FAILED DRUG POLICIES

Former Mayor Dean Koldenhoven of Palos Heights expresses the thoughts and
frustrations of many Americans when he categorizes heroin and the poppy
fields of Afghanistan as weapons of mass destruction [''Pretty poppy is
most obvious weapon,'' featured letter, June 10]. And he mimics the
sentiments of many more when he argues that the president and men and women
in Congress ''refuse to do anything'' to stop drugs at the source.

''We don't have airplanes, helicopters and ships. We don't bring the drugs
into the states''--is a refrain heard from African Americans frustrated
with the lack of drug war results and suspicious that government officials
are corruptly in on the failure.

The facts, however, are largely to the contrary. The president and Congress
spend money on the drug war as if it grew on drug trees. America's drug war
budget is now pushing $20 billion a year. Since 2000, American political
leaders have spent $2.5 billion in Colombia alone on the eradication, crop
substitution and interdiction of drugs. And while the former mayor vilifies
the poppy fields of Afghanistan (rejuvenated since the onset of the U.S.
war on terrorism and the Taliban), former Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) said last
year, ''Plain and simple, the heroin that is flooding the United States and
killing our citizens comes from Colombia.''

And while heroin is killing some Americans, cocaine is much more popular in
the United States than heroin. And marijuana is more popular than cocaine.
And ecstasy and methamphetamines are becoming epidemic in the United States
while LSD, PCP and ''bennies'' are on the wane. What's really with the drug
war? And is an attack on the source the answer?

The problem is not that the president and Congress refuse to attack drugs
at their source. No, the problem is that no matter how much money is spent,
no matter how draconian the punishment, no matter how many drug dealers are
killed, no matter how many years prohibition policies are tried -- zero
tolerance prohibition as a national and international drug policy is a
loser, and the loser policy is the source of the drugs. In that respect, we
ought to go after the source.

James E. Gierach, Oak Lawn