Poem

Started over 35 years ago

A war that now costs over $40 billions a year

Has killed millions of people

And most people don't even know its going on

I'm talking about the war on drugs in the U.S.

This all started when Reagan was in office

Cocaine hit the streets harder and faster than a hurricane   

And it only got worse from there

Presidents haven't been able to control this problem

So who can?

Will it ever get better? 

What is Obama gonna do?

Who can we count on? 

How much longer?

So many questions, when are they going to get answered.

Annotated Bibliographies

1. Drug Policy Alliance. "Effectiveness of the War on Drugs". Drug Policy Alliance. 11/10/08 .

This article focuses on the government's standings that we are not winning the war on drugs, that the drug war fueled America's prison boom, the public health costs of the drug war, how the drug war impacts American youth negatively educationally, and failed prevention strategies.

It was not the most beneficial article, but gave a good summary of all of the main dynamics of the war. It was somewhat repetitive to the information I already had learned. The information was reliable and presented in a rather objective way.

This was helpful in helping me understand how the war on drugs has effected America in a lot of different aspects. It helped shape my argument because it showed that this is a bigger problem than it first seems because drug use effects a lot of areas. It did not change how I think that the war on drugs is not progressing.

2. Feldman, Charles. "America's 'War on Drugs' reduces users, but supply keeps coming". CNN. 09/17/08

This article discusses how drugs have increased and we should keep trying to fight the war on drugs because it has been somewhat successful. Although drugs are not eliminated they are being used less and this is a positive step towards ending drug abuse. It argues that we should keep fighting and there are battles yet to be fought.

It was useful to bring controversy to the topic and my research topic because it is the opposite of a lot of my sources. It provided statics that show the decrease in drug use in America. Coming from one of America's largest new stations, the information is very reliable. The source is biased, taking the side that we should keep fighting the war on drugs.

This source was helpful in opening my eyes to the possibility that we can win the war. It gave me a greater understanding of the complexity of the issue. It did not help me shape my argument, other than proving that the successes and decreases in drugs is very minimal.


3. Gleason, Chistina . "Financial Cost of the War on Drugs". Suite 101. 11/10/08 .

This article talks about how much money is being spent on the war against drugs. It covers all the financial aspects of the war. It includes how much money it takes to keep an inmate in jail who has been convicted of using illegal drugs, providing and paying police officers with drug units, and other programs such as DARE. This article provides statics of the money spent since Reagan was in office and how it has increased over the years.

This was a useful source because it is the only one of my sources that provides information about the financial dynamics of the war. The information is reliable and is a genuine source with credible references cited. This article is biased, saying that spending this amount of money is useless since there has been little progress to end the war on drugs.

Gleason's article was helpful and corresponded directly with my topic. It helped shape my opinion on my topic after I read how much money was being wasted on trying to prevent using drugs. This was used in my research project because it gave concrete facts and a dollar value to the unproductive war against drugs.

4. "The War on Drugs Can Be Won." Alfonse D'Amato.

Current Controversies: Drug Trafficking. Ed. Karin L. Swisher. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1991.

D'Amato states in this article that the war against drugs can be won only if we attack it at every level of the Federal, state, and local government and by every citizen in every community across the country. It is a war that is not concerned with borders and overflows from country to country. Colombia has long been a drug provider to the U.S. and when we stop sending money there the flow of drugs should decrease.

This source sheds light on the positive side of the issue, that it is a matter of wanting to stop the use of drugs, and when that occurs we will become a drug free society. It cited many references and was a reliable source. It was presented in a biased manner and I was able to use this in my research to show it can be won even though it will not be easy.

This source was not very helpful as it was not very focused on the problems in America, but more of Colombia. It made me think about how the drug trafficking may be at the core of drug abuse in America. It did change my perspective on my topic because it helped me realize that if we control drug trafficking first we can demolish the war within our own borders.

5. "The War on Drugs Cannot Be Won." Doniphan Blair.

