War on Drugs 1181646 226090819 2008-07-16T19:58:31Z 71.102.126.237 /* Legislation of desire */ {{for|the [[Barenaked Ladies]] song "War on Drugs"|Everything to Everyone}} {{mergeto|Drug policy of the United States|date=June 2008}} {{globalize/USA}} The '''War on Drugs''' is a [[prohibition (drugs)|prohibition]] campaign undertaken by the [[United States]] government with the assistance of participating countries, intended to reduce the [[illegal drug trade]]—to curb supply and diminish demand for certain [[psychoactive substance]]s deemed "harmful or undesirable" by the government. This initiative includes a set of laws and policies that are intended to discourage the production, distribution, and consumption of targeted substances. The term was first used by President [[Richard Nixon]] in 1971, and his choice of words was probably based on the [[War on Poverty]], announced by President [[Lyndon Johnson]] in 1964. ==History== In the broadest sense, modern War on Drugs could be considered to have started in 1880, when the U.S. and [[Qing Dynasty|Qing China]] completed an agreement that prohibited the shipment of [[opium]] between the two countries; Qing China itself was still reeling from the effects of fighting the [[Opium War]] after a failed attempt to stem the British importing of opium into [[China proper]] (see [[Lin Zexu]]). [[Prohibition in the United States|The United States alcohol prohibition]] from 1920–1933 is the most widely known historical period of drug prohibition. The term itself, however, was coined in 1971 by [[Richard Nixon]] to describe a new set of initiatives designed to enhance drug prohibition. ===Timeline=== '''1911''': United States first Opium Commissioner argues that of all the nations of the world, the United States consumes most habit-forming drugs per capita. <ref>[http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/e1910/worstfiend.htm Edward Marshall: UNCLE SAM IS THE WORST DRUG FIEND IN THE WORLD, New York Times 1911] </ref> '''1914''': The first recorded instance of the United States enacting a ban on the domestic distribution of drugs is the [[Harrison Act|Harrison Narcotic Act]] [http://www.druglibrary.org/SCHAFFER/history/e1910/harrisonact.htm] of 1914. This act was presented and passed as a method of regulating the production and distribution of opiate-containing substances under the [[commerce clause]] of the U.S. Constitution, but a [http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/cu/cu8.html section] of the act was later interpreted by law enforcement officials for the purpose of prosecuting doctors who prescribe opiates to addicts. '''1919''': [[Prohibition in the United States|Alcohol prohibition]] in the U.S. first appeared under numerous provincial bans and was eventually codified under a federal [[Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|constitutional amendment]] in 1919, having been approved by 36 of the 48 U.S. states. '''1925''': [[United States]] supported regulation of cannabis as a drug in the [[International Opium Convention]].<ref>[http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/e1920/willoughby.htm W.W. Willoughby: Opium as an international problem, Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins Press, 1925]</ref> and by the mid 1930s all member states had some regulation of cannabis. '''1933''': [[Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution]] is repealed. The amendment remains the only major act of prohibition to be repealed, having been repealed by the [[Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution]]. '''1935''' President Roosevelt hails the [[International Opium Convention]] and application of it in US. law in a radio message to the nation. <ref>[http://www.druglibrary.net/schaffer/History/e1930/rooseveltasks.htm ROOSEVELT ASKS NARCOTIC WAR AID, 1935]</ref> '''1937''': Congress passed the [[1937 Marijuana Tax Act|Marijuana Tax Act]]. Presented as a $1 nuisance tax on the distribution of marijuana, this act required anyone distributing the drug to maintain and submit a [http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/mjtaxact.htm detailed account] of his or her transactions, including inspections, affidavits, and private information regarding the parties involved. This law, however, was something of a "[[Catch-22 (logic)|Catch-22]]", as obtaining a tax stamp required individuals to first present their goods, which was an action tantamount to confession. This act was passed by Congress on the basis of testimony and public perception that marijuana caused [http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm insanity, criminality, and death]. '''1951''': The 1951 Boggs Act increased penalties fourfold '''1956''': The Daniel Act increased penalties by a factor of eight over those specified in the Boggs Act. Although by this time there was adequate testimony to refute the claim that marijuana caused insanity, criminality, or death, the rationalizations for these laws shifted in focus to the proposition that marijuana use led to the use of heroin, creating the [[Gateway drug|gateway drug theory]]. '''1960s''': The Kennedy and Johnson Administrations adapted relatively liberal drug policies in the 1960s. The 1960s is remembered for its "Flower Power" culture and frequent and open use of marijuana and other drugs. '''1969''': Psychiatrist Dr. Robert DuPont conducts [[urinalysis]] of everyone entering the D.C. jail system in August of 1969. He finds 44% test positive for heroin.<ref name="dwarcr"/> '''1971''': The Vietnam War is linked with concerns over drugs. *May: Congressmen Robert Steele (R-CT) and Morgan Murphy (D-IL) release an explosive report on the growing heroin epidemic among U.S. servicemen in Vietnam.<ref name="dwarcr"/> [[Image:US incarceration timeline.gif|thumb|Some who prosecuted the War on Drugs now believe it caused a large increase in the [[United States incarceration rate]].<ref>[http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/87702 "I Was Wrong About the War on Drugs -- It's a Failure"]. By [[Bob Barr]]. June 11, 2008. [[AlterNet]].</ref>]] *[[June 17]]: Nixon declares war on drugs.<ref name="dwarcr"/> He characterized the abuse of illicit substances as "public enemy number one in the United States". Under Nixon, the U.S. Congress passed the [[Controlled Substances Act]] of 1970. This legislation is the foundation on which the modern drug war exists. Responsibility for enforcement of this new law was given to the [[Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs]] and then in 1973 to the newly formed [[Drug Enforcement Administration]]. During the Nixon era, for the only time in the history of the war on drugs, the majority of funding goes towards treatment, rather than law enforcement.<ref name="dwarcr">[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/cron/ Thirty years of america's drug war: a chronology]</ref> *Later in the month the U.S. military announces they will begin urinalysis of all returning servicemen. The program goes into effect in September and the results are favorable: "only" 4.5% of the soldiers test positive for heroin.<ref name="dwarcr"/> '''1972''', [[March 22]]: The National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse recommends legalizing possession and sales of small amounts of marijuana. Nixon and the Congress ignores the suggestion<ref>[http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5097 Nixon Commission Report Advising Decriminalization of Marijuana Celebrates 30th Anniversary - NORML<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> '''1974''': A Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, chaired by Sen. [[James Eastland| James O. Eastland]] on The Marihuana-hashish epidemic and its impact on United States security invited 21 scientists of the first rank from seven different countries to testify, including [[Gabriel G. Nahas]] and [[Nils Bejerot]]. The testimony of these experts showed that the evidence accumulated by scientific researchers on marijuana had turned dramatically against this drug.