Abstract
Introduction
In 1989, President Bush presented a speech in a national television that outlined a comprehensive anti-drug program both in domestic and international dimensions . The refined strategy, associated by its objectives has reached the Congress in 1990 that reduced the amount of marijuana, heroin, cocaine, and other drugs that are dangerous to people as estimated by 15 percent in 2 years and by 60 percent in 10 years, respectively that entered in the United States. However, the United States has experienced the fluctuation that concerned how people viewed drugs and its drug policies. The situation of drugs in the social and legislative levels has evolved until today, and fluctuates in the extreme cases. On the contrary, the evolution at present has a balance point that would determine the drug policy result in the future. Socially, the process has not influenced the drug policy; it only influenced the level of opinions about drug that is useful for the next generations. As considered in the drug policy, it consists of two aspects such as people influenced by society and as influenced to the society. The roles have represented the connections between drugs and the criminal system of the public majority. The public wanted the drug policy, the policy tells what is right or wrong for the people, and has a great influence for the future opinions. To control drugs or substances in a proper way, the Controlled Substances Act or CSA has placed all the substances regulated under the federal law existence. The placement of all the substances has based on the potential for abuse, medical use, and dependence liability or its safety. In addition, CSA provides mechanisms on the substance control or removes from control.
The basic principle of the drug control policy promotes strict compliance to control substances that generates harm to the users or intoxicates people. This intoxication has challenged the self-control of a person that creates threat of crime and accident and the intake of the drugs contributes difficulty to keep its limit within its boundary. Debatably, the opinions shared by many about drug control resources have allocated to treatment against enforcement. Most debates have presumed that there is only one answer to resolve the issue; however, interventions affect the process, and it varies according to the size of alteration of the issues. The decriminalization of drug possession defined to remove sanctions under the criminal law with its application of the administrative sanctions. This administrative sanction has an application of the civil fines or the therapeutic response of the court orders. Often, the public misunderstood decriminalization as a means of complete removal or abolition of possession offences. Relatively, it confused with legal regulation of drug production and availability. Under the regime of decriminalization, the use of small quantity of drugs or possession are still unlawful, however, the offences are not criminal.
It is encouraged that the government agencies should adopt practices to enhance the program performance, and identify the variations of the public and private sectors in the nature of commodity and decision-making roles. The variations affect the expected result or success of the process and plans. The undying efforts of the office of National Drug Control Policy aim to develop strategies. Its theoretical model of the performance-based management has developed in the context that allows identifying any tensions in the system applied. The United States drug policy has no limit on its capacity to provide the health framework to the public. The framework does not limit on the choice of the person whether he or she use drugs out of interest only since it would endanger its health or the possibility to damage its moral and psychological aspects due to intoxications.
The perspective of the public health sector, the objective of the drug control policy is to reduce the unpleasant consequences of consumption socially. It entails the prevalence reduction of consumption; however, the preventive effects of the policy intervention have the necessity to weigh its costs. The fact, that current policy toward the illegal drugs, defended on its moral ground with its sole criterion, and the reduced prevalence with inadequate attention on morbidity and mortality. The Drug Recognition Expert or DRE has evaluated and completed all the phases of the Drug Evaluation and Classifications Programs or DECP. The DRE with its expertise detects and identifies people under the influence of drugs and its category that caused any impairment. In addition, DRE conducts a thorough diagnostic examination for those arrested and suspected of drug impairment or offences.
Core Target
The strategy introduced during the time of President Bush is the concept to focus on the high-value traffickers, drug shipments, and operations . High-value is the involved of the overall significance to drug trafficking operations and not solely referred to the dollar value or the prominent drug traffickers. There is deep analysis, advanced collection, and proper dissemination of the drug related intelligence, and adequate control, command, and communications for any anti-drug operations conducted by the law enforcement authorities at federal, state, or local levels including the Department of Defense in the United States. The increased funding for the Department of Defense on anti-drug operations has primarily interdicted the drug smugglings across the southern borders of the country. The designed initiative has enhanced the assistance of the economic, military, and law enforcement particularly in Peru and Colombia . It assisted the nations to strengthen the economic and political conditions and its capability to take action against the traffickers effectively. Increased the military and law enforcement agencies effectiveness to fight against the trade of cocaine such as the isolation of coca-growing regions, blocking the delivery of chemicals, and destroy the laboratory.
