Drug Policy in Hawaii
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1996-09-29
Guests: Pam Lichty (co-founder, Hawaii Drug Policy Options Group); Sandra Lacar (social worker; Executive Director, Coalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii); Bernie Poner (physician); Kenneth Tano (Captain, Honolulu Police Department)
Duration: 1:04:50

[00:00:01] Randall Roth: Good morning. This is Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise Radio Show. We're broadcast live each Sunday morning at 8:00 on KHPR and KKUA, and then replayed at 8:00 in the evening on KIFO. The show is the product of volunteers. We do what we do because we enjoy doing it and because we believe in the importance of lively and informed public dialogue. Our sponsor, the Hawaii Community Foundation, is an organization that supports grassroots efforts to improve the quality of life in Hawaii and that administers charitable funds with efficiency and compassion. Today's topic has to do with drug abuse in Hawaii. Specifically, what, if anything, should we be doing differently?
[00:00:42] Randall Roth: Some say crack down harder, that we should have zero tolerance when it comes to illegal drugs. Others contend the war on drugs has failed and that it's time to legalize all drug use. Somewhere in between is a notion called harm reduction, and one of the things we're going to try to do today is find out a little bit more about that. In order to set this up, I thought what I would do is is quote from an article some time ago in the Advertiser a few months ago by George Reed, who is an an emeritus professor of pharmacology at the University of Hawaii and was chairman of what's called the Hawaii Substance Abuse Task Force.
[00:01:21] Randall Roth: It was a task force made up of 33 respected members of the community who were brought together trying to figure out what would make sense so far as drug policy in Hawaii is concerned. I'm going to quote from his article. He said, some members felt that elimination of all drug use should be the state's goal, arguing that anything less would send the wrong message. Others believed that a goal of total abstinence is unattainable and so unrealistic. These members agreed that we should continue our efforts to reduce drug abuse, but at the same time, we should try to reduce the harm associated with such use.
[00:01:57] Randall Roth: It was impossible to reach consensus on this issue until seven months later when the two groups compromised on the following wording. We recommend that the ideal and ultimate goal Yes, we recommend that the ideal and ultimate goal of the state of Hawaii should be an environment free of substance abuse and its consequences. Toward that end, we recommend that the immediate goal of the state be to adopt strategies that will reduce substance abuse and its consequences. Well, with that introduction to our topic, I'll tell you very quickly that our guests in the studio are Pam Lichty and Sandra LeCar. Pam is the coordinator and co-founder of the Hawaii Drug Policy Options Group.
[00:02:39] Randall Roth: A founding member of Harm Reduction Hawaii and vice chair of the Sterile Needle Exchange Committee. Sandra LeCar is a founder and executive director of the Coalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii. That organization has as its focus a substance abuse prevention. We've got some other people on the phone that you'll hear from and I'll tell you about in just a minute. But first, I thought I would start with Pam Lichty. Pam, you wrote an article in this morning's Advertiser. Could you just real briefly tell us what the main theme of that article is?
[00:03:10] Pam Lichty: Good morning, Randy. Thanks for having me. The thrust of the article is to try to explain what harm reduction is and it's a term that is not doesn't lend itself necessarily to sound bites. In essence, it's a method a strategy and a philosophy to reduce the harm to both the individual and to society from substance abuse, and one of its priorities is to well, let me leave it at that for now.
[00:03:45] Randall Roth: Okay. Sandy LeCar, you've got an article in this morning's paper, and I should mention for our our listeners who um uh who noticed there is a little caption under your photo says, plaintiff spitting in the well. That has nothing to do with you or anything that you've said or wrote.
[00:04:01] Randall Roth: That was a mistake uh people who who remember about a month ago, we did a show on the Native Hawaiian vote, one of our guests and an author of a piece in the newspaper was Hayden Luly, and that was a quote from his piece, and it was under his photo. So, there's just been a a mistake in the layout over at the Advertiser on this piece. So, the person who didn't say, plaintiff spitting in in the well, uh, Sandy LeCar, could you tell us what you did say in your article this morning?
[00:04:26] Sandra Lacar: Good morning, Randy. Um, what I did say was that it's really important as we look at the drug problem in Hawaii that we realize that uh we it's a complex complex issue and that it's really a values laden issue.
[00:04:40] Sandra Lacar: And that to really come up with a strategy that is going to work for our communities and our families is by um dialogue and really coming up with making a declaration, first of all, that legal and illegal abuse of um drug abuse, whether it's legal or illegal, um is not acceptable in Hawaii and that we want we want healthy uh strong families, we want children who can learn and [unintelligible — audio glitch] we want uh workers who can be productive in the workplace.
[00:05:07] Sandra Lacar: And that um uh drug abuse just has no place in Hawaii. That doesn't mean that um we don't feel that there there and it needs to be a three-pronged approach, which is law enforcement, but we also need to have a strong uh education prevention which leads to action, and we need good treatment on demand. So that's our position in a nutshell.
[00:05:28] Pam Lichty: The drug policy group agrees with a lot of the things that Sandra has said, and in particular, the need for treatment on demand. One of the main uh ideas behind harm reduction is that it's uh comes from a public health point of view, not a moral one and not a law enforcement one. Our premise is that the drug problem in uh Hawaii and in America today, uh shouldn't be dealt with in a law enforcement manner. That's what we've been doing thus far.
[00:05:52] Pam Lichty: We have more a higher percentage of our citizens locked up than any country in the world, and a large proportion of them, maybe 40% in the federal system are there for drug related crimes, either direct or indirectly related to drugs. So the drug the jails are full. We're sending our inmates to Texas and now to Connecticut, and we feel it's really time to try something else, something that would uh lessen the harms to those individuals, to society, help these folks get treatment, help them get the kind of compassionate, humane treatment that really works. and to thus reduce the dangers uh to the society at large and to those folks as well.
[00:06:30] Sandra Lacar: Um, I I think that um uh in Pam's article, she presents at least the side that really relates to treatment and again, we would support that. But um many people that support harm reduction, may many people in Hawaii and some of the people that serve on your committee really feel that legalization is a very strong part of that.
[00:06:49] Sandra Lacar: Um, and I guess that's part one of the places that we differ. I don't think that we should get soft in terms of our law law enforcement approach. I think we need to get stronger in terms of our treatment and in terms of prevention, so that people um do understand what the dangers are and they're moved to action. So it's more than just education. It's really how it's it's helping people understand how they get involved, how they make behavioral changes in their lives so that drugs isn't a part uh and and affects them negatively.
