The US likes to fight ‘wars’ when it faces huge challenges: Lyndon B. Johnson fought the ‘war on poverty,’ George W. Bush started the ‘war on terrorism,’ and Richard M. Nixon first talked about the ‘war on drugs.’ One can discuss if these wars failed; however, none of these battles can be framed as a total success. It can be assumed that these long-term overarching wars were better fought on a lower level with less ambitious but more practicable goals.
With regard to the US prohibitionist policy on certain psychoactive substances, I will evaluate the US ‘war on drugs.’ Before taking a closer look at the data, I will outline the criteria which should be used to guide public policy in the area of psychoactive substances. The scrutiny of the statistics of the drug phenomenon in the US will then lead to my analysis of possible policy solutions for those fields where the ‘war on drugs’ has not been successful. The standpoints and arguments of different interest groups in the public policy field will be discussed, and strategies for coalition building outlined. In a further step, I will describe how international policies can support my public policy. Different types of evidence to assess the future progress of my policy advices will conclude my analysis and will be followed by an outlook.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Criteria for Guiding Public Policy in the Area of Psychoactive Substances
3. The US ‘War on Drugs’
3.1 Evaluation of the US Drug Policy
3.2 Lack of Progress and Failure of the US Drug Policy
4. Analysis of a Public Policy on Drugs
4.1 Cost Increase for Alcohol Consumption and Crimes under the Involvement of Alcohol
4.2 Decriminalization of Marijuana on the State Level
4.3 Professional Programs in Schools to Raise Risk Awareness
4.4 Extension of Psychological Services for Students in Educational Institutions
5. Supportive International Policies
6. Evidence for Assessing the Progress of a Public Policy on Drugs
7. Conclusion & Outlook
8. Bibliography
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the US prohibitionist "war on drugs" by applying a rational choice perspective and harm reduction principles. It seeks to propose alternative, more practicable policy solutions at the state and local levels to address identified failures in current drug policies.
- Rational choice assessment of US drug policies.
- Implementation of harm reduction strategies in public health.
- Policy proposals for alcohol taxation and marijuana decriminalization.
- Educational and psychological interventions for substance risk awareness.
Excerpt from the Book
2. Criteria for Guiding Public Policy in the Area of Psychoactive Substances
I think that the US drug policy should be assessed from a rational choice perspective. In this theory individuals are assumed to have preferences concerning the ranking of different options. In a cost-benefit-analysis, the individual values the possible positive and negative outcomes of different options and egoistically decides for the one with the highest payoff for himself/ herself. The individual acts in a society in which institutions and their rules guide behaviors and decisions by offering positive and negative incentives – explicitly (laws etc.) and implicitly (cultural, social, group norms etc.). The idea here is that we understand the psychoactive substance commodity system as a phenomenon and do not frame it as a problem – all components of this system (production, trafficking, consumption, money laundering) exist in every nation in the world and politicians have to deal with this fact. From this standpoint, it has to be the objective of a public policy on drugs to adjust the negative and positive incentives in the institutions to change the outcomes of drug production, trafficking, consumption, and money laundering.
In this paper, I will concentrate on the public health aspect of the phenomenon; meaning that I rank public health (mental, physical, and social well-being of the US population) as a high criterion in formulating a public policy on drugs. My assumption is based on the idea of harm reduction, which “refers to any effort to reduce the harm caused by drug or alcohol use. Harm reduction principles help us realize that when we understand our relationship with alcohol and drugs we can make decisions and choices that reduce harm in our lives and in the lives of those we care about.” Let us now take a look at the data for the drug phenomenon in the US to evaluate the success, progress, or failure of the prohibitionist policy with respect to certain psychoactive substances.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: The author introduces the critique of the US "war on drugs" and sets the stage for a policy evaluation based on rational choice and harm reduction.
2. Criteria for Guiding Public Policy in the Area of Psychoactive Substances: Establishes the theoretical framework of rational choice and defines the objective of adjusting institutional incentives regarding drug commodity systems.
3. The US ‘War on Drugs’: Analyzes data on substance consumption and crime, concluding that the current prohibitionist model shows significant failures and lack of progress.
4. Analysis of a Public Policy on Drugs: Proposes specific, decentralized policy initiatives including alcohol taxation, marijuana decriminalization, and expanded educational/psychological support.
5. Supportive International Policies: Argues that international cooperation should focus on shared research and information exchange rather than the current failed international prohibitionist trade policy.
6. Evidence for Assessing the Progress of a Public Policy on Drugs: Outlines criteria and data requirements needed to monitor the future success of the proposed policy shifts.
7. Conclusion & Outlook: Summarizes the shift from a "war on drugs" mindset to a more granular, practicable policy approach based on harm reduction.
8. Bibliography: Lists all academic sources, legal documents, and governmental reports used to support the analysis.
Keywords
US Drug Policy, War on Drugs, Rational Choice, Harm Reduction, Public Health, Prohibitionism, Marijuana Decriminalization, Alcohol Consumption, Crime, Psychoactive Substances, Risk Awareness, Policy Evaluation, Drug Commodity System, Education, Psychological Services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper evaluates the effectiveness of the US "war on drugs" and proposes shifting toward more practical, decentralized policies based on rational choice and harm reduction.
What are the primary themes discussed in the work?
The work covers rational choice theory, public health, the intersection of crime and drug/alcohol use, and specific policy interventions like taxation, decriminalization, and school-based support programs.
What is the primary goal of the author?
The goal is to demonstrate that the current prohibitionist policy has failed and to provide actionable, localized policy recommendations that are more likely to achieve progress.
Which scientific theory frames this analysis?
The analysis is grounded in rational choice theory, focusing on how individuals weigh costs and benefits and how institutional incentives can be adjusted to influence behavior.
What specific interventions are discussed in the main body?
The main body proposes increasing costs for alcohol, decriminalizing marijuana at the state level, implementing school-based risk awareness programs, and extending psychological services for students.
What characteristics define the keywords of this work?
The keywords highlight the intersection of sociology, policy science, and public health, centering on the failure of US drug prohibition.
Why does the author advocate for state-level rather than federal-level policies?
The author argues that federal legislation faces insurmountable coalition-building challenges, while state and local initiatives are easier to implement, evaluate, and adapt to specific regional conditions.
How does the author propose dealing with prescription drug misuse among students?
The author suggests moving away from punitive measures and instead focusing on providing expanded, high-quality professional psychological services in educational institutions to address the root causes of usage.
- Quote paper
- Renard Teipelke (Author), 2010, US Drug Policy, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/149678
