Research Library

Drug Policy Program director Bill Martin summarizes the scientific and fiscal evidence supporting the efficacy of syringe exchange programs and outlines a framework for public policies to deal with this aspect of drug use and abuse.

There is broad consensus in the medical and scientific community that substance abuse should be treated as a medical and public health problem, not a crime. The authors recommend a sensible pivot from failed policies of drug prohibition toward a realistic approach to drug use.

Using charts, figures and graphs of this survey data originally created by former career intelligence analyst Brian C. Bennett and updated by the Drug Policy Program, this issue brief offers an overview of drug use trends in America over the last four decades. The brief is part of a larger online project chronicling the pattern of the use and abuse of individual drugs over (in most cases) more than 40 years.

This downloadable PDF is a compilation of an extensive collection of charts that present the findings of decades of massive government survey data on drug use in the United States.

The core strategies of the U.S. War on Drugs are eradication, interdiction and incarceration. After a 40-year and trillion-dollar effort, illicit drugs remain available to meet a remarkably stable demand. Drawing on decades of government-gathered and publicly available data, William Martin, director of the Drug Policy Program, and contributing expert Jerry Epstein contend that U.S. drug policy is premised on incorrect assumptions, aims at the wrong targets and can never succeed. But because these data run counter to a century of anti-drug propaganda, they play only a small role in public policy, mass-media presentation and popular perception. In this policy report, Martin and Epstein call for a reexamination of the data and sweeping revision of existing strategies. They urge formation of a politically independent national scientific commission, its members chosen by the National Academy of Sciences, in consultation with the NIH and the Department of Health and Human Services, to facilitate open examination and honest consideration of alternatives to current failed or flawed policies.

William Martin, director of the Drug Policy Program, and Katharine A. Neill, Alfred C. Glassell, III Postdoctoral Fellow in Drug Policy, testify about the likelihood of marijuana being used as a gateway to harder drugs and the effects of decriminalization on teen use rates before the Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee.

In 1972, a National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, comprising establishment figures chosen mostly by President Richard Nixon himself, issued a report that declared that “neither the marihuana user nor the drug itself can be said to constitute a danger to public safety” and recommended that Congress and state legislatures decriminalize the use and casual distribution of marijuana and seek means other than prohibition to discourage use. President Nixon ignored the report and Congress declined to consider its recommendations, but during the 40-plus years since its publication, at least 37 states have acted to refashion a crazy-quilt collection of prohibitions, nearly always in the direction favored by the commission. The specifics vary by state, but most reform legislation has followed one of three formulas: decriminalization of marijuana possession, legalization of marijuana for medical use, or legalization of marijuana for adult recreational use. In this issue brief, authors Katharine Neill and William Martin examine the facts and fears surrounding each of these options.

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?”

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?"