Sep 24, 2009
Over the last few weeks, I’ve had several opportunities to attend Q & A sessions with the Obama administration’s drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske. Increasingly, the audiences are asking him about the cartels in Mexico.
A typical question goes something like this: “Wouldn’t ending marijuana prohibition in the U.S. wipe out the drug cartels like the 21st amendment wiped out the illegal liquor trade in the 1930s?”
His typical response, which I practically have memorized at this point, goes something like this: “The liquor trade was not wiped out in the 1930s. They might have taken a step back, but the violence and criminal activity persisted. They just moved into other areas like kidnapping and drugs.”
I read an article in Reuters today that got me thinking about his response (Mexico cartels kidnap, kill migrants headed to U.S. -- September, 23). Kerlikowske’s point is that ending prohibition would not solve the cartel problem because they would shift to other illegal activities. But the Reuters article shows that the cartels are already engaged in just about every evil deed imaginable: kidnapping, extortion, murder … you name it! And these behaviors have developed over the last decade under a system of prohibition. So what do we really have to fear from taking away the biggest chunk of their business, marijuana sales in the U.S.?
Another one of Kerlikowske’s favorite lines demonstrates his true motives: “Legalization is not in the president’s vocabulary and it is not in mine.” Why, you might ask, is America’s top drug policy official refusing to even listen to one side of this argument? The answer is in United States Code § 1703 (b)(12), which is a federal law that requires the drug czar to “take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a [Schedule I] substance.” Yes, federal law requires the drug czar to blindly oppose half of the policy arena he oversees. It’s like telling the secretary of state to ignore everything south of the equator.
The argument that ending marijuana prohibition in the U.S. would wipe out the cartels is sound -- marijuana alone makes up 70% of their U.S. profits. The official government response is attenuated and dishonest. As a result, they are losing ground. The more we talk about Mexico, the more people are beginning to see the logic behind our arguments.
So go out there and have this conversation with a friend or family member who doesn’t support legalization. Show them the Reuters article, and ask them if the status quo is worth defending.