Current Update

 

From the Folks Who Insist They Don't Want to Legalize Drugs: Remarks of Peter Lewis and Ethan Nadelmann at the Lindesmith Center-Drug Policy Foundation 2001 International Conference

Albuquerque, New Mexico
May 30 - June 2, 2001

Closing Panel

Excerpts from Peter Lewis, Panel Moderator
(Mr. Lewis is one of the millionaires/billionaires who fund drug-legalization organizations such as the Lindesmith Center and the Drug Policy Foundation, and of drug-related state ballot initiatives that he, George Soros, and John Sperling have financed since 1995. Mr. Lewis made these remarks at the closing panel of these organizations' 2001 conference. The entire panel can be viewed on the Internet at http://www.drugpolicy.org/events/archive/conferences/drugpolicies/.)

"I'm not new to supporting the movement, but I'm new to becoming involved face to face. And I suspect the fact that I retired from a job that I had 35 years as CEO of Progressive Insurance is the motivation for my now becoming a little bit more personally involved. And I suspect more financially involved as well.

"I am here because my own experience suggests that these laws that we're fighting against are so idiotic it almost deserves no attention, and yet they're screwing up the country and the world and we've gotta do something and start somewhere. And what thrills me is to see you all – mature, thoughtful people getting the information that is presented by knowledgeable, brilliant presenters who know what they're talking about, trying to understand all the detail of this, caring about this issue so much, a group of people, like, at its'-- this movement – this movement with you at the core can't miss and I am delighted to be one of you."

Closing Remarks, Ethan Nadelmann
(Mr. Nadelmann is executive director of the Lindesmith Center, an arm of George Soros' Open Society Institute. The Lindesmith Center and the Drug Policy Foundation merged last year. Their new name is the Drug Policy Alliance. After congratulating staff responsible for organizing the conference, Mr. Nadelmann drew the conference to a close with the following remarks:)

"Now, just a few comments on what's been said to date, and where I think we're going.

"The first is, I don't think there's any 18th amendment of drug prohibition that we're gonna repeal and end it the way alcohol prohibition did.

"I don't think there's any Berlin Wall that we're gonna keep kicking at and all of a sudden the whole thing's gonna come crashing down.

"And I think it may be a mistake to operate and proceed on that assumption. It may lead to false hopes and incorrect strategies.

"I think this is gonna be bit by bit. We're gonna jump forward in places and get knocked back in some places else. You know, this is not some national amendment. This is an infrastructure of laws built up in your cities and your states and in our country and around the world over the last hundred years.

"We have some serious, serious unraveling, unraveling of this system to do. That's gonna mean bit by bit, taking that piece, step by step, medical marijuana, this city, that state, let's go with that politician, let's move there, let's target our limited resources.

"It's gonna be bit by bit. And we're gonna measure success by asking how many people got arrested last year? It was 1.6 million last year, we want it down to 1.4, and then 1.2, and then to 1, and then under a million and then lower and lower and lower.

"How many behind bars? It's almost half a million today, let's get it down to 450, and 4, 350, and 3 and 250 until there's fewer and fewer people behind bars on drug charges.

"How many people died of a heroin overdose last year? Was it 10,000 or 15,000? Let's cut that number by a third, and then by a half.

"How many new hepatitis and HIV infections? Let's bring those numbers down as well and further and further and further.

"How many kids are getting pulled unnecessarily out of raves because something happened with a drug that was sold to them called ecstasy, but that was not ecstasy, and they got hurt because they didn't have regulated drugs around? Let's put those numbers down and down and down.

"The devastation and the acres and hectares of Latin America being eradicated with our chemicals? Let's bring those ones down and down.

"Let's slowly gain more and more human freedom and compassion by doing it bit by bit by bit.

"If we can grab it, and if, in fact, we can kick it and it's gonna come crumbling down, then we'll do it, but don't plan on that. Don't assume that. Cause we'll set ourselves up for false hopes and expectations. We'll lose hope too soon. We can't assume it's gonna be that way.

"Now, you know, I was thinking about when Ira [Glasser, executive director, American Civil Liberties Union] and Deborah [Small, director of public policy and community outreach, The Lindesmith Center] and Dave [David Lewis, director, Center for Alcoholism and Addiction Studies] were talking this morning about coerced treatment and Deborah was talking about Schindler and Ira was talking about D-Day. Let me give you another twist.

