The Rand Corporation is notorious for its history of pro-drug-war studies. A report of theirs from earlier this year on Proposition 19 was full of dubious claims based on what even they had to admit were just guesses. Once again, with their newest report about marijuana legalization, the Rand Corporation buries the lede from their own study, one which strongly supporters the anti-cartel claims made by marijuana reformers. While not part of the press release, the study, in fact, backs up one of the main arguments of the supporters of marijuana legalization. The study determines legalizing, taxing and regulating marijuana could eliminate all the profits the Mexican drug cartels currently make thanks to cannabis prohibition. From the Rand Study (PDF):
We believe that legalizing marijuana in California would effectively eliminate Mexican DTOs’ revenues from supplying Mexican-grown marijuana to the California market. As we elaborate in this chapter, even with taxes, legally produced marijuana would likely cost no more than would illegal marijuana from Mexico and would cost less than half as much per unit of THC (Kilmer, Caulkins, Pacula, et al., 2010). Thus, the needs of the California market would be supplied by the new legal industry. While, in theory, some DTO employees might choose to work in the legal marijuana industry, they would not be able to generate unusual profits, nor be able to draw on talents that are particular to a criminal organization.
Of course, this is not the story the Rand Corporation wanted to push. Instead, their press release was shaped to encourage the media to write stories with a fairly negative spin on Prop 19. The study tries to call into question the US government’s statistic
(also cited by supporters of Proposition 19) that marijuana accounts for 60 percent of Mexican drug cartel profits. According to their study, which they admit is full of uncertainty, marijuana sold in the US accounts for only about $2 billion in annual revenue, and about 15 to 26 percent of all revenue for Mexican drug cartels. Not surprisingly, since California is only one of 50 states, legalization of marijuana in California alone would, they project, only cut off a portion of the cartels’ profits from marijuana. This leads to a finding by Rand–which they try to present as damaging to pro-legalization arguments–that the passage of Prop 19 would only eliminate about two to four perent of cartel profits.
Leaving the vagaries of their numbers aside, any supporter of marijuana legalization knows that you won’t fully eliminate the illicit profits from marijuana in this country until it is fully legalized and regulated. No one has been claiming just the passage Prop 19 alone would eliminate all of the Mexican drug cartels’ marijuana profits across the whole country. Prop 19 is just the first big step toward a broader adoption of a more sensible marijuana policy that denies the cartels a huge source of funding.
What is important is that even this Rand study fully backs up the inherent logic of those pushing for marijuana legalization (see page 19). The study shows legalizing and regulating marijuana in one region would effectively shut down the cartels’ lucrative marijuana trade to that location. Whether legalizing and regulating marijuana in this country would take away 60, 50, or only 26 percent of the dangerous Mexican drug cartels’ revenue is impossible to pinpoint, due to the lack of good statistics on illegal products. Whether legalizing marijuana would make the murderous cartels terrorizing Mexico $6 billion a year poorer or a mere $2 billion, I still think it is a very good idea to take the first step toward depriving dangerous criminals of billions of dollars in revenue.


21 Comments


If you search Google News for “marijuana legalization California” you will see that the report is being spun exactly as Jon predicts.
Damnedest thing, I just commented on the AP version of this story (via MSNBC), and it was headlined
Study: Legalizing pot won’t hinder Mexican cartels.
I pointed out that it would only BEGIN to, and that we need to legalize now, if only because we can’t do it forty years ago.
From my NewsVine comment:
Legalizing pot will only BEGIN to hinder the “cartels.” It’s a big, ugly monster that’s grown and thrived on decades of prohibition, and it’s not going away overnight. But it’ll never be torn down until after it stops being built up.
Legalizing will reduce crime here in America as well. No one will have to talk teenagers out of going into the drug-selling business if there is no opportunity for them to.
The latest – In the case of the man who was shot and killed on Falcon Lake, the Mexican Army has just taken delivery of the severed head of the chief investigator. To the prohibitionists I ask: When will it be enough? What has to happen before you wake up and face what your ‘moral stance’ has done?
Anyone remember the party that got massacred a couple of months back? Eighteen teenage kids killed when some goons attacked an incorrect address? Can someone explain how that supports the public health?
END PROHIBITION NOW – Because we can’t do it forty years ago.
The War On Drugs is Worse Than Drugs.
Funny. It was ONDCP, not Prop 19, that had pushed the “60% of Mexican DTO profits” line. My guess is that some dim bulb thought, “Let’s use the Mexican violence to lay a guilt trip on the stoners!” similar to their post 9/11 “marijuana use fuels terrorism” ad campaigns.
