Prohibition

RSS Feed for this category

Prop 19: Amsterdam Psychiatrist Blasts US Drug Czars for Distortions, Fear-Mongering (Letter to the Editor)

On August 25, the Los Angeles Times published an open editorial written by six former US drug czars referring to cannabis policies in the Netherlands while voicing their opposition to California's Proposition 19. On September 2, ENCOD president Fredrick Polak sent an open letter to the LA Times.
Publication/Source: 
Men's News Daily (US)
URL: 
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2010/09/03/prop-19-amsterdam-psychiatrist-blasts-us-drug-czars-for-distortions-fear-mongering/

The Relationship Between Prohibition and Homicide

Data analyzed by Harvard University's Professor Jeffrey Miron confirm the hypothesis that drug and alcohol prohibition cause increased rates of violence.
Publication/Source: 
Free Market Mojo (US)
URL: 
http://freemarketmojo.com/?p=13016

Ending the War on Drugs

Location: 
Australia
Australian barrister and former political adviser Greg Barns opines on why drug prohibition is bad for Australia and calls for an end to the drug war.
Publication/Source: 
ABC News Online (Australia)
URL: 
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2998116.htm

President Obama's New Drug War Strategy and the Low-Down on 'America's Trillion Dollar Dope Game'

Houston-area journalist Clarence Walker reflects on the occasion of a trillion dollars spent on the failed US drug war.

No other has spent more money on the dope trade than our own U.S. Federal Government. Even the richest of drug barons and associated players, dead and alive, cannot or could not have competed with the avalanche of paperwork doled out by the government in its fight against this monster. Even the once ruthless - and now dead - Pablo Escobar and his Medellin Cartel, the Cali Cartel or the Mexican Drug Cartels cannot match the money they have earned from the drug trade with the amount the Federal Government has allocated for years in its battle to stem the flow of illegal drugs into America.
 
And what is the cost for our government in its fight against this narcotics epidemic, a war raged now for some four decades? By all means have a guess, but here is the figure according to The White House: One trillion dollars.

The war on drugs is the longest war the American government has ever fought, longer than World War II, the Cold War, the Korean War and  the Vietnam War. And even after 40 years, the battle to enforce the laws of the land that prohibits "getting high on dope", this poisonous, addictive trade continues to thrive with the ferocity of an earthquake across the planet. Quite obviously, there is no clear-cut victory in sight.

From the outset, if  the intent driving the war on drugs, beginning in 1970 under President Nixon's Administration, was to create a drug-free America, we can see that after the spending of a trillion dollars, culminating in millions of arrests, the creation of a burgeoning health care system with which to effectively treat addicts, and the billions spent on law enforcement's task of arresting drug dealers and the  prison system in housing the millions of nonviolent drug offenders alongside thousands who have brought violence and death, the "war on drugs" nevertheless remains a dismal failure.
 
This stated, 'drug warriors' on the front lines against the illegal drug trade, beginning with The White House and extending to Congress, the FBI, the DEA and down to the street cops of America, remain committed to fight this evil to the finish line.
 
A DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) spokesman issued the following statement: "Our fight against drug abuse and drug trafficking is an ongoing struggle that should be treated like any other social problem. Now is not the time to abandon our efforts."
 
Therefore, if America's war on drugs is a sure loser then what plans will be deemed effective enough to change courses for the better? Critics of  drug policies say that the only sensible solution in controlling drug abuse in America is to legalize drugs across the board.
 
However, the Obama Administration concedes they have a better plan to deal with drug abuse and drug trafficking, a plan they state is far more efficient than that seen with previous administrations.

 

President Obama has Devised a New Drug War Strategy for America.

 

Three months ago, U.S. President Barack Obama unveiled a historical new drug war strategy for 2010 to fight drug trafficking, and to increase efforts towards prevention and demand reduction.
 
Those agreeable with the proposed plan view Obama's strategy as a step in the right direction.
 
"For the first time ever, the nation has an administration that views the drug issue first and foremost through the lens of the public health mandate,"  says John Carnervale, an economist and drug policy expert who served under three previous White House administrations and four drug czars.
 
U.S. Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowke concedes the old drug war strategy hasn't worked. "In the grand scheme, it has not been successful,"  he told the Associated Press in May. "Forty years later, the concern about drugs and drug problems has, if anything, magnified and intensified."
 
In announcing the Drug Control Strategy before Congress, President Obama gave the following speech to unveil his new plans for America:
 
"I am committed to restoring balance in our efforts to combat the drug problems that plague our communities. Drug use endangers the health and safety of every American, depleting financial and human resources, and it deadens the spirit of many of our communities. While I am proud of the new direction described herein, a well-crafted strategy is only as successful as its implementation. To succeed, we will need to rely on the hard work, dedication, and perseverance of every concerned American."

 

U.S. Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowski says the old drug war strategy hasn't worked.
 

 

Obama has requested a record of $15.5 billion for the 2011 drug war, with approximately two thirds of the $15.5 billion for law enforcement and another $5.6 billion for treatment and prevention.
 
The New Drug Control Strategy outlines the five-year goals to reduce drug use and its consequences:
 
(1) Reduce the rate of youth drug use by 15 percent
 
(2) Decrease drug use among young adults by 10 percent
 
(3) Reduce the number  of chronic drug users by 15 percent
 
(4) Reduce the incidence of drug-induced deaths by 15 percent
 
(5) Reduce the prevalence of drugged driving by 10 percent
 
In the aftermath of Obama's drug budget plan, the opposition took center stage, shooting barbs at what they brand as a similar blueprint to those mandated by previous adminstrations.
 
"Obama's newly released drug war budget is essentially the same as George Bush Jr., with roughly twice as much money going to the criminal justice system as to treatment and prevention, despite Obama's statements on the campaign trail that drug use should be treated as a health issue, not a criminal justice issue",  said Bill Piper, Director of National Affairs for the non-profit Drug Policy Alliance.
 
"People say the drug budget hasn't shifted as much as it should have, and granted I don't disagree with that,"  Drug Czar Kerlikowske responded. "We would like to do more in that direction."
 
"Nothing happens overnight," he added. "We've never worked the drug problem holistically. We'll arrest the drug dealer, but we leave the addiction."
 
Former Drug Czar John P. Walters was unimpressed by Kerlikowske's disparaging comments. "To say that all the things done in the war on drugs hasn't made any difference is ridiculous," Walters said.  "It destroys everything we've done. It's saying all the people in law enforcement, treatment and prevention have been wasting their time. It's saying all these people's work is misguided."
 
Critics say Obama's new plan to deal with drug abuse is needed but that the 'war on drugs' is still in effect because billions are still being wasted on overcrowding jails and prisons with low-level users and that the criminalization of illicit drugs has also fueled the HIV epidemic around the globe.
 
No billions, howevr, are wasted, according to DEA authorities as long as lives are saved from the destruction of drugs and while the arrests of thousands of drug kingpins and other large-scale dealers continues.
 
Anti-drug organizations have historically argued that the government's attempt to sway people from using drugs is a ridiculous course of action because people will always use drugs.

A drug war is not an overnight solution. Remember that it took the FBI  almost 50 years to finally break the Mafia organizations into a million pieces. Today's Mafia is a far cray from the highly disciplined, secretive and well-oiled criminal machine it had once been; now a broken, disrupted syndicate polutted with more 'rats' on the feds' side than those members still alive, trying to 'kick' hard enough one last time and score enough paper to retire without going to prison for the rest of their lives.
 
