>> we have no chance. what do we do, ignore the problem

? there are things we can do. thethe goal should be to channel the trade every substance as well as other current illicit drugs and illegal channels come into the hands of reputable businesses which means requiring standards for labeling and dosage so that customers no what there getting. and then as citizens of a free society they get to make there own decisions. people see a percentage of the population has a great desire to get high one way or the other. people have been sniffing glue and paint thinner for decades. we are not about out those substances. it would not be effective if we tried. again the focus ought to be

on harm reduction policy one that tries to channel the trade through the hands of reputable businesses, guarantees accurate labeling and dosage and then allows people to remain free to make there own decisions for good or ill. nobody saidnobody said the ability to make these decisions will always ensure wise decisions. that is a matter of individual responsibility. the one thing that we can be sure is that prohibition of synthetic drugs, prohibition of designer drugs is not going to work any better than prohibition has with regard to alcohol in the 1920s or early 1930s or more traditional illicit drugs such as marijuana and cocaine in a decade sense. we ought to at least learn from that lesson and not apply the same failed model with this knew phenomenon.

thank you. [applause] >> thank you, ted. let me introduce our to distinguish commentators. since 1989 eric sterling has been the president of the criminal justice policy foundation, a private foundation, a private nonprofit organizational foundation that helps educate the nation about criminal justice issues and failed global drug policy. he was counsel from 1979 until 1989 when he was principal aid responsible for developing legislation. for example he was counsel prior to the emergency scheduling amendment in the 1984 comprehensive control act and the designer drug enforcement act of 1986 and he was the principal staffer

in developing the chemical diversion and trafficking act of 1988 that brought many of the common precursor meant -- precursor chemicals under dea jurisdiction including the ban on manufacture and distribution of free net round bottomed flasks which he tells me some people find hilarious. i don't know what that is but he will explain. three next round bottomed flasks. i don't have one. maybe that's why. mr. stirling helped found and serves on the board of directors of families against mandatory minimums and marijuana majority in the voluntary committee of lawyers and a number of other boards. eric received a ba in 1973 from haverford college. if all thatif all that was not enough he graduated from

hurricane island outward bound school and climbed the matterhorn in 1979. i can't top that. our 2nd commentator is the founder and president of the future of freedom foundation one and raised in louisville, taxes and received a ba in economics from the virginia military institute and lot agree for the university of texas. a trial lawyer, and adjunct professor at the university of dallas we toggle on economics.economics. in 87 he left the practice to become director of programs at the foundation for economic education advanced freedom and free markets on talk radio stations all around the country in a number of television shows and appears regularly on judge andrew napolitano show. with that, take it over.

>> chris, thank you so much for the introduction. it is an honor for me to be invited to speak to cato. i started attending sessions such as this in 1981 when the offices were right across the street from the library of congress and my thinking was profoundly shaped by the speakers that i heard. and to be asked to speak is really a high.for me command to be on this distinguished panel. this question of synthetic drugs that we are addressing is obviously a tremendous déjà vu for me professionally but in some sense it should be a déjà vu for libertarians. this is a copy of inquiry magazine from february 1984. the title is the war on

drugs over. the government has lost by jack shafer who was managing editor. he is now a senior political writer in washington for politico. he lays out in this article for the war on drugs is over essentially the story that we are facing right now dealing with synthetics. he -- i want to give him credit for being so percy and in this and this 84 article before the legislation i was involved in past. he noted that early on in california synthetics for drugs like heroin is already begun. unless we turn away from drug prohibition we will be awash in a flood of cheap and deadly synthetic drug substitutes.

itit is important that the drugs we are talking about really are quite harmful. in contrast to drugs like marijuana and heroin you know, heroin legally obtained safely injected does not lead to crime, does not cause tissue damage, lead to insanity. you are simply addicted

check includes his article. what can dea do that ithas not already tried? control the chemicals needed congress passed a comprehensive precursor bill very interesting to see at that time the chemistry industry was unable to recognize they are now going to be regulated not nearly by mpa but dea. the dea approach we will be very different. very interesting for me as a congressional staffer trying to see how the interest groups might respond. here is one that was unable to mobilize and see what the implications were of this knew regulatory approach. we see that the drug precursors are still getting in the mexico and the united states. jack asks well, we saw the consequence in the united

states. we saw the increased power that the civil war cartel has had. licensed lab equipment? and this brings me to a story of the three neck round bottom flask's. the synthesis required that a particular piece of lab equipment called at three neck round bottom flask. that was the standard laboratory piece. and so congress banned it but it did not been for neck round bottom flask. and of course one would have to do is put a plug into the neck and you would still be able to have a for neck round bottom flask do everything that your three neck round bottom flask would. i don't know how many of you no the name of a chemist in california who is known for

the reduction of mdma commonly known as ecstasy in the popular society. a scientist who is interested in the exploration of drugs. and i knew sasha you know that one time we're talking about chemistry. i am telling them the story. he. he says, that's the most hysterical act of congress i can imagine. clearly congress trying to do something which is practice on its face. and he was the one who just cracked up regarding this. finally, of course if you can't wiselife is a lab equipment that you jail everyone who has access. that doesn't happen. there are already enormously harsh penalties.

