this is al jazeera america live from new york city. i'm tony harris with a look at today's top stories. a group of house republicans are meeting with president obama at the white house at this hour. earlier the president met with senate democrats. >> i -- listen, i think the president wants to deal with america's pressing problems just as much as we do, but in order to deal with these pressing problems we have got to sit down and have a conversation that leads to a negotiation that begins to solve these problems for the future and for frankly our kids and our grandkids. >> the white house called boehner's office encouraging,

but said the president wants to sniet writing. libya's prime minister was on abducted by a group of armed gunmen, but they are not going into specifics on the deal. it was a retaliation for last week's special forces raid that captured an al-qaeda suspect in libya. the state department says egypt's interim government must show more progress towards democracy before aid is resumed. those are the headlines. "inside story" is next on al jazeera america. ♪ attitudes and laws on marijuana are changing, creating a dizzying picture for smokers, law enforcement, and the federal government. pot and policy, the inside story

on al jazeera america. ♪ hello, i'm libby casey. it's now legal to smoke pot if you live in washington state or colorado. some other states have decriminalized marijuana, so you won't get thrown in jail for having a small amount. but wait, smoking pot is still a federal crime, and that's a conflict that hasn't been solved. the debate over marijuana is now woven into layers of social policy. from local law enforcement to the courts, the prisons, and the global war on drugs. >> well, it definitely smells like freedom. >> and a large majority of americans agree. 72% say the cost to enforce marijuana laws just aren't worth it, but navigating the maze of laws on the state level is

complicated. washington state and colorado are the only two states that have legalized pot for adults over 21. and while it's illegal to possess, use, buy, or grow marijuana in 26 states, silt approved for medical use in 16 where taking can any bus must come with a doctor's order. and it is decriminalized in other states. in august the obama administration declared it won't challenge flaws colorado and washington as long as they maintain federal rules in the selling and distributing of the drug. as laws on marijuana become more relaxed the justice department is shifting its policy on drug incarceration tackling the minimum sentences for non-violent offenders.

domestic drug policy impacts international drug policy too. in may the president addressed the issue in mexico. >> i also reaftfirmed our need o meet our responsibilities. ♪ we're joined by some authorities on u.s. drug policies, sam is the director of the drug policy project here in washington. kevin serves as an advisor to three presidents and is now the director of the institute on drug policy at the university of florida. he is the author of the new book, reefer sanity. and the director of the none ro profit organization leap which works to change drug laws.

welcome to all of you. sam if you are a pot smoker or want to be a pot smoker, what do you make of this patch work of laws. >> it's difficult at best. the obama administration has gone as far as it can go under our system of checks and balances to allow states to tolerate what is going on in colorado and washington state. >> kevin polls are showing that americans are increasingly okay with looser marijuana laws, so what do you make of that? and what should it mean for policy? >> well, i think to say that people should don't be to jail for mirn is very different than saying we should create a for-profit retail business for marijuana, which is exactly what we're about to do. although many states have different specific laws on the books, the reality is for people who smoke marijuana today or even in the bush administration

or the clinton administration, people are not being imprisoned for any appreciable amount if they are only smoking marijuana. there are a couple of places like new york city where if you are publicly smoking, but the chances of getting arrested every time you smoke a joint is something like under 3% as an adult. so people already aren't being put in prison for smoking marijuana. right now we're on the precipus of creating a huge retail business similar to the cigarette or alcohol industry. >> the white house says legalizing pot would create more of a burden on the criminal justice system and they point to alcohol as an example of that, because there were 2.7 million alcohol-related crimes in 2008 alone. >> well, i think that's wrong. i think our current policy

creates a huge burden on law enforcement. it's quite obvious. first of all we're spending somewhere around $3.6 billion per year in enforcing these marijuana laws. prohibition of marijuana, which is the largest money maker for organized crime in our neighborhood gangs. how do you think these gunni gue being bought? the cartel in mexico and the problems we had and the violence along the border, that's all about trafficking of drugs. it is our current policy that creates a huge burden for law enforcement. if we move towards tax and regulating marijuana, we can then get back to the business of violent crimes, solving violent crimes, murders, rapes, domestic violence, and so on, crimes against our children. >> i want to give you a chance to respond to that. >> sure. well, we're confusing two issues here. marijuana on the one hand,

[ inaudible ] a rand study, the most prominent study done on looking at the revenues for mexican cartels showed that marijuana was a minority of the revenue that big cartels get. the foreign cartels as well as the domestic gangs they are not making non-ny from marijuana. >> we're going to get to more of that later -- >> i want to ask major franklin -- >> yes, let's ask him. >> between 2001, and 2010 we arrested more than 7 million people in this country for marijuana. a marijuana arrest will ruin your life whether you spend time in prison or not. every arrest goes into cyberspace, and if i'm an employer and i am hiring people, and i have three people in front of me joshgs and one has an marijuana arrest and the other

two don't, i'm putting that person aside. >> coming up we'll take a look at the complicated job in washington.

