THE CASE FOR LEGALIZING DRUGS

BAD TRIP: HOW THE WAR ON DRUGS IS DESTROYING AMERICA

By Joel Miller

WND, $24.95, 256 pages

DRUG WAR CRIMES: THE CONSEQUENCES OF PROHIBITION

By Jeffrey A. Miron

The Independent Institution, $15.95, 107 pages

For decades the U.S. government has attempted to suppress the use of
illicit substances. Alcohol and tobacco once were on the prohibited
list but now are legal. Cocaine and marijuana, which once were legal,
are now banned. Two recent books persuasively argue that this campaign
has been not just ineffective, but counterproductive. In the words of
book editor Joel Miller, "Prohibition is supposed to make America
better. In reality it makes it manifestly worse; just like a
drug trip gone bad."

The costs of substance abuse are obvious: Some people "ruin their
lives with drugs," notes Jeffrey Miron, an economics professor at
Boston University. "The right question for policy analysis, however,
is not whether drugs are sometimes misused but whether policy reduces
that misuse, and at what cost."

The answer of both authors is that the price paid by all of us is too
high.

The drug war has little impact on demand. Looking back at alcohol
Prohibition, Mr. Miron concludes that cirrhosis deaths fell by 10 to
20 percent, "far smaller than suggested by many advocates of
prohibition." Mr. Miron also points to the experience of dozen
American states that decriminalized marijuana and foreign countries
with less restrictive policies. Of the latter, he observes: "there is
no evidence these countries have higher drug use rates; indeed the
U.S. rate frequently exceeds that in most other countries."

As for supply, law enforcement stops just 10 percent of
the illicit supply. Indeed, prohibition turns smugglers
into entrepreneurs. Writes Mr. Miller: "When dealers
sound more like business-school graduates than hustlers
and brand their products like desktop PCs and
designer-name chef's knives; all despite the
best efforts of police; perhaps people should
begin questioning whether those efforts actually serve any use."

If drug prohibition was merely ineffective, it wouldn't matter as
much. But the policy imposes a high price on American society.
Prohibition generates crime. Those who use drugs do so illegally. They
often steal to fund habits made more expensive by prohibition. More
important, notes Mr. Miller, "Because the illegality of the drug trade
removes legal protection from its participants, the business is
subject to brutality." Traffickers settle their disputes with guns
rather than lawsuits. In contrast, drugs themselves are not crimogenic.

Explains Mr. Miller: "An overwhelming percentage of
drug users never thump old ladies, loot convenience
stores, beat their children, or shoot police officers."

Equally disturbing is the problem of corruption. There always have
been bad cops, but ongoing, profitable criminal enterprises post the
greatest temptation. Judges and politicians are equally susceptible to
the lure of drug money. Writes Mr. Miller, "no other factor inflates
corruption as much or as perniciously as drug prohibition."

Of particular concern today is the impact of the drug war on
terrorism. Notes Mr. Miller, "Thanks to inflated prices caused by
global narcotics prohibition, whoring after state sponsors is no
longer needed." Instead, the Taliban can raise millions from opium
production throughout the Afghan countryside.

Another casualty of the drug war is privacy. As Mr. Miller points out,
the fact that drug abuse is a victimless (or, more accurately,
self-victim) crime means that there is no complaining witness. It is
hard to collect evidence against drug users without using searches,
wiretaps, and snitches. Even so, winning convictions in drug cases
isn't easy. Thus, the government has increasingly relied on property
seizures, which demand a lower standard of proof, to punish presumed
wrongdoers. Yet Mr. Miller finds that the toll among the innocent is
very high.

Particularly frightening is the increase in what Mr. Miller calls
"drug-only offenders," people who were not violent but were jailed,
often for significant periods of time due to new mandatory minimums
for drug crimes. Imprisonment encourages them to shift into a life of
more violent crime, creating far more social harm than the drug use
that otherwise would occur.

There is little good news in the drug war. The government has
militarized law enforcement and turned homes and entire neighborhoods
into war zones. Locking up ever more people hasn't stopped the flow of
drugs, which are available inside supposedly secure
penitentiaries.

Proposals for decriminalization or legalization seem radical. But the
only hope may be to treat drugs as a moral, spiritual, and health
problem rather than a legal one. Mr. Miller notes the importance of
"social controls" in limiting destructive behavior, which ultimate are
more powerful than ill-enforced laws. America's tradition of liberty
should put the burden of proof on supporters of the drug war. After
all, concludes Mr. Miron, "the goals of prohibition are questionable,
the methods are unsound, and the results are deadly."

Mr. Miller and Mr. Miron have presented a powerful case against the
drug war. Drug prohibition is making Americans neither safer nor better off.