At  this year's Vienna Declaration, Evan Wood, a founder of the International Centre for Science in Drug Policy, told the foreign media,  "The current approach to drug policy is ineffective because it neglects proven, evidence-based intervention, while pouring a massive amount of public funds and human resources into expensive and futile enforcement efforts."
 
Overall, the ongoing violence seen in Mexico between rival drug cartels is a tragic reminder of the alarming threat of drug trafficking and the urgent need for every nation and foreign nations to keep pushing forward to protect its people from the violence, corruption and instability caused by illegal dope smuggling across national and international borders.
 
Mexican President Felipe Calderon offers a more rehabiliatitive approach. "If America wants to fix the drug problem, it needs to do something about Americans' unquenching thirst for illegal drugs."
 
Drug Legalization: Pros and Cons
 
Rising crime rates, the excessive cost of enforcing drug laws, and the exclusive availability of illegal drugs shipped daily into the United States have led to people from all walks of life in pressuring the government to legalize drugs.
 
Proposals to advocate drug legalization vary widely, with hard-line advocates opting for the elimination of all federal drug laws, while others call for more modest reforms. Some advocates focus on legalizing just marijuana, either specifically for medical purposes or more general use, and further schools campaigning for more 'flexible' and 'relaxed' narcotic laws.
 
Writer Ted Mclaughlin voiced his sentiments about what he calls 'America's failed drug policies'. "It is said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat history and that is obviously true with prohibition when it was tried in the 1920s with alcohol."
 
"Our second attempt at prohibition, the "war on drugs" has done exactly the same thing. It has not stopped or decreased drug use."
 
"Instead of spending another trillon dollars trying to stop drug use and failing, while the drug cartels get richer and more violent, wouldn't it make more sense to legalize drugs and then tax the hell out of them?"
 
Supporters of legalization contend that easing the nation's drug laws would carry numerous benefits, such as the destruction of the black market and the inherent criminality which surrounds it. If drugs were legal and available in the legitimate marketplace, they believe, that smugglers and their networks of dealers would be put out of business and drug gangs would no longer engage in violent battles for territories.
 
As the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) once put it: "Drug legalization would sever the connection between drugs and crime that today blights so many lives and communities."
 
Does this sound logical or is it a figmentation of someone's fantasy?  Here are the real voices declaring whether or not drugs should be legalized and they belong to those in the trenches of America's drug war, the former DEA agents and narcotics detectives, the patrol officers, political players from the past as well as those still active in the dope game, professional drug crusaders:
 
Case Argument Number # 1:

David Boaz, a high-ranking member of the Cato Institute, states, "As long as Americans want to use drugs, and are willing to defy the law and pay high prices to do so, major drug busts are futile, and, yes, drugs should be legalized."
 
Case Argument Number # 2:

U.S. Congresman Bob Barr said, "Despite numerous law enforcement efforts  and the dedicated service of thousands of professional men and women, the government has not halted drug use; the problem is worse today than in the 1970s when President Richard Nixon first coined the phrase the "War on Drugs."
 
"Whether we like it or not, tens of millions of people have used drugs and some will continue to use drugs. Yet in 2005, we spent more than $12 billion on federal drug enforcement efforts and another $30 billion was spent to incarcerate non-violent drug offenders."
 
Case Argument Number# 3:

Jeffrey A Miron, a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University, is on the same team as Congressman Barr. In a CNN commentary, he wrote that, "Drug prohibition has disastrous implications for National Security.
 
By eradicating coca plants in Colombia or poppy fields in Afghanistan, prohibition breeds resentment for against the United States and we enrich those who produce and supply drugs."
 
"Prohibition, Miron adds, supports terrorists who sell protection services to drug traffickers."
 
Case Argument Number # 4:

DEA Authorities: "Critics of drug legalization have made the argument that drugs are no more dangerous than alcohol. But drunk driving is one of the primary killers of American people. Do we want our bus drivers, nurses, doctors, school teachers and airline pilots to be legally allowed to ingest drugs one evening, and operate freely at work the next day? Do we want to add to the destruction by making drugged driving another primary killer?"
 
Case Argument Number# 5:

Charles B. Rangel,  U.S. Democratic Congressman, stated, "Rather than holding up the white flag and allowing drugs to take over our country, we must continue to focus on the drug demand as well as supply if we are to remain a free and productive society."
 
Case Argument Number # 6:

Joe Harris, a retired narcotic detective with Harris County Sheriff department  in Houston Texas offered his views on President Obama's new drug war approach in spending more money focused on prevention and to treat serious drug abuse as a major health issue:
 
"For a drug user to get help they must first want it. It is a good thing for the Obama administration to try another approach in dealing with drug abuse because enforcement is not doing it." 
 
Harris should know how the drug trade works and how it affects millions of users. As a highly regarded narcotics detective with 20 years of experience on the streets of Houston, Harris worked many high-profile drug trafficking cases both with the Federal Drug Enforcement Agency and the FBI under the HIDTA (High Intenity Drug Trafficking Area).
 
In one heroin bust in 1983, former detective Harris was shot and seriously wounded by a drug dealer in Houston's South Park area. A total of five people were shot in the firefight, which was captured by Channel 2 news reporters.
 
During the late 1980s, when the Federal Government cracked down nationwide against the epidemic of crack cocaine, Harris worked deep undercover with Houston's DEA office to bring down major drug criminals in the Houston area. This operation netted multiple charges against several people in what was to become the first crack cocaine case in the United States to be tried under the Federal Kingpin statue. In a  jury trial lasting three months, out of 20-25 defendants, many were convicted and sentenced to prison, including the ringleaders Martha Marie Preston and Johnnie Binder. Both Binder and Preston were given 40 years in prison.
 
Although Harris supports preventative alternatives, the retired detective is adamantly against legalizing drugs. "Drugs are bad for your health including marijuana because marijuana even causes birth defects in new born children. How in the hell can intelligent people be so stupid as to think that dangerous drugs should be legalized?" Harris concluded with these parting words. "If drugs were legalized, that would only increase addiction."
 
Case Argument Number# 7:

Actor Bruce Willis encapsulates his drug legalization thoughts in terms of government benefits. "Cocaine is killing this country and the countries 'coke' goes into. If the government was not making money on it they would have stopped it in one day."

Case Argument Number #8:

Jacksonville Florida Police Chief Tony Grootens who worked 21 years with the DEA, agrees with many of President Obama's new drug enforcement programs. Most importantly, Grooten forewarns of the pitfalls in battling a drug problem within communities.
 
"If you have a bunch of people in a community involved in narcotics, thats the kind of community you're going to have."
 
Grooten also agrees that strategies aimed at staunching drug abuse should continue: "I think we need more prevention here at home and more controls on our  borders to stop the flow of drugs. If you have a farmer in Bogota, Colombia gowing coffee and making a living or if he can grow cocaine and get rich,  what is he going to do?"
 
Case Argument Number # 9:

 

 

Former DEA Agent Lew Rice says that if drugs were legalized it would only increase addiction that those wanting to legalize drugs should allow their children or grandchildren to try drugs.

 

Lewis "Lew" Rice is a retired Special Agent  with DEA (DRUG Enforcement Administration). Throughout Rice's exemplary career, he worked the nitty-gritty streets of Harlem, taking down drug dealers in New York, Jamacia, Miami, Washington D.C., Philadephia and Detroit.
 
As a security business owner, Lewis recently wrote an interesting book about the drug trade titled: 'DEA Special Agent: My Life On The Front Line'(Dorrance Publishing Company). In the book, Rice recalls his firsthand experience of the devastation caused by drugs:

"Several of my friends had served in Vietnam and when they returned to the States, their daily focus was to purchase heroin. My running buddies were distracted, and I wanted revenge."
 
