The War on Drugs: A Battle for Health or Wealth?
The War on Drugs: A Battle for Health or Wealth?
Credits to Mark Hayes
What Is the War on Drugs About?
Launched in June 1971 by President Richard Nixon, who declared drug abuse “public enemy number one,” the War on Drugs is a U.S.-led campaign to curb the illegal drug trade through prohibition, aggressive law enforcement, and international interventions. Its stated goals are to reduce the production, distribution, and consumption of illicit psychoactive substances, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and, more recently, synthetic drugs like fentanyl.
The campaign has involved creating the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in 1973, implementing mandatory minimum sentences, and funding global anti-drug operations in countries like Colombia, Mexico, and Afghanistan. Over the decades, it has expanded to include militarized policing, mass incarceration, and policies like zero-tolerance and mandatory drug testing. Despite its public health rhetoric, the war has often prioritized criminalization over treatment, reshaping American society, politics, and the economy.
Is America Trying to Win the War on Drugs, or Is It About Money?
The War on Drugs has cost over $1 trillion since 1971, with federal spending on drug enforcement rising from $1 billion in 1981 to $34.6 billion in 2020 (a 1,090% increase when adjusted for inflation). Yet, drug use and overdose deaths have climbed, with 13% of Americans aged 12 and older using illicit drugs in 2019 and over 90,000 overdose deaths in 2020. Critics argue the war’s persistence despite these failures suggests motives beyond reducing drug use.
The financial incentives are significant. The prison-industrial complex, including private prisons, benefits from incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders, with nearly 500,000 people jailed for drug violations annually. In 2015, states spent $7 billion incarcerating drug offenders, while federal costs reached $3.3 billion. Law enforcement agencies receive substantial funding, with the DEA’s budget growing from $75 million in 1973 to $2.03 billion today.
Asset forfeiture laws allow police to seize property linked to drug crimes, creating revenue streams that some argue incentivize over-policing.
The pharmaceutical industry also plays a role. In the 1990s, companies like Purdue Pharma aggressively marketed prescription opioids like OxyContin, contributing to the opioid epidemic while generating billions in profits. Regulatory failures allowed this flood of legal drugs, suggesting a double standard where legal drug markets thrive while illicit ones are policed. Critics point to international policies, like U.S.-backed coca eradication in South America, which devastate local economies without curbing drug supply, potentially benefiting U.S. economic interests by destabilizing competitors. Journalist Gustavo Gorriti has called the drug trade an “unstoppable industry” fueling corruption and economic shifts in Latin America, often with U.S. complicity.
However, defenders argue the war aims to protect public health and safety. Paul Larkin of The Heritage Foundation contends that abandoning enforcement would ignore the harms of illicit drugs, advocating for a balanced approach with education, interdiction, and treatment. Yet, the war’s focus on punishment over prevention—evidenced by the lack of robust harm reduction programs—raises questions about its true priorities.
Americans’ Use of Legal and Illegal Drugs
Drug use, both legal and illegal, is widespread. In 2019, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration reported that 13% of Americans aged 12 and older (about 35.8 million people) used illicit drugs, including marijuana (48.2 million users), cocaine (5.5 million), and non-prescribed opioids (9.7 million). Marijuana use has surged, with 24 states legalizing recreational use and 39 allowing medical use by March 2025.
Legal drug use, particularly prescription opioids, drives significant harm. Americans consume 80% of the world’s opioids despite being less than 5% of the global population. In 2012, doctors wrote 259 million opioid prescriptions—enough for every adult. This over-prescription fueled the opioid epidemic, with 2.4 million adults having an opioid-use disorder. Overdose deaths from prescription and synthetic opioids, like fentanyl, reached 20,000 in 2016 alone.
Drug use varies by demographic. Black and White Americans use drugs at similar rates, yet Black individuals are 3.5 times more likely to be arrested for possession. Women have seen a 400% increase in prescription painkiller overdose deaths from 1999 to 2010. Youth drug use, though relatively low (4% of adults had tried cannabis in 1969), remains a concern, with policies like school drug testing criticized for doing more harm than good.