<ref>[http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/1986/01b.html Reed Irvine: THE MEDIA AS DRUG PROMOTERS, AIM Report January 1986]</ref><ref name="congre">[http://ia311312.us.archive.org/3/items/marihuanahashish00unit/marihuanahashish00unit.pdf Marihuana-hashish epidemic and its impact on United States security : hearings before the Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration of the Internal Security Act and Other Internal Security Laws of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Ninety-third Congress, second session [-Ninety-fourth Congress, first session] .. (1974)]</ref> '''1988''': Near the end of the Reagan administration, the [[Office of National Drug Control Policy]] was created for central coordination of drug-related legislative, security, diplomatic, research and health policy throughout the government. In recognition of his central role, the director of ONDCP is commonly known as the ''[[Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy|Drug Czar]]''. The position was raised to cabinet-level status by [[Bill Clinton]] in 1993. '''1989''' The first [[drug court]] in the U.S. took shape in Miami-Dade County, Florida '''1993''', [[December 7]]: [[Joycelyn Elders]], the [[Surgeon General of the United States|Surgeon General]], said that the legalization of drugs "should be studied", causing a stir among opponents '''1998''': The [[National Research Council]] (NRC) commissions such a study, establishing a Committee on Data and Research for Policy on Illegal Drugs. '''2001''': The National Research Council Committee on Data and Research for Policy on Illegal Drugs publishes its findings. The NRC Committee finds that existing studies on efforts to address drug usage and smuggling, from U.S. military operations to eradicate coca fields in Colombia, to domestic drug treatment centers, have all been inconclusive, if the programs have been evaluated at all: "The existing drug-use monitoring systems are strikingly inadequate to support the full range of policy decisions that the nation must make...It is unconscionable for this country to continue to carry out a public policy of this magnitude and cost without any way of knowing whether and to what extent it is having the desired effect."<ref>[http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:BF_QQZiMZggJ:www.dpeg.org/dpeg_2001_spg.pdf+charles+manski+scathing&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=safari Drug Policy News], Drug Policy Education Group, Vol. 2 No.1, Spring/Summer 2001, p.5</ref> The study, though not ignored by the press, is almost entirely ignored by policymakers, leading Committee Chair [[Charles Manski]] to conclude, as one observer notes, that "the drug war has no interest in its own results." <ref>[http://www.drugsense.org/dsw/2001/ds01.n215.html "Weekly News in Review"], DrugSense Weekly, August 31, 2001 #215</ref> ==Cost== The U.S. government estimates the cost of the War on Drugs by calculating the funds used in attempting to control the supply of illegal drugs, in paying government employees involved in waging the war on drugs, and to satisfy rehabilitation costs. This total was estimated by the federal U.S. government's cost report on drug control to be roughly $12 billion in 2005. Additionally, in a separate report, the U.S. government reports that the cost of incarcerating drug law offenders was $30.1 billion—$9.1 billion for police protection, $4.5 billion for legal adjudication, and $11.0 billion for state and federal corrections. In total, roughly $45.5 billion was spent in 2005 for these factors.<ref name="06BUDGET"> {{cite web | author = | year =February 2005 | url =http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/policy/06budget/06budget.pdf | title =National Drug Control Strategy—Budget summary| | format = | work =PDF | publisher =White House | accessmonthday =January 5 | accessyear =2007 }}</ref> The socioeconomic costs, as well as the individual costs (i.e., the personal disadvantages in income and career), caused by the incarceration of millions of people are not included in this number. Nor are the many real wars fought in the name of the "War on Drugs" included. In 1998, the total cost of drug abuse in America was estimated at $143.4 billion.<ref name="ABUSECOSTS"> {{cite web | author = | year =September 2001 | url =http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/pdf/economic_costs98.pdf | title =The Economic Costs of Drug Abuse in The United States 1992–1998| | format = | work =PDF | publisher =Office of National Drug Control Policy | accessmonthday =January 5 | accessyear =2007 }}</ref> This number, however, includes indirect costs and some costs of drug policy enforcement, so it is not directly comparable. ==Effects== Drug use has increased in all categories since prohibition <ref name="MonitoringTheFuture">[http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/new.html Monitoring The Future]</ref> except that [[opium]] use is at a fraction of its peak level, although this is not an effect of the War on Drugs. The big decline in use of opium started already after the [[Harrison Narcotics Tax Act|Harrison Act]] of 1914.<ref>[http://www.nida.nih.gov/PDF/DARHW/033-052_Kandall.pdf Stephen R. Kandall, M.D.:Women and Addiction in the United States—1850 to 1920]</ref> By 1937, the use of marijuana, once an activity seemingly limited to Mexican immigrants and jazz musicians,<ref>[http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm Charles White bread: The History of the Non-Medical Use of Drugs in the United States]</ref> has become one undertaken by up to 50% of the youth of the United States.<ref name="MonitoringTheFuture"/> The big growth in use of marijuana happened however in the 1960s, well before the start of the war on drugs in 1971. President Richard Nixon stated that the increased drug use and drug related crime in the decade before 1971 was the cause for the war on drugs. Between 1972 and 1988 the use of cocaine increased more than fivefold.<ref>[http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR331/ Controlling Cocaine: Supply Versus Demand Programs]</ref> The usage patterns of the current two most prevalent drugs, amphetamines and ecstasy, have shown similar gains.<ref name="MonitoringTheFuture" /> [[Image:Drugs-PriceMarkUp2.jpg|thumb|400 px|A basic economic problem of unintended consequences: '''Large profits and markups associated with the very illegality of illicit drugs, helps fuel the business which the "war on drugs" was constructed to stop.''' In this way, the war on drugs assists illicit drug trade. [http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/strategy/work_areas/drugs.aspx UK Govt report]]] It was, however, successful in reducing the amount of marijuana being illegally imported into the United States. [[Unintended consequence]]s{{Fact|date=May 2008}} of the War on Drugs include increased potency and growth of marijuana crops ''within'' the United States, and an increase in cocaine smuggling which is easier to move and yields a higher profit margin. A number of economically-depressed Colombian farmers in several remote areas of their country began to turn to what became a new, illicit [[cash crop]] for its high resale value and cheap manufacturing process. Local [[coca]] cultivation, however, remained comparatively rare in Colombia until the mid-1990s. Drug traffickers originally imported most coca base from traditional producers in [[Peru]] and [[Bolivia]] for processing in Colombia, continuing to do so until eradication efforts in those countries resulted in a "[[balloon effect]]". Despite the Reagan administration's high-profile public pronouncements, secretly, many senior officials of the Reagan administration illegally trained and armed the [[Nicaraguan]] [[Contras]], which they funded by the shipment of large quantities of cocaine into the United States using U.S. government aircraft and U.S. military facilities.<ref name="archive">{{cite web | title = The Contras, Cocaine, and Covert Operations / Documentation of Official U.S. Knowledge of Drug Trafficking and the Contras |publisher= The National Security Archive, The George Washington University| curl = |url = http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/nsaebb2.htm | accessioning = July 22 | access year = 2006 }}</ref><ref name = "whiteout"> {{cite book | last = Cock burn | first = Alexander | author link = | coauthors = Jeffrey St. Clair | year = 1998 | title = '''Whiteout, the CIA, Drugs and the Press''' | publisher = Verso | location = New York | id = ISBN 1-85984-258-5 }} </ref> Funding for the Contras was also obtained through the illegal sale of weaponry to [[Iran]].<ref>[http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/nsaebb2.htm The Contras, Cocaine, and Covert Operations<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref><ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/06/29/reviews/iran-transcript.html Excerpts From the Iran-Contra Report: A Secret Foreign Policy<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> When this practice was discovered and condemned in the media, it was referred to as the [[Iran-Contra]] affair. In 1996, 56% of California voters voted for [[California Proposition 215 (1996)|Proposition 215]], legalizing the growing and use of [[cannabis (drug)|marijuana]] for [[Medical cannabis|medical purposes]]. This created significant legal and policy tensions between the federal and state governments. Courts have since decided that state laws in conflict with a federal law about cannabis are not valid. Cannabis is restricted by federal law (see [[Gonzales v. Raich]]). Regardless of public opinion, marijuana could be the single most targeted drug in the drug war. It constitutes almost half of all drug arrests, and between 1990–2002, out of the overall drug arrests, 82% of the increase was for marijuana. In this same time period, New York experienced an increase of 2,640% for marijuana possession arrests.{{Fact|date=April 2007}} Less than 1 % of all state prison inmates are serving time for just marijuana possession. <ref>[http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/pdf/mj_rev.pdf DEA: What America need to know about Marijuana]</ref> As of 2006, marijuana has become the United States of America's biggest cash crop in terms of revenues.<ref name="Americas_top_cash_crop">{{cite web | url =http://www.drugscience.org/Archive/bcr2/intro.html | title =Marijuana is US's biggest cash crop | accessioning =October 8 | accessyear =2007 }}</ref> === U.S. comparison to other countries === Official agencies and departments tasked with implementing drug policies, such as the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, have published several reports which indicate several other countries with restrictive drug policies, for example Finland, Japan, Norway and Sweden, have for decades produced significantly better results than the U.S. (lower prevalence for use of different drugs, fewer citizens imprisoned for drug crimes).<ref>[http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/WDR-2007.html UNODC World drug report 2007]</ref><ref name="UNODCrep">[http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/Swedish_drug_control.pdf UNODC: Sweden's successful drug policy, 2007]</ref><ref>[http://www.unodc.org/documents/wdr/WDR_2008/WDR2008_Statistical_Annex_Consumption.pdf UNODC: World Drug Report, Consumtion, 2008]</ref><ref>[http://fiordiliji.sourceoecd.org/pdf/factbook2008/302008011e-11-03-03.pdf OECD FACTBOOK 2008 – ISBN 978-92-64-04054-0, 2008]</ref> ==United States domestic policy== {{seealso|Drug policy of the United States}} [[Image:DEA Operation Mallorca, 2005.jpg|caption|frame|Operation Mallorca, U.S. [[Drug Enforcement Administration]], 2005 ([http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/pressrel/pr061405.html US Department of Justice press release])]] For U.S. public policy purposes, [[drug abuse]] is any personal use of a drug contrary to law. The definition includes otherwise-legal [[pharmaceutical]]s if they are obtained by illegal means or used for non-medicinal purposes. This differs from what mental health professionals classify as drug abuse per the [[DSM-IV]], which is defined as more problematic drug misuse, both of which are different from [[drug use]]. In 1994, it was reported that the War on Drugs results in the incarceration of one million Americans each year.<ref>{{cite journal|author=[[Lester Grinspoon]], M.D.& James B. Bakalar, J.D.|url=http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/330/5/357|title=The War on Drugs—A Peace Proposal|publisher=[[New England Journal of Medicine]]|date=February 3, 1994|num=5|pages=357–360|volume=330}}</ref> Of the related drug arrests, about 225,000 are for simple possession of [[cannabis (drug)|marijuana]], the fourth most common cause of arrest in the United States.<ref>[[Federal Bureau of Investigation]]. Crime in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1991.</ref> In the 1980s, while the number of arrests for all crimes was rising 28%, the number of arrests for drug offenses rose 126%.<ref>Austin J, McVey AD. The 1989 NCCD prison population forecast: the impact of the war on drugs. San Francisco: National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 1989.</ref> The United States has a higher proportion of its population incarcerated than any other country in the world for which reliable statistics are available, reaching a total of 2.2 million inmates in the U.S. in 2005. The U.S. Dept. of Justice, reporting on the effects of state initiatives, has stated that, from 1990 through 2000, "the increasing number of drug offenses accounted for 27% of the total growth among black inmates, 7% of the total growth among Hispanic inmates, and 15% of the growth among white inmates." In addition, the United States provides for the deportation of many non-citizens convicted of drug offenses.<ref>[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=774866 Jeff Yates, Gabriel J. Chin & Todd Collins, A War on Drugs or a War on Immigrants? Expanding the Definition of 'Drug Trafficking' in Determining Aggravated Felon Status for Non-Citizens, 64 Maryland Law Review 875 (1995)]</ref> Federal and state policies also impose [[Collateral consequences of criminal charges|collateral consequences]] on those convicted of drug offenses, such as denial of public benefits or licenses, that that are not applicable to those convicted of other types of crime. <ref>Gabriel J. Chin, ''Race, The War on Drugs, and the Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction,'' [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=390109 6 Journal of Gender, Race & Justice 253 (2002)]</ref> ==United States foreign policy== {{main|Foreign policy of the United States}} {{US involvement in Colombia‎}} [[Operation Just Cause]] involving 25,000 American troops. The U.S. alleged that Gen. [[Manuel Noriega]], head of government of Panama, was involved in drug trafficking in [[Panama]]. As part of [[Plan Colombia]], the U.S. has funded [[coca eradication]] through private contractors such as [[DynCorp]] and helped train the Colombian armed forces to eradicate coca and fight left-wing guerrillas such as the [[FARC]] (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) and right-wing paramilitaries such as the [[AUC]] (United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia), both of which have been accused of participating in the illegal drug trade in their areas of influence. Private U.S. enterprises have signed contracts to carry out anti-drug activities as part of Plan Colombia. [[DynCorp]], the largest private company involved, was among those contracted by the State Department, while others signed contracts with the Defense Department.