7/28/95 Dr. John Morgan on Drug Legalization

AOL Transcript John MorganCopyright 1995 America Online, Inc.

PhilCLU: Evening everyone. We'll be beginning our discussion about drug prohibition with Dr. John Morgan in moments. First let me tell you a little about Dr. Morgan and his background.

OnlineHost: Dr. John Morgan, a nationally renowned expert on : drug policy in the United States, is a professor : of pharmacology at the Sophie Davis School of : Medicine at City College, City University of New : York. A passionate advocate for drug : decriminalization, Dr. Morgan has written : extensively on the topic of alcohol, drugs and : public policy.

OnlineHost: His current projects include studies of marijuana : toxicity, the use of marijuana as medicine, the : social pharmacology of crack and cocaine, and the : impact of drug prohibition on drug potency and : purity.

OnlineHost: Dr. Morgan joins the ACLU to discuss the folly of : drug prohibition. Please welcome him to Center Stage.

PhilCLU: And now just a couple words about the format here and then we'll start.

OnlineHost: The auditorium consists of two major areas: the : audience, where you are right now, and the stage, : where the speakers appear. Text which you type : onscreen shows only to those in your row, prefaced : by the row number in parentheses, such as (2) if : you are in row 2. To interact with the speaker, : use the Interact icon on your screen.

OnlineHost: To send your question to the speaker, click on : the Interact icon, then use the Ask a Question : option.

PhilCLU: Okay...the first question, and I'll paraphrase this one if I may, is whether Dr. Morgan is in favor of drug legalization.

JohnMrgn: I am surely in favor of drug legalization, although the term of legalization provokes such feeling of emotional response that I usually start with decriminalization. I no longer want anyone to go to jail or be arrested for possession or use of drugs. I'm fond of saying that once that's in place, that people regain the right of self-ownership. Then, something else will have to be done about supply and regulation, purity, taxation, but I'll leave those decisions to my children.

PhilCLU: We're talking with Dr. John Morgan about the national policy of drug prohibition. The next question is a follow up....

Question: What problems, if any, do you foresee arising from decriminalization?

JohnMrgn: It's difficult to me to think of problems because we are so beset with the problems of prohibition, but it is possible that there may be increased use of some substance by some people after legalization and I know that this is a great concern of many. However, I suspect such use will be experimental and largely non-harmful just as most use is today.

PhilCLU: The next question for Dr. John Morgan is about a recent pronouncement from the Speaker of the House.

Question: Newt Gingrich recently called for national referendum on drug policy - do you favor such a vote, and who do you think would win?

JohnMrgn: Well, I favor a national discussion, a national commission, and I'm perfectly happy for there to be a national referendum. However, I suspect that prohibition and prohibitionists would win a referendum. That fact does not make prohibition right or moral. Our only hope is to continue knocking at doors and speaking to try to persuade Americans that prohibition is harmful. However, I would add that even if we never have the majority to win a referendum, our Constitution should still protect drug users from state intervention.

PhilCLU: We're talking about our nation's policy on drugs with Dr. John Morgan. Here's an offbeat question that I'm curious to get Dr. Morgan's response to...

Question: The criminalization of drugs is designed to ensure we have a subclass of criminals, someone whom to blame, diverting attention from the real problems with this nation using the fear to trample with our constitutional rights. Would you care to comment on this?

JohnMrgn: In essense, I agree, although the marginalization and creation of criminals is not really conspiratorial. I guess I would refer the questioner to a book called Ceremonial Chemistry by Thomas Szasz. He makes the point very clearly that drug users and drug dealers have become the required scapegoats in this society. A society can exist without honor and decency and a variety of things, but it cannot exist without scapegoats. Apparently, there must be someone to blame for our troubles.

PhilCLU: The next question -- and I'm going to paraphrase again -- is whether you believe increased addiction would result from legalization or decriminalization?

JohnMrgn: I doubt that legalization would lead to increased addiction. I would point out that addiction, of course, has occurred often during prohibition. The chief failure of prohibition is that it does not stop, or even significanty curtail, drug use. Although increased availability might lead to increased use, I envision in a more rational world more rational drug use.

