'Demon drug' propaganda doesn't cut it anymore

The Providence Journal ^ | May 10, 2006 | Froma Harrop

[cryptical]

America's war on drugs is actually a Raid on Taxpayers. The war costs an estimated $70 billion a year to prosecute, and the drugs keep pouring in. But while the War on Drugs may have failed its official mission, it is a great success as a job-creation program. Thousands of drug agents, police, detectives, prosecutors, judges, anti-drug activists, prison guards and their support staffs can thank the program for their daily bread and health benefits.

The American people are clearly not ready to decriminalize cocaine, heroine or other hard drugs, but they're well on their way to easing up on marijuana. A Zogby poll found that nearly half of Americans now want pot legal and regulated, like alcohol. Few buy into the "demon drug" propaganda anymore, and for a simple reason: Several countries have decriminalized marijuana with little effect on public health.

Americans could save a ton of money doing the same. The taxpayers spend almost $8 billion a year enforcing the ban on marijuana, according to a report by visiting Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron. State and local governments consume about $5 billion of the total.

The war on pot fills our jails. America arrests 755,000 people every year for marijuana infractions -- the vast majority for possession, not dealing. An estimated 80,000 people now sit behind bars on marijuana offenses.

The Bush administration stoutly supports the campaign against marijuana, which others think is crazy. Compare the Canadian and American approach to medical marijuana: The Canadian Postal Service delivers it right into the mailboxes of Canadian cancer patients. The U.S. Justice Department invades the patients' backyards and rips out cannabis plants, even those grown with a state's blessing.

The Bush administration isn't going to last forever, nor is the patience of Americans paying for and suffering under the ludicrous war on marijuana. Surely letting sick people smoke marijuana to ease their discomfort -- 11 states have approved such, including Rhode Island -- would be a good start for a more enlightened drug policy.

For the drug warriors, however, this toe in the water seems a foot in the door for eventual decriminalization of pot. That's understandable. Relaxing the rules on marijuana would greatly reduce the need for their services.

Remember the Supreme Court case two years ago, when Justice Stephen Breyer innocently suggested that the federal Food and Drug Administration be asked to rule on whether marijuana had an accepted medical use? Well, the FDA has just ruled. In a total lie, the FDA said that no scientific studies back the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Actually, the prestigious Institute of Medicine issued its findings in 1999 that marijuana helped patients for pain and for the relief of nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy.

The federal government "loves to ignore our report," John Benson, a professor of medicine at the University of Nebraska and co-chairman of the committee that wrote the Institute of Medicine" study, said after the FDA issued its "advisory."

The Drug Enforcement Administration, which feeds off the drug war, plays a big part in stopping this and all future efforts to reach educated opinions on marijuana. Lyle Craker, a University of Massachusetts authority on medicinal plants, wanted to grow marijuana for the purpose of evaluating its possible medical uses. The DEA said no, insisting that he use marijuana from a University of Mississippi lab. The DEA knows full well that the UMiss pot is low-quality and therefore useless for study.

The drug warriors' incentive to keep the game going is pretty obvious. But what's in it for taxpayers?

Miron's Harvard study looked beyond what the public pays to enforce the marijuana laws. It also investigated how much money would roll in if marijuana were legal and taxed like alcohol. The answer was over $6 billion in annual tax revenues. Do the math: If government stopped outlawing marijuana and started taxing it, its coffers would be $14 billion richer every year.

We could use that money. For example, $14 billion could pay for all the anti-terrorism port-security measures required in the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002.

More than 500 economists of every political stripe have endorsed the Miron study. Growing numbers of Americans are beginning to agree with them: The war against marijuana is an expensive failure -- and pointless, too.

Froma Harrop is a Journal editorial writer and syndicated columnist. She may be reached by e-mail at: fharrop@projo.com.

[William Terrell]

The Libertarians support the WOD? They certainly support open borders!

I said, "It's interesting that many of the same people that support the war of drugs support letting illegal aliens invade our country."

The ones I'm talking about are not libertarians. Libertarians are just the opposite. I depart with them, however, on the disposition of illegal aliens. The first was never comprehended under the common law whereas the second is well founded in the common law.

It's interesting to note that republicans and democrats, with few exceptions, support that immigration plank of the libertarian platform, too.

How odd.

[robertpaulsen]

"is anathema to the original Constitution, personal liberty and federalism, but that the same regulation of marijuana is just fine, is inconsistent to the point of irrationality."

Then what about those FReepers who call for the legalization of marijuana but favor keeping all other recreational drugs illegal? Just like the author of this article?

