Introduction to the '70s Rockefeller New York Drug Laws Time excerpt
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, New York legislators faced a drug problem they feared was growing out of control. Federal statistics showed as many as 559,000 users nationwide and state police saw a 31 percent increase in drug arrests by 1972. In response Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, a liberal-leaning Republican who was said to have had presidential aspirations, created the Narcotic Addiction and Control Commission in 1967, aimed at helping addicts get clean. After the program proved too costly and ineffective, New York launched the Methadone Maintenance Program, which similarly caused little reduction in drug use. But by 1973, calls for stricter penalties had grown too loud to ignore, prompting Albany to enact legislation that created mandatory minimum sentences of 15 years to life for possession of four ounces of narcotics — about the same as a sentence for second-degree murder. The statutes became known as the Rockefeller Drug Laws — a milestone in America's war on drugs and the subject of one of the most abrasive legal tug-of-wars in the nation. The laws almost immediately led to an increase in drug convictions, but no measurable decrease in overall crime. Meanwhile, critics argued that they criminalized what was primarily a public health problem, incarcerated nonviolent felons who were better off in treatment, caused a jump in recidivism rates, and prevented judges from using discretion in sentencing. In January, during his State of the State address, New York Gov. David Paterson told his audience: "I can't think of a criminal justice strategy that has been more unsuccessful than the Rockefeller Drug Laws."
CONTINUED AT BOTTOM OF PAGE.....
1970
Public interest attorney R. Keith Stroup founds the National Organization
for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) in Washington, D.C.
The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) becomes law and for the first time sets up a
scheduling system for illicit and licit substances, classifying cannabis as a
schedule I controlled substance with “a high potential for abuse; …
no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States; …
[and a] lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision.”
The CSA called for a presidential commission to convene to
examine cannabis policy, later to be known as the Shafer Commission.
1971
First political pro-reform conference,
the First People’s Pot Conference,
convened by NORML in Washington, D.C.
1972
The Shafer Commission recommends that cannabis should be decriminalized for personal use; and that personal cultivation be allowed along with small transfers for no profit (Nixon and US Congress reject recommendations). NORML takes the commission findings to all fifty states encouraging adoption of state decriminalization laws.
NORML files first ever lawsuit to re-schedule cannabis
for medical use, under the Controlled Substance Act, NORML vs. DEA.
Amorphia merges into NORML.
1973
Oregon becomes the first state to pass cannabis decriminalization legislation
1975
NORML helps Robert Randall of Washington, D.C.
become first legal medical cannabis patient ever in America.
1976
President Jimmy Carter endorses the Shafer Commission’s findings
and sends a statement to Congress on August 3 asking them to
decriminalize cannabis possession in America for adults.
1980
President Reagan is elected to the White House
(along with his wife Nancy’s anti-cannabis crusade)
and this effectively ends ‘an era of decriminalization’,
from 1973 to 1981, culminating with eleven states having
decriminalized marijuana possession at the time
(AK, OR, CA, CO, NE, MN, MS, OH, NC, NY and ME).
1980-1988
NORML’s darkest days politically and financially with most of the political efforts directed to 1.) Successfully lobbying 36 states to pass non-binding medical cannabis laws (usually legislative resolutions encouraging the federal government to change the Controlled Substances Act to allow for the medicinal use of cannabis) and 2.) Organizing local stakeholders for cannabis law reforms in the form of active NORML chapters in most of the states.
1988
Drug Enforcement Administration administrative law judge Francis Young rules in favor of NORML to make cannabis a medicine, citing among many affirming reasons “Marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man.”
The Reagan administration and Department of Justice appealed DEA administrative law judge Young’s ruling seeking to uphold a total ban on cannabis—even for sick, dying or sense-threatened medical patients whose physicians recommend cannabis as a safe and non-toxic therapeutic agent.
1991
San Francisco become the first city to pass an ordinance
—with a 79% support rate— in favor of
medical patients having access to cannabis.
1993
NORML launches its first webpage on
the World Wide Web (aka, Internet)
1994
California Governor Pete Wilson vetoes popularly
passed medical cannabis from the state legislature.
