Marijuana Legalization

RSS Feed for this category

Washington State Chooses Mark Kleiman Firm as Marijuana Consultant

The state of Washington has chosen its official marijuana consultant as it marches boldly forward toward implementing the voters' decision to legalize marijuana at the polls last November. The State Liquor Control Board, which is charged with overseeing the nascent legal marijuana business, announced Monday that it had selected a Massachusetts-based firm headed by academic drug policy analyst Mark Kleiman.

Mark Kleiman (ncjrs.org via wikimedia.org)
The firm, Botec Analysis Corporation, has been in existence since the mid-1980s and has won contracts to evaluate government programs and done consulting on drugs, crime, and public health. Botec advised the Office of National Drug Control Policy on demand reduction programs in the early 1990s and has studied efforts to suppress heroin dealing in Lynn, Massachusetts, among other projects.

Kleiman, a professor public policy at UCLA, has written a number of books on drug and criminal justice policy, including coauthorship of last year's primer, Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know. Some of his stands over the years, including the contention that states couldn't legalize marijuana because the federal government wouldn't allow it, have irked drug reformers, and some reacted with skepticism to news of the appointment.

Tom Angell, chairman of Marijuana Majority, told the Associated Press Kleiman needed to answer some questions. "You might ask him if he's either changed his mind or if he intends to advise the state on undermining the will of the voters," Angell said. Kleiman in turn responded on his blog.

The Liquor Control board sifted through more than 90 applications for the consultant position, and Botec outscored all comers. At this point, the decision is provisional; rejected applicants can challenge the selection, but if no one challenges or any such challenges fail, Botec is it.

Botec's job will be to advise the state on how build a newly legal industry from scratch. That's going to include such nuts-and-bolts issues on how many growers and retail outlets there should be, how products should be packaged, testing requirements, and even store hours of operation.

Meanwhile, all parties concerned are waiting for the federal shoe to drop. Stay tuned. This is going to be interesting.

Olympia, WA
United States

Kleiman Addresses His Prop 19 Editorial

Prof. Kleiman has responded to concerns raised over his remarks during the Prop 19 campaign in California, predicting that Prop 19 would cause prices to plummet and that the feds would have had to intervene in ways going beyond how they've dealt with the medical marijuana trade. He doesn't see that happening in Washington State; he thinks it may well happen in Colorado. He called it a "fair question."

Seattle skyline
Kleiman did not address the argument I raised in my post last night for why I doubt his analysis. I reasoned that continuing federal prohibition would have prevented Prop 19 from causing the kind of price drop from occurring in California, in the same way that the extensive medical marijuana industry hasn't seen price drops -- because it's too risky to create the industrial level grows and distribution systems that would be needed to achieve that kind of price drop -- a point raised by his coauthors during recent talks and fora.

I'm not making anything out of the fact that Kleiman hasn't addressed that point, by the way -- I don't know that he's read my post yet, and that particular point did not appear in the mainstream media articles he surely did read. Nor do I think that much should be made of it in 2013. But that's how I see that particular point, and therefore how I view that two and a half year old editorial.

I'm still cautiously optimistic, after reading the response, maybe even a little "excited" (I confess) as Kleiman wrote that he and his colleagues are feeling. Some of my colleagues have commented, and I tend to agree, that a cautious approach to implementing the Washington initiative is what will have the best chance of threading the federal needle and moving legalization forward -- especially in Washington, where the law allows for fewer licensed sales outlets and doesn't have home growing as Colorado does. And Washington or parts of it may provide our best shot at getting something resembling meaningful federal cooperation.

Some of my colleagues probably disagree with me, and many undoubtedly feel we should be wary. As a practical matter, I agree that we should be wary -- it's our responsibility as advocates to be wary, whoever the state decides to bring in. But it's also not like we get to decide who does the work on this -- our direct power to influence this ended on election day -- and I wasn't really expecting it to be someone from the all-out legalization camp.

As I wrote last night, time will tell -- about Kleiman et al's work, and about the future of I-502 and marijuana legalization in Washington State.

Location: 
WA
United States

Marijuana Legalization Bill Introduced in Nevada

On Monday, Nevada became the latest state to see a marijuana legalization bill filed this year. Assemblyman Joe Hogan (D-Las Vegas) introduced Assembly Bill 402, which would allow people 21 and over to possess up to one ounce of marijuana and would set up a system of state regulation and taxation of marijuana commerce.

