Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review March 19, 2001 / 24 Adar, 5761

Jonah Goldberg

Jonah Goldberg
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports


"Traffic" moves propaganda into drug-policy debate

http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- WHETHER or not the movie "Traffic" wins the Oscar for best picture, it still qualifies as the movie of the year, at least in Washington. Senators and policy wonks are invoking it as the motivation for new hearings - and a new focus on drug treatment.

"That movie just brought it home for me that we've got to do more," Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, told The Washington Post. It was "kind of a final tipping point," convincing him to hold Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on how to fund more prevention and treatment programs. Other senators on the committee referenced the movie like co-workers at the water cooler. The Post called this renewed interest an example of "policy imitating art, or at least echoing it."

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. If the movie helps drug-use prevention and treatment efforts, that's great. But before we start basing our drug policies on the message of a single movie, we should be clear about what that message is.

Stephen Gaghan, the Oscar-nominated script writer for "Traffic," told The New York Times last month that "If there is a message to the movie, I guess it's that drugs should be considered a health-care issue, rather than a criminal issue."

He told ABC's George Stephanopoulos: "It's easier to raise your hand and say, 'Hey, I have a health-care problem. I need some help,' than to say, 'Hey, I'm a criminal. I need some jail.'

"You know, we have so polarized the semantics of this debate that to say 'legalization' out loud brands you a revolutionary," says Gaghan. He suggests that, rather than stifle debate, we should, "do a test case somewhere and see what happens. Take a small place, try decriminalizing it, making it legal, giving it to the addicts, see what happens, open a dialogue, tax it, use the money for the treatment programs."

After all, he says: "We've just filled up our prisons. I mean, they're just full. We build more, and we fill them up."

This all sounds perfectly reasonable and humane. But it's actually very misleading and very dangerous. First of all, while it may make Gaghan feel good to say so, you are not a "revolutionary" for saying legalization out loud. William F. Buckley's National Review, the flagship magazine of the conservative movement and my employer, has been in favor of legalization for years.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman is pro-legalization. Kurt Schmoke, the former mayor of Baltimore and current chairman of Yale's board of trustees, has been arguing in favor of decriminalization for more than a decade. In short, this is not a "revolutionary" topic only spoken about in hushed whispers by a few brave souls willing to speak the truth to the powerful.

Second, legalizing drugs in a "small place" has been tried. In Switzerland, for example, they tried it in a park that quickly became known as needle park. They had to shut it down because it became a petri dish of scummy addicts, petty criminals and prostitutes. After that experience, the Swiss voted by 73 percent to reject drug legalization. If they had noted what a sewer Amsterdam turned into because of legalized drugs, they could have saved some hassles.

Lastly, and most importantly, it's simply disingenuous to say that addicts fear getting help because they're afraid of being called "criminals." Nobody ever gets arrested for admitting to past drug use, and most addicted criminals are criminals not for using drugs but for robbing or stealing to pay for them. (Indeed, it's a myth that our prisons are "full" of nonviolent drug offenders.)

Serious addicts are simply afraid of admitting they're serious addicts. It's humiliating to admit to a drug problem, but that's an inevitable byproduct of our society's reasonable effort to stigmatize drug use. Which is really the crux of the issue. It's amazing how many people can say with a straight face that we vitally need "hate crimes" laws to "send a message" about what is and is not acceptable in this country but at the same time reject the notion that our drug laws discourage people from doing drugs.

More importantly, even if our drug laws don't do a great job discouraging drug users, they do have a hampering effect on drug dealers. Gaghan was a heroin and cocaine addict until his three primary dealers were arrested. "My dealer, my backup dealer and my backup-backup dealer. I was left alone, and I just hit that place, that total incomprehensible demoralization," he told The New York Times.

Indeed, it was because his supply of drugs was cut off by our draconian drug laws that he was able to demand treatment.

"Traffic" is a powerful movie, and it deserves much of the praise it's gotten, but let's not confuse a good message about drugs being bad with a bad message full of propaganda.