<ref>''[http://www.colectivodeabogados.org/article.php3?id_article=1253 Private Security Transnational Enterprises in Colombia]'' [[José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers' Collective]] February, 2008.</ref> In 2000, the Clinton administration initially waived all but one of the human rights conditions attached to Plan Colombia, considering such aid as crucial to national security at the time.<ref name="doug"> {{cite book | last=Stokes | first=Doug| title=[http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/54324.html America's Other War: Terrorizing Colombia] | publisher=Zed Books | year=2005 | isbn=1-84277-547-2}} p.&nbsp;99</ref> Subsequently, the U.S. government certified that the Colombian government had taken steps to improve respect for human rights and to prosecute abusers among its security forces.<ref name="CERTIFY">{{cite web| url =http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/9891.htm| title =Colombia: Determination and Certification of Colombian Armed Forces with Respect to Human Rights-Related Conditions| accessdate =2006-06-23| last =Boucher| first =Richard| date =2002-05-01| publisher =U.S. Embassy in Colombia}}</ref> The U.S. has later denied aid to individual Colombian military units accused of such abuses, such as the Palanquero Air Force base and the Army's XVII Brigade.<ref name="AIRBASE"> {{cite web |url=http://www.laborrights.org/press/oxy_052604.htm |title=The nation is sentenced to pay 2000 million pesos to the victims of the attack on Santo Domingo |accessdate= |accessmonthday= |accessdaymonth= |accessyear= |author=El Tiempo |date=2004-05-24 |work= |publisher=International Labor Rights Forum}}</ref><ref name="XVII">{{cite web |url=http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/colombia/doc/brigxvii1.html |title=El senado norteamericano pone objeciones a la Brigada XVII por violaciones graves al derecho internacional humanitario |author=Equipo Nizkor and Derechos Human Rights |date=2005-12-11 |language=Spanish}}</ref> Opponents of aid given to the Colombian military as part of the War on Drugs argue that the U.S. and Colombian governments primarily focus on fighting the guerrillas, devoting less attention to the paramilitaries although these have a greater degree of participation in the illicit drug industry. Critics argue that Human Rights Watch, congressional committees and other entities have documented the existence of connections between members of the Colombian military and the AUC, and that Colombian military personnel have committed human rights abuses which would make them ineligible for U.S. aid under current laws. In January 2007, [[United States Attorney General|U.S. Attorney General]] [[Alberto Gonzales]] met in [[Mexico]] with his counterpart [[Eduardo Medina-Mora Icaza]] to discuss ways to stem growing drug-related violence in Mexican [[border town]]s associated with the [[illegal drug trade]] to America. More than 2,000 Mexicans died in [[gang]]land-style killings in 2006, prompting a petition by the U.S. [[Drug Enforcement Administration]] to open new offices in [[Nuevo Laredo]], [[Matamoros, Tamaulipas|Matamoros]], and [[Nogales, Sonora|Nogales]]. The requested expansion would bring the total number of Mexican offices to 11 and increase the number of DEA agents from 81 to nearly 100.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/world/4465264.html|title=Attorneys general cite shared responsibility|date=2007-01-11 | last=Lloyd |first=Marion |publisher=[[Houston Chronicle]]}}</ref> === Merida Initiative=== The [[Mérida Initiative]] is a security cooperation approved on June 30, 2008 between the [[United States]] and the government of [[Mexico]] and the countries of [[Central America]], with the aim of combating the threats of drug trafficking and transnational crime. The Merida Initiative will appropriate $1.4 billion in a three year commitment to the Mexican government for military and law enforcement training and equipment, as well as technical advice and training to strengthen the national justice systems. No weapons are included in the plan.<ref>[http://www.janes.com/news/defence/business/jdw/jdw071211_1_n.shtml Mexico's 2008 defence budget goes under review]</ref><ref> [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10180.html Bush pushes Mexico money in Iraq bill]</ref> ===U.S. government alleged involvement in cocaine trafficking=== A lawsuit filed in 1986 by two [[journalist]]s represented by the [[Christic Institute]] alleged that the [[Central Intelligence Agency]] (CIA) and other parties were engaged in criminal acts, including financing the purchase of arms with the proceeds of cocaine sales.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://foia.fbi.gov/christic_institute/christic_institute.pdf |title=Subject: Christic Institute |year=1987 |format=PDF |work=Lawsuit: Tony Avirgan and Martha Honey v. John Hull, ''et al.'' |publisher=[[Federal Bureau of Investigation]]}}</ref> [[US Senate|Senator]] [[John Kerry]]'s 1988 [[U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations]] report on Contra drug links, which was released on [[April 20]], [[1989]], concluded that members of the U.S. State Department "who provided support for the Contras were involved in drug trafficking...and elements of the Contras themselves knowingly received financial and material assistance from drug traffickers."<ref name = "whiteout">{{cite book | last = Cockburn | first = Alexander | authorlink = Alexander Cockburn | coauthors = [[Jeffrey St. Clair]] | title = Whiteout, the CIA, drugs and the press | publisher = [[Verso]] | year= 1998 | location = [[NYC|New York]] | isbn = 1-85984-258-5 }}</ref> The report went on to say that "the Contra drug links included...payments to drug traffickers by the U.S. State Department of funds authorized by the Congress for humanitarian assistance to the Contras, in some cases after the traffickers had been indicted by federal law enforcement agencies on drug charges, in others while traffickers were under active investigation by these same agencies." In 1996, journalist [[Gary Webb]] published reports in the [[San Jose Mercury News]],<ref>{{cite news | last = Webb | first = Gary | title = Iran-Contra articles | publisher = [[San Jose Mercury News]] | year= 1996 | url = http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/webb.html }}</ref> and later in his book ''[[Dark Alliance]]'',<ref> {{cite book | last = Webb | first = Gary | title = Dark alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the crack cocaine explosion | publisher = [[Seven Stories Press|Seven Stories]] | year= 1998 | isbn = 1-888363-68-1 }} </ref> detailing how Contras had distributed [[crack cocaine]] into [[Los Angeles]] to fund weapons purchases. These reports were initially attacked by various other newspapers, which attempted to debunk the link, citing official reports that apparently cleared the CIA. In 1998, CIA [[Inspector General]] [[Frederick Hitz]] published a two-volume report<ref>{{cite paper | author = Frederick Hitz | title = CIA Inspector General report into allegations of connections between the CIA and the Contras in cocaine trafficking to the United States | publisher = [[CIA]] | year= 1998 | url = https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/cocaine/report/index.html }}</ref> that substantiated many of Webb's claims, and described how 50 Contras and Contra-related entities involved in the drug trade had been protected from law enforcement activity by the [[Reagan-Bush administration]], and documented a cover-up of evidence relating to these incidents. The report also showed that the National Security Council was aware of these activities. A report later that same year by the [[United States Department of Justice|Justice Department]] Inspector General also came to similar conclusions. ===U.S.