<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Why Don’t Conservatives Oppose the War on Drugs?<br>
by Laurence M. Vance, November 24, 2010<br>
<br>
The war on drugs is a failure.<br>
<br>
According to the latest National Survey on Drug Use and Health
conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration: “Drug use in the United States increased in 2009,
reversing downward trends since 2002. ” There was a spike in the number
of Americans admitting to using marijuana, ecstasy, and methamphetamine.<br>
<br>
Yet, no matter how much it costs to wage the federal drug war (more
than $41 billion according to a just-released Cato Institute study),
conservatives generally support it. I know of no prominent conservative
who publicly calls for drug legalization. I know of no Republican
candidate in the recent election (outside of Ron Paul) who has ever
publicly voiced his support for the decriminalization of drug
possession. Republicans in Congress — by an overwhelming majority —
have even criminalized the purchase of over-the-counter allergy-relief
products like Sudafed because they contain pseudoephedrine.<br>
<br>
Negative arguments about how the war on drugs ruins lives, erodes civil
liberties, and destroys financial privacy are unpersuasive to most
conservatives. None of these things matter to the typical conservative
because they, like most Americans of any political persuasion, see
using drugs for recreational use as immoral.<br>
<br>
The hypocrisy of conservatives who support the war on drugs but not the
prohibition of alcohol should be readily apparent. But aside from a
small minority of conservative religious people that long for the days
of Prohibition, conservatives generally don’t support making the
drinking of alcohol a crime even though alcohol is a factor in many
accidents, crimes, and premature deaths. So why is getting high on
drugs treated differently from getting high on alcohol?<br>
<br>
The reason conservatives should oppose the war on drugs is a simple one
that has nothing to do with positive, negative, or financial arguments.
Drug prohibition by the federal government is simply unconstitutional.
Conservatives claim to revere the Constitution. They regularly lambaste
judges for being activists and not strict constitutionalists. In the
“Pledge to America” they released a few weeks before the recent
election, House Republicans promised to “honor the Constitution as
constructed by its framers and honor the original intent of <font
face="Times,Times New Roman">those precepts that have been
consistently ignored — particularly the Tenth Amendment. ”
</font>
<p><font face="Times,Times New Roman">In article I, section 8, of the
Constitution, there are eighteen specific powers granted to Congress.
We call these the enumerated powers. Everything else is reserved to the
states — with or without the Tenth Amendment. Nowhere does the
Constitution authorize the federal government to concern itself with
the nature and quantity of any substance Americans inhale or otherwise
take into their body. Nowhere does the Constitution authorize the
federal government to prohibit drug manufacture, sale, or use. Nowhere
does the Constitution authorize the federal government to ban anything.
When the Progressives wanted the United States government to ban
alcohol, they realized that an amendment to the Constitution was
needed. </font></p>
<p><font face="Times,Times New Roman">Drug prohibition is likewise
incompatible with private property, individual liberty, personal
responsibility, free markets, and limited government — things that
conservatives claim to believe in. What happened to the conservative
emphasis on families, churches, private charities, and faith-based
organizations solving problems instead of looking to the federal
government to solve them?
</font></p>
<p><font face="Times,Times New Roman">But if conservatives want a war
on drugs or any other personal freedom, then from a constitutional
standpoint it is at the state level that they must wage their war. From
a libertarian standpoint, state (or local) attempts to prohibit or to
tax and/or regulate drugs are likewise attacks on property and freedom.
But from a constitutional perspective, conservatives should be just as
against a federal war on drugs as libertarians are.
</font></p>
<p><font face="Times,Times New Roman">So, if conservatives want to be
both constitutional and consistent, they would have to say that there
should be no National Drug Control Strategy, no National Survey on Drug
Use and Health, and no Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program. They would have to say that the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration, the Office of National Drug Control
Policy, and the Drug Enforcement Administration should all be
abolished. And they would have to say that the Controlled Substances
Act, Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act, and Combat
Methamphetamine Epidemic Act should all be repealed.
</font></p>
<p><font face="Times,Times New Roman">Although I would vehemently
oppose their war on drugs at the state and local level, conservatives
could do abolish all those federal agencies while at the same time
waging a relentless war on drugs — and all vice — at the state and
local levels.
</font></p>
<p><font face="Times,Times New Roman">Who do conservatives, who profess
to revere individual liberty, free markets, private property, limited
government, and the Constitution continue to support the war on drugs?
</font></p>
</body>
</html>