Pubdate: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 Source: Springfield News-Leader (MO) Copyright: 2001 The Springfield News-Leader Contact: http://www.springfieldnews-leader.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1129 Author: Robert Sharpe Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1602/a02.html WAR ON DRUGS Current Policy Fails Miserably Farris Robertson's Aug. 29 column was right on target. A cost-benefit analysis of the drug war is long overdue. Instead of wasting billions incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders while simultaneously waging a futile supply-side war abroad, we should be funding cost-effective treatment. A White House proposal to expand the Clinton administration's $1.3 billion Plan Colombia into a broader Andean initiative is a prime example of big government throwing good money after bad. The additional funds will not negate the immutable laws of supply and demand that drive illegal drug production. A crackdown in one region leads to increased cultivation elsewhere. Creating a global welfare state in which every developing country is paid not to grow illicit crops is a rather expensive proposition. The various armed factions in Colombia that are tearing the country apart are financially dependent on profits generated by the never-ending drug war. While U.S. politicians continue to use the drug war's collateral damage to justify its intensification at home and abroad, European countries are embracing harm reduction. Harm reduction is based on the principle that both drug use and drug prohibition have the potential to cause harm. Given the historical precedent in America's disastrous experiment with alcohol prohibition, harm reduction should be readily understood by Congress. Ironically, fear of appearing "soft on crime" compels many politicians to support a punitive drug policy that ultimately fuels organized crime and violence, while failing miserably at preventing use. Robert Sharpe Program Officer, The Lindesmith Center-Drug Policy Foundation, Washington, D.C. - --- MAP posted-by: GD