America has always been a militaristic nation, and this is reflected in our use of the word "war" to describe any large-scale national efforts. Whether it's Johnson's "War on Poverty", the conservative accusations of a "War on Christmas", or the liberal accusations of a "War on Women", it seems that war is the only conceptual framework that we have to explain systemic change in our society. When Nixon announced his policy of strict prohibition, he bought into this language by calling it the "War on Drugs". By portraying drug users as outsiders that threaten society, the new era of prohibition played to the fears that middle-class Americans have of the lower-class and the poor. Images of inner-city communities where hard narcotics are widespread were used to portray drug use as an "epidemic" that threatens to corrupt the entire country. The result was an unprecedented crackdown on nonviolent drug users, usually disproportionately targeted at racial minorities and the poor.
 |
| US prisoners, 1920-2006 |
Unsurprisingly, the increase in prohibition enforcement caused a dramatic increase in the number of incarcerated citizens. The number of prisoners in America quadrupled from 500,000 to 2,000,000 in just 20 years, from 1980 to 2000. We now have even more prisoners than China, both in absolute terms and relative to our population. As a nation that prides itself as freedom-loving, it is shameful that we have resorted to the incarceration of nonviolent "criminals" on such a massive scale. The long-term costs of this imprisonment far exceed any harm they could have done to society by using drugs. Not only are they prevented from being productive members of society, we are forced to pay for their upkeep and the staff that runs the prison. Furthermore, it is widely known that prisons are breeding grounds of future criminals, allowing inmates to network with members of serious criminal organizations. After their release, with little to no job prospects available through legal means, former prison inmates are often forced to choose between a life of crime and abject poverty. In this way, incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders is a counterproductive way of reducing crime.
The irrational policies of drug prohibition are made even more destructive by the financial incentives that drive them. American prisons are no longer run exclusively by the state; they are increasingly becoming privatized. The US has at least 264 privately-run correctional facilities, housing almost 99,000 inmates. Proponents of privatization will argue, as usual, that private prisons are more efficient and cheaper to maintain than government-run prisons. This is an unfair comparison, however, for the same reason that it is unfair to compare public and private schools. Private prisons, unlike state prisons, have the right to select which inmates they accept and which they reject. So all of the dangerous, unruly, or otherwise more expensive prisoners get sent to the public prisons, which naturally increases their operation costs. But beyond this argument is the perverse incentives that the private prison industry exerts on the legal system. Insofar as private enterprises can use their wealth to influence government policies, private prisons incentivize politicians to enact stricter drug laws that will increase demand for prison space. This is perhaps the best explanation of why our irrational policies of drug prohibition have lasted so long. Prohibition has become a self-perpetuating system of incarcerating entire sections of our society.
On the bright side, public opinion is becoming increasingly favorable to drug legalization. In the 2012 election, Washington and Colorado both voted for complete legalization of recreational cannabis use for adults, the first two states to do so. This is still in contradiction with the federal ban on cannabis use, but enforcement of this federal law is unlikely. Many other states have already legalized the use of cannabis for medical purposes, so it is only a matter of time before full legalization spreads to other parts of the country. In time, the results of these changes could lead to a wider discussion of drug policies in general, and the end of the failed "War on Drugs" that is long overdue.
No comments:
Post a Comment