[00:07:16] Randall Roth: And Pam, I guess that word legalization is one that um that you would prefer not to focus on that word, but as I read the the article, isn't that a part of the approach that you're describing?
[00:07:27] Pam Lichty: It could be, and it could not be. Unfortunately, the drug debate in America today has become incredibly polarized and and this is partly with the help of the politicians who see everything in black and white. And it's much easier to look at it at the very difficult problem and Sandra and I both agree it's really a complicated issue. But it's much easier to look at it in terms of it's either prohibited or it's legal, and harm reduction proponents believe that [unintelligible — audio glitch] represents a middle ground. Yes, some people who support harm reduction, think the legalization of maybe some substances might be a way to go, but it's not part and parcel of it.
[00:08:01] Pam Lichty: Harm reduction grew out of uh HIV prevention. Again, it grew out of a public health model and uh many harm reduction programs, as I said in the article, coexist or exist with prohibition, for example, Hawaii's needle exchange program.
[00:08:14] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, I'm going to come back to Sandy and Pam in just a bit, but we've got three people on the line that I called and asked to be available to us this morning so that we could hear from their different perspectives, their thoughts on on drug policy issues here in Hawaii. The first is Bud Smiser, who's a columnist with the Star Bulletin and and happens to be a a neighbor of mine. I ran into Bud this morning. He was out walking his dog. Bud, are you there?
[00:08:39] Bud Smiser: I'm here.
[00:08:39] Randall Roth: I'm glad to see you got back uh from your your walk this morning. Uh, any thoughts to share with us real briefly, Bud, on on drug policy in Hawaii?
[00:08:48] Bud Smiser: Yes, and this is partly being this is partly reinforced by just having been off in in New York City and Denver, but you don't have to travel to know that the streets and parks parks of America are not safe anymore. That uh the [unintelligible — audio glitch] grassroots of the drug movement lead to to muggings and robbings and so on on our streets. Nobody walks through Kapiolani Park at night if they have good sense and they get out of a this is a crime problem and the and and this is just the grassroots of the crime problem.
[00:09:28] Bud Smiser: It goes up through that works of criminals, it it corrupts politicians, it corrupts businessmen. It it goes in into the in in international area. It corrupts foreign governments, it probably corrupts our government. Uh, I don't uh I [unintelligible — audio glitch] think we faced uh probably not quite as bad a prohibition or a problem that when when we had prohibition for alcohol. We finally decided that with the Al Capones and so on and the fact that people were going to drink no matter what, it was better to legalize it. Now we're living with a terrible problem from alcohol.
[00:10:10] Bud Smiser: Nobody can say that alcohol isn't an awful problem. It kills thousands of people on our roads every day, but I don't think anybody wants to go back to it. And I really think we ought to look at drugs from the standpoint of uh of of accepting the fact that there is going to be drug demand. I just don't believe that any of the educational programs are going to stop drug usage, and so I would look very hard at various forms of legalization. I don't know to what degree, but I would go well beyond harm reduction.
[00:10:38] Randall Roth: Okay. Bud, thank you very much for your uh participating this morning, for sharing your thoughts uh uh and welcome back. I know you got in real late last night on a flight, and I appreciate you talking to us this morning. Uh, we have on another line um uh Captain Kenneth Tano. Uh Captain Tano has 29 years of police service. Uh currently, he's captain of uh Honolulu Police Department's Narcotics Vice division, which addresses the unlawful use and distribution of narcotics as well as illegal gambling and prostitution. Ken, are you there?
[00:11:13] Kenneth Tano: Yes, hello.
[00:11:13] Randall Roth: Good morning. Uh, any thoughts to share with us about drug policy in Hawaii?
[00:11:18] Kenneth Tano: Yeah. Well, first I'd like to say uh hello to Sandy and Pam. Um, I I've sat on a lot of meetings, panels, conferences and uh legislative hearings with Pam. And although I admire her intensity by which she debates her harm reduction issue, we are on complete opposite ends of the table on the drug issue. You know, um, harm reduction, I I recall an article I read about it uh saying that it would be an achievement if a heroin user used uh heroin, you know, wisely.
[00:11:53] Kenneth Tano: Um, you know, that that creates a problem for us in law enforcement because how can you know, anyone on heroin or cocaine or crystal methamphetamine, how do you how do you use those kinds of drugs intelligently, you know? And then because of the problems we have with uh youngsters with with juveniles, how can you administer that kind of philosophy on youngsters also? So, with law enforcement, of course, uh you know, a lot of people accuse of of taking a very idealistic point of view and we want total abstinence, but we're going to remain with that with that point of view because that's we feel is the only thing that's that's going to work.
[00:12:35] Kenneth Tano: Um, we're the ones out there on the streets and we we see all the detriment that that drugs cause and we see the homicides and and the murders and and child abuse and domestic violence. And and we're sticking with with our thoughts that uh just as Sandy mentioned, what we need is is strong prevention, what we need is strong law enforcement and we need treatment. Um, you know, just in in closing, let me say that uh just this past Wednesday, myself and she's not we're down at the narcotics anonymous meeting and there was a whole group of people there and they had what's called a countdown for the addicts.
[00:13:17] Kenneth Tano: And and everybody applause the applauds the amount of years that that people are are clean. And they started with uh 25 years and somebody stood up and we applauded him, and it went all the way down to about two weeks. And and the thing about it is in looking at these people, you know, we we see that there is hope. There is hope for people to change their lives around and we don't want to give up on them. We don't want to say, you know, you can't do it. Here's your needle, here's your drugs. You can't do it.
[00:13:51] Kenneth Tano: We we want to give them hope by saying, we're going to be there for them to try to keep them to get them off of it, and it's going to be through through people, the hope is going to come through people like like Sandy, people like Dr. Tom Liland, Dr. Dr. David Mee Lee, and people in law enforcement that will help these people make a turnaround.
[00:14:11] Randall Roth: Ken, we really appreciate you being available to us this morning. I know you've got some other duties that you've got to attend to, uh but thanks again for being with us this morning. We also have on the line Dr. Bernie Portner. Uh, Bernie is an assistant clinical professor at the John A. Burn School of Medicine, uh currently specializes in non-surgical orthopedic and sports medicine, but he's had extensive experience in the emergency room of a busy county hospital where he has seen and treated uh I suppose about every conceivable form of of drug abuse and related behavior. Bernie, are you there?
[00:14:45] Bernie Poner: I am. Thank you.
