Washington state had every reason to decriminalize drugs. Geographically and ideologically, it lies between Oregon and British Columbia, which have both embraced liberal drug regimes. Groups in Washington have advocated ballot initiatives similar to the one that brought decriminalization to Oregon two years ago. And a U.S. Supreme Court decision knocked down Washington’s existing law, placing it on track to legalize narcotics at the beginning of July.
Instead, Washington Governor Jay Inslee last month signed into law a new policy that keeps most drugs illegal and increases penalties for possession – amounting to a rejection of the approach taken by the state’s neighbours.
On Tuesday, however, Seattle’s city council voted down an ordinance to conform to the new law, following a raucous public comment session that drew widespread criticism of the state approach. Overdose deaths in that city increased by 22 per cent last year, and the council rejection underscored the deep fractures over drug policy that remain in the state.
“Jail is not a solution to a public-health problem. In fact, jail will exacerbate the problem,” councillor Tammy Morales argued,
But, responded councillor Alex Pedersen, “many people will see our city as descending from defund to decriminalize.”
The council vote leaves Seattle as a potential island without municipal prosecution, but does not change the new state law, which makes knowing possession a gross misdemeanour punishable with a fine of up to US$1,000 or six months in jail for the first two offences – and a year after that. The law also urges authorities to send offenders for treatment, and provides US$44-million in additional funds for mobile methadone clinics and other supports for people with substance-use disorders.
It’s far different from Oregon, where voters’ approval of the Measure 110 ballot initiative in 2020 removed criminal penalties for possession of small amounts of virtually all hard drugs, while providing authorities limited options to encourage treatment.
“When Oregon enacted Measure 110, our antennae went up,” said Roger Goodman, a Democratic Washington state representative who chairs the House public safety committee. The electorate in his state has been generally supportive of decriminalization, and he has been a champion of such efforts. But the pandemic brought rising crime rates and new public concern.
“It was the most challenging political environment to decriminalize drug possession,” Mr. Goodman said.
Oregon and B.C. have embraced decriminalization at the same time fentanyl has overtaken drug supplies across the continent. Both jurisdictions have ugly statistics to show for it. In B.C., overdose deaths per capita more than doubled between 2019 and 2022; no province has a worse rate.
As B.C. is poised for drug decriminalization experiment, will it help stem deadly tide?
Oregon, meanwhile, has the second-highest rate of substance use disorder in the U.S., while occupying last place in the provision of treatment services. Fatal overdoses in the state rose 20 per cent in the first year of decriminalization. That policy created a US$100 fine for possession, which could be waived if a person sought treatment. The state also diverted hundreds of millions of dollars in marijuana tax revenue to providing additional treatment services.
But in the first year, that spending resulted in just 136 people starting treatment, state statistics showed.
“Even a lot of Measure 110 ardent supporters are kind of looking in horror at what’s happening right now in Oregon,” said Kevin Sabet, who served in the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy under three presidents and who has been a vocal critic of liberal drug policies.
“The voter intent was to make it easier to get off of drugs. And that’s certainly the opposite of what’s happening.”
Oregon’s decriminalization of harder drugs has served as “a warning shot” for other states that have considered similar approaches, he said. Now a resident of Vancouver, Mr. Sabet described parts of the downtown as “depravity and poverty at the level that makes Skid Row in L.A. almost look like Beverly Hills.”
In Oregon, meanwhile, local headlines have conveyed despair. One 11-hour period in April brought as many overdoses in downtown Portland. A state survey late this spring showed nearly two-thirds in support of re-criminalizing possession.
“What we’re seeing in some of these early reports from these areas that have decriminalized is that it doesn’t work,” said Jim Carroll, who was the U.S. drug czar under former president Donald Trump.
Another critic of decriminalization, Ken Williams, who is a retired judge and founder of Washington State Association of Drug Court Professionals, argues that people often do not enter treatment voluntarily: “Sometimes what it takes is facing prison,” he said.
Decriminalization advocates, however, say it is fear of punishment that keeps people from seeking help. In Oregon, overdose deaths fell in 2022, even as drug fatalities slightly rose across the U.S.
Proponents of decriminalization in Oregon have argued it would dramatically reduce drug arrests of minority groups. State statistics bear that out, showing a 75-per-cent decrease in possession arrests for Black Oregonians over the past two years, although that is a modest change: Even before Measure 110, barely more than one Black Oregonian was arrested a day for possession state-wide. Decriminalization has had virtually no effect on incarceration rates for that demographic.
In Washington, meanwhile, the push for decriminalization continues. Malika Lamont, a progressive advocate who is director of Voices of Community Activists and Leaders – Washington, called her state’s new drug law “regressive,” and “driven by stigma.” She said critics of Oregon’s experience have been driven by “misinformation.” A rise in overdoses is more closely related to the spread of fentanyl, she said.
Relying on the justice system to steer people into treatment for medical issue is “bad social policy,” added John Hayden, a lawyer who does public-defence work and sits on Washington state’s substance use recovery services advisory committee, alongside Ms. Lamont. SURSAC recommended decriminalization earlier this year, before legislators chose a different course.
“It’s as if a whole segment of the law-making bodies just don’t read history – or don’t care,” Mr. Hayden said.
Mr. Goodman, the Democratic state representative, does not count among them. He expects coming years to bring renewed decriminalization attempts to Washington.
“The legislature is not ready to end the war on drugs,” he said. “But the people are.”
On Tuesday, Seattle’s city council rejected an ordinance to conform to the new law, following a public comment session that drew widespread criticism of the state approach. Overdose deaths in that city increased by 22 per cent last year, and the council’s rejection underscored the deep fractures over drug policy that remain in the state.
“Jail is not a solution to a public-health problem. In fact, jail will exacerbate the problem,” councillor Tammy Morales argued,
But, responded councillor Alex Pedersen, “many people will see our city as descending from defund to decriminalize.”
The council vote leaves Seattle as a potential island without municipal prosecution of a new state law that makes knowing possession a gross misdemeanour punishable with a fine of up to US$1,000 or six months in jail for the first two offences – and a year after that. The law also urges authorities to send offenders for treatment, and provides US$44-million in additional funds for mobile methadone clinics and other supports for people with substance-use disorders.
It’s far different from Oregon, where voters’ approval of the Measure 110 ballot initiative in 2020 removed criminal penalties for possession of small amounts of virtually all hard drugs, while providing authorities limited options to encourage treatment.