Current Controversies: Drug Trafficking. Ed. Karin L. Swisher. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1991

In this article the issue that even if the U.S. does get all the addicts and dealers off the streets it is going to cost the U.S. a bunch of money to keep them incarcerated. Jail is not therapy for addicts and when released from jail the problem will continue and may even worsen, as the person no longer has a job, supportive family and friends and is in an unstable living condition which makes them vulnerable to drug use. It states that the person using drugs does not take responsibility and is in denial of their conditions. The war is lost, funding that does not correct the problem is failure.

This information was useful because it supported my argument that this war is a lost cause and wasting tax payers money and a different approach is necessary. This article talks about the peoples problems versus the nations problems and in that way is different from all my other sources. It was written by the same author of "The War Can Be Won", and had credible sources and references to back up his argument.

This article was helpful because it backed up my argument. It helped solidify my argument because it talked about try to sober up the addicts rather than spending money to incarcerate them which is not fixing the problem, but making it worse as the government spends more money. This did not change how I feel about my topic, it has fueled my argument and further made me believe this war is a lost cause.

Letter to a leader

Dear President-Elect Barack Obama,
The war on drugs in America has been an amoral issue that has existed for the past forty years and has yet to be resolved. It is essential that the government is adamant and persistent in enhancing the previous and current efforts to fix this problem. This problem has escalated over the years. We are now fully engrossed in this war on drugs, and should limit our unproductive spendings and make better use of our money to terminate this war. The United States government has spent 40 billion dollars on the prevention of drug use in America since the late nineteen seventies. Reagan increased spending on the war against drugs drastically, however, no major improvements have occurred since. Obviously, we are spending money in all the wrong places. Not only is the money being spent carelessly, but also, our laws, amendments, and policies in place to discourage the use of illegal drugs are not being enforced.
If the government focuses its efforts on enforcing our laws through local police officers, senators, and other authoritative figures in communities across America, the potential to end the war would skyrocket. The laws themselves are not flawed or in need of enhancement, but just need to be followed and lived by. Currently, these laws seem to go by the wayside as drug trafficking has become a substantial mean of income and a way of life. We have laws in place to make our nation the best it can be and not enforcing them allows for the disintegration of a better America.
Spending money on programs that discourage the use of drugs and promote educating the youth about the dangers in drugs is something that would require nominal efforts and have profound results. D.A.R.E. is an example of a program dedicated to keeping drugs off the streets and away from our youth and teens, who are the most vulnerable targets in this war. Education is the means of prevention in this case. A shift in spending could make this problem very easy to resolve.
Change in America is something you promised, and it starts with the people who are currently tainted by drugs. Any efforts to make our streets safer deserves acclaim. It is an overlooked problem that, although concurrent among many others, is one that can easily be avoided and resolved. I strongly advise, for the safety and well-being of our nation, that you thoroughly consider taking action. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Humberto Murillo

Data

While searching for graphs that are related to my topic I came across that caught my eye.  This graph that I picked showed the number of annual deaths caused by drugs in the United States.  It mentions eight different killers that ranges anywhere from tobacco to marijuana to prescription pills.  And while the U.S. government is so worried about banning illegal drugs.  It's not even in the top three killers in the U.S. So should we be spending so much time, effort and money on this war?  

My data showed that the number one killer in the America is tobacco.  That kills over 400,000 people a year.  Which is then followed by alcohol, side stream tobacco smoke, prescription drugs, all illegal drugs combined, cocaine, heroin and marijuana.  Which tell me that the U.S. needs to worry about other things that are killing more Americans then illicit drugs.  

 All in all, this graph was a huge eye opener and help me to further realize that all the money that is being spent could and probably showed be going to other, not necessarily better issues, but more important issues.   

Debate

Although there are many sides to this war, two articles were founded that was were stated two very different opinions.  For example the first article that was found was called "The War On Drugs Cannot Be Won." It states many facts and opinions on why this war is failing and how it needs to change.  The second article that was found was called "The War On Drugs Can Be Won."  This article states facts and opinions too, but this one talks about how the war can be won.

Even though there are many differences there are some similarities as well that were talked about in both the articles.  For example, one of the similarities between the two were that the gave new ideas and advice on how to win the war.  One idea that was said was that, "legalizing drugs will not work." (D'Amato, 1991).  This was said after the government announced that they were going to try and legalize cocaine and heroin.  Which also brought the author to say this, "to win the war, we ultimately are going to have to focus much more attention on reducing the demand for drugs and preventing young Americans from ever trying them in the first place." (D'Amato, 1991).  Which agrees with the other article that says it needs to spend more time and money to educate the young by the program D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education).

