Drug War Games

THE DRUG HYSTERIA which has dominated the rhetoric of the politicians and the reports of the media in recent weeks sheds ironic light on the idea that Reagan and his cronies are working toward an end to big government.

As though the nation itself were drugged, the American people are accepting Reagan's hyperbolic tales of the horrors of drug abuse. Entranced by the words of the President and other high-ranking officials, many Americans now think that drugs are our nation's worst problem. But far worse than Reagan's effort to make drugs a partisan issue is his willingness to violate rights of others in order to crush the enemy.

The political bandwagon is full to capacity as hundreds of national and state leaders jump aboard. But while the bandwagon keeps stopping to pick up more players, the riders are missing the boat.

ON THE ONE HAND, Reagan and company are only fighting part of the problem. Attacking "hardcore" drugs--including cocaine, crack, and heroin--is a slick political move. Users are universally held in low esteem and are commonly regarded less as victims than as criminals. On this issue, a politician just can't lose.

These drugs are not socially acceptable, so they become the natural target for politicians. They are the drugs of decadent youth, of the poor, of a different and a lower class, Reagan and others seem to believe.

These drugs kill people; they destroy lives and families. But on the same day that University of Maryland basketball star Len Bias died from a cocaine over-dose, countless more Americans abused alcohol. Some of those people died, others brought about the deaths of others. By suggesting that substance abuse flourishes largely among a segment of the population outside the mainstream, Reagan arms himself with painlessly-acquired political capital, yet ultimately misrepresents the problem.

THE PHYSICAL AND SPIRITUAL decay which substance abuse induces is not just spreading inward from the outer fringes of society, as Reagan would have it. Rather, the decay is also at the core of American society and spreads outward as normal and "productive" Americans regularly consume large amounts of alcohol. Yet Reagan does not attack alcohol abuse with the same gusto as drug abuse.

Why? Because "ordinary people" have a drink or two when they come home after a long day at the office. Or a three-martini power lunch. Or a Friday afternoon happy hour. All of these activities are socially acceptable, even though they can lead to substance abuse, can kill people, and can destroy families. But attacking what ordinary people regularly do is not politically expedient.

Reagan's proposed methods for beating drugs--namely drug testing--is an invasion of privacy worthy of 1984. Reminiscent of the McCarthy era, a person is presumed guilty until his urine indicates otherwise. And should he refuse to take one of these "voluntary" drug tests, he obviously has something to hide, is thus immediately suspect, and is assumed guilty. Perhaps the President's remedy will prove more of a threat to the framework of American society than the original problem.

The drug problem already promises to be a hot campaign issue in the 1988 presidential race. Republican Pierre S. Dupont IV, the former governor of Delaware who has already declared his candidacy for president, has also proposed drug testing for all high school students, a measure which attacks basic civil rights.

So conservatives once again take it upon themselves to define for all of Americans exactly what is and what is not socially acceptable, just as they have in the past come out for prayer in public schools and a constitutional amendment against abortion. And the great conservative myth of an end to big government comes back to haunt us.