and jack quotes a mentor of mine from american university who says, the clandestine synthetics may well soon swap drug markets and deliver the coup de grace to a dying international drug system. the plain truth is in a society technologically advanced as ours the government cannot keep people from experimenting. the government crackdown has always been of the process and fouled the market with drugs of uncertain. potency. we see these things called synthetic marijuana. the law still punishes harshly the production of high-quality marijuana that can be produced without

contamination. legally regulated marijuana markets in colorado and washington that were putting in laboratory controls. in maryland where our regulations are going to require that every batch be tested by an independent testing laboratory. we can produce safe high-quality cannabis and eliminate the market for synthetic marijuana. these things called incense and bath salts are clearly intended for human consumption and it seems that the prosecutors say to hell they're is nothing we can do and have not been sufficiently creative and getting the targets of these investigation. why does a gas station so something by the cash register called incense or bath salts fact it is inconceivable to me that you can't send in a sufficient number of well-trained informants to get the clerk

to make some kind of statement that indicates that the clerk understands this is for human consumption. and so i will conclude by saying the government is struggling to go along. in 2012 congress passed the synthetic drug -- excuse me. the synthetic drug abuse prevention act of 2012 as though that is going to happen. they added the schedule 15 specific classes of canada netted compounds, 15 specific cabinet. [inaudible] mimetic compound that was specifically banned as well as 1111 of the kind of

chemicals sold his bath salts which set up the opportunity for additional kinds of compounds to be sold. the public's demand to get high, to relieve pain whether it's from the mentally ill or the mentally -- intellectually curious that is going to take place and the public remains a risk until these guys are properly regulated and controlled, sold by lessons laboratories, come with appropriate kind of warnings thank you. [applause] >> thank you. it is great to be back here at the cato institute to participate in the program. done such great work advancing liberty. it is a special honor to be on this panel. one of my real life

libertarian heroes. a special honor to be here discussing his paper. as i was reading through this paper and listening to tell his remarks and eric's remarks as well ii think the central message that was coming through to me throughout all of this was just the utter futility that no matter what the drug warriors do, no matter what they do it's not going to change anything. is a classic case of just utter futility. and i was thinking back to an open letter written in the 1990s six years after this article americans talking about. an open letter by milton friedman that appeared in the "wall street journal" to bill bennett who was the drugs are at that time. friedman said to bennett the same sort of thing that had says in this paper.

bill, you know i beseech you. and this war on drugs 25 years ago because it will not accomplish what you hope to accomplish. it will only bring death, destruction and a loss of well-being for the people of society. and then he cites a column that he wrote 17 years before the1973 when the drug war is really getting wrapped up. and in that article he made the same.that had makes in this paper about designer drugs. pointing out that crack cocaine was developed as a response to the government crackdown on regular crack -- regular cocaine eileen. because it was so expensive the black market brought into existence crack cocaine, sheep, more addictive and it went on to

ravage people in the inner cities, especially african-americans. here you have this program that is utterly futile. why wouldwhy would it surprises? just look at basic law of supply and demand the government enacts a law this is no one is permitted to take drugs. their expectation is that everyone will obey. we just made it illegal. well, life doesn't work that way. when you make a peaceful activity illegal that people want to engage in is a high probability that people are going to continue engaging in that activity despite what the law says and especially for drug addicts of people that just enjoy taking drugs. and so they violate the law.

then you putthen you put out of business all the reputable businesses pharmacies pharmaceutical companies and you turn over the distribution network to the unsavory types the people that did not give a hoot whether someone dies or not. and so the drug warriors get angry so they go after the drug lords in the drug gangs and you have to incarcerate them on a regular basis. but all that that does is generate high prices exorbitant profit that induces more people to get into the business, including regular ordinary people who see a chance fora chance for a quick score and of course never dreaming of what it can't. now, if the consequences of this war or benign. if it was just a matter of giving something to do, jobs for federal judges and prosecutors and dea agents

deputy sheriffs, that would be one thing. okay. let them have there jobs but it is not like that. there are tremendous adverse effects from this thing. you have got the corruption of course, bribes among the judiciary and the prosecutors and law enforcement asset forfeiture laws for the cops are stealing money from people. you have got the massive infringement on civil liberties the bashing down a people's doors, shooting of innocent people shooting there pets, massive invasions of privacy and it just never stops. a few days ago some us officials said about the drug war that just escaped from a mexican prison that man has destroyed thousands of lives and we're going to get him back in the jail. well, that may be but the

fact is that the drug warriors have destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives if not millions with death and destruction and, of course, overfilling the penitentiaries. thethe penitentiaries the biggest business in america primarily because of the drug war. i grew up on the border in laredo. so when i was in high school andin late 60s when the drug role was starting to be going have friends whose lives were destroyed. but we always went across the river on dates and had a great time. it was a a nice place to grow up and have fun. tourists were flooding the border area to get a taste of old mexico. not anymore. but they said today is this drug war is just so

destructive. it has destroyed the fabric of mexican society. now. out of my friends ever go across the river anymore. it's too dangerous. one of the consequences, i'm glad ted brought this out his paper, this concept of overdose. we hear at all the time. someone dies of a drug overdose. in virtually every case it's never a drug overdose. that's what they say. the real cause is the corrupted drug, the polluted drug that is a direct result of the illegality because the drug lord, the drug gang they couldn't care less if someone dies. they certainly don't have to worry about a lawsuit as they would in an unhampered market economy are pharmaceutical companies are careful. they put the seals on the casually well and are

careful because they no the one death will cause a massive large -- massive loss of market share bankruptcy,share bankruptcy, and the lawsuits which is one of the tragic consequences. attics okay. okay. drug addiction is a tragedy. but it is a bigger tragedy when they die because of the drug war itself. finally i should wrapi should wrap this up by saying that is futile is this drug warriors as destructive as it is that is not the real reason why we should call for the end to this war. i mean,, we see the futility going to put him back in jail make sure he is incarcerated for the rest of his life without parole like they did the silk road guy. you know, for what? what is the.? they put him back in jail or they don't.