Nevada now joins Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Oregon as states where legalization bills have been or will be filed. A legalization bill died earlier this year in Hawaii, and one died last week in New Hampshire, but another New Hampshire legalization bill is still alive.

The Nevada bill expressly does not allow driving while impaired, does not require employers to accept marijuana use, and limits legalization to those 21 and over.

Marijuana has already been legalized by voters in Colorado and Washington, and the Alaska courts have recognized a privacy right allowing for the possession of small amounts of marijuana in one's home. Marijuana remains illegal under federal law.

Hogan told the Las Vegas Review-Journal he introduced the bill because of what he called the persecution of young people.

"I think it's better than chasing young kids around the neighborhoods, endlessly, and damaging them," he said. "We've been wasting terrible amounts of money on these completely unsuccessful law enforcement techniques. I think it's time to get serious, get it fixed and move on."

Hogan said that marijuana legalization would raise badly needed money for the state's education system. It envisions excise taxes on both wholesale and retail sales of marijuana and marijuana products.

"There's enough tax money in this line of products to properly and fully support education in the state of Nevada, which we have failed to do for a number of years," Hogan said.

The bill is the brainchild of Dr. Steven Frye, a retired Las Vegas psychiatrist and marijuana legalization activist. Frye told the Review-Journal legalization could generate as much as $500 million a year in tax revenues.

"It's a big tourist issue," he said. "And we create green jobs in Nevada growing, processing and selling it."

Carson City, NV
United States

Mark Kleiman Wins Washington Marijuana Legalization Implementation Contract

Prominent policy analyst and UCLA professor Mark Kleiman has won Washington State's consulting contract on I-502 implementation. According to Northwest Public Radio, "Washington's Liquor Control Board wants consulting help in four areas: marijuana industry knowledge, plant quality and testing, regulation, and to the extent possible, projecting how many people will use pot now that it's legal."

Mark Kleiman (ncjrs.org via Wikipedia)
Reformers have had a "love/hate" relationship with Kleiman over the years. He supports some of our issues, like marijuana legalization -- sort of. He acknowledges the impact of prohibition in increasing the harmfulness of addictive drugs to their users, but states as nearly a fact the assumption that overall harm would go up with legalization nonetheless -- while admonishing the rest of us not to make assumptions about the positive effects of even just marijuana legalization. He does pretty clearly want to make criminal justice less punishing, and wrote a book about that. Another book Kleiman's co-authored, which we've promoted on this web site and which Phil complimented in a book review, is "Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know." (You can order a complimentary copy from us if making a donation of $35 or more.)

A quote that caused some consternation among reformers is one he gave to the LA Times during California's 2010 Prop 19 campaign:

"There's one problem with legalizing, taxing and regulating cannabis at the state level: It can't be done. The federal Controlled Substances Act makes it a felony to grow or sell cannabis. California can repeal its own marijuana laws, leaving enforcement to the feds. But it can't legalize a federal felony. Therefore, any grower or seller paying California taxes on marijuana sales or filing pot-related California regulatory paperwork would be confessing, in writing, to multiple federal crimes. And that won't happen."
 

I think the quote deserves some criticism. Medical marijuana provision is also a federal felony, under the same law Kleiman cited with regard to legalization of marijuana. Kleiman's arguments in the piece -- that the feds can afford to largely ignore the medical marijuana industry only because prices remain high, and because regulation of medicine is traditionally a state matter -- are unpersuasive to me. Administrations in power during the medical marijuana years have not suggested that medical marijuana is a state matter; even Obama's inconsistently-respected "not a priority" position about going after businesses operating in compliance with state law, made clear that they can go after any medical marijuana business if they think it's in the federal interest to do so. And Kleiman or his coauthors during book talks and related fora I've attended have argued that we don't know what will happen to marijuana prices following state legalization in the face of continuing federal prohibition. One reason they've argued it might not is that federal prohibition makes it too risky to set up the very large scale growing and distribution infrastructures that are needed to bring down prices in the way that we'd predict from legalization at all governmental levels.