Sec’y of State Clinton emphasized that 60% figure, as did Terry Goddard (AG of Arizona) and others, and followed it up with pronouncements about “Americans’ demand for Mexican marijuana fuels these violent thugs…” They thought we’d react by thinking, “My God, I like to get high, but I just can’t live with blood on my hands! I guess I should drop the pot and get a six-pack instead…”
Instead, we reacted by saying, “Whoa, 60%?!? You realize that we only buy that schwaggy Mexican brickweed because we can’t buy a nice bag of American-grown buds like we’d buy a bottle of rum, right? How about you legalize it and let Americans build businesses and jobs in the industry AND make some tax revenue to boot, instead of enriching murderers with gold-plated AK-47s and albino tiger pens (yes, seriously) who behead federal officials and drown police in vats of acid?”
They laughed at us, literally chuckling as they dismissed legalization rising to #1 in multiple White House online polls. But as bullets fly into in El Paso and bodies pile up (literally) in the streets of Juarez, the people began to fear the effects of prohibition more than the uncertainty of legalization. Prop 19, not given a chance, defied all typical initiative polling and grew in support over time. My god, those stoners might actually legalize marijuana in California!
So now, suddenly, those Mexicans are only getting 1%, maybe 2% of their income from California marijuana smokers. Don’t bother legalizing marijuana, they’re telling us, because it would “only” impact the DTOs by a billion or two.
Russ Belville
NORML Outreach Coordinator
It’s ridiculous how they argue that since it won’t take a big enough chunk that it isn’t worth doing. Any money, especially if it’s in the billions, that we can prevent from going to drug cartels is a good thing.
Can we really accept information from RAND Corp.? Take a look at who they are and how they got started, and who funds them. This is why all their findings agree with the govt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAND_Corporation
What a beautiful picture of a beautiful plant. Even if it was not psychoactive (in addition to its myriad of other uses), it would still be a great houseplant.
Banksters Laundered Mexican Cartel Drug Money
Submitted by Robert Oak on Tue, 06/29/2010 -
All of that death and mayhem on our Southern Boarder(sp) and in the U.S. over the illegal drug trade of course brings in the Banksters to launder the money.A new report, outlined by Bloomberg, implicates three Banksters laundering money for the Mexican drug cartels. They are Wells Fargo, HBSC and Bank of America. Seems when a DC-9, carrying 5.7 tons of cocaine was busted in Mexico, the police found just a little bit of other stuff.The smugglers had bought the DC-9 with laundered funds they transferred through two of the biggest banks in the U.S.: Wachovia Corp. and Bank of America .Wachovia, now owned by Wells Fargo made a habit of laundering Mexican Drug Cartel money.This was no isolated incident. Wachovia admitted it didn’t do enough to spot illicit funds in handling $378.4 billion for Mexican-currency-exchange houses from 2004 to 2007. That’s the largest violation of the Bank Secrecy Act, an anti-money-laundering law, in U.S. history — a sum equal to one-third of Mexico’s current gross domestic product.
Drug traffickers used accounts at Bank of America in Oklahoma City to buy three planes that carried 10 tons of cocaine, according to Mexican court filings.Federal agents caught people who work for Mexican cartels depositing illicit funds in Bank of America accounts in Atlanta, Chicago and Brownsville, Texas, from 2002 to 2009.(Excerpt,Economic Populist)
Banks Financing Mexico Gangs Admitted in Wells Fargo Deal – Bloomberg
Jun 29, 2010 … Smith Discusses Drug Money Laundering by U.S. Banks …. Five days later, Wells Fargo promised in a Miami federal courtroom to revamp its …
http://www.bloomberg.com/…/banks-financing-mexico-s-drug-cartels-admitted-in-wells-fargo-s-u-s-deal.html – Cached►
Wall Street Is Laundering Drug Money and Getting Away with It …
Jul 16, 2010 … Wachovia was acquired by Wells Fargo in late 2008. The bank’s penalty for laundering over $380 billion in drug money is going to be a …
http://www.alternet.org/…/wall_street_is_laundering_drug_money_and_getting_away_with_it/ – Cached
The Banksters Laundered Mexican Cartel Drug Money | The Economic …
Jun 29, 2010 … A new report, outlined by Bloomberg, implicates three Banksters laundering money for the Mexican drug cartels. They are Wells Fargo, …
http://www.economicpopulist.org/…/banksters-laundered-mexican-cartel-drug-money – Cached
Does anyone who isn’t brain dead NOT realize that legalizing drugs would eliminate drug dealers’ profits? Has NO ONE read anything about Prohibition? WTF?
