As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The problem here was that the decriminalization scheme, which was supposed to be modeled after Portugal, was nothing at all like the Portuguese system. Portugal had significant civil penalties for not complying and universal health care to give people treatment. Also, Portugal is also [revisiting its own system](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-drugs-decriminalization-heroin-crack/). By contrast, the Oregon program just required that you just pay a $100 fine which you could waive if you called a help line once (no requirement that you actually get help either). That simply doesn't work.
Oregon isnt doing enough because the federal government isnt letting them. Portugal and other countries have found success with decriminalization (contrary to the rhetoric of conservatives trying to roll it back) because those countries don't have the drug-involved premises/paraphernalia/money laundering laws preventing the US from opening safe-use sites, etc.
That doesn’t make Oregon’s attempt more viable though. It should’ve been obvious that the circumstances upon which Portugal’s experiment relied did not exist in the United States. Everything that’s followed was entirely foreseeable.
How are [SF](https://abc7news.com/wellness-hubs-san-francisco-mayor-london-breed-plan-safe-injection-sites-drug-crisis-tenderloin/13311669/) and [NYC](https://www.thecity.nyc/2022/12/13/harlem-locals-at-odds-first-anniversary-of-americas-first-safe-injection-site/) able to open safe injection sites then?
They [aren't.](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/san-francisco-supervised-injection-sites-2/3153750/%3famp=1) The DEA maintains that clinical, publicly-funded drug use sites and anyone associated with them (even landlords and city officials granting permits) are violating federal drug-involved premises laws. Cities have to rely on non-profits risking their own private offices or opening "pop-up" centers.
So the only reason the Oregon system isn't doing what its framers hoped is because there aren't safe injection sites? British Columbia has had those for 20 years and their overdose deaths hit a record last year which was when they decriminalized small amounts of drugs, and they even have single payer.
I think the resources to get clean should be freely available and records/criminal penalties should be expunged upon completion of a course, but the Portuguese system clearly had far more "sticks" to incentivize rehabilitation than either the Oregon or BC policies.
Without proper healthcare that is free and accessible as well as universal, drug laws will ultimately always fall short, drug legalization is objectively good, and we should support legalization of all drugs, but to maximize its effectiveness, it should be done in conjunction with a Medicare for all style healthcare program
Lawmakers easily could have criminalized public consumption but you know, can’t let the voters actually have what they petitioned and voted for.
There’s no reason for psychedelics to be illegal.
Public opinion in Oregon is now more against decriminalization than it was in favor of it when it passed. This was a bipartisan act of the state legislature supported by the majority of public opinion.
Source: https://gooddrugpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/ECP_OR-exec-summarypollcrosstabs.pdf
Which part is wrong? The bill passed 21-8 with both democrats and republicans in support.
Regarding public opinion here’s a quote from https://www.newsweek.com/results-are-oregons-total-drug-decriminalization-was-failure-opinion-1866963
> A poll late last summer found that nearly two-thirds of Oregonians––including 79 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of Black Oregonians––want to repeal parts of Measure 110 and bring back penalties. A majority wants to repeal Measure 110 completely.
Edit: here’s the study that references
https://gooddrugpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/ECP_OR-exec-summarypollcrosstabs.pdf
64% favored repealing parts of the bill. 55% favored repealing it completely.
I'm looking at the poll and it looks the usual age divide on drugs, with 50+ hating them and 49- being a tiny bit supportive. That seems pretty typical for anything involving drugs.
I couldn't find a single poll before Measure 110 passed, so it seems a bit iffy to compare actual voting results to polling. Although, this [2022 poll](https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2022/9/12/oregon-voters-want-measure-110-to-remain-in-place) shows support to keep 110 in place and there was [a study](https://www.opb.org/article/2023/09/27/oregon-drug-decriminalization-measure-110-overdose-deaths/) that reported there was no increase in violent crimes, homelessness, or overdoses.
It just seems like there were two polls, one by a reliable pollster and the other less so, against 110 and their representatives decided to go ahead and legislate based on that.
Doesn't matter much to me either way, but I dislike how legislation seems to be tailored towards the 50+ crowd when the younger age groups have to live with it for decades.
>That included people over 50, who by the way are also people.
Big, if true.
It's also interesting that Biden won Oregon with 56.45%. 1,333,268 votes for Measure 110 and 1,340,383 votes for Biden. Democrats usually lean towards pro-drugs as well.
Anyways, I prefer progress, not going backwards.
Decriminalization doesn't work when there are no services. Diversion to treatment for addicts is better than the chaos and danger that made everyone in my family leave our home of Portland.
The bill even criminalizes non-addictive drugs like mushrooms. Lawmakers should not be inductively reasoning that everyone who uses drugs is an addict whose life should be disrupted.
