Pubdate: Fri, 05 Sep 2014
Source: Guardian, The (CN PI)
Copyright: 2014 The Guardian, Charlottetown Guardian Group Incorporated
Contact:  http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/174
Author: Robert McGarvey
Page: A7

THE CONSERVATIVE CASE FOR LEGALIZING MARIJUANA

Tax revenue alone will overcome any reluctance from cash-strapped
governments

The Harper government's response to Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau's
plan to legalize marijuana has been predictably dismissive and
partisan. Unfortunately for the government, public support for the
young Liberal leader's plan is growing. Despite obvious reservations,
is there a conservative case for the legalization of marijuana?

I'll admit, right off the bat, that as a non-smoker (and allergic) I
find the prospect of more smoke in the air (marijuana or otherwise)
appalling. And, clearly, like conventional cigarettes, there are
serious health problems associated with pot. Increased pot use will
create victims of vulnerable young people and undermine the health of
the nation. It will also compound the problem of driver impairment;
driving under the influence of drugs is no less hazardous than with
alcohol.

Let's face it: although there are positive medical uses associated
with marijuana use, its legalization is not a particularly welcome
development. But let's assume for a moment that the government is
interested in promoting traditional conservative values like
preserving order and fiscal responsibility. What are the implications
of legalization on these values?

It was preservation of 'order' that buttressed the original War on
Drugs. In June of 1971 U.S. President Richard Nixon declared drug
abuse "public enemy number one". Not only was drug use becoming more
widespread at the time, but - more importantly - pot was the drug of
choice for many protesting (anti-Vietnam war) youth. Whatever the
President felt about drugs, there's no doubt he considered rebellious
young people in the '60s a real threat to public order in the United
States.

Has the War on Drugs preserved public order as it was intended to
do?

According to a recent report from the London School of Economics (LSE)
the answer is no. Five Nobel Prize-winning economists at the LSE
released an 84-page report entitled "Ending the Drug Wars". The report
declared the War 'lost' and called for major drug law reforms.

The numbers are staggering. The (illegal) drug trade is a $300
billion/annum business. Not only is it a cash driven monster, the
level of official corruption, murder and mayhem associated with the
drug gangs is devastating many cities in Europe and North America. In
many drug-producing regions, criminal empires have infiltrated the
government and the police, creating a criminalized culture that
threatens to totally overwhelm these vulnerable nations.

Today, worldwide, approximately 3.5 million prison inmates are in jail
for drug-related offences - almost 60 per cent of the U.S. prison
population is drug related.

In other words, the War on Drugs has not diminished drug use nor has
it preserved social order; it has done quite the opposite.

If the prohibition of alcohol taught us anything, it should have
reinforced the notion that public 'demand' in a free society cannot be
ignored. Banning alcohol might have seemed a good idea in those days;
alcohol was the cause of a lot of family violence, unruly behaviour
and general chaos. Prohibition simply drove alcohol use underground
and, in the process, made a mockery of the law.

The same forces are at work today in relation to marijuana, the
difference being the 'empire of crime' associated with drugs is larger
and much more violent. Apart from another real war, drug-related
violence (and corruption) is the most serious threat to civil society.
So, how do the numbers stack up? They also point in favour of
legalization. The United States alone spends about $60 billion dollars
annually fighting the War on Drugs. Of course, drug related offences
consume massive amounts of law enforcement time and drug related cases
dominate the courts.

Legalization would reduce many of these costs. Further, by legalizing
the supply chain many predict a corresponding decrease in gang-related
murders, and other associated crimes. Naturally, there are tax
implications; there are billions of dollars of (what could be)
legitimate profits at stake and that means tax revenue for
cash-strapped governments.

On the whole the conservative case for legalization of marijuana is
negative; the 'empire of crime' associated with drugs is a greater
threat to public order than the obvious harm that will be done in
legalization. And, if that were not enough, the tax numbers will soon
overcome official reluctance as they have in the past with gambling
and other formally prohibited vices.

Robert McGarvey is an economic historian and co-founder of the Genuine
Wealth Institute, an Alberta-based think tank dedicated to helping 
businesses, communities and nations built communities of wellbeing.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt