Pubdate: Thu, 22 Nov 2012
Source: Detroit News (MI)
Copyright: 2012 The Detroit News
Contact:  http://www.detroitnews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/126
Author: Eugene Jarecki
Note: Eugene Jarecki won the 2012 Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance 
Film Festival for "The House I Live In."

FROM COAST TO COAST, AMERICANS ARE VOTING OUT THE DRUG WAR

As a filmmaker committed to addressing the injustices of the War on 
Drugs and its devastating impact on American communities, I awoke on 
Nov. 7 to a renewed sense of purpose.

Beyond working to support the movement for marijuana reform in 
Colorado, Massachusetts and Washington, I had traveled to California 
in the week leading up to Election Day to work for the passage of 
Proposition 36, a vital piece of legislation that reduces the 
severity of California's notorious "three strikes" law. By voting to 
amend the law so that offenders with two nonviolent "strikes" against 
them cannot henceforth receive a life sentence for a third strike 
that is petty or nonviolent, Californians have sent a resounding 
signal to the rest of the country: It is possible to retreat from the 
tragic excesses of America's criminal justice nightmare. The same 
state that helped lead the way into the darkness of draconian 
sentencing for nonviolent crimes has begun, it seems, to lead us back 
toward the light. And because every state has its own special brand 
of excess when it comes to the treatment of nonviolent offenders, as 
California goes, so, I hope, will go the nation.

In my new film, "The House I Live In," I try to understand how 
America became a land without pity in our treatment of drug crime.

We are the world's leading jailer, with more of our citizens behind 
bars than any other country. The statistics speak volumes. Over 40 
years, the War on Drugs has cost a trillion dollars and accounted for 
45 million drug arrests. Yet for all that, America has nothing to 
show but a legacy of failure. Drugs are cheaper, purer, more 
available and used by more and younger people today than ever before. 
Perhaps this explains why any mention of the issue was notably absent 
from this year's presidential campaign. Ever since Richard Nixon 
declared the War on Drugs in 1971 and proved the electoral power of 
anti-crime rhetoric, politicians of both parties have known that 
talking tough on crime is smart politics.

But what happens when people begin to acknowledge that the war is a 
total failure?

And what if politicians are starting to realize that associating 
themselves with this loser is bad politics?

What this means is that reformers can now turn from California to 
other states across the country and offer them a win/win: By reducing 
excesses in their criminal justice systems - like stop-and-frisk in 
New York City - they too can improve the quality of mercy in their 
states, produce greater public safety and save vast sums of money at 
the same time.

Who can argue with that?
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom