Defeating the Drug Problem: A Commentary

Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain have a coherent drug policy . The books I reference are Crime and Justice in America, The Honest Politician's Guide to Crime Control and Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs.

The difference between the two political viewpoints "Liberal and Conservative Theology" will be examined. The liberals and conservatives are guilty of using crime control theology to treat drug crime.

Crime Control Theology is the interaction of faith and legal practice in treating criminal activity. Both progressives and neoconservatives practice policy which border on religious belief. Neither of these belief systems is supported by empirical data. Despite a dramatic decrease in drug-related homicides after 1994, there has been a steady increase after 2001.Drug use and crime

Conservative Theology envisions a world of discipline and self control. Free will and rational choice reign supreme. They believe people (should) weigh the risks versus the rewards/punishment for an act. Punishment is moral and supposedly a practical element. Belief in family values, etc. However, America is not like a family. We are a fragmented society. We have different values, cultures, social status, etc. An example of this is the “Just say No” campaign. The root cause of crime is “moral poverty” as opposed to material poverty. The reality is in many impoverished neighborhoods incarceration is so prevalent; it no longer has its deterrent edge. Conservatives cannot punish criminals as a parent does a child because the analogy of parent/society to criminal/individual does not work. Instead of accepting empirical evidence, the conservative blames the criminal justice system. “The system is too meek, punishment is not severe enough.” The idea that criminals get off or beat the system is a key ideal of conservative theology. The death penalty and longer sentences does not effectively deter crime. The following information is from http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/John_McCain_Drugs.htm.

Administration is AWOL on the war on drugs

Of the four major candidates, McCain has expressed the most hawkish positions on drug policy. He wants to increase penalties for selling drugs, supports the death penalty for drug kingpins, favors tightening security to stop the flow of drugs into the country, and wants to restrict availability of methadone for heroin addicts. He said the Clinton administration was “AWOL on the war on drugs” and he would push for more money and military assistance to drug-supplying nations such as Colombia.

Source: Boston Globe, p. A21 Mar 5, 2000

Public/private partnerships for drug treatment

McCain indicates that federally sponsored drug education and drug treatment programs should be expanded. He says, “Work to expand public/private partnerships in support of such initiatives, and coordinate them with state and local efforts.”

Source: Vote-Smart.org 2000 NPAT Jan 13, 2000

Prevention & education apply to alcohol as well as marijuana

Q: How do you reconcile the tolerance for alcohol with the intolerance for marijuana?
A: I can’t support the legalization of marijuana. Scientific evidence indicates that the moment that it enters your body, one, it does damage, and second, it can become addictive. It is a gateway drug. There is a problem in American with alcohol abuse, and there’s no doubt about that. We have to do whatever we can to - prevention, education, and that applies to drugs too.

Source: Republican Debate at Dartmouth College Oct 29, 1999

We’re losing drug war - just say no

We’re losing the war on drugs. We ought to say, “It’s not a war anymore,” or we really ought to go after it. And there was a time in our history when we weren’t always losing the war on drugs. It was when Nancy Reagan had a very simple program called “Just Say No.” And young Americans were reducing the usage of drugs in America.

Source: Republican Debate at Dartmouth College Oct 29, 1999

McCain supports the following principles concerning illegal drugs:

• Increase penalties for selling illegal drugs
• Impose mandatory jail sentences for selling illegal drugs
• Impose capital punishment for convicted international drug traffickers
• Strengthen current laws dealing with non-controlled substances, including inhalants and commercially available pills
• Increase funding for border security to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the US

Here is how McCain voted. This information was gathered from http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53270&type=category&category=25&go.x=10&go.y=8

Date	Bill Title	Vote	Outcome
06/09/1998	Illegal Drug Amendment S 1415	Y	Amendment Adopted - Senate (52 - 46)
03/20/1997	U.S.- Mexico Drug Trafficking Prevention Amendment H J Res 58	Y	Amendment Adopted - Senate (94 - 5)

Liberal Theology views crime in a social context. Criminal behavior is largely the result of social influences (family, friends, and the environment). They want to alter such influences. There is a belief in rehabilitation and collective responsibility. Rehabilitative initiatives include reform due to the over zealous nature of the criminal justice system. An overall emphasis upon criminal procedure is at hand. They believe human behavior can be changed through a formal treatment program, although treatment usually doesn’t help. There is less of a focus on individual responsibility. Rehabilitation programs are designed to provide a structured set of influences that will shape the offender’s behavior in a positive direction. “Liberals favor community-based alternatives to imprisonment because they represent a healthier environment than prison. Supervised probation and parole are designed to provide positive external influences. Basic education and vocational training programs, meanwhile, are designed to equip the offender for success in life. Liberals are as guilty of wishful thinking as conservatives.” (Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs p20) The premise is that behavior can be altered by a treatment program. In the 19^th century, man invented the prison to reform offenders. This failed. Then reformers invented parole and the intermediate sentence which did not solve the crime issue either. Now reformers try group counseling, intensive supervision, etc. which have no empirical evidence of consistent results in deterring drug-related crime.

