Need help? Call our 24/7 helpline. 844-844-1491

Will My Insurance Pay for Rehab?

To Legalize or Not To Legalize

By Russell Brown 02/25/14

Colorado, Washington and Uruguay have legalized recreational cannabis, but there are still many questions around how these systems will work. Russell Brown investigates.


The Fix is co-publishing occasional articles with the New Zealand Drug Foundation’s excellent magazine Matters of Substance, which initiated this report.

You’re going to legalize and regulate the trade in cannabis. It’s the thought experiment at the center of any argument for drug law reform, but this time it’s for real. What do you need to know?

“How much cannabis is currently sold, by the ton and by the dollar?” asks Mark Kleiman. “How much should you expect to sell legally? How many square feet of production capacity is that? If you’re going to allocate retail outlets to counties based on consumption, what would that map look like? For what impurities and adulterants should cannabis be tested, and what’s the available testing technology? What’s the environmental impact?”

These are a few of the questions Kleiman, the new “pot czar” (he doesn’t much like the term) of the US State of Washington, has been proposing and trying to answer since voters last year, via Initiative 502, instructed their state to legalize the production, sale and use of cannabis.

The former Department of Justice analyst has been preparing for this day for a long time—it’s nearly a quarter of a century since he wrote Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control. The jump from theory to practice must have been a thrill.

“Oh yeah,” agrees Kleiman. “It was completely irresistible when this came along.”

The real work began in March when the Washington State Liquor Control Board selected a team from the Massachusetts-based think tank BOTEC Analysis as its technical vendor. Kleiman, as CEO of BOTEC, leads the project team, which includes Beau Kilmer, Co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Research Center and Kleiman’s co-author on last year’s book Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know.

Kleiman is now one of the key figures in a cluster of experiments that will be watched all over the world. Colorado, like Washington, passed an initiative to legalize the production, sale and use of cannabis, and the government of Uruguay has passed laws introducing direct state control of a cannabis market.

“Everyone in drug policy will be inevitably looking at these experiments closely—they are hugely important,” affirms Steve Rolles of the British drug policy foundation Transform.

“Lessons will need to be learnt from both successes and failures, and the fact that there are different models in the two states—and in Uruguay—is also useful from a comparative perspective. It’s much easier to study a legal market than an illegal one, so whether the outcomes are good or bad, there will certainly be a lot of quality data to inform future debate.”

The fact that Kleiman is helping Washington regulate its new market doesn’t mean what’s happening there is necessarily what he would do.

“My ideal world would not have commercial sales. But given their voters wrote their laws for them, I think both Colorado and Washington are doing a perfectly reasonable job of setting up regulation.

“They’re operating under the alcohol model. As the liquor board, they are held responsible if their licensed sellers are reselling to minors. They’re held responsible if there are unlicensed sellers, if bars are operating past the allowed times or serving people who are obviously drunk or allowing a lot of noise that bothers the neighbors. And they’re held responsible if there’s tax evasion. That’s the complete list.

“They’re not held responsible when somebody gets drunk and commits suicide or wrecks his car or beats up his girlfriend or commits a rape. And I think it’s wrong. If I were setting up a liquor control system, I would say to local authorities, you’re accountable for minimizing the public damage from heavy drinking, and figure out how to do that.

“I think, in the case of cannabis, there in fact is a political matter. They’re going to be held accountable for a much wider range of outcomes. But it’s not easy for them to think in those terms.”

“‘Legalization’ is just a word, it’s not a policy or a strategy,” observes Kasia Malinowska-Sempruch, Director of the Open Society Global Drug Policy Program.

“To understand the policy or strategy, you need to look at what it’s intended to do. The Dutch have some smart regulations and some great public health strategies. They just never resolved the supply problem. I think what they are doing in Washington and Colorado will resolve some of those issues, but they will likely encounter their own challenges.”

She’s impressed by the attention to process in both US states (“all those studies and hearings!”), but it’s hard to debate that the most important formal move has come from the US Federal Government. US Attorney General Eric Holder advised recently that the government, while emphasizing that cannabis remains illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act, should not meddle with the state initiatives, subject to eight enforcement criteria being met. These include keeping the trade away from minors and criminal groups and preventing the “diversion” of cannabis to other states.

Given that the Obama Administration has, with the help of a cluster of US attorneys, been actively hostile towards some state medical cannabis operations, this was big news.

“It was the best we could have hoped for under our system of checks and balances,” says Sanho Tree, Director of the Drug Policy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies.

“Holder could not change the laws—only Congress can, unless the Supreme Court declares a law unconstitutional. So he urged the US attorneys to exercise discretion and focus on the points that interest the Feds. His suggestion is not enforceable, but it is a huge political victory in that the executive branch has thrown in the towel in terms of responsible adult cannabis use.”

The hardline US attorneys at the sharp-end of the Federal Government’s hostile approach towards some medical cannabis suppliers were quick to insist that Holder’s statement would make little difference to their approach. But it seems likely that Colorado, which has been running a much tighter medical pot regime than California, is well placed to introduce a system that will keep the Feds out of its hair.

“The medical scene has been very tightly regulated in Colorado—unlike California,” says New Zealand reform advocate Chris Fowlie, who recently visited the state.

“From the seeds all the way through to actually smoking it. All the plants have barcodes on them, and they see that as one of the reasons legalization happened—it disproved all the ‘sky will fall’ claims. It was de facto legalization, and it disproved all the lies that prohibitionists feed us. Everyone over there told me that was crucial to public support growing and growing.”

Kevin Sabet, Director of the Drug Policy Institute at the University of Florida, takes a very different view of Colorado’s med-pot experience, noting the drug-testing company Conspire’s report this year that THC concentrations in the blood of state high school students had risen sharply—suggesting more frequent use.

“Anyone who has been to Colorado—or California, for that matter—since 2009 can get a sense of what full legalization looks like already,” says Sabet.

“Mass advertising, promotion, using items that are attractive to kids—like medical marijuana lollipops, ‘Ring Pots’,‘Pot-Tarts’—are all characteristics of current policy.”

But by any lights, legalization has obliged everyone to confront questions that had been put to one side under medical cannabis. A key issue for regulators is standardization, and it turns out that the science of testing cannabis product just may not be there. Rolles doesn’t see it as a problem.

“The medical cannabis industry has established ways of reliably producing standardized products. Testing is not a perfect science, but error margins can also be tested and factored into regulation models, and we would expect testing science to become increasingly sophisticated as time goes on.”

Kleiman isn’t so sure.

“I think it’s going to be a huge problem,” he says.

“There’s a question about simply measuring THC content, which is solvable up to the tolerance you need a solution to. The real issue is that, for alcohol, there’s one active agent. If I know it’s six percent alcohol, I know everything I need to know. Cannabis has at least three and maybe 40 chemicals that matter.

“I assumed when we started this we’d just look at the literature, figure out some key ratios of, say, THC to cannabidiol and require special labels for anything over some ratio. And then we look at the papers, and it’s not there. We simply do not have the science to put together a decent warning label. Can I show you a paper that shows that a 200:1 ratio of THC to CBD is riskier than 6:1? I’d bet my eye teeth on it, but I don’t have the paper for it.”

Please read our comment policy. - The Fix
russell brown.jpeg

Russell Brown is an Auckland-based writer and blogs at Public Address. You can follow russell on Twitter.

Any Questions? Call Now To Speak to a Rehab Specialist
(844) 844-1491