Resolved: We Should Not Be Fighting the Drug War.Guest: Senator John Dunne
ce...@yale.edu
FLOOR MEETING
OCTOBER 11, 2005 - LC 211
At 7:40 pm, the Speaker called the meeting to order.
The chairmen make their announcements.
The President welcomes the night's guest, former New York State
Senator John Dunne. He was a cosponsor of the Rockefeller drug laws,
but now wants them repealed. He will be speaking about laws and the
drug war, in general. The main question will be whether or not we
should be legislating against drugs at all.
The President of the Yale Political Union moves the topic Resolved: We
Should Not Be Fighting the Drug War.
Mr. John Dunne remembers spending two years at Yale as a law student.
Asks if anyone "grew up" in Vanderbilt. He says that he is proud
to be a Yale alumnus. Dunne remembers that he was rejected by Yale
College, but eventually made it to the Law School. He notes that he
would like to be a part of the Conservative or Tory parties because
their debate topics dealt with social policy.
Dunne observes that the war on drugs has failed to reduce addiction or
get rid of drug dealers. It is diverting energy away from how to deal
problems of addiction. Like the war in Vietnam, it has lasted too long
and cost too many lives. Focus needs to be on education and treatment.
Why do politicians adopt war metaphor and why do presidents need to
appoint drug czars? Politics is like warfare. What goals, resources,
and courses of action should be taken? Former police chief of Los
Angeles said that casual drug users should be "taken out and shot".
He defended that statement by saying that we're in a war. Former
New York State Governor, Mario Cuomo, said that policy makers need to
distinguish between ideas that sound good and good ideas that are
sound. The war on drugs isn't a good idea that's sound. How much
longer will war on drugs continue? The time has come that we have to
stand back and figure out what we've done and where we want to go.
When did the war start? Nixon declared an all out global war on the
drug menace. Reagan and Bush Sr. did the same. The National Review
declared that the war on drugs had failed. Buckley observed that more
people die from the war on drugs than from overdosing. Drive-by
shooting, turf wars, etc are results of the drug war. The harsh
reality is that drugs are here to stay in our society. It's time to
abandon the idea of a drug free society. We need to focus on a way to
live with drugs so that they cause the least amount of harm. What's
wrong with war? Everyone has stake in ending the war...parents, social
justice advocates, environmentalists, fiscal conservatives. The
government has spent billions of dollars on this, yet drugs are cheaper
and purer than ever. The war on drugs has become a war on families,
public health and constitutional rights. Drug related crime is result
of drug prohibition. Drug abuse is bad, but the drug war is worse.
Some say that the war helps communities of color be safer. Black women
are 10 times more likely to be reported for pre-natal drug use than
white women. White people use more drugs, but minorities are convicted
more often. A new version of the Patriot Act, called the Victory Act,
would include the War on Drugs. Another myth is that good drug policy
outlaws drug use. Harm reduction provides a strategy that is away from
legislation. This is alternative approach to drug policy and
treatment. Reality-based drug education is critical to harm reduction.
Must identify effects and casualties of this war. Evidence lies in
impact on women. Who ever heard of female drug lord? Men are almost
always head of drug links, but women are convicted much more often.
Has had devastating effects on women, especially those of color or
low-income. Problems are addressed as a criminal issue instead of a
health issue. Drug treatment is cheaper than the cost for
incarceration and foster care for children. Thirty years ago,
Rockefeller proposed laws. The unhappy conclusion is that the measures
were strong but ineffective. Doesn't propose decriminalizing current
criminal behavior. Wants to emphasize treatment as an option for
non-violent drug users, which would save space in jail for king pings
and violent drug users. Incarceration is appropriate for violent
people. The justice system needs to be able to utilize alternatives.
Current drug lords are relying on imprisonment. Criminal justice
system can reduce use and addiction by diverting focus to treatment.
In NY, too many non-violent people have been sent to prison (which
costs too much money) since the Rockefeller drug laws. Treatment
alternative is more cost effective and better at dealing with drug use.
Not good for all people. Need to return sentencing discretion to
judges. Seeks nothing less than a decrease in substance abuse. We
need to ask if the criminal justice system is effective in reducing
substance abuse and crime? Need to answer this based on science, not
politics. It is irresponsible to do otherwise.
Mr. Johnny Beski asks why the gentleman is not arguing for
decriminalization.
Mr. Dunne explains that it has a lot to do with his political
background. Always tried to work for achievable and doable. Thinks
that we have failed to use our resources to address problems of drug
abuse. Not happy with situation in Holland. Legalization of drugs has
done harm.
Ms. Shari Wiseman wonders how Mr. Dunne went from supporting to
opposing the Rockefeller drug laws.
Mr. Dunne says that Rockefeller launched the most ambitious methadone
treatment program. Despite cost, there was no beneficial effect. This
was an elaborate drug treatment program. Many of the people in it were
sent to prison through these programs. Was disturbed that the majority
of people sent to prison were Black or Latino.
Mr. Noah Mamis notes that we have all been through DARE and have seen
the "This is your brain, this is your brain on drugs" commercials.
