State House News Service

MAY 12--With state lawmakers listening attentively, a Barnstable town councilor told them today that the "war on drugs" has failed and should be discontinued, starting with the decriminalization of marijuana. 

     Though there were no bills to that effect on the Criminal Justice Committee's hearing agenda this morning, committee members listened closely and questioned attorney Richard Elrick, who came to the State House to appeal for a "more humane and effective drug policy." 

     "Rather than reducing the harms of substance abuse, our country's present policy of prohibition has only served to exacerbate those harms," Elrick 
said.  "Like alcohol prohibition before it, drug prohibition causes higher 
prices, dangerously inconsistent quality of drugs, disrespect for the law, 
leaky national borders, bribery of police and other forms of corruption." 

     Mandatory minimum sentences for drug use, particularly marijuana, have 
caused overcrowded prisons and the early release of "truly violent felons," 
said Elrick, who led an unsuccessful petition drive in 1997 to include a plank in the Democratic Party platform supporting medicinal use of marijuana. Because of mandatory minimums, the average marijuana offender spends 50 months in federal prisons, compared to 43 months for the average violent offender, he said. 

     "The policy of imprisoning marijuana users is particularly cruel and ineffective," Elrick said.  "We must show our young that the best way to 
handle the potential abuse of drugs, particularly marijuana, is through regulation, taxation, education and treatment, not by imprisonment." 

     At the start of his testimony, Elrick warned committee members he was going to present a different perspective on the drug war.  Afterwards, co-chairman Rep. Stephen Tobin (D-Quincy) sat back and said, "I think you were right.  You certainly brought us a perspective we don't hear very often."  Tobin then asked Elrick point-blank, "Are you a recreational marijuana user?" 

     Elrick, wearing a conservative suit and tie, said "Not anymore," but he added, "I grew up in the '60s and I used it then."  He then compared the drug war to the Vietnam War, where there was "no effective strategy and we were pursuing unattainable goals." 

     Co-chairman Sen. Cynthia Creem (D-Newton) pointed out that there were no bills before the committee dealing with the de-criminalization of drugs, although there were many on today's agenda hiking existing drug penalties and establishing new "drug-free" zones.  "Are you suggesting we vote against all the bills before us?" she asked. 

     That's a bit drastic, Elrick said, but added, "You should not be endorsing 
mandatory minimums for drug zones, particularly in regard to marijuana. I 
think it's frankly counter-productive." 

     Creem replied, "I share your view in not supporting mandatory minimums, 
period, but there are no bills particularly on legalizing drugs.  Perhaps 
you should file one." 
 

     Committee member Rep. Anne Paulsen (D-Belmont) also appeared intrigued by the discussion, telling Elrick that while he seemed to have accurately diagnosed the "conundrum" around drug sentencing, "I think we're at a time in our society when we don't want to be soft on drugs." 

     Nevertheless, Paulsen said, she's disturbed by stories about 18-year-olds who make mistakes dabbling with drugs and get sent to jail for long periods of time.  "It just seems as though we're not going to look forward to having these people leave jail and have very productive lives," she said. "I agree with you that we really do need to look at our mandatory minimums." 

     Current drug laws target low-level users and dealers, but don't get at "drug kings," Paulsen said.  On medicinal marijuana use, she added, "I think that's worthy of certainly our consideration." 

     Tobin cut off the debate, saying the committee needed to get on with its 
scheduled business, but he said lawmakers needed to keep "open minds" in 
examining current and proposed drug policy.  He also asked Elrick to stay 
after the hearing for an informal discussion. 
 

RETURN TO FRONT PAGE