When Rice first joined the DEA he hopped on a train home to where he lived with his mother in the housing projects of Queens, New York. Upon arrival, he told her: "Mom, I'm a Special Agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration." 
 
She responded unenthusiastically,"You don't need to be involved in that work, it's too dangerous." 

But this young man wanted to be a anti-drug enforcer. He felt passionately that dealers belonged in the penitentiary and for 25 years he helped put many there.
 
As for drug legalization, Rice feels that the idea is totally misguided and illogical. "Those that seriously believe in legalization should try it with their own kids and grandkids to see how it works."
 
"The people I know have seen first-hand the danger of drug addiction, overdose, breaking up families and the devastation of entire communities."
 
Lewis provides his assessment of the 2010 National Drug Control Strategy under President Obama:
 
"It is a well thought out, sensible and reasonable plan. As a former 25 year veteran of the DEA and also a parent who has raised children who fortunately did not succumb to the drug life style, I applaud Obama's strategy."
 
Rice says that part of Obama's prevention education plans designed to educate teenagers about the dangers of drugs, including providing treatment on demand, is an important step in the right direction.
 
But Rice also says it is very important for the government to continue "aggressive law enforcement against drug dealers who know the danger of using drugs because they don't  use drugs themselves."
 
"Drug dealers know that drugs ruin people lives."
 
A graduate of St. John's University, Rice was sworn in as a Special Agent with the DEA on October 29th, 1974. Lewis became the first African-American to become the Special-Agent-in-Charge (SAC) of the DEA office in New York, one of the largest drug enforcement agencies in the world. He also served as the SAC for the Detroit and Philadephia offices.
 
Overall, Rice is not surprised that many people favor legalizing drugs. In his book, he writes, "In June 2000,  I wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Post in response to a column by Arriana Huffington, an advocate for legalizing drugs. "
 
Rice's decisve article explained how important it was that drug enforcement and prevention programs should work hand-in-hand to assist the government's ability to impede drug trafficking and save the lives of young people.
 
What stunned the veteran agent was that ninety-five percent of the respondents to his story ridiculed him, stating that the 'drug war' was  a failure.
 
In Rice's book, he fired back, "tell that to the spouses and children of the hundreds of narcotic agents and officers who were either killed or severely injured trying to stop drug dealers from poisoning the minds of our children."
 
Case Argument Number# 10:

Retired Houston-based DEA agent Charlie Mathis had a message for all those who say drugs should be made legal: "How would they feel if one of their family members were on hooked on a drug like PCP, a drug that makes people go crazy - they take off their clothes and become violent as hell."
 
 
Case Argument Number #11: 

Dionne McCloud, a Houston resident with extensive knowledge of drug users and the drug trade, says that even if our government legalized drugs it wouldn't prevent the dealers from making money but that legalization would serve to make the situation more complicated.
 
"If drugs were legalized, the government would have to change drug laws, then regulate the drugs sold to people."
 
And there's the risk factor. She added, "Legalizing drugs would increase addiction and even allow the government to be sued if someone's relative or love one died from an overdose."
 
"Does anyone really think the government wants to be responsible for legalizing dangerous drugs like PCP, heroin and cocaine that can cause immediate death?"
 
Case Argument Number#12:

As a Journalist, writer and documentary film maker, Tom Feiling lives in South London. Feiling has argued for drug legalization for several years through his writing and film productions. His documentary "Resistencia" is a powerful film based on the Hip-Hop culture in Columbia and won numerous awards at Film Festivals worldwide. This sensational film was aired in four countries.
 
Last year, Penguin Books published Feiling's first book, 'The Candy Machine: How Cocaine Took Over The World.' In 2010, the book was republished as 'Cocaine Nation'. 

Feiling has worked for the BBC and produced another documentary called 33% Heroin and subsequently he wrote a compelling feature in The Sunday Times newspaper, 'The Truth About Cocaine in Britain'.
 
Feiling stated to this journalist. "I've heard it said that if drugs were legalized, those currently involved would find other criminal activities to make money from. This strikes me as a fatalistic way of looking at the problem. Drug dealers respond to the demand for drugs, which can only be supplied illegally."
 
In response to critical statements made by former DEA agents, Lew Rice and Charlie Mathis, say "for people in favor of legalizing drugs how would they feel to see any of their family members on PCP or other hard drugs."

Feiling responds, "Truth be told, I know almost nothing about the drug PCP. But if it were legal and regulated, public health authorities would have the ability and motivation to educate people like me about PCP. Therefore I'd be able to find out a lot more about it and its effects."
 
If drugs in America were legal, Feiler indicated that the drug producers of Colombia would be undercut by legal production of cocaine and driven into bankruptcy. Feiler explains. "Legal opium production for medical use is a mainstay of the economy in Tasmani, Australia. It is legal, regulated and taxed; organized crime groups in Australia have no interest or place in the business."
 
"The terrible violence afflicting countries like Mexico, Colombia and Afghanistan would be significantly reduced by legalizing drugs like cocaine and heroin."
 
The concept of drug legalization does have some credibility but so far only has a place in a few countries:
 
(1) Argentina
 
(2) Canada
 
(3) Sweden
 
(4) Czech Republic
 
(5) Netherlands
 
(6) Portugal
 
(7) Norway
 
In 2001, Portugual earned the distinction of becoming the first European country to abolish all criminal penalties associated with personal drug possession. Drug users in that country are targeted for therapy rather than prison sentences. DEA officials express opposition against the American government incorporating European liberal drug policies into U.S. law.
 
Why are the DEA opposed to the idea? 
 
DEA authorities told Congress that when Holland legalized marijuana, heroin addictions also tripled. But overall drug use in fact  decreased to comfortable levels in Portugual.
 
Case Argument Number 13:

Houston's KPFT Radio Host Dean Becker is one of the nation's fiercest advocates against drug prohibition laws. A former marijuana grower, he staunchly supports legalizing drugs. "People need to know the truth about these draconian drug laws."

In a Huffington Post article published last year, Becker asked this simple question: "Who are the real drug kingpins?" 

He ticks off a cast of characters. "They are bankers, pharmaceutical house CEOs, weapons manufacturers and a thousand other corporate interests whose gross profits depend on violence, hatred, distrust and deception. The prohibition of drugs is the ideal mechanism to continuously increase the rhetoric of fear and to incrementally diminish our rights and freedom."

A former U.S. Air Force Security Policeman, Becker retired from the oil and gas business in 2001 and following retirement commenced a new career as a radio host for the Pacifica Networks KPFT 90.1 Station.
 
In 2002, Becker founded the Drug Truth Network on KPFT and currently each week produces nine programs for more than 60 broadcast affiliates in the United States, Canada and Australia.
 
KPFT Drug Truth Network has gained so much popularity that recently the world-renowned James A. Baker Institute for Public Policy at Houston's prestigious Rice University has archived Becker's radio broadcast for download and stream the option to hear the program on its website.
 
For years, Dean advocated on his popular show that the American government's so-called 'war on drugs' has been an absolute failure. "Over thirty million people have been arrested,  we empower our terrorist enemies,  we enrich barbarous cartels, and we're giving a reason for the violent gangs to exist, and furthermore we ensure more access to drugs for our children."
 
In a July 11th interview with New Criminologist journalist Clarence Walker, Becker insists the drug war is the legacy of the DEA and other associated law enforcement. "No DEA agents, or narcotic enforcers, (former or current) will come on my show to defend the drug war policy."
 
Why? He explained what he considers to be their cowardice: "Law enforcement have their reputation to defend. They wouldn't want to say,  'We've locked up over thirty million people for nothing!'"
 