In a two-to-one decision, the US District Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C.
ruled in favor of the Drug Enforcement Administration in
long-suffering NORML vs. DEA. NORML chooses not to appeal to
US Supreme Court in fear of making ‘bad’ law.
1996
California citizens place on the ballot and champion to victory Proposition 215 which sought to ‘legalize’ medical cannabis use, possession and cultivation. After numerous federal legal challenges, the basic law and right of doctors to recommend cannabis were affirmed.
1997
NORML Foundation founded
Arizona’s voters also approve medical cannabis laws,
but, because of problems with the language of the initiative,
the law was never implemented.
1998
Numerous states pass medical cannabis laws and patient protections: Alaska, Oregon, Washington and Arizona (though, again, the legislature failed to implement the will of the voters who approved a second medical cannabis initiative).
A legislative effort in Oregon is successfully made to place a
‘cannabis re-criminalization’ initiative on the ballot, which fails,
32%-68% as Oregonians prove they really like their
so-called cannabis ‘de-crim’ laws.
1999
Maine voters approved a medical cannabis initiative.
Timeline 2
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/drug_law_timeline.htm
1970
Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act
Replaces and updates all previous laws concerning narcotics and other dangerous drugs. Empasis on law enforcement.
1972
Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act
Establishes federally funded programs for prevention and treatment
1973
Methadone Control Act
Regulates methadone licensing
Heroin Trafficking Act
Increases penalties for distribution
1973
Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration (ADAMHA)
Consolidates NIMH, NIDA, and NIAAA under umbrella organization
1973
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
Remodels Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs into DEA
1974 and 1978
Drug Abuse Treatment and Control Amendments
Extends 1972 act
1978
Alcohol and Drug Abuse Education Amendments
Sets up education programs within Department of Education
1980
Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment, and Rehabilitation Amendments
Extends prevention education and treatment programs
1984
Drug Offenders Act
Sets up special programs for offenders and organizes treatment
1986
Analogue (Designer Drug) Act
Makes use of substances with similar effects and structure to existing illicit drug illegal
1988
Anti-Drug Abuse Act
Establishes oversight office: National Drug Control Policy
1992
ADAMHA Reorganization
Transfers NIDA, NIMH, and NIAAA to NIH and incorporates ADAMHA's programs into the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
Timeline 3
http://facultypages.morris.umn.edu/~ratliffj/psy1081/drug_laws.htm
1970
Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (Controlled Substance Act of 1970)-- Specifically stated that drugs under act were now under Federal jurisdiction and dealt with both narcotics and other "dangerous" drugs. Also dealt with prevention and treatment. Treated marijuana differently-- making a separate commission to study this and report in 1972. Continuing with the trend started in 1965, and in contrast to early acts, this one was to control drugs directly, not through taxes-- moving enforcement out of Treasury to Justice and established the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). Attorney General in charge of enforcement; but Health, Education, and Welfare (through the FDA) in charge of defining what needs to be controlled, considering:
1) pharmacologic actions
2) other scientific knowledge about it and related drugs.
3) risk to public health
4) dependence (psychic or physiologic) potential
5) whether the drug was a pre-curser for other drugs listed.
Alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine excluded.
The 1970 Controlled Substances Act brought about our current approach to drugs. Addiction and drug use are now squarely in a behavioral realm with the government's role being in enforcement. The laws that followed 1970 have been to strengthen or expand the Controlled Substances Act:
1972
Marijuana recommended to be downgraded to misdemeanor. (Previously, states treated as felony resulting in extreme penalties). Oregon first state to do so in 1973-- resulting in small increase in use. Other states followed (inc. Minn.) In 1970's, Carter administration worked toward Federal decriminalization.
1984, 1986
Drug Analogue (1984) and Anti-Drug Abuse (1986) Acts-- The Drug Analogue act was enacted to deal with "designer" drugs, allowing immediate classification of a substance as a controlled substance. Previous to this, people were avoiding prosecution with chemically altered versions of controlled substances with similar drug effects because they didn't appear on the Schedules. The Anti-drug abuse act focused on penalties for trafficking.
