Drug Control Policies: Liberal vs. Conservative
By
John Remy
Professor Jones
English 102: Section 23503
28 March 2016
One of the most controversial and important issues in the world today is the control of illegal drugs. Countries around the world have been using different drug control policies, either liberal or conservative, in order to minimalize the consequences of illegal drugs and their black market suppliers. Liberal drug policies focus on people rather than drugs. These types of policies allow for human error without consequence, and instead they offer help and treatment to drug users. Conservative policies on the other hand focus on the drugs. These policies search for people that have any relation to illegal drugs in order to convict them and essentially remove drugs from the streets. America and Portugal are great examples of the opposite sides of the spectrum. Both of these countries have had obvious difficulties controlling drugs in the past. Now, their different approaches have produced various positive and negative results in different areas concerning illegal drugs. The effects of the liberal drug policies in Portugal compared to the effects of conservative policies in the U.S. draw attention to areas that need improvement in both systems. The effects of various policies are evaluated based on the amount of government spending, the rates of drug related deaths and diseases, the rates of drug use and abuse, and the rates of drug related crimes including possession, trafficking, and all crime inspired by drug use.
In order to successfully estimate the effectiveness of drug control policies, the first step is to determine how much various governments spend on drug control and what specific areas they spend it on. The Portuguese government uses their limited budget to focus on prevention and treatment, leaving a small portion for prosecution. However, they did not always allocate their resources to this area. In the 1990s and early 2000s Portugal experienced a major heroin epidemic. The heroin problem impacted many communities in Portugal and spread HIV/AIDS throughout the country at a rapid pace. In 2001, Portugal decided to take a radically different approach in order to change the status of their drug problems. The Portuguese government decriminalized all drugs for possession and use. They adopted fully liberal drug control policies and shifted their focus stopping drug trafficking instead of drug use. Since the drug decriminalization, the Portuguese government has approved a similar budget to before the change. However, instead of using their budget for enforcement and prosecution, they use almost 90% of it for treatment and prevention ("Challenges and Limitations"). This use of their drug control budget has allowed major improvements in living conditions for drug users across Portugal. The treatment is offered and easily available to everyone, which has proven to be very effective and beneficial. Although the shift in the allocation of government resources has helped the citizens of Portugal immensely, the increased budget approved to prevent drug trafficking has not proven to work well yet. According to the Portuguese Police force, since 2001 when the budget for prevention increased significantly, the Police have failed to increase the amount of drugs seized in drug trafficking busts ("Challenges and Limitations"). The number of people convicted for drug trafficking has also remained the same throughout the years. Therefore, the Portuguese government has improved the effects of its drug control budget for treatment purposes, but they have yet to figure out how to effectively stop trafficking.
The American government takes the opposite approach, focusing most of their efforts on interdiction and domestic law enforcement conviction, while using a small portion of the budget on prevention. Ever since drug trade became an international process, America has been the demand capital of the world for illegal drugs. The government's response to America's drug problems has been to use incredible amounts of money to try to stop all illegal drugs from getting to and being used in America. Since the early 2000s the U.S. has been consistently increasing its drug control budget, using about 17 billion in 2003 and 29 billion in 2015 ("Economics"). Although America's drug control policies are the best example of conservative policies, they have begun to realize the importance of treatment. Although the overall budget is continuously increasing, the percent of that budget spent on all areas of drug control has decreased except for treatment ("Economics"). This can be explained by a study done by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, which estimates "that the costs of crime and lost productivity are reduced by $7.46 for every dollar spend on treatment" ("Economics"). Since this realization has become clear to government's around the world, the U.S. has poured money into treatment over the last decade and they now use about 45% of their budget for treatment. However, America still focuses more on interdiction and conviction rather than prevention. The U.S. still uses about 31 percent of its budget for domestic law enforcement processes ("Economics"). This allocation has been the most controversial topic in the discussion of drug control policies in America. Many people argue that the government should focus on stopping the international criminals who bring the drugs into the U.S., instead of harassing American citizens that are drug users. However, the government believes that since it is too difficult to stop most of the drug trafficking, they would rather try to get rid of drugs that do get into the country.