Talk about constitutionally inconsistent!

[robertpaulsen]

You're buying into the author's argument that marijuana would be taxed like alcohol. Don't. The author lies throughout the article.

If anything, marijuana would be taxed like cigarettes. And, as with cigarettes, this high tax imposed by ALL levels of government would drive the product back underground to the drug dealers who are selling all the other drugs that remain illegal.

[robertpaulsen]

Legal medical marijuana sells for $480./oz. in California.

Should I believe reality or your theory?

[robertpaulsen]

Do I have a contitutional right to spit on the public sidewalk? People used to do that.

[robertpaulsen]

"If mj were reasonably regulated and taxed, like alcohol"

What makes you think it would be? Why wouldn't mj be unreasonably regulated and taxed like tobacco?

I mean, if you're going to insist on the rest of us accepting your fantasyland scenarios, why don't you ask our opinion if mj were reasonably regulated and UNtaxed?

[robertpaulsen]

"if but for the farmer growing his own, he would've bought the contraband on the open market"

That's part of it, certainly. But the larger part is that the farmer's intrastate activity would substantially effect Congress' constitutional interstate regulatory efforts.

Congress regulates interstate airlines. Should a private pilot, flying within a state, be allowed to fly whenever and wherever he wishes?

Are you saying that Congress may not regulate that pilot since he's only operating intrastate?

[Ken H]

What makes you think it would be? Why wouldn't mj be unreasonably regulated and taxed like tobacco?

If you had bothered to read my next post, you'd realize what a dumbass question that was. From post #104:

The stated premise was "regulate like alcohol". What you described is not "regulating like alcohol". I never claimed that the government would regulate mj reasonably, like alcohol. They may or may not.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1629808/posts?page=104#104<>

[robertpaulsen]

So the author makes a dumbass supposition and you repeat it as justification for the legalization of marijuana? Asking them IF it was taxed like alcohol?

What's your purpose in asking another FReeper to respond to your question that you conceed has no basis in reality?

[PaxMacian]

"Do I have a contitutional right to spit on the public sidewalk?"

No, but nobody is being locked up for it either.
Nobody is knocking down doors of homes over spit nor
are they taking homes from their owners to house a standing
army conducting a perpetual war upon our own spitting
citizens while we ignore the invasion at our borders.

[Ken H]

What's your purpose in asking another FReeper to respond to your question

That FReeper took up the question of "regulate like alcohol" before I did, in post #23.

that you conceed has no basis in reality?

I conceded no such thing. I said the government might or might not regulate mj reasonably. Quit lying about what I wrote.

[Tokra]

Legal medical marijuana sells for $480./oz. in California. Should I believe reality or your theory?

That's because it is still an illegal drug. Obviously if it were legal - the price would drop.

[pawdoggie]

You're buying into the author's argument that marijuana would be taxed like alcohol. Don't. The author lies throughout the article.

You're confused. I was making your argument (vs some pro-dope guys).

[robertpaulsen]

At one time it was legal to spit on the sidewalk. How is that possible if people didn't have the right?

[Know your rights]

You're buying into the author's argument that marijuana would be taxed like alcohol. [...] If anything, marijuana would be taxed like cigarettes.

Because you say so?

[Know your rights]

At one time it was legal to spit on the sidewalk. How is that possible if people didn't have the right?

At that time, a majority of the sidewalk's owners were willing to let it be spat on; since then they've changed their minds. No puzzle there.

[PaxMacian]

"At one time it was legal to spit on the sidewalk. How is that possible if people didn't have the right?"

John 9:5-7
As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. When he had said these things, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and spread the clay on his eyes, And said to him: Go, wash in the pool of Siloe, which is interpreted, Sent. He went therefore, and washed, and he came seeing.

Yet, a century after the foundation of the United States
Pasteur discovered germs and now we have laws to protect
the individual's right to life over and above any other's
presumed right to hurl excretions because citizenship
carries with it certain responsibilities and duties,
not the least of which is refraining from poisoning your
fellow citizens. Granted, it should be a crime for anyone
to blow smoke in another's face. But, the right to choose
the substance from which we are made is undeniably a God
given right which is in no way enumerated as a federal power.

Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities,
against powers, against the rulers
of the darkness of this world,
against spiritual wickedness in high places.

[tacticalogic]

Are you saying that Congress may not regulate that pilot since he's only operating intrastate?

What do you think he's saying?

[robertpaulsen]

Patience. Let's wait for his answer.

[tacticalogic]

Probably be waiting awhile. I'm betting he's smart enough to know a loaded question when he sees it.