When this journalist asked Becker what he thought of the former drug agents quoted in this story, who said legalizing drugs would only increase addiction, the radio host paused, then replied,  "there's a slight chance people will try drugs. But Obama's treatment and prevention program ends right there because it amounts to window dressing the situation and not really doing the kind of job and what it takes to tackle the bigger issues regarding drug use and the profits made by our enemies who turn around and use the drug profits to arm themselves with military weapons to kill American people."
 
Becker does agree to an extent with Obama's new  approach toward helping those dependant on drugs. "Treatment should be made more available on demand rather than people being caught by the law and forced into treatment."
 
"This war on drugs will go on until the last man standing and the last man standing will say: 'Lock up the drug dealers, they are the bad guys.'  So the war on drugs will remain the first declared war that could last forever."
 
Here is a more in-depth report of the Obama Drug Control Plan:
 
Prevention:
 
(1) Steady collaboration between public health and public safety organizations to prevent drug use.
 
(2) To curtail drugged driving by encouraging States to establish and enforce laws that impose penalties for the presence of any illicit drugs while driving.
 
(3) Start a National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.
 
 
Health Care Intervention:
 
 
(1) Increasing screening and early intervention for substance use in all health care settings.
 
(2) Curbing prescription drug abuse by expanding prescription drug monitoring programs.
 
(3) Supporting the development of new medications to treat addiction.
 
Breaking Incarceration Cycle:
 
(1) Promoting  and supporting alternatives to incarceration such as drug courts.
 
(2) Supporting post-incarceration re-entry efforts by assisiting in job and housing programs.
 
(3) Developing more effective models of addressing substance use disorders among youth in the juvenile justice system.
 
Disrupting Drug Trafficking:

(1) Implementing the Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy, the Adminstration's border plan, which require U.S. agencies to take specific actions to address the serious border drug threat.
 
(2) Interdicting the southbound flow of currency and  weapons.
 
Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director for Drug Policy Alliance, weighed in on Obama's drug plan for America. He writes in a Huffington Post article, "The Obama Administration has taken important steps to undo some of the damage of past administrations' drug policies. And there's no question that it points in a different direction and embraces specific policy options counter to those of the past thirty years. But the new plan makes it clear it is still addicted to the reality of the drug war."

Under U.S. Freedom of Information Act  Law, the Federal government released the following historical audit this year on the Trillon dollars spent on the drug war since 1970, and the cost is still rising as nationwide law enforcement,the DEA, FBI, U.S. Border Patrol, U.S. Military and  other drug enforcement groups continue to battle the  Mexico Drug Cartels and Afghanistan's heroin trade along with drug trafficking throughout cities in the United States.
 
(1) $20 billion for designated foreign countries to battle drug gangs in their home countries. In Colombia, for example, the U.S. spent more than $6 billion, while coca cultivation increased and trafficking expanded to Mexico, thus bringing forth years of horrendous violence.
 
(2) $33 billion in marketing "Just Say No" message to America's youth and thousands of other prevention programs. Yet high school students report the same rate of illegal drug use during the 1980s and 1990s was practially the same usage in the 1970s. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention also says drug drug overdose have "risen steadily" since the early 1970s to more than 20,000 drug deaths last year.
 
(3) $49 billion allocated to law enforcement agencies to stem the flow of illegal drugs transported across the border. Experts predict at least 25 million Americans will snort, swallow, inject and smoke illicit drugs in 2010, which averages more than 10 million more users than in 1970. Much of the consumable drugs this year alone will come from the narcotics territory of Mexico.

 


 

(4) $121 billion to arrest more than 37 million nonviolent drg offenders, 10 million of them for marijuana possession. Studies show that jail time usually increases drug abuse.
 
(5) $450 billion to incarcerate drug offenders in the federal prison system. Last year, half of all federal prisoners in the U.S. were serving sentences for drug offenses.
 
At the same time, drug abuse is costing the nation in other ways. The U.S. Justice Department estimates the consequences of drug abuse has overburdened resources, including a burgeoning health care system, lost productivity and destruction of the environment will eventually cost the U.S. over $200 billion a year.
 
With the government now having spent a trillion dollars to fight drug trafficking and drug abuse, what is the game plan to end this war altogether?

There isn't one. And there should be no plan to quit because questions must be asked, such as if the government legalize drugs because people still use drugs, then why not legalize murder, rape and robbery? This sounds extreme of course but it's the same principle; the law hasn't resoundingly stopped people from killing their fellow human beings, so is there a reason then to legalize murder?
 
Case Argument Number#14:

The Final Argument: Drug Crusader Carolyn Gagaro makes a compelling case against drug legalization: "I believe we need to focus more on educating children on the dangers of using drugs and keeping the drug dealers from bringing the drugs into our country. Just because some efforts were misplaced that does not mean we should throw in the towel and make illegal drugs legal. Should we re-focus our efforts, 'yes'. Eliminate our efforts, 'no'."
 
Adversaries who favor drug legalization have said that taking drugs is an individual choice and people have a right to ingest drugs as they see fit as long as there is no harm being caused to anyone else.
 
Gargaro responds, "I understand this argument but it has two major flaws: First, we don't have the right to do anything with our bodies. Can I walk down the street naked?"  Can I say what I want to say anywhere at anytime? (if you said "yes", try yelling "hijack" on a airplane)."
 
"If drugs become legal, be prepared to see me walking around topless. I'll be damned if people are allowed to shoot up with drugs and I have to wear a top on a blazing hot day in the summer!"
 
Regarding illegal drugs' harmful effects, the crusader replies, "Don't tell me that drugs only hurt the user, tell that to a crack baby. It is estimated that over 100,000 babies each year are born addicted to cocaine and I don't think these babies chose to take these drugs."
 
"How can we prohibit legal drugs like "Phen-Fen" due to its side effects but allow people to take cocaine?"
 
Most critics say if drugs were legalized it will mean less government and less taxes: Gargaro counters, "legalizing drugs will not magically change the government and if government has not changed prior to drug legalization, then legalized drugs will only lead to more government."
 
This dedicated person outlines the consequences of drug legalization and what it will bring forth for American people:
 
(1) New Laws For Minors:
 
"If cigarettes and alcohol cannot be sold to minors, can anyone realistically say that drugs will not be restricted from minors."
 
(2) Lawsuits:
 
"Everyone should be aware of the lawsuits against the tobacco industry; so guess how many lawsuits will be brought up for drugs?"
 
(3) Taxes:
 
"Do people really think legal drugs will not be taxed? In fact it is the tax from the drugs to pay for all the drug rehab programs."
 
(4) Will Legalized Drugs Reduce Crime?

"Crime will also not be reduced by drug legalization because studies show a correlation between drug use and crime - violent crimes such as homicides, assaults, robberies and domestic violence".

"Has  anyone considered the reason that people committed a crime was because they were on drugs, legal or not? And violent behavior caused by drugs won't stop because drugs are legal. Legal PCP isn't going to make a person less violent than illegal PCP."
 
"Crime will rise when drugs are legal," Garago added, because more people will be taking drugs. And think about this. "Drug-related crime rates are highest where crack is the cheapest."
 
(5) Have Previous Prohibition Laws Worked?
 
Gargaro says, "No." 

"Did alcohol use decrease when it was legalized? No. When abortion became legal, did abortions decrease? No. When an action becomes legal, the number of people carrying out that action increases. Drugs are no different."
 
Furthermore, she argues, "Unless the most harmful and addictive drugs, such as crack and heroin, are made legal, people will still be drawn to these black market drugs."
 
