AMERICA IN A FIX

Our present War on Drugs began in 1972 when pot-smoking demonstrators
against the Vietnam War mocked all authority, ridiculed President Nixon and
challenged the very assumption of his authority. His response has resulted
in a society subjected to draconian remedies. The War on Drugs - through
stringent, puritanical measures - attempts to set the public right. Not only
is justice not done, it is threatened and derided.

Our national drug policy, hasn't changed significantly with changes in
administration. It emphasizes interdiction, police action and imprisonment
with a pious and pseudo-reverential nod to treatment and education. The
policy persists in spite of all evidence, even the government's own,
demonstrating that it is foolish and unworkable. And despite the billions of
dollars spent each year in drug enforcement programs, less that $1 out of
every $100 is spent on research and evaluation to find out why it isn't
working. As recently as March 29 of last year the National Research Council
of the National Academy of Science and the National Academy of Engineering
advised that the nation's ability to evaluate whether the drug policies even
work is no better now than it was twenty 20 years ago when the War on Drugs
was escalated from bravado to guns and blood.

Without hard, well-researched information, it is not even possible to
articulate a new or improved policy. All that is left is the frequently
expressed inanity that changing our drug policy would ``send the wrong
message to our children.''

In this darkest of comedies, the government hasn't the slightest notion what
message our children are presently receiving.

Perhaps we should send a message to our children about the causes of death
in the United States. We would have to tell them that tobacco is legal and,
at 430,700 deaths per year, is the leading cause of substance-abuse deaths;
that alcohol is legal and 110,600 die from it each year; that adverse
reactions to legal prescription drugs cause 32,000 fatalities a year; that
30,500 commit suicide; 18,000 are homicide victims; and that 7,600 people
die each year from taking anti-inflammatory drugs such as aspirin. Of
course, we don't want to send them the wrong message that the total number
of deaths caused by marijuana is zero.

Perhaps the message we should be sending our children is that local, state
and federal governments now spend more than $9 billion per year to imprison
458,000 drug offenders. What would be the cost of our current drug policy if
it were succeeding rather than failing? Incarcerating all cocaine users in
the U.S. would cost $74 billion, but only after constructing 3.5 million
more prison beds at an initial cost of $175 billion. It would cost $365
billion to jail everyone who smoked marijuana last year - five times the
total national, state and local spending for all police, courts and prisons
combined. To contain this crowd behind walls, we would need a cadre of
guards and other prison employees larger than all of our military forces
combined. These projections are not entirely academic: The nation is
completing the construction, on average, of a new prison every week.

More costly than money, however, is the price we now pay for this failed
policy in terms of the decline in public safety, the breakdown of our
criminal justice system, the erosion of our civil liberties and the
pervasive public disrespect of the law.

Good citizens, who are otherwise law-abiding, ignore or evade drug laws.
With literally tens of millions of people using illegal drugs or related to
those who do, an ever-increasing part of the population has become cynical
about our laws, legal system and political process.

Each year since 1989, more people have been sent to prison for drug offenses
than for violent crimes. At the same time, only one in five burglaries is
reported and only one in 20 reported burglaries ends in arrest. Yet
detectives continue to be reassigned from burglary details to investigation
of street sales of drugs. The cost for this particular aspect of our
national folly is absorbed in significantly increased insurance premiums.

Furthermore, interdiction efforts are utterly futile.

Using data supplied by the federal Office of National Drug Control Policy,
we learn that the price of heroin has dropped, not increased, while its
production has risen greatly. The illegal market price of cocaine in 1981
was $275.12 per gram and by 1996 it had dropped to $94.52. Because a
kilogram of raw opium sells for $90 in Pakistan, but is worth $290,000 in
the United States, law enforcement seizures have little, if any, impact on
operations or profitability.

And, as New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis observed on April 28, 2001,
``The effort to stop cocaine exports from Peru has cut the flow from there
substantially. But that reduction has been more than made up by a huge
increase in coca cultivation and production in Colombia. As Plan Columbia,
the military anti-drug program, gets under way there, production is
reportedly beginning to shift to Ecuador.'' Lewis listed the costs to other
nations of our current drug policies: the rise of drug gangs, the poisoning
of peasants from the spraying of undesirable crops, the corruption of
governments and increased deaths by violence. ``Yet,'' he notes, ``the
amount of cocaine and heroin entering the United States is as great as
ever.''

Police agencies still need to protect the public by holding those who cause
accidents or commit crimes while under the influence of drugs and alcohol
fully accountable for their acts, but we must get them out of the business
of financing their operations through the seizure and forfeiture of private
property. The costs of law enforcement should be funded from the public
treasury so that we can determine how much the implementation of government
policies is costing. In other and harsher words, we need to terminate the
symbiotic business relationship that law enforcement has with the illegal
drug industry. Each scratches the other's back.

Indeed, the two groups who would suffer most from an elimination of the
black market in drugs would be, in nearly equal measure, organized crime and
law enforcement. Those who would benefit the most would be the people,
especially children, who have never before tried drugs because there would
be no economic incentive to turn them into customers.

Those who are already addicted or abusing drugs or who will no matter what
law obtains can be treated rather than imprisoned at a cost of one-seventh
the amount needed to imprison them.

And let's not forget the ``other victims'' of the so-called War on Drugs -
those people and businesses who can't get into court to have their cases
heard; the victims of traditional crimes such as burglary, rape and robbery
who can't get justice because the police are tied up with drug cases;
merchants going bankrupt because the police no longer have time to
investigate or prosecute bad-check cases; battered spouses whose mates are
not sent to jail because there's only room there for pot smokers; physicians
and other medical care providers who cannot treat their patients according
to conscience and the discipline of their profession; the sick and dying who
endure unnecessary pain; children whose parents are taken from them; the
police who have given up honorable and challenging work investigating and
detecting crime because they have become addicted to and dependent upon an
informant-based system reminiscent of Lenin's dreaded Cheka; families forced
to select one member to plead guilty lest the entire family be charged;
prosecutors and defense attorneys who have turned the temples of justice
into plea-bargaining bazaars; and, most painful to me, judges who let this
happen and don't say a word.

In order to deal successfully with drug abuse, this nation must abandon its
failed policies and rhetoric of misinformation.

I suggest that federal drug law should be severely cut back. The importing
of unauthorized drugs should continue to be a federal crime and the
regulation of manufacturing drugs for distribution in interstate commerce
should likewise be a federal concern, but the several states should regulate
sales and decide which activities are criminal - such as selling or inducing
minors to take drugs - and which drugs, if any, should be prohibited. In
sum, the policy should be to end the black market, end the freebooting
financing of law enforcement by forfeiture and treat those drug and alcohol
abusers who want to be treated.

At the present time, our national drug policy is inconsistent with the
nature of justice, abusive of the nature of authority and ignorant of the
compelling force of forgiveness. Our drug laws, indeed, are more mocked than
feared. These are the messages we are sending our children.