They're not effective. What should be done about that?
Mr. Dunne says that DARE is a disaster. Says that too many programs
use scare tactics and don't explain the real problems of addiction.
This is because people want a drug free society. We have to develop
greater awareness and help those that are addicted.
A lady in the body asks what Mr. Dunne thinks about legalizing
marijuana for medical purposes.
In response, Mr. Dunne states that he has to disagree with Ashcroft.
He hopes that states be allowed to authorize the use of marijuana for
those purposes.
Dr. Huang tells Mr. Dunne that he was involved in a study in
Connecticut and discovered that a big problem for treatment programs is
that many people choose to go to jail instead. The programs required
much more time.
Mr. Dunne reminds the body that it is very difficult to be diverted
into a treatment program. The problem is that the program is run by
the DA and not the court. While the success rate is better than that
of unsupervised treatment, it can still be better.
The President of the Yale Political Union moves that we thank Mr. Dunne
for a fine speech on the floor of the Yale Political Union.
Speaking in the negative, Mr. Andrew Olson agrees that the war on drugs
is like Vietnam. He says that both wars were fought in ridiculous
ways. Mr. Olson notes that we haven't gotten any good results and
concludes that the war is therefore retarded.
The Speaker warns him not to say "retarded".
Olson apologizes and continues. Problem is that the federal
government is wrongly positioned to tackle this issue. This war should
be led by the states. The NY government is being ineffective. Alabama
is doing a good job. While they supported California's decision,
their program is doing well. This is a state that knows how to use
resources to address problems. There is a constitutional rights
problem. Federal government has no right to tell you not to snort your
cocaine. States can do this. Olson states that the war on drugs is
not related to crime. When else have we experienced this? He saw it
in The Godfather. There were drugs then, but the justice system was
ineffective. The answer is to bring the justice system into those
areas. That's what ended the Mafia's control. Olson also admits
that he hates welfare and doesn't think the appropriate response to
drug abuse is more welfare. Non-violent people are part of larger
society. What message do we send when we say that some drug users are
ok and some aren't? We're letting the black market flourish and
letting people get off easily. Shows gum, Blistex, and Gobstoppers to
explain how much 2 ounces of cocaine looks like. That's a lot of
gum, Blistex, and Gobstoppers! That's a lot of cocaine too!
The President tries to decide what question to ask. In the meantime,
she mentions that size and weight don't necessarily correlate.
Alabama is good at locking people up. But doesn't show if it's
stopping people from doing drugs.
Olson notes that it is a valid point.
The Vice President says, "Of course, she's the president!"
Olson asks if the President of the YPU is infallible...he thought that
was just the Pope. He then says that people should know that drugs are
dumb. Believes that if drugs are legalized, they should have warning
labels. He says that we need to show people we are serious.
Ms. Alexandra Charrow notes that The Godfather occurred during
Prohibition.
Mr. Olson admits that The Godfather was not the only time he saw crime.
Remembers driving through DC. He says that the real reason why there
is crime is the lack of law enforcement. That's why people do what
they want.
The Chairman of the Party of the Right says that she will not ask if
Mr. Olson is chewing gum. Instead, she wants him to address the point
that the former Senator brought up: does putting people in jail destroy
their lives?
Mr. Olson says that he has difficulty understanding Mr. Dunne.
Doesn't know how you cannot decriminalize and hold Dunne's point of
view. It knocks a hole in the justice system. If we're going to
keep drugs illegal, we must show strong enforcement. Zero
tolerance...that's the answer!
In the affirmative, Ms. Sophie Brill tries to refute Mr. Olson's
points. She recalls that he arrived at the conclusion that federal
government shouldn't be involved. Opposite of what Gonzalez wanted.
With respect to Alabama: arresting people isn't a sign of success.
If welfare is about money, it costs more to put them in jail.
Incarcerating is more expensive and we should do that because it
doesn't help people? Doesn't make sense! Most libertarians should
be alarmed by Patriot (Victory) Act. War on drugs gives federal
government more power. Says that there is a class bias. Laws dealing
with crack are harsher than cocaine laws. Some say that it's because
minorities use crack. Prescription drugs that affluent people are on
are almost the same as the stuff used on the streets. Laws are
socially unjust. Laws haven't been helping anyone...we should end
war on drugs.
The Floorleader of the Left says that racial disparity can be fixed
with reform. It's not necessary to end the war on drugs.
Ms. Brill says that reform would end the war on drugs. War metaphor
won't apply anymore. We should end disparity by making sentences
harsher for drugs that rich white people use.
The Chairman of the Independent Party, Mr. Dave Derusha, is the next to
speak in the negative. Admits that he made the decision to speak
late...apologizes for lack of polish. Wants to reiterate what FLL was
beginning to get at: reform instead of ditching. If we say that we
have a war, then there is an escalation of response. Saying that
we're ending war is bad...it's like admitting defeat. Wants to go
back to Olson's speech. Agrees that problem isn't the war, but the
way it's being fought. Wants more emphasis on education and rehab,
but doesn't mean we can't have a strong war. Thinks that we must
acknowledge that rehab won't work as well as we want. But, it
doesn't have to be a trench war. Needs powerful social norms. We
can't pull that off if we say that we can't have a war on drugs.
