Expanding on the last notion that I expressed, here is a little satirical news article that I wrote up last year when I got to thinking about how the President could align his drug policy with his policies on fossil fuels (and, particularly, ANWR and global warming):
President Announces Radical Shift in Drug Policy
April 9, 2002
In a policy shift that stunned press and pundits alike, President Bush announced “a re-alignment” of drug policy at the White House this morning. Stating that past policies had failed, the President explained “sometimes you just have to look for new and innovative solutions.”
Under the newly-announced policy, the government will seek to lower not total drug use but rather “drug use intensity,” which is total drug use divided by GDP. In this way, the President noted, the nation could make progress in the war on drugs without jeopardizing economic growth. He called the new goal of an 18% decrease in drug use intensity “an ambitious yet achievable goal.” The goal would apparently be achieved by voluntary measures such as paying drug users to lower their drug use. Drug users could also “bank” these reductions in drug use so that they would be credited with the reduction that they have already achieved in case rationing of drugs were imposed at some future date. Similar incentives would be put into place for drug pushers and suppliers.
One of the most surprising aspects of the new policy is the President’s proposal to grow opium poppies in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). “The economic potential is great,” the President said, “and we cannot let our nation’s drug supply be held hostage to evil dictators and drug lords around the world.” The President cited a recent spike in the price of heroin and other drugs as evidence of the necessity to insure an adequate homegrown supply to meet America’s drug use needs.
The ANWR poppy growing plan drew sharp criticism from environmentalists and drug policy advocates alike. However, Presidential aides dismissed claims that the poppy growing would disturb the calving of the Alaskan caribou by displacing their traditional food supply as “more wacko environmentalism unsubstantiated by any evidence other than science.” “This kills two birds with one stone!” exclaimed one obviously gleeful aide. “Once the caribou have eaten enough of those poppy plants, they won’t even notice the oil rigs! The synergies between this plan and the President’s energy policy are just amazing!”
Environmentalists particularly disputed an Administration claim that only 2000 acres of the coastal plain would be affected by the poppy growing. “In fact, this figure includes only the acreage of land actually touched by the poppy plants, that is, the total of the cross-sectional area of each plant stem where it touches the ground. If one also includes the areas between the stems of the plants, which will be placed about one foot apart, the number jumps to over 400,000 acres,” explained a senior scientist at Environmental Defense. Vice President Dick Cheney, while not disputing these figures, pointed out that the Administration’s 2000 acre estimate involved “standard land-use accounting practices,” noting that the space between each plant would remain largely untouched and pristine due to “modern environmentally-sound agricultural practices.” He also emphasized that the details of the planting had not yet been worked out. “The environmentalists are assuming a square array of plants while we may decide to plant in a more efficient hexagonal array,” he explained to one befuddled reporter.
As the press scurried to try to learn more about the motives behind this shift in policy, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer explained that the President had hit upon the idea after extensive discussions with Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. “They had been discussing the need to find more domestic sources of oil to meet the nation’s insatiable energy appetite. The President, whose mind works in truly wondrous ways, saw the obvious connection with drug policy that nearly everyone else had missed. The American people should be thanking God in their prayers each night for a Supreme Court that selected a President capable of thinking outside the box.”
Columnist George Will was uncharacteristically enthusiastic in his assessment. “I think it’s a great idea. Any policy change to correct the inept policies of a previous Democratic Administration is a great idea.” Will admitted that he had not had a chance to read “all of the details” of the proposal. “But I understand it’s about drugs or something,” he added.
While others criticized the President’s plan, it also found quick praise from Senior Policy Analyst Frank Mitchell of the Cato Institute. “We’ve been arguing for this sort of policy for years,” said Mitchell. “Just as environmentalists in the EPA have systematically prevented oil exploration, forcing gasoline prices so high that most American families cannot afford to own and operate more than one Ford Excursion, so our nation’s failed drug policy has had similar consequences. Clearly, government solutions to drugs have failed and it is time to let the free market decide.”
)