welcome back to "inside story." we're continuing our discussion on marijuana laws and their impact on law enforcement and public policy. still with us, the director of the drug policy institute, kevin who has served as an advisor to three presidents. he is the author of the new book, reefer sanity. and the executive director of the nonprofit organization, law enforcement organization against prohah bigs or leap. should there be more uniformity about the laws and should congress get involved? >> yes, ultimately congress has to get involved. what attorney general holder did was urge u.s. attorneys who have a lot of latitude in how they interpret the districts, to use discretion to go after higher priorities, which makes a lot of sense. so congress still has

to -- to -- to pass the laws that will catch up with the states, which has tremendous implications for 2016 by the way. this is a time bomb, attorney general holder has left on the gop's doorstep. whoever seeks the nomination -- >> for the presidential race. >> yeah, has to please two wings of the party that are essentially at civil war with each other. it will be in full bloom in a year or two, and that is to say the social conservatives and tea parties who are generally against the use of marijuana and the libertarian side. >> kevin, political imply caseings and what do you think washington should do? >> well, first i think it's disturbing that the attorney general has said in this one case federal law is not going to be upheld. it compromises the president's

own objectives on voting rights, health care reform, because washington and colorado will be the first places in the world to fully legalize the for-profit retail sales of marijuana, the u.s. will now be in violation of several un treaties at a time when we are talking about the importance of international law for military intervention -- >> kevin we'll get into the international perspective later. but i want to hear from you what you think washington should do? and what are the political implications. >> sure. okay. so i think first of all in terms of what congress should do is enforce the law. this is a federal law, and the issue is this is not about going after people with small amounts -- with a joint or two and saddling them with a criminal record as neil was saying earlier. i don't want to do that, in fact the organization i started project sam talks about how we don't want to saddle people with

criminal records if their only crime is smoking a joint. but the issue is those people need treatment, and it hurts our ability to compete in intelligence and education, so i think congress should uphold federal law. in terms of 2016, i cannot imagine that the nominee is going to want to be the president running on the platform running up the big next tobacco. >> i want to get major franklin in the conversation here. if you are not just a policeman on the beat, but if you are a prosecutor, how do you deal with what attorney general eric tolder has said so far? >> first of all it is a blessing for them. because their case loads are overburdened. it will lighten their loads, but i want to comment real quick.

kevin and i agree on a lot of things regarding health and prison, but it is the responsibility of congress to change law, not to enforce the law, and that's what they are faced with right now. right now, nationwide, the constituents say let's tax and regulate marijuana. let's move away from these archaic policies that are responsible for so much crime, so much violence, the president even said we have guns and cash going south. how do you stop that? change the policies. >> respond to what we heard from kevin in terms of the potential of marijuana now stronger than it was back in the 60s or 70s? >> that's a red herring, number one. strong marijuana has always been around it just wasn't as available. but just because it is stronger doesn't mean it is less for you. it means you consume less of it. so if you are concerned about smoke, it's better that people

take something of higher purity. you smoke less of it. so it's a real misnomer to think that someone is going to smoke a whole joint like they would have years ago. >> setting a role model or example is one thing. but what is really happening with prohibition is that it's more available to kids. drug dealers hire children to sell drugs to other children. drug dealers on our corner are very good at recruiting young kids. this would change that. we take it from the street corner and put it behind a counter somewhere. >> kevin go ahead. >> we do that with alcohol and it's abysmabysmal.

the general population, drinks and -- and for alcohol it's about eight times more drinkers than smoking marijuana. yes, there are negatives to current policy that the three of us should agree on. a recent study when kids are asked what are the substances that are easiest to get? it was beer, tobacco, prescription drugs. the three classes of legal drugs were the top three you could get followed by marijuana. people are smoking more marijuana now. we just had a survey two days ago, the bottom line is 50% increase in daily marijuana smokers among kids over the last five years. i don't think that's something we should brush off that we have always had high potential marijuana. today's marijuana is sending more people to the emergency

room. it's not about reefer madness it's not about saying this is heroin or cocaine, it's about looking at the real consequences. so we don't need to go to one extreme or the other, but the real consequences is for the adolescent brain it is not safe. it's why the ama and others do not side on the side of legalization. >> i have to get to sanho in here. >> the same study showed for 12 to 17 year old kids the rate of marijuana use has gone down over the past decade. >> let's get to s -- why would that be significant? >> because we have a regulatory mechanism in a lot of these states now. when kevin said the study showed what is easy for kids to obtain

alcohol or marijuana or prescription drugs, obtain is different. kids can steal alcohol from their parent's cabinet or whatever, but they can't purchase it. >> and colorado and washington state what are you watching there to see how this unfolds? >> the first thing for me personally, since my background is law enforcement, i have been in touch with the law enforcement community, and i'm hearing good news that their work loads have changed. they can now focus more on these crimes of violence. they are waiting for a study to come out in january so they know exactly what their guidelines are. but they see good times ahead. >> all right. kevin you want to get a last word? >> yeah, law enforcement community, all of the major law enforcement communities sent a letter to holder expressing their outrage --