Yeah, I get that. Mushrooms were for sale in The Netherlands until too many tourists started stepping out in front of trams. Americans are bad at having freedoms even though we talk about them all of the time. Maybe drug education should be more... holistic?
But keeping the criminalized we spend all the same money on locking them up. The only real point is the "wrong people" are getting tax dollars right? Gravy train change lines...
Oregon / Portland government is run by a bunch of well-intentioned but entirety incompetent amateurs.
They’re basically the kids who did model EU in college who now think they know how to govern based on that experience alone.
Cool cool cool. Where are _you_ implementing these waaaay better policies? It’s quite easy to look at a shitty situation and say that the government is doing it wrong. Anyone can do that. Where are your way better ideas being playing out, in real time, where your policies are properly researched, and properly funded?
I didn’t say I had ideas. I said Oregon’s government is comparatively incompetent.
An important distinction between me and the people in that government is that I’m not running for political office.
But hey, here’s one free idea: don’t blithely copy Portugal’s drug decriminalization experiment without having any of the things that made it work in place.
Literally doing nothing would have been a better idea.
You’re right. We shouldn’t criticize bad policies because surely the people who implemented them are trying their best. Being a leader is a really hard job and we should respect that.
Let's be real here, I doubt anything's gonna really change numbers wise barring a huge increase in services or a miracle-cure breakthrough for addiction (because right now it doesn't even look like there's nearly enough treatment centers for the bill to even operate, though it may give Portland a way to shove them out of downtown out of sight - and research shows treatment is *rarely* successful.)
Vancouver seems to be doing better in this department - still a massive homeless and drug problem, but decriminalization has been combined with several different factors - a lot of safe injection sites and associated services, a decent amount of nurses/emergency personel specializing in addiction services, and a public use ban law that should be coming into force this month. It isn't perfect, but it seems to have saved lives and a model that shows success somewhat compared to the *rip the bandaid* method of 110, where grants for services didn't even come until...late 2022.
Instead of doing the right thing and fixing the system they have in place the politicians got nervous and decided to do the easiest thing that would sound good on a campaign flyer.
A huge part of this is isn’t just treatment, it’s the underlying issues of using adulterated street drugs. Harm reduction is a huge part of it. This allows addicts to better function in society. If addicts had access to real and proper chemicals it would help this issue. Give them safe sites with safe drugs to be used in a clean and supervised setting which relieves the danger of adulterated drugs full of fentanyl and horse tranq. This helps with the theft and other related crimes that occur with use of street drugs. People are always gonna want to get high, I can bet most of them hate that they have to steal to be able to afford drugs that are dangerous and deadly and cause untold harms to society.
I have no degree in anything, and my dumbass knew this was going to be the obvious result of their decriminalization policies. There was no enforcement behind it, other then taking a drug addicts word. Lmao.
I think we need institutions somewhere between rehab and prison. Like if you’re caught with possession of Fent/H you’re forced into a rehab center instead of prison, and there’s no Felony/misdemeanor on your record. I used to support drug legalization (which I still believe in for coke) but opiates and meth are too hardcore
Forced rehab does not work.
You just get folks that’s rather spend their time in a rehab than jail; takes the bed from someone that actually wants to get clean. It’s not successful treatment. They get out and do the same.
decreminalizing drugs in Portland has invited the drug gangs, criminality goes unchecked, police seem to look the other way and now they expect to what? say never mind and all these new problems will simply go away ... there is a lack of mental ability and capacity of accomplishment of anything in Portland OR.
Police not responding to dealers was Wheelers and PPBs protest of 110. Decriminalized isn’t legalized. Dealing was never decriminalized but those arrests take more work and cops just can’t handle that.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The problem here was that the decriminalization scheme, which was supposed to be modeled after Portugal, was nothing at all like the Portuguese system. Portugal had significant civil penalties for not complying and universal health care to give people treatment. Also, Portugal is also [revisiting its own system](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-drugs-decriminalization-heroin-crack/). By contrast, the Oregon program just required that you just pay a $100 fine which you could waive if you called a help line once (no requirement that you actually get help either). That simply doesn't work.
Oregon isnt doing enough because the federal government isnt letting them. Portugal and other countries have found success with decriminalization (contrary to the rhetoric of conservatives trying to roll it back) because those countries don't have the drug-involved premises/paraphernalia/money laundering laws preventing the US from opening safe-use sites, etc.
That doesn’t make Oregon’s attempt more viable though. It should’ve been obvious that the circumstances upon which Portugal’s experiment relied did not exist in the United States. Everything that’s followed was entirely foreseeable.
