It's the Brian Lairn Show on WNYC. I'm producer Amina Serna filling in for Brian today. Welcome back, everyone. When states began legalizing recreational marijuana, it was supposed to be a win-win.

The black market would shrink, tax revenue would pour in, criminal justice reform would take

a major step forward, and cannabis would become a safer, more regulated product.

But more than a decade later, my next guest argues that win-win hasn't

materialized. A recent article in the Atlantic argues that legal weed hasn't lived up to its

promises. The piece points to a sharp rise in daily cannabis use, particularly with the spread of

high-potency products that differ significantly from what was on the market decades ago.

It raises concerns about public health, profit motives, and questions whether the criminal justice benefits have been as far reaching as some advocates predicted.

Joining me now, Keith Humphreys, Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences

at Stanford University, author of Addiction, a very short introduction, and a member of the

Stanford Network on Addiction Policy. His piece in the Atlantic co-authored with Jonathan Culkins

is legal weed didn't deliver on its promises.

He'll unpack his argument and talk about where he feels legalization may have gone wrong.

Professor Humphreys, welcome to WMIC.

Thanks very much for having me.

You and your co-author on this article, Jonathan Calkins, write that the promises of marijuana legalization,

quote, have turned out to be overstated or simply wrong, end quote. What were the biggest

expectations and how do you think the reality has fallen short? Yeah, probably helpful to say

where the point of you were coming from is not to say,

you know, we should or shouldn't legalize, we have.

That's reality.

And the question is, how do you make it work better?

...