nothing is going to change any more than it has over the last four years. but the real reason that we want to end this war on drugs is not just the futility of it but because of the concept of human freedom. ted mentioned russia and iran. conservative examples of the war on drugs. let's look at the leftist examples like cuba and north korea and china and vietnam all of which have drug laws and the drug war because the drug war is inherent to a tyrannical, totalitarian authoritarian regime. it is only in free societies are people always recognized that people have a right as a concept of human freedom itself to ingest whatever they want to ingest no matter how destructive, no matter how dangerous harmful. if there was ever any reason why we should end this futile war on drugs it's

because we, thewe, the american people, stand for freedom. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, jacob, eric. i'm going to exercise my authority tyrannical authority as moderator because you talk about futility. one of the cases are described is the three neck round banda. the futility of trying to ban to make illegal things that are kind of transparently innocuous, legal and then the process, the market being what it is for the process of getting around those restrictions. and this is a.command i we will admit this is a topic i had not studied much. i was struck by the ease

with which the manufacturers of these chemicals substances can evade restrictions by making very minor changes to the chemical composition to get around the law but then as we have talked about they may inadvertently introduce new harms to users who thought they were getting one thing and get something else. can you talk a little bit more about that concert? we will we have seen is really quite tortured legal reasoning to describe, we aredescribe, we're going to make illegal substances like this and others like them sort of thing. laws that are that vaguely worded. it carries a host of threats to liberty. >> first of all, i would like to thank eric and jacob for excellent comments on the paper and presentation.

what chris has pointed out is an inherent dilemma that prohibitionists face. they can either have laws that are very specific but when your dealing with synthetic drugs a very small change in chemical composition and suddenly create a substance that is no longer covered by law. and i believe the "washington post" article pointed out that currently they're are about 350 varieties of synthetic drugs and counting. this constantly changes. if you have specific bands this is like playing whack a mole. you been one substance and then get its 1st cousin or 2nd cousin. that is perfectly legal and prosecutors have to go after that and legislators have to go after that.

the alternative is to enact very broad bands but as we have seen with other laws that are vague and overly broad that can lead to massive abuses of authority. and people who may have perfectly legitimate businesses suddenly find themselves under scrutiny, under prosecution. and at times not even being clear on what law they violated. so that is an option that i think is inherently destructive to a free society. this is, again, an inevitable problem that prohibitionists confront particularly withconfront, particularly with synthetic drugs that all you need is an enterprising chemist to change the composition of the substance little and a specific bands simply doesn't work. so they're is an irresistible pressure to

come up with broader and broader ever more vague bands despite the destructive effects of that has on the rule of law. >> you want to add to that? >> i do. you put your finger on this. in -- at the committee level as we were trying to figure out what to do with the call to take this action, there's a great concern about due process providing real notice to the public of what is permitted and was prohibited. and we are witnesses spoke about this particular problem that in the research trying to find new compounds for medical purposes or otherwise you are going to look at existing drugs because that is your starting. we already no these drugs

are effective in the particular psychiatric way. if tweaking it produces something that is useful. there was this concern. we put in language about being intended for human consumption. those who are doing this kind of experimentation for research purposes they are not covered by the prohibition. the danger that people face now the congress is going to say this human consumption thing as too much of a barrier, too much of a barrier. let's take that out because they are shipping this stuff and we can't prove they intended it for human consumption. twenty-four insulated. you endyou end up with the

prohibition that is squishy. the chemical that may produce these kind of affects. you have a professor at a college a professor at a college and suddenly runs afoul because this is too close to a prohibited drug. the danger in this current kind of political climate will i think, present a real problem if this log is further watered down. >> very good. we dogood. we do have time for questions. a few notes. wait for the microphone for the benefit of those watching online and identify yourself and your affiliation. the jeopardy rule applies here which means please fraser question in the form of a question. with thatwith that in the back on the wall right they're.

>> i guess you would call me a prohibitionist. my name is paul a gordon. i have a website called drug abuse prevention. >> speak up. >> my name is probably gordon. i have a website called gordon drug abuse prevention .com. >> okay. >> i also had a nonprofit organization in california and berkeley which was called the committee for psychedelic drug information we tried to do everything we could to dissuade individuals not to use marijuana and other psychedelic drugs. what you have overlooked all of you is the fact that if you clarify -- so-called

purify the substances you still have a psychoactive substance which is addictive which can be addictive. longitudinal studies in last year have shown that one in six youngsters, young people become addicted. one in ten adults become addicted to marijuana and what you are overlooking is in order to ascertain the harmfulness of the substance pharmaceutical substance you have to go to the active principle, the thc. no amount of thc could -- should be used by someone who is driving. you should not drive under the influence of marijuana. >> the question is if you purify the substances and get around the problem of

them being contaminated you still have the issue of addiction for use. okay. >> exactly. that is part of the question have you read the medical research? do you no that there people who contribute to the medical research have not read the medical research. and they cherry pick those things. but the major.-- two points -- >> please, ma'am, this is going on.on. we have a question on the table. let the panelist respond. >> one scientific fact. do you no they're was research in the 60s which showed that thc in normal human subjects can cause idiosyncratic psychosomatic effects. >> did you no?

