Effective Drug Control: Toward A New Legal Framework

actions could only hope to contain the problem of drug abuse and that total elimination was an unlikely
prospect. See Domestic Council Drug Abuse Task Force, White Paper, September 1975, p. 97-98.
183 In a message to Congress, President Carter stated that “penalties against possession of a drug should not
be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself; and where they are, they should be
changed.” Quoted in David F. Musto (1999), op. cit., p. 261.
184 In 1982 the White House launched a coordinated effort in South Florida to fight illegal drugs entering
the state. The government spent millions to seize over 30 tons of cocaine and 1500 tons of marijuana
between 1983 and 1985. Richard Davenport-Hines (2002), op. cit., p. 437. Despite this massive
interdiction, drug use was estimated by the DEA to have increased substantially during that time. Yet,
while more money was appropriated for law enforcement, funding for treatment and research declined.
David F. Musto (1999), op. cit., p. 267.
185 See Pub. L. No. 98-473, Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1976; Alexander T. Shulgin (1988), op. cit., p. 250.
186 Pub. L. No. 99-570, Oct. 27, 1987, 100 Stat. 3207.
187 Pub. L. No. 100-690, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4181.
188 Alexander T. Shulgin (1988), op. cit., p. 250.
189 See King County Bar Association (2001), Is It Time to End the War on Drugs?, op. cit., pp. 59-65.
190 See discussion of drug courts in Part III, infra, “Controlling Psychoactive Substances; The Current
System and Alternative Models,” pp. 62-63.
191 Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics (1997), Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington: Department
of Justice, table 5.37 p. 414; Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics (2001), Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Washington: Department of Justice, table 5.19, p. 416, and table 6.51, p. 512.
192 Jonathan Caulkins and Sara Chandler, “Long-Run Trends in Incarceration of Drug Offenders in the
United States,” cited in John M. Walsh (2004), Are We There Yet? Measuring Progress in the U.S. War on
Drugs in Latin America, Washington, D.C.: Washington Office on Latin America, p. 7.
193 John M. Walsh (2004), op. cit., p. 7, citing U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States,
2003.
194 Lloyd D. Johnston et al. (2003), Monitoring the Future National Survey Results on Drug Use, 1975-
2002, NIH Publication No. 03-5375, Bethesda: National Institute on Drug Abuse, v. I, table 13.
195 John M. Walsh (2004), op. cit., p. 5, citing National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2003.
196 Lloyd D. Johnston et al. (2003), op. cit.
197 Office of National Drug Control Policy (2004), National Drug Control Strategy, March 2004.
198 Id., FY2005 Budget Summary.
199 Office of National Drug Control Policy (2004), The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981 Through the
Second Quarter of 2003, Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President (Publication Number NCJ
207768), November 2004.
200 U.S. Department of Justice (2004), National Drug Threat Assessment 2004, Washington, D.C.: National
Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), April 2004.
PART II
INTERNATIONAL TRENDS IN DRUG POLICY:
LESSONS LEARNED FROM ABROAD
201 U.N. ECON. & SOC. COUNCIL, SINGLE CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS, 1961, U.N. Doc.
UNE/CN.7/GP/1, U.N. Sales No. 62.XI.1 (1961); U.N. ECON. & SOC. COUNCIL, CONVENTION ON
PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES, 1971, U.N. Sales No. E.78.XI.3 (1977); and U.N., CONVENTION AGAINST
ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES, 1988 (1988).
202 Robert J. MacCoun and Peter Reuter (2001), Drug War Heresies, Cambridge University Press, p. 206.
203 Peter Andreas from Harvard University’s Center for International Affairs describes the political pressure
on nations not to withdraw from global drug prohibition: “Open defection from the drug prohibition regime
would…have severe consequences, placing the defecting country in the category of a pariah “narcostate,”
generating material repercussions in the form of economic sanctions and aid cutoffs and damaging the
country’s moral standing in the international community.” Richard Friman and Peter Andreas, eds. (1999),
The Global Economy and State Power, New York: Roman and Littlefield, pp. 127-8. Dutch scholar Peter
Cohen expresses it more dramatically: “The international drug treaties are among the holiest texts of the