1988
Omnibus Drug Act (a.k.a., "Chemical diversion and trafficking act")-- added registration requirements on airplanes and boats, dealt with arms sales, money laundering, and added death penalty for murder connected with drug-related felony. Toughened penalties for users and allowed for confiscation of vehicles used in distribution.
1990s
Legislation and litigation regarding tobacco has taken on a new twist, with cigarette manufacturers being challenged for health costs associated with use of their product. This has led to settlements with numerous states, notably the Minnesota settlement in 1998. Further, the Food and Drug Administration proposed in 1996 to place tobacco under its control (excluded in the Controlled Subst. Act and also the Pure Food and Drug Act that established the FDA.) The FDA maintains that cigarettes are a "nicotine delivery device" and, therefore, similar to any other drug product. Congress has disagreed and the cigarette manufacturers have challenged this in the courts. The Clinton administration has sided with the FDA. The Supreme Court heard arguments on this matter in Fall, 1999. The Supreme Court decided against the FDA being able to regulate tobacco, citing the Controlled Substances Act as deliberately excluding tobacco from the FDA's control. Congress would need to act to change the law.
1996
The Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act restricts access to chemicals and equipment used in the manufacture of methamphetamine and increases penalties for possession of these plus the manufacture and/or sale of the drug. The Combat Meth Act of 2005 amended the Controlled Substances Act to make pseudophedrine (the active ingredient in Sudafed and a necessary ingredient for home meth production) a Schedule V drug to limit amounts that can be purchased and requiring I.D. This amendment has been credited with a significant drop in home meth production. However, distribution has shifted to cheaper sources from, predominantly, Mexico.
The text goes through a similar timeline, splitting medicinal controls from drug abuse controls after 1914. You should be familiar with this material before contributing to the drug criminalization/legalization discussion.
...CONTINUED FROM TOP OF PAGE
The effect of the new sentencing guidelines has been dramatic. Drug offenders as a percentage of New York's prison population surged from 11% in 1973 to a peak of 35% in 1994, according to the state's Corrections Department. The surge was mostly a result of convictions for "nonviolent, low-level drug possession and drug sales" Paterson told TIME, "people who were addicted and were selling to try to maintain their habits." According to Paterson, just 16% had a history of violence. "And so really," he says, "you're shipping off a generation." In 1979, the laws were amended, reducing penalties for marijuana posession. But despite the ongoing criticism in New York, other states began to enact laws to deal with their own drug problems. In 1978, for example, Michigan passed its infamous "650-lifer" law which required judges to incarcerate drug offenders convicted of delivering more than 650 grams of narcotics. Also, in 1987, Minnesota passed laws that imprisoned offenders for at least four years for crack cocaine possession. (Read "Mandatory Sentencing: Stalled Reform".)
By the mid-1980s, the war on drugs was in full swing, as the crack epidemic threatened to overwhelm American cities' criminal justice systems. Drug crimes had become increasingly violent, prompting calls for even stricter mandatory minimum sentencing laws. In 1986, the Reagan Administration passed a law requiring federal judges to give fixed sentences to drug offenders based on variables including the amount seized and the presence of firearms.
But activists began to increasingly complain that the laws were too harsh and that non-violent offenders were being lumped in with narcotics kingpins and unfairly left at the mercy of the penal system. Celebrities including hip hop mogul Russell Simmons and actors Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon lobbied for the cause. In 2004, prompted by increasing pressure from activists and legislators, then-Gov. George Pataki signed the Drug Law Reform Act, a move that significantly changed the Rockefeller laws' sentencing guidelines. The harshest mandatory minimum was relaxed to 8 to 20 years and those convicted of serious offenses were allowed to apply for lighter sentences. (Read "The Wire's War on the Drug War".) Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1888864,00.html#ixzz2GrmbK7rC
Rockefeller New York Drug Laws Time excerpt shared on 1/2/2013 from http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1888864,00.html