[00:14:46] Randall Roth: Uh, we did a program a year and a half or so ago with um uh Don Topping and Dan Bent, uh generated a a lot of calls, a lot of interest. Uh at that time, you commented that we really ought to have the voice of a physician somewhere in this conversation. You're it. Go for it.
[00:15:03] Bernie Poner: Well, uh as a physician, uh there are a few facts, I think, very few, precious few, that need to be emphasized and uh believed by all. Number one is uh that the illegal drug group, heroin, marijuana, cocaine, LSD, those are inherently no more or less dangerous than the legal ones, tobacco, alcohol, and various prescription drugs. That fact alone is hard to swallow, particularly by enforcement officers who if they believe this to be true and you know, and it is, it it sort of makes a folly what they're doing.
[00:15:42] Bernie Poner: They're they're uh trying to enforce the use of some drugs, but uh the [unintelligible — audio glitch] trying to enforce uh the lack of use of some drugs while allowing the use of others and they're equally harmful. The other uh issue I think that a physician needs to point out uh coming from the emergency room and from the medical wards is that the uh fact that drugs are illegal, that fact is responsible for much of what's bad about drug abuse.
[00:16:15] Bernie Poner: In other words, the fact that it's illegal gives us unclean needles and we get AIDS and and hepatitis and other uh uh disease uh bacterial infections that put put people in the hospital for a long time. The fact that drugs are illegal accounts for overdoses and drug reactions from impure drugs and drugs whose dose you don't know off the street. Not to mention the fact that drugs are illegal creates the whole business that uh the uh police officer uh that uh Bud Smiser um alluded to regarding prohibition. When you make something illegal, you bring in the criminal world and you create drug cartels and the money corrupts everybody.
[00:16:58] Randall Roth: Bernie, are you are you personally for legalization or would you say like Pam, that's just the wrong question to ask?
[00:17:07] Bernie Poner: Um, I'm uh I actually, I think that the only answer is to the the only uh global answer is to legalize it, but I think under the political and moral situation of the country, pragmatically, that's not the way to start. I think the way to start uh has to do with what both your guests have to say say. I think we all have to ask ourselves and perhaps agree at the end of the show. Number one, do we really want to punish people who choose to harm themselves or we do we want to try to help them and and from doing that?
[00:17:40] Bernie Poner: And number two, if we do want to punish those who wish to harm themselves for some reason that I can't quite comprehend, but assume that we say yes. People who want to harm themselves, let's punish them. Do we really want to fill up our prisons with those people? They don't want to harm others. They want to harm themselves. Do we really want to fill up the beds in our limited prisons with those people who want to harm themselves and not have room for those who want to harm others?
[00:18:07] Bernie Poner: I think that that's a very small and [unintelligible — audio glitch] clear question that we can all agree upon. So rather than talk about legalization, which I think is probably the only answer. As soon as you legalize it, you drop out you you drop the bottom out from all the uh all the action, all the drug cartels, all the uh organized crime. But uh aside from that, assume that we can't quite take that step politically, perhaps we can agree that people who casually use drugs and harm and do harm only to themselves, if anybody, shouldn't be incarcerated in our limited prisons.
[00:18:48] Bernie Poner: That those beds should be reserved for the criminals who want to harm others. I think that that's something that maybe all of us will agree.
[00:19:00] Randall Roth: I'd like to come back to you later in the program, see if you have any any additional thoughts, but we do have to move on.
[00:19:04] Pam Lichty: I'll hang on.
[00:19:05] Randall Roth: Thank you very much. Um, you're listening to the Price of Paradise radio show. My name is Randy Roth. We're talking about drug abuse in Hawaii, specifically what on a policy level should we be doing about it. With me in the studio is Pam Licty, who's the coordinator and co-founder of the Hawaii Drug Policy Options Group and founding member of Harm Reduction Hawaii, and also Sandy LeCar, who is the founder and executive director of the Coalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii. If you would like to ask a question or make a comment, you can reach us at 955-8821, or if you're on a neighbor island, the number is 1-800-955-8821.
[00:19:47] Randall Roth: Well, our lines are are full, which which means we've got some folks who've been planning to call in from uh before I made that extended that invitation. From the last show we did on this topic, or generally with this topic, I know we're going to have a lot of calls and so I'm going to ask our callers to try to keep their question or their comment as as short, as tight as possible. And and Pam and and Sandy, to the extent that you can comment very briefly on them, that would be wonderful.
[00:20:15] Randall Roth: And I'll give each of you an opportunity to raise some issues that haven't been raised yet in just a bit. But let's see if we can get to as many callers as possible this morning. Let's start with John in Makiki. Good morning, John.
[00:20:25] John: Good morning, Randy. Fascinating subject. First of all, all the people that you have so far presented, uh part of my country way I was expressing, but it sounds like they're all addressing the back end of a horse. Because every human has an addiction. You name one that don't and I I'll show you a miracle. Either climbing the highest mountain, finding the highest mountain or collect collectibles. Everybody's got an addiction. The problem is we have to address what is causing this drug addiction. And normally it comes right back to something everybody avoids, and that is the home. And with the divorce rate, it's such a high phenomena. This is a net result.
[00:21:07] Randall Roth: Okay. John, thank you for your call. I I I'm going to keep moving because we want to hear a lot of voices. I think you've given us uh food for thought. Uh let's go to Andrew in Makiki. Andrew, good morning.
[00:21:19] Andrew: Morning. Um tough subject. Tough to both sides. But um I read somewhere once that uh money goes where it's wanted, stays where it's well treated. And this annoys the government and this is all about money, right? You know, where the money's going, you know, for these drugs. I I don't think that you should put marijuana in the same category.
[00:21:39] Andrew: Um I've been in Amsterdam where they have uh pot bars and they seem to work out pretty good. And you never see you know, people that are stoned on pot doing bad things. And then they just eradicate all the weed out of the big island, like a few years back and that's when everyone started using ice. I mean this is, you know. I don't know what to say. That's about it. That's so much, you know what I'm saying.
[00:22:04] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, I think [unintelligible — audio glitch] you've said a lot. Let's go to Steve in Waikiki. Good morning, Steve.
[00:22:09] Steve: Good morning. Um I have two short questions and they're really questions I really would like to hear our panel uh give me some answers on things I don't know. Uh first of all, many years ago I was uh I studied I was a student in England and in those days uh hard drugs that particularly heroin, I believe, were was legal in Britain and regulated by the government and used to be distributed by certain pharmacies, but they call them chemists in those days.