two questions.questions. did you know. >> first of all, i am always wary about the argument that some people can become addicted therefore we have to outlaw. you can do that with a lot of substances. you can do it with all forms of behavior. a certain percentage of people become addicted to gambling so we have to outlaw all games of chance. some people become addicted to high-fat foods, therefore we ought to outlaw all high-fat foods. obviously some people become addicted to alcohol. that's why we have alcoholics. therefore we have the right to outlaw alcoholic beverages. that is not a sufficient reason, particularly in a free society. some people are going to be susceptible to poor

decisions, poor behavior compulsive behavior but that is aa price that we all have to pay to live in a free society unless we want some benevolent guardians of public morality to dictate everything that we do command that is a price i don't think any of us want to pay. >> when i here someone talk about the risks of addiction or the risks of psychiatric consequences i think about the fact -- i think of the jingle of dunkin' donuts. america runs on duncan. america runs on risk. our entire economic enterprises based on risk. we look at people who want to be athletes and admire the risk. people try to climb the

matterhorn fail. risk is built into the dna of america. the risk of addiction, the risk of these effects is real but small command it's a risk that people should be educated about. folks who want to stop this never ever acknowledge the benefit of the use of these drugs. these drugs are beneficial. the evidence is the tens of millions of people who want to use them because they are addictive but because the effect of these drugs are pleasurable inspiring transcendent. these are real effects and people want to use them and that is why they we will continue to. >> you want to add? >> a couple of interesting points. got her activity enterprising people of the dangers of drugs, i think

that is something to be applauded. there are -- sorry. there are drugs that are dangerous. and one of the beast i have the marijuana legalization movement is the argument is made that marijuana is not harmful. i find that problematic because my position is that sort of implies if it is horrible it should be illegal. why argument in terms of freedom is look i'm assuming that drugs are absolutely the worst thing in the world for me that's my business. is no business of the state. if i want to sit in my home and ingest heroine or cocaine or lsd on math that's my business. that's what being a free person is all about. she makes a valid.about driving on public roads or

externalities of the drug. children, children's rights, all the different categories i say if you legalize drugs get rid of the unsavory suppliers which would go out of business immediately you're much better off having a supply and distribution of drugs the pharmaceuticals pharmacies were much more responsible when it comes to selling to children and minors than the unsavory elements we have to day. in terms of freedom legalize it but keep people like her to apprise people what a horrible thing it is to become a drug addict. >> right here. >> retired detective with law enforcement against prohibition. on the relative harm of synthetic drugs despite vicious rumors i never went past marijuana.

i have no clue what cocaine does. i went to a briefing in the congress three years ago congressman pitt had a dog and pony show with the va and brought in an eer got -- ner dark and said gave us a couple pick cases and they acted badly, they did things the harmful what reminded me as a police officer a guy jumps out of the car at 40 miles an hour. he's drunk. question is relatively so people can understand, how relatively dangers his bath salt or meg in comparison to whiskey, alcohol, or some other drug that we all pretty much of a common experience with? >> i would say this. these are among the more

dangerous substances. in part and when you talk about this before because you never quite certain what all is in it which creates its own set of problems. the effects seem to be somewhat unpredictable. but it is good to always keep this in perspective. we have heard the stories before with regard to other substances. remember all the stories about crack cocaine 25 or 30 years ago. the penalties that were enacted ten times as severe as for powdered cocaine. the hundred. as though there was that kind of real difference in the effect. going back further, more the lsd scare in the 1960s. this was going to absolutely destroy american society. if you want to go back

farther come back to late 1930s and reefer madness. obviously marijuana was a drug it was going to completely destroy western civilization. we have to keep the stories in mind. there's that sense of déjà vu. i would not say with regard to some of the synthetic drugs. they appear to be more dangerous and volatile than most of the natural psychoactive drugs. it is good to monitor. education definitely encourage people to stay away from these. but that oughtbut that ought to be part of a larger package to create a legal drug structure and one that eliminates prohibition so that there are safe,safe,

legal alternatives for people who want to use psychoactive substances. and we can continue this crusade of trying to prevent drug use. i am one of these people who , if we have tried a policy for four decades or more in the policy is failed the ought to try something else not just continue applying that same model to knew substances. that's just me. >> in talking about alcohol and alcohol prohibition bootleg alcohol was adulterated with methyl alcohol and other compounds. drinkers were blinded and people were paralyzed. it was a term called jake greg which is a kind of paralysis in which people

were probably injured. and that, of course, we know, we know, is a function of prohibition, not the legal control. are these drugs harmful? the evidences of people who present themselves to the police and so on yes, these seem to be quite harmful. they are harmful as a consequence of the market distortions the law enforcement create for the drugs that people want to get and that there was -- the article in the new york times magazine last sunday people saying i didn't want to use these drugs but they were easier to get being represented as legal. and until drugs that people want to use that can be produced safely better warnings we will see this kind of tragedy happen again and again and again. >> right down here in the front. >> good afternoon.

former libertarian candidate i've tried to read your book it reads like the worst horror story ever. i watched the movie down the street. how much does all this scare -- the scare tactics in the war on drugs just benefit the gun industry all of the military-industrial complex because everyone has to have a gun. the police have to have more guns and regulars have to have more guns. they all try to outpace each other. >> a good question. i think that is a subset. it probably does create incentives to have greater and greater armaments but i think you have a drug war industry that has a vested interest in creating as many

horror stories as humanly possible. and it is often difficult to tell whether those were putting out the stories are simply doing this to further there own career and institutional interest of whether they believe they are propaganda. and i think there's probably a bit of both. but what you are talking about a multi, multibillion dollar a year industry that has locked up with current drug policy at the local, state, and national level and they are not going to go quietly into that good night of legalization. they are going to use every tactic imaginable to try to preserve the prohibition system and scare stories certainly so that agenda. they are tremendously effective. i think the bias case with

regard to cocaine use in the mid- 1980s was one factor that really stop the momentum toward a harm reduction strategy if not decriminalization if not for legalization. reverse that. the whole might case changed and it has been a good many years to switch that back to a more rational discussion. i do not think the drug war industry likes to have a discussion about having synthetic drugs within the legal framework. they want the prohibition model applied. this is a job enhancement process at aa minimum.

