THE DRUG WAR'S MISPLACED PRIORITIES

In his column "California, drugs and Mideast terror" (Commentary, Friday),
Robert Charles argues that the drug war requires increased funding now
because, to quote Attorney General John Ashcroft, "[T]he war on terrorism
has been joined with the war on illegal drug use." Apparently, the war on
drugs is the more important of the two. By raiding California's
voter-approved medical marijuana suppliers, the very same drug warriors who
claim illicit drug use funds terrorism are forcing cancer and AIDS patients
into the hands of street dealers.

Assuming it's true that drug use finances organized crime at home and
terrorists abroad, that's hardly reason to maintain drug prohibition, much
less throw more money at the problem. Attempts to limit the supply of
illegal drugs while demand remains constant only increase the profitability
of drug trafficking. In terms of addictive drugs such as heroin, a spike in
street prices leads desperate addicts to increase criminal activity to
satisfy their desperate habits. The drug war doesn't fight crime; it fuels
crime.

With drug war budgets at risk during a time of shifting national
priorities, drug war profiteers are cynically using drug prohibition's
collateral damage to justify more of the same. The illicit drug of choice
in America is domestically grown marijuana, not Colombian cocaine or Afghan
heroin. As long as marijuana remains illegal and distributed by organized
crime, consumers will continue to come into contact with more dangerous
drugs. For obvious reasons, the entrenched interests riding the drug war
gravy train prefer to blame the plant itself for the alleged "gateway" to
hard drugs.

ROBERT SHARPE

Program officer

Drug Policy Alliance

Washington