creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Mona Charen
Mona Charen
21 Oct 2014
Does Obama Care About People?

Can you walk out on the messiah? Appearing at a campaign rally for gubernatorial candidate Anthony Brown in … Read More.

17 Oct 2014
The Equal Pay Delusion

Voters are souring on the Democratic Party. Apparently, all it takes are six years of economic torpor; the … Read More.

14 Oct 2014
Ted Olson's Evasions

Appearing on "Fox News Sunday" to discuss the Supreme Court's decision to let stand a number of judicial … Read More.

Where Ron Paul Is Right

Comment

Five years ago last month, Milton Friedman died at age 94. To the very end, the Nobel Prize winning economist was astute, tireless and wonderfully avuncular. Thanks to the Internet, his commentaries on subjects ranging from greed, to slavery, to the Great Depression myth and many other topics, can be enjoyed forever.

Of course, great thinkers have been recording their thoughts in books for millennia. And Friedman was no exception. But there's no denying the immediacy and intimacy of video. Wouldn't we have loved to click on Edmund Burke, Alexander Hamilton or Cicero and watch them talk about their ideas? If you do dip into the Friedman oeuvre, start with his exchange with Phil Donahue!

Nothing would be easier than to invoke the great Friedman as the sage of limited government. He was certainly that. If he were commenting on America's current predicament, he would doubtless prescribe a radically smaller public sector.

But Friedman poses challenges to conservatives as well as liberals. He opposed, for example, the war on drugs. That's right. Friedman was for legalization of all drugs, not just marijuana.

It's a position embraced by only one candidate for president, Ron Paul. Congressman Paul holds some ludicrous views. He seems to believe, for example, that if we were just nicer to the Iranians, we wouldn't need to fret about their acquisition of nuclear weapons. Still, Paul deserves full credit for endorsing drug legalization. Friedman would approve.

Governments in the United States, federal and state, spend an estimated $41.3 billion annually to prevent people from ingesting substances we deem harmful, though many unsafe ingestibles — you know the list — remain legal. Half of all federal prisoners are serving sentences for drug offenses, along with 20 percent of state prisoners.

In 2009, there were 1.7 million drug arrests in the U.S. Half of those were for marijuana. As David Boaz and Timothy Lynch of the Cato Institute noted, "Addicts commit crimes to pay for a habit that would be easily affordable if it were legal. Police sources have estimated that as much as half the property crime in some major cities is committed by drug users."

Drug money, such as booze money during Prohibition, has corrupted countless police, Drug Enforcement Administration agents, border patrol agents, prosecutors and judges.

Drug crime has blighted many neighborhoods. America's appetite for drugs has encouraged lawlessness and violence in many neighboring countries, most recently in Mexico, where its drug violence is spilling north.

Because illegal drugs are unregulated, their purity is unknowable — accounting for thousands of overdose deaths and injuries. Since we maintain drug prohibition to protect people from their own foolish decisions, those overdose deaths must weigh in the balance, too.

Drug prohibition, Milton Friedman pointed out, keeps the price of drugs artificially inflated and amounts to a favor by the government to the drug lords. "The role of the government is to protect the drug cartels," as he provocatively phrased it. Due to our interdiction efforts, Friedman explained, it's enormously costly for a small competitor to attempt to import drugs. This ensures that only the big operators with large fleets of planes, heavy weapons, et cetera can compete.

Prohibition makes it unnecessarily cumbersome for cancer patients and others to receive painkillers and other drugs. A misplaced fear of addiction sometimes leads doctors and other health care providers to underprescribe pain medicine. Meanwhile, any high schooler can score whatever drugs he wants on the way to gym class.

Harvard economics professor Jeffrey Miron estimates that if drugs were legal and taxed, the U.S. and state treasuries would receive $46.7 billion in added revenue, while saving $41.3 billion in expenditures.

What is the downside to legalization? Friedman acknowledged the possibility that legalization might result in some increase in drug addiction. There was, after all, an uptick in alcoholism after Prohibition was repealed. But not all victims are created equal. The child, Friedman notes, who is killed in a drive-by shoot-out between drug gangs is a total victim. The adult who decides to take drugs is not.

Let's stipulate that some unknown number of Americans will become addicts after legalization, who otherwise would not have. We must ask whether the terrible price we are now paying — in police costs, international drug control efforts, border security, foregone tax revenue, overdose deaths, corruption and violence — is worth it.

To find out more about Mona Charen and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM



Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
Milton Friedman was a marvelously intelligent human being (very rare). At present, Ron Paul is the only choice residing in the neighborhood of logic and reason. His record demonstrates his dependability just as clearly as most others demonstrate their dishonesty and self-centeredness. The logic behind the drug war is illogic and worse, it's reinforcement of the clear fact that we are NOT free. In a society centered on freedom/responsibility, we could purchase whatever drug we choose and the results of our use of that drug would be our own responsibility. Ah yes... Freedom and responsibility... what a magnificent fantasy!
Comment: #1
Posted by: ibaconi
Tue Dec 6, 2011 7:38 PM
Paul is NOT the only republican candidate who is in favor of legalizing drugs, and the other candidate is more qualified as he is a former governor instead of a legislator! It is Gary Johnson, who is polling as strongly as other candidates at the debates, but has been excluded from all but one.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Steve
Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:19 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Mona Charen
Oct. `14
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Authorís Podcast
Walter Williams
Walter E. WilliamsUpdated 22 Oct 2014
Newspaper ContributorsUpdated 21 Oct 2014
David Limbaugh
David LimbaughUpdated 21 Oct 2014

28 Aug 2012 This Convention Matters

5 Oct 2012 The Best Presidential Debate Performance

6 Mar 2012 Genius for Subject Changing