The two aspects considered on drug policy as influenced by the society and influence on society has roles that represent the linkages of drugs, the public and criminal system. The duality of the system experienced by the drug policies has lack of balance; however, the preservation influenced the generations of the future on the imposed standard and conduct. The attention of the policy has focused on the controversial issues about the legalization of marijuana, and the influenced of the policy to the young people of America that represents as decision-makers that imposed current trends in drug control policy in the future generations.
Decriminalization is the common usage in drug policy that refers to the removal of criminal sanctions for possession of a small quantity of currently illegal drugs for personal use and optional use of civil and administrative sanctions. It remains unlawful and a punishable offence and distinction is between de jure decriminalization that involved specific reforms to its legal frameworks, and de facto decriminalization with similar outcomes; however, achieved through non-enforcement of criminal laws that remain in force technically. There is an exception of some of the tolerant policies for cannabis possession. For example, in Spain, the Netherlands, and Belgium, people caught in possession under a decriminalization model have the drugs confiscated.. The decriminalization effectiveness of the drug possession is dependent on a number of other key considerations that include investments in wide range of harm reductions and treatment options.
The relationship of the law enforcement and the public health office of the country can change a person’s experience following an arrest for drug offences. Some commentators have highlighted that the reduced stigma associated with drug use, largely in part to the decision not to impose criminal sanctions has contributed to the increased of offenders. It has shown that jurisdictions varied in the resources allocated to and availability of harm reductions and treatment programs. In recent years, the high-level support for decriminalization has increased in parallel with the increasing trends toward its implementation. The development of the mainstream drug policy reform or movements that focused primarily on recreational cannabis use, supported for decriminalization of the drug possession and the use in context of HIV and other blood-borne viruses has increased among key voices in the public health communities.
Around 25 to 30 countries had implemented some form of decriminalization; the approach is common in Europe, Latin America, and even in Australia. The number of countries that implemented the approach in decriminalization depends on the definition with additional issues in quantifying more localized or informal de facto decriminalization policies, and the challenges of incomplete country data. In addition, some Southeast Asian states like Vietnam technically adopt decriminalization of use; however, not included instead of criminal sanctions, they often detain drug users forcibly in drug detention centers indistinguishable from prisons associated with serious human rights violations.
The Drug Enforcement Agency or DEA and the Department of Health and Human Services or HHS have initiated the alteration of the schedule of drug or by petitioned. The petition from interested party includes the manufacturer of a drug, medical society or association, pharmacy association, public interest group concerned with drug abuse, state or local government agency, and individual citizen. The agency has started its own investigation after it received the petition, and based on the information received from the law enforcement laboratories, regulatory agencies, state and local law enforcement, and other sources of reliable information. Some of the discussion has focused on the application of the private sectors management techniques to issues that existed in the public sectors. Many relevant materials found in the performance monitoring articles for the performance measurements, strategic planning, and the total quality management . The purpose is to foster any accountability in the performance-based management. The mechanisms of the government guided the rationality of the political interest.
Effect of the Drug Control Policy
The United States international narcotics policy directed many significant issues and queries during the Bush administration and the Congress including nations that supported sought by the policymakers in the United States. In general, one of the major issues is the availability of resources specifically resources to reduce the supply from overseas and to counter the drug problems in the United States. As estimated, the illicit drug industry generated all over the world with the excess amount of 300 billion US dollars annually in gross total receipts engaged in the drug trades chemical elements . A concerned of the second issue in the part of the Latin America involved the use of the United States military forces in the anti-narcotics operations in some other countries that often referred to as the Militarization of the War on Drugs. The Andean countries in South America has viewed that the drug trade is an economic issue than a military issue.