Since the 1950s, the RAND has been instrumental in defining US military strategy.[citation needed] Their most visible contribution is the doctrine of nuclear deterrence by Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), developed under the guidance of then defence secretary Robert McNamara and based upon their work with game theory.[13] Chief strategist Herman Kahn also posited the idea of a “winnable” nuclear exchange in his 1960 book On Thermonuclear War. This led to Kahn being one of the models for the titular character of the film Dr. Strangelove.]
We need to talk about the huge profit realized by the PTB on confiscated property, such as cars and their contents? Here in Texas, one must actually petition to have their property returned if found innocent of charges of possession with intent, snd if said personal property has been disposed of, well, that’s too bad.
LE realizes a handsome profit through the sale of confiscated property, often that of relatively minor offenders. What motivation would they have to change that policy and end the revenue stream which feeds their ever growing appetite for more and better military apparatus with which better to intimidate serve and protect the populace? And that is only if they use the funds correctly.
Yup. Do the anti-19 forces really want to see the cartels import their thuggery into California’s national forests? Because that’s what’s happening. Make it legal, keep the cartels from taking over a part of the country eminently suited for growing that cash crop. (Where else are they going to go? Desert southwest’s too dry, southeast’s too wet, anything north of the Mason-Dixon line’s too cold — unless it’s in California.)
I wonder how many police officers have been killed or wounded over the years in the course of enforcing marijuana laws?
I find it highly interesting that over at msnbc.com, they have a headline stating exactly the opposite – that legalization won’t have any impact on Mexican cartel profits. I’m so sick of biased news organizations on BOTH sides of every issue!
Rand corporation is a tool of the federal government and has a very long history of dishonest studies to promote the drug war
I don’t think any reformer thinks Prop 19 will immediately shread the cartels. However, it’s a step. Capone didn’t disappear the day after alcohol was legalized. Bathtub gin was around for a while after relegalization. However, we have the right to hold our “social experiment, to test new concepts.” Status quo hasn’t and won’t get anything done. We know that. Prop 19 is not a catch all. It’s simply an “experiment.” Experiments work or fail. Yet it has to be tried. If it passes, we have to be careful to be sure to keep it in a workable environment because the Utopians will be out to sabotage it if they can. Passage only means MORE WORK! We’re ready for that!
While bullets fly into El Paso and bodies pile up in the streets of Juarez, and thugs with gold-plated AK-47s and albino tiger pens are beheading federal officials and dissolving their torsos in vats of acid, here are some facts concerning the situation in Holland. –Please save a copy and use it as a reference when debating prohibitionists who claim the exact opposite concerning reality as presented here below:
Cannabis-coffee-shops are not only restricted to the Capital of Holland, Amsterdam. They can be found in more than 50 cities and towns across the country. At present, only the retail sale of five grams is tolerated, so production remains criminalized. The mayors of a majority of the cities with coffeeshops have long urged the national government to also decriminalize the supply side.
A poll taken earlier this year indicated that some 50% of the Dutch population thinks cannabis should be fully legalized while only 25% wanted a complete ban. Even though 62% of the voters said they had never taken cannabis. An earlier poll also indicated 80% opposing coffee shop closures.
http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2010/02/public_split_on_cannabis_legal.php
It is true that the number of coffee shops has fallen from its peak of around 2,500 throughout the country to around 700 now. The problems, if any, concern mostly marijuana-tourists and are largely confined to cities and small towns near the borders with Germany and Belgium. These problems, mostly involve traffic jams, and are the result of cannabis prohibition in neighboring countries. Public nuisance problems with the coffee shops are minimal when compared with bars, as is demonstrated by the rarity of calls for the police for problems at coffee shops.
While it is true that lifetime and past-month use rates did increase back in the seventies and eighties, the critics shamefully fail to report that there were comparable and larger increases in cannabis use in most, if not all, neighboring countries which continued complete prohibition.
According to the World Health Organization only 19.8 percent of the Dutch have used marijuana, less than half the U.S. figure.
In Holland 9.7% of young adults (aged 15 to 24) consume soft drugs once a month, comparable to the level in Italy (10.9%) and Germany (9.9%) and less than in the UK (15.8%) and Spain (16.4%). Few transcend to becoming problem drug users (0.44%), well below the average (0.52%) of the compared countries.
The WHO survey of 17 countries finds that the United States has the highest usage rates for nearly all illegal substances.
In the U.S. 42.4 percent admitted having used marijuana. The only other nation that came close was New Zealand, another bastion of get-tough policies, at 41.9 percent. No one else was even close. The results for cocaine use were similar, with the U.S. again leading the world by a large margin.