PhilCLU: We're talking with Dr. John Morgan, a national expert on drug policy.

Question: Do you expect any now illegal drugs to be legalized in the near future?

JohnMrgn: I do. I cannot believe that marijuana will not be legalized or decriminalized in the next ten years.

Question: What proof do you have that legalization will help America?

JohnMrgn: Let me approach the question from a slightly different direction. At the end of alcohol prohibition in 1934, there was no increased use of alcohol for the next decade. So, the lifting of prohibition did not generate harmful consumption. But the lifting of prohibition deflated the criminal enterprise, curtailed the sale of poisonous alcohol, and improved American life. I believe that prohibition generates such harms, poisoning, and criminal activity without diminishing drug use. I believe those marks constitute proof, although I don't have much empirical data.

PhilCLU: We're talking with Dr. John Morgan, a noted pharmacologist and expert on the nation's drug policy. The next question is about that funny tobacco-like substance.

Question: Has anyone ever died directly from smoking marijuana?

JohnMrgn: I believe the answer is no. Marijuana's toxicity is so low that people essentially cannot kill themselves acutely. Recent research has demonstrated that there are very few cannabinoid receptors in the brain portion which regulate respiration and heart function. This explains the wide safety margin of marijuana.

PhilCLU: In the interest of time, I'll paraphrase the next question...What do you think about medical use of marijuana?

JohnMrgn: I am a strong supporter of medical use. The best way and the cheapest way to deliver THC to the blood stream is by smoking it. Therefore, I believe that THC's usefullness in stopping nausea and vomiting increasing appetite, treating glaucoma can be delivered by smoking. Therefore, I believe individuals and their physicians should make the decision about theraputic use of marijuana.

PhilCLU: We're talking with Dr. John Morgan about the nation's drug policy. The next question is about the harder stuff.

Question: Don't you think that the legalization of extremely addictive drugs such as cocaine and herion would hurt, more than help, society?

JohnMrgn: I do not. I do not believe that drugs should be legalized because they are safe, but should be legalized because they are dangerous. During the last 50 years, we have continued to have problems with heroin, cocaine, and other drugs, even though they are prohibited. In fact, heroin is a relatively safe drug made terribly dangerous by prohibition. This does not mean I approve of heroin use, or cocaine use, and I'm not encouraging anyone, young or old, to use such drugs. However, I believe that prohibition has made it much worse than even the frightening idea of such drugs being legally available. The legislation of morality does not work. We cannot modify dangerous and risky behavior by and large by making it illegal.

PhilCLU: We're talking with Dr. John Morgan about the nation's policy of drug prohibition. The next question is about the politics of the issue.

Question: Current political attitudes will not tolerate a serious proposal to decriminalize/legalize drugs. What steps do you believe need to be taken to enact a sweeping change in the mentality of the people in this country?

JohnMrgn: I plan to shout loudly. 🙂 Seriously, this is a political battle that I do not approach foolishly, although I do approach it optimistically. In 1929, President Hoover received a report from a commission which stated that prohibition really was working, but we just needed a little more money and a little more committment. Four years later, prohibition was dead. Prohibition is a foolish 20th Century concept - maybe it will die in the 21st.

PhilCLU: We've got many, many excellent questions for Dr. Morgan. You're all making my job very difficult here. The next question is about what if the unimaginable would indeed happen.

Question: What role should government have in the distribution and regulation of legalized drugs? Should taxes be collected on them?

JohnMrgn: I wish not. However, that wish is almost certainly naive. John D. Rockefeller became opposed to alcohol prohibition, but also proposed that no one should profit from the sale of alcohol. I worry about a government and agents of the government becoming reliant on drug profits. However, I prefer a taxed legality to and will vote for it, despite my fears.

PhilCLU: We're talking drug policy with Dr. John Morgan. Here's one about the international scene.

Question: Do you think the US will be incorporating harm reduction measures such as Great Britain has done?

