A Critical Look at the American Drug War, Research Paper Example

Though the official War on Drugs in America began in 1969, America’s history with drugs goes back to its inception.  However, by the late 1960’s, drug abuse had become such a problem in society that Richard Nixon, then President of the United States, told Congress that drug abuse was “a serious national threat.” (NPR.org, n.d.)  As evidence for this statement, he cited a “dramatic jump in drug-related juvenile arrests and street crime between 1960 and 1967.” (NPR.org, n.d.)  In order to combat the drug problem, Nixon declared an official “war on drugs” in June of 1971. (NPR.org, n.d.)  However, in the four decades following this move to eliminate or at least reduce drug use and sales in America, the current situation seems to speak of complete failure of the policy. Although arrests are made and prisons are stuffed to overflowing with drug users and sellers, there seems to be just as many people using drugs as before.  In order to ascertain the success or failure of the drug war, it is necessary to examine the statistics that are available by agencies such as the surveys published by the Office of National Drug Control Policy.  It is also necessary to talk to the judges and lawmakers, those on the front line of the drug war, to understand their views on the success or failure of the policy.  If it is true that the drug war is failing, then the question that begs to be asked is, why is the federal government continuing to funnel millions of dollars into the war?  From a business perspective, it would make sense to see who is profiting form the War on Drugs.  This would determine who has vested interest in the continuation of the drug war. In order to understand the drug war, it is important to take a critical look at the policy, the lawmakers, and the profits being made to understand the true nature of the policy and what is really being done to keep America’s citizens and streets free of drugs and drug related crime.

The history of drugs in America goes back to the very beginnings of America’s history.  Since the 1600’s, hemp was one of the favored crops to plant, due to its usefulness in industry.  Hemp was used in everything from rope to cloth, and was one of the most valuable crops grown. “Marijuana cultivation began in the United States around 1600 with the Jamestown settlers, who began growing cannabis sativa or hemp plant for its unusually strong fiber that was used to make rope, sails and clothing.  Until after the Civil War, marijuana was a sourced of major revenue for the United States.  During the 19^th century, marijuana plantations flourished in Mississippi, Georgia, California, South Carolina, New York and Kentucky.  Also during the is period, smoking hashish, a stronger preparation of marijuana derived from the dried resin of the plant, was popular throughout France and to a lesser degree in the U.S.” (PBS.org)  America’s love affair with drugs continued.  During the American Civil War, a new pain killer, called morphine, was used on soldiers.  Morphine, which Friedrich Sertuerner of Germany has synthesized in 1803, was derived from the opium poppy.  The Chinese had always smoked the opium resin.  Morphine, however, was injectible.  Its high potency made it highly addictive.  “Opiates were popular in the United States throughout the 19^th century, particularly among women.  Tonics and elixirs containing opium were readily available in drugstores, and doctors commonly prescribed opiates for upper and middle class women suffering from neurasthenia and other “female problems.” (PBS.org, n.d.)  By the early 1900’s, lawmakers had begun to see a need for some sort of control to be put over the sale of narcotics like heroin and cocaine.  The first law dealing with illicit substances was passed in “1906 , when the most effective law dealing with psychotropic substances in the United States was passed.  This was the federal Pure Food and Drug Act.” (Gray 22)  Though this law did not make drugs illegal, it did require manufactures of elixirs which contained drugs such as heroin and cocaine, to correctly label the bottle so buyers would know exactly what it contained.  Later, in 1914, the Harrison Act was passed which required doctors and pharmacists who prescribed narcotics to register and pay a tax.  This was followed by the 1923 move by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Narcotics Division to “ban all legal narcotics sales.” (PBS.org, n.d.)  The drug prohibition effectively eliminated the legal sale of narcotics.  However, there was still a demand for the illicit drugs.  Sales moved to the underground, forcing addicts to search out new, and illegal, avenues in which to purchase their drugs.  This led to a thriving black market in lucrative underground drug sales.

There is little evidence to suggest that the prohibition had any success on curbing drug use in America.  The main evidence to its obvious failure was Nixon’s creation of the Drug Enforcement Administration in July of 1973.  Had the initial laws been successful in curbing drug use and sales, the declaration of a War on Drugs 50 years later would have been unnecessary.  Instead, the laws had merely created a thriving underworld.  According to Gray (22) “our country was launched into a wide-scale criminal activity, both by sellers, in order to make inflated and underground profits, and by users, in order to obtain the money to buy the now higher-priced drugs.  Clinics that had worked effectively with addicted people were closed; clinical experiments and research dealing with narcotics addiction were abandoned; and public fear and misinformation increasingly demonized all people who used any of these now illicit drugs.”  This policy has led us to the present day.  Lawmakers, police, and judges still stand on the front lines of the drug war.  Judge James P. Gray has been a witness to the drug policy for years, serving as s federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, a criminal defense attorney in the navy, and finally as a trial judge since 1983 in Orange Country, California.  He says, “I had seen firsthand that we were wasting unimaginable amounts of our tax dollars, increasing crime and despair, and severely and unnecessarily harming people’s lives, particularly the lives of our children, by our failed drug policy.  In short, I had seen that our drug laws were a failure, and I simply could not keep quiet any longer.”  Prompted by his experience and insight, Judge Gray wrote a book, chronicling what he viewed as a failed drug war and failed policy that has been creating more harm than good.