One of the main reasons why drug control policies are in place is to better the general health of the nation. Ever since Portugal restructured its drug control policies, the drug-related death rates and drug-related disease rates make a strong argument in favor of liberal policies. Portugal has adopted policies that focus on harm reduction. This has created a safe atmosphere for drug users. Since they are no longer afraid of consequences for their drug use, they can focus on recovery, treatment, and safe use. Portugal also employs thousands of harm reduction agents that go around to drug users offering advice, treatment, clean needles, and clean pipes in order to reduce the spread of disease. Since the induction of Portugal's harm reduction policies, the rate of drug users newly diagnosed with HIV has dropped by more than 70 percent (Csete). The rates of drug related deaths have also plummeted. Portugal now has one of the lowest rates of drug-related deaths in the world, having approximately three deaths per million citizens per year, while the EU average rests around 17 deaths per million citizens (Ingraham). Since harm reduction policies have been so effective in increasing the health and safety of Portuguese citizens, the health aspect makes a strong argument in favor of liberal drug policies.
In the United States however, drug-related deaths and diseases are very present issues that need to be addressed. Since there are so many drugs that are strictly illegal in America, many drug users are dismayed from seeking treatment. Drug users in America are constantly afraid of being found to be users, since they can be prosecuted for simply having one dosage of any illegal drug. Therefore, they have little incentive to turn themselves into a drug recovery facility. They also are not able to easily find safe methods of use. Unlike in Portugal, clean needles and pipes are difficult to find in the America. As a result, the spread of HIV/AIDS has been a huge issue in America that remains untouched (Bottia). As a result of the strictness of America's conservative policies, the government has not been able to make a plan that addresses the spread of disease through illegal drug use. Another shocking fact is that the United States has the highest rate of drug-related deaths in the world, having approximately 140 deaths million citizens ("America vs. Europe"). Many supporters of conservative policies argue that this is not an issue because drug users should already be aware of the risk of death and disease when they use drugs. However, it is undeniable that since the Portuguese government has successfully reduced the risk of death and disease, they have made the country better and safer than it was, while the American government has been useless for this issue.
The rates of drug usage in any given country may be the most important factor when evaluating the success of drug control policies. Although Portugal's actual drug usage rates have been difficult to determine in recent years, the overall trends suggest that they are moving in the right direction. Immediately after the decriminalization in 2001 the usage rates for all drugs rose. After the initial rush however, drug use returned to a similar state as before decriminalization. In the national Cato studies conducted in 2007, drug use in Portugal had increased slightly for all drugs except for heroin ("Challenges and Limitations"). These results conflicted with arguments in favor of liberal policies at the time. However, in the most recent Cato study conducted in 2012, the rates of drug usage fell for all drugs except for marijuana ("International"). Now the drug usage rates appear to be at or below the percentages that they were at before decriminalization. These statistics are still very new, which makes it difficult to determine if the trends in these studies will continue at the same rate. Nonetheless, it is now clear that the decriminalization of all drugs did not make Portugal a mecca for drugs.
America's overall drug usage makes it the consumption capital of the world for drugs. Drug usage has been a major problem that America has known about for a long time. Unfortunately, the government's drug control efforts so far have not proven to reduce trafficking or use. In fact, "the UNODC report of 2006 reported that the highest number of drug treatment slots per million inhabitants was found in the United States (5,200)" (Bottia). This is shocking considering that "more than 94% of the addicts in the US do not realize they need help and have not searched for treatment" (Bottia). Mostly due to the lack of treatment centers that are available and lack of awareness of drugs, many Americans that need help have not ever been able to look for it. This is extremely dangerous for American citizens, especially considering that the U.S. leads the world in drug use for opioids, amphetamines, and cocaine, and it comes in second for marijuana use ("America vs. Europe"). Obviously this is an area that suggests that America should change their drug control policies. However, since Portugal's fully liberal approach has not yet proven to significantly affect drug usage rates, a more moderate change may the right solution.