[ overlapping speakers ] >> talk to men and women on the streets who are doing the actual work -- >> yeah, i have. >> thank you gentlemen. that's all we have time for. sanho is going to stick ash, and when we come back we'll look at the impact of the patch work laws and what impact they are having south of the border in mexico and latin america. stay with us.

♪ we understand that much of the root cause of violence that's been happening here in mexico from which so many mexicans have suffered is the demand for illegal drugs in the united states. [ applause ] >> and so we have got to

continue to make progress on that front. i have been asked, and i -- i honestly do not believe that legalizing drugs is the answer. >> that's president obama during a visit to mexico in may. let's turn our discussion to how changing marijuana laws here in u.s. states are having an internation aim pact nvenlt we're joined by eric who is the vice president of the council of americas, and sanho stays with us. the president says he is not looking to legalize marijuana. but it has been in a couple of states what sort of message does that send to countries south of the border? >> it is complicated. we have had a policy to say illegal substances are bad and we need to reduce their production and flow. now that the united states may be reviewing some of those laws,

that is confusing the message, no doubt, it's complicating diplomacy and leading to the impression in some countries, that are saying why are we paying these high costs when you yourself may not even be following these policies. >> does the obama administration have a different voice speaking to countries outside of the u.s. than it does to hear at home. >> yes, obama has to be careful, because in colorado and washington state, it received more votes. there is a lot of money and budgets, so messing around with that causes a lot of waves within the government and a lot of protests, but also it's -- you have to maintain that kind of idealogical line if you are going to ask your allies

to spend so much treasury and blood to enforce these laws, that is shifting, because they are saying this is not right. and if your own citizens is telling you war on drugs has failed why should you continue to fight. >> in the context of the united states the drug trafficking patterns really don't go from [ inaudible ] to the united states. the drug trafficking patterns in the context of uruguay are much more important to argentina. it's likely the senate still has to pass the law, but it will probably happen, but i think it's a more complicated for the brazilians and argentines. in terms of the united states it's more of a symbolic issue. >> can the u.s. learn from it, though? >> absolutely.

i think what uruguay is saying, they are taking a proactive approach. they are stepping in and regulating these markets. and for those that oppose these policies, you have to answer why it is a better idea to give that revenue to criminal organizations, why not have the state tax it and sell it at a lower cost so you undermine the criminals. >> we hearted from the president a recognition that americans are in some ways -- in large part responsible for the drug war, because americans are the purchasers by and large, so eric how do you deliver a message that makes sense outside of this country when we're the ones with the problem. >> well, we are not the only ones with the problem, but we clearly have a problem. political leaders in the united states take responsibility for that and say this is a shared issue in mexico

ju don't have the majority of people who want legalization. it's a very small minority. so it cuts a little bit both ways because they see the issue not just in terms of whether or not the product moved to the united states, but what it is doing to the local communities and the crime that it brings one point that he mentioned they would like to expand a little bit more. the cartels are involved in a lot of bad things, people trafficking, money laundering, and things that go far beyond drug trafficking. we're now seeing them globalizing to asia, so this is a law enforcement rule of law issue as much as it is a drug issue, so you can cut down the demand, and that's a very important aspect, but at the

same time i don't think it's a reality if indeed demand dried up in the united states, that the cartels would go away, they wouldn't, they would find other areas to get involved in. >> two thirds of uruguayans say they don't want marijuana legalized. so how much should government listen to the populous? >> they should listen but they should also lead. it's counter intuitive to end prohibition for a lot of people. if you are living in mexico and central america, you are struggling to make ends meet, and economic theory is not your thing, and so when you see crime and lawlessness, you want law and order. that's understandable, but it's very often counter intuitive, so being tough is not the same as being effective, that by escalating the war on drugs, you end up providing a greater price point if you will, that is on

drug traffickers. by raising the risk for traffickers they are charge the next person much, much more money. we will never make these substances disappear by making them more valuable. >> what are you watching in washington state and colorado? >> i think it has huge implications because the united states has got to find a policy consistency here if we're going to talk to friends and allies and people who don't agree with it to ask them to do certain things on our behalf. >> that's it from the team in washington, d.c. and for me libby casey. you can keep this debate going by logging on to our facebook page or on twitter. thanks for watching. ♪