[00:22:39] Steve: And you go down at at midnight, you'd see of the people who were waiting for their legal dose of whatever, uh waiting in front of Boots chemist to pick up their their drugs at midnight. Because if the next day what they were allowed to have their prescription. My question is, whatever happened to the legalization program in Britain? Uh you know, how did it turn out? How does it work? Is it still going?
[00:23:02] Steve: My second question. Uh I have heard a lot of comments in the press and on the radio, that there's a definite class social class aspect to the drug problem in Hawaii, specifically Crystal Methamphetamine. That Crystal Methamphetamine really is kind of the working class drug of choice. And that for a long time not not a whole lot was done about it noticed about it because uh because of the because of this class aspects. And that uh um I I really don't know much about the whole question of social class and and drug use and and whether there are well, you know.
[00:23:32] Randall Roth: Okay. That's that's that's good. You asked two really good questions. Uh let me start with Pam Licty and see if you want to respond to one or both and again if we can keep it real tight. Just as soon as somebody gets off the line, somebody else is jumping on and so, we're going to try to keep moving. Pam Licty.
[00:23:57] Pam Lichty: Okay, I'll try to comment as quickly as I can on that last person's comments. On social class and drug use, uh yeah, this is obviously a a major factor. If you look at who's in our prisons today, and the other aspect of that is race. Um an interesting study was done in Florida where they determined that pregnant women were using, black and white pregnant women were using drugs in in roughly the same proportion, and yet it was the black women who got in trouble for it, the black women that their physicians uh asked about it and who who paid the consequences.
[00:24:26] Pam Lichty: So it's it's race and class, I'm afraid. Um and as far as uh what they call drug maintenance in Britain, um it is still going on, uh in terms of people being um maintained on heroin, it has been cut back. It's been under a lot of attack there, and partly because the United States has pressured Britain, as they have other countries around the world to um emulate our our kinds of drug policies, and that has had some effect.
[00:24:48] Pam Lichty: But also in Switzerland, they have a very interesting heroin maintenance trial going on right now in many cities, and so far the results are looking very promising in terms of reducing crime, stabilizing those people's lives and so forth.
[00:25:00] Randall Roth: Sandy LeCar, any thoughts?
[00:25:02] Sandy LeCar: I think the gentleman's question was about uh drug use and and is it only in certain social classes. And I think drug use in fact is throughout all the social classes. I think we we want to believe that it's just in uh brown communities with low income, and that in fact is not accurate. That that it does, it's pervasive throughout all of our social structures. Um and the second thing is when you're looking at um drug policy and how it is in other parts of the world, you need to consider the the social context in which the drug policy is placed.
[00:25:35] Sandy LeCar: Um uh England has a uh um uh socialized medicine, so the uh advantage of having a a stronger treatment community, having uh more medical services available to people is very different than what we're currently facing, as I said in my article. Um uh there's probably about I think the latest study from Alcohol and Drug Abuse uh division in the state of Hawaii here, Department of Health, has identified about uh 9% of the population here who need some kind of treatment, either for uh heavy um alcohol abuse or drug abuse, and they're only able to treat about 3% of the 9%.
[00:26:15] Sandy LeCar: So we are extremely lacking in terms of any kind of treatment for people and until we begin to have treatment for people who want to get off of drugs, um I don't really think we can we can even begin to talk about other efforts.
[00:26:28] Randall Roth: Okay.
[00:26:29] Steve: Can I can I ask one thing? Uh my my question about social class specifically. Don't don't certain drugs tend to be used by certain classes? It's not the does n't this is usage is restricted to to one part.
[00:26:39] Randall Roth: Okay. We'll let Pam Licty respond to that and then I need to move on.
[00:26:42] Pam Lichty: Well, that's in part true, but I do agree with what Sandra said. It's used by every class. But for example, in the case of cocaine, on the mainland especially, crack cocaine is largely used by um African Americans. Powder cocaine is largely used by white Americans and there are great differentials in the sentencing guidelines for these two drugs. So um it's in the law enforcement aspect that I think the [unintelligible — audio glitch] uh disparities really come into play.
[00:27:04] Randall Roth: Okay. Steve, thank you. Thank you for your questions. Again I want to ask listeners to try to keep their statement or their question as as brief as possible. Let's go to Ruth in Kailua. Good morning, Ruth.
[00:27:13] Ruth: Yes, good morning, sir. I have a comment. A drug-free Hawaii is not a utopia. It can be done, and I believe that it will be accomplished. The Drug and Vice Department of HPD has been hard at work creating the population of the terrible nuisance caused by drug people. When the last drug bust came in Chinatown, most of the money realized from the condemned building was allotted to HPD. Obviously it it would have been good if the Public Relations Man of the FBI have said the FBI salted together with the HPD. Also I have been told that the drug problem is not a mosquito. It's an elephant.
[00:27:55] Ruth: But um even the elephant would have been exterminated if it hadn't been for the protection of the international police.
[00:28:02] Randall Roth: Okay. Ruth, thank you for your call. We go to Dave from uh Makawao. Good morning on Maui.
[00:28:08] Dave: Morning.
[00:28:10] Randall Roth: Good morning, Dave.
[00:28:13] Dave: Yeah, I'm I'm listening to your program with uh with uh a bunch of mixed emotions. I'm a uh a drug addict and alcoholic uh since the age of 14. I'm 44 now. I have like a little over 5 years of uh abstinence from all substances. And I'm um I'm uh You know there's some truth in in what everyone has to say on this, you know, the the law enforcement uh uh option has some value and of course the treatment options.
[00:28:48] Dave: I think one of the one of the things that that uh is is real real uh critical to to look at is is the money thing, you know, that the [unintelligible — audio glitch] fact that drugs are illegal. The fact that they perpetuate a criminal class, the fact that the uh uh police and the in the enforcement are perpetuated by the criminal class, the need for the enforcement. The fact that the government is intimately uh has been intimately linked to the production of drugs on a worldwide basis uh the [unintelligible — audio glitch] uh the contract trading uh guns for drugs uh situation with the CIA and George Bush.
[00:34:16] Randall Roth: There's no easy answer because this thing is is integrated into the fabric of our society. Dave, and and I know and and you're saying there's no easy answer and therefore it doesn't boil down to a simple question. Um if I asked are you are you in favor of legalization of all drugs, would you would you have an answer or would you simply say that's not the right question to ask?
[00:34:40] Dave: Um no I I would I would be in favor of legalization, not [unintelligible — audio glitch] blanket legalization. I would I would say no to that. But in in some form of the way that the the Brits used to treat the uh heroin or still do treat the heroin thing, I think it should be not legalized, but I think it should be decriminalized. Um I believe it should still remain illegal and I believe that the the criminal penalties for trafficking in drugs, um you know, let's let's take some examples from Islam. How about how about cut off a finger or something.