It is true that prisons today are ever expanding in order to accommodate the violators of drug crime.  However, this is not necessarily a view of its success as a policy.  The prison industry is profiting heavily from incarcerated drug criminals. However, many of these criminals are guilty only of buying or using an illicit drug.  Does going to prison rehabilitate a drug addict?  Or does it introduce them to more hardened criminals, leading them deeper into a life of crime, perhaps violent as opposed to their original non-violent crime?  “As a direct result of the enormous amount of money available from illicit drug sales, the corruption of public officials and private individuals in our society has increased substantially.  We have a much higher incidence of diseases, such as hepatitis and AIDS, caused by the use of dirty needles, than most industrialized countries in the world.  The War on Drugs has resulted in the loss of more civil liberties protections than has any other phenomenon in our history. Instead of being shielded, our children are being recruited into a lifestyle of drug selling and drug usage by the current system.  And revolutionaries and insurgents abroad are using money procured from the illegal sale of drugs to undermine legitimate governments all over the world.” (Gray 2)  Gray makes a strong case against the effectiveness of the war on drugs, and in fact, blames many of the other social problems America faces directly on drug prohibition, not necessarily on drug use.

Each year the Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control Policy issues

surveys on the most current statistics available on the amount of drug users, money spent on drugs, and other relevant information in order to drive policy for the coming years.  Looking at one such report issued in December of 2001 entitled “What America’s Users Spend on Illegal Drugs 1988-2000”, we can hope to find some official results of the effectiveness of the drug war.  If the drug war was being won, it would be expected that drug users and the amount spent on illicit drugs would steadily be decreasing year after year.  However, before even looking at the gathered statistics which will drive policy for the years to come, a disclaimer is issued in the report, which states, “Because of the quality of the available data, there is considerable imprecision estimates of the number of chronic and occasional users of drugs, the retail sales value of their drug purchases, and the amount of drugs they consume.  The best estimates reported in the paper follow..” (NCJRS.gov, 2001).  Due to the “quality of the data”, should any of these numbers be taken seriously?  It appears that the government is basing far reaching and potentially very damaging policy on a best guess scenario.  However, the data suggests that drug use is thriving in America despite the lengthy and expensive drug war and the overflowing prisons.  The report states, “In 2000, Americans spent about $36 billion on cocaine, $10 billion on heroin, $5.4 billion on methamphetamine, $11 billion on marijuana, and $2.4 billion on other substances.” (NCJRS.gov 2)  While the survey suggests a drop in total cocaine users, from 6 million in 1988 to 3.2 million in 2000, heroin use was said to have increased.  In addition, methamphetamine use became more popular, and due to being less expensive, perhaps influenced cocaine users to switch over to the locally produced, and cheaper, product.

The statistics used by the Office of National Drug Control Policy have recently come under criticism.  The numbers derived by the office are begin used to drive policy, and if they are being misinterpreted or misleading, then our current failed policy can be said to be a direct result of these statistics.  The 2007 book by Robinson and Scherlen, “Lies, Damned Lies, and Drug War Statistics: A Critical Analysis of Claims Made by the Office of National Drug Control Policy” opens with the statement by Mark Twain that “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.”   This is not to say that statistics lie, since numbers are just numbers.  “It is more accurate to say that statistics can be used to lie.  That is, they can be manipulated to support any argument, including a knowingly false argument.” (Robinson and Scherlen xiii)  Robinson and Scherlen (9) assert that it is the dominant ideology that drives the drug war.  They cite the dominant ideology concerning drugs as being based on 4 principals, each of which the ONDCP stands behind.  The concepts are that (1) Drugs are always bad; (2) Drugs are never acceptable; (3) Drugs are supply driven; and (4) Drugs must be fought through an ongoing war. This ideology colors the statistical analysis of the ONDCP in order to present to the public results that coincide with the dominant ideology.  In order to justify the current spending on the drug war, it is necessary to provide statistics that back up the claims made by policy makers that the drug war is effective.  However, when the reports are critically analyzed by Robinson and Scherlen and their team, the results are found to be very misleading, and in fact paint a very different picture than the one officially released.  Their analysis reveals a drug policy that has been ineffective in reducing drug use, fatalities associated with drug use, and has even driven up the price of drugs, making the drug trade more profitable.

