(Note: A sympathetic voice, nay, a clarion call from the editor. Listen up!
pd)

THROWING MORE MONEY AT THE WAR ON DRUGS

Pouring dollars into a black hole

I haven't met Ramona Shapiro but I feel like I know her, based the feelings
and thoughts expressed in a fine "Young Voices" column she wrote for the
News-Press a few weeks ago.

I liked the column because it said many of the things I have been saying
about the problem of drug abuse and how we should deal with it, but in
plain language. I'll have to work on that.

Ramona has courage. Her message is that America has a failed drug policy,
in large part the result of politicians - who are well aware of the failure
- - continuing to support the costly "war on drugs" because to do otherwise
threatens their political existence.

That's what they think. Never mind that they're wrong.

Ramona also makes the point that it's not so much the reduction in drug use
that usually accompanies legalization, but that crime done by addicts tends
to decrease dramatically in an environment of legalized drugs.

Here's how that works: If a junkie needs $100 a day to support his habit,
and can't work because he's too high or low to work, he'll have to find
some other way to get the money to pay for the drugs. He does it by
stealing. If the addict is female, she may turn to prostitution. Another
favorite scheme of addicts to get money is to take valuables from their
loved ones and sell the items for almost nothing. It can be very
disheartening for the loved ones, to say the least.

A prosecutor in another state who went to Congress once told me - off the
record - that if just heroin were legalized, home burglaries would
immediately drop 95 percent in his county. Home burglary was, at that time,
the biggest category of crime there.

The comments were off the record, of course, because for him to make such a
pronouncement publicly would have put an end to his political career, and
he would have missed out on all that power and glory in Washington.

Legalizing narcotics and controlling them would obviously undermine the
world market and put drug dealers out of business. It's so obvious, in
fact, that I am baffled why Americans don't demand it.

I can say that because I am not, nor do I intend to be a politician. Ramona
may be in the same boat because she wrote:

" ... it's inhumane to punish people for drug use, instead of helping them."

I was kind of hoping members of Congress would get a chance to read
Ramona's column before they voted on a war-against-drugs bill last week,
but apparently they didn't. Or, if they did, they chose to ignore the
thoughts of a 12-year-old.

That's too bad. It certainly would be a step up from their usual level of
thinking.

The House voted 384-39 to spend another $3.2 billion on the drug war.
Tobacco, unfortunately, wasn't included among the prime targets. How
convenient for members of Congress to overlook the drug that kills the most
Americans, simply because those who manufacture the product give so much in
campaign contributions.

House members want to spend $917 million on new airplanes for the U.S.
Coast Guard, and $889 million for new airplanes for the U.S. Customs Service.

An acquaintance of mine used to fly shipments of marijuana into the United
States across the Gulf of Mexico. He flew low to avoid radar detection.
He'd also fly low over Coast Guard cutters, waggling his wings in the
time-honored military salute. The sailors on deck would wave back. Just one
big, happy family.

Another acquaintance regularly brought marijuana into Arizona from Mexico.
He didn't waggle his wings. He rolled down the window of his Bronco and
opened his wallet at the border. No problem, on your way.

That's the other thing about the bill approved last week by the House. It
gives $177 million to Colombia and $18 million to Mexico to buy helicopters
for in-country interdiction efforts. And there's another $1.25 million
earmarked for concertina wire, which I think is like barbed wire but much
more damaging to the skin, and a tunnel detection system for a prison in
Colombia. One wonders if the $1.25 million is less than what the convicts
pay prison officials to make life easier for themselves and, if so, what
will the U.S. money actually be used for?

Why are we giving more than $178 million to Colombia to fight a drug war?
Colombia is a point of origin for much of the drug traffic that enters the
United States, and the flow is encouraged by a government so corrupt that
good cops are routinely gunned down by drug lords. You either accept the
bribes or you are killed. That certainly would make you think twice about
being a good cop, wouldn't it.

So another $3.2 billion - above the billions already dedicated to this
losing war on drugs by the Clinton administration - will be spent on gear,
gizmos and Mercedes payments for Latin American drug dealers and their
stooge police forces, and it will have an all-but-imperceptible effect on
drug use in America. Same as always.

One wonders what would happen if the U.S. government just simply
acknowledged the truth, which is that spending perhaps a trillion dollars
or more in recent history fighting the war on drugs has not worked.

What if, instead, the government used that money to educate people about
the misery of drug addiction, both for the addict and his or her
co-dependents, of which there are many.

Or, as Ramona Shapiro puts it:

"I wish people would admit this and stop dreaming that one of these days
suddenly these methods will work."

That's probably too much to ask.
...........
John Lankford is editorial page editor of the News-Press. Call him at
564-5161; fax: 966-6258; e-mail: SBNPedit@aol.com;
website: www.sbcoast.com.

Checked-by: Pat Dolan