"I think what we're really involved in here is more like a guerilla insurgency. We are the democratic, nonviolent, guerilla insurgency focused in America, but operating as much as we can around the world.

"The other side has 1,000 times the resources as we have when it comes to money, and to force. We have 1,000 times what they have when is comes to science, and health, and decency, and heart, and brains.

"That means, that means being strategic. It means being tactical. It means picking our opportunities. It means when this governor stood up in New Mexico, we were gonna be there and we were gonna help him make things happen.

"And it meant that when Rocky Anderson in Salt Lake City popped up, we're gonna be there.

"And when Maxine's going (unintelligible), we're gonna be there.

"We're gonna pick our targets. We're gonna do it. It's targeting these things.

"Now, I can also say that if you look – what does it mean to build a war--we're not gonna have the forces of the Allied forces landing on the beaches of Normandy.I don't think we'll ever have that.

"We're gonna have to creep up and around and bit by bit – we can't really get to D.C. yet. We have our agents in D.C. They're walking around the edges. That's the last place things are gonna change.

"It's gonna be local. It's gonna be state. It's gonna be in the communities, in the homes, and the families – it's bit by bit building this stuff, doing it.

"And I'll tell you something else. Although we're gonna target our resources, we're gonna do more ballot initiatives. We're gonna pick out states where we see opportunities. That doesn't mean the whole country's not involved.

"How many people from Arkansas came up to me here at this conference?

"How many people from Oklahoma?

"How many people from Indiana?

"It means even in the places where reform seems most distant, we're gonna help to plant seeds.

"If you're there, and you're working hard, and you're thinking hard, and you're gonna be part of this movement, we're gonna try to spread the seeds and cultivate those in environments that can grow.

"This is gonna have to be a national movement where resources get targeted, but where nobody gets left behind. That is the way it's gonna happen.

"It's also a matter of realistic expectations. Of what we can expect from one another. As allies in this.

"Quite frankly, I don't expect everybody committed to drug policy reform to embrace the broader agenda of economic and social justice.

"I think there are certain issues that it's very hard for us not to empathize with when we talk about basic civil rights and women's rights and the rights of gay people in this country.

"There's almost no way that we can be antithetical to that.

"When we talk about the issue of people to be entitled to vote and not losing the right because of felony convictions, that's gonna apply not just to drug law violators, but to all others as well.

"There are some core basic principles, but I don't expect my Libertarian allies to embrace national health care.

"And I don't expect my allies on the left political side to embrace some of the principles on the Libertarian right.

"What I do hope and expect – and I think we all should – is that for those of you who belong to the NRA, go back and line up more members of the NRA in support of drug policy reform.

"And for those of you who marched in the million mile march, go back and line up more of them for drug policy reform.

"For those of you who are pro-life, and some are here, go back and explain why the war on drugs is inconsistent with your values about the preservation of life.

"And for those of you who fight for reproductive rights, bring that message home to groups who understand the reproductive rights issue, but don't understand this issue as yet.

"It's going into your own communities and talking to them.

"If you come from the church, go back to the church and explain it in their terms.

"They don't need to embrace all of this. They just need to embrace enough to understand why the essence of drug policy reform is consistent with almost all of the decent values in this country and around the world.

"Now. Finally. Here's my real fear.

"I think that the movement towards incarcerating more and more Americans, both generally and specifically, on drug offenses has already turned.

"I think there's a decent chance that the White House – this White House – is gonna take an initiative this year or next to address the issue of mandatory minimum sentencing.

"And they're gonna do it for calculated reasons, to reach out to African American communities, because more and more Republican governors – not just Johnson – but Rowland in Connecticut, and Thompson from Wisconsin, and others – are saying it's time to do that.

"But they're gonna be doing a lot of insidious stuff as well.

"They're gonna be promoting more and more insidious sanctions against people who use drugs, and people who used to use drugs, and people who've ever been convicted of any drug offense.

"What I'm scared of – and this is why we had that debate in part this morning – is that as there's more and more pressures to get people out of prison, we're gonna see more and more pressures to extend the network of surveillance and control in our society.

