Drug Reforms Significant

FROM THE ARCHIVES (Daily Nebraskan columns)

Drug Reforms Significant

Jeremy Patrick (jhaeman@hotmail.com)

Daily Nebraskan (www.dailyneb.com)

November 13, 2000

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary."
---H.L. Mencken

America has a long tradition of periodic mass hysterics that are forgotten or even mocked by later generations. In the 1920s, religious leaders preached earnestly about the demon-liquor. In the 1950s, every non-conformist was an instant commie and, therefore, an unparalleled threat to democracy. In 1999, thousands of Americans spent millions to prepare for the Y2K apocalypse.
And hysteria can go on for decades. An example: The War on Drugs. Fortunately, the end (while not near) can be glimpsed in recent ballot initiatives.
* California voters passed, by a 2 to 1 margin, a constitutional amendment requiring treatment instead of incarceration for nonviolent drug offenders. The law is expected to save hundreds of millions of dollars that would otherwise go to operate and construct prisons.
* In Massachusetts, voters narrowly defeated a similar measure 53 to 47 percent.
Colorado voters gave the nod to medical marijuana. Patients with debilitating conditions will now be issued identification cards enabling them to use the law as an affirmative defense should a prosecutor bring charges.
* Nevada voters also passed a medical marijuana law in a 65 to 35 percent decision. This makes 10 states that have voted to legalize marijuana for medical purposes.
* Two states, Oregon and Utah, acted to limit police in the War on Drugs by requiring that proceeds from seized property must be used for drug treatment or public education instead of being added to law enforcement budgets.
* In Alaska, the broadest of all drug-related ballot initiatives failed 61 to 39 percent. The proposed law would have completely legalized marijuana (subject to regulation like alcohol), granted amnesty for all persons convicted of marijuana offenses and created an advisory group to study restitution for those convicted of marijuana offenses.
Although the measure failed, its proponents are surely encouraged by the result and will likely return with a less sweeping measure.
America is finally beginning to understand there are always costs to legislating morality. In the War on Drugs, the cost is exorbitant. In April, we reached a record 1.86 million imprisoned adults. The Omaha World-Herald reported in April the U.S. now has the dubious distinction of being first worldwide for highest rate of incarceration. And, according to the Aug. 31, 2000, World-Herald, there are 1.5 million children with a parent in prison, a 60 percent increase since 1991.
The War on Drugs costs us in other ways too. We now know the White House drug policy office offered financial incentives to magazines and television networks that ran stories discouraging drug use. Public service announcements are one thing. But offering financial incentives to change a show's content comes dangerously close to censorship.
In Los Angeles, in the largest corruption trial in the city's history, many of the charges are related to manipulation of drug charges: The money is big, and the evidence easily manipulated.
Even proponents of the War on Drugs admit they are losing. In March, Barry McCaffrey (the government's so-called Drug Czar) appeared before a House Appropriations subcommittee and testified that the prices of cocaine and heroin have fallen to record lows and remain widely available. His report also stated that 4.7 million people have tried methamphetamine and that its use is spreading. (World-Herald March 23, 2000)
As Mark Twain said about alcohol, "Prohibition only drives drunkenness behind doors and into dark places and does not cure or even diminish it." The importance of even one state, such as California or Alaska, reforming its drug laws should not be underestimated.
These states provide a comparison and undermine the often-hysterical claims of law enforcement groups about what will happen if some drug use is legalized.
Just like Vermont undermined conservative claims about how the institution of marriage would be destroyed if GLBT people gained equality, so will conservative claims about mass violence and anarchy be undermined after reasonable drug law reforms are put into effect.
The issue is not simple, and there are legitimate grounds for debate. Drug abuse is a real problem. It ruins lives and can even kill.
The fundamental question, however, is how we should solve the problem. Shall we continue locking nonviolent drug offenders in cages? Or should we provide treatment and education but allow individuals to live their lives in the way they choose so long as they do not harm others?
After Nov. 7, the correct choice is becoming increasingly clear.