Even more striking is what the researchers found when they asked young adults when they had started using marijuana. Again, the U.S. led the world, with 20.2 percent trying marijuana by age 15. No other country was even close, and in Holland, just 7 percent used marijuana by 15 — roughly one-third of the U.S. figure.
thttp://www.alternet.org/drugs/90295/
In 1998, the US Drug Czar General Barry McCaffrey claimed that the U.S. had less than half the murder rate of the Netherlands. That’s drugs, he explained. The Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics immediately issued a special press release explaining that the actual Dutch murder rate is 1.8 per 100,000 people, or less than one-quarter the U.S. murder rate.
Here’s a very recent article by a psychiatrist from Amsterdam, exposing Drug Czar misinformation
http://tinyurl.com/247a8mp
Now let’s look at a comparative analysis of the levels of cannabis use in two cities: Amsterdam and San Francisco, which was published in the American Journal of Public Health May 2004,
The San Francisco prevalence survey showed that 39.2% of the population had used cannabis. This is 3 times the prevalence found in the Amsterdam sample
Source: Craig Reinarman, Peter D.A. Cohen and Hendrien L. Kaal, The Limited Relevance of Drug Policy
http://www.mapinc.org/lib/limited.pdf
Moreover, 51% of people who had smoked cannabis in San Francisco reported that they were offered heroin, cocaine or amphetamine the last time they purchased cannabis. In contrast, only 15% of Amsterdam residents who had ingested marijuana reported the same conditions. Prohibition is the ‘Gateway Policy’ that forces cannabis seekers to buy from criminals who gladly expose them to harder drugs.
The indicators of death, disease and corruption are even much better in the Netherlands than in Sweden for instance, a country praised by UNODC for its so called successful drug policy.
Here’s Antonio Maria Costa doing his level best to avoid discussing the success of Dutch drug policy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lExNjEhdSkY&feature=related
The Netherlands also provides heroin on prescription under tight regulation to about 1500 long-term heroin addicts for whom methadone maintenance treatment has failed.
http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/free-heroin-brings-everyone-a-bit-peace
The Dutch justice ministry announced, last year, the closure of eight prisons and cut 1,200 jobs in the prison system. A decline in crime has left many cells empty. There’s simply not enough criminals
http://www.nrc.nl/international/article2246821.ece/Netherlands_to_close_prisons_for_lack_of_criminals
For further information, kindly check out this very informative FAQ provided by Radio Netherlands: http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/faq-soft-drugs-netherlands
or go to this page: http://www.rnw.nl/english/dossier/Soft-drugs
I live in Oregon and I am going to vote against M74. M74 taxes, for both producers and dispensaries, 10% of gross sales. That can add up to as much as 90% of your profits. In fact, it can cause you to loose money. Then there is location. You cannot have either facility within 1000 feet of a school. Do you know how many schools there are in Portland? So both producers and dispensaries have to rent or purchase commercial space. Wave good by to more of your diminishing profits. Maybe someone else sees profit where I don’t, if so, please point it out to me. Growing medicine to improve the lives of the ill is a good thing, but when you live under the poverty line, it would be good to get a little more than just covering the costs.
Jesus said “Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.” (Matthew 7:12).
I know I wouldn’t want my child sent to jail with the sexual predators, or my aging parents to have their house confiscated and sold by the police, for growing a marijuana plant.
Let’s change the world. Let’s get registered and vote.
Just Google your state name and the phrase, voter registration. In many states, you can simply print off the form and mail it in, but do it today! Registration deadlines are upon us!
James A. Thomson, RAND Corporation’s president and chief executive officer since 1989 is also a director of Encysive Pharmaceuticals, which, in 2008, was acquired by -32 billion dollar per year- Pfizer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Thomson_(executive)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_corp
http://www.linkedin.com/companies/encysive-pharmaceuticals
http://mcsocal.com/blog/tag/pfizer/
We are glad that people interested in California’s marijuana debate are discussing the latest RAND Corporation report on the topic. We encourage everyone to read the report on our website: http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP325/. If you don’t have time to read all 45 pages, at least look at the summary bullet points on page 3 and 4 of the report. They provide a short outline of the report’s major findings and address the issues raised by postings made here.
Regards,
Warren Robak
RAND Corp. media relations
The RAND Corp numbers are garbage, actually. They’re all based on the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), where a federal employee goes to your house with a survey, and asks you to admit to illegal drug use. RAND figures that’s accurate within 20%…right.
Who would be stupid enough to say “yes” to a fed, in your house, asking if you’re breaking the law?
That’s like the military enlistment form with the checkbox “Are you homosexual, yes / no”. Anybody checking “yes” was turned down, of course. From that form, the military concluded only 1% of people are gay..