LEGALIZING DRUGS MAKES MATTERS WORSE

When I mentioned in my last column that our federal (and many state)
drug laws were irrational, I was immediately greeted with the demand
that we solve the problem by legalizing drugs.

If only things were so simple. The central problem with legalizing
drugs is that it will increase drug consumption under almost any
reasonable guess as to what the legalization (or more modestly, the
decriminalization) regime would look like. The debate, I think, must be
between those who admit this increase and then explain why they would
find it tolerable and those who admit the increase and find it
intolerable.

Illegal drugs--and here I refer chiefly to cocaine, heroin, PCP, and
methamphetamine--have three prices that are much higher than what they
would be if the sale were legal.

First, under legalization the cash price would be lower. No one knows
by how much, but the most cautious scholar says by a factor of three,
the boldest one says by a factor of 20. Now take a powerfully addictive
substance, one that not only operates on but modifies the human brain
by producing compelling effects that often can only be achieved again
by increasing the dosage, and ask how many more people would buy it if
its cash price were only 30 percent or even 5 percent of its current
price. Unless you think that everybody who wants the drug is already
using it, a most unlikely possibility, then the answer must be--a lot.

Second, under legalization the quality price would be lower. Drugs are
now purchased in most cases from people who offer no meaningful promise
of quality. You can buy cocaine or heroin that has been cut five times
or 20 times, and cut with sugar or rat poison. The Food and Drug
Administration does not require accurate labeling, and unless you are a
repeat customer, you probably have no idea what you are getting. Feel
like taking a chance? Buy a drug from the furtive fellow on the street
corner.

Third, under legalization the search price would be zero. You would not
have to search or run risks of being mugged or arrested. Maybe you
would be able to buy it in the local pharmacy, but you would get it
from some dealer operating in the open with no risk to you.

Cut all of these three prices--the cash cost, the risk of not getting a
decent quality, and the absence of searching and running risks--and the
total price reduction would not be by a factor of 20 but probably by a
factor of 50. Consumption will go up dramatically.

Now what happens? Here is where the only meaningful debate can exist.
Do you think that there will be a decrease in drug crime? Maybe--if the
crime committed by users seeking money to buy drugs and the dealers
protecting their right to sell drugs falls by an amount greater than
the increase in crime committed by addicted users who are no longer
capable of holding a job. Not all coke or heroin addicts are
incapacitated, but a significant fraction--perhaps one-fifth, perhaps
more--are. Say we have 1 million users now, with 200,000 of them so
dependent on the drug that they are useless for any activity, including
holding a job. Now suppose after legalization we have 5 million users,
with 1 million totally zonked.

We can support the 1 million on welfare, though I think the political
chance of that is utterly remote. Or we can let them fend for
themselves by stealing. They may well steal more than the 200,000 steal
when the price of drugs is much higher. Take a guess. But remember that
after we create the 1 million, we can't turn the clock back. We shall
have them forever.

Or to take another example. Suppose we have 15,000 people killed by
drunken drivers. How many will be killed by coke-or heroin-addicted
drivers if access to those products becomes as easy as access to
alcohol is now? There is no way to tell, but it would be foolish to
assume that the number would be trivial.

Or ask how many marriages, now afflicted by alcoholism, will be
afflicted by drug abuse when drugs become legal. Or how many
pregnancies that now are harmed by fetal alcohol syndrome will be
harmed by fetal drug syndrome.

Recall also that most people in drug treatment are there because of
some form of coercion. Very few walk in on their own. Take away
coercion, and you take away treatment for all but a few burned-out
addicts.

John Stuart Mill, the father of modern libertarians, argued that people
can only restrict the freedom of another for their self-protection, and
society can only exert power over its members against their will in
order to prevent harm to others. I think that the harm to others from
drug legalization will be greater than the harm--and it is a great harm-
- -that now exists from keeping these drugs illegal.