"How will children and teenagers learn to say 'no' to pushers when they they see their parents getting high with government consent. The drug war is long and difficult and sometimes seems hopeless but we shouldn't give up."
 
When an Associated Press reporter asked U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano why the government still spends billions of dollars on drug programs that haven't really worked, she lamented: "Look, this is something worth fighting for because drug addiction is about fighting for somebody's life, a young child's life, a teenager's life, making sure they have abilities to be successful and productive adults. If you think about it in those terms, that our government are fighting for lives and in Mexico, they are literally fighting for lives as well from the violence, then you realize the stakes are too high to let go."  
                                                            

End


Journalist Clarence Walker can be contacted at: cwalkerinvestigate@gmail.com
 
Sources and Quotes used for this story: ( 1) Associated Press (2) CNN News  (3) DEA Records (4) Carolyn Gargaro (5) Huffington Post. (6) U.S. Government.gov. (7) British Filmaker and Journalist Tom Feiling (8) KPFT drug crusader Dean Becker.

Swiss Pol Who Probed Secret CIA Prison System Says Legalize Drugs

In an interview Friday with the Austrian newspaper Kurier and reported in the Swiss newspaper Tagesanzeiger, prominent Swiss politician Dick Marty called drug prohibition a failure. Drugs should instead be legalized, taxed and regulated, he said.

Dick Marty
Marty was the state prosecutor in Ticino for 15 years and in 1987 won an award from the International Narcotic Enforcement Officers Association. He was elected to the Swiss Council of State in 1995 and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in 1998. He has hold both positions ever since. Marty gained international prominence when he was appointed by the Council to investigate the collaboration of various European governments in the CIA's secret prison program and issued a damning report in 2006.

Drug prohibition has been "a total bust," Marty said Friday. "It only leads to high prices and corresponding profits for the drug mafia, without diminishing the access to drugs."

Recalling his years as a prosecutor, Marty added that it was only the small-time dealers who got paraded through the courts, while the drug lords were "little bothered" and stayed in luxury hotels. And despite the endless low-level prosecutions, it has never been so easy to get drugs, he added.

Money wasted on enforcing drug prohibition could instead be spent on prevention, and after legalization, governments could control the drug sector through regulation and taxation, as is the case with alcohol and tobacco, Marty said.

Although he conceded that "drug prices will fall" and consumption would rise -- perhaps only temporarily -- if prohibition is ended, Marty said societies must confront the problem of consumption, much as the US did after the end of Alcohol Prohibition. He pointed to a Swiss example, as well: the use of heroin maintenance programs to reintegrate hard-core addicts into the social fabric. "These people are supported medically and they can work again," he said.

Ending prohibition must be a global affair, he said, pointing to the emerging discussion of the theme in Mexico as it is buffeted by prohibition-related violence that has left 28,000 dead in the past 3 ½ years. Still, Marty isn't holding his breath. "Worldwide drug legalization isn't going to happen" in my lifetime, he predicted.

Dick Marty is only 65. Let's see if we can't prove him wrong.

Switzerland

New California Poll Has Prop 19 at 52%

A majority of California voters support Proposition 19, the state's Tax and Regulate Cannabis marijuana legalization initiative, according to a poll released Tuesday by Public Policy Polling. The poll has support at 52%, with 36% opposed and 12% undecided.

http://stopthedrugwar.com/files/ballot2.jpg
November 2nd, 2010
The ballot measure would legalize the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by those 21 or older, as well as allowing any adult to grow up to 25 square feet of it. It would also give counties and municipalities the local option to approve the regulated cultivation, sale, and taxation of marijuana.

The poll was an automated phone sampling of 641 people who voted in the last election. As Nate Silver of the polling analysis web site 538.com has noted, this is the sixth California legalization poll released in recent months. Automated call polls like this one have consistently shown Prop 19 winning, while human operator polls have shown in losing narrowly. Silver suggests that people are less likely to take a possibly controversial position (such as legalizing marijuana) with a human operator, thus introducing a possible downward bias in the human operator polls.

The Public Policy poll found that 62% of Democrats supported the proposition, as did 55% of independents, but only 37% of Republicans. Among ethnic groups, support was highest among African-Americans (68%), followed by whites (53%), and Hispanics (47%). Only among Asians was there more opposition to the measure (43%) than support (29%).

Levels of African-American support for the measure have been all over the map in the recent polls, and so the numbers should be viewed with a grain of caution. Blacks make up only slightly more than 6% of the electorate, and the small number of actual black people being polled means the numbers are not very reliable.

Nearly two out of five (38%) of Californians said they had used marijuana, but even among those who said they had never tried it, 44% still support Prop 19.

"Marijuana continues to be a hot button issue in California," said Dean Debnam, president of Public Policy Polling. "Voters seemed to be convinced that is about more than simply dispensing marijuana, but that such a change could have huge impacts on the state."

CA
United States

On the street, you can see the harm caused by drug laws (Opinion)

Location: 
Canada
Former British Columbia police officer David Bratzer discusses drug prohibition's role in increasing the rate of HIV infections, and how the Vienna Declaration is trying to bring positive change.
Publication/Source: 
The Ottawa Citizen (Canada)
URL: 
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/street+harm+caused+drug+laws/3334743/story.html

Anti-Prohibitionist Candidates Challenge New York Status Quo (FEATURE)

An unlikely pair of anti-prohibitionist insurgents are running statewide campaigns in New York designed to challenge the political status quo. Randy Credico, a comedian turned activist turned senatorial candidate, is challenging incumbent Charles Schumer for the Democratic Party senatorial nomination, while hedge fund manager turned madam turned convict Kristin Davis is running for governor on the Anti-Prohibition party ticket.

http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/files/randycredico2010.jpg
Randy Credico
Credico is familiar to the activist community as a relentless organizer against the Rockefeller drug laws from his post at the William Moses Kunstler Fund for Racial Justice, while Davis's notoriety comes from her prosecution and four-month imprisonment as a "Manhattan Madam" who procured prostitutes for deposed former Gov. Eliot Spitzer. Both are proving adept at milking the media for all it's worth in a bid to bring their anti-prohibitionist messages to the public eye.

By all accounts, neither has a chance of winning outright. In the latest Siena Poll of New York politics, Credico was pulling 11% against Schumer, up from 9% last fall, but still hardly a close race. Davis has not figured in any polls, but is running as a third party candidate in a year when Democrat Andrew Cuomo appears to be a shoo-in in November.

Still, both are committed to doing all they can to bolster their campaigns and get the spotlight focused on their issues. Last week, the Credico campaign handed in signatures in a bid to qualify for the Democratic primary, while the Davis campaign is in the midst of a signature drive of its own.

"I'm exhausted, I just spent 38 days on the petitioning drive," said Credico on the way back from Albany after handing in signatures. "I'm sick. I have some bronchial problem. If Paterson signs the medical marijuana bill, I might be able to get some relief. We have enough signatures to get on the ballot. Now we have to wait to see if Schumer challenges us," Credico said.

That may be unnecessary, given that the state Democratic Party chair Jay Jacobs told the New York Daily News Sunday that Credico and his allies had not turned in enough signatures to make the party ballot. But whether he makes the Democratic ballot or not, Credico will be in the race. He is also on the ticket for both the Libertarian Party and Davis's Anti-Prohibitionist Party.

"Randy submitted 7,000 signatures himself, and one running mate submitted 6,500, and the third guy was supposed to submit 9,000, but only handed in 500," said Roger Stone, a Republican political operative who is friends with Credico and is advising Davis. "The next morning, the Democratic state committee was peddling the story that Randy had fallen short. I think the third guy was working with Chuck Schumer in a Nixon-style dirty tricks operation. Why does Chuck Schumer fear competition? Why deny people a vote?"