Still, I count myself among the optimistic when it comes to Kleiman's work for Washington State. Kleiman prefers a very non-commercial form of legalization to any big sales model. But he's also suggested the federal government allow the Washington and Colorado experiments with legalization to take place. And whatever quotes I might take issue with from time to time, Kleiman is a very serious academic who's written extensively about the issue; and he's not a drug warrior, even if his support for legalization, even of just marijuana, tends toward the tepid. I expect he'll do the best job he can on this very high profile assignment -- that assignment being to advise on the implementation of legalization, not on whether it's a good idea. (I also saw Kleiman wearing a Students for Sensible Drug Policy t-shirt at the Takoma Park Folk Festival one year. :-)) I can think of plenty of people who might have been in the running for the job, who would make me a lot more nervous than Kleiman. But time will tell.

Anyway, along with some articles linked here, CNN has pitched an interview with "Washington State's New Pot Czar" on "Erin Burnett OutFront" tomorrow (Tuesday) night. Perhaps the interview will provide some indicators of where Kleiman might go with this.

Vermont Marijuana Legalization Bill Filed

Vermont has become the latest state to see a marijuana legalization bill filed this year. House Bill 499, "An Act Relating to Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana," was introduced to the House and assigned to the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.

The bill is sponsored by Reps. Susan Davis (P-Washington), David Deen (D-Westminster), James Masland (D-Thetford), William Stevens (I-Shoreham) and Teo Zagar (D-Barnard).

It would allow people 21 and over to possess up to two ounces of marijuana and grow up to three plants. The bill also legalizes the possession of pot paraphernalia. It would also "create a regulatory structure for the wholesale and retail sale of marijuana that includes licensing and oversight by the Department of Liquor Control." The bill envisages a $50 per ounce excise tax on commercial marijuana sales.

People who possess more than two ounces or three plants or who sell marijuana outside regulated commercial channels would still be subject to criminal penalties.

And the bill would allow industrial hemp production in accordance with existing state law "regardless of whether federal regulations have been adopted."

Colorado and Washington freed the weed in November, and marijuana legalization bills have been or will be introduced this year in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Oregon. A legalization bill died earlier this year in Hawaii, and one died this week in New Hampshire, but another New Hampshire legalization bill is still alive.

Montpelier, VT
United States

New Hampshire Marijuana Legalization Bill Defeated

A bill to legalize marijuana in New Hampshire is dead after a House vote Wednesday. The measure was defeated on a vote of 239-122 with no debate. Democrats supported the bill on a roughly two-to-one margin, while Republicans opposed it by roughly the same margin.

The vote against the bill came after the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee voted 12-8 last month not to pass the measure.

The bill, House Bill 337, would have removed marijuana from the state's criminal code, effectively ending marijuana prohibition in the Granite State, but did not contain any provisions for taxation and regulation of cultivation and sales.

Another marijuana legalization bill, House Bill 492, is still alive, but is stuck in the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee with no vote scheduled. That bill would allow people to grow up to six plants and sets up a scheme to tax and regulate marijuana commerce.

Concord, NH
United States

Portland (ME) Greens in Marijuana Legalization Referendum

There is a marijuana legalization bill pending in the Maine legislature, but some activists in the state's largest city aren't waiting for elected officials to get the ball rolling. The Portland Green Independent Committee was set to deliver a request for a municipal legalization petition drive at the city clerk's office late last week.

"We are still waiting to hear back from corporation counsel," committee chair Tom MacMillan told the Portland Daily Sun. "We are going to begin collecting signatures soon on a citizens' initiative to legalize marijuana in the city of Portland."

Once the clerk certifies the petition, organizers will have 180 days to gather 1,500 valid voter signatures. If the signatures are approved, a citywide vote could happen as early as November.

The final language has yet to be approved, but the Greens are expected to call for the legalization of the possession of up to 2 ½ ounces, as well as the possession of pot-smoking paraphernalia. Under current Maine law, possession of up to 1 ¼ ounces is decriminalized, punishable as a civil infraction with a maximum fine of $250.

While Rep. Diane Russell (D-Portland) has prefiled a legalization bill (LR-21), the Greens aren't counting on it passing this year, and they aren't waiting to find out if it does.

"Any progress that we've seen on this has come from voters," Green Independent city councilor David Marshall told the Portland Press Herald Tuesday. And while Maine already has decriminalization, "It's still a crime. It still affects people's lives."

The timeline now is up to city officials, the Greens said. "We should probably see some of those petitions on the streets next week," Marshall predicted.

