Pubdate: Fri, 21 Feb 2014
Source: U.S. News & World Report (US)
Copyright: 2014 U.S. News & World Report
Contact: (202) 955-2685
Website: http://www.usnews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/464
Author: Carrie Wofford

PROGRESSIVES SHOULD JUST SAY NO TO LEGALIZING DRUGS

There's a good reason drugs are illegal: They're dangerous.

Medical marijuana has arrived in the nation's capital. Why would we
wish drug's destructive effects on more Americans?

By Carrie Wofford Feb. 21, 2014 One comment SHARE Legalizing drugs has
long been a rallying cry on the left, and not without good reason.
Progressives remain deeply concerned about the large numbers of
low-income males - especially African-American males - who lose their
prime years to prison for what seems like the harmless crime of
possessing drugs. Legalizing drugs, therefore, seems a sensible way to
decriminalize the activities of low-income young African-American men
who might feel that the drug economy is the only economy available.
Proponents also argue that legalizing drugs would reduce drug-related
violence and protect drug users from tainted drugs (on the assumption
that the government would sell cleaner, purer drugs).

With Colorado and Washington state leading the momentum toward
legalizing marijuana (including news this week of Colorado's expected
large influx of business tax dollars from marijuana sellers), and
given the growing number of municipalities embracing medical marijuana
(surely, a humane response to chemotherapy patients and others in
tremendous pain) the movement to legalize drugs for recreational use
is gaining significant steam. In recent days, we've even seen calls
for legalization from former Rep. Barney Frank and the pages of the
Washington Post.

Nevertheless, legalizing drugs is not the answer - even for the left.
Here's why: Drugs kill. They turn talented, intelligent people into
impulsive animals. They destroy marriages. They deprive children of
emotionally healthy parents. There's a good reason drugs are illegal:
They're dangerous. Products that kill do not belong on drugstore shelves.

[See a collection of political cartoons on pot legalization.]

Does the name Lenny Bias ring a bell? Boston sports fans will never
forget his name. Professional basketball's number two draft pick in
1986, and the star son of the Maryland Terrapins, Bias was quickly
scooped up by the Boston Celtics, bringing hope and excitement to
Celtics fans. Bias was thrilled. So thrilled he celebrated that very
night by trying cocaine for the first time ever. And that cocaine killed 
him.

More recently, America suffered the loss of a tremendously gifted
actor, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, who died of a heroin overdose. Heroin
kills. It's as simple as that. Medical experts say that heroin changes
the brain's chemistry, making addicts out of people who were curious
to try it one time.

Why would we wish addiction, misery and death on more Americans by
making it legal and easier to access? Moreover, why would we eliminate
the deterrent effect that criminality now imposes on the general
public? If drugs were as legal as alcohol, a lot more people would try
them. Do we really want to see legions of Americans die because
they're curious to try a new high?

Progressives should oppose drug legalization because the people most
likely to be killed, the families most likely to be torn apart, the
futures most likely to be destroyed are the very people progressives
work hardest to help - the downtrodden, with lower incomes (who,
according to government data, are significantly more likely to use
drugs). Progressives believe the American dream should be available to
everyone, regardless of skin color or nationality. We believe
opportunity should not be curtailed because a child has the bad luck
to be born on the wrong side of the tracks. But addiction can rob a
struggling family of its shot at the American dream faster than a
sudden-onset recession; the death and destruction that drugs bring can
destroy a kid's future more powerfully than the lack of strong schools.

Even the least damaging drugs - like marijuana - still kill brain
cells and even shrink parts of the brain with prolonged use.
Proponents argue that marijuana is no worse than tobacco, which is
available on drugstore shelves (although no longer on the shelves at
CVS, thanks to CVS' bold decision to put public health above profit
and to focus more seriously on its health care delivery). While
tobacco is addictive and causes many health problems (draining public
health resources), cigarettes don't shrink parts of the brain. Why
would we want a generation of teenagers to have smaller brains with
fewer brain cells from smoking marijuana?

[See a collection of political cartoons on the economy.]

America's next generation must be smarter than ever to compete in the
global economy against the kids from Shanghai, Singapore and Tokyo,
who consistently outscore Americans on international academic tests.
How do we expect American kids born in poor neighborhoods to compete
on the global stage if they're stoned?

Certainly, drugs can destroy families of any wealth level, and
addiction does not discriminate, but the people most vulnerable to
drugs' power tend to be those who are the most hopeless, and
hopelessness comes in large doses in lower-income communities. While
depression can hit any income level, there are a lot more reasons to
be depressed if you live in bleak poverty.

Admittedly, opposing legalization will not solve the problem of huge
numbers of African-American men who lose their adulthood to prison for
drug possession. But legalization isn't the most direct answer for
that problem anyway. Prison terms and mandatory minimums can be
addressed by statutory changes. (For example, the 2010 Fair Sentencing
Act ended the racially unfair sentencing disparity between crack and
powder cocaine.) Without losing the deterrent effect of criminality,
there's no reason laws could not require more drug treatment and
assistance rebuilding lives and less traditional jail time for illegal
drug use. What progressives should focus on is improving the
opportunities of Americans born into the bleakest neighborhoods - not
advocating for legalization of drugs, which are a guaranteed
opportunity-killer.

Carrie Wofford Carrie Wofford is a Democratic strategist who served as
a senior counsel in the Senate and a policy aide in the Clinton White
House and in the Labor Department under Robert Reich. A veteran of
many presidential and Senate campaigns, she also worked as a lawyer at
WilmerHale and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Follow
her on Twitter at  ---
MAP posted-by: Matt