Drug Czar Should Go

[User]

Voters are disgusted by the reckless spending of politicians in Washington. The backlash is coming, so policymakers are now scrambling to do something, or at least be seen as doing something, about the enormous federal debt. Now is a good time for Congress to abolish government agencies that are outdated, dysfunctional or just unnecessary.

A prime candidate for abolition is the office of the so-called "drug czar."

The position of the drug czar was created by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act in 1988. It was a time of drug war hysteria. Former first lady Nancy Reagan called casual drug users "accomplices to murder." President George H.W. Bush vowed to make the war one of his top priorities. During his inaugural address, he said, "Take my word for it. This scourge will stop." The conservative firebrand William Bennett became the first czar and made headlines with brash talk of beheading drug dealers. The nation's capital was declared to be a "high intensity drug-trafficking" zone. There were raids and arrests - including the notorious trial of then-Mayor Marion Barry.

In theory, the drug czar's office was supposed to develop a long-term strategy to win the drug war and bring about a "drug-free society." Each year, the czar would call for more governmental efforts to "reduce demand" and to "disrupt the supply" of narcotics. Instead of millions, the government started to spend billions.

The bureaucracy flourished as more agents were hired and more high-tech equipment was purchased. The criminal justice system expanded to handle the influx of cases. More prosecutors. More judges. More prison guards.

And yet, millions and millions of Americans continued using drugs.We now know that Presidents Obama and Clinton were among them. Indeed, nowadays, police agencies like the FBI can only recruit young people if the agencies are willing to overlook past drug use.

The goal of "disrupting supply" has been proved farcical. Drugs are as widely available as ever. Indeed, Washington remains a city with thriving drug traffic. There are open-air drug markets in many neighborhoods. More than a decade after the drug czar went into business, a commission on federal law enforcement practices gave this blunt assessment: "Despite a record number of seizures and a flood of legislation, this Commission is not aware of any evidence that the flow of narcotics into the United States has been reduced." No one thinks that hiring more Border Patrol agents will make a dent.

The violence and destabilization have become most acute at our southern border. According to the Los Angeles Times' ongoing project on the drug war in Mexico, more than 9,900 people have been slain in Mexican drug-related violence since January 2007. The kidnappings and killings that have become commonplace across the border are now spilling into the American Southwest. Government efforts in Colombia have already cost U.S. taxpayers more than $5 billion, and Mexico is slated to receive about $1.4 billion. Meanwhile, the killings continue at a rate that has prompted the State Department to issue travel advisories to Americans traveling to our southern neighbor.

The drug czar has also meddled in local politics. Some states, for example, have moved to change their laws to allow marijuana to be used by certain patients in consultation with doctors. Whenever a state has a referendum about medical marijuana on the ballot, the federal drug czar typically comes in to lobby against the measure. Since the czar was created to oversee federal policies, such politicking at the local level is outside his sphere - and is thus an abuse of power.

The office of the drug czar issues an annual report regarding the efficacy of drug policies. Scholars are skeptical of those reports because the bureaucrats invariably prepare reports that come to the defense of existing policy and "spin" the data to find good news and "progress." An independent analysis of the drug office in 2007 found "overwhelming evidence of consistently false and dishonest claims."

Perversely, Congress tends to reward government agencies that perform poorly. When the drug czar's office was created in 1990, its budget was $12 million; this year, the office will cost more than $400 million.

If Congress wants to take a serious step to curb reckless and wasteful spending, it ought to admit the futility of the drug war in the same way we came to realize that alcohol prohibition was misguided. If Congress is only ready to abolish some of its very worst mistakes, it should get rid of our drug czar.


NewsHawk: User: http://www.420magazine.com/
Source: Washington Times (DC)
Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/A1kAshhc
Copyright: 2010 The Washington Times, LLC.
Website: Washington Times - Politics, Breaking News, US and World News
Author: Timothy Lynch

[Warbux]

Excellent points,,Great read..