-sponsored heroin production and smuggling=== In the 1980s, top U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officials believed that they would never be able to justify a multibillion-dollar budget from the U.S. government to fund the Afghan Muslim radicals, the mujahideen, in their fight against the Soviet army, which had occupied Afghanistan. As a result, the Mujahideen decided to generate funds through the poppy-rich Afghan soil and heroin production and smuggling to finance the Afghan war creating the notorious [[Pashtun Mafia]]. [[Ayub Afridi]], a radical [[Pashtun]] Muslim leader and drug baron, was the kingpin of this plan.<ref> Asia Times, Dec. 4, 2001, http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/CL04Df01.html </ref> ==Criticism== {{worldwide|date=October 2007}} ===Negative=== ====Legitimacy==== {{"|We're playing with half a deck as long as we tolerate that the cardinals of government and science should dictate where human curiousity can legitimately send its attention and where it can not. It's an essentially preposterous situation. It is essentially a civil rights issue, because what we're talking about here is the repression of a religious sensibility. In fact, not ''a'' religious sensibility, ''the'' religious sensibility.|[[Terence McKenna]] in: ''Non-Ordinary States Through Vision Plants'', Sound Photosynthesis, Mill Valley CA., 1988, ISBN 1-569-64709-7}} {{"|The government has been actively destroying crop fields in which marijuana is suspected to have been growing—however, punitive measures such as long prison sentences for drug offenders does not actually decrease the demand for the drug. If anything, its banned status gives it a certain "appeal" that actually makes it more attractive to people. With artificially low supply and high demand, the cartels profit dramatically, and with dealers competing for the "turf," which is often the nation's inner cities, to sell these highly valuable products, violence often erupts.|Petition from http://www.legalreefer.com"}} ====Legality==== In his essay ''The Drug War and the Constitution'',<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.paulhager.org/libertarian/drug_con.html |title=The Drug War and the Constitution |last=Hager |first=Paul |year=1991 |work=The Libertarian Corner}}</ref> Libertarian philosopher Paul Hager makes the case that the War on Drugs in the United States is an illegal form of prohibition, which violates the principles of a limited government embodied in the [[United States Constitution|Constitution]]. [[Prohibition in the United States|Alcohol prohibition]] required [[Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|amending the Constitution]], because this was not a power granted to the federal government. Hager asserts if this is true, then [[Prohibition (drugs)|marijuana prohibition]] should likewise require a Constitutional amendment. =====Federalist argument===== In her dissent in ''[[Gonzales v. Raich]]'', [[Sandra Day O'Connor|Justice Sandra Day O'Connor]] argued that drug prohibition is an improper usurpation of the [[commerce clause|power to regulate interstate commerce]], and the power to prohibit should be [[states rights|reserved by the states]]. In the same case, Justice [[Clarence Thomas]] wrote a stronger dissent expressing the similar idea. =====Substantive due process===== Another argument against drug prohibition is based on the notion that its practice violates implicit rights within the [[substantive due process]] doctrine. It has been suggested that anti-drug laws do not achieve enough reasonable benefit to State interests to justify arbitrarily restricting basic individual liberties that are supposed to be guaranteed by the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments to the US Constitution. One proponent of this notion is attorney [[Warren Redlich]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.redlichlaw.com/crim/substantive-due-process-drug-war.pdf |title=A Substantive Due Process Challenge to the War on Drugs |last=Redlich |first=Warren |authorlink=Warren Redlich |date=2005-02-05 |format=PDF |quote=It is true that the approach suggested in this paper would limit police power. Constitutional protection of individual rights exists for that very purpose. We face coercive government action, carried out in a corrupt and racist manner, with military and paramilitary assaults on our homes, leading to mass incarceration and innocent deaths. We can never forget the tyranny of a government unrestrained by an independent judiciary. Our courts must end the War on Drugs.}}</ref> The substantive due process argument is sometimes used in [[medical marijuana]] cases. [[NORML]] once wrote in an [[amicus brief]] on ''[[United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative]]'' that the right to use [[medical marijuana]] to save one's life is within the rights established by the substantive due process.<ref> [http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=4950 Amicus brief] NORML </ref> However, the Supreme Court, expressing its verdict through Justice Clarence Thomas, refused to accept the argument, and ruled against the medical marijuana dispensaries. Some opponents of the substantive due process doctrine who support the War on Drugs have noted that the doctrine could potentially lead to the invalidation of anti-drug laws.<ref> [http://www.boalt.org/bjcl/v8/v8tennenprint.htm Is the Constitution in Harm's Way? Substantive Due Process and Criminal Law] Eric Tennen </ref> ====Efficacy==== [[Image:Rentz vs Narcotics Smugglers.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[[USS Rentz (FFG-46)]] combats a fire set by drug smugglers trying to escape and destroy evidence.]] [[Richard Davenport-Hines]], in his book ''The Pursuit of Oblivion'' (W.W. Norton & Company, 2001), criticized the efficacy of the War on Drugs by pointing out: {{"|10–15% of illicit heroin and 30% of illicit cocaine is intercepted. Drug traffickers have gross profit margins of up to 300%. At least 75% of illicit drug shipments would have to be intercepted before the traffickers' profits were hurt.}} [[Alberto Fujimori]], president of [[Peru]] from 1990–2000, described U.S. foreign drug policy as "failed" on grounds that "for 10 years, there has been a considerable sum invested by the Peruvian government and another sum on the part of the American government, and this has not led to a reduction in the supply of coca leaf offered for sale. Rather, in the 10 years from 1980 to 1990, it grew 10-fold."