Stone might know a thing or two about political tricksters. He has a long history of political shenanigans, most notably a role in the infamous "Brooks Brothers riots" in Florida in the disputed 2000 presidential election, where mobs of angry Republicans rushed election offices as officials scrutinized chads. He denies any involvement in that.

"I'm a libertarian Republican, not a religious right or Moral Majority Republican," Stone said. "I'm pro-freedom, I favor gay marriage and the legalization of marijuana, casino gambling, and prostitution. The only way to get the pimps and drugs out of it is to regulate it. It's a $10 billion industry -- let's legalize it and run out the mob, the pimps, the guys who exploit women, let's empower women."

He is also critical of New York's drug laws. "The Rockefeller laws were racist," Stone said bluntly. "If you were a rich white kid, you could get a break. I think there's a difference between cocaine and marijuana, and I'm not for the legalization of heroin, but until someone can convince me marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol, I say legalize it. It's a harmless herb that grows from the earth, and the idea it's a gateway drug is horseshit. New York has millions of marijuana users and they didn't all turn into heroin addicts."

Whatever Stone's motives, he is pushing both anti-prohibitionist campaigns and played a key role in getting Davis into the governor's race. "I met Roger Stone on a Sirius radio show, and afterward, I approached him about lobbying for the legalization of prostitution," said Davis, whose blonde bombshell looks belie a keen intellect. "That was right after a woman who had worked for me was killed by the Craig's List killer in Boston. I feel very strongly she would still be alive if prostitution were legal. If one of his earlier victims had felt comfortable calling the police, he might have been caught before he killed," she said.

http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/files/kristindavis2010.jpg
Kristin Davis
"My platform is pro-freedom," said Davis, adding that some of her issues are getting more play than others. "We've sort of moved into being most vocal on marijuana and gay marriage," she said. "These are the two issues that resonate most with people. New York is broke, deeply in debt, so we're looking at marijuana not so much as a social issue, but as an economic one."

Davis acknowledged that actually winning the governorship was unlikely, to say the least, but said her campaign was more about getting the issues addressed and getting enough votes to get the Anti-Prohibitionist Party official status in New York. "People say you can't expect to win, but that depends on your definition of winning," she said. "Andrew Cuomo has approval ratings over 60% and $23 million in campaign funds, but voting for me sends a clear message to the career politicians that these issues need to be heard. If we can get 50,000 votes for the party, then we're officially recognized and can lobby for our issues. Every single vote matters. Every vote for me shows the career politicians that New Yorkers care about these issues, that they want legal marijuana."

The anti-prohibitionist tag team has been doing some joint appearances, Davis said. "Randy is on my Anti-Prohibitionist Party petition as the Senate nominee. We just did an event over the weekend. It was a signature drive kickoff slash birthday party for me," she said. "There were maybe 300 people there."

Davis's notoriety has both helped and hindered her campaign, the former madam said. "It's a double-edged sword. Compared to sex, people by and large are not so interested in politics," she explained. "Sex gets people interested, and I'm an interesting character, but on the other hand, the mainstream media has been skeptical. The Post and New York One have not covered the campaign at all. I hope that once we're on the ballot, and they see this isn't a hoax, they'll start taking us a little more seriously."

"She's been able to use the celebrity that came out of her brush with Eliot Spitzer to her advantage to continue to point out the inequities of the criminal justice system," Stone said. "She went to prison, and he went back to his town house."

If politics makes strange bedfellows, anti-drug war politics makes even stranger ones. Stone is a libertarian Republican, Davis describes herself as a libertarian, but Credico comes out of a left-leaning social justice perspective. They don't agree on everything. For instance, Credico has come out in favor of allowing a mosque to be built near the former World Trade Center site, while Davis opposes it. Similarly, Credico touts an anti-war, anti-interventionist foreign policy, while Davis doesn't touch those issues.

"In the end," said Stone, "Credico and Davis become running mates and are on the same side. The drug war is one of the issues that motivates them both."

Whether he makes the Democratic ballot or not, Credico isn't going away. "We're going to start a war of attrition against Schumer," the activist/comedian turned candidate vowed. "We'll be making inroads in the black, latino, lesbian and gay communities, we'll be making inroads with people upstate concerned about their mortgages and credit cards. "I know Schumer is not happy I'm in the race," said Credico. "I'm the last person he wants challenging him. I have a show biz background, I have charisma."

But he also has street cred dating back to his days agitating against the Rockefeller drug laws. "I worked with the families of prisoners, I worked with the African-American community. That's what helped get me over the top. Women whose kids were incarcerated came out and canvassed for me. Schumer has nothing to offer them," Credico said.

Credico compares and contrasts his career with Schumer's and finds the incumbent fares badly. "I ran a civil rights organization, and he conducted himself as someone opposed to civil rights, as manifested by his support of the Patriot Act, the drug war, ID cards, the wall on the border, and other repressive measures. He's anti-civil rights, not for constitutional or civil rights for most Americans."

The Schumer campaign did not respond to emailed requests for comment.

"I'm for civil rights, human rights, a clean environment, and pulling out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Colombia," Credico elaborated. "Schumer was going to waltz right in there without having to talk about this, and New Yorkers deserve better. Why is he an avid supporter of the drug war? Why isn't he as progressive as [Republican senators] Sessions and Hatch on the crack/powder sentencing disparity?" the long-time activist asked.

"I'm for legalization of marijuana," Credico continued. "We should be able to grow marijuana here, without taxing it. Let's not give the government any more layers of power. Prohibition has to be abolished. We have to talk about this. The drug war is a Trojan horse to incarcerate people of color for social control."

The Republicans and Democrats in New York have shown little taste for challenging drug war orthodoxy, but insurgent candidates Credico and Davis are determined to hold their feet to the fire when it comes to justifying prohibitionist policies. Let the games begin!

(This article was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)

Chronicle Reviews: Two Books on Mexican Drug War, One on Border

Drug War Chronicle Book Review: Ruben Aguilar and Jorge Castaneda, "El Narco: La Guerra Fallida [The Failed War] (2009, Punto de lectura, 140 pp., $10.00 PB); George W. Grayson, "Mexico: Narco-Violence and a Failed State?" (2010, Transaction Publishers, 339 pp., $35.95 HB); Tim Grayson, "Midnight on the Line: The Secret Life of the US-Mexico Border (2010, St. Martin's Press, 304 pp., $25.95 HB)

On the streets of Mexican cities, a deadly, multi-sided war, complete with horrific exemplary violence -- among competing drug cartels, between the cartels and the Mexican state, and sometimes between different elements of the Mexican state -- rages on, the body count rising by the day, if not the hour. The cartels -- Frankenstein monsters birthed by drug prohibition, swollen with profits from supplying our insatiable demand for their forbidden goods -- not only fight the Mexican state, but also insinuate their way into it, and into Mexican society at large, buying with their immense wealth what they cannot command with their bullets.

This is commanding attention not only in Mexico, but also here north of the border, where the drugs are consumed and the cash handed over, where the fear looms that the violence will leak across the border. Despite the hyperventilating cries of some paranoid nativists, that has mostly not been the case, but if the violence hasn't arrived it's not because the cartels haven't extended their tentacles into Gringolandia. They are here, from San Antonio to Sacramento to Sioux Falls, doing business, and business is -- as always -- good.