there going to keep pushing stories whatever humanly possible. >> chris this morning is actually a warning in the national commission on marijuana anddrug abuse and 73, the shafer commission observed this is a danger that the current approach was bringing about. i think part of what we're missing jacob described penitentiaries is the biggest business in america. obviously making a rhetorical., but the alley is it is infinitesimal and are 14 trillion -- probably bigger than that now. the.that i want to make is that the collateral consequences of our drug enforcement policies undermine the entire economy jacob did not fully talk about the impact of the tens of millions of people have drug convictions which means

their employment prospects are reduced. for an economy that depends on consumption it means those folks are out of the economy. tens of millions of people are out of the economy. you don't -- your not able to get a job with a paycheck so you don't get a car loan so you don't get a car made in detroit. the war on drugs kicks off in the 1970s and american car sales start going down relatively. thinkthink of any particular part of the economy in which you are invested. if you simply have a pension plan 4 o 1 k all of your assets and american industries are less valuable because those industries are selling less than they could otherwise so if we did not have no one drugs cutting the economic power of the

american public day after day. the message needs to be your membership is being hurt by drug prohibition. you have an obligation to speak on behalf of the american economy to.out that this is hurting the bottom line every american investor other than the private prison industry this little -- the gun industry the small piece of supply. tiny when you think about the implications for the rest of us. >> you have been patient. >> independent drug policy researcher. i lived in central america and mexico. i am just curious, for all the panelists, what do you believe are the realistic policy objectives for the us government and perhaps other latin american governments

that are thinking about drug policy reform. countries and russia and china completely separate or distinct. quite honestly i think coming at it from the complete either prohibitionist drug war regime which is really something of the past if you talk to most current up-to-date drug policy folks they realize the drug war is over. at the same time you talk about the unfettered access to all kinds of drugs. you get all that out. >> unfettered access i don't believe. >> regulated drugs to me ultimately is unfettered access. the reason i say that just one example and proposing something else. there are in between policies. i don't look at it as a

foster economy. there are places like portugal that have the decriminalization of all drugs. it's a little messy because you can't import drugs and you can sell them but the people are not penalized for consuming drugs. the reason why cannot you guys put it out about four or five years ago, the conclusion was it trusts the policy concern of the government which was how addiction. the last.i will make even as early as 20th century they're was no prohibition but we were beginning to prohibit legal drugs at times. pharmacies themselves and doctors were not all necessarily prescribing drugs the way they should be today when we invented a more easy, accessible way to

use morphine through prescription opiates you have pharmaceutical companies marketing those drugs quite strongly to doctors and hospitals. anyone who goes into hospital today what's the 1st thing they ask you. i'm not saying that bad, but it has contributed to an increase in opiate addiction which is led to an increase in heroin addiction and the heroin problem has been the result of your cheaper heroin that actually gives a type of side effect. >> do you discern a question that? >> the problem that you have put your finger on what is best prescribing doctors and

the excesses of the pharmaceutical marketing enterprise in many cases is correct. the fact that we have prohibition means those folks who have become medically addicted that is stigmatized. they do not have access to the drugs. suddenly thesuddenly the prescription gets cut off and they turned the heroin because it's cheaper his days off to sickness. my sense is that you need better regulation of physicians, change the culture of prescribing. wwor

>> >> to say i am addicted i have to find another scam. all of this closeout of a prohibition approach. this is wrong and immoral a

and it is not. it is not immoral to be addictive addition never be a crime to be an addict. >> first of all no one i fate has never argued that legalization is say panacea to work beautifully but prohibition to identify the various problems associated with the views to show how those problems are made better through prohibition. but because it is is almost never talked about with that international environment we have is each stage is an attitude.

it is a key development one of the things that is most important it blew up the prohibitionist myth that you will see soaring crime rates associate -- associate with decriminalize system. the trend is in either direction. the stranglehold of the prohibitionist on international policy and other countries that may have thought for many years the u.s.-led policy was your interests -- idiocy but you

don't tell that to the world's superpower. now governments are willing to deviate. where there is legalized commerce. and to see where that goes i am a strong believer in the yogi berra observation it ain't over until it's over but i see favorable trends i will not pop the champagne to assume it is legal at the time until we see better results.

[laughter] >> it appears throughout human history human beings have been abusing substances to cope with daily life as a stimulant or to relax them and that continues throughout history. therefore do you think the supply of drugs is only catering or providing humans now with something they have been deciphering for centuries that is inherent to human nature? >> that is an excellent question. it would seem that way given the long long history that comes across different cultures in and so on and. i think there is a

percentage of the population that feels that it needs that kind of artificial boost. i have never entirely understood that, but it is enough of a phenomenon it is clear you cannot pass laws against that. that is the one bus and that is indisputable at this point. if you try to prevent it as much as possible but you have a significant percentage of the population that will continue to use those substances regardless of the lot. that will not teacher them from doing what they want to do. good or bad they will do it. >> i think that is a deep and profound question in the context of american society because we obviously live in

a very controlled society. every kid is forced into a public school system leases by the state living there 12 years with the message drugs are bad but yet over four years the problem has only gotten bigger. why is that? i think drug addiction is rigid and family but societal implications wise there were alcoholism in the soviet union? there may be a correlation the more controlled the of more despair there is. the less economic activity the dynamism that comes originally free market society is absent the plight of the american people is significantly worse than those of cuba or north korea

because of the words they're not hopelessly enslave them those who falsely believe they are free. eidenshink when you combine that controls society that this is freedom it may be a cause of why there is so much drug abuse in american society. >> ica dissertation of. [laughter] >> i am very interested. [laughter] so could you quickly go through the brief history of that regulation and where it is now if you give more

