Voters in the state of Oregon passed a ballot measure in 2020 to decriminalize small amounts of hard drugs. Ballot Measure 110 passed by a significant 17-point margin. The progressive measure was intended to test new ideas, mainly that the role of law enforcement was not productive in reducing drug use. The measure also dedicated tax revenue from cannabis sales for drug treatment centers. The new law did not make it legal to possess drugs. Under Measure 110 drug use became a minor violation that was supposed to lead to a small fine or diversion to a treatment program. People cited for drug possession could call a state treatment referral hotline to avoid a fine. In the end, violations often led to neither. After Measure 110 was passed police began writing far fewer tickets for drug possession, probably thinking their efforts were of little consequence. Calls to the treatment referral hotlines were also few and far between. The cost of running the call hotline divided by the low number of calls meant each call cost the state about $7,000.
Measure 110 never worked well from the start. Last July I wrote state officials, advocates for drug reform laws and Oregon residents are left wondering whether Measure 110 needs small reforms, is merely experiencing growing pains or should be scrapped altogether. Also, one has to wonder if the tax revenue supporting treatment centers was supposed to mitigate the increase in drug use by making drug use less risky.
On April 1st Oregon governor Kotek signed a bill overturning Measure 110 and recriminalizing possession of small amounts of hard drugs.
Under the new law, the possession of small amounts of drugs such as heroin or methamphetamine will be classified as a misdemeanor and punishable by up to six months in jail.
Drug treatment will be offered as an alternative to criminal penalties.
Measure 110 was contentious, as is returning to the former status quo, which many fear is a return to the War on Drugs.
Opponents of the bill, including treatment service providers and public defenders, said the new law marks a return to the failed war on drugs, which filled jails but did little to curb drug addiction.
The original goal of Measure 110 was to help people struggling with addiction get help. However, despite hundreds of millions in spending, access to treatment never materialized. Oregon has the second highest rate of substance abuse in the country. Critics of Measure 110 say that the result was to increase open-air drug sales and to bring drug use out into the open.
“Combatting a problem by decriminalizing the problem is bad policy,” Oregon Senate Republicans said in a statement last month. “Never again.”
The Oregon governor claims this is not a return to the War on Drugs, which she admitted did not work. Instead, she claimed Measure 110’s implementation was botched because drugs were decriminalized before addiction treatments facilities were available to treat those who needed them. Something that proponents may not realize is that people who are ready for treatment often say they are worn out with the constant fear of being apprehended by law enforcement. Measure 110 seemed to be missing both a carrot and a stick to entice people into treatment. It remains to be seen what effect the new law will have. It was clear, however, that making open drug sales and open drug use easier and less risky did not result in more people seeking treatment for drug addiction.