Research Library

In this report, the authors analyze the potential benefits of expanding jail diversion programs for low-level drug offenses in Harris County.

A new White House initiative to address rising U.S. heroin use will increase funds to pinpoint the sources of heroin as well as hot spots for drug overdoses. Baker Institute Blog: http://bit.ly/1h0W7r2

While the recent fiscal troubles in Greece have received much attention, the U.S. fiscal position is hardly comparable to that of Greece. However, the United States is experiencing, and will continue to experience, one of the fundamental economic costs of relatively large and persistent deficits.

Mexico Center director Tony Payan testifies before a House subcommittee on the major threats to the implementation of Mexico's energy reforms.

Nonresident fellow Gary Hale, former chief of intelligence in the Houston Field Division of the Drug Enforcement Administration, pulls no punches in a blog on the escape of Mexican drug lord Chapo Guzman.

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.

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?”