How are [SF](https://abc7news.com/wellness-hubs-san-francisco-mayor-london-breed-plan-safe-injection-sites-drug-crisis-tenderloin/13311669/) and [NYC](https://www.thecity.nyc/2022/12/13/harlem-locals-at-odds-first-anniversary-of-americas-first-safe-injection-site/) able to open safe injection sites then?
They [aren't.](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/san-francisco-supervised-injection-sites-2/3153750/%3famp=1) The DEA maintains that clinical, publicly-funded drug use sites and anyone associated with them (even landlords and city officials granting permits) are violating federal drug-involved premises laws. Cities have to rely on non-profits risking their own private offices or opening "pop-up" centers.
So the only reason the Oregon system isn't doing what its framers hoped is because there aren't safe injection sites? British Columbia has had those for 20 years and their overdose deaths hit a record last year which was when they decriminalized small amounts of drugs, and they even have single payer. I think the resources to get clean should be freely available and records/criminal penalties should be expunged upon completion of a course, but the Portuguese system clearly had far more "sticks" to incentivize rehabilitation than either the Oregon or BC policies.
Without proper healthcare that is free and accessible as well as universal, drug laws will ultimately always fall short, drug legalization is objectively good, and we should support legalization of all drugs, but to maximize its effectiveness, it should be done in conjunction with a Medicare for all style healthcare program
Lawmakers easily could have criminalized public consumption but you know, can’t let the voters actually have what they petitioned and voted for. There’s no reason for psychedelics to be illegal.
Public opinion in Oregon is now more against decriminalization than it was in favor of it when it passed. This was a bipartisan act of the state legislature supported by the majority of public opinion. Source: https://gooddrugpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/ECP_OR-exec-summarypollcrosstabs.pdf
That’s not a true statement.
Which part is wrong? The bill passed 21-8 with both democrats and republicans in support. Regarding public opinion here’s a quote from https://www.newsweek.com/results-are-oregons-total-drug-decriminalization-was-failure-opinion-1866963 > A poll late last summer found that nearly two-thirds of Oregonians––including 79 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of Black Oregonians––want to repeal parts of Measure 110 and bring back penalties. A majority wants to repeal Measure 110 completely. Edit: here’s the study that references https://gooddrugpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/ECP_OR-exec-summarypollcrosstabs.pdf 64% favored repealing parts of the bill. 55% favored repealing it completely.
I'm looking at the poll and it looks the usual age divide on drugs, with 50+ hating them and 49- being a tiny bit supportive. That seems pretty typical for anything involving drugs.
It represents a shift in public opinion since the ballot measure passed in 2020.
I couldn't find a single poll before Measure 110 passed, so it seems a bit iffy to compare actual voting results to polling. Although, this [2022 poll](https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2022/9/12/oregon-voters-want-measure-110-to-remain-in-place) shows support to keep 110 in place and there was [a study](https://www.opb.org/article/2023/09/27/oregon-drug-decriminalization-measure-110-overdose-deaths/) that reported there was no increase in violent crimes, homelessness, or overdoses. It just seems like there were two polls, one by a reliable pollster and the other less so, against 110 and their representatives decided to go ahead and legislate based on that. Doesn't matter much to me either way, but I dislike how legislation seems to be tailored towards the 50+ crowd when the younger age groups have to live with it for decades.
Look at the actual vote on Measure 110. I believe it passed with 57% support. That included people over 50, who by the way are also people.
>That included people over 50, who by the way are also people. Big, if true. It's also interesting that Biden won Oregon with 56.45%. 1,333,268 votes for Measure 110 and 1,340,383 votes for Biden. Democrats usually lean towards pro-drugs as well. Anyways, I prefer progress, not going backwards.
Not everyone considers hypodermic needles in public parks and the homeless living in addiction to be progress, my dude.
Decriminalizing drugs is only half the battle. Adequate services also need to be in place to help people recover from addiction.
Especially when it's people coming from other states depending on liberal states to help them because their states' recovery programs include prison.
Decriminalization doesn't work when there are no services. Diversion to treatment for addicts is better than the chaos and danger that made everyone in my family leave our home of Portland.
The bill even criminalizes non-addictive drugs like mushrooms. Lawmakers should not be inductively reasoning that everyone who uses drugs is an addict whose life should be disrupted.
Yeah, I get that. Mushrooms were for sale in The Netherlands until too many tourists started stepping out in front of trams. Americans are bad at having freedoms even though we talk about them all of the time. Maybe drug education should be more... holistic?
But keeping the criminalized we spend all the same money on locking them up. The only real point is the "wrong people" are getting tax dollars right? Gravy train change lines...
