The war on drugs has had an on again off again relationship with the media for decades since it really took hold in the mid-20th century. Recently, most of the talk has been about marijuana and its legalization in some states across the US, but rarely has America’s drug policy as a whole been questioned by the mainstream. Most people would assume that the status quo of making drugs illegal, and punishing people for their possession and use, is the only way to protect people from their harmful effects. However, looking at the results over the past 70 years shows the drug war has come with its own extensive list of harms while having no impact on the reduction of drug use. The war has caused an increase in drug production, driven consumers of drugs underground, made consumers hesitant to reach out for help for fear legal consequences, is the single largest factor contributing to the extreme overincarceration rates in America. So, what is the alternative? Decriminalize drugs. Instead of providing drug users with jail cells, the money squandered on drug enforcement should be used to provide citizens with health services to keep them safe and reduce drug related deaths and addiction.

While this may at first sound radical, the reality is far more grounded. Countless organizations, scientists, and studies show that decriminalization would have a far better impact on public health than the current policy of prohibition. This claim is backed up by statistics from Portugal, the poster-child for drug decriminalization. In 2001, Portugal was facing a heroin epidemic and needed a solution. Now, after 15 years of decriminalizing all drugs, the results are in; it worked. Despite fears of increased usage, the country has seen a decline in drug use, drug related deaths, and drug related crimes, leading to much better relationships between communities and the police.

So why has the war on drugs failed and can decriminalization really work to reduce the harms of drug use?

America’s drug policy has failed for a myriad of reasons. One major problem is that current policies strive to reduce drug supply without doing anything to reduce demand. Therefore, attempts to shut down the production of drugs only leads to a spike in the demand for that drug and greater incentives for people to manufacture that drug as the market is willing to pay more. For example, the U.S. implemented strict regulations on chemicals that were used to produce methamphetamine. This put large scale meth producers out of business, but in return hundreds of small scale meth productions popped up all over the country to take their place.  To combat this the government placed regulations on the common decongestant found in many cold medicines, pseudoephedrine, a key ingredient in amateur meth production. Initially, this did have an impact on meth abuse, but only until Mexican drug manufactures seized the opportunity to capitalize America’s strong demand for meth. The meth that was now being smuggled in from Mexico was much purer than it ever was coming from the small-scale producers, rising from 50% purity to around 80%. With this increase in purity came an increase in overdoses as well. In the end, the US’s attempts to reduce the meth problem only increased the strength of the drug and led to an increase in illegal smuggling from Mexico. It’s easy to see that these efforts were counterproductive.

Another example of the war on drugs being counterproductive is its track record of violence. A comprehensive study from the International Journal of Drug Policy finds a “significant association between drug law enforcement and drug market violence,” and concludes that “drug prohibition has not meaningfully reduced drug supply” (Werb et al.). Some estimates suggest the US homicide rate is between 25%-75% higher due to the war on drugs (Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell 3:27-4:00).

America faces a significant problem with the overcrowding of its prisons, a problem that is exacerbated by the arrest of drug offenders. The United States has 5% of the world’s population, but 25% of the world’s prisoners. According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, of the 189,041 total federal inmates, 46.3% of prisoners are in jail due to drug related offenses. These arrests affect minorities especially, with African Americans being around 6 times more likely to be arrested for drug offenses despite usage being relatively the same across ethnicities (Williams).  By arresting people, the government ensures they are unable to reenter society by stamping them with a criminal record that makes it very difficult to find a job. Without the means to work and support themselves, and hit with the feeling of rejection from society, they are likely to fall back into old habits. Drug possession is the number one cause of arrests in the US. All this time and effort spent achieving nothing is a waste of resources and taxpayer money.

So, seeing that prohibition fails in preventing harm from drugs, let’s look to see how a policy of decriminalization and harm reduction would solve these problems.

In the aftermath of Portugal’s Carnation Revolution, a peaceful 1975 coup that overthrew the country’s old authoritarian regime, the country was facing many challenges, including rising rates of heroin use. By the end of the 20th century Portugal was facing a full-on heroin epidemic, and the government was desperate to find a solution. After spending millions on traditional prohibitionist solutions that had little impact, they appointed a commission of nine doctors and judges to come up with a drug policy that would actually work to help solve this problem. The committee concluded that treating addicts like criminals was “the best way to make them wish to keep using drugs. To deal with it by chaining, by humiliating—it’s the best way to make them angry with the system.” Instead, they insisted “drug users should be treated as full members of society instead of cast out as criminals or other pariahs” (Hari). The Portuguese Parliament debated the idea and agreed, passing a policy that decriminalized all drugs in the country, and established healthcare services to both educate and protect people from the potential harms of drugs. In the book Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs, author Johann Hari travels to Portugal to get a better picture of how the country is taking care of its citizens. Police don’t go searching for drug users, but if caught with drugs, instead of being arrested, police will simply write them a ticket requiring a meeting with the Dissuasion Committee. These regional committees are made up of a few legal, healthcare, and social work professionals. Their job is to separate the drug users that don’t have a problem from the addicts. In these meetings, subjects can feel comfortable talking openly without any fear of criminal consequences. The large majority of cases are suspended with no penalty, however multiple visits to the Dissuasion Committee may land you a small, arbitrary fine. If the committee thinks you have a problem they may encourage you to seek treatment, however treatment is voluntary and not forced upon anyone. Hari details his experience observing one of the many addiction treatment centers. Inside, addicts participate in activities that help take their mind off withdraw pains, encourage them to express their emotions, and engage in team building exercises focused on helping them build trust and feel a part of the community. Dr. João Goulão, a physician and one of the key members in the committee charged with reinventing Portugal’s drug policy, explains that the program is born from the belief that “using drugs is only a symptom of some suffering, and we have to reach the reasons” that addicts feel the need to be high most of the time just to get through the day.