[00:35:19] Randall Roth: Okay. You know I think maybe the punishment should be extreme there. There's the the criminal class, you lock them up, that's fine. They don't care. They're in jail. They know jail, they live there. It's not a big deal to them.
[00:35:31] Dave: Life goes on for them in jail. They have drugs in jail. They have, you know, their whole It's just a life that they're used to.
[00:35:39] Randall Roth: Dave, I [unintelligible — audio glitch] really I appreciate your calling. You've you've added a lot to our show and I wish I could just let you have the rest of it. One of my jobs and and I apologize, one of my jobs is to be rude and and keep it moving. Uh you really have added a lot to our show and [unintelligible — audio glitch] I have to move on.
[00:35:58] Dave: Okay great. Thanks a lot.
[00:36:00] Randall Roth: Thank you, Dave. Uh I want to remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise Radio Show. My name is Randy Roth. In the studio with me is Pam Licty, who's the coordinator and co-founder of uh the Hawaii Drug Policy Options Group and also a vice-chair of the Sterile Needle Exchange Committee and Sandy LeCar who's a founder and executive director of the Coalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii. If you'd like to try to get in line our number is 955-8821. On a neighbor island that's 1-800-955-8821.
[00:36:31] Randall Roth: We're talking about drug policy in Hawaii. I've got some people in the line I'm going to go to in just a minute but very quickly Sandy LeCar, any reaction to either what Dave was saying or anything else over the last 10 or 15 minutes since we last heard from you.
[00:36:45] Sandy LeCar: Um yes I do. Uh one of the things that I want to say is when we bring up the uh issue of legalization and we're only looking at in terms of reducing drug cartel, we also have to look at what other consequences there might be like um opening it up to making the drugs more accessible. And to what extent, uh we know that accessibility um creates uh increase in use. So as we legalize drugs, um we we are potentially looking at even more people having um access to them and perhaps using them. So we may not be we may be pushing one problem down and be dealing with another problem.
[00:37:23] Randall Roth: Uh Pam Licty, any thoughts on that or thoughts on what Dave or any of our other callers have been saying over the last 10 minutes.
[00:37:30] Pam Lichty: Yeah, I've got a lot of thoughts. Um one one thing is in in terms of law enforcement, I agree that law enforcement is an important important part of the approach to uh controlling uh drug use and abuse. But uh I think we should make a distinction between arresting people for trafficking as opposed to arresting them for possession and use. Um and I think that uh in some countries and in some places in the United States, for example in New Haven, Connecticut, uh the police are [unintelligible — audio glitch] taking a more um
[00:38:00] Speaker 1: nuanced approach so we say, where they're really cracking down on traffickers and large scale um use um and and trying to uh direct users into treatment programs and to tell them what help is available out there. But I also wanted to comment on Kent Tano's uh comments about uh responsible drug use, um because I think he's referring to an article I wrote. Um in in terms of a a heroin user, for example, the difference with harm reduction is that there is there it is an incremental approach. It does believe that any positive change is good.
[00:38:31] Speaker 1: And so in the case of somebody who's addicted to heroin, um you might start but and assuming that treatment is not available, which is a pretty good assumption because we all agree there's a great shortage of treatment availability. Your first step might be to to convince this heroin uh injector not to share needles with other people. That's step number one. Secondly, you know, okay, let's say he goes along with that. Well, there's still a lot of harms associated with shooting drugs. So you might say to him, well, snorting it would be would be a safer option. You know, you're not as likely to spread disease or to get abscesses and so forth.
[00:39:02] Speaker 1: And, you know, maybe methadone will at that point become available to him. So we're not saying to this fellow, sorry, treatment's not available but you're just going to have to go cold turkey, you're going to have to give it up on your own, rather we try to guide him through a series of steps to cut down his use or or to maybe to substitute for a less harmful substance. And it's not a purist approach. It's um it's not only abstinence as the only model. Not everybody can do that.
[00:39:26] Speaker 2: And in the meantime, um we don't put him in jail even though we know he's he's using quote illegal drugs.
[00:39:33] Speaker 1: Well, that would be my. Okay. Uh Sandy?
[00:39:36] Sandy: A a couple of things. First of all, you have to remember that um that use of drugs does affect the brain and the brain is kind of like our our central control system for our our judgment and our our bodily functions and our behaviors. So let's be real clear when people are using drugs that they are affecting their ability to to make judgments and and to operate. I think another point is, um it's been mentioned once before and this is there's a suggestion that um substance abusers aren't effective if they're not harming anyone.
[00:40:06] Sandy: And I would say, let's talk to the families, let's talk to the significant others, let's talk to the employer and the co-workers of this person to in fact see if if their uh drug use is harmless and not harming anyone else. And if they are only harming themselves, which I don't believe is possible, um what about the health health risks to their to their own to their own body? And who pays for those uh health risks? And and continually we have a society in which, you know, is is going to be responsible for that in some way.
[00:40:37] Speaker 2: So so we have a stake in their drug use.
[00:40:40] Sandy: We certainly do. And and there there's no such thing as this harmless drug use, them using drugs and and not harming someone else. There is, there's significant harm and cost.
[00:40:49] Speaker 2: Okay. Brief, brief response from Pam and then we're going to go to our callers. Pam?
[00:40:52] Pam Lichty: I agree with a lot of what Sandra said, but I think that throwing people in jail is is not going to help them deal with their drug use. We have a huge recidivism rate of people being going through a revolving door and that's because their underlying drug problem is not addressed. But needle exchange programs throughout the world have collected a ton of data and all of it shows that that drug users are able and willing to change their behaviors in ways to improve their lives and the lives of those around them.
[00:41:19] Pam Lichty: We have to remember and this is a basic premise of harm reduction that they are human beings. They're not just drug abusers, they're human beings and we need to treat them as such.
[00:41:27] Speaker 2: Okay, let's go to a caller. We have Will who is a physician from Kailua. Good morning, Will.
[00:41:32] Will: Yeah, good morning. Am I on?
[00:41:34] Speaker 2: You're on the air.
[00:41:35] Will: Yeah, I've had a good deal of experience, not only medical but forensic in this area including emergency room experience. I strongly support harm reduction concepts. I think that the idea of a drug free goal is a pie in the sky. It also is is punitive and frequently vengeful and certainly moralistic usually. Uh two specific points, lumping all drugs together for discussions like this gets you off on the wrong foot right away and practically undercuts the value of discussions including the one you folks are having right now. Unfortunately, people on both sides of all sides of this argument are guilty of this offense of logic and and knowledge.
