Mock Debate

A DEA manual on how to argue against legalization shows lack of imagination.

Jacob Sullum from the July 1995 issue

(Page 2 of 2)

The DEA also shows a lack of imagination when it tries to envision how drugs would be produced and sold in a legal regime.

"If U.S. farmers were given subsidies to produce drugs (as they are given subsidies for tobacco)," the manual warns, "the U.S. taxpayers would be responsible for paying for these subsidies. If foreign sources of drugs (opium or coca) were allowed to supply the raw material, an elaborate system of tariffs and trade preferences would need to be established." And then there is "the cost of collecting revenues associated with drug sales"--who would pay for that?

The 18 questions that the DEA expects will reveal "the shallowness of the legalization concept" actually reveal the shallowness of prohibitionist thinking: "Should all drugs be legalized?...Will they be limited only to people over eighteen?...Who will sell drugs? The Government? Private companies? And who is liable for damages caused by drug use and the activities of those taking drugs?...How will a black market for cheaper drugs be controlled?...How will absenteeism and loss of productivity be addressed?...Will legal drugs require prescriptions?" And so on. Anyone who has given the issue serious thought will be able to answer these questions readily.

The litany serves not so much to stump critics of prohibition as to keep them on the defensive. "Always remember," the guide advises, "the burden of proof is on the proponents of legalization." Lucky for the DEA.