Notable new discussions of marijuana’s potential pros and cons in New York papers
I find discussions and debates over marijuana policy and reform so interesting because they are so dynamic and include a wide array of concerns ranging from criminal justice to economic development to public health. A couple of recent pieces from New York papers reinforce this reality.
A few days ago, the New York Post, which has tended to have coverage critical of marijuana and marijuana reform, published an article on the potential health benefits of marijuana use for older adults: “Researchers ‘surprised’ by the brain benefits of cannabis usage in adults over 40.” Here is how it starts:
Pass the pot to Grandma — her brain might thank you. A new study is challenging long-held assumptions about cannabis, finding that middle-aged and older adults who use the drug may actually see some brain and cognitive benefits.
The twist comes as cannabis use is climbing among older Americans. Research shows that nearly 1 in 5 people ages 50 to 64 reported using marijuana in the past year, along with 5.9% of those 65 and older.
Today, the New York Times, which has run opinion pieces generally supportive of marijuana reform, published a lengthy editorial stressing the harms of marijuana use advocating for greater restrictions and regulations and taxation of marijuana: “It’s Time for America to Admit That It Has a Marijuana Problem.” Here is an excerpt:
[T]here is a lot of space between heavy-handed criminal prohibition and hands-off commercial legalization. Much as the United States previously went too far in banning pot, it has recently gone too far in accepting and even promoting its use. Given the growing harms from marijuana use, American lawmakers should do more to regulate it. The most promising approach is one popularized by Mark Kleiman, a drug policy scholar who died in 2019. He described it as “grudging toleration.” Governments can enact policies that keep the drug legal and try to curb its biggest downsides. Culture and social norms can play an important role, too.
The larger point is that a society should be willing to examine the real-world impact of any major policy change and consider additional changes in response to new facts. In the case of marijuana, the recent evidence offers reason for Americans to become more grudging about accepting its use.
Over the past several decades, supporters of marijuana legalization often called for a strategy of “legalize and regulate.” It is a smart approach. Unfortunately, the country has pursued the first part of it while largely ignoring the second.
There is much that could and should be said about both of these press pieces, but I am especially eager to note that the NYT talk of “grudging toleration” is quite reminiscent of what the Shafer Commission famously recommended as sound policy in Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding back in 1972. What’s old is new again.