Those seem like great ideas stated by both articles, they disagreed on everything else.  Which was anywhere from one article saying that to much money was spent already and that we need to give up as soon as possible, to the other saying we need to put more programs out there to try and stop the drug abuse.  Also making it easier for addicts to get help, because even though prison does keep them off drugs it does not help them rehabilitate or prepare them for the real world such as jobs and a steady home. 

In conclusion, even though this article were really old they gave really good information that might help us today on the same war.  Both of them got there point across very well which is good and bad because it is hard to pick a side.  

"The War on Drugs Can Be Won." Alfonse D'Amato.

Current Controversies: Drug Trafficking. Ed. Karin L. Swisher. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1991. 

"The War on Drugs Cannot Be Won." Doniphan Blair.

Current Controversies: Drug Trafficking. Ed. Karin L. Swisher. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1991.

Reflection

The way I got started on this topic was quite difficult, I started on with a closely related topic, that was the war on drugs at the U.S.-Mexico border, but that one turned out to be way more complicated because I couldn't find any information about this topic. So, I changed it to just the U.S. war on drugs. By doing this I feel I have learned a lot more then I would of on the other topic. For example one thing that I have learned about this topic is that it i really expensive and it's going no where. $40 billions a years, that's a lot!

This war is a waste of time and money, I understand that's it's important, but I believe that this country has bigger issues at the moment.  From my understanding and research i have learned both sides of this issue, and from both sides all I have read it that the U.S. has spent $500 billion in the last 35 years and all that's happening is that the drugs are easier to find and buy then ever before.  Honestly I believe that they should make drugs legal.  Because everyone always wants to do what is forbidden that way the temptation is not there.  I almost bet that,that would work better than spending $40 billion a year.  

In conclusion, I am at a point where this is a very interesting topic, but at the same time it makes me mad how much money the U.S. is spending and nothing is getting done.  In my next blogs I hope to learn more about why this war is not working.  Also I would like to learn a lot more from the drug dealer's or user's point of view.  How and why they got so hooked on these types of drugs? And why don't they try and seek help?  

Research and Report

There are many questions that could be asked about this issue, it's a very controversial. Some people think that the U.S. should end this war. Others think that it should continue and it expand as far as law enforcement and money. Three questions were asked and research about this issue. How much has this war on drugs cost the U.S.? How effective has the war been? Has the Bush administration done good or bad for this war? To answer these questions some in depth research had to be done.
The first question that was asked was, how much has this was on drugs cost the U.S.? Well this can be explained in many different ways. Ben Wallace-Wells of Rolling Stone said, " After Thirty-Five Years and $500 Billion, Drugs Are as Cheap and Plentiful as Ever: An Anatomy of a Failure." Also according to the author of "Financial Cost of the War on Drugs," said that it's a $40 billion a year, but in 2003 the amount spent was which equals to $600 every second. That is to much money being spent on this war that has failed for over 35 years. That money could have gone to more important issues that are going on in the U.S.
Although the U.S. government has spent an enormous amount of time fighting this war on drugs it has not paid of very well. According to the author of "Effectiveness of the War on Drugs," it has been proven that the war budget has increased $39 billion since 1980. Despite America's efforts, illicit drugs are cheaper and purer than they were two decades ago, and continue to be readily available. This should tell the U.S. something, that either they need to give up or put more money an effort into it.
Many people believe that Bush's administration has done no good for this country in 2 terms. They were wrong, his administration saw victory on this war on drugs, not complete, but they did see very good progress. In an interview that President Bush has with Rolling Stone he stated some goals that he and his administration set out for and they reached them, as he say in his interview. "In 2002, I set a goal to reduce illegal drug use by 10 percent over two years, and by 25 percent over five years. This Monday, we will release the annual National Drug Control Strategy, which shows the impressive progress we have made. Youth drug use declined 11 percent between 2001 and 2003, meaning 400,000 fewer young people used drugs. These results exceeded our goal, and proved that our hard work is paying off." Those seem like some pretty successful numbers compared to the other administrations that have gone through the White House. What does President-Elect Barack Obama have in store for this country?
In conclusion, hopefully this research answered those questions asked. Also hopefully this helps you develop your own thesis about the America's war on drugs, and if you want to see your tax money funding this failing war.

