Reality Check: Laws and Drug Control

Drug laws, in the United States, are as strong, or stronger, than any other country in the world. The Controlled Substances Act, Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse, Prevention, and Control Act of 1970 is the law that forms the foundation for the so-called War on Drugs. This law covers how drugs are manufactured and classified, drug prevention, drug enforcement, and descriptions of offenses and their penalties (DEAa, 2004). The National Drug Control Strategy sets forth a three-pronged approach for dealing with the drug problem in the United States (NDCP, 2002). According to the National Drug Control Strategy, the first line of defense, in the War on Drugs, is stopping drug use before it starts, through drug education programs and community action. The second line of defense consists of ensuring that drug treatment resources are allocated appropriately. The third line of defense is actively seeking out and destroying the organizations that fund and transport drugs; thus, disrupting the drug market by attacking its economic base (NDCP, 2002). While these laws and policies have lofty goals and seem to make many promises, it is necessary to investigate the reality of the situations they have helped to produce since their creation and implementation.

First, it is helpful to note the claims made by Asa Hutchinson (2002), Director of the Drug Enforcement Administration, to the Modernizing Criminal Justice Conference in London, England. In his remarks, Director Hutchinson made some thinly veiled attacks on European countries that favor decriminalization of some drugs, as well as the reclassification of others, and actually uses strong language suggesting that these countries are attacking U.S. drug policies. His analogy of the fight against drugs as a war is coupled with rhetoric implying that all of democracy could be lost if this war is not won, and suggests that the European countries who favor decriminalization might not be disappointed if the U.S. lost both the drug war and its democracy. According to Hutchinson (DEAb, 2004), the U.S. drug policy has not failed, U.S. prisons are not filled with drug users, and marijuana is at least as dangerous as other controlled substances. The problem with Director Hutchinson's (DEAb, 2004) remarks is that they are not supported by the FBI Crime Index (NDCP, 2002), nor by the findings of research in such states as Wyoming (Curley, 2002). As Director of DEA, Hutchinson had to know that his claims of the success of the U.S. War on Drugs were not true. The other members of the conference knew the real situation in the U.S., and such brazen twisting of the facts by a U.S. official who should know better can do little to improve the declining level of respect for the U.S. in other countries.

One of the realities of the failure of current U.S. drug policies is the unintended consequence of more than 150,000 American college students who are unable to receive financial aid because they have a drug conviction on their record (SSDP, 2004). At the University of Florida, the Student Senate is going so far as to recommend calling a complete halt to the War on Drugs because it is unfairly applied to minorities, who are those least able to do without financial aid for college (Lake, 2002). The supposed logic to this area of the war on drugs was to deny academic funding to drug users, so that other students could receive more academic funding. It did not work that way. Instead, good students, who have been convicted of no drug offences in years, are being denied funding for college and the money is going back into the general education budget, never to be seen by a college student again.

What we have learned is that U.S. drug policy (guns, big money, and incarceration) is a miserable failure from start to finish. From successful programs in European countries and states like Wyoming and New Hampshire, we know that successful treatment and rehabilitation can be paid for by insurance. We know that $1 spent in properly funded drug treatment can save up to $7 spent in taxpayer funded social costs (Curley, 2002). We know that respect for the U.S., on the world stage, is being seriously eroded when our own officials stand up and proclaim that only about 5% of our population using drugs, when our own FBI Crime Index is published on the Internet and clearly shows that chronic drug use has risen to nearly 20% among our young adult population and has consistently increased throughout the so-called War on Drugs (NDCP, 2002).

What other conclusion could other countries draw, except that the American War on Drugs is a big money business that is being allowed to continue by only paying lip service to the notion of damaging the economic base of the drug trade at top levels, while unfairly punishing drug users in a system that only seems to be benefiting those who are in the business of participating in this so-called war?

References

Curley, B. (2002). Grassroots alliance between mental health addiction advocates wins N.H. parity law. Retrieved: October 18, 2004, from: http://www.phs.wfubmc.edu/sshp/rwj/GranteeResources/Newsreports/02may.htm

Curley, B. (2002, Nov. 15). Wyoming launches most comprehensive anti-drug plan in U.S. Retrieved: October 18, 2004, from: http://www.jointogether.org/sa/news/features/reader/0,1854,555304,00.html

Lake, R. (2002). Student senate should support reforming financial aid drug laws. University of Florida OpEd. Retrieved: October 18, 2004, from: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n2121/a03.html

Office of National Drug Control Policy (NDCP). (2002, February). National Drug Control Strategy. Retrieved: October 18, 2004, from: http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/policy/03ndcs/pdf.html

Office of National Drug Control Policy (NDCP). (2002, October). Drug Use Trends. Retrieved: October 18, 2004, from:

Students for a Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP). (2004). Urgent: Take action to repeal the ban on federal financial aid for drug offenders. Retrieved: October 18, 2004, from:

United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEAa). (2004). Controlled Substances Act. Retrieved: October 18, 2004, from: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/agency/csa.htm

United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEAb). (2004). Speech: Asa Hutchinson, Director, Drug Enforcement Administration, Modernizing Criminal Justice Conference, London, England, June 18, 2002. Retrieved: October 18, 2004, from: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/speeches/s061802.html

http://www.ssdp.org/http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/druguse/index.html