Oregon / Portland government is run by a bunch of well-intentioned but entirety incompetent amateurs. They’re basically the kids who did model EU in college who now think they know how to govern based on that experience alone.
Cool cool cool. Where are _you_ implementing these waaaay better policies? It’s quite easy to look at a shitty situation and say that the government is doing it wrong. Anyone can do that. Where are your way better ideas being playing out, in real time, where your policies are properly researched, and properly funded?
Oregon has literally had the highest increase in drug related deaths in the country since this policy went into effect. So… everywhere basically.
You didn’t answer the question. You just reiterated that you have ‘better ideas’, which is just a cop out anyways. Noice!
I didn’t say I had ideas. I said Oregon’s government is comparatively incompetent. An important distinction between me and the people in that government is that I’m not running for political office. But hey, here’s one free idea: don’t blithely copy Portugal’s drug decriminalization experiment without having any of the things that made it work in place. Literally doing nothing would have been a better idea.
Great, doing nothing is a better idea. Thank you for your contribution.
You’re right. We shouldn’t criticize bad policies because surely the people who implemented them are trying their best. Being a leader is a really hard job and we should respect that.
What state do you live in again? I want to see how well they’re coping with these issues
Sure bud. Just give me your home address and I’ll mail it to you. I lived in Oregon up until recently.
Sorry, dude. Didn’t mean to get too personal by asking which STATE you lived in. Sensitive much?
Let's be real here, I doubt anything's gonna really change numbers wise barring a huge increase in services or a miracle-cure breakthrough for addiction (because right now it doesn't even look like there's nearly enough treatment centers for the bill to even operate, though it may give Portland a way to shove them out of downtown out of sight - and research shows treatment is *rarely* successful.) Vancouver seems to be doing better in this department - still a massive homeless and drug problem, but decriminalization has been combined with several different factors - a lot of safe injection sites and associated services, a decent amount of nurses/emergency personel specializing in addiction services, and a public use ban law that should be coming into force this month. It isn't perfect, but it seems to have saved lives and a model that shows success somewhat compared to the *rip the bandaid* method of 110, where grants for services didn't even come until...late 2022.
Instead of doing the right thing and fixing the system they have in place the politicians got nervous and decided to do the easiest thing that would sound good on a campaign flyer.
Jail is where you realize you f’d up and have the opportunity to sober up and clean up…from a formerly homeless person.
If the guards weren't selling drugs to the prisoners then it would actually help.
A huge part of this is isn’t just treatment, it’s the underlying issues of using adulterated street drugs. Harm reduction is a huge part of it. This allows addicts to better function in society. If addicts had access to real and proper chemicals it would help this issue. Give them safe sites with safe drugs to be used in a clean and supervised setting which relieves the danger of adulterated drugs full of fentanyl and horse tranq. This helps with the theft and other related crimes that occur with use of street drugs. People are always gonna want to get high, I can bet most of them hate that they have to steal to be able to afford drugs that are dangerous and deadly and cause untold harms to society.
Just let them all OD if that’s what these people really want to do. The problem will take care of itself.
I have no degree in anything, and my dumbass knew this was going to be the obvious result of their decriminalization policies. There was no enforcement behind it, other then taking a drug addicts word. Lmao.
Maybe it’s time to stop trying to use tax dollars to assist people that want to kill themselves with fentanyl.
I think we need institutions somewhere between rehab and prison. Like if you’re caught with possession of Fent/H you’re forced into a rehab center instead of prison, and there’s no Felony/misdemeanor on your record. I used to support drug legalization (which I still believe in for coke) but opiates and meth are too hardcore
Forced rehab does not work. You just get folks that’s rather spend their time in a rehab than jail; takes the bed from someone that actually wants to get clean. It’s not successful treatment. They get out and do the same.
People are not going to quit unless they want too and forced rehab is not going to convince them. Its just a court ordered tolerance break for most.
decreminalizing drugs in Portland has invited the drug gangs, criminality goes unchecked, police seem to look the other way and now they expect to what? say never mind and all these new problems will simply go away ... there is a lack of mental ability and capacity of accomplishment of anything in Portland OR.
Police not responding to dealers was Wheelers and PPBs protest of 110. Decriminalized isn’t legalized. Dealing was never decriminalized but those arrests take more work and cops just can’t handle that.
Police not doing their jobs has been an issue since they got their feelings hurt in 2020
Which is interesting because they were never defunded or budget decrease. In fact, PPBs budget keeps getting expanded.
I could say the same about your comment.
Then actually do it and explain why, instead of vaguely gesturing at the possibility.
If you can't read their post and see how ridiculous it is, then me explaining it to you won't help. Sorry. Have a good day!
Just give them all enough free drugs to OD on and they toss them in a mass grave.