Portland, ME
United States

US, International Drug Warriors Attack State Marijuana Legalization [FEATURE]

As the nation awaits the Obama administration's response to marijuana legalization votes in Colorado and Washington, Tuesday saw a two-pronged attack on the whole notion. On the one hand, former drug czars and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) heads lined up to urge the administration to act now to strangle legalization in its crib, while on the other, the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) warned that allowing states to legalize would violate international drug control treaties.

"S.O.S." web site celebrates defeat of Hawaii marijuana legalization bill
Legalization supporters rejected the attacks, comparing the ex-DEA chiefs to Prohibition agents seeking to justify their efforts and dismissing the global anti-drug bureaucrats as largely irrelevant.

In a joint letter under the auspices of the anti-drug reform group Save Our Society From Drugs, eight former heads of the DEA and four former heads of the Office of National Drug Control Policy urged the federal government to act now to nullify the votes in Colorado and Washington. The same group similarly called on Attorney General Holder to speak out against those state initiatives last September, but he failed to do so.

Holder, who said last week his decision will be "coming soon," was scheduled to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday. The retired drug fighters urged senators to press him on the issue.

Holder's actual appearance, though, was anticlimactic. He told the committee only that he hoped, again, to be able to announce a policy "relatively soon."

That prompted committee chair Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) to hand out some advice of his own. "If you're going to be -- because of budget cuts -- prioritizing matters, I would suggest there are more serious things than minor possession of marijuana, but it's a personal view," Leahy told Holder, adding that more states were sure to follow in Colorado's and Montana's footsteps.

That's not what the drug warriors were telling Holder.

"We, the undersigned, strongly support the continued enforcement of federal law prohibiting the cultivation, distribution, sale, possession, and use of marijuana -- a dangerous and addictive drug which already has severe harmful effects on American society," they wrote. "We also respectfully request your committee at its March 6 hearing to encourage Attorney General Eric Holder to adhere to long-standing federal law and policy in this regard, and to vigorously enforce the Controlled Substances Act (CSA)."

The signatories suggested that senators ask Holder is he still believed in the Supremacy Clause when it comes to conflicts between state and federal law and why he isn't enforcing the Controlled Substances Act in Colorado and Washington. They also suggested asking him "what is being done about our international drug treaty obligations," noting that they require the federal government to enforce marijuana prohibition.

And speaking of international drug treaty obligations, the INCB, which is charged with ensuring that countries live up to them, also criticized marijuana legalization as it issued its 2012 Annual Report.

Noting the popular votes in favor of legalization in Colorado and Washington, INCB reiterated that "the legalization of cannabis for non-medical and non-scientific purposes would be in contravention to the provisions of the 1961 Convention as amended by the 1972 Protocol."

The INCB also took a shot at medical marijuana, noting that "the control requirements that have been adopted in the 17 states in question and in the District of Columbia under the 'medical' cannabis schemes fall short of the requirements set forth in articles 23 and 28 of the 1961 Convention as amended by the 1972 Protocol."

And, also expressing concerns about decriminalization moves, INCB "requests that the government of the United States take effective measures to ensure the implementation of all control measures for cannabis plants and cannabis, as required under the 1961 Convention, in all states and territories falling within its legislative authority."

The two-pronged attack excited a quick response from drug reform groups and at least one Democratic congressman.

"As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once observed, states are the laboratories of democracy. The federal government should concentrate on shutting down meth labs -- not the laboratories of democracy. The people of Colorado and Washington voted to implement these laws, and the federal government should respect their will. States have a right to determine their own possession laws," said Rep. Steven Cohen (D-TN) in a Tuesday statement.

"If the people of Colorado and Washington want to legalize small amounts of marijuana, that is their decision. It is arrogant of these former DEA chiefs to encourage the President to nullify these laws," Cohen continued. "The fact that these former DEA chiefs are so focused on marijuana possession is why we have lost the war on drugs. The war should be on heroin, meth, crack, cocaine and unauthorized use of prescription drugs -- not marijuana possession."

