|
Dear Dr. Bill,
Bravo!!! I just read your article 'Supply
side efforts won't whip illegal drug problems.' (South
Bergenite, 12/13/00) Truer words were never written.
The prison "industry" grows and grows, while
Americans complacently go about their daily lives as
if nothing is wrong. You are correct. Too much money
is wasted (my word) on law enforcement and way too little
is spent on rehabilitation. Thank you for addressing
this issue in your column.
Christopher B., Sussex,
NJ (via e-mail)
|
|
Dear Christopher,
Thank you for your support. On October 4, 2000
this column carried an open letter as well as a personal
letter to each candidate for federal office, in which
I asked that "you and your staff conduct a thorough,
honest, independent appraisal of the drug situation
and see if you don't then agree with my view that the
present approach to the problem, in spite of the inflated
rhetoric about waging "war" on drugs, is inadequate."
I made it it perfectly clear that I do not advocate
a so called "legalization" of drugs, but that
I was urging them "to become actively, politically
involved and support a change in allocations in the
2001 drug budget to target drug-abuse education, treatment
and rehabilitation and an enlightened approach to law
enforcement." Did I get any response to my letter?
The answer is "no.... of course I didn't."
In the later column which caught your
attention, I applauded the California voters for approving
"Proposition #36" designed to treat instead
of imprisoning drug users who are stuffing the state's
jails and prisons. The initiative is narrowly drawn
to address only the most minor of drug crimes: simple
possession or use by nonviolent offenders. Thus,supporting
my professional opinion that non-violent addicts behind
bars belong in treatment centers, not in prison where
they learn to become better criminals. I concluded by
writing: "We've tried locking up drug offenders,
and all we've accomplished is to pack our prisons. It's
time to try attacking the drug problem itself, rather
than just the symptoms. That means treatment, not just
incarceration. Will our New Jersey legislature consider
a similar proposal? I hope so, but I doubt it."
The continued lack of a response supports the departing
statement by the drug czar, General McCaffrey, that
"our politicians, like a majority of Americans
who look at the problem are frightened and disgusted
by it and want to walk away from it" adding, however,
that "you can't , you've got to rationally deal
with it."
The fact that drug abuse or alcoholism
elicits more revulsion than sympathy is highlighted
by John Ashcroft, President Bush's choice for attorney
general who, in opposing any shift of government resources
from interdiction to treatment, has asserted that "a
government that makes such a shift is a government that
accommodates us at our lowest and least." This,
in spite of the fact that interdiction has been an abject
failure while alcohol and other drug treatment has proved
to be cost effective in reducing both use and crime.
This hard-line attitude by the new
head of our justice system will likely add fuel to the
perception of a lost "war" on drugs.... General
McCaffrey challenges the use of the "war"
metaphor as "a very deliberate, well-thought-out
strategy by drug legalization forces seeking public
acceptance of drug use (particularly pot) by convincing
them that it's a 'war' and it's lost and rational people
ought to move on." When talking about this in a
theoretical way, lots of educated, thoughtful people
may accept that but, McCaffrey adds, "when you
are confronted with the problem in your own home, business,
or community, that kind of logic evaporates."
The second largest money crop in the
U.S. today is marijuana (corn is first). Why the big
push to legalize pot? If you don't understand something,
think of money!!
|
