For decades, there have been several proposals when it comes to addressing the problem of drug use. Some are calling for the decriminalization of some substances, while others are saying that we need to legalize currently illegal drugs and regulate them, while others argue that illicit drugs need to remain illegal. So what is the most effective way to approach drug policy in our country?
This week on Family Policy Matters, host Traci DeVette Griggs welcomes Dr. Kevin Sabet, President and CEO of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, to discuss the importance of effective drug policies.
- Subscribe to our podcast so you can hear our interviews every week.
- Tune in to one of the radio stations that carry Family Policy Matters (see the list below).
- Click below to listen online.
Spotify • Apple Podcasts • iHeart Radio • Audacy • Amazon Music
Family Policy Matters
A Smart Approach to Drug Policy (with Dr. Kevin Sabet)
TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS: Thanks for joining us this week for Family Policy Matters. Too many American families are being wrecked by drug abuse and the catastrophic consequences that it wreaks, and it has far-reaching consequences for communities as well. Well, we’re joined today by Dr Kevin Sabet, President and CEO of the Foundation for Drug Policy Solutions to discuss a policy guide for decision makers oriented toward changing the course of the drug crisis. Dr Sabet is the only bipartisan drug policy advisor to serve three US presidential administrations. Dr Kevin Sabet, welcome to Family Policy Matters.
KEVIN SABET: Thanks so much for having me, Traci. It’s an honor.
TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS: This solution you have named the Hyannis Consensus. Tell us about that. How did it come to be?
KEVIN SABET: I’ve worked in a couple different white houses, and when I left in 2011, I started a marijuana policy group called SAM, Smart Approaches to Marijuana, because I’m concerned about how today’s highly potent marijuana is being quickly commercialized and promoted to our kids. You know, it’s causing mental illness and psychosis. IQ loss, all kinds of things that are not good, and I think we’re just on the wrong direction in our country on it. But then over 10 years later, during the pandemic, I was also noticing that the same people that wanted to legalize marijuana were saying, well, nothing works. We should actually just legalize all drugs, then we should, you know, look at Oregon, for example, that essentially legalized the personal possession of all drugs, including fentanyl, heroin and cocaine and methamphetamine. You know, I felt like there needed to be another drug policy group that looked at all the drug issues, not just marijuana, which we’re still doing very active actually in North Carolina and beyond, by the way, but we wanted to do more than that. And so, we started the Foundation for Drug Policy Solutions. And then I started it with the former member of Congress, Patrick Kennedy. Of course, the Kennedy name is very close with Hyannis, their summer retreat in Hyannis Port, Massachusetts, on Cape Cod. And so we gathered about 50 to 75 of the country’s top leaders on drug policy, former advisors for both Republicans and Democrats, scientists, parents, practitioners, business people. And we gathered in Hyannis, actually, at the Kennedy compound, and we worked together on this consensus document, I’ll call it, which lays out a path forward. There’s no simple solution, there’s no silver bullet, but it lays out some policies and some philosophies in order to go forward in fixing this problem, which is wrecking too many families in this country.
TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS: So, before we go into the specifics on this consensus, talk a little bit more about where the problem is, because you suggest that some of the current policies actually embrace drug use. And I think you just kind of referred to that. But why do you suppose people feel like that’s a solution?
KEVIN SABET: Well, there’s a lot of money, first of all, behind the move to normalize, legalize, and commercialize addictive substances. I mean, just look at alcohol and tobacco. We don’t have to talk about the money and influence that those industries have. Look at the prescription drug problem that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, over-prescribed oxycodone and other drugs. This was driven by for profit. This wasn’t driven by drug dealers, you know. This wasn’t driven by people, you know, in underground markets. This is driven by people with suits on that lobby in state capitals. And so, there’s a lot of money to be made. And so, I think the move to legalize marijuana, for example, it’s really driven by money and folks who. you know, they just want to have another industry. And so, imagine how much money you can make off cocaine being legalized, or these more addictive substances like heroin being legalized. And so, I think a lot of the drive is money. I think there’s a lot of misconceptions also about the harms. Because you know, not every time anyone you know, let’s say smokes a joint does their life fall apart. But we know that it can lead to very negative consequences. Doesn’t always lead to that, but it can. I think about something like speeding. We’ve outlawed speeding, but we all know people, maybe ourselves, to have driven over the speed limit now and again, and we’ve been okay. That doesn’t mean we want to encourage speeding or have people pay a tax if they want to go 100 miles an hour, then we would never say that. It’s the same thing with some of these drugs. And so, I think a lot of this is mainly motivated by money. Some people, personal experience. Hey, I was fine with it, so why not just let it happen? So, I think there’s a lot of misconceptions around these drugs.
TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS: The record-breaking drug overdose deaths that have happened in the past, like four or five years, has got to get our attention. Certainly, the war on drugs so far has been a failure.
KEVIN SABET: To be honest, I don’t love the term war on drugs, because, first of all, I see it’s mainly used by those who want to legalize drugs, because people feel like we have drugs, and we had a war on drugs. So obviously it’s failed. I sort of like to think of it as more of a cancer that we need to prevent and treat and also reduce the supply, you know, the way, you know, people are exposed to different, let’s say carcinogens or environmental factors that can lead to cancer. That means what’s around you matters as well. I think the drug effort, you know, could be likened to something more like that. You know, we’ve had a war on poverty for you know, let’s say, since the 1960s since LBJ launched it, certainly we haven’t eliminated poverty. Does that mean we turn our back on those with less than us? No. So I don’t love the war terminology. But you’re right. That’s the normal way that people think about this issue, because we used to use it all the time, but I just think it sets unrealistic expectations. We’re not going to eliminate drug use, but we can certainly reduce it much more than we have now, in a way. But you’re right. We’ve had a generation that’s been affected by this because, let’s say they’ve used a pill at a party that they thought was maybe a Xanax or a Prozac or something not great, but certainly wouldn’t kill you taking it once, but it’s been laced with fentanyl, or you have cocaine now laced with fentanyl, you have all these drugs. So, the drug supply has changed. This is why we’ve seen the overdoses. You know, we are seeing a little bit of a reduction in overdoses lately, which is good news, but I think that’s also because the drug supply is changing for various reasons as well, a little bit less deadly than it was. Regardless, we need to focus on prevention and recovery as well as law enforcement on this issue.
TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS: Okay, well, let’s do that. Let’s talk a little bit about the Hyannis Consensus. From what I understand, there are five pillars. What are those? Take us through them.
KEVIN SABET: Well, the first one, and I would say the most important, is prevention. We know that if a kid doesn’t use a substance by age 21, they are unlikely ever to do so. I mean, that is a tremendous statistic that all parents keep in mind. And parents need to understand that they are the number one influencer on their child, more than any friend, more than any coach, and more than any teacher, more than anybody. Now all those other people are very relevant. Trust me, it takes a community, but the parent is the most relevant. That’s why families are so important. So, if we can prevent using any substance, including alcohol, by age 21 that child is unlikely ever to have an addiction. So that’s a very powerful statistic. The other pillar is essentially intervention and treatment. We need to intervene early. Just like cancer, the earlier you intervene, the more likely you are to have success with treatment. And so, by the way, and there’s so many different treatments now, there’s the tried and true, what many call modern miracle of the 12-step process, which is still probably the most effective treatment we have, which is an incredible resource. It’s you know, tens of millions of Americans are in AA and NA that gives them higher purpose. It gives them accountability. These things are very important when overcoming addiction. Accountability, higher purpose, thinking outside themselves. These things are extremely important. But also, there are medications now that we didn’t have 20 years ago that can treat severe opioid addiction, for example. We don’t have, by the way, medications to treat severe cannabis addictions, which is marijuana addiction, which, by the way, is more prevalent now in kids than any other addiction, which is incredible. We also don’t have any medications for things like methamphetamine or cocaine. So, you know, you’re not going to have a magic pill for everything, but there are medications that can help with opioids, also recovery.