details of the 430 variations of the synthetic drugs and then the government tried to address it? >> 1987 congress was developing the anti-drug abuse act of 1988 including amendments to the act of 1986. to state that this particular piece of equipment was a major part of the problem with the production of methamphetamine to propose that it be banned so by an act of congress other feature of the anti-drug abuse act of 1988 this was enacted and remains part of

the controlled substances act. >> if they change it we will get rich because we will start to buy it spread there are a couple of examples. >> most of the laws were passed before 2012 they were specific chemical substances. but what lawmakers are finding is the ink was barely dry and did enterprising chemist in shanghai or wherever it would change the composition of one molecule and suddenly the law did not apply to that substance anymore. so since 2011 that the national and state level

there have been very broad bans attempting to enroll lot entire families of substances to trying to deal with the problem in that fashion. anything that resembles the whole lot drug would be considered in that same category and is outlawed. as an engineer to deal with one problem but it also creates another inherently you have laws that our vague and overly broad. i am not sure that is the pattern we want to encourage in this country because we see abuses in other areas with such laws and we have to be cognizant of that. >> also the prosecution were summer was convicted not convicted but charged with violating the sale of the substance at the time she

was selling it was not illegal it was made illegal after she was charged. >> that was in texas the woman was charged with marketing the illicit substance and the charge was filed three months before the texas legislature had outlawed that substance. >> i want to comment on prohibitions that our specific because the designer drug enforcement act of 1986 is essentially was very broad it says the analogs should be treated like a schedule one substance that me is a substance the chemical structure of which is similar to the controlled

substance and has a stimulant. for air in effect that is similar. that is pretty broad and 1986. sold the approaches with a broad lot to be enacted and that is still on the books. >> but state laws have distinctions. >> one last question. >> they give for your presentation. so talk about prohibition with the black market to and how much people had to pay

that would be helpful and second it's not really a probable cause a under the law if law-enforcement abuses the power in of the authority to reduce the opportunity. so how much loss economically for the people who suffer estimate cost of the prohibitionists strategy more generally. >> an excellent question and. something appointed out and i guarantee ed gentlemen sitting in the oval office

if he had run afoul of the laws. barack obamacare admitted he used illegal drugs but he was lucky and it did not get caught. how many others are their careers blighted because of that? the cost of that is measured in the hundreds of dollars per year this is a massive effect on our society. something we will see more common if they become more popular because of

questionable judgment. we have to make a distinction of activity is under good for you or activities that result in questionable judgment and crime and we tend to blur that distinction with detriment. >> 84 attending today. please join us in the conference center. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

today i believe someone says to dwindle i don't think that was the norm. i don't think they needed that. and they were moderating.

said he would not have a moderator and as abc's stood back to let the fire burned. >> let me for say i am a congressman from new jersey the raking member house

committee on energy and commerce. with a committee here today to a joyous as well as one member who joined us from maryland. with jurisdiction and appreciative the academy was willing to host us today with the hearing on climate change. to make an opening statement congressmen surveys to is the member of the energy commerce committee and did most of the preparation and to bring us here today.

and then the congress rand from the york who is the ranking member of our subcommittee of the environment and to his left who was soaves subcommittee from an adjoining congressional district the floor of us that our up here today to conduct the field during. that i want to thank the vice admiral and superintendent to host us here at the academy. i had the opportunity earlier this morning with a couple of your staff after 27 years in congress i could not miss the opportunity to do the tour today figure for

posting today. we also have the mayor from annapolis yesterday then national oceanic and atmospheric administration released its report obfuscated the climate and this authoritative report was based on contributions from 413 scientists from 50 countries with data around the globe. it is real and happening now and it is indisputable. and the data sets confirm the 2014 the war machine record and it is widespread across land area.

and also noting at a record high but the sea level was also had a record high and the above average a tropical cyclones. this consensus is clear as climate change continues unabated the record ocean temperatures. this is no coincidence and a direct result of greenhouse gases. no one noted almost 30 percent less than high population density coastal areas where suitable places a role from the storms into my home state of new jersey we had extensive damage and loss of life.

it is increasing at the exponential rate and annapolis prepares for the next storm like sandy. many would argue it is not cute -- caused by human activity but the cause of an action is upon all of us so the increase of diseases and security risk and then with climate change with my opportunities to ruth for

word for the sustainable future one that we're more competitive and energy independent and secure. with the best thinkers of advisers to take action now i the forge your testimony of all the witnesses i will yield your congressman and sarbanes. this is the perfect place with the attention of climate change to combat the effects.

to read knowledge of a tragic shooting yesterday in chattanooga to become all on line as a marine see your feeling this loss accused the today our thoughts and our prayers go out to the victims. that occurred yesterday. also thank you to my colleagues and to the congressman as the whole committee is of this issue and krispy and holland the ranking member of the budget committee that caucus from that position to understand addressing issues of climate change with the budgetary documents that we create in

washington. we will come back to the witness says that there is a lot of people today who cared deeply about this issue as to many familiar faces who looked -- work long and hard but in particular on the chesapeake bay that maryland holds dear to our hearts but there are many that are part of the solution when it comes to chesapeake bay since it begins in new york actually there are 70 million residents within the chesapeake bay watershed. 64,000 square miles we have a special responds with leadership to make sure we protect chesapeake bay.

but that consensus is overwhelming that climate j.j. is happening and it is the most significant cause of that. would never the issue may be on a larger reality but every issue is the baseline effort to address climate change proposal all those other things are not relevant over time. we are in annapolis today we will see the local effects so when it comes to that.