Throw in some festering anti-immigrant (read: Mexican) sentiment, Congress's failure to act on comprehensive immigration reform, and some zealotry from the land of Sheriff Joe, and Mexico and the border are commanding a lot of attention. That's being reflected in the publishing world. Over the past two or three years, I've reviewed a handful of titles about Mexico and the border (and read more), and now we have three more contributions -- one an academic study of the cartels by a leading American Mexicanist; one a polemic against President Calderon's drug war by a Mexican journalist and a former Mexican foreign minister; and one a journalist's look at the world of smuggling, of both drugs and people, and counter-smuggling along the 1,700 mile border.

http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/files/graysonmexico.jpg
George Grayson's "Mexico: Narco-Violence and a Failed State?" is an extremely thorough and comprehensive history and analysis of the rise of the cartels in the context of the weaknesses of the Mexican state. If you can't tell your Carillo Fuentes from your Arellano Felix, if you're not sure if it's the Gulf Cartel or the Zetas, if you keep getting "La Barbie" mixed up with "El Chapo," Grayson will save you. He's got all the cartel players and all their nicknames -- and they all have them -- he's got all the busts and the shootouts, he's got what is so far the definitive history of the cartels and Mexico's response to them.

But Grayson is a political scientist, and that means we also get a history lesson on Mexican politics and culture, which for Grayson is largely a history of authoritarian institutions (the Catholic Church, the "perfect dictatorship" of the PRI), which the cartels imitate in their internal structures. Under the PRI, which ruled until Vicente Fox's PAN won the presidency in 2000, drug cartels existed, but in a modus vivendi with elements of the state. It was the political earthquake that shook loose the PRI that also unleashed the cartel wars, as old arrangements no longer served and new ones had to be forged. The ramping up of the drug war, first under Fox, and then under his successor, has only worsened the situation.

Grayson doesn't see any easy way out. It is "extremely difficult -- probably impossible," he writes, to eradicate the cartels, even with heightened law enforcement measures on both sides of the border. Raking in billions of dollars a year and employing nearly half a million Mexicans (and no doubt, some Americans, too), the cartels may just be, in a phrase, too big to fail. Just like the Mexican state, in Grayson's opinion. It may be corrupted, it may be suborned, but it goes on.

Although Grayson certainly plays it close to the vest, in the end he denounces the drug war. "Few public policies have compromised public health and undermined fundamental civil liberties for so long and to such a degree as the war on drugs," he writes.

http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/files/laguerrafallida.jpg
One gets the feeling that Jorge Castaneda, coauthor along with Ruben Aguilar of "Narco: La Guerra Fallida" (sorry, it's only available in Spanish), would like to be part of that Mexican state again. The former foreign minister has for years publicly suggested that it is time to talk about drug legalization, and "Narco" feels like part of a campaign to position himself for a run at office in 2012 or a post in whatever government emerges after elections that year. It is a polemic aimed directly at President Calderon's drug policies.

Castaneda and Aguilar set out to systematically demolish the reasons cited for ramping up the drug war, and do a pretty thorough job of it. (Although not everyone agrees with them. I saw Castaneda roundly berated at a Mexico City conference earlier this year for arguing that drug use in Mexico was not a significant problem, one of the central claims in the book.) Guns coming into Mexico from the US are not the cause of the violence, they also argue, and a full-blown confrontation with the cartels is not the way to go.

Instead, they propose increasing public security and reducing the "collateral damage" from drug prohibition and the drug wars by concentrating police on street crime and selectively targeting the most egregious drug offenders. The others? Perhaps a modus vivendi can be reached, if not at the national level, perhaps at the state or local level, as long appeared to be the case in Sinaloa. Decriminalization is another response, although not without the US joining in at the same time, lest Mexico become a drug tourism destination. And harm reduction measures should be applied. But "Narco" is ultimately a call for ending drug prohibition -- and a marker for Castaneda in forthcoming political moves.

http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/files/gaynormexico.jpg
Of course, all those Mexican-controlled drugs have to get here somehow, which means they have to cross the US-Mexican border, and Reuters reporter Tim Gaynor's "Midnight on the Line" has got that covered. This is a fast-paced, entertaining, and insightful look at the contraband traffic -- both drugs and people -- across the border and the people who try to stop it. Gaynor works both sides of the border, talking to coyotes in Tijuana, showing up in a dusty Sonora border town and following the illegal immigrant's harrowing journey through the searing deserts of Arizona, and interviewing all kinds of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol folks, as well as other officials on this side.

Gaynor demonstrates with some verve the continuous, perpetual struggle between contrabandistas and the US authorities (or, like the Minutemen he interviews, volunteers) who struggle to choke off that traffic. He tracks for sign with Indian scouts on an Arizona reservation that has in recent years become a smuggling hotspot, he rides horseback and in a Blackhawk helicopter with the Border Patrol and tags along with one of its SWAT teams, he learns about the drones patrolling high overhead and the tunnels being bored far beneath the ground. And he introduces us to the people involved on both sides.

Gaynor concludes arguing -- no doubt much to the consternation of the "secure the border" crowd -- that the border is tighter than ever, and that the steady increase in federal officers there this decade has had an impact. But, he notes, this success has perverse results. Tightening the border has been "a market maker for ruthless and profit-hungry coyotes and drug traffickers, for whom smuggling has never been more profitable," he writes. And so it goes.

Gaynor's book is no doubt the easiest read, Castaneda's is more a marker of a political position than anything, and Grayson's belongs in the library as a desk reference for anyone really serious about following the cartels and Mexican politics. Happy reading.

Feature: Drug War a Devastating Failure, Scientists and Researchers Say in Vienna Declaration

A decade ago, scientists, researchers, and AIDS activists confronted a sitting president in South Africa who denied that AIDS was caused by HIV. They responded by declaring at the 2000 Durbin AIDS conference that the evidence was in and the matter was settled. Now, with the Vienna AIDS conference coming up later this month, they are at it again -- only this time the target is the war on drugs.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/files/vienna2009demo1.jpg
HCLU-organized demonstration outside UN anti-drug agency, former SSDP executive director Kris Krane inside cage (drogriporter.hu/en/demonstration)
Their weapon is the Vienna Declaration, an official conference statement authored by experts from the International AIDS Society, the International Center for Science in Drug Policy, and the British Columbia Center for Excellence in HIV/AIDS. The document is a harsh indictment of the global drug war that calls for evidence-based policymaking. It demands that laws which criminalize drug users and help fuel the spread of AIDS be reformed.

The authors of the Vienna Declaration want you to sign on, too. You can do so at the web site linked to above.

"The criminalization of illicit drug users is fueling the HIV epidemic and has resulted in overwhelmingly negative health and social consequences. A full policy reorientation is needed," they said in the declaration.

Arguing there is "overwhelming evidence that drug law enforcement has failed to meet its stated objectives," the declaration lays out the consequences of the drug war:

  • HIV epidemics fueled by the criminalization of people who use illicit drugs and by prohibitions on the provision of sterile needles and opioid substitution treatment.
  • HIV outbreaks among incarcerated and institutionalized drug users as a result of punitive laws and policies and a lack of HIV prevention services in these settings.
  • The undermining of public health systems when law enforcement drives drug users away from prevention and care services and into environments where the risk of infectious disease transmission (e.g., HIV, hepatitis C & B, and tuberculosis) and other harms is increased.
  • A crisis in criminal justice systems as a result of record incarceration rates in a number of nations. This has negatively affected the social functioning of entire communities. While racial disparities in incarceration rates for drug offenses are evident in countries all over the world, the impact has been particularly severe in the US, where approximately one in nine African-American males in the age group 20 to 34 is incarcerated on any given day, primarily as a result of drug law enforcement.
  • Stigma towards people who use illicit drugs, which reinforces the political popularity of criminalizing drug users and undermines HIV prevention and other health promotion efforts.
  • Severe human rights violations, including torture, forced labor, inhuman and degrading treatment, and execution of drug offenders in a number of countries.
  • A massive illicit market worth an estimated annual value of US $320 billion. These profits remain entirely outside the control of government. They fuel crime, violence and corruption in countless urban communities and have destabilized entire countries, such as Colombia, Mexico and Afghanistan.
  • Billions of tax dollars wasted on a "War on Drugs" approach to drug control that does not achieve its stated objectives and, instead, directly or indirectly contributes to the above harms.