[michaelkaer]

Here in Canada we do not have such a job. We do have the minister of health or minister of justice. I am not sure which it would be... Drug Csar is a U.S. thing with no real counterpart here.

[Colum]

What a total waste of money and resources. That $400 mil would go a long way to create new jobs if used properly.

[free2blaze]

"if used properly."

[flank]

Originally Posted by free2blaze

"if used properly."

On another jail and a bigger house for your local government official, how else is money spent?

[surfin365]

Great point, makes sense, due to that simple fact it won't happen anytime soon.

[michaelkaer]

In theory, the drug czar's office was supposed to develop a long-term strategy to win the drug war and bring about a "drug-free society."

There has never been a drug-free society anywhere. The U.S. has the most criminals for pot, yet the prisoners can still get drugs IN PRISON. If we can not stop it from getting in there, what hope in hell do we have of controling it's use on the outside? The answer is NONE! The whole job is a farce! Even if we had a cop/person ratio of 1/1 you would not be able to control drugs. That would take a dictatorship where the cops are numbered more than people. Maybe a ratio of 3/1 you maybe able to stop drug taking for a day. Ok second thought, what about all the big Pharma drugs floating around? If you got rid of all illegal drugs, than the legal ones will be abused more. 3rd thought- I have a card that allows me to smoke Cannabis as a medicine. It is legal in my hands. Would a cop still take away my legal Medicine? If I lived in the States, that answer is a "maybe". Up here in Canada I may get detained long enough to show them my card and I should be let go. We have not had much of a problem as far as that goes (yet).

[110100100]

Thanks news team, great article!

michaelkaer excellent post, my thoughts exactly.

They can not control drugs in prison.

What else needs to be said? It's like trying to legislate morality, it just don't work.

How many people are we going to put in jail for nothing more than simple cannabis possession? We spend billions each year trying to keep a useful plant illegal, all while doing nothing to stem the flow of cannabis into users hands and lining some very unsavory pockets with billions of U.S. citizens hard earned dollars. Why?

Even though I think there might be some better places for at least part of that money we spend "stamping the menace of marijuana out" even if they kept it to use to keep the police and homeland security beefed up I'd be willing to try that out. I mean here we have people trained to take very dangerous individuals off the streets busting someone with some weed.

Let these guys crack into the violent crimes, the rapes, the murders, the robberies, the things that really affect peoples lives. Let them go to work to make our borders safe and catch terrorists. I guarantee that if the only change to the war on drugs is cannabis was legalized, you'd see a HUGE drop in the number of smugglers and border traffic. Suppliers in the U.S., legitimate, law abiding, tax paying business people would emerge to fill in demand for marijuana.

100 Billion+ taken directly out of the hands of narco-terrorists and pumped right back into the U.S. economy. The money would be much more likely to stay here and grow as well. The number of jobs that would be created would be large, both direct and indirect. Jobs would be saved too. Support industries that are struggling in this economy now would get a boost from lifting all prohibition on cannabis. Manufacturing, shipping, retail, farming, small business/entrepreneurs, green businesses. There are vast almost untouched markets when it comes to cannabis. Billions more in revenues and taxes just waiting to be tapped.

Narco-terrorists don't give a shit about us, they sell things like harmful drugs and guns to anyone with greenbacks so don't loose sight of the fact that they are willing to do anything for a price. The less of them that have incentive to try and carry ANYTHING illegally into our country the better. Leo can focus harder with fewer people trying to hump 50 pounds or more of low grade, drug lord du jour's buds for sale. The economy of smuggling is such that you're already taking the risk. Adding something to be smuggled can be had much cheaper than if all you want is someone to move some weapons. Eliminating regular drug runs should be a national security priority.

The war on drugs was started by Nixon in '73. 35 years and hundreds of billions of dollars spent fighting this "war" later and we're no better off than we were when it started. I think that's a lose.

Legalize Now!