Drug Policy

Drug use is a serious problem that takes a toll on both individuals and their loved ones. Unfortunately, the war on drugs has failed to solve this problem-- drugs are as widely used as ever. Meanwhile, millions of our fellow citizens are in jail and we are spending untold billions enforcing ineffective laws. There are better options, though, that can seriously tackle the issue of drugs and preserve the American way of life.

The War on Drugs has Failed

1. Fundamentally Flawed Goals. One of the primary goals of the war on drugs is to drive up the price of drugs in the hope that fewer people will use it.¹ This goal is fundamentally flawed. First, the vast majority of adults who do not take drugs now would not begin taking drugs, no matter how low the cost. Second, to quote Stanford University professor Joseph McNamara, “[w]herever you can make something for $1, and sell it for $17,000, no government is going to stop it.” Higher drug prices, in other words, makes more incentive to produce and sell drugs.

2. Excess Reliance on Prison. The title of a recent news reports said it best: “U.S. Leads World in Incarceration.”² The article notes that a majority of prisoners under federal jurisdiction have been convicted of a drug offense, and that “in 1980, about 40,000 people were in American jails and prisons for drug crimes… [t]hese days, there are almost 500,000.” The U.S. now leads the world in the number of prisoners, greatly out of proportion to our population: “The U.S. has less than 5 percent of the world’s population but almost 25 percent of the world’s prisoners.” In short, drug arrests are burdening our justice system.

3. Costly, Yet Ineffective. A tremendous amount of money has been spent to fight the drug war. One prominent American economist and Nobel laureate estimated the cost, per year, as $100 billion. That breaks down to approximately $900 per household per year. Moreover, this figured did not include “important intangible costs, such as the destructive effects on many inner city neighborhoods, the use of the American military to fight drug lords and farmers in Colombia and other nations, or the corrupting influence of drugs on many governments.”³ Yet, drug use has not decreased!

4. Marijuana. In all significant respects, marijuana is a less harmful drug than alcohol.⁴ Marijuana is (a) less of a problem than alcohol in terms of its effects on social behaviors such as aggression; (b) marijuana is less addictive than nicotine, caffeine, alcohol, cocaine and heroin, and it is not physically addictive; (c) for the vast majority of persons, marijuana is not a stepping stone to more harsh drugs; (d) long-term exposure to marijuana alters the way the brain functions during complex tasks, and some studies have shown that marijuana can harm brain development and physical development of people who started smoking marijuana prior to age 17; (e) marijuana smokers and nonsmokers have comparable grades in college, but high school students who use marijuana have lower grades and quit school more often (but most of these high school students performed poorly in school before they began smoking marijuana); (f) marijuana causes markedly less harm than other drugs, including alcohol; (g) in 1997, between federal, state and local costs, approximately $21,400 was spent (on average) per marijuana arrest; and (h) less than one-tenth of the people who try marijuana end up using it regularly.

Let’s Consider Other Options

Whenever something does not work, and has not worked for a long time, the commonsense thing to do is to try something else. Options other than the war on drugs are available. They can help us reach the most important goals of a practical drug policy: to educate people about the dangers of drugs and protect people who do not use recreational drugs from those people who use them.

Some possible alternatives to the war on drugs follow. Under any approach, education about the dangers of drugs is of paramount importance. Unfortunately, “[t]he history of drug education programs in America is largely dismal.”⁵

1. Rehabilitation Instead of Incarceration.  Coupled with elimination of the drug war, rehabilitation that is paid for by the person taking drugs could be the primary means of dealing with illegal drug use.  For example, a first offender (i.e. possessor) might be required to pay a $250 fine and take a course he/she pays for on the dangers of the drug possessed.  A repeat offender might be required to work for pay, for a period of time, with reduced time if the person undergoes rehabilitation for which he/she pays the cost.  Very significant penalties could apply to significant dealers.  Obviously, this approach requires the use of force.

   In addition to other significant penalties that were determined by state and local governments, any person caught operating a vehicle, plane or boat under the influence of marijuana, alcohol or any other drug, and any person caught possessing an illegal drug, could be required to utilize a monitoring machine in his vehicle, plane or boat that prevents him/her from driving/flying if under the influence of any drug.  The cost of installation and rental would be paid by the person who was caught driving under the influence or who was caught with possession of an illegal drug.  In this regard, one company has already produced a goggles-type device which readily determines drugs in the person’s system.

2. Rational De-criminalization. Consider legalization of hard drugs, with the requirement that in order to purchase a hard drug, a person would need to agree to install a detection device in his/her vehicle or any other means of transportation that prevents utilization if the person tests positive for recent utilization. Law enforcement personnel could verify installations. Severe penalties could apply if someone subject to the requirement used another person’s vehicle while under the influence of a hard drug. Any person purchasing and installing the detection device would receive a license that would permit the person to buy the hard drugs. Harsh penalties that were determined by state and local governments would apply to sales to minors.

3. Learn From Others. On October 17, 2007, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution published an article by Rick Steves titled “Europe has a cleaner mind on drugs.” The article discussed some means of handling recreational drug use in Europe. The article provides that a 2007 U.N. World Drug Report said that the percentage of Europeans who use illicit drugs is about half that of Americans. The article states: “While each European nation has its own drug laws and policies, they seem to share a pragmatic approach. They treat drug abuse not as a crime but as an illness. And they measure the effectiveness of their drug policy not in arrests but in harm reduction.” A three-pronged approach is used, involving police, educators and doctors. Police focus on dealers, to limit supply. The article also provides: “In the Netherlands, it’s cheaper to get high than drunk, and drug-related crimes are rare. . . .After 10 years of allowed recreational marijuana use, Dutch anti-drug abuse professionals agree that there has been no significant increase in pot smoking among young people and that overall cannabis use has increased only slightly. Meanwhile, in the United States, it’s easier for a 15-year-old to buy marijuana than tobacco or alcohol . . .” If others can have a sensible and effective drug control policy, there is no reason that the United States cannot.

4. Local Solutions to Local Problems: Let the States Regulate. State and local governments are already responsible, under our Constitution, for lion’s share of police work. The powers of the federal government and the aspects of life which it regulates need to be diminished. Since states do not have armies, troops would not be sent to foreign countries to try to destroy drug crops. No longer would money be sent to South American countries to fight drug lords. The federal war on drugs would cease. While some states would continue a punishment focus, other states might make marijuana legal for some purposes. Some states would emphasize rehabilitation more than punishment. Over time, the states would learn from each other the nation would gravitate towards the best practices.

¹ Just one example is the recent President’s National Drug Control Strategy for 2008. It focused heavily on disrupting the market for drugs to drive the price of drugs up and to, in turn, drop drug use. http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/policy/ndcs08/ch3.pdf

² Adam Liptak “U.S. Leads World in Incarceration,” April 27, 2008, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

³ Dr. Gary S. Becker, “The Failure of the War on Drugs,” http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html

⁴ See Understanding Marijuana A New Look at the Scientific Evidence, by Mitch Earleywine, Ph.D., Oxford University Press (2002). (Based on critiques, this book objectively analyzes marijuana. At the end, the book recommends that legalization be considered or tried).

⁵ “Speedy Decline,” May 3rd 2008, The Economist.