[00:42:22] Will: Lumping marijuana together with ice or or other dangerous drugs is very foolish for example and makes it pointless and yet you look at the script of your show and you'll see that everybody's talking about all drugs. Do this with all drugs, do that with all drugs. Get off of the idea of lumping all drugs together. Start discussing them individually. Some drugs should be decriminalized, some should be legalized, some some should continue to be absolutely illegal and [unintelligible — audio glitch] efforts made to eliminate them completely.
[00:42:53] Will: My second point is that there are interested parties involved here. Police departments and law enforcement authorities in general have a very uh unfortunate uh and frequently unspoken interest and incentive in this because they get a lot of money from from their efforts in against relatively innocuous substances like marijuana. Don't forget the the uh the interest that law enforcement has in this area.
[00:43:21] Speaker 2: Okay. Well, thank you very much for your comment. You've added a lot to our conversation. Uh let's keep moving. We've got some people who've been real patient waiting their turn. Let's go to Joe from Honolulu. Good morning, Joe.
[00:43:33] Joe: Good morning. Thanks for letting me on the air. This has been a values laden discussion from the beginning. When I hear a statement like our goal should be to have a society where substances are not abused, this is an absurd goal and this is a value that is not shared by significant members of our society. Marijuana must be legalized as soon as possible for all sorts of obvious reasons. One of the values that I value is a value of liberty, which is hardly ever discussed in these discussions. Okay. I've been working all my life. I'm 40 some years old. I've been paying taxes all my life.
[00:44:18] Joe: I am a marijuana smoker. I do not intend to stop. I have no one that represents my point of view in either the state legislature or in Washington. So I am being taxed without being represented. The only way we can achieve a drug-free society is through brainwashing techniques and a total police state.
[00:44:38] Speaker 2: Okay. Joe, thank you for your call. We appreciate it. You know, as I was listening to Joe, I'm kind of reminded, I used to think that this kind of broke down on liberal versus conservative lines, and and over on the conservative side, there's there's kind of a split because there are, I think, a growing number of of libertarians who part of their conservatism is that government should not be as involved in people's lives as as it currently is. And um so just on a political level, I think it's a little bit more complicated than what I used to think.
[00:45:11] Speaker 2: Let's go to a few more callers and then I want to get some thoughts from our guests again. Uh we have Bill Sage from Makiki. Good morning, Bill.
[00:45:17] Bill: Good morning. I'd like to uh make a comment about a statement I heard on NPR a couple of years ago and this to me completely converted my beliefs. I used to be anti-drug legalization. A New York vice squad detective said that he was anti-drugs until he began to think about the math. Whether you legalize drugs or not, you're going to have the same number of addicts in the population, or the same thing true of alcohol abuse.
[00:45:39] Bill: He says, how many people would be in favor of getting at least 50% of the drugs off the streets to a large audience? They all raise their hand. He said, all right, now you have the same number of addicts. What's going to happen to the crime rate and the demand? It's going to be the same. The price is going to double and therefore people are going to have to commit twice as many crimes to get the same amount of stuff.
[00:45:55] Speaker 2: Supply and demand, huh?
[00:45:57] Bill: Exactly. Okay. Bill, thank you for your call. You're welcome.
[00:46:01] Speaker 2: We appreciate it. Um and I'll tell you what, I am going to invite some comments, but we've got people who've been waiting patiently. I want to hear from a few more of them and then we'll open it up for our guests here in the studio. We go to Ellen in Pu'unui. Good morning, Ellen.
[00:46:11] Ellen: Good morning. Um well, I'm part of the Hawaii Harm Reduction Working Group. And you know, I I've heard a lot of talk, you know, there's discrimination among substance users. And uh I work with substance users, and the biggest problem I'm running into in Hawaii now is QUEST and the HMOs with QUEST. Um substance abuse treatment is difficult to get. We all know that. Um what's happening now is with the QUEST HMOs, when we finally get a slot for a substance user, they're limited sometimes to three days, five days of residential treatment. They're also limited to two treatment sessions per year.
[00:47:04] Ellen: To me, that's setting people up for failure. You can't do anything with somebody in three to five days. So you've got your white collar user users who um have regular insurance, they are getting the treatment that they need for longer periods of time. How do we fix that?
[00:47:23] Speaker 2: Okay. Ellen, I appreciate your call. I'm I'm going to have to move on, but uh we will comment on that or invite our guest to comment on it in just a bit. We go to Lela in Ia. Good morning, Lela.
[00:47:35] Lela: Good morning. You know, the Wall Street Journal of September the 23rd had an article saying that incarceration is a bargain. Uh that the average criminal on the loose costs $53,900 in crimes. If he's incarcerated, the cost per prisoner is $30,000. There's a net benefit of 23,900. Now instead of putting people who are in drugs in prison, if we had alternative places, and we now have uh the navy giving us back a huge area, um that is isolated. Why couldn't we set up um drug camps or whatever you call them to help these people, because I feel they are ill, um get off the hard drugs which are so detrimental?
[00:48:36] Speaker 2: Okay. Lela, thank you for your call. I've I've got to move on. I've got two more people who have been waiting very very patiently. I'm going to hear from them quickly and then we'll hear some more from our guests in the studio. We go to Wally in Kaimuki. Good morning, Wally.
[00:48:48] Wally: Good morning. Uh I had two questions. Uh one was uh why Miss Lecar, when she talks about the health risks of drugs, doesn't talk about the health risks of alcohol and tobacco which kill over half a million Americans every year? And the second question was uh regarding her uh comments about accessibility. Now that they have clamped down on the marijuana with all these operation wipe outs and what not. I think the will's comment about uh the effect of marijuana being much less is very relevant because we've seen the uh increased use of ice and crack and heroin all come in to fill the vacuum that was once the market here for the income generating marijuana.
[00:49:36] Wally: And I think we've had a lot of problems with that. Not only the ice but the economy going down and I'd like to hear some comments on that.
[00:49:43] Speaker 2: Okay. Wally, thank you for your comment and your question. Uh I'm going to go to Karen in Kaneohe and then we're going to hear from our guests. Karen, good morning.
[00:49:51] Karen: Uh yeah, actually Lela actually addressed some of what I was going to ask, and that has to do with the cost of incarceration versus treatment, especially if you take into consideration the the law enforcement money spent on things like helicopters for eradicating marijuana. And and does anybody do either of them have numbers on the cost of treatment versus incarceration? In addition then, there's the non-revolving door if you truly get someone off of drugs if you get them into recovery. So I'd like that address.