So, after you’ve gone through treatment, we need to make sure we’ve set you up for success to live a life of recovery. Addiction is really the only disease out there that I know of where you’re a better person after you had it than before you had it. Think about that. So, if we can keep that person in recovery with support networks, gainful employment, building what we call recovery capital, keep them going. That is really going to be key. The other element, which a lot of people don’t like to talk about, but it’s the reality of it, is the criminal justice system. First of all, 70% of people committing crimes, not drug crimes. I’m talking just other crimes. They have a drug problem. 70%. So that means addiction and drug use is driving a lot of crime. We need to make sure that’s a low hanging fruit for society to be able to tackle. If they’re under our supervision because they committed a crime, we should also use that time of them serving to also get them the help that they need, so that when they are released, they are not going to re-offend and be addicted again. And you know, unfortunately, there’s this cycle of arrest and release and re-arrest. You know, you’re much more likely to be arrested if you’ve been arrested before. There’s just so many statistics about this. We need to really use the criminal justice system in a way, because we, you know, carrots and sticks matter when it comes to addiction and recovery. That means accountability matters. When, you know addiction, again, it’s a brain disease, but it’s a different kind of brain disease, because it responds to incentives. Unlike, let’s say, a brain disease like Alzheimer’s disease, which just really does not respond to incentives, but addiction does, and so yes, you are addicted. Yes, your brain chemistry has changed. Yes, you are doing things you would not normally do. Yes, you’ve maybe lost control. However, most people that still are addicted, they have some control still. They can change behavior if the situation is set up the right way. And so, things like drug treatment courts. These are specialized courts that essentially say if you don’t go to treatment, you’re going to jail. That is a very powerful, believe it or not, it actually changes behavior. Now, imagine telling that to an Alzheimer’s patient. It wouldn’t work, but with addiction, it works.
The other final thing, which is a little bit more kind of political and sort of maybe removed, but it’s very important, is international cooperation. What we do over our borders, and what we do on the border, what we do when we work with other countries. You know, fentanyl today is being manufactured in China and India and being transported by mainly drug cartels that are involved, by the way, in multiple things, not just spectacle. They’re involved in human trafficking. They’re involved in selling fake Gucci purses on the streets of New York. They’re involved in legal industries like logging and mining. I mean, this isn’t just drugs. That’s why this sort of misnomer that if you legalize drugs, you’re going to get rid of the cartels. It’s completely wrong. They’re involved in so many things. So, we need other governments to be cooperating with us on this issue that will also help.
TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS: Okay, so let’s talk about best first steps for policy. This is a lot, right? And so, where’s the best place for maybe a state or the federal government to start?
KEVIN SABET: Well, first of all, because prevention is so important, we need to do a better job on preventing. You know, I hesitate to say good news, because it’s sort of came, you know, on the backs of something horrendous. But the good news about fentanyl being so deadly, which is hard to say, but the reason I’m saying that is because most people know that it’s deadly now. I mean, it’s sort of now that it’s killed so many people, you have to have been living under a rock to hear that fentanyl might be in a pill that someone gives you at a party. So, my point is saying that is, awareness is very important. So, we need governments to do awareness campaigns. We need to go back and have a multimedia campaign that uses social media, that uses platforms that young people are at to prevent this from happening in the first place. So that, first of all, is what we need, is more prevention, but not just in schools, not just the, you know, a class a month or something, but actually prevention in a way that is delivered across multiple platforms where young people are. That’s the first thing I would say. The second thing is that every state in the country should give treatment to anyone who wants it. It pays back in dividends if you could prevent somebody from committing a crime because they’re addicted, if you could stop somebody’s drug use along the way. I mean, it pays back in dividends, and of course, recovery as well. We need states to invest in recovery. We’ve seen states, like in Texas and in other places, that basically they were going to build prisons because they saw the increase of drug use and crime that was happening. But instead of that, they actually invested in what we call re-entry programs that basically were, when people were released from prison, rather than building another prison because they were going to come back, having a program for them to be re-entered and reintegrated into society in a more seamless way so that they don’t commit crimes, that’s also an investment. It’s just, it’s worth it, because you’re not going to have to pay again for their incarceration, which is very costly.
TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS: Okay, Dr. Kevin Sabet, tell us a little bit about where our listeners can go to learn more about the Hyannis Consensus and all the other really good work that you do.
KEVIN SABET: Appreciate it. So, they can go to GoodDrugPolicy.org That’s GoodDrugPolicy.org to look at the Hyannis Consensus and also, you know, read up about our foundation. And then if they’re interested specifically on the marijuana issue in particular, which, again, is something with all these Delta 8 hemp derivatives. It’s such a complicated issue, they can go to LearnAboutSAM.org. And that’s SAM, like the name Sam, because it stands for Smart Approaches to Marijuana. LearnAboutSAM.org
TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS: Okay, Dr Kevin Sabet, President and CEO of the Foundation for Drug Policy Solutions. Thank you so much for being with us today on Family Policy Matters.
– END –