America’s Budgetary Challenge

Narcotics Policy Reform as Catalyst to Budget Reform (Finding the Money)

According to the official U.S. narcotics policy document—issued annually by ONDCP, the Office of Narcotics and Drug Control Policy, the present annual cost to America of narcotics is $160 billion annually.

The use and abuse of only two drugs, heroin and cocaine, makes up the bulk of this expense, perhaps as much as $122 billion of that total.

Only recently has it been officially acknowledged that narcotics are the principal funding vehicle of worldwide terrorism, a logical and renewable source of revenue for both terrorist and criminal organizations. The 9/11 Commission Report also makes this connection.

We argue that the present cost estimates are too low. Given the fact that the costs of 9/11, and attendant and associated new costs of both homeland security and the worldwide response to terror are not included in the ONDCP narcotic costs total, one might easily speculate a one time 9/11 related cost of $300 billion and an additional annual cost of $100 billion for the foreseeable future. Since narcotics cannot finance 100% of terror, however, and for the sake of this paper I am attributing an additional $20 billion dollars annually to America’s true cost of narcotics. There will be some, of course, who will disagree, some prone to claim a higher or lower number, but suffice it to say that the figure also cannot be zero, as even the 9/11 Commission report makes the unmistakable connection between narcotics and terror financing. If terror financed wholly or in part by narcotics occurs, there is a cost to it. Only the number chosen is subject to debate.

For the sake of current discussion we are now talking about $180 billion dollars annually, as the US cost of narcotics, again with an adjusted figure of $132 billions of that sum attributable to two plant derived narcotics—heroin and its derivatives and cocaine and its derivatives.

Therefore, at a minimum, we could find $132 billions of new money annually if we could eliminate future cultivation of only two narcotics producing plants.

The previously mentioned $72 billion annual costs related to Social Security reform and Medicare prescription funding will now be subtracted from the $132 billion figure. This subtraction of spending creates an additional annual budgetary surplus of $60 billion dollars annually. At this juncture, this is available to Congress for discretionary spending.

The “Law Abiding” Distinction Defined

For the sake of this discussion, and for the most part, I hope you will agree that the old and the ill are not out robbing and creating crimes of violence or other illegal acts. Therefore, by-and-large, these are stand-up Americans, even realizing that some current or future entitlement recipients will not be law abiding in the absolute.

By the same token, narcotics cultivators, traffickers, users and dealers of narcotics are engaging illegal acts—pretty much uniformly defined as such, whether or not the country involved is the U.S., Colombia, Afghanistan, Mexico, Myanmar or North Korea.

When it is possible to create public policy that rewards the law abiding instead of the law-breaking, doing so is a desirable goal.

According to the United Nations, there are currently 191 represented nations. Of these, only 30 are what we would call developed or industrial nations. These 30 belong to OCED, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

More rather than less, these more economically developed are also the law-abiding nations, furthering the economic premise that those who benefit from each other economically are less prone to fight. They are also nations where rule of law tends to be strongest.

The Many Budget Beneficiaries

For lack of a better yardstick, allow me to use these 30 OECD nations as my primary grouping in this discussion of budgetary beneficiaries. They are what Thomas P.M. Barnett calls “Core Nations” in his influential book, The Pentagon’s New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century. What smacks you more forcefully than stepping on a rake is that just 30 of 191 nations account for over 30 trillion dollars of annual GNP! And the bulk of this is shared between the United States and the EU nations.

These 30 are the ‘Core’ nations because they are the furthest along toward economic globalization—far and away.

Conversely, those nations furthest away from the benefits of globalization are those that Barnett calls: The Gap.

Among the nations recently rebuked by President Bush for involvement as either narcotics producers or transit nations are: Afghanistan, the Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Venezuela, and Vietnam. Most of these are among the Gap nations, those less prosperous as ranked by per-capita-income.

In other words, although Mexico is an OECD nation, these are nations for whom globalization will be hardest. Not only are they more easily characterized by their economic rankings but also by their propensity to be dependent upon or not in control of--narcotics production..

Reducing and eliminating that dependency is essential so that developing nations can more quickly enlist both their human and financial resources toward developing more long-term, sustainable (and legal) sources of growth. It is also a vital component that law-abiding citizens are needed for rule of law nations. One cannot depend on illegal activity to sustain economic or moral well-being.

Without narcotics, however, how can poor nation’s peasant farmers sustain themselves, even in the short term? That pointed question is the one most frequently repeated, despite the known attendant facts regarding both societal and environmental degradation.

Too often, the answer is that peasants are not farmers, but merely criminals producing an illegal product—persons following an illegal occupation--callous predators on more affluent others. A common response is: “Let them get another job! “

It is not that easy. In many poor countries the actual cultivators are essentially slaves to drug barons and terror organizations, conscripted child and adult labor,, For such persons, can there be a more humane, hopeful and healthful response?

Money for Human and Economic Development and Change

The answer is yes! Globalizations largest beneficiaries are also the affluent others whose money (for the most part) purchases narcotics. The primary user nations are also well defined as the OECD members. (Unfortunately, the poor nations are also becoming user nations.)

Narcotics are such a significant problem, that it costs the Core nations (on average) at least 1.5% of their GNP, as their societal cost of narcotics. I have already said that in the United States alone that figure is estimated at over 160 billions of dollars annually, and with an adjustment for the counter-terror component included, $180 billion.

Comments?
Email us at info@publicpolicypress.com

©2001-2008 Public Policy Press

Website design by Packetrat Communications