2007: Update on The War on Drugs

The coming election has Americans asking questions about everything. Hot button issues like the environment and illegal immigration have people all curious and hopping mad, however, it seems that there is one issue, the legalization of marijuana, that is having a much larger effect on American society in the sense that currently over 650,000 Americans are currently incarcerated for the possession of marijuana.

Back in 1937, when marijuana was initially outlawed, it seems that the issue was racially motivated. It has been suggested that early lawmakers saw marijuana use as a problem brought to the US by migrant Mexican workers. For whatever reason, it was in fact outlawed, and thus the birth of the Drug War in America.

It is estimated that each year over $15 billion in federal funds and $33 billion in state and local funds are spent under the title of anti-drug programs. Granted, many of these monies are granted to law enforcement agencies who are legitimately raiding methamphetamine manufacturers and other types of *labs* which make hard drugs. Also, this funding includes most of the activities of the Drug Enforcement Agency, which is responsible for the location and detainment of individuals attempting to cross US borders with drugs.

Most of America would probably agree that manufacturers and traffickers of hard drugs should be sought after and incarcerated. By nature, *drug dealers* are considered to be shady, and in many cases violent. Obviously, a high percentage violent crimes are statistically linked to the production and distribution of illegal drugs. Also, violent crimes can be linked to hard drug abuse, specifically from users of cocaine and methamphetamines. A new player in the illegal drug trade is anabolic steroids. These types of drugs, which can potentially *enhance* severe mood swings and erratic behavior, are generally thought of as substances that *cause* violent behavior.

Studies have concluded that since the inception of the idea of the *War on Drugs*, drug abuse has not yet declined, and has in all actuality exploded over the last few decades. With billions spent on trying to conquer marijuana use, it is still the most widely used and widely available illegal substance in the US. Funding allocated for programs slated to eradicate abuse of pot have proven useless, and much of this funding is unaccounted for. Marijuana arrests were up 113% between 1990 and 2002, during which 4 separate Federally funded programs were initiated to dissuade teenagers from using marijuana. In total, 60% of inmates in Federal prison are there because of drug-related incidences, and HALF of those cases are related to marijuana.

Domestically cultivated marijuana is considered to be the US's biggest cash crop, bigger than corn and wheat combined. pro-legalization groups argue that this fact alone should be reason to reconsider the US stance on legalizing the plant. Legally available marijuana could be highly taxed and would alleviate a large proportion of debt. (Also, struggling farmers would benefit greatly from pot production in certain sunnier and warmer regions of the country.) Organizations like the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) share the common interest of many to separate potsmokers from users of hard drugs by legalizing and regulating marijuana.

Many pundits and candidates have recently suggested that if not legalized, cannabis should be DECRIMINALIZED, including a few right-wing candidates like Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee from Arkansas. Ideas are quite different for harder drugs such as ecstasy, cocaine, methamphetamine and heroin, and for obvious reasons. One third of all new HIV cases in the US are caused by IV drug use, 17,000 deaths occur (usually from the overdose of these substances) each year, and health care costs for uninsured addicts are estimated at $20 Billion per year (at the expense of American taxpayers.)

So, why is it with all the money allocated to ridding the US of drugs, drug use rates among Americans are higher than ever? Many factors are to blame, but let's take a look at a few that are likely the common denominators.

Drug abuse is considered a *Consensual* crime, meaning that (aside from individuals possibly being hurt procuring the substance) there is no victim. An person decides to do drugs, they take the substance, and likely they are only individual to suffer the consequences of the drug. The *War on Drugs*, much like prohibition, in itself has made drugs more readily available. Illegal substances can have a street value up to 20 times the initial buying price, thereby making an obscene profit margin. Illegal drugs, in essence, fund the extravagant lifestyles of those who sell them, providing large amounts of free money to insure the safety of their business with no regulation. All of this makes drugs easier to get, thereby causing more abuse.

Countries that manufacture and distribute illegal crops, i.e. heroin and opium from Afghanistan, Cocaine and high grade marijuana from Colombia and Mexico, are unwilling to work with United States in curbing the rate of successful transaction between the nations. In the movie *Traffic*, it is noted that while the US has many law enforcement agencies working to stop trafficking over the borders, while many other countries (in the movie, Mexico) have no regulated agencies dedicated to the cause. Basically, our DEA has *no one to work with* on the other side.

Bad information from drug-addicted informants. The current system rewards certain individuals detained on drug related charges who are willing to say where it was that they purchased the illegal substance by offering plea bargains or reduced sentences to those that will *rat* on suppliers. There are many problems with this theory. After a large portion of an agency's budget has been spent organizing raids based on information from informants, too much room for corruption is left at the hands of police and agents who are desperate to make an arrest. Claims of evidence being *planted* by informants or law enforcement are at an all time high, and while many of these claims are likely false, corruption can be directly related to the use of these *informants*.

It is estimated that $300 million is spend nationwide each year in the way of anti-drug Public Service Announcements, paid to broadcasting companies, who then broadcast programming that makes light of drug abuse. This kind of hypocrisy is what causes teens to assume that anti-drug rhetoric is fluff and that drugs are safer than they actually are.

Although marijuana abuse can account for absolutely no deaths in the US each year, the link between cannabis use and that of harder drugs is unmistakable. Often called a *Gateway Drug* even most pro-legalization addicts and abusers would agree that had they never tried smoking pot, they would likely not have graduated onto harder drug use.

In a society where tobacco (a legal substance) kills over 300,000 people each year, alcohol (a legal substance) is responsible for hundreds of thousands of accidents and violent deaths, and heart disease (generally caused by poor diet and a lack of exercise combined with tobacco and alcohol abuse) kills a half million people a year, it's no wonder that some are starting to question the funding of a *war* that statistically, is less dangerous than eating greasy cheeseburgers.