Conservatives blame problems on loop holes in the system. However, liberals are guilty of blaming everything on overly harsh punishment. They ignore the individual’s role in the crimes committed.

Here is Obama’s take on the issue of drugs.

According to http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490, there are no votes from Obama on the drug issue. I suppose he was not in the Senate long enough to vote on such issues? Well, at least he cosponsored some legislation. Nevertheless, we have quotes from http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Drugs.htm.

Obama co-sponsored requiring chemical resellers to certify against meth use:

Sen. FEINSTEIN: This act is designed to address problems that the Drug Enforcement Administration, DEA, has identified in the implementation of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005. The bill that I introduce today would:

• clarify that all retailers, including mail order retailers, who sell products that contain chemicals often used to make methamphetamine--like ephedrine, pseudoepedrine and phenylpropanolamine--must self-certify that they have trained their personnel and will comply with the Combat Meth Act's requirements;
• require distributors to sell these products only to retailers who have certified that they will comply with the law;
• require the DEA to publish the list of all retailers who have filed self-certifications, on the DEA's website;
• and clarify that any retailer who negligently fails to file self-certification as required, may be subject to civil fines and penalties.

The Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act that we passed last year has been a resounding success. The number of methamphetamine labs in the United States has declined dramatically now that the ingredients used to make methamphetamine are harder to get. Fewer meth labs means more than just less illegal drug production. In 2003, 3,663 children were reported exposed to toxic meth labs nationwide--but so far this year, the number of exposed children is only 319.

This is a common-sense bill, designed to strengthen the implementation of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act. This bill would create incentives to ensure that the self-certification process of the law is made both effective and enforceable. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Source: Combat Methamphetamine Enhancement Act (S.2071) 2007-S2071 on Sep 19, 2007

I pose a question. Has this bill done anything OTHER than make it more difficult for citizens to purchase cough medicine? Is there any empirical evidence to support the purpose of this legislation?

Deal with street-level drug dealing as minimum-wage affair

We need to tackle the nexus of unemployment and crime in the inner city. The conventional wisdom is that most unemployed inner-city men could find jobs if they really wanted to work; that they inevitably prefer drug dealing, with its attendant risks but potential profits, to the low-paying jobs that their lack of skill warrants. In fact, economists who've studied the issue--and the young men whose fates are at stake--will tell you that the costs and benefits of the street life don't match the popular mythology: At the bottom or even the middle ranks of the industry, drug dealing is a minimum-wage affair. For many inner-city men, what prevents gainful employment is not simply the absence of motivation to get off the streets but the absence of a job history or any marketable skills--and, increasingly, the stigma of a prison record.

We can assume that with lawful work available for young men now in the drug trade, crime in any community would drop.

Employment alone is not enough Senator. We need programs. We need education. We need public representatives of these districts to step up to the plate.

2001: questions harsh penalties for drug dealing

In 2001, Obama questioned the harsh penalties for drug dealing, noting that selling 15 tablets of Ecstasy was the same class of felony as raping a woman at knifepoint. In 2002, Obama sponsored an unsuccessful measure to create an employment grant program for edx-criminals, who often return to a life of crime because no one will hire them.

THE PROBLEM

• Disparities Continue to Plague Criminal Justice System: African Americans and Hispanics are more than twice as likely as whites to be searched & arrested when stopped by police. Disparities in drug sentencing laws, like the differential treatment of crack as opposed to powder cocaine, are unfair.

OBAMA'S PLAN

• Expand Use of Drug Courts: Obama will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.
• Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support: Obama will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society.
• Eliminate Sentencing Disparities:The disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.

Obama is on the right track here. However, Obama's policy is not enough to challenge the American drug issue.

Decriminalization is the first principle in deterring drug crime and drug-related crime. Many health and criminal justice experts believe alcohol and drug abuse are psychological and sociological issues which should not be met by the criminal justice system. “We do not have convincing evidence of a program or policy that has been proven effective in reducing drug abuse and crime associated with drugs. Politicians continually restate the same old policies (“longer prison terms,” “more treatment”) without any evidence regarding their effectiveness.” (Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs p.275)

The drug issue is similar to other political issues. There is no clear, solitary political solution. A synthesis of conservative and progressive ideologies, in addition to decriminalization, may be a better solution to the long term drug problem in America.