The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Ben Potter is a fourth-year student in political science at the University of Maine who grew up in Falmouth. These are his views and do not express those of the University of Maine System or the University of Maine. Ben provides this column at the invitation of the Maine chapter of the Scholars Strategy Network, which brings together scholars across the country to address public challenges and their policy implications. Members’ columns appear in the BDN every other week.
Maine suffered 723 fatal overdoses last year alone, according to the Maine Drug Data Hub. On average, two of our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, friends or coworkers left us every single day. Odds are, you have seen the impact of this epidemic around you, even if you haven’t been personally affected by it. Burying our heads in the sand isn’t going to save lives.
We need to elect policymakers who are ready to take risks and experiment with new approaches to addressing the crisis. And as we look for guidance for how to address this tragic situation, British Columbia can help lead the way.
Many Mainers would find themselves right at home in much of British Columbia; the province shares the same rugged coast, rural towns, and deep woods that cover so much of our state. Unfortunately, like Maine, British Columbia has recently seen an explosion in overdose deaths. In the seven years since the provincial government declared opioids a public health emergency in 2016, fatal overdoses have claimed the lives of 12,739 British Columbians.
Scrambling for a way to address these deaths, lawmakers in Canada’s federal government granted the province an exemption to national drug policy beginning earlier this year, allowing it to experiment with new ways to prevent overdose deaths.
If we have learned anything from our decades-long war on drugs, it’s that any attempt to disrupt supply will be imperfect and only address part of the problem. We need to accept that drugs will enter our country and our state and focus our attention on protecting substance users.
A cornerstone of British Columbia’s harm reduction strategy is its robust drug checking program where users can go to have their drugs tested for the presence of fentanyl. The Mills administration has allocated funding for fentanyl and xylazine test strips, but more can still be done to ensure convenient testing across the state. Maine has already taken valuable steps to ensure the availability of Naloxone, a drug which saves lives by reversing overdoses. But expanding the reach of drug checking initiatives is a smart investment in preventing overdose from occuring in the first place.
Despite their similarities, it’s important not to lose sight of a few critical differences between Maine and British Columbia. First, unlike Maine, Canada has universal healthcare and a more robust social welfare system. This may give British Columbia an advantage as it implements treatment and harm reduction programs for substance users. Also, Vancouver, the largest city in British Columbia, is roughly 10 times the size of Maine’s largest city; some resources which make sense in large cities simply won’t be transferable to a more rural environment.
British Columbia’s experiment began less than a year ago. While initial results show promise its full impact has yet to be seen. It’s possible that the desired results won’t be fully achieved, forcing policymakers to go back to the drawing board. It is, after all, a pilot.
Regardless of this specific attempt though, the province reminds us that we are in unprecedented times and we need to be ready for unprecedented policy approaches. Our current approach to drug control simply isn’t working, and we need to be prepared to take policy risks in order to save the lives of our fellow Mainers.
In order for Maine to follow British Columbia’s lead, we have to be ready to give those developing and implementing these experimental initiatives some leeway. Change isn’t going to happen overnight. And with bold initiatives such as this, it’s likely that things will have to get worse before they can get better.
Tempering our expectations in the short term will give those crafting these policies the autonomy they need to be able to roll out imaginative new programs to protect the people of Maine.
As we look forward to elections in 2024, we should seek out politicians who are willing to try new things with our state’s drug policy instead of sticking with what we know doesn’t work.