[00:50:23] Speaker 2: Okay. Karen, thank you for your call. And before I open it up to our our guests, I want to remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise radio show. My name is Randy Roth. We're talking about drug abuse in Hawaii and what to do about it. In the studio is Pam Likty, who's the coordinator and co-founder of the Hawaii Drug Policy Options Group, the founding member of Harm Reduction Hawaii, and vice-chair of the Sterile Needle Exchange Committee.
[00:50:48] Speaker 2: Also Sandy Lecar, who is a founder and executive director of the Coalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii. We've heard from a lot of callers including Dr. Bernie Portner, uh Captain Kenneth Tano from HPD, and Bud Smiser from the Star Bulletin. And we're going to uh hear a little bit more from uh Bernie Portner I believe in in just a little bit. But we've had a lot of callers, a lot of issues have been raised. Um I don't think we're going to have time for for more callers and so um um you know, you probably shouldn't uh shouldn't call us up.
[00:51:21] Speaker 2: We are down to the last 10 or 15 minutes and I want to give our guests an opportunity to comment on all the issues that have been raised. If you turn tuned in late and you'd like to hear the show in its entirety, tonight on KIFO 1380 a.m., you'll be able to do exactly that. Again, we're talking about drug abuse in Hawaii, what on a policy level should be done about it. Pam Likty?
[00:51:42] Pam Lichty: Yeah, I wanted to come uh to respond to the person who asked about the cost of treatment. There was one really important study that was done in this about a year or so ago by the Rand Corporation of California. And they found, this was specifically on cocaine treatment, and they found that uh for every dollar spent, um that's that treatment is seven times more cost effective than uh interdiction and uh law enforcement efforts. Interdiction on in an international level was the least cost effective. The closer you got to home, the more cost effective it was.
[00:52:13] Pam Lichty: But nevertheless, the money spent for treatment was seven times more cost effective and uh this is a fact we that that the politicians need to know about.
[00:52:20] Speaker 2: Pam, let me get Sandy's reaction to that statement and then I'll come right back to you. I know you have a number of points to make, but Sandy, do you agree, disagree, or do have a different spin on that particular issue?
[00:52:29] Sandy: Well, I I know that study so I'm not I'm not going to refute the study, but I what I wanted to say to the caller is treatment is also less expensive than incarceration is. Mhm. So if if people can be treated and that's their main problem, then um it's less expensive than putting them in jail and trying to treat them.
[00:52:48] Speaker 2: So both of you would favor treatment over incarceration? Sandy?
[00:52:52] Sandy: Uh depending on the crime, yes.
[00:52:54] Speaker 2: Oh, okay. Uh Pam, I interrupted you a minute ago. What else were you going to say?
[00:52:57] Pam Lichty: Well, I had comments about some of the other callers um comments. Uh one is uh the idea of taking different approaches for different drugs. Um I think this is very important. Um this is a short discussion. We don't really have time to get into all the details, but it's a fact as I and mentioned in my article that fashions shift and they do in terms of what drugs are legal and illegal, too. Earlier in this century, there were many patent medicines that had cocaine and morphine in as primary ingredients and uh now those are illegal. Um in other parts of the world, uh marijuana products are legal and alcohol is illegal.
[00:53:31] Pam Lichty: So it's kind of a matter of um you know, how a given society regards given drug. But in terms of uh different approaches, um the harm reduction movement also believes that no one approach is good for everybody. I was just at a four-day harm reduction conference in California, and at that conference there were people from 12-step programs. There were also people who were active users and actually had support groups for users. And these people were trying to work together and to try to um to try to determine um things that they could agree on.
[00:54:01] Pam Lichty: And one of the things they agreed on was that, you know, you have a given user and there's not one approach that's good for that person. Abstinence does not work for everybody and cutting down does not work for everybody. You really have to tailor each approach. And it's very important for the person involved, the person at the center of it, to try to figure out with the um social worker or service worker what's best for them.
[00:54:23] Speaker 2: And as I understand it, at [unintelligible — audio glitch] the heart and there are other things at the heart, but at the heart of your position is that a person is more likely to seek help if they're not admitting that they're committing a crime in stepping forward and admitting to this drug problem.
[00:54:36] Pam Lichty: Well, of course they are admitting that they're committing a crime because that's But I guess the point is that that if if that didn't have the current consequences, they'd be more likely to step forward and seek help. Exactly. Uh drug users are extremely stigmatized in this society, and we may think that's good or we may think that's bad. But the fact is that it it puts it again into that law enforcement arena and makes it hard for people like pregnant women who really need to seek help if they're substance abusers. Makes it very hard for them to step forward.
[00:55:03] Sandy: Um, I think it makes it makes it hard for them to step forward when there's no treatment available. So, I wouldn't I would hold the line on any kind of decriminalization or legalization until we have a solid treatment program and good quality treatment available for people and then see where we are in terms of the legalization issue.
[00:55:21] Speaker 2: And just so I understand, I I'm under the impression Sandy that you think um the foundation of Pam's position is legalization. I get the impression you think that that the discussion of harm reduction while on the surface is appealing, that it includes legalization and that you're opposed to that?
[00:55:39] Sandy: I'm opposed to legalization, yes.
[00:55:41] Speaker 2: And is is that a part of of harm reduction as described by Pam's group?
[00:55:46] Sandy: Yes. Uh I think it is. I think that is a part of it because she's talking about stigma stigmatization and and um if the group was really about treatment, then I think their actions and the kinds of things that they would be presenting at the legislature would be more in terms of supporting treatment and treatment on demand where most of the um debates and discussions that they have and people that they bring in is much more about legalization and decriminalization as an issue rather than looking at areas in which we do agree on.
[00:56:15] Speaker 2: I think if if we could join forces on what we agree on, I think we'd have a much more humane and sane society.
[00:56:23] Pam Lichty: And that's where harm and that's where harm reduction is. That's where everyone on this task force agreed.
[00:56:29] Sandy: The task force did not agree with harm reduction and it's because it's gotten to be uh such a dicey. Uh it means different things to different people and people have used it to mean different things. And um I think the statement that you read is probably the closest we could get on that, which is I I think I think again, we're in agreement.
[00:56:48] Speaker 2: To me, that statement didn't say very much.
[00:56:50] Sandy: Well, that's the only way we could get an agreement.