The last indicator of effective drug control policies is the national rates of drug related crimes. Since drug possession is no longer a crime in Portugal, the overall rates of drug related crime have decreased obviously. However, the rates of drug trafficking and other drug-related crimes suggest that Portugal's system may need refining. According to drug facts published by the White House website, "in 2000, approximately 14,000 people were arrested for drug-related crimes in Portugal. This number dropped to an average of 5,000 to 5,500 people per year after decriminalization" ("International"). The amount of arrests after 2001 decreased significantly because it is now extremely rare for someone to be arrested for possession without also being charged with drug trafficking. In 2015, approximately 80 percent of those convicted for drug-related crimes were convicted for trafficking ("International"). However, the overall number of drug trafficking arrests has only increased slightly since 2000 ("International"). Again, the lack of influence that Portugal's efforts have had on drug trafficking suggest that Portugal may need to adjust its laws in order to make it more difficult for drugs to move across the country. However, the exact method for which Portugal could do that is difficult to determine.
Drug-related crime in America varies from state to state depending on state laws. Overall, the difference in rates of drug-related crime between different states highlights the effects of various policies. Due to the strict prohibition of drugs at the federal level, black markets have developed and become extremely influential in many states. States that border Mexico such as California and Arizona have been the most affected. Illegal drug trade has created a realm of drug-related crime that affects the communities, the government, and police force (Bottia). Although the federal government holds strictly conservative drug policies, various state governments have begun experimenting with more liberal policies. For example, Colorado was the first state to legalize marijuana for recreational use. Since legalization, drug related crimes have decreased significantly as the percent of arrests, black market trafficking, fatal car accidents, and murder rates have all fallen (Downes). As more states have begun to see the benefits of more liberal drug laws, more and more data is showing that all crime rates in areas where marijuana has been legalized have been falling significantly. Although associating the legalization of marijuana to the rates of fatal car accidents may seem like a fallacy, the association rather suggests that consequences that many people projected have not come true. For example, many skeptics of the legalization projected that the rates of car accidents, drug related deaths, and drug usage for teenagers would skyrocket. However, none of these things have happened, which suggests that liberal policies may be more beneficial than consequential for America.
Overall, the effectiveness of liberal and conservative drug policies are subjective depending on the areas of influence that the evaluator deems most important. The clearest victory for liberal drug policies comes with the health aspect. As Portugal's rates of drug related deaths and diseases continue to drop, the benefits of their harm reduction policies are highlighted. On the other hand, America's conservative policies essentially neglect the health of the general public in the way that they discourage safe drug use. As a result of this neglect, America is the worst example in the world for safe drug use. This is shocking considering that America has one of the largest budgets for drug control in the world. Although their allocation of the budget is becoming more appropriate, much of the budget is wasted on tedious interdiction, law enforcement, and conviction processes that do not yield as much benefits as desired. Possibly the largest weakness of liberal policies, at least in Portugal, has been the ineffectiveness of prevention methods. Since Portugal has not been able to reduce the rates of drug trafficking, many use this as an argument against liberal policies. However, since America's conservative policies have allowed America to be the drug capital of the world, the right method to stop drug usage has yet to be determined.
Works Cited
Bottia, Martha Cecilia. "Drug Control Policies: The Cases of Colombia and the United States." The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, 2010. Ann Arbor: ProQuest. Web. 25 Feb. 2016.
Csete, Joanne, and Daniel Wolfe. "Turning a page in drug control and public health: advancing HCV/HIV prevention through reform of drug law and policy." Future Virology Jan. 2015: 17+. Academic OneFile. Web. 25 Feb. 2016.
Downes, Lawrence. "The Great Colorado Weed Experiment." Aug 02 2014. Web. ProQuest. 22 Mar. 2016.
"Drug Decriminalization in Portugal: Challenges and Limitations." National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Office of National Drug Control Policy, Aug. 2010. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
"Drug Use in America vs Europe." RecoveryBrands.com. Web. 22 Mar. 2016.
"Economics." Drug War Facts. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Feb. 2016.
"International - Portugal Data and Policies." Drug War Facts. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, n.d. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
Ingraham, Christopher. "Why Hardly Anyone Dies from a Drug Overdose in Portugal." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 5 June 2015. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