<ref>Don Podesta and Douglas Farah, "Drug Policy in Andes Called Failure," ''[[Washington Post]]'', March 27, 1993</ref> Critics often note that during [[Prohibition in the United States|alcohol prohibition]], alcohol use initially fell but began to increase as early as 1922. It has been extrapolated that even if prohibition hadn't been repealed in 1933, alcohol consumption would have quickly surpassed pre-prohibition levels <ref>[http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-157.html Alcohol Prohibition Was a Failure<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>. They argue that the War on Drugs uses similar measures and is no more effective. In the six years from 2000–2006, the USA spent $4.7 billion on [[Plan Colombia]], an effort to eradicate coca production in Colombia. The main result of this effort was to shift coca production into more remote areas and force other forms of adaptation. The overall acreage cultivated for coca in Colombia at the end of the six years was found to be the same, after the U.S. Drug Czar's office announced a change in measuring methodology in 2005 and included new areas in its surveys.<ref name = "est"> {{cite web | year =April 14, 2006 | url =http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/news/press06/041406.html | title =2005 Coca Estimates for Colombia | publisher =Office of National Drug Control Policy | accessdate =October 04 | accessyear =2007 }}</ref> Cultivation in the neighboring countries of Peru and Bolivia actually increased.<ref>Juan Forero, "Colombia's Coca Survives U.S. plan to uproot it", The New York Times, August 19, 2006 </ref> Similar lack of efficacy is observed in other countries pursuing similar{{Fact| in conflict with article about cannabis laws in Canada|date=April 2008}} policies. In 1994, 28.5% of Canadians reported having consumed illicit drugs in their life; by 2004, that figure had risen to 45%. 73% of the $368 million spent by the Canadian government on targeting illicit drugs in 2004–2005 went toward law enforcement rather than treatment, prevention or harm reduction.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/01/15/drug-strategy.html |title=Canada's anti-drug strategy a failure, study suggests |author=CBC News |date=2007-01-15}}</ref> ====Terminology==== =====''War'' as a propaganda term===== The phrase "War on Drugs" has been condemned as being [[propaganda]] to justify military or paramilitary operations under the guise of a noble cause. <ref> {{cite journal |last = Bullington |first = Bruce |coauthors = Alan A. Block |year = 1990 |month = March |title = A Trojan horse: Anti-communism and the war on drugs |journal = Crime, Law and Social Change |volume = 14 |issue = 1 |pages = 39–55 |publisher = Springer Netherlands |issn = 1573-0751 |doi = 10.1007/BF00728225 |language = English }} </ref> [[Noam Chomsky]] points out{{Fact|date=February 2008}} that the term is an example of [[synecdoche]] referring to operations against [[In dubio pro reo|suspected]] producers, traders and/or users of certain substances. This form of language was previously used in Lyndon B. Johnson's "[[war on poverty]]", and later by George W. Bush's "[[War on Terrorism]]". The word "war" is used to invoke a state of emergency, although the target and methods of the campaign is largely unlike that of a regular [[war]]. =====''War'' as an accurate description of the government's war against the people===== In their book [[Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire|''Multitude'']], [[Michael Hardt]] and [[Antonio Negri]] oppose the view that the use of the term "war" is only metaphorical: they analyse the War on Drugs as part of a global war of a [[biopower|biopolitical]] nature. Like the War on Terrorism, the War on Drugs is a true war, waged by the US government against its own people.<ref>Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri (2005). ''Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire''. Hamish Hamilton.</ref> Richard Lawrence Miller's ''Drug Warriors and Their Prey'' draws detailed comparisons of the War on Drugs in the United States today with events in 1930s Germany that led to [[Hitler]]'s [[Third Reich]] and the attempted [[Holocaust|destruction of the Jewish people]]. Miller writes that "authoritarians are manufacturing and manipulating public fears about drug use in order to create a police state where a much broader agenda of social control can be implemented, using government power to determine what movies we may watch, determine who we may love and how we may love them, determine whether we may or must pray to a deity. I believe the war on drug users masks a war on democracy."<ref>Miller, Richard Lawrence (1996). ''Drug Warriors and Their Prey: From Police Power to Police State'', pg. 191 (Greenwood Publishing Group). ISBN 0275950425</ref> ====Children involved in the illegal drug trade==== The U.S. government's most recent 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) reported that nationwide over 800,000 adolescents ages 12–17 sold illegal drugs during the 12 months preceding the survey. [http://oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/2k5nsduh/2k5Results.htm] The 2005 Youth Risk Behavior Survey by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that nationwide 25.4% of students had been offered, sold, or given an illegal drug by someone on school property. The prevalence of having been offered, sold, or given an illegal drug on school property ranged from 15.5% to 38.7% across state CDC surveys (median: 26.1%) and from 20.3% to 40.0% across local surveys (median: 29.4%).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5505a1.htm |title=Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—United States, 2005 |last=Eaton |first=Danice K. |coauthors=Laura Kann, Steve Kinchen, James Ross, Joseph Hawkins, William A. Harris, Richard Lowry, Tim McManus, David Chyen, Shari Shanklin, Connie Lim, Jo Anne Grunbaum, Howell Wechsler |date=2006-06-09 |publisher=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention}}</ref> Despite over $7 billion spent annually towards arresting<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/ |title=Costs of Marijuana Prohibition: Economic Analysis |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=Miron |first=Jeffrey A. |date=2007-09-17 |publisher=Marijuana Policy Project}}</ref> and prosecuting nearly 800,000 people across the country for marijuana offenses in 2005 {{Fact|date=May 2008}}(FBI Uniform Crime Reports), the federally-funded Monitoring the Future Survey reports about 85% of high school seniors find marijuana "easy to obtain." That figure has remained virtually unchanged since 1975, never dropping below 82.7% in three decades of national surveys.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/data/05data/pr05t13.pdf |title=Table 13: Trends in Availability of Drugs as Perceived by Twelfth Graders |last=Johnston |first=L. D. |coauthors=O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G. & Schulenberg, J. E. |date=2005-11-30 |format=PDF |work=Teen drug use down but progress halts among youngest teens |publisher=Monitoring the Future}}</ref> ====Hindrance to legitimate research==== The scientific community{{Fact|Who ?|date=April 2008}} has criticized U.S. drug policy as being "outdated,"<ref>"Perspectives", ''[[Scientific American]]'', December 2004</ref> and a hindrance to legitimate medical and scientific research efforts. For example, the U.S. government's classification of [[cannabis (drug)|marijuana]] as a Schedule 1 drug (having no medicinal value) is contradicted by the journal ''[[Nature Medicine]]'':<ref>''Nature Medicine'', October 2003</ref> {{"|the [[endocannabinoid]] system has an important role in nearly every important paradigm of pain, in memory, in neurodegeneration and in inflammation;" although this quote refers to endogenous cannabinoids (cannabinoids made from the body itself and not taken in from the outside of the body), research on cannabinoids from secondary sources such as the cannabis plant has shown them to have legitimate medical uses.}} Also Marijuana is known to be particularly effective in treating the symptoms of glaucoma. Many people suffering from glaucoma are considered to be legally blind and cannot drive due to the blind spots caused by the internal pressure on the optical nerve. Marijuana, when smoked, helps to relieve this pressure significantly. ====Racial inequities in prosecution==== The social consequences of the drug war have been widely criticized by such organizations as the [[American Civil Liberties Union]] as being racially biased against minorities and disproportionately responsible for the exploding [[Incarceration in the United States|United States prison population]]. According to a report commissioned by the [[Drug Policy Alliance]], and released in March 2006 by the [[Justice Policy Institute]], America's "[[Drug-free school zone|Drug-Free Zones]]" are ineffective at keeping youths away from drugs, and instead create strong racial disparities in the judicial system.<ref name="justice">{{cite web | title = How drug-free zone laws impact racial disparity–and fail to protect youth |publisher= Justice Policy Institute | url = http://www.justicepolicy.org/article.php?id=575| accessmonthday = July 27 | accessyear = 2006 }}</ref> ====Environmental consequences==== Environmental consequences of the drug war, resulting from US-backed aerial fumigation of drug-growing operations in third world countries, have been criticized as detrimental to some of the world's most fragile ecosystems;<ref>Rebecca Bowe, "The drug war on the Amazon," ''E: The Environmental Magazine'', Nov–Dec, 2004</ref> the same aerial fumigation practices are further credited with causing health problems in local populations.<ref>Larry Rohter, "To Colombians, Drug War is a Toxic Foe," [[New York Times]]; May 1, 2000</ref> ====Impact on growers==== The US's coca eradication policy has been criticised for its negative impact on the livelihood of coca growers in [[South America]]. In many areas of South America the coca leaf has traditionally been chewed and used in tea and for religious, medicinal and nutritional purposes by locals. For this reason many insist that the illegality of traditional coca cultivation is unjust. In many areas the US government and military has forced the eradication of coca without providing for any meaningful alternate crop for farmers. The status of coca and coca growers has become an intense political issue in several countries, particularly in [[Bolivia]], where the president, [[Evo Morales]], a former coca growers' union leader, has promised to legalise the traditional cultivation and use of coca. In [[Afghanistan]], the implementation of costly poppy eradication policies by the international community, and in particular the [[United States]] since their military intervention in 2001, have led {{Fact|date=April 2008}} to poverty and discontent on the part of the rural community, especially in the south of the country where alternative development policies have not been put in place to replace livelihoods lost through eradication. Furthermore, poppy cultivation has dramatically increased since 2003 as has support for anti-government elements. Although alternative policies such as controlled [[opium licensing]] have been suggested and are supported by many in [[Afghanistan]] and abroad, government leaders have still to move away from harmful eradication schemes. ====Innocent Victims==== Peter Guither in his [http://victims.drugwarrant.com/ Drug War Victims blog posted at Salon] lists dozens of people who have been killed by law enforcement and the DEA, without having been convicted of any crime. Many of them were not even suspects, nor had been using drugs at all. These include a 35-year-old [[Christian]] [[missionary]] and her seven-month-old infant daughter, both killed (and her husband and son seriously injured) in April of 2001 when the [[Cessna]] airplane carrying them and other missionaries was shot out of the sky over [[Peru]] due to faulty information from the DEA. Others include an eleven-year-old boy who was shot in the back by a SWAT team after following their instructions and lying on the ground, and an elderly woman frightened into a fatal heart attack when law enforcement officers burst into her home unannounced in the middle of the night, setting off flash grenades — they had the wrong address. Several were cases of people defending themselves and families against what they thought were burglars or rapists, but which were actually law enforcement, with the police killing them in retaliation. ==== War on drugs as cyclic creation of a permanent underclass ==== Since illegal drug use has been blamed for feeding the growth of the underclass, this has caused prohibitionists{{Fact|Who??|date=April 2008}} to call for further increases in certain drug-crime penalties, even though some of these disrupt opportunities for drug users to advance in society in socially acceptable ways. It has been argued by Blumenson and Nilsen that this causes a vicious cycle: since penalties for drug crimes among youth almost always involve semi-permanent removal from opportunities for education, and later involve creation of criminal records which make employment far more difficult, that the "war on drugs" has in fact resulted in the creation of a permanent underclass of people who have few education or job opportunities, often as a result of being punished for drug offenses which in turn have resulted from attempts to earn a living in spite of having no education or job opportunities.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.dpfma.org/pdf/war_on_drugs_education.pdf |title=How to construct an underclass, ''or'' how the War on Drugs became a war on education |last=Blumenson |first=Eric |coauthors=Eva S. Nilsen |date=2002-05-16 |format=PDF |publisher=Drug Policy Forum of Massachusetts}}</ref> ===Positive=== {{Expand|date=May 2008}} ==== Reduction of drug availability ==== [[Antonio Maria Costa]], executive director of the [[UNODC|United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime]] has argued that there is a strong correlation between drug availability and drug abuse. {{"|Legalization may reduce the profits to organized crime, but it will also increase the damage done to the health of individuals and society. Evidence shows a strong correlation between drug availability and drug abuse. Let us therefore reduce the availability of drugs - through tackling supply and demand - and thereby reduce the risks to health and security [...] drug policy does not have to choose between either protecting health, through drug control, or ensuring law-and-order, by liberalizing drugs. Democratic governments can and must protect health and safety. Besides, just because something is hard to control doesn't mean that its legalization will solve the problem. For example, it is hard to stop human trafficking - a modern form of slavery. This is a multi-billion dollar business. Because the problem is out of control, would you equally propose that we accept it? | [http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/about-unodc/speeches/2007-12-06.html Free Drugs or Drug Free?] UNODC Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa, New Orleans, December 2007.}} == Pharmaceuticals == {{Unreferencedsection|date=May 2008}} {{POV-section|date=May 2008}} In another regard, the war on drugs affects the US in the manner of its impact upon how health care providers employ psychoactive medications already extant in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia (many of which have the potential for abuse, or for use as chemical precursors to substances proscribed by the [[Controlled Substances Act]]). To take as one example, patients with [[ADHD]] are commonly prescribed various stimulant medications in maintenance regimens to control the symptoms of the condition. Frequently used drugs are [[Ritalin]] ([[Methylphenidate]]), [[Dexedrine]] ([[Dextroamphetamine]]), [[Adderall]] ([[Amphetamine]]), and [[Desoxyn]] ([[Methamphetamine]]). All three of these products (and their congeners) are rated as Schedule II drugs which - per CDS-imposed regulations - can only be dispensed in amounts suitable for a month's medication at most, with the requirement that each month's supply can be renewed only with the auhorization of yet another written prescription. Licensed prescribers are not even permitted to telephone or fax an authorization for refill to the patient's pharmacy. This obliges patients on stable regimens of therapy to physically visit their health care providers for reasons of regulatory compliance rather than medical necessity, adding substantially to the aggregate burden in financial cost accruing nationally due to the incidence of ADHD in the population, and providing no substantive benefit to either the patient or the community. Another example is found in the [[2005 Combat Methamphetamine Act]], which seeks to control the volume of retail purchase of [[pseudoephedrine]], a safe and effective [[Over-the-counter drug|over-the-counter]] systemic decongestant, simply because the methods by which these pseudoephedrine products can be used to extract a chemical base for the illicit manufacture of [[methamphetamine]] has become widespread knowledge in the flourishing [[black market]] for drugs of abuse. This latter government grope in the [[War on Drugs|War on (Some) Drugs]] serves to impose a major financial burden on the pharmaceuticals industry (forcing the reformulation of well-established products with the substitution of the demonstrably less effective decongestant [[phenylephrine]]) as well as substantially increased costs upon pharmacies and inconveniences upon patients on the dubious grounds that it poses a minor inconvenience to the hardened criminals running [[Meth_lab#Illicit_production|meth labs]]. == See also == {{col-begin}} {{col-break}} *[[Above the Influence]] *[[American Drug War: The Last White Hope]] *[[Arguments for and against drug prohibition]] *[[Cognitive liberty]] *[[Cocaine Cowboys]] *[[Plan Colombia]] *[[Decriminalization]] *[[Demand reduction]] *[[Drug policy]] *[[Drug Policy Alliance]] *[[Harm reduction]] *[[Gang]] *[[Gary Webb]] *[[Golden Crescent]] *[[Golden Triangle (Southeast Asia)|Golden Triangle]] *[[Illegal drug trade]] *[[Just Say No]] *[[Law Enforcement Against Prohibition]] *[[Legal history of marijuana in the United States]] *[[Legal issues of cannabis]] *[[Lin Zexu]] {{col-break}} *[[List of wars on concepts]] *[[Marijuana Policy Project]] *[[Mérida Initiative]] *[[Mexican Drug War]] *[[Nancy Reagan]] *[[Narco News]] *[[Narcotrafficking in Colombia]] *[[Neurolaw]] *[[Norml]] *[[Office of National Drug Control Policy]] *[[Opium War]] *[[Organized crime]] *[[Prison-industrial complex]] *[[Prohibition (drugs)]] *[[Richard Nixon]] *[[Ricky Ross (drug trafficker)]] *[[Ronald Reagan]] *[[Students for Sensible Drug Policy]] *[[United Nations Drug Control Programme]] *[[Zero tolerance]] {{col-end}} ==References== {{reflist}} ==External links== * [http://borderstories.org/index.php/ciudad-juarez-the-war-on-news.html Border Stories profiles a newspaper reporter caught up in the drug war in Mexico] * [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2028208/Cocaine-overdose-cases-quadruple-at-hospitals.html? Cocaine overdose cases quadruple at hospitals] [[Telegraph.co.uk]] [[25 May]] [[2008]] * [http://www.americandrugwar.com The War on Drugs is the subject of the 2007 documentary film "American Drug War"] * [http://rakontur.com/cocainecowboys The War on Drugs is covered in the 2006 documentary film "Cocaine Cowboys"] * [http://www.ssdp.org Students for Sensible Drug Policy] An international grassroots network of students working to end the War on Drugs. * [http://www.Druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/studies.htm Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy] Full text of major government commission reports on the drug laws from around the world over the last 100 years * [http://www.Druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/history.htm Historical Research on the Drug War] Full text of numerous full histories of the drug war and thousands of original historical documents * [http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/index.htm National Drug Threat Assessment 2006] from the [[United States Department of Justice]] * [http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/19493.pdf War On Drugs: Legislation in the 108th Congress and Related Developments], a 2003 report from the [[Congressional Research Service]] via the [[United States Department of State|State Department]] website * [http://www.acluprocon.org/bin/procon/procon.cgi?database=5%2dG%2dSubs%2edb&command=viewone&id=5&op=t&ct=d Review of the War on Drugs] * Gabriel Chin, [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=390109&high=%20Gabriel%20CHin Race, the War on Drugs and the Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction,] 6 Journal of Race, Gender & Justice 253 (2002) * Michael Blanchard & Gabriel J. Chin, [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1128945 Identifying the Enemy in the War on Drugs: A Critique of the Developing Rule Permitting Visual Identification of Indescript White Powders in Narcotics Prosecutions,] 47 American University Law Review 557 (1998) * [http://www.drugwarfacts.org/ Drug War Facts] * [http://www.drugwardistortions.org/ Drug War Distortions] * [http://www.november.org/ November Coalition]—Working to end drug war injustice * [http://www.briancbennett.com/history/headline.htm The Anti-drugwar Over 100 years of Headlines] * [http://www.cagw.org/site/DocServer/Drug_Report.pdf?docID=1661 Wasted in the War on Drugs] report by [[Citizens Against Government Waste]] * [http://www.cato.org/current/drug-war/index.html Cato Institute Drug Prohibition Research] * [http://www.mapinc.org/ The Media Awareness Project] * [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se_TJzB9-z0 Nobel Prize in Economics winner Milton Friedman interviewed] about his opposition to the War on Drugs * [http://www.faqs.org/faqs/law/lawful-arrest/ Lawful Arrest FAQ] * [http://www.drugnerd.com/archives/434/the-war-on-drugs-the-prison-industrial-complex/ The Prison Industrial Complex] War on Drugs Documentary * [http://www.onf.ca/webextension/damage-done/home.php Another documentary film, ''The Damage Done''] * [http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/drugs/main.html War on Drugs]—How government drug war policies promote violence, destroy liberty and actually increase drug abuse. * [http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17438347/how_america_lost_the_war_on_drugs How America Lost the War on Drugs]—[[Rolling Stone Magazine]], November 27, 2007 * [http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/ledain/ldctoc.html The Report of the Canadian Government Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs—1972] * [http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/08/17/drugWarVictims.html Drug War Victims] * {{nl}} [http://mens-en-samenleving.infonu.nl/sociaal-cultureel/14324-de-amerikaanse-war-on-drugs-in-zuid-amerika.html War on Drugs] {{United States topics}} [[Category:Law enforcement in the United States]] [[Category:Richard Nixon]] [[Category:United States controlled substances law]] [[Category:Organized crime events]] [[Category:United States-Central American relations]] [[Category:United States-South American relations]] [[Category:United States-Asian relations]] [[Category:Drug policy]] [[Category:Drug control history]] [[de:War on Drugs]] [[es:Guerra contra las drogas]] [[fr:Campagne des États-Unis contre la toxicomanie]] [[pl:Wojna z narkotykami]]