Drug Policy Alliance. "Effectiveness of the War on Drugs". Drug Policy Alliance. 11/10/08 .

Gleason, Chistina . "Financial Cost of the War on Drugs". Suite 101. 11/10/08 .

Longley, Robert . "Bush Sees Victories in War on Drugs". Rolling Stone . 11/10/08 .

Wallace-Wells, Ben . "How America Lost the War on Drugs". Rolling Stone . 11/10/08

Survey

In this survey I was kind of unclear about what my topic was and what i wanted it to be. Therefore the wrong questions were asked. I will still give the information that I collected, but keep in mind that this information is closely related to my topic but it's not 100 percent. Now that you know that, here is what the survey looked like. The 3 questions that i asked where: Do you think the U.S. needs to do more at the border to appease this war on drugs? Do you think Mexico needs to do more at the border? Do you think this war at the the U.S.-Mexico border taints America? The answers that I expected were yes for every question. This is because that is what I believe needs to happen and I was pretty sure everyone did too. This survey was also given to five males and five females, a total of ten students.

For the most part my prediction was correct. About 80 percent of the students that answered the survey agreed with me. They thought that the U.S. needs to be doing more at the border to stop this war. 8 out of 10 students said answered yes to the first question 5 of them being girls. 2 of the boys said no, and one of them even left a footnote saying that he thought that the U.S. did not need to spend anymore money. All 10 answered yes to the second question which was surprising. The same male also left another note saying that he thought it was Mexico's problem that they needed to put in the most work. Then finally the third question, this one was the same as the first 8 out of 10. Except that it was 4 girls and 4 guys that said yes. With a female this time that left a note saying she thought that that's the reason the drug-gang violence is so high in the U.S. I think the numbers came out the way they did is because most of the students knows how the crisis in Mexico is going. For example all the murders of innocent people caused by this drug war at the border. The thing that might of also influenced people to answer the way they did was because almost half of the students still have family in Mexico which they still talk to. Therefore they are very well informed on the subject. These numbers came out the way I predicted.

Like mentioned in my introduction this is no longer my research topic, it's extremely close, but not totally. So, even though this information was very interesting it really doesn't help me on what to research in later blogs.

Website Review

This website was very interesting, apart from being very helpful and giving a lot of information it was almost fun to learn from and easy to navigate. This website is very effective, accurate and very credible.
This website, created by the Drug Policy Alliance Network (DPA) is extremely effective and incredibly easy to find the information that you need and/or are looking for. Also another reason this website is great is because it is visually appealing, it engrosses the reader and it doesn't bore you so that you can't concentrate on what you are doing. Another thing that really helps out and makes it good is that it is edited well, it's not to hard to read. It's written at an average reading level.

The DPA website is very accurate, probably one of the most accurate related to this topic. It has all current and tangible information and it tries to inform you on everything, by different sections, from what kind of drugs are out on the streets to how bad our war on drugs is failing. Which is the section that was brought up upon reaching this topic. Even though it presents all type of information from all angles it does have its bias side, for example the section "What's Wrong With the Drug War?," it kind of leans towards the side that the war on drug has failed and the America should stop spending so much money on it.
The website, DPA is very accurate and credible. This is because this website was created by a very well known organization and very knowledgeable about the topic. Although it is believed that it's updated every month if not everyday there was no proof found. But at the home page of the DPS website there are links that will take you to what is called "Todays Highlights." As mentioned before the whole website is not bias, but there are some sections that are bias.
In conclusion, the DPA website has all the great qualities that a great research website should have. It is fun, informative and easy to read.


