View all Articles
Commentary By Joseph Mitrani

Waging War Against the War on Drugs

Economics, Economics Regulatory Policy, Healthcare

For years Washington's policies towards recreational drug abuse could be described as myopic and reactive. Mandatory minimums imposed on largely nonviolent drug offenders served more as political campaign fodder than shrewd governing. Federal spending to combat what President Richard Nixon once called "public enemy number one" has ballooned to $25 billion.  Army personnel have been deployed in foreign countries to train anti-drug battalions. And yet, in spite of all of these efforts, illicit drug usage has increased over the last few years.

However, after decades of policy driven by public hysteria, the current administration has begun to recognize the inefficiency of the crusade against drugs. This is not to advocate for a complete public disregard of drug abuse and the crimes that generally go along with it. Rather, future government methods could feature greater success at a fraction of the cost. 

Tactics used to prevent drug abuse and crime primarily consist of seizures by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and additional security at America's borders. These actions are key features of a supply-side drug war. 

Yet, attempting to curtail supply for a product with such large demand has proven to be a failure. Among recreational drug users, addiction is often a powerful motive to purchase, regardless of price. 

Trying to limit drug availability in the black market raises prices for all parties involved. With such steep demand, cartels simply pass on high prices to addicted consumers. Frequent heroin users are not concerned with a 20 percent mark-up in price, so long as they get their next fix, and shoot and rob more people in order to shoot up. 

Some assert that laws prohibiting drugs are both effective and influential among non-drug users. The high costs of drugs, the logic goes, compounded by the legal ramifications of possession and distribution, could dissuade many from partaking and subsequently getting addicted.

However, a recent study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that the use of medical marijuana reduced deaths from opioid pain relievers. Citing legality and pricing as barriers for drug usage simply is not a credible argument, as the overwhelming majority of deaths from overdose occur not from heroin and cocaine, but through lawful and expensive opioid abuse. As addicts are literally picking their poison between illicit narcotics and prescription painkillers, the government remains fixated on the wrong aspect of the drug market.

Raising awareness about the potency of drug abuse could be an effective measure towards reducing demand. In 2012, the Senate commissioned a report discussing possibilities to reduce demand for illegal drugs, including the creation of drug prevention and treatment programs. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), once a staunch advocate for harsh drug policy, co-signed the report along with three other senators. Grassley's shift from once comparing drug usage to genocide towards trying to implement addiction treatment programs signals a broader transition within the government.

Drug prevention programs serve as both a powerful and inexpensive strategy to combat abuse. The National Institute on Drug Abuse reports that every dollar invested in research-based drug use and abuse prevention programs has the potential to save up to $7 in areas such as drug abuse treatment, healthcare, and criminal justice system costs.

In order to reduce demand for drugs, one must acknowledge disparities at the state level. In 2012, the most recent year of available data, Florida saw an average of 6 people die daily due to prescription drug usage.

Attempting to categorize citizens of different states under one-size-fits-all legislation is not feasible. Considering that drug prevention efforts are predicated upon appealing to specific demographics, individualized state efforts could yield better results.

The late Nobel Prize-winning economist, Milton Friedman, asserted that problems stemming from drug regulation would cease to exist if the government were to legalize all forms of recreational drugs. While some warn against conflating drugs such as cocaine and marijuana with substances such as alcohol and tobacco, there are numerous ramifications that stem from an illicit drug market.

The illegal nature of drugs often increases their potency. In the absence of regulation, the coca plant was transformed into its more toxic relative, cocaine, as people came to dismiss the medical qualities it contains. The same derivation occurred with poppy seeds and heroin, changing a compound with analgesic and pain-relieving qualities into a fatal narcotic. Leaving the manufacturing and distribution of street drugs to unregulated hands has come with deadly consequences. Additionally, the stigma associated with current illegal drugs has barred any substantial medical development or research.

Furthermore, the loss of tax revenue is immense. The alcohol industry currently garners about $6.5 billion in tax revenue. Revenue from taxes on tobacco is estimated to be $17.6 billion. As various states such as Colorado have realized revenues that can be exacted from marijuana, consider the amount of money to be gained in a regulated market for other drugs.

This week President Obama pardoned 46 nonviolent drug offenders. These commutations serve solely as a symbolic gesture. For real change, Congress needs to act. 

Eighty-five years ago, the federal government banned the sale of liquor, beer and wine through Prohibition. The unintended consequences of such regulation included a surge in organized crime, aggravated socio-economic tensions, and a loss of governmental and entertainment industry revenue. If proposed legislation can target the demand of illicit drugs at the state level, perhaps our nation has finally sobered up to the reality of effective drug policy.

 

Joseph Mitrani is a contributor for Economics21

Interested in real economic insights? Want to stay ahead of the competition? Each weekday morning, e21 delivers a short email that includes e21 exclusive commentaries and the latest market news and updates from Washington. Sign up for the e21 Morning eBrief.