Legalizing Drugs

As an example of social pragmatism (and fiscal responsibility), I think the Democratic party ought to come out in favor of legalizing drugs.

One of my favorite blogs to read is the Becker Posner blog.  It is co-written by Gary Becker, a professor of economics at the University of Chicago, and Richard Posner, a professor in the University of Chicago Law School.  These two guys are really smart.  And they cover a very interesting set of topics, with one new one each week.

A week and a half ago, they covered the "War on Drugs".  There are four posts that you should read:

Becker's initial post on The Failure of the War on Drugs

Posner's reply to Becker's post where he essentially agrees with Becker and adds a legal framework for thinking about this issue.

Becker's reply to coments on his post.

Posner's reply to comments on his post.

These guys are a lot smarter about this stuff than I am.  And they think drugs should be leglalized.

If Becker is right and the US is spending north of $100bn per year on a war that we are losing, we should try something else.  If we legalized drugs and used tax policy and the law of price elasticity to regulate drug use in our society, we'd produce a huge new form of tax revenue for the state, local, and federal governments.

The net of all of this should be at least a couple hundred billion in less red ink per year and given where we are right now in terms of defecits, that's a big deal.

But the social benefits would massively outweigh the fiscal benefits.  I believe we'd see less drug users, not more, I believe we'd improve the quality of life in our inner city neighborhoods, and I believe we'd stop channeling smart young black men into prisons so early in their life.

This is a classic example of where smart fiscal and social policy is being held hostage to "moral values".  And its exactly the kind of issue where social pragmatism is a winning strategy.

Comments

[dino]

Love your blog by the way. You have me hooked on many podcasts.

I cringe when you jab at modern day conservatism with assuming that today's democratic party is that much different.

Pragmatism is what is wrong with both parties. One believes morals is a means to an ends, while the other believes taxing you to death is a means to an ends.

I only cringe, because my hope is that you know better. With all due respect, please don't take this as anything more than my opinion and not any form of insult. What is modern day conservatism is pretty much what you say it is, the moral right, the religious right, the thought police. What a true conservative is, is a Jeffersonian liberal, who believes in choice and free trade. That is what today's conservatives are severly lacking.

You want legalized drugs? I agree. Neither party will go for it or even pretend to go for it. They are too tied to the police unions and the pharmaceutical tax base. Yeah the left has its hippies and students, but that's about it going for it. The Libertarian Party supports this as they make it plain to see that The War on Drugs is useless. I am not a member of the Libertarian Party, but plan to be. Their platform is the closest to Jeffersonian Liberal and promotes Austrian economics.

Legalize drugs overtime, else there will be chaos, and enforce crimes committed under the influence swiftly and stern. I wonder how many blogs are written under the influence???

I guess what I am saying is, I agree with you, but the democrats are not the answer. They are equally part of the problem if not more.

Thanks,

Dino

P.S. Confession. Hell yes I read your blog because I need some VC money in the future. I mean your family vacation is nice to know about and all...but I gotta come clean.

[earle]

why stop at drugs? its time that prostitution be legal too. how long should this silent economy continue?

also, mod up dino! +1

"Neither party will go for it or even pretend to go for it. They are too tied to the police unions and the pharmaceutical tax base."

[Dino]

Yes legalize prostitution too. We need that tax money dang it! Pro choice on everything, except one must hate the Yankees if not from NY.

Not sure what Mod up means, but I'll take more if it's good.

[Ben Casnocha]

Fred - glad you came across the Becker Posner blog. I've blogged about some of their posts before....it's a front row seat to some of the most gifted minds alive today.

[mark pincus]

this would be brilliant. but when's the last time you saw the democratic party do anything 'brilliant'? lets see...nominating kerry over dean?...no. nominating gore over anyone else?...no. trying to nationalize healthcare (clintons)?...no.

[jackson]

Drugs are Illegal?

[aaron wall]

Would be awesome to see signs

"Fund Terrorism
by Keeping Drugs Illegal -
Vote Republican"

[Michael Parekh]

Good debate, with good points pro and con...

There are many good points pro and con in this debate.

According to Tom Evslin (http://blog.tomevslin.com/),
who I believe started this cross-blogging thread, one of the best anti-legalization arguments is by Theodore Dalrymple in this article at (http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_2_a1.html)

After reading the long, but well-written Dalryumple article leave me at con on this issue...there are many points here, but the three that get me are:

1. The negative impact of addictive substances don't just affect the individual, but his/her family, community and employer.

2. Legalization would likely push the criminal marketing activities to kids who will presumably still be restricted from buying legalized drugs, much like alcohol and cigarettes today.

3. Generally speaking, people have lousy self-control, on matters of indulgence. Cheaper, legal drugs would make more people try and get hooked on them. (aka the price elasticity argument above)

Will continue to study the debate, but this feels like a non-starter to me.

[Michael Parekh]

Responding to Jackson's post above, and I quote:

"Would be awesome to see signs

"Fund Terrorism
by Keeping Drugs Illegal -
Vote Republican"

pithy, and probably funny in some circles, but my response would be drugs don't fuel terrorism long-term, the underlying political and social realities do.

There are other ways to address terrorism, and we're addressing some, but not all of those ways.

But let's not turn the drug debate into a cheap bumper sticker on terrorism and partisan politics.

[ashley]

me and a partner are doing a debate for our government class and i was wondering if you could send me any information on debates that discuss legalizing drugs. my email address is ashley43340@yahoo.com. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Ashley

[Dave]

Legalizing drugs may be a good idea for many reasons, but I don't think a major political party will endorse the idea anytime in the near future. Most of the voters and influential financial contributors are against it, and endorsing it would be policital suicide.

If it happens, it's probably more likely to start from within the already-elected legistlators. But I'd still be surprised to see it taken seriously anytime soon.

[heather]

i totally agree that drugs should be legalized...crimes would go down as well as taxes...right on!!