[Ed: We don't think war on those other drugs is a good thing either -- to the extent at least that "war" means arresting and incarcerating people. Not that we want underground meth labs all over the place. But meth is going to be supplied by someone in some way, despite enforcement efforts, so long as there are people who want to use it. We're losing the "war on drugs" because it is prohibition based, and prohibition doesn't work. The government's focus on marijuana enforcement only highlights the sheer senseless of it all. -DB]

"The former DEA chiefs' statement can best be seen as a self-interested plea to validate the costly and failed policies they championed but that Americans are now rejecting at the ballot box," said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance. "They obviously find it hard to admit that -- at least with respect to marijuana -- their legacy will be much the same as a previous generation of agents who once worked for the federal Bureau of Prohibition enforcing the nation’s alcohol prohibition laws."

"The war on drugs has been a failure by every measure," said Neill Franklin, the executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. "After more than a trillion dollars spent over the last forty years, we have nothing to show for it except more violence on our streets, the fracturing of community trust in the police and overflowing prison populations. Still, use has not significantly declined. It's unfortunate the DEA heads can't admit this failure. As someone who gave three decades of his life fighting this 'war' on the ground, I can tell you that from that perspective, this policy was dead on arrival."

"It is not surprising that these ex-heads of the marijuana prohibition industry are taking action to maintain the policies that kept them and their colleagues in business for so long," said Mason Tvert, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project and an official proponent of the Colorado initiative. "Their desire to keep marijuana sales in an underground market favors the drug cartels, whereas the laws approved in Colorado and Washington favor legitimate, tax-paying businesses. Marijuana prohibition has failed, and voters are ready to move on and adopt a more sensible approach. It's time for these former marijuana prohibitionists to move on too."

As for INCB, it essentially plays the role of toothless nag, said Eric Sterling, the executive director of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation. It is mandated by the United Nations to report on adherence to global anti-drug treaties, but has only the power to hector, not to enforce.

"The INCB has no power other than to issue reports," he said. "It can't issue indictments, it can't call for a resolution in some other body to condemn a nation. It's strictly hortatory, and for many years, it's bordered on the preposterous in the condemnations it's made. The INCB thinks that nations ought to suppress music or motion pictures or books that 'send the wrong message' about drugs. In that sense, it is completely out of step with Western Civilization. They would reject art and music and probably science if it were contrary to their abstinence focus on drug use."

Not only is the INCB relatively powerless, it is largely irrelevant, Sterling said.

"In our American drug policy, they have only negligible influence," he said. "I don't think that in any state capital, the INCB's comments carry any political weight. I don't think in most journals of opinion, their observations are important. Whether their comments have significance in other countries would be harder for me to assess. I tend to believe they are not that important," he said.

"Most people don't even know what it is or what its power is or what it said, including most members of Congress and their staffs," Sterling continued. "The INCB is obscure. Maybe some former DEA administrators might want to refer to them in a press release, but nobody else is going to pay any attention."

The forces of opposition to marijuana legalization are lining up to put pressure on the Obama administration. It shouldn't listen to them, said DPA's Nadelmann.

"President Obama and Attorney General Holder really need to allow Washington and Colorado officials to implement the new laws in ways that protect public safety and health while respecting the will of those states’ voters," he said. "At this point, insisting on blind obeisance to strict interpretation of federal drug laws will only serve the interests of criminals who want to keep this industry underground and law enforcement officials who want to justify their legacy."

And the wait for clarity from Washington continues...

Oregon Marijuana Legalization Bill Filed

A bill that would legalize marijuana possession and create a state-regulated system of legal marijuana commerce was introduced in the Oregon legislature Monday. That makes Oregon the eighth state to either see such a bill this year or have one pending. The others are Hawaii (already dead), Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

House Bill 3371, also known as the Control, Regulation and Taxation of Cannabis Act was introduced by the House Committee on Revenue. As of Friday, it had yet to be assigned to a committee and was at the Speaker's desk.

The bill would legalize the possession of up to six plants and 24 ounces of marijuana "on the premises" of non-commercial home grows. The bill does not otherwise set possession limits, but leaves them to the Oregon Health Authority to regulate.

The bill would also direct various state agencies to regulate, control, and tax marijuana commerce, with the tax set at $35 an ounce. Marijuana commerce would include "edibles." The bill would also legalize industrial hemp.

Last year, a marijuana legalization initiative, Measure 80, was defeated at the polls, gaining 46.3% of the popular vote. Oregon activists are currently debating whether to move forward with another initiative in 2014 or wait for the next presidential election in 2016. [Ed: Presidential years are considered more favorable with respect to the type of voter turnout.] But Oregonians need not have to wait even until 2014, if the legislature acts on HB 3371.

