documents the accelerating rate of climate change caused by human activities, leading to extensive and damaging impacts. The report represents scientific findings on the state of climate change in the United States, summarized in a way that is accessible to its intended audience: the president, members of Congress, and the American people, writes Ron Sass, fellow in global climate change. Will the U.S. Congress respond actively to the report rather than do nothing, as it has in the past? Sass is not sure, but writes that “it is up to the American people to inform themselves and then vote into power those who have the ability and desire to understand the seriousness of the changing climate and are willing to work together to confront it.”
In this installment of Baker Institute Viewpoints, experts discuss the question, "What does jury nullification of marijuana cases in Texas indicate about the possibility of marijuana legalization?"