unfortunately is good to get out of washington and and out into the communities that are grappling with this issue with a real consensus this is a priority that has to be addressed and we have assembled a panel of leaders that we will hear from today. and the american public is as focused as our witness is are there is recent polling showing 70 percent of americans favor stronger limits and over 80 percent of americans think the united states should take action to address climate change the experts understand this i think the

united states congress needs to catch up with that. we thought we could put in play say super structure with economics as the driver the opportunity was missed stepping into the breach is the efforts they have undertaken in to address the congress has to get back to the task to be of leader to address the important issue. we will hear testimony that there is a trade-off between a strong economy with of environment looking at chesapeake bay the best way to drive that economic tension of this region is to

make sure the day is healthy. with it a clean power technology is looking to the future to produce those technologies that will generate a tremendous number of jobs that is a clear priority we have a wonderful panel assembled and thank you superintendent for hosting us and i yield back my time. >> we have a congressman from new york of the economy subcommittee. >> it is up pleasure to join so thank you for hosting us to the wonderful city i could cruise around town to

hit the state house and visit the campus with a beautiful space. thank you for the good work that you do at the academy we are thrilled to work with you to appoint nominees to the various academies it is a nice partnership. with the role that cities play and paiute wish you well for the tradition that is part of the academy. thank you very much your strength is valuable. a representative state part of the watershed communities of chesapeake bay will love to be a part of that watershed and thank you dr. for offering your

information in your way to move forward in the academic way. i represented a district that is a confluence of the hudson in mohawk river and west into the erie canal territory. the coastal communities have been impacted by mother nature in significant ways. the work that we do today is very valuable to the al, public safety and economic growth and a environmental agenda with the partnership with the environment. i am an engineer i enjoy these technical assignments

and bivalve way i am thrilled to be sitting with three colleagues to absolutely get it with their efforts to make the difference on behalf of our environment and that is refreshing. and the subcommittee with science and space and technology i am amazed about the kickback people who reject science that should be idiots in the best policy and what science tells us to be speaking more forcefully then science itself but we need to move forward with the agenda at that understands the stewardship of the environment and growth of the economy go hand in hand, when we

understand the partnership. before mayday's in congress i served as president and ceo of the research and development authority as relates to energy and the environment and the prototypes developed that we were growing jobs that enable us to strengthen the economic recovery. i believe to except the notion 97% of the science committee said climate change do israel and it is up part of that concept so we can make fundamental change based on human activity if we think that isn't a problem then wait. there are all sorts of efforts coming forward to address the missions in our

society and the growth of the economy, the impact we can avoid the orders of prevention are difficult just as an act of human nature but it is important to move forward with those preventative measures because the metro area is hit hard by mother nature with superstorm sandy with the indoor rinks nature of the 500 years dwarf was embraced every other year multiple times within the decade so the nomenclature does not even fit we see time and time again the erosion of prime farmland closing the business disaffirm it is not totally a fifth if the most impact in human lives lost phenol

there is a way to come back to speak to race auletta jeff that will acre and bad in policy. to put together their resources that we need. fate you for showing your interested this issue. i hit the ice cream shot - - shop downtown and talk to a very young man at the counter. very young. i said where you -- she said what you hear for? he said please do something so maybe that younger generation will push us for go whenever it takes let's do that. >> and will not yield to the ranking member of the budget committee.

>> that ice cream cone was melting way too fast. they kefauver joining us with this discussion. they key for your stewardship of this great institution. thank you for that. they key for europe leadership and your testimony for this important issue with the immediate impact of climate change is having on annapolis. thank you for your incredible leadership to protect chesapeake bay has

amado save the day and head of the chesapeake bay foundation is leading that effort thank you for the union of concerned scientists for your great leadership and contributions to the scientific debate but also translating that analysis into sound public policy. also the leading democrat to bring us your seventh 84 years of leadership. with respect to climate change to my friend john sarbanes is the elevator on a lot of issues working close together on protection

and to encourage young people to appreciate the young outdoors the more they understand their environment they will understand to protect that. they give for your leadership. paul hill helps a yorkers realize there part of the of watershed. we understand what a precious resource three have but as mr. sarbanes indicated it extends over multiple states the ratio of landmass to water is huge that is why it is a challenge to protect the bay. i wish all members of

congress were at the same level of understanding as the american people clearly are and we have science deniers in the united states congress who can steer evidence in the face to still put their head in the sand. the good news is the american public is ahead of the game but is here and now in the form of disruptive whether events increasing cost to the american public and they recognize putting lives at risk. so they are able to see with their own eyes what the data is indicating. we all know the cost of doing nothing is a huge.

i have testimony, it is piling up because of lack of action of places around the world i am pleased we're at the naval academy because the military has spent at the forefront to explain this challenge and threats so for those who deny the evidence we should ask the u.s. military about this threat because the military has said it is a threat multiplier to take the threats and intensify them around the world and piles on top of that her rather then do nothing, we should take action in the president has put forward the climate action plan and i salute him but the president would be the first direct knowledge

there better and more efficient ways to address climate change including the of legislative route and and proposals from the past to take us in the right direction but the bottom line is we have to act. it is a just a question of cost but also economic opportunity by investing in the cleveland energy economy not only to save lives also create huge economic opportunities i assure that testimony today with a cost

we're facing as we address the challenge in the right way. is dead rehab each of the panel members make the statement of the left then to the right. >> our first witness today the mayor elected november november 2013 the first republican mayor since 1997 and i mention that because as i indicated you could

find republicans and democrats working together the mayor is a member of the sailing holophane and a board member of the annapolis county insists of a legislative committee for the municipal league where he has a the leadership position. he has rallied the people to recognize the threat that they are presenting to the city to have any event close by to punctuate the hearings we're looking forward to the testimony the vice admiral