Judge Gray (2) states that “Most judges have strong views about how to improve our drug policies, some of them are quite advanced.  I have had many private conversations on this subject with other judges, who know that the war on drugs has failed, i.e., that “The Emperor has no clothes.”  In his book, he reprints part of a letter entitled “An Open Letter from Judges and Attorneys” that was sponsored by the Voluntary Committee of Lawyers, Inc.  and originally signed by eleven judges and appellate justices.  In the letter, it states, “…we unanimously observe that neither drugs nor drug abuse has been eliminated or appreciably reduced, despite massive spending on interdiction and harsh punishments.  Attempts at enforcement have clogged the courts, filled the prisons with non-predatory offenders, corrupted officials, imperil the liberties of the people, burdened the taxpayers, impeded public health efforts to stem the spread of HIV and other infectious diseases, and brought the nation no closer to abstinence.  As Congress and state legislatures enact more punishment and costly drug control measures, we conclude with alarm that the war on drugs now causes more harm than the drug abuse itself.” (Gray 3)

If the current strategy of eliminating or reducing drug use in America has been effective, perhaps it is time to look at alternatives.  However, in order for alternative measures to be found, the drug problem must be openly discussed based on science and modern day understanding, without fear propaganda being used as the driving force behind policy.  Legalization has been feared by many, with the thought being that by making drugs legal drug abuse and addiction would increase dramatically.  However, it is evident that the current policy is not deterring drug use either.  Education seems to be the most effective policy.  “Education has its limits.  But it is certainly one of our most important tools.  Its goal should be to impress upon people, both young and not so young, that drug use is risky, harmful and unattractive.  There are several traditional approaches to accomplish this goal.  One, the “cognitive model” of drug use and abuse, assumes that people will make rational and informed decisions either not to use drugs or to use them in moderation, if only they are given true information about drugs.” (Gray 166).  Gray also discusses Affective Education, which stresses and open communication about the true nature of drugs, and teaches individuals how to resist peer pressure.  De-glamorizing drug use in the media and popular culture is also necessary in order to keep individuals away from what are viewed as “sexy” and “cool” drugs.  Whether drugs are legal or illegal, it is obvious that there will never be a time when America is completely “Drug Free”.  This is an unrealistic expectation, considering there has never been a time in the past when this was true.  There is no reason to believe that a drug free America is ever possible.  The only way to prevent and reduce drug use is to help people make an educated decision about drugs and drug use.

No one wants to live in a country racked by drug violence, drug addicts and drug related crime.  The ideal behind the drug war is, supposedly, to rid America of these festering problems.  However, the result has been far from this enlightened vision.  Drug crimes continue, addicts are incarcerated, and drug lords reap in billions of dollars in profits from illicit drug sales, while in the streets, drug crimes take the lives of innocent bystanders every day.  In order to combat this problem, fresh insight and policy is needed.  The drug war, as is, seems only to benefit the prison industry, which is thriving on the profits from incarcerating hundreds of thousands of non violent drug criminals each year.  The policy of harsher penalties for drug use and sellers is not enough to deter those wishing to reap the easy profits that are to be made by selling drugs.  The drug war policy has not deterred producing countries from continuing to find ways to grow and produce the illicit drugs that are so profitable.  Our knowledge of drugs and drug policy has increased over the years and knowing what does not work, it is time for America to take a fresh approach to the drug problem and find another way of dealing with this problem that is causing untold misery to millions of Americans.  No one claims to have the answer, but that’s why discussion and open debate is needed.  If the drug war continues as it, millions more will suffer while the top tier producers profit off of their misery.

Works Cited

Gray, James P. “Why our Drug Laws have Failed and What We Can Do About it: A Judicial Indictment   of the War on Drugs.” Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2001.

NPR.org (2007) “Timeline: America’s War on Drugs” Web. Retrieved 31 May, 2010 from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9252490

PBS.org, n.d.  “A Social History of America’s Most Popular Drugs.”  Frontline Web. Retrieved 31 May, 2010 from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/buyers/socialhistory.html

Office of National Drug Control Policy (2001) “What America’s Users Spend on Illegal Drugs 1988-2001. Executive Office of the President Office of National Drug Control Policy. Web. Retrieved 31 May, 2001 from       http://www.ncjrs.gov/ondcppubs/publications/pdf/american_users_spend_2002.pdf

Robinson, Matthew B., Scherlen, Renee G. “Lies, Damned Lies, and Drug War Statistics: A Critical Analysis of Claims Made by the Office of National Drug Control Policy.” Albany: State   University of New York Press, 2007.