To comment on JWR contributor Jonah Goldberg's column click here.

Up


03/15/01: Appeal of 'Sopranos' lies in strict code of honor
03/09/01: Organic claims are cleverly written fiction
03/07/01: Snow job: There the media go again
03/02/01: It's a vision thing
02/28/01: SAT is best measure of general aptitude
02/26/01: Easing the estate tax
02/23/01: Clinton defenders finally admit to his power abuses
02/21/01: Failed dot-coms missed rules of the marketplace
02/15/01: Clinton heeds my Harlem advice
02/12/01: Harlem could be Bill's best move yet
02/06/01: Lying, betrayal essential parts of journalism
01/18/01: How to polarize candidates
01/15/01: Dems never tire of using 'race card'
01/11/01: Taking the celebrity out of politics
01/08/01: Unfairly 'borking' Ashcroft
01/04/01: Want to be more efficient? Increase number of politicians
01/02/01: Whole lotta exploitin' goin' on
12/28/00: Hypocrisy police pounce on Clinton book deal
12/26/00: Sometimes, it's good to be a Grinch
12/21/00: Though symbolic, Bush's diversity sends a message
12/19/00: Gore concedes --- but why did it take so long?
12/14/00: Is 'Queer as Folk' what we asked for?
12/11/00: Election mess hardly a 'civics lesson'
12/07/00: Clinton's tacky legacy
12/05/00: Marriage civilizes the manly beast
11/30/00: Gore's speech more pompous posturing
11/28/00: Rabble-rousing Dems act irresponsibly
11/27/00: Duking it out with democracy
11/16/00: Issues irrelevant to most voters
11/14/00: Gore's us-vs.-them campaign
11/10/00: Dot-com disasters missing brand-name success
11/06/00: Conventional wisdom turns with the polls
11/03/00: Clinton photo, appropriately, hits below the belt
11/01/00: Electoral college ensures democracy
10/30/00: New Yorkers, media letting Hillary off the hook
10/23/00: Gore needs to put first things first
10/20/00: Treatment of Farrakhan glosses over odd issues
10/16/00: Secrets of election can be found in 'Star Trek'
10/12/00: Arafat hardly 'provoked' into violence
10/10/00: Undecided voters may be ignorant, not discriminating
10/06/00: The importance of character isn't debatable
10/03/00: Conservatives are the true friends of science You know why?
09/29/00: Symbolic 'born alive' vote makes sense
09/25/00: Conservatives adopt abandoned liberalism
09/21/00: Ventura's media backpedaling makes fiction of his new book
09/18/00: Tough questions target Hillary Clinton's elitism
09/14/00: Hollywood morality to blame
09/11/00: Specifically, AlGore's detailed plan is meaningless
09/07/00: Time-honored tradition: Insult the press
09/05/00: Scouting out justice
08/30/00: The ADL's historical revisionism
08/28/00: Sitcoms will survive, post-"Survivor"
08/24/00: Candidates' choice of movies shows refreshing honesty
08/21/00: An AlGore victory? Only if dead birds fly
08/17/00: AlGore is doomed, but Dems ignore warning signs
08/15/00: Proud and true: He's a Jew
08/10/00: Exploiting religion would be tragic mistake
08/08/00: Cheney serves up tempting appetizer
08/03/00: Republicans now 'nice,' media still nasty
08/01/00: Presidential campaign could use some anti-metric mania
07/27/00: Government shouldn't subsidize Reform Party
07/25/00: Campaign finance 'reform' gives too much power to liberal media
07/20/00: Hillary slur speaks volumes
07/18/00: AlGore's McCarthyism
07/11/00: 'Survivor' shows hypocrisy of animal rights groups
07/05/00: McDonald's deserves a break today
07/03/00: On July Fourth, time to reflect on America's founding
06/28/00: America bashing becomes international pastime
06/23/00: If Fonda is sorry, let her say so
06/06/00: NAPSTER exposes artists' hypocrisy
04/18/00: Not much difference between TV journalists, TV actors

© 2000, TMS