LETTER: Current national policy on drugs deserves campuswide discussion

---

by Jean Claude De Bremaecker

---

To the editor:

Now that we have an expert on the "war on drugs" on the faculty, I hope that the Rice Program Council will organize a meeting at which the pros and cons of a drastic change in the national policy on drugs can be rationally discussed.

For the reasons outlined below, I believe that the following policy should be adopted: Drugs should be regulated like tobacco and alcohol, and their use should be decriminalized.

At the same time, the United States and the individual state governments should launch a serious and long-term effort to discourage drug use.

There may be overriding rational arguments for keeping the present policy; I do not know them.

It is, however, clear that the economic interests of the builders of prisons, the many Departments of Corrections, the Drug Enforcement Administration, etc. all push in this same direction.

Let me, on the other hand, briefly list the reasons for my present thinking:

* The suggested change in policy would obviously cut the cost of drugs and would probably result in an increase in their use.

True, but this is just the bad side of the story because it also would greatly reduce the crime rate, free police for other activities and reduce the power of crime syndicates both here and abroad.

* The funds now used to "eradicate" the cultivation of coca, marijuana and poppies in Mexico, Colombia, etc. would no longer be needed.

The cessation of the activities of the DEA in those countries would remove an irritant in our relations with them.

More importantly, it would reduce or eliminate the power of the drug traffickers and the ensuing corruption there.

* The funds now used to build and maintain prisons are on the order of $20,000 per prisoner per year (more in some states, less in others).

To these should be added the other expenses of the "war on drugs" and the cost of the DEA. Most of these funds should be used to educate and train young people.

* A large percentage of African-American men are presently in jail (the figure of one-third sticks in my mind), many of them for drug-related offenses.

The situation is so bad that a former prosecutor has suggested that black jury members should acquit black offenders despite the law.

* The number of drug offenders in jail is so large that prison officials are forced to release dangerous criminals who have served but a fraction of their time.

Taken together, these reasons appear ample to justify the proposed change, but rational arguments to the contrary may be heard.

I should perhaps mention that I have never used illegal drugs myself.

Furthermore, I do not suggest that the proposed policy would be "good," but only that it would be much better than the present one; and while I have no hope that the present laws will be changed soon, this is no reason not to get the ball rolling.

Finally, one of the roles of a university is rationally to discuss controversial topics; let us not shirk our responsibility, disagreeable as it may be.

Jean Claude De Bremaecker

Professor Emeritus

Geology and Geophysics

This item appeared in the Opinion section of the March 15, 1996 issue.

Copyright © 1996 The Rice Thresher. All Rights Reserved.
This document may be distributed electronically, provided that it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of:
The Rice Thresher, Rice University, 6100 Main, Houston, TX 77005-1892, USA.