
Not what a black market looks like. (via Curtis Gregory Perry on Flickr)
Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske fears the creation of “a black market that would come into play” if California votes to legalize marijuana. Question for Kerli: what the hell would you consider the $45 billion annual industry in the US that exists despite marijuana prohibition?
Kerlikowske made the curious remarks to NPR’s Michel Martin on Friday when questioned about the administration’s stance on marijuana legalization. Here’s a transcript of the exchange:
MARTIN: One of the arguments, though, that many people make is that just our whole philosophy toward drug use is just flawed, that there are those who of course who favor a dramatic liberalization of drug laws.
That they argue really the issue is prohibition and that if we have the same attitude toward illegal drugs now that we had to with prohibition, it didn’t work then, it’s not going to work now. And what do you say to that?
Mr. KERLIKOWSKE: Well, we know that certainly California is poised to and will be voting on legalizing small amounts of marijuana. And that vote is scheduled for November of this year.
There are a number of studies and a number of pieces of information that really throw that into the light of saying that, look, California is not going to solve its budget problems, that they have more increase or availability if drugs were, or marijuana, was to become legalized. That in fact you would see more use. That you would also see a black market that would come into play. Because why wouldn’t in heaven’s name would somebody want to spend money on tax money for marijuana when they could either use the underground market or they could in fact grow their own.
So there are a whole lot of good reasons why we don’t want to see drugs legalized. And that’s why the Obama administration has a very clear and direct opinion on that.
There’s a lot in here, but let’s start with the basics. Marijuana production is a $45 billion annual industry in the United States, very little of which any state considers legal, and that the federal government considers totally illegal. If that’s not a black market, what is? Either Drug Czar Kerlikowske is ignorant of this reality, which is doubtful, or he considers both the domestic cultivation and sale of marijuana, and the invading Mexican drug cartels, something other than a “black market.”
If marijuana were legalized, regulated, and taxed, as California’s Prop 19 would do, the “black market” that currently exists for the sale of marijuana would be largely irrelevant. A black market exists, by definition, for illegal transactions. Prop 19 would bring this huge industry out of the shadows, where the millions of current marijuana users could make their purchases from legitimate, regulated businesses, as opposed to from dealers that more likely than not buy their pot from Mexican drug cartels. Those cartels, in turn, would see their cash crop of marijuana dry up and defund the rest of the cartels’ dirty work. Marijuana legalization is the ultimate killer of black markets.
The second part of the Drug Czar’s argument seems to be that if marijuana were legalized, California wouldn’t see much, if any, tax revenue; that marijuana usage would increase; and that people would evade taxes on marijuana. All those false conclusions appear to be based on a recent study from the RAND Corporation. That study blared dire headlines about the use and cost of marijuana, though the substance of the study stated quite differently.
An analysis of the study by Drug War Rant found that the study’s author’s grossly spinned the actual findings.
There have been a lot of media reports in the past few days talking about the new RAND study that shows how California legalization will result in as much as an 80% decrease in marijuana prices and doubling of marijuana use.
Except, of course, that the RAND report doesn’t really say that at all.
It’s a 55 page report with lots of interesting stuff in it, but when it comes to an actual projection of change in marijuana use with legalization, they have absolutely no idea.
The report was covered with caveats like “unclear,” “uncertain,” “hard to answer,” “for the sake of exposition,” “readers should not interpret our use,” and “the absence of marijuana-specific information.” Basically, the whole damn report is one big question mark, authored by anti-legalization crusader Rosalie Pacula.
Without RAND, and without unfounded fears of a “black market” under legalization, Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske is left with nothing in his argument against legalization aside from the government’s need to continue to spend $15 billion every year to fight drugs like marijuana. Which makes Kerlikowske’s answer to fighting marijuana even more hilarious:
My colleagues, including Ed and others, don’t talk about a war on drugs. They talk about, we can’t arrest our way out of the drug problem in this country. So we have to focus on reducing demand.