This idea is a sharp contrast to America’s policy of labeling addicts as criminals, cladding them in orange jumpsuits, and sending them to prison with the wild expectation that they will somehow come out the other side a better functioning member of society. In fact, often it is this treatment that prevents them from being able to rebuild their lives. Having a criminal record can severely limit a person’s ability to find a job. 

Portugal on the other hand has placed special attention on this problem by focusing heavily on aiding addicts that come to treatment centers in acquiring a job with decent wages. Dr. Goulão thinks this is the most important part of recovery and declaring, “we can’t [tell] them to behave as a normal citizen and deprive them . . . of a role in society: having a job, having work, having a salary.” To incentivize hiring former addicts and giving them a chance at employment the government gives business owners yearlong tax breaks for hiring people coming out of rehabilitation. The goal is to give former addicts something to lose, to give them a reason not to relapse and to stay strong, a reason to fight.

Other forms of aid are also provided. Hari recounts visiting a medical van dispensing Methadone to addicts that weren’t ready to give up their habit. Methadone is a drug that is capable of satiating heroin cravings and symptoms of withdraw without getting the user high so they can go about their normal lives. Social workers chat with the people waiting in line, many of whom they know by name, making sure they are doing well. Another service goes to poor neighborhoods with high concentrations of heroin users to provide users with fresh, clean needles. This side of the aid is grittier and less appealing, but just as important. These interactions build bonds between communities. Hari says, “these social workers told me that before João’s drug revolution, people ran from them. Now, they run toward them. Addicts come forward, to replace their needles, to chat, to say they are thinking about asking for help.” They remind people that they are cared about, and provides them with resources to go to should they ever wish to get clean, or at the very least provides them with resources that very well may save their life by helping them continue their habit in a safer way.

But the question remains: did it work? Yes, yes it did. A 2015 study by the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) looking at the impact that Portugal’s drug policy shows that, despite the fears of many, there has been no rise in drug use across the country, and indeed drug use has declined since 2001, especially use by adolescents. In comparison to the rest of the world the DPA states “Portugal’s drug use rates remain below the European average – and far lower than the United States.” The number of people receiving drug treatment has risen by 60%, which is especially impressive given that treatment is voluntary. 

Perhaps the most important statistics would be the rate of death and the spread of HIV/AIDS due to drug use. Amazingly, drug-induced deaths since 2001 have fallen from 80 per year to only 16 per year in 2012 and the number of new HIV cases among drug users fell from 1,575 to 78, over a 95% decrease.

In a 2010 study published in the British Journal of Criminology, respected researchers Caitlin Elizabeth Hughes and Alex Stevens concluded, “contrary to predictions, the Portuguese decriminalization did not lead to major increases in drug use. Indeed, evidence indicates reductions in problematic use, drug-related harms, and criminal justice overcrowding.”

Portugal has been very pleased with the results and has no plans to change its policies.  In his time in the country, Johann Hari talked with João Figueira, chief of the Lisbon Drugs Squad—essentially the Portuguese DEA—who, at the start of the move towards decriminalization warned, ‘we could have an explosion of consumption . . . [where] lots of people start consuming, and then we lose control of the situation.” After the policy change and he saw that his fears hadn’t come true, he began to notice something unexpected. “[C]rimes related to drug consumption are now finished. It doesn’t happen,” he explains. Before decriminalization, robbery in order to fund heroin addictions was very common, but is now a problem Portuguese police rarely have to deal with. Without feeling constantly threatened, Figueira feels that “people in poor neighborhoods don’t see the police now as enemies.” This is especially relevant in America today, where tensions between police and local communities are very high. Decriminalization could be huge in deescalating this situation and healing the bonds between police and the communities they protect.

While drug policy change has typically been an issue more focused on by the left, this doesn’t belong to any one ideology. This is a change that would be beneficial for everybody. Reduction of crime, death, and disease, while putting tax dollars to a better use and helping the problem of overcrowding in prisons. João Figueira describes himself as “very conservative” and says that Portugal’s political right, himself included, was initially very opposed to the idea. However, since 2001 Portugal has had two left governments and two right governments. Neither wanted to change the policy.  Figueira admits, “I was not expecting that this would work so well.”

That is one of the biggest issues facing the adoption of new policies of decriminalization and harm reduction. While the statistics and research almost unanimously support that it would have a positive impact on the country, politicians and the media are hesitant to talk about the touchy subject. It’s one that has the ability to alienate certain people making politicians worried about losing voters and networks worried about losing viewers. But we as citizens need to start talking about it seriously. It’s an issue that affects us all, regardless of our opinions of drugs. People are going to do drugs whether we like it or not, but it is up to us to decide how we are going to approach the problem and try and fix it.

Treating drug users as criminals doesn’t work. Our policies on drugs for the last 70 years have been a failure, but it doesn’t have to be in vain. It is time to learn from our mistakes and move on to a different tactic to ensure the safety and well-being of our country. Decriminalization alone won’t work. Harm reduction alone won’t work. But together, using decriminalization to help adjust the way we approach the problem of problem drug use, combined with measures that provide options and encouragement instead of punishment to those who need help is the first step to getting us back on track. The US can’t afford to continue wasting billions of dollars while rates of addiction and drug-related deaths rise. The US can’t afford to be complacent while thousands of people are imprisoned needlessly, many of them needing help to get their lives on track, and many of whom will only face greater challenges when they are released. This issue doesn’t belong to any one political party, but is a problem that affects every single American. Following in Portugal’s footsteps, it’s time for America, the most influential country in the world to further prove there is a better way than war.

It’s time for peace.