JohnMrgn: I certainly do. The idea and philosophy of harm reduction is appealing to many decent people, even those who fear drug use. So I believe that encouraging Americans in the ideas of harm reduction is valuable. Harm reduction implies that we can reduce the harm done by drugs even if we cannot convince individuals to stop using drugs dangerously. One of the best examples of harm reduction is the provision of nicotine in skin patches. Users who cannot or will not give up nicotine can consume it much more safely. Also, although we've made some steps in that direction, we don't really hate nicotine users yet. So, harm reduction applied to a legal gives me some hope that we can do better than we have heretofore. That is, with such approaches to illegal drugs.

PhilCLU: The next question, I believe, is from someone who opposes your ideas about drug decriminalization, Dr. Morgan.

Question: Who pays for the indulgences of legalized drug use?

JohnMrgn: Who pays for the indulgences of legalized chainsaw use? I believe that legalization must be accompanied with clear expression of user responsibility. For example, I would make the penalty of driving while intoxicated with a previously illegal drug very harsh. I believe that the America exists because of the ideas of responsibility and freedom, and I cannot see why those do not apply to drug use.

PhilCLU: We're talking about drug prohibition with Dr. John Morgan. And our next question is...

Question: Do you believe that the frequency of crimes committed while under the influence of drugs will increase if they are decriminalized?

JohnMrgn: I do not. Some acts of alcohol consumption precede criminal behavior, however, most acts of consumption, and even intoxication, do not cause criminal behavior. The chief connection between crime and drugs is of course the idea or fact that possession of drugs is a crime. I do not fear increased criminality after legalization.

PhilCLU: Several people in the audience have asked, Dr. Morgan, whether you believe ALL drugs should be legalized.

JohnMrgn: I do. I think marijuana's legalization makes sense because it is relatively safe, and I would start with legalization of marijuana as a political reality. Legalization of more harmful drugs, i.e. cocaine, heroin is proper because prohibition does not work, and in fact makes the drug more dangerous. There was very wide consumption of cocaine beverage and smokable opium at the turn of the century. Criminalizing that behavior led to the marketing of more dangerous forms of those drugs. The iron rule of prohibition is the generation of more potent and more dangerous forms of the drug. So, I am not afraid of legalizing dangerous drugs, in fact, I'm afraid not to.

PhilCLU: The next question for Dr. Morgan deals with the recent NIDA conference, which I believe he attended.

Question: Would you also comment on the recent statement at the NIDA conference in which Lee P. said marijuana caused violence.

JohnMrgn: I do not believe that marijuana causes violence. Furthermore, there was nothing presented at the NIDA conference which proved that marijuana causes violence. The idea that drugs cause violence is actually never provable. We believe, however, that drugs are used by dangerous and violent people, which is one of the reasons we criminalize the drugs and marginalize the users. The fact that marijuana is detectable for days after use means that it can be blamed by Lee Brown and other fools for anything that happened during those days.

PhilCLU: We have time for two more questions. The next one is one that I'm particularly interested in since my best friend just died of a drug overdose.

Question: With decriminalization, would it be easier to obtain help for people with drug abuse problems? (Treatment for the abuser, support services for the family, etc.) It has been nearly impossible to gain access to realistic drug treatment.

JohnMrgn: Absolutely, we could help drug users better if drugs were legal. We deny services to drug users, and in fact even deny housing, jobs, and freedom from prison, to drug users. I believe that criminalizing drug use essentially guarantees that people shall not be treated decently. I believe that some drug users harmed by prohibition shall need a variety of help and services and treatment when prohibition ends. However, many drug users will not need such help and will not desire it because they will use drugs safely.

PhilCLU: We have time for just one last question, I'm afraid, but rest assured this is a topic that the ACLU will soon explore once again. And I'll paraphrase the last question, which was asked by many members of the audience: Do you, Dr. Morgan, use drugs?

JohnMrgn: I will choose not to answer. But I ask those who were curious whether they think my answers would be more or less informed if they knew whether I was a drug user or not.

PhilCLU: Alright. Please join me in thanking Dr. Morgan. And if you have strong feelings about this topic, as we all apparently do, please visit the ACLU's Constitution Hall and voice your opinions there. (Keyword ACLU). Thanks all.