Good luck with that, Kerli.



40 Comments

growing your own and not paying taxes on it is legal, there for not even part of the black market. Just like it is legal to brew your own beer and not pay taxes on it.
The Obama Administration’s approach to fighting unemployment, solving America’s income inequality problem, and creating new opportunities for engagement sure goes a long way toward reducing the demand. Not.
What a moron Kerli is. The idea that legalization will CREATE a black market is looking-glass wrong. And to think Obama put him in charge of America’s drug policy.
Makes you wonder. Sorta. He needs to go back to his day job with Moe and Larry.
Gil is just a conscientious employee giving his all to do his job as required by law, and the Drug Czar is required by law to lie if the truth doesn’t promote his mission. Anyway, here’s an analysis of that law if you don’t believe me:
http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/drug-czar-required/
I was going to include a line about home brewing but forgot – so thanks for the reminder! I hope Kerli starts cracking down on home brew kits soon….
Yes, totally. I hit that point in a segment for Russia Today TV a couple months ago, which you can watch here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZUX4KF0PtY
WARNING: it was super hot, and as such, I look like a sweaty lunatic :)
What.An.Idiot.
I’m guessing that when Prohibition was the law of the land before repeal, he’d have given exactly the same interview about Daemon Rum to NPR back then.
The “War on Drugs” is nothing more than a boondoggle for the military-industrial, and prison-industrial complex to generate revenue via an intricate scheme of fear and trepidation of allowing drugs to be legal, and thus put them out of business.
I don’t see a whit of difference between Orahma’s appointee Mr. Kerlikowske and that idiot (whose name escapes me at the moment) who made these same arguments under Jimmy Carter.
There really does appear to be a “band of stupidity” that must stretch as a bubble around DeeCee people
Edit: but this is also Dems still fighting the political battles of Nixon et al – “Dems are soft on crime/drugs/terrah/[fill-in-the-blank]“
God damned un-america administration of republicans in democratic clothing.
How much do we pay this ass to spout bullshit. You can smoke pot and still be president, right mr cool?
Publish the studies and information so we can debate you totaliarian position.
I wonder if it will create a black market in Canada and Mexico too?
I think that if you sell small amounts, like one does of objects at a garage sale, you don’t have to pay taxes, either.
William F. Buckley, that bastion of Conservativism, advocated for the legalization and taxation of drugs. This prohibition has worked just as well as the era of alcohol prohibition. It is time to dig up the old stuff Buckley wrote and just plaster it everywhere.
So we have to focus on reducing demand by shooting people and with predator drone strikes, because that’s working so well in other US controlled drug areas.,
There fixed.
I know people who would love to be legal growers. They have land, they have the resources, they pay taxes, they send their kids to school. They have a marketing plan in place, they know it wouldn’t be hard to set up distribution lines… Imagine: Yuppies, tired of their rat race life, move to northern California and set up a little artisan MJ farm. It comes packaged in a tidy little brown bag with letterpress printing in organic soy ink. It has a web site with a subdued earth tone color scheme, low-key, low depth-of-field photos of MJ flowers. Ad copy telling the tale of this strain of MJ, how it survived prohibition, how it was cultivated by loving dope peddlers from British Columbia before being imported to the US, where it now thrives in happy, organic growing conditions, delivered by horse-drawn carriage to the city, to the boutique in the shopping center next to Chico’s and Restoration Hardware.
Does that not appeal? :-)
Ummm… Cause then they wouldn’t get arrested?