[00:56:52] Pam Lichty: But I think the [unintelligible — audio glitch] point that Pam makes, I think most people would agree that that there isn't one approach. There's a lot of different reasons why people use drugs.
[00:57:00] Speaker 1: lot of different social context that they're each in and that relates to that use and there's a lot of, there has to be a lot of different approaches to get them, you know, off of their use. And I think we all agree to that, but it's having the system in place to do that.
[00:57:13] Speaker 2: Okay. Pam Lichtig and then I want to hear from Dr. Bernie Portner, too.
[00:57:16] Pam Lichty: Yeah. Well, I I think it keeps coming back to legalization, unfortunately, and uh we've never talked about legalization in the legislature because it simply doesn't come up there. What we have talked about are things like opposing mandatory minimum sentencing requirements, which are part of the reason that our prisons today are so incredibly full. And again, this comes out of the kind of black and white lock them up, put them away, uh three strikes and you're out uh position that that uh politicians feel compelled to take. And uh I think it's it's not a thoughtful position. It's extremely expensive. Um, it's the reason, largely the reason that our jails are packed.
[00:57:50] Speaker 2: Okay. Well, we heard from Dr. Bernie Portner Partner Partner earlier in the show. Bernie, I think you've been listening to the show.
[00:57:58] Bernie Poner: Yes, I have.
[00:57:59] Speaker 2: Uh, you got about a minute or so to share any thoughts about uh anything and everything you've heard.
[00:58:04] Bernie Poner: Well, it's uh medically speaking, I'll try to limit it to that. Healthcare costs uh, uh contrary to Sandra's article, will not necessarily go up if it's legalized or decriminalized. Healthcare costs will go down. The uh assumption that uh use will go up if uh criminalization uh goes down is not necessarily true. Availability certainly is not affected by law enforcement. The drugs could not be more available. There is no inner city person who wants to get drugs that can't go out and get it in a in a handshake.
[00:58:39] Bernie Poner: So availability and use is not necessarily affected for one one way or another by legalizing or decriminalizing it. Uh safety also is a falsehood in Sandra's article, uh it's a lot more safe if it's legal. Uh, on the other hand, uh having said that, I agree with much of Sandra's uh article and point of view and I uh sympathize and empathize with her uh focus in terms of prevention and treatment, in terms of uh education, but she says let's focus our scarce resources on these things and yet she wants to keep it criminalized. I mean, you can't do both. Most of our resources are going into helicopters, going into law enforcement. Why not put those resources into these fine education and prevention and treatment programs.
[00:59:21] Speaker 2: Okay. Bernie, thank you very much.
[00:59:24] Bernie Poner: Thank you very much. I enjoyed it.
[00:59:26] Speaker 2: Okie dokie. Well, we're down to the last few minutes and I'm going to give each of you an opportunity to to add anything you want to add, but I have to ask the question. Uh the photo that ran with your two articles this morning uh has what some people would call, you know, an educational exercise. When I saw it, I thought my goodness uh at least one way of interpreting the picture is is somebody teaching kids how to uh abuse drugs. I I don't know. Sandy, what what was your reaction to the photo on the paper?
[00:59:54] Sandy Lakar: Uh showing drug paraphernalia to children and children, especially of that age, is not a very effective drug prevention um method to be used. And we would encourage program more police programs like the DARE program where they're actually teaching kids refusal skills and making them more aware of their surroundings and more aware of the kind of resources that are available. But uh showing kids uh drug paraphernalia is not an effective prevention strategy.
[01:00:21] Pam Lichty: I quite agree with the last statement. In fact, the studies have shown that it just intrigues kids and makes them more interested. They may not have thought of it before. Their eyes are wide open in this photo. But I also wanted to comment on the DARE programs, which are, as everybody knows, also a program taught by police officers in the school. DARE programs have have come under a lot of attack nationally and there have been some very reputable studies done which uh cast doubt on their on their usefulness. Uh this particular study I'm thinking of that appeared in the American Journal of Public Health showed that uh students like them, teachers like them, they're very popular and but what is their long-term effect? Very minimal. They have a they have a temporary effect on postponing kids' drug use, but they don't have any long-range effect.
[01:01:03] Speaker 2: We're down to the last couple minutes, you've each got about one minute. It's all yours. Sandy Lakar.
[01:01:09] Sandy Lakar: Okay. I um you can only expect the DARE program, it's only so many, I think it's 18 weeks long uh for fifth graders. So if they can keep them off the drugs for the fifth grade level, that's a positive thing to happen. But most importantly, and I think one of the callers at the beginning said this, and we haven't spent any time talking about it, is prevention, which is why are people using drugs? What do we need to be doing in our society so that the only option that people feel they have is to anesthetize themselves? And that's what the Coalition for a Drug Free Hawaii is all about is is uh empowering youth, is strengthening families, is working with communities to have them decide what's appropriate and what do they want in their communities in a positive way. And that's what we need to be doing if we're going to really turn the drug problem around in our society and in Hawaii.
[01:01:58] Speaker 2: And you're saying each of us has to get involved. We can't point our finger at some group or the government or whatever. It's not the government, it's not the police. We need to be doing something as parents, we need to be talking to our children. As employers, we need to make sure we have effective uh, uh, programs in our employment. And we need to be working in our communities to make sure we have strong messages and support for our kids to stay off drugs. Very, very quickly, if someone wants to get involved and wants some help from the coalition, what's your phone number?
[01:02:25] Sandy Lakar: My phone number is 545-3228.
[01:02:29] Speaker 2: Okay. Pam Lichtig.
[01:02:30] Pam Lichty: Yes. Well, we all agree that uh it's very important for prevention. That's that's obviously the bottom line. I think where Sandra and I part company is the nature of the prevention education. Uh the harm reduction approach would favor absolute honesty in [unintelligible — audio glitch] drug education. Tell kids what what it's all about, what the differences are between the drugs, and uh don't try to use scare tactics, which are shown to be not very successful. Use peer education, use other kids to uh to try to get these messages through to them.
[01:03:00] Speaker 2: Okay. That's what we do with the Coalition for a Drug Free Hawaii. I want to thank Pam Lichtig and Sandy Lakar. We've been talking about drug abuse in Hawaii. Our producer is Susie Roth. Helping immensely this morning was Jenny Tanji. Director of Operations at Hawaii Public Radio is Jeff Alardi. Next week we're going to have uh one or more trustees of the Bishop Estate. We've had three of the five in the past, we hope to have the other two next week. They're going to be on the hot seat. Be sure to call in. Thank you for listening.