IT'S TIME TO DECLARE DEFEAT IN THE WAR ON DRUGS

Public opinion, as expressed in the AC-T letters of Jan. 17, lauds the
effort of Councilman Carl Mumpower to lead the fight against drug
crime in our public housing. I commend him for his commitment to good
order among the poor we aid.

The Herculean task of cleansing certain neighborhoods of illicit
drugs, as honorable as it is, is as shortsighted as the failed "war on
drugs." For a better discussion of the issue, I refer the reader to an
op-ed article by Orlando Patterson in the Jan. 13 New York Times. The
special efforts to squelch this crime began in 1971, apparently as
part of Richard Nixon's personal vendetta against pot-crazed
communists, hippies and peaceniks, all unsavory characters. (I know
this to be true from experience. I was one of those about whom parents
warned their daughters.) The results of this forgotten war have been
anything but what was intended, and makes one wonder why it is not
terminated.

The Drug Enforcement Agency has created an artificial shortage of
product, without affecting demand. Risk is not inherent to the
industry, and has been introduced by the government in a way that only
the most ruthless entrepreneurs will enter the market. Narco-managers
reduce risk further and increase efficiency by usurping the
government's monopoly of violence.

Eradication as a means of restricting supply means the waging of
chemical warfare on peasants of Latin America. We spray the coca crop,
and any crop and person in the way, with herbicides.

Markets for cocaine were developed by dramatizing the exploits of drug
agents and smugglers, making the enterprise appear exciting and
romantic, with such entertainments as "Miami Vice." When demand and
supply reached equilibrium and growth stalled, new forms were
introduced. Crack sells for less per dose, but economies of scale mean
greater total revenue. I don't believe manufacturers knew that the
delivery mechanism, smoking, was more efficient than snorting.

This was a bonus, making the longevity of the high shorter, the drug
more addictive, and more of it sold. It has all the makings of perfect
capitalism: Make it for a dime, sell it for a dollar, and it's
habit-forming.

Where local supply is unreliable, and there's an upward pressure on
price, the market has become differentiated. For each of the major
illicit drugs, there is at least one designer drug substitute. Some of
these are more dangerous in the production process, in their effects
on the body, and some are more addictive. There is also a thriving
black market in stolen pharmaceuticals.

The law draws a border between legitimate society (white, middle
class, middle-aged men) and the society and culture of drugs. Beyond
that border there are no controls.

A street dealer is not going to complain to the cops that he has been
ripped off. Nor is a cop going to run to his aid as he might to a
storeowner. Once one is willing to enter this underworld, one is also
willing to abandon normal inhibitions. Morality becomes a remote
memory. I agree with the conservative analysis of William F. Buckley
on the subject of de-criminalization of cocaine: The result would be a
supply far exceeding demand, and prices would fall far below
profitability. Each of these drugs originates in vegetable form, and
have uses with little refinement. Coca leaf is a good stimulant,
better than caffeine.

There is considerable need for opiate anesthetics in the Third
World.

Marijuana, now the most profitable crop in the country, has good
enough medical uses that Canada approved a drug for treatment of
multiple sclerosis distilled from cannabis sativa. Decriminalization
and controlled production can enhance the incomes of peasant farmers
in Latin America and Afghanistan.

There are distinct advantages to declaring defeat in the war on drugs.
The nation would cease the billions of dollars of expenses incurred by
the DEA. The cost of prisons would be cut about in half, because we
would stop prosecuting and incarcerating young men for drug crimes and
drug-related crimes committed against the vulnerable poor. We will
have adequate funds for prevention, education and treatment.

Carl Mumpower could go home to bed.

There are severe impediments to decriminalization of these drugs. Each
drug provides instantly and artificially something that is lacking in
the life of the user. Inasmuch as they mimic natural processes, then
there is a drug-free means to achieve this. Drugs offer the user a
false sense of empowerment, of well-being, of invulnerability. The
natural option, then, is to organize politically. Self-empowerment,
economic cooperation and community protection will produce authentic
and clean neighborhoods. Go ask the Black Panthers, those still alive,
what they know about this.