On the contrary, the United States has preferred to perceive suppression of this drug trade as an act of war countered by the military forces or means. Another major issue that has great effect to the nations involved is the concerned on cooperation. The United States government believed that to obtain the objectives of its international drug policies, sincere cooperation from different foreign government is a necessity. Criticisms of the policies had occurred as fragmented and overly bilateral in nature. It suggested that to ensure success the government should pursue the policy options in context on its comprehensive plans with emphasis on the multilateral implementation. United States has sought to form joint active consultative groups with consumer nations that continue to provide the financial assistance to the United Nations Fund for Drug Abuse Control .
Conclusion or Recommendation
The United States provided assistance through military aid and training initially, and its economic assistance has started in 1991. Some observers had perceived the application of a double standard in a United States policy that forbade the United States military from taking on law enforcement roles to eradicate drug traffic at home and exhorting foreign military forces that assumed the role in relation to the people in its own countries. The increased in militarization as its basic domestic law enforcement issues that the United States aid, designed to strengthen the armed forces in the counter-narcotics operations. Inadvertently, foster abuses of the human rights as soldiers not trained to respect the fights of civilians. In addition, strengthen the military at the expense of civilian government that undermined the authority of already stressed democratic governments and the institutions that the United States would encourage. To ensure that the United States military keeps a low profile, foreign anti-narcotics forces will receive military training in the United States whenever possible and as necessary. The United States policymakers have acknowledged the probability that counter-narcotics activities would require counter-insurgency efforts in the preservation of the government control in certain areas.
Specific positive changes to current policy are somehow necessary in some aspects for the benefit of the people and the country as a whole. Better science for making and evaluating drug policy is a necessity, especially the better data on consumption, prices of drugs in illegal market to ensure clear assessment of the policies effectively. It needs to assign responsibility for the collection and maintenance data on illegal drugs to independent statistical agencies such as the National Center for Health Statistics and the Bureau of Justice Statistics protected from any political interference. Important steps strengthen the scientific bases for making drug control policies. The purposes of the policies are toward the drug users on sound moral foundations. In a zero tolerance policies, the convicted drug users are subject to loss of federal benefits, driver's licenses, eligibility for public housing, and a variety of other supplemental sanctions, and applied in a highly selective fashion. The law enforcements and other user sanctions is not cost-effective, it is morally questionable when it produces substantial racial and ethnic disparities or convicting users of felonies and put to prison for this conduct cannot be justified. People cannot change these policies overnight, but the respective agencies or government should implement reforms properly. It is necessary to increase the investment in treatment in particular to the drug-involved offenders. An empirical approach to utilize the law enforcement and sanction or punishment as the instrument of the drug control policy.
Today, drug law enforcements and punishments for drug offenders shaped by what appears to be mindless drifts toward its excessiveness. What is more is not essentially better. The choices about enforcement strategies and levels of punishments should serve as guides by considerations of proportionality and cost-effectiveness.
Reference
Bonnie, R. J. (2001). Reforming United States Drug Control Policy: Three Suggestions. Social
Research , 68 (3), 863-865.
CHILEA, D. &. (2011). A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF DRUG CONTROL POLICY IN THE
UNITED STATES AND ITS CURRENT CHALLENGES. Juridical Current , 14 (3), 13-22.
Kleiman, M. R. (2001). Toward Practical Drug Control Policies. Social Research , 68 (3), 884-
890.
Perl, R. F. (1990). United States international drug policy: Recent developments and issues.
Rolles, S., & Eastwood, N. (2009). Drug Decriminalisation Policies in Practice: A Global
Summary. Retrieved from http://www.ihra.net/files/2012/09/04/Chapter_3.4_drug-decriminalisation_.pdf.
Simeone, R. C. (2005). A Systems Approach to Performance-Based Management: The National
Drug Control Strategy. Public Administration Review , 65 (2), 191-202. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00444.x.
The International Drug Evaluation and Classification Program. (2000). About Us: DECP.
Retrieved June 9, 2014, from DECP Web site: http://www.decp.org/experts/whattheydo.htm
Tragler, G. C. (2001). OPTIMAL DYNAMIC ALLOCATION OF TREATMENT AND
ENFORCEMENT IN ILLICIT DRUG CONTROL. Operations Research , 49 (3), 352-362.
U.S. Department of Justice. (2011). Drugs of Abuse. United States. Retrieved from
http://www.dea.gov.