Salem, OR
United States

Slim Majority Favors Marijuana Legalization in California Poll

A Field poll of California voters released Wednesday had support for marijuana legalization at 54%, the highest number ever for a Field poll. Only 43% opposed legalization. The same poll reported that two-thirds of Californians want the federal government to end its crackdown on medical marijuana providers.

While the 54% in favor of legalization is the highest ever for Field, it is not high enough to make potential initiative organizers or contributors feel sanguine. The conventional wisdom about initiative experts is that they should be polling at 60% or above at the beginning of the campaign. However, it will be a few years before Californians are likely to vote on legalization again, and support for legalization has only continued to increase in recent years.

Proposition 19 in 2010 typically polled in the 50s in the run-up to the election last year before losing on election day with 47% of the vote. That year, the final Field poll to ask about marijuana legalization, four months ahead of the election, had support at 50%, but as is typical in initiative campaigns, support wavered at the end.

This week's Field poll found support for legalization at 60% or above for San Francisco Bay Area residents (66%), single people (64%), men (62%), voters under 40 (60%), and African- and Asian-Americans (60%).

Support was lowest among Latinos (41%), Republicans (42%), voters 65 and older (43%), and women (46%).

Californians strongly support their medical marijuana system, the poll found. In addition to the 67% calling on the federal government to end its crackdown, 72% said they favor the state's medical marijuana law. That figure, however, was down two points from 2004 and 2010 Field polls.

Some 58% of respondents would allow dispensaries in their communities. Support for dispensaries was highest in the Bay Area (65%) and lowest in "other Southern California" (San Diego, the Inland Empire and Central Valley).

CA
United States

Drug War Issues

Criminal JusticeAsset Forfeiture, Collateral Sanctions (College Aid, Drug Taxes, Housing, Welfare), Court Rulings, Drug Courts, Due Process, Felony Disenfranchisement, Incarceration, Policing (2011 Drug War Killings, 2012 Drug War Killings, 2013 Drug War Killings, Arrests, Eradication, Informants, Interdiction, Lowest Priority Policies, Police Corruption, Police Raids, Profiling, Search and Seizure, SWAT/Paramilitarization, Task Forces, Undercover Work), Probation or Parole, Prosecution, Reentry/Rehabilitation, Sentencing (Alternatives to Incarceration, Clemency and Pardon, Crack/Powder Cocaine Disparity, Death Penalty, Decriminalization, Drug Free Zones, Mandatory Minimums, Rockefeller Drug Laws, Sentencing Guidelines)CultureArt, Celebrities, Counter-Culture, Music, Poetry/Literature, Television, TheaterDrug UseParaphernalia, ViolenceIntersecting IssuesCollateral Sanctions (College Aid, Drug Taxes, Housing, Welfare), Violence, Border, Budgets/Taxes/Economics, Business, Civil Rights, Driving, Economics, Education (College Aid), Employment, Environment, Families, Free Speech, Gun Policy, Human Rights, Immigration, Militarization, Money Laundering, Pregnancy, Privacy (Search and Seizure, Drug Testing), Race, Religion, Science, Sports, Women's IssuesMarijuana PolicyGateway Theory, Hemp, Marijuana -- Personal Use, Marijuana Industry, Medical MarijuanaMedicineMedical Marijuana, Science of Drugs, Under-treatment of PainPublic HealthAddiction, Addiction Treatment (Science of Drugs), Drug Education, Drug Prevention, Drug-Related AIDS/HIV or Hepatitis C, Harm Reduction (Methadone & Other Opiate Maintenance, Needle Exchange, Overdose Prevention, Safe Injection Sites)Source and Transit CountriesAndean Drug War, Coca, Hashish, Mexican Drug War, Opium ProductionSpecific DrugsAlcohol, Ayahuasca, Cocaine (Crack Cocaine), Ecstasy, Heroin, Ibogaine, ketamine, Khat, Marijuana (Gateway Theory, Marijuana -- Personal Use, Medical Marijuana, Hashish), Methamphetamine, Nicotine, Prescription Opiates (Fentanyl, Oxycontin), Psychedelics (LSD, Mescaline, Peyote, Salvia Divinorum), Synthetic Drugs (Mephedrone, Synthetic Cannabinoids)YouthGrade School, Post-Secondary School, Raves, Secondary School