It is telling that a report from the Rand corporation, which as as pro authoritarian/imperialism an institute as exists, cannot draw a single conclusion as to what will happen to consumption and price if prop. 19 passes. I believe they are secretly of the opinion that the ultimate effect would be to give California an annual cash infusion in excess of 20-30-40 billion or more, but they are unable to explicitly say so because the people that fund the likes of Rand do not want to hear it. What they wanted was a study that showed without a doubt legalization would create more problems than it solves. What they got was a study that laid out that theory, then proceeded to produce not one iota of evidence to support it. So all they could do is lean back on that old dodge, “we don’t know what will happen but we made an educated guess and we think (and hope it goes unsaid) it will all be bad.” Not a very convincing argument to uphold the status quo, given how current policy is by all accounts a miserable and costly failure. I never thought I’d see it in my lifetime but it seems like it might pass this year. If not, bring it back in the next election. Sooner or later it’s going to be legalized.
Geeeeeeeeeeeeeezz, unreal.
To paraphrase a line from a Batman movie…
This country needs an enema!
I had no idea Obama had worked with Moe and Larry…dang, the thangs ya larn reading blogowiches…
I don’t know why Oregon needs dispensaries. They just make money for the few that sell there and the folks who cannot afford meds will have to do without. Many of the present growers give their patients one or two ounces per month free, others charge, I mean ask for donations. There will be no more of that. I’m voting NO!
Somebody needs to roll Gil a spliff, sit him down, and explain informal labor markets to him.
Lisa Derrick is upstairs!
FDL Movie Night: Filmmaker Roundtable
And yet, not peep one from the RAND Corp. or the News Media reagarding the seizure/profits to local law enforcement organizations. Mexi-cartels were only able to establish grow-ops in the national forests due to the forfeiture laws that sent otherwise law-abiding Californians into the same National Forests due to the threat of loss of property due to forfeiture laws.
The concept of “illegal drugs” in the US today is laughable. The US is probably the most drug addicted country on the planet.
The much vaunted capitalist economy requires some illegal commodity that is in great demand as a source of untraceable, untaxable cash to lubricate the gears just as it requires slave labor.
Camelot in America was created by Joe Kennedy during Prohibition. Who can forget Iran Contra? Wachovia Bank has admitted to laudering drug money, and there has been speculation that the recent economic crisis could have been much worse if the largest banks had not had billions in illegal drug money to tide them over.
Legalizing pot will deprive the capitalists of a very important source of liquidity.
Most assuredly. It has also been proven (Iran Contra) that there are some people who can move and market illegal drugs at will while law enforcement turns a blind eye.
Perhaps that is why President MIC Obombya stated that the USA is not quite ready for decriminalization without giving a single reason (O’bullshit or otherwise) as to why we are not ready.
One other thing that goes unreported, it is no longer safe to backpack in many places in California and, I suspect, a lot of other states as well. About 5 or 6 years back I stumbled across on old forest service road in a National Forest that was protected by armed guards. One of them came down and told me I was trespassing on private land, so I quickly left, and reported the incident to the local Forest Service. Nothing ever came of it as far as I know. I have stopped backpacking.
Very appealling, although I do hear thru the grapevine that those same yippies in Humboldt and Lake Counties, CA are bewailing the legalization of pot bc it will make their incomes lower. And that’s probably factual. That said, I’m still all for legalization.
At the end of the day, this is about a bunch of different businesses, including Prisons & Big PhARMA, who don’t want pot legalized because it’ll cause a downturn in their profits.
The Big Boyz don’t care about the hippies in NoCal, but they do listen to the other big Boyz who’re whining about lost profits. Eff ‘em.
I suspect that everything he officially knows about marijuana is covered by Reefer Madness. Certainly that seems to be about the most recent information on pot that most government officials are aware of.
The drug caesar’s comments are an example of an attempt to put a positive spin on an untenable position that the administration has adopted, no doubt in the spirit of tri-partisanship. Me, myself, and I, Mr. Prez?
Much twisted and circular logic here, no doubt to keep the PDFA quiet.
Thing is, Mr. President, you are wrong. Jailing and prosecuting people for marijuana is very mean in spirit, now that facts of long-term cannabis usage are pretty much well known.
What I fail to see is is how ANYONE could argue for continued criminalization of cannabis while alcohol is is legal and governments derive tax money from it.