http://www.drugpolicy.org/drugwar/

Current News

Although there is a lot of controversy, most people would say that this war on drugs that the U.S. is fighting is a lost cause. There are many reasons why people think this. One, experts say that it has failed and that we have lost this war on drugs. Second, to keep going with this war is a waste of tax payers money that the U.S. has already put a lot of money into it. Third, some say that the acts of trying to stop people from using drugs are racist, that the America is not doing it the correct way. They proceeded this matter in a very amoral fashion.
This war has been lost since it started, America did not approach it correctly. They have spent to much money and time and seen very little results. According to Charles Fledman the author of "Americas War on Drugs," says that there main target is adolescents, but the number of adolescents that ave stopped using the drug has only been 13 percent. That isn't a lot considering that this war has been going on for over 30 years.
Also way to much money has been put towards this war that has come out of tax payer's pocket. Tony Newman explains in his article "Drug War Madness," that for 40 years this has been a 40 billion dollars a war that has got us no where. He showed great animosity towards the U.S. war on drugs policy. Fledman also back him up by saying in his article that Each year, 52,000 Americans die due to drug use, which also causes tens of billions of dollars in damage to the U.S. economy. Now ask yourself, is all that money really worth it for the results that the U.S. is seeing?
The Third reason this war is such a failure is because of how corrupt some of the laws are on this subject. Some people call it racist. Newman, explains about how this elderly woman lost her home because her grandson smoked pot. He explained how the federal government's public housing system has a "one strike and you're out" policy for any drug law violation. Even if it happens away from home. Newman also says that, "the New York Civil Liberties Union released a report earlier this month that found 83 percent of those charged with marijuana possession over the last 10 years are black or Latino even though federal surveys show that whites are more likely to use pot. If you are poor and live in public housing, your whole family is punished for a drug offense--even for smoking a joint. But if you are middle class and do not rely on public housing or other benefits it is a "personal" issue."
As a result of all of this America still keeps going with this war, but only time will tell if it is a good and well thought out choice to continue with this war.

Newman, Tony. "Drug Word Madness: Smoke a Joint and Your Whole Family May End Up Homeless". 09/17/08 .

Feldman, Charles. "America's 'War on Drugs' reduces users, but supply keeps coming". CNN. 09/17/08 .

Background

This war on drugs has been an on going issue ever since president Nixon took office in 1969. It has cost billions of dollars to try and fight this war. All though Nixon made a dent in use of marijuana in the late 1960s. A new drug was discovered that made an uproar in the 1980s that called for president Reagan to increase the fund for this war. This did little to stop the use of crack, it made it worse. Gangs became of this new drug and cities were reporting record homicide rates. Reagan took action and announced a "zero tolerance" for anyone in the drug market. After Reagan' s term ended President George Bush came into office and countinued the war.
Soon after the new drug "crack" found it's way to the streets of America, president Ronald Reagan increased the funding for this war from $1.5 billion when he came into office in 1981 to an amazing $2.75 billion in 1985. This of course made Americans mad and said that the war was unnecessary and a waste of time and money.

As bad as this drug was it did not come alone. Along with this drug came gangs of young adults distributing this drug, also weapons, and the willing to kill/protect their "turf". These distributors were willing to sell to anyone even schoolchildren. Only a few years after this drug was discovered it was available in every inner-city , and many major cities in the U.S. were reporting record numbers of homicide in that city. Which soon made the nations leading concern. Since the laws at the time were unable to stop or even reduce the violence caused by this drug Reagan took another step by announcing "zero tolerance" towards any all members of the drug market. Which cracked down on anyone associated with the drug.
All in all our former presidents have done decent job on trying to fight this war, but even 40 years later we are still fighting the war and cannot seem seem to stop the violence in our own nation, but it has become worse now the drugs are smuggled across the U.S.-Mexico border which is causing even more violence.

Introduction

My topic that I choose is War on Drugs. Things that I know about my topic is that it is a major problem at the U.S.-Mexico boarder. There has been a lot of killing between the "drug dealer" and the boarder patrol and/or the Mexican military which is also caught in the middle of this war, on the other side of the boarder. How can this issue be stopped? Is there anything the U.S. or Mexico can do to help or stop the trafficking of narcotics across the boarder? How do we stop the violence at the boarder that is against innocent people? What is the purpose of all this trafficking and why has it become so popular in the last couple of years?