Pubdate: Mon, 05 Jun 2000
Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Copyright: 2000 Chicago Tribune Company
Contact:  435 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60611-4066
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/
Forum: http://www.chicagotribune.com/interact/boards/
Author: Salim Muwakkil

COMBAT FATIGUE: THE DRUG WAR'S MOUNTING TOLL

By any measure the U.S. is losing the war on drugs. Instead of creating a
drug-free society, this high-cost combat strategy has unleashed an assault
on American liberty, fueled a gun-riddled underground economy, corrupted law
enforcement and transformed the "land of the free" into the world's largest
jailer.

But most of all, the war is a failure on its own terms. If the campaign's
objectives were to save lives, keep drugs away from kids and reduce
drug-related crime, the enemy has won.

That defeat is clearly defined in a wide-ranging report released last month
by the left-leaning Institute for Policy Studies, a Washington, D.C.-based
think tank. According to the report, titled "The War on Drugs: Addicted To
Failure," drug deaths are up, high school kids can get drugs more easily
than ever, drug use by junior high kids has tripled, hard drug prices are at
historic lows, drug purity is as high as ever and we fail to provide
treatment for the millions of addicts desperate for help.

Despite this clear rout, U.S. drug warriors persist in their folly. The
"war" metaphor itself helps perpetuate this perverse crusade by equating
change with surrender. It also allows those addicted to the combat motif to
accuse dissenters of disloyalty.

But those who oppose the battlefield approach are not advocating wholesale
surrender to the forces of evil. Instead, they argue that ending the drug
war will help redefine substance abuse as a public health rather than
military problem and thus allow for more successful solutions. They note
that studies consistently have shown that medical drug rehabilitation is
more cost effective than incarceration. Despite their logical arguments,
however, these anti-war activists often ignored and marginalized. Why?

The drug war is an integral part of the burgeoning jails-industrial complex,
and increasing numbers of players have a vested interest in its
perpetuation.

Just on the federal level, funding for the Office of National Drug Control
Policy was $17.1 billion in 1999 (and drug czar Gen. Barry McCaffrey wants
more). Spending by state and local agencies rose from about $5 billion in
1986 to $9 billion in 1996 and estimates place the figure near $11 billion
today.

The United Nations estimates that in 1997 worldwide trade in illicit drugs
amounted to $400 billion per year or 8 percent of the global economy. The
U.S. accounts for a disproportionate portion of that commerce. Drug war
policies not only have failed to curb this illicit trade, they have promoted
it. Much of the war is focused on trying to eliminate the black market, but
drug policy itself has created that market by criminalizing selected drugs.
The profitability of the market attracts more players (including
increasingly more law enforcement officers) and thus justifies the war's
existence.

This is the very definition of a vicious cycle.

That cycle will get a bit more vicious if the Methamphetamine
Anti-Proliferation Act passes a House vote expected this month. The
legislation, ostensibly designed to fight the dangerous stimulant in the
bill's title, would legalize censorship regarding any discussion of
controlled substances. The ban would extend into cyberspace, outlawing links
or pages that relate to any substances now illegal. For example, information
about how to grow or use marijuana for medicinal purposes would be banned.

Another provision of the proposed legislation, which already has passed the
Senate, would allow government agents to search private residences without
informing the owners; these often are referred to as "black bag" searches.
The same conservative politicians who exploit every opportunity to denounce
governmental power, give the government a pass when it comes to prosecuting
the inane drug war. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who publicly shuddered at
Janet Reno's use of military force to rescue Elian Gonzalez, is a cosponsor
of this benighted legislation.

With the spectacular failure of this 30-odd-year anti-drug campaign, it
would seem logical that both liberals and conservatives could agree that
it's time for a change. But many of the drug war's most avid political
supporters ducked out of this nation's real wars and now seek to burnish
their macho credentials by talking tough about drug dealers and Colombian
drug cartels.

Unfortunately, too many folks have too much to lose if the drug war ends. If
it continues, however, the real loser will be our collective future.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Don Beck