There is a real disconnect at the White House when it comes to having the courage to avoid positions of political expediency.
They are actually picking on my religion.
Since the first amendment clearly states that congress has no right to do that, they just ignore the law. They are, in fact, terrorists, and operating completely outside of the law themselves.
If our DOJ wasn’t so completely corrupt, and in on it, they never would get away with it like they do.
Michael Whitney is upstairs!
Maloney Pushes for Enforcement of BP Recovery Worker Respirator Guidelines
If “crime/drugs/terrah/[fill-in-the-blank]“ are code words for a group of activities that are part of a secret club, maybe being “soft” on it is a code word for the threat of exposure.
Lets say for example this all powerful group runs drugs, launders money, knocks over governments, and deals is prostitutes – of all ages, besides being pedophiles, then I can see how making the accusation of someone being ‘soft’ could be a warning to those in the know of a whistle-blower.
Just a thought.
Don’t forget my line of ‘tainted’ communion wafers and other happy cookie varieties.
I plan on going into major production of a high quality product line, possibly including candies. Sounds like fun huh?
So you think he is in complete ignorance about all that organized crime?
I doubt it, I think he knows pot is harmless and he is motivated by his racism. I think he has a religious prejudice against us.
Every time, and I mean EVERY time, a government tries to prohibit its citizens from whatever, a Black Market for that item immediately springs up.
It happened in the old Soviet Union. It’s happening in Communist China today. It happens in one hardcore Muslim country after another. It happened during alcohol prohibition in America. And it definitely is happening in America today over pot. (To name just a few “prohibition leads to a black market every time” instances throughout history). But the conservatives all over the world (even those labeled leftists) still keep trying to ban one thing after another…which is ALWAYS good news for the black marketeers everywhere. Supply and demand, or demand fueling supply, inevitably, inexorably, in case after case, throughout history, driven underground. Some things never change, no matter how insane.
Eh … you did great. I can see that you can take the heat. Keep up the good work. :)
watertiger is upstairs!
Late Night: GOP Joins in Campfire Rendition of “Those Were The Days”
Sounds like you’ve spent some time thinking about this.
Jon, while you are correct about home brewing beer (at least it’s legal on the federal level, though I think a state could make it illegal), I don’t think you are correct about home growing marijuana, even for personal use.
WOW! thats the most incredible, brain dead, village genius statement of all the brain dead things ive ever heard any of them say. the drug grand poobah is worried their could be black market for drugs. wow.
Hi all,
The RAND study on marijuana legalization is available for free at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP315/. The site also includes links to the 9 working papers that provide many of the background calculations used in the study. For those who don’t have time to read the report, there is also a one-page summary.
If you want to see how other media outlets are covering the report, you may want to check out this piece in the LA Times (which suggests that CA NORML finds RAND’s price drop figure to be reasonable, but that it would not occur overnight–we agree):
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/08/local/la-me-0708-pot-legalization-20100708
and this piece in The Economist:
http://www.economist.com/node/16591136/
Beau Kilmer
Co-Director, RAND Drug Policy Research Center
Great post and commentary. I think people are right that Wall Street would collapse if the black market for illicit drugs – and corporate money laundering – were eliminated. However I question the assertion by RAND that drug use would increase. The experience in other countries that have redirected enforcement costs into free drug treatment and rehabilitation on demand(and other important social programs, such as decent housing, education, health care and employment support) is that illicit drug use either decreases or remains unchanged. We have never had free drug treatment on demand in the US and I think we should give it a try. Eliminating the black market would also get the CIA out of the drug trafficking business – and decriminalizing drugs is worth it for this reason alone. Who wants to live in a country where the government openly supports a criminal enterprise? I write about my own close encounter with some of the street level federal and police informants who sold drugs on the side in my recent memoir THE MOST REVOLUTIONARY ACT: MEMOIR OF AN AMERICAN REFUGEE (I currently live in exile in New Zealand).