became the 62nd u.s. lieutenant and native of rhode island graduated from the academy here in 1981 and graduated from the fighter weapons school top gun in 1985 and completed the air command and in 2001 completed the power program and if i told you all of the awards and recognition as he has received we cannot hold a the hearing today. read this to say he has excelled whenever he has attempted. he flew 125 combat missions in bosnia coast of kuwait

and iraq and afghanistan accumulated 6,150 flight hours during his career to safely complete the carrier rested landings that is the record from all aviation and detonators. [applause] we are looking forward to your testimony. >> of man on a mission he began his career at the chesapeake bay foundation and decided at that point in time he could take this operation over which he did to become president in 1982 leading the largest nonprofit conservation organization so vague to

protect the chesapeake bay for cry want to thank him in particular to help spread the word how reconnect young people to the environment to help immensely to build a coalition to the no child left behind we are blessed to have the protection and preservation of chesapeake bay and the foundation has received many awards but that includes the highest environmental or other the 1992 level of excellence with the environmental program that was a commitment to those issues

for so many years a river looking forward to the testimony of the chesapeake bay fell last witness is a senior climate scientist that leads the climate science education for policies prior to you joining to be on the department of hydrology to protect ground water sources at the connecticut department and whole day ph.d. with the department of earth science and the post

doctoral research at the laboratory in california. in other words he is an expert. i yield back. >> we will start with the mayor. >> welcome to annapolis we appreciate you choosing a our city of local committees to create policies for congress to go along vice admiral carter and will carter from the chesapeake bay foundation thank you for being here. see the greatest increase in the last 50 years it measured the average new since fled increased from the average of four floods

per year to more than 40 based on percentage increase it has the largest number at 40 freer with washington d.c. but to this end this city of annapolis meeting with local and state entities to address flooding in the city it presented a town hall focused on the seaport he said to have to rally the community we invited 4,000 people and not many people show up one person showed up of the budget but 140 people showed up for the town hall meeting and that surprised us. of malta i agency initiative to develop the plan to recommend a strategy to

reduce the risk of pipe for it and public-sector properties in 18 months planning effort with a collaborative partnership with the city and state and federal agencies and nonprofit partners that is what i have learned in the short time anything you do you cannot address flooding without the naval academy and our partners as well in a preliminary survey food there is responsible for reducing floods in the historic district? 32 percent said the local government 32 percent put it on the stage. the good news we have all been doing work to prepare for the next hurricane sandy we're working to develop plan designed in response

for historic properties. we're working on the regulatory response but meanwhile with the strategic plan to design a cultural resource plan these are major projects dedicating money toward the one to think the partners of these endeavors. we have completed a number of state-funded documents including the strategic plan phase one the indignation and strategy there is more to do that means critical dollars are needed people think of sea level rise affect downtown but there are other parts that are affected as well. but we all understand

secured funding $172,398 we all understand more is needed to hold an estimated price tag of $1 million monday for a flood of litigation in the number one legislative fact to go to the state to ask for money am sure you are familiar the largest from the state of maryland last year and will be this year as well going forward. looking for funding opportunities the whole for additional $45,000 from the national center for preservation technology and trading and 2016 turning to the maryland agency with a cultural resource hazard mitigation plan we're also

seeking assistance from the rockefeller 100 resiliency organization part of the model to be nationwide this city of annapolis is the model for hazard mitigation planning that nor the district says attempted to have of full-scale plan to address see little -- sea level rise. given the importance of the district the response was focus to protect the state structure add infrastructure to protect historic structures to flood prove while preserving the historic exterior of the building from my time in office fled mitigation is a top priority i appreciate

the close work with the images states naval academy. thank you for this opportunity to justify - - testify. >> good morning and panel and taking for a loving is the privilege to host this important hearing today. before i make my prepared remarks i would say house hadn't i am to send our thoughts and prayers to chattanooga tennessee after the tragic events of yesterday. thanks for your thoughts. as you walk around the yard today, this is a historic site. starting 1845 we're entering a 170 years to be a partner

with the city of annapolis. klay 338 acres it is still a relatively small campus but we are very proud. but you can see behind me recovered 2 inches of water from a nuisance tied this is no great over the last couple days it is not unusual you can still see the remnants on the road behind may. chairman and distinguished members simply is to report solid progress with response to prepare for the effects of rising sea levels.

but to address the efforts with the aid delayed to do with conventional flooding to impact success with the short end, and related events. with a can handle a major storm to manage a of a surge with the heavy rainfall and high tide. we have several projects in various stages of implementation. the of cooper road store water management project uses the underground reservoir to capture storm water that remains there and tell the water table can absorb effective to manage to cause regular flooding serving other areas of the art.

to resolve the closure dates for use as the flood wall and lastly the cyberbuilding in procurement is located on the quarter read experience uses flooding and this will be located just adjacent to us from the library and engineering facility. this will be designed to act as a flood wall for that corner of the yard. and the wake of changes from isabel causing widespread flooding and damage throughout the hard part of the total cost was $120 million we have taken several measures to insure a similar event does not have

the same detrimental impact. to raise the ground floor but the field house was built above the flood level and we relocated the plant moving the equipment to the rooftops said raise electric paulettes' and for the flood prove fame. once in a hundred your typing storms they can handle some flooding with minimal damage in using the resources to keep them dry would that be cost-effective we have a protocol for but a clever relocation in the event of a major storm. tier prepare for future

flooding with the sea level advisory council is cochaired by the naval architecture event the capt. from the oceanography associate chair. and also includes sarah phillips who is our effort - - architect to use for actual infrastructure implementation. . .

thank you for the opportunity to appear be