[amykhar]

The demographics of Vermont makes me curious. Many people say that the war on drugs is racially motivated in that more blacks and hispanics are prosecuted than whites. Vermont is 95% Caucasian. I wonder if this fact influenced the new policy in any way.

[mturmon]

I think you're getting at something. The easier availability of prescription opiates (e.g., Dad's Vicodin for his bad back) has produced an addiction surge in middle-class communities. This is not just Vermont, but across the U.S.; I'm well aware that Vermont has a unique political culture that also factors in to how this played out.

In some places, this has turned out to result in significant high school heroin overdoses among well-off white folks, and significant heroin addiction among their parents.

If it's your kid or your neighbor, the "harm reduction" path starts to look a lot better than criminalization, and you start to see political viability for something that was radioactive before.

It hurts to admit it, but when you see political demagoguery in the U.S. (i.e., War on Drugs), looking for the racial angle is a good first strategy.

[pionar]

I would say that it's just Vermont being independent as usual. Vermont has always gone against the grain, in good ways and bad (there's a secessionist movement there now[0]). I've long advocated for treating drug abuse as a disease and making it a health problem.

I'm against complete legalization of most drugs, though. I say make personal use legal and continue prosecuting dealers and pushers.

And for anyone who disagrees, that's fine. This is just my personal opinion.

[josefresco]

Nope just Vermont being ... Vermont. Caring for your neighbor, and not being afraid of them (racially or socioeconomically) is one key to having a view like this. When one group is afraid of another you get insane sentencing laws and all sorts of discrimination.

Vermont is very independent, and doesn't have much of a "big city" influence, or cultural divide seen in even other New England states.

[bilbo0s]

I see where you are going... but I'm also pretty sure you have it backwards.

Demographics aren't the reason for Vermont's soft touch policy... demographics are the reason for the hardline policies in all of the other states.