"Many of us in AIDS research and care confront the devastating impacts of misguided drug policies every day," said Julio Montaner, president of the International AIDS Society and director of the BC Center for Excellence in HIV/AIDS. "As scientists, we are committed to raising our collective voice to promote evidence-based approaches to illicit drug policy that start by recognizing that addiction is a medical condition, not a crime," added Montaner, who will serve as chairman of the Vienna conference.

"There is no positive spin you can put on the war on drugs," said Dr. Evan Wood, founder of the International Center for Science in Drug Policy. "You have a $320 billion illegal market, the enrichment of organized crime, violence, the spread of infectious disease. This declaration coming from the scientific community is long overdue. The community has not been meeting its ethical obligations in terms of speaking up about the harms of the war on drugs."

Stating that governments and international organizations have "ethical and legal obligations to respond to this crisis," the declaration calls on governments and international organizations, including the UN to:

  • Undertake a transparent review of the effectiveness of current drug policies.
  • Implement and evaluate a science-based public health approach to address the individual and community harms stemming from illicit drug use.
  • Decriminalize drug users, scale up evidence-based drug dependence treatment options and abolish ineffective compulsory drug treatment centers that violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  • Unequivocally endorse and scale up funding for the implementation of the comprehensive package of HIV interventions spelled out in the WHO, UNODC and UNAIDS Target Setting Guide.
  • Meaningfully involve members of the affected community in developing, monitoring and implementing services and policies that affect their lives.
  • We further call upon the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, to urgently implement measures to ensure that the United Nations system -- including the International Narcotics Control Board -- speaks with one voice to support the decriminalization of drug users and the implementation of evidence-based approaches to drug control.

"This is a great initiative," enthused Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance. "It is the most significant effort to date by the sponsors of the global AIDS conference to highlight the destructive impact of the global drug war. It is nicely coordinated with The Lancet to demonstrate legitimacy in the medical community. And it is relatively far reaching given that the declaration was drafted as a consensus statement."

"This is aimed at politicians, leaders of governments, the UN system, and it's aimed at housewives. We are trying to do basic education around the facts on this. There are still politicians who get elected vowing to crack down on drugs," said Wood. "While the declaration has a global aim and scope, at the end of the day, the person who is going to end the drug war is your average voter, who may or may not have been affected by it," he said.

"This was needed a long time ago," said Wood. "The war on drugs does not achieve its stated objectives of reducing the availability and use of drugs and is incredibly wasteful of resources in locking people up, which does little more than turn people into hardened criminals," he said.

The authors are hoping that an official declaration broadly endorsed will help begin to sway policy makers. "It will be interesting to see what kind of support it receives," said Wood. "Former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper has endorsed it, and we have a 2008 Nobel prize winner for medicine on the web site. There are high level endorsements, and more are coming. Whether we touch a nerve with the news media remains to be seen. I am hoping it will have a big impact since this is the official conference declaration of one of the largest public health conferences on the planet."

"We have reached a tipping point in the conversation about drugs, drug policy, drug law enforcement, and the drug war," said Stamper, now a member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. "More and more, science has found its way into the conversation, and this is one step to advance that in some more dramatic fashion. I've heard much from the other side that is emotional and irrational. This is one effort to create even more impetus for infusing this dialogue on drug policy with evidence-driven, research-based findings."

That the AIDS conference is being held in Vienna adds a special fillip to the declaration, Wood said. "Vienna is symbolically important because it is where the infrastructure for maintaining the global war on drugs is located," said Woods, "and also because of the problems in Eastern Europe. In Russia, it's estimated that one out of every 100 adults is infected with the AIDS virus because Russia has not embraced evidence-based approaches. Methadone maintenance therapy is illegal there, needle exchanges are severely limited, the treatment programs are not evidence-based, and there are all sorts of human rights abuses around the drug war."

With the AIDS conference set to open July 18, Wood and the other authors are hoping the momentum will keep building up to and beyond. "It is my hope that now that the Vienna Declaration is online, large numbers of people will come forward and lend their names to this effort," he said.

The Vienna Declaration is one more indication of just how badly drug war orthodoxy has wilted under the harsh gaze of science. It's hard to win an argument when the facts are against you, but as the declaration notes, there are "those with vested interests in maintaining the status quo." The declaration should make their jobs that much more difficult and bring progressive approaches to drug policy that much closer.

Drug War Issues

Criminal JusticeAsset Forfeiture, Collateral Sanctions (College Aid, Drug Taxes, Housing, Welfare), Court Rulings, Drug Courts, Due Process, Felony Disenfranchisement, Incarceration, Policing (2011 Drug War Killings, 2012 Drug War Killings, 2013 Drug War Killings, Arrests, Eradication, Informants, Interdiction, Lowest Priority Policies, Police Corruption, Police Raids, Profiling, Search and Seizure, SWAT/Paramilitarization, Task Forces, Undercover Work), Probation or Parole, Prosecution, Reentry/Rehabilitation, Sentencing (Alternatives to Incarceration, Clemency and Pardon, Crack/Powder Cocaine Disparity, Death Penalty, Decriminalization, Drug Free Zones, Mandatory Minimums, Rockefeller Drug Laws, Sentencing Guidelines)CultureArt, Celebrities, Counter-Culture, Music, Poetry/Literature, Television, TheaterDrug UseParaphernalia, ViolenceIntersecting IssuesCollateral Sanctions (College Aid, Drug Taxes, Housing, Welfare), Violence, Border, Budgets/Taxes/Economics, Business, Civil Rights, Driving, Economics, Education (College Aid), Employment, Environment, Families, Free Speech, Gun Policy, Human Rights, Immigration, Militarization, Money Laundering, Pregnancy, Privacy (Search and Seizure, Drug Testing), Race, Religion, Science, Sports, Women's IssuesMarijuana PolicyGateway Theory, Hemp, Marijuana -- Personal Use, Marijuana Industry, Medical MarijuanaMedicineMedical Marijuana, Science of Drugs, Under-treatment of PainPublic HealthAddiction, Addiction Treatment (Science of Drugs), Drug Education, Drug Prevention, Drug-Related AIDS/HIV or Hepatitis C, Harm Reduction (Methadone & Other Opiate Maintenance, Needle Exchange, Overdose Prevention, Safe Injection Sites)Source and Transit CountriesAndean Drug War, Coca, Hashish, Mexican Drug War, Opium ProductionSpecific DrugsAlcohol, Ayahuasca, Cocaine (Crack Cocaine), Ecstasy, Heroin, Ibogaine, ketamine, Khat, Marijuana (Gateway Theory, Marijuana -- Personal Use, Medical Marijuana, Hashish), Methamphetamine, Nicotine, Prescription Opiates (Fentanyl, Oxycontin), Psychedelics (LSD, Mescaline, Peyote, Salvia Divinorum), Synthetic Drugs (Mephedrone, Synthetic Cannabinoids)YouthGrade School, Post-Secondary School, Raves, Secondary School