Pubdate: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 Source: Province, The (CN BC) Copyright: 2011 Postmedia Network Inc. Contact: http://www2.canada.com/theprovince/letters.html Website: http://www.theprovince.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/476 Author: Dr. Evan Wood, Professor of Medicine at the University of B.C. and a member of Stop the Violence B.C. THERE'S NOTHING CONSERVATIVE ABOUT BANNING POT Imagine an extremely expensive government policy proven to be completely ineffective at achieving its stated objectives. Consider also that whenever this policy is subjected to any kind of impact assessment, the government's own data clearly show that the policy has been ineffective, expensive and fuelled the growth of organized crime. Finally, imagine this remark-able set of circumstances persisting for decades - at great cost to taxpayers and community safety - and yet elected officials say and do nothing to address the status quo. Does this sound like something most conservative-minded voters would support? Sadly, you don't have to imagine. This policy is marijuana prohibition and it is an unfortunate legacy for conservatives that we have consistently elected right-ward leaning politicians who have been among the strongest defenders of our failed anti-marijuana laws. If you look at the U.S. government's own data, for instance, despite the long-standing "war on drugs" in the United States, the U.S. Nation-al Institutes of Health has concluded that over the last 30 years of marijuana prohibition the drug has remained "almost universally avail-able to American 12th Graders," with between 80 per cent and 90 per cent consistently saying the drug is "very easy" or "fairly easy" to obtain. Unfortunately, anti-marijuana laws have been much more than simply ineffective, and famous fiscal conservatives have long under-stood why. In 1991, conservative economist Milton Friedman noted: "If you look at the drug war from a purely economic point of view, the role of the government is to protect the drug cartel." Friedman, who won the Nobel Prize in 1976, held strong views about the certain failure of marijuana prohibition shared by virtually all economists. They stress that costly efforts to remove marijuana supply by building prisons and locking up marijuana growers and sellers has the perverse effect of making it that much more profitable for new marijuana producers to enter the market. The laws of sup-ply and demand, which free-market conservatives hold dear, explain the ongoing warfare between drug cartels, including those operating in the Lower Mainland. Marijuana prohibition is their biggest cash cow and they have repeatedly shown their willingness to resort to extreme violence to gain or maintain market share. While a commitment to stronger families is a conservative value often cited to support marijuana prohibition, the policy clearly can-not be credited with helping young families. In an editorial published last week, former president of Brazil Fernando Henrique Cardoso wrote: "To protect children from drugs, it is to my mind now beyond debate that drug laws need to be reformed. From what we already know, the ongoing and future identified harms of current drug policies to our children must be considered not as unintended, but a result of negligence, recklessness or simple disregard." Earlier this year, a new coalition of legal, law-enforcement and public-health experts known as Stop the Violence B.C. was launched to "break the silence" regarding the failure and negative consequences of cannabis prohibition. Those reading this article are encouraged to join. Rather than advocating for a free-market approach to legalized marijuana sales that would allow for advertisement and promotion of marijuana use, the coalition is calling for a strictly regulated legal market for adult marijuana use under a public-health framework. Research clearly suggests that a regulated model could redirect the hundreds of millions of dollars that currently fuels violence in the illegal market to the provincial government in the form of taxation. More importantly, moving away from a profit-driven and increasingly violent unregulated market to a strictly regulated legal market has the potential to actually reduce rates of marijuana use, in the same way that regulatory tools have dramatically cut rates of tobacco use. Last week, four former mayors of Vancouver endorsed the Stop the Violence B.C. coalition in the form of an open letter addressed to B.C.'s elected officials. The letter encouraged politicians to voice their sup-port for taxation and regulation of cannabis as a strategy to reduce gang violence. Despite a recent Angus Reid poll showing that only 12 per cent of British Columbians support existing marijuana laws, with almost 70 per cent supporting the taxation and regulation of marijuana, the B.C. Liberals and their NDP opposition have yet to show meaningful leadership on this issue. Apparently, they are concerned that voicing a progressive opinion could lead to a bleeding of support to the emerging B.C. Conservative Party. Ironically, based on traditional conservative values of family, government accountability and fiscal restraint, B.C. Conservative Party Leader John Cummins should be the first to join the Fraser Institute in supporting a taxation and regulation strategy. The conservative think tank's 2004 report concluded that if we treat marijuana "like any other commodity we can tax it, regulate it, and use the resources the industry generates rather than continue a war against consumption and production that has long since been lost." That's conservative thinking that British Columbians from across the political spectrum should support. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard R Smith Jr.