Should remember that criminals commit crimes...drug criminals probably
commit other crimes. Not the case of casual users. Giving up means
that we've been defeated.
The Vice President asks why Mr. Derusha thinks that this is a war worth
fighting.
Mr. Derusha knows that people will ask, "If drugs are bad and it's
government responsibility to fight it, then what about alcohol?"
Drug use is a different thing. Substance abuse in general is bad.
Nature of substance is different. Different debate.
Mr. Aaron Margolis ask why he should give tax money to the government
to prevent "that guy" from using heroine?
Mr. Derusha explains the impact on the people around drug abusers. It
has an effect on society. The victim is not just the user.
Mr. Matt Grant notes that smoking has reduced even though there was no
war on smoking. It was a public info campaign.
Mr. Derusha thinks that there is more at stake here. We never declared
the smoking war. In this case, we have declared a war on drugs.
The Chair of the Liberal Party wants to know how laws are going to
realistically make the distinction between casual and violent users?
Mr. Derusha believes it to be unrealistic to say that there will be
different sentences for each case. Judges should have more
jurisdiction, but we shouldn't over-rely on rehab option.
Ms. Shari Wiseman makes the next speech in the affirmative. Prefaces
speech with a confession...uses cocaine every single day. Ms. Wiseman
works in a lab that studies addiction. Looks at effects by shooting up
her rats. Personally having worked with drug abuse, knows a lot about
addictive behavior. Has seen what animals look like when on cocaine
and when going through withdrawal. Not in favor of legalizing drugs.
Addicts have impaired judgment and can't inhibit impulses. This is
dangerous for society. Addiction is a medical disorder. Different
because its onset is due to a person's decision to use drugs. Wants
to address Olson's point that "drugs are dumb", which implies
that people that use drugs are dumb. What we should be focused on is
the impact that drugs have on urban poor. Olson glosses over fact that
population is poor, people feel like there's not much to live for.
People are willing to do a lot to obtain drugs...not so simple to say
that it's an illness for the dumb. Wants to spend money on treatment
and research. Wants to talk about prison industrial complex. Suggests
that more than Vietnam War, drug war is more like Iraq War. It's a
war that exists so that big businesses make more money. This is heir
to slavery: involves minorities and poor people, profiteering from
their labor, used by states to gain electoral votes. Drugs are
available in jail...jail isn't effective treatment.
The Vice President asks if Ms. Wiseman wants decriminalization.
Ms. Wiseman responds that she doesn't want that.
The Floorleader of the Left wants Ms. Wiseman to consider that
enforcement and treatment are hand in hand strategies.
Ms. Wiseman notes that it is true that you can't treat people until
you find them. She wants to find ways prevent people from getting
addicted or prevent relapse.
The Chairman of the Independent Party agrees that catching people and
having treatment for casual users is good...but how would you do this
before they're binge users?
Ms. Wiseman observes that if drugs haven't had adverse consequences,
people don't want to be treated. People should look for these people
in communities. It would have to be a priority for society.
Mr. Andrew Olson claims to not be a fan of prison industrial complex.
But, it gives us offsets the cost.
Ms. Wiseman: thought about giving a sarcastic speech on how the prison
industrial complex gives us money.
For another speech in the affirmative, Mr. Schwab wants to draw
attention to the economic reality in this country. Money for drugs
comes from minorities and young people (people that don't have much
money). Where is money going? Goes to buying guns, sports utility
vehicles, and harder drugs. These make our cities unlivable! This
makes people leave cities and have to drive more. People have greater
degree of control in where they'll position themselves in economy.
Believes that drastic civil liberties infringement is incredible. We
have experience concealing drugs. What would it mean to root out more
drug users?
The President is interested in hearing more about the link between drug
war, SUV's, and moving away from cities.
Mr. Schwab says that SUV's are bought by drug lords, which makes
cities undesirable.
The Chairman of the Conservative Party thinks that Mr. Schwab has more
of a problem with suburbanism than with drugs and violence. Comments?
Mr. Schwab thinks people should be able to choose where they want to
live. Citizens of this country don't really have a choice of where
they can live. Poor people should have the same chance to live in
these other places as rich people do.
Ms. Wiseman moves that we thank Mr. Schwab for a fine maiden speech on
the floor of the Yale Political Union.
Mr. Dunne give his closing remarks. Wishes he could have a discussion
as fruitful as this one in Albany. Compliments YPU for talking through
this. He did this so he could learn something. The point he wanted to
make is that we can't be nuanced in each case. Each person that
comes to judicial system is entitled to be treated as human being.
Courts should have opportunity to let a person that wants to undergo
treatment, do so. We have to take a more personalized approach.
The Chairman of the Conservative Party moves the previous question.
With a vote of
Affirmative: 20
Negative: 5
The motion clearly passes.
The Chair of the Liberal Party moves that we adjourn.
Respectfully submitted,
Maria Gabriela Orochena
Secretary of the Yale Political Union