U.S. Government Policy on Drug Use
U.S. drug policy has historically favored criminalization over public health. Nixon’s 1971 declaration led to the DEA’s creation and mandatory minimums under the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which disproportionately penalized crack cocaine (used more by Black communities) over powder cocaine (used more by White communities). The 1994 Crime Bill under President Clinton added $30 billion for prisons and harsher sentencing, increasing drug-related incarcerations from 50,000 in 1980 to 400,000 by 1997.
Recent shifts show reform. The 2010 Fair Sentencing Act reduced the crack-to-powder cocaine sentencing disparity from 100:1 to 18:1. States like Oregon (via Measure 110) and 24 others have decriminalized or legalized marijuana, redirecting resources to treatment. The Biden-Harris administration emphasized harm reduction in 2021, funding naloxone and supervised consumption sites, though federal resistance persists. In 2024, California’s Proposition 36 reintroduced harsher penalties for “hard drugs,” reflecting ongoing policy tensions.
Internationally, the U.S. has pushed prohibition through UN treaties like the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, which critics argue suppresses traditional uses of substances like coca. Policies like coca eradication in South America have harmed Indigenous farmers without reducing drug supply, fueling calls for reform.
The Business of Making and Creating Drugs
The drug industry operates on dual tracks: legal and illegal. Legally, pharmaceutical companies like Purdue Pharma and Johnson & Johnson have earned billions from opioids, with Purdue’s OxyContin generating $35 billion since 1995. These firms face scrutiny for misleading marketing that downplayed addiction risks, contributing to over 500,000 deaths since 1999. The legal cannabis industry, valued at $28 billion in 2024, thrives in states with legalization, generating $6 billion in tax revenue annually.
Illegally, cartels dominate production and trafficking. Mexican cartels earn $6.5 billion annually from U.S. drug exports, with profits potentially halved by marijuana legalization. Synthetic drugs like fentanyl, produced cheaply in clandestine labs, have flooded markets, driving overdose deaths. The illegal trade fuels corruption and violence, with Latin American economies reshaped by drug profits that outstrip legitimate businesses.
Both sectors exploit regulatory gaps. Pharmaceutical lobbying influences policy, while cartels adapt to enforcement, ensuring supply meets demand. Critics argue the War on Drugs sustains this cycle by focusing on interdiction over addressing root causes like addiction.
Who Is Really Harmed by Drug Use and the War on Drugs?
The War on Drugs disproportionately harms marginalized groups:
- Communities of Color: Black and Latino individuals make up nearly 80% of federal drug prisoners despite comprising 13.4% and 18% of the U.S. population, respectively. Black Americans are four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession despite similar usage rates. This disrupts families, with 1 in 9 Black children having an incarcerated parent.
- Low-Income Communities: Incarceration for drug offenses limits access to jobs, housing, and voting, perpetuating poverty. Policies like the 1996 Personal Responsibility Act restrict public assistance for those with drug convictions, exacerbating economic insecurity.
- People with Addiction: Treating addiction as a crime rather than a disease increases overdose risks. Incarceration is linked to higher post-release mortality, and limited access to harm reduction (e.g., naloxone) worsens outcomes.
- Global Communities: U.S.-backed eradication in South America has left farmers destitute, destroying livelihoods without viable alternatives. In Afghanistan, post-2001 opium production resumed, fueling conflict and instability.
- Youth: Zero-tolerance policies in schools lead to expulsions, harming educational outcomes. The American Academy of Pediatrics opposes random drug testing, citing its ineffectiveness.
Drug use itself harms through addiction and overdoses, with 90,000 deaths in 2020. However, the war’s punitive approach amplifies harm, targeting vulnerable groups while failing to curb supply or demand.
Conclusion
The War on Drugs, now over 50 years old, has failed to eradicate drug use, instead fueling mass incarceration, racial disparities, and economic hardship. While costing over $1 trillion, it has enriched prisons, law enforcement, and pharmaceutical companies, raising questions about whether the U.S. prioritizes health or profit. With drug use rising and overdoses at record highs, the focus on criminalization over treatment has proven ineffective.
Reforms like decriminalization and harm reduction offer hope, but entrenched interests and policy inertia persist. Ending the war requires treating addiction as a public health issue, addressing systemic inequities, and rethinking global drug policies to prioritize human rights and dignity.
Credits: This article was inspired by questions posed by Mark Hayes, whose inquiry into the War on Drugs shaped its direction.
