Opposition is growing to the landmark $26 billion opioid settlement announced last week, as a growing number of states and cities say the amount isn’t enough and the 18-year payout period is too long. So far, West Virginia and Washington State, as well as Philadelphia, have said they won’t sign on to the deal, noting that we need more money right now and upfront to tackle the nationwide drug crisis. Critics also say that the proposed settlement does not hold the companies in the opioid industry accountable for contributing to the opioid epidemic, because they do not admit responsibility for an epidemic that has killed more than 500,000 Americans over the past two decades. States have only 30 days to opt into the deal, and if there’s not enough support the settlement could be reduced. This settlement involved the country’s 3 largest drug distributors and the opioid maker Johnson & Johnson, but thousands of cases remain against pharmacy chains and other opioid makers.
Meanwhile, the AP carries a story marking the 50th anniversary this summer of the “war on drugs,” launched by former President Richard Nixon, and concludes that this approach has been an abject failure. The so-called war did not lead to an end to drug addiction—as we are in the middle of a raging overdose crisis, with a record 93,000 fatalities last year—and mass incarceration of millions of people, mostly Black and Hispanic Americans. Between 1975 and 2019, the U.S prison population jumped from around 250,000 to 1.4 million, with 1 in 5 people incarcerated with a drug offense. Today, there is a correct policy shift underway from sending addicts to prison and focusing instead on engaging them in drug treatment and harm reduction.
And finally, an opinion piece in the New York Times picks up on this topic, arguing that harm reduction—including needle exchanges and safe injection sites—should be the cornerstone of our national drug policy, without mentioning the importance of drug treatment. While harm reduction is of course critical to save lives, reduce criminality, and stop the spread of infectious diseases, it should only be a short-term measure that engages individuals to pursue drug treatment. It’s not an end, in and of itself, but part of a broader and comprehensive approach to confronting addiction. The writer says that the humane treatment offered by harm reduction can spur self-care rather than self-destruction, but what is truly humane would be to help those struggling with substance use get on the road to recovery.