"That there are people for whom the ultimate ideal is one in which not that many people are behind bars for drug law violations, but in which everybody from birth is being tested for substances in their bodies.

"That's what I really fear. That we are gonna move in that direction. We're gonna move in that direction.

"Now the debate this morning was not whether that's a good or bad thing, the debate was over tactics.

"What is the best way to deal with this?

"You know, more and more – how many years is it gonna take before people are gonna appear before a judge and the judge is not gonna say, okay a choice between prison or this urine-tested, abstinence-only drug treatment program?

"Or, in fact, what you're gonna get is a patch – and it's not just gonna be a drug-testing patch. It's gonna be a patch that maybe if you do take a drug, it just beeps like an electronic bracelet to the authorities that be.

"Or better still, it's gonna be a patch that if you do smoke a joint or take some other drug, unleashes some disgusting chemicals in your body that make you sick.

"In fact, why use a patch, when we might be able to implant something?

"In fact, why wait til you're an adult to implant it? Maybe we can do it at birth, or screwing with your genetic coding.

"I think so long as the drug hysteria continues, that may be where we're headed.

"Now, we have to watch out. We are moving into a quote unquote brave new world. A world where on the one hand more and more new drugs are gonna be coming around.

"You know, who ten years ago had ever heard of Viagra?

"Who 15 years ago had heard of Prozac, right?

"Who 20 years ago had heard of ecstasy?

"Who 50 years ago had heard of LSD?

"You know, 10, 20, 30 years from now the drugs that are being produced and made, both legal and illegal, are just gonna be a whole nother world.

"There's gonna be some extraordinary drugs out there. Some extraordinary drugs.

"You know, can you just imagine? I mean imagine. Imagine. Just imagine ecstasy, generation 5, and Viagra, generation 6, all rolled in one? And what exactly is the government gonna do about that?

"Well, my fear what they're gonna do about that is start testing every single person in this society. That's my fear.

"And that's why I think – that core principle that you keep hearing? Joe [McNamara, former police chief, San Jose, California, and board member of several drug legalization organizations] said it before. Ira [Glasser] said it earlier, so many others did.

"You gotta (unintelligible) that principle, that the adults in this country should not be punished for what they put into their bodies.

"That adults should not be punished for what they put into their bodies, what they do to alter their state of consciousness.

"That adults in this country should not be punished for what they put into their bodies.

"That our bodies and our minds are sovereign.

"That principle, that principle has to be whole. Has to be consistent, because otherwise all the movement to get fewer people behind bars and more people in the community is gonna come with that tradeoff of violating that basic principle.

"Now, how do we get the majority of Americans to embrace and understand that core principle?

"Sometimes I think – and more and more I think this – it's simply by articulating it.

"Because when you articulate it to the ordinary American – what right does your neighbor, your whatever, have to say what you put into your body – a lot of people don't have a good answer. They don't have a good answer.

"Why shouldn't we be sovereign over our minds and our bodies? Why shouldn't we be sovereign over them?

"Think about it this way. A few hundred years ago, some people came up with a bright idea that they put into the First Amendment of the Constitution in regard to freedom of speech and press and religion and assembly.

"I'm so glad they did that. I'm so glad they thought of that back then.

"The freedom of speech and press and religion and assembly -- that fundamental freedom, the fundamental freedoms that make our country more unique than any other -- it means that even though we have these horribly, horribly repressive tendencies in our society -- we've had that First Amendment and other rights around it that protected us and preserved our fundamental freedoms.

"Now, ask yourself something. What exactly do all those freedoms mean without another freedom? What underlies, what is implicit we assume to make those freedoms real?

"It's basically another freedom. It's a freedom that our founding fathers never envisioned would be threatened because they could not imagine the capacity to undermine it.

"But it's the freedom of control over one's consciousness. It goes back to that basic principle of control over your mind and body.

"Do you know what I'm openly really fighting for – and I hope and I think most of you are fighting for?

"One day, maybe one day, and I know this is a pipe dream, a crazy dream – it'll be when we create a movement, when our movement evolves into a movement in this country to put forward another national amendment, a national amendment in this country for the sovereignty over our minds and bodies.

"That is gonna be the core principle. It's gonna be the one which sets us free ultimately.

"I wanna thank you very much for being here. Next time, wherever it may be."

Previous Updates