LET'S REASSESS, OVERHAUL DRUG LAWS IN THE U.S.

As the (Observer's) only Libertarian community columnist, my main goal
has been to show how less government intervention in our lives is
better. I hate covering topics that I've already written about, but
when I heard that Rush Limbaugh confessed to being addicted to
OxyContin, I couldn't think of a more appropriate illustration.

My wife lives with chronic pain, so we know firsthand how frustrating
it is trying to find a competent doctor willing to treat pain with
opioids, such as OxyContin. I'm sure that others in our situation get
the same gut-wrenching feelings when OxyContin is negatively portrayed
by the media. Imagine for a moment that insulin was found to get
people "high." How would those close to a diabetic, someone who needs
insulin in order to function on a daily basis, like to see the press
take cheap shots at this medication and call for its immediate removal
because far less than 0.01 percent of those who use it choose to abuse
it?

Nearly every article about OxyContin contains the same two components
- -- the claim that it's "the most powerfully, addictive narcotic on the
market, and has become the addicts' drug du jour with it's heroin-like
effects" and "the recovering addict who continued taking it after the
pain had subsided because of its euphoria." The person usually
recounts the struggle to get off the medication, but often admits to
living with pain. Given a choice, I would prefer not to be in pain,
regardless of the misguided opinions of others.

What they fail to mention is that people who are in chronic pain do
not receive this euphoria from opioids and they don't become
"addicted" to them. Unfortunately, most doctors don't know or explain
the difference between addiction and tolerance/physical dependence. So
when a national news story like the one about Rush L breaks, a lot of
people on OxyContin try to get off it because of pressure from family
members who don't understand that they need it in order to function.
Or, their doctors stop prescribing it out of fear.

Rush was initially prescribed OxyContin following spinal surgery that
resulted in severe, chronic back pain. Then, as is often the case, he
became addicted to the euphoria it creates in people who no longer
suffer from pain. Estimates are that millions of Americans abuse
prescription painkillers. Unlike most, Rush could continue to feed his
addiction and function as the top-rated radio talk show host in the
country. This dispels previous stereotypes of drug addicts as being
out-of-work, homeless bums.

Many liberals would love to see Rush in stripes at the state
penitentiary for years, but what would that really accomplish? How
would society be better off by incarcerating someone for a medical
addiction? And as long as the user doesn't infringe on the rights of
or cause harm to others, what is the big deal? I do, however, agree
that once someone breaks the law -- regardless of the illegal
substances involved -- he should be held accountable for his actions.

Supporters of Rush say addiction is simply a disease. Cancer is a
disease; those stricken usually have no choice. Substance abuse is a
choice that snowballs out of control. But if we agree that addiction
is also a medical condition, then what is accomplished by ruining
peoples' lives, overcrowding prisons and mixing in with murderers and
rapists other people who, as Rush proves, can function in society?

Decades of drug laws have provided financial incentive for people to
sell narcotics to people who are psychologically addicted. Outlawing
certain drugs is nothing more than an attempt to legislate morality. A
more viable alternative would be to tax all drugs and then use that
money for education and treatment facilities. But with politicians
controlling the purse-strings, that would be about as likely as
lottery money being spent on education.

Most Libertarians agree that our draconian drug laws cause more
problems than they solve. One problem is this: If a multimillionaire
like Rush Limbaugh, who can afford the best healthcare in the world,
is in so much pain and agony that he accepts his housekeeper's offer
to buy prescription painkillers on the black market, after his own
doctors obviously failed to help him, then what chance does an average
person have of finding effective pain management?

The best thing to come from Rush's plight would be an honest
examination of our most expensive and disastrous "war" to date. It
could spark a real national debate and lead to a complete overhaul of
our country's drug laws.