Pubdate: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 Source: (1) Oakland Tribune (CA) (2) San Mateo Times (CA) Copyright: 1998 by MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers Contact: (1) (2) (1) http://www.newschoice.com/newspapers/alameda/tribune/ Website: (2) http://www.newschoice.com/newspapers/alameda/smct/ Columnist: Molly Ivins Note: Molly Ivins is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Her e-mail address is http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n1086.a05.html TIME FOR NEW TACTICS HEADS up, team: Ithink we're starting to see a major change in the old Zeitgeist on the issue of drugs, This is one of those seismic shifts when the unsayable suddenly becomes sayable, when we notice that the emperor is wearing no clothes. the main problem with the war on drugs - you've probably noticed - is that we're losing.I We're also seeing the start of a consensus that it's time to try something else. One way you can tell when one of these major shifts Is happening is when some of those speaking out are so respected and respectable that they give cover to others who are more conformist. The Lindesmith Centre in New York has marshaled an impeccable set of world citizens behind the simple proposition that the global war on drugs is now causing more harm than drug abuse itself. Among those who signed that declaration are Walter Cronkite, former U.N. Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar, former U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz, Nobelist Oscar Arias, and on and on and on. There are also several indications that the people are well ahead of the politicians on this one. On Election Day, medical marijuana initiatives passed in Washington state, Alaska, Arizona (second time), Oregon and 'Nevada - this despite drug czar Barry McCaffrey and the rest of the drug war etiablishment swearing that this was tantapmunt to legalizing heroin. The people are perfectly capable of deciding that relieving the suffering of the dying is not the same as supporting the Medellin cartel. Notice, too, that Jesse "the .Governor" Ventura, the crackjerjack populist surprise in Minnesota, was elected in large part ,by young people who like his Libertarian straight talk on drugs. Of course, our normal politicians are frozen on this issue. Liberals have been drug-baited for so long that they live in terror of the dread accusation "soft on drugs." And the law-and-order conservatives have been making hay at the polls with this cheap scare stuff for so long that they're hooked on It. Fortunately, the libertarian wing of the right has made uncommon sense on the issue all along, and even establishment conservatives like William F. Buckley are open to reasonable discussion. There's a real chance here for conservatives to seize an important issue and do major public service at the same time. Just to give you an idea how petrified the libs are on this issue, note President Clinton's Performance - he fired Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders not for advocating legalization of drugs but for suggesting that it should be studied! And he stopped Donna Shalala, secretary of health and human services, from implementing a clean-needle program - an obviously sensible public health measure. The liveliest recent polemic on the subject is Mike Grays book "Drug Crazy: How We Got Into This Mess & How We Can Get Out of It." Gray has some horrifying reports on how deeply the drug war has corrupted law enforcement across the country. He also makes a strong case that the war on drugs is just as disastrous a failure as was Prohibition, with exactly the same consequences in the growth of enormous criminal empires. However, it may be that debating legalization will simply turn out to be polarizing and futile while it takes the focus Off the need to at least reform drug regulation. For starters, we could consider decriminalizing marijuana a, rethinking the mandatory minimum sentences that put, small-time users in prison for years while leaving major dealers untouched. Another idiotic injustice that needs to be addressed immediately is the disparity sentencing between crack cocaine - mostly used by inner-city blacks because of its cheap street price - and the powder cocaine favored by wealthy whites. Same drug, gross inequity in sentencing. In-prison drug treatment prograins make far more sense that the usual litany of more money, more cops, more prisons, longer sentences, etc. Well short of legalization, any fool can see how we could spend anti-drug money more effectively and fairly. That's a mandatory minimum in itself. Our poor frozen political establishment does in fact replicate Prohibition. President Hoover appointed a commission to study Prohibition back in 1929, and after 19 months of labor, the commission reported that it was a disaster area - and recommended no changes. A columnist known as F.P.A. summarized the finding in doggerel: "Prohibition is an awful flop. "We like it. "it can't stop what it's Meant to stop. "We like It. "It's left a trail of graft and slime. "It's filled our land with vice and crime. "It don't prohibit worth a dime. "Nevertheless, we're for It." Time for new tactics and strategy, and anyone who says so is not soft on drugs but strong on common sense. - --- Checked-by: Richard Lake