|
The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) periodically
updates and publishes a comprehensive report on "The
Economic Costs of Drug Abuse." The most recent version
is based on the period of 1992 to 2002(4). Few of the costs
detailed in this report concern marijuana use. The total annual
cost of drug abuse presented in the report is an impressive
$180.8 billion. These costs are divided into three categories
- productivity, health, and other costs.
Over two-thirds (71.3%) of the costs of drug abuse are attributed
to lost productivity, expressed in calculations of lost economic
activity due to premature death, drug-abuse related illness,
institutionalization, the productivity loss of victims of
crime, incarceration and crime careers. Even though marijuana
is the most popular illegal drug in the United States, these
factors are disproportionably associated with chronic heroin
and cocaine addiction. Furthermore $39 billion in lost productivity
is attributed by the ONDCP report to incarceration for all
drug-related offenses (regardless of the drug). This is not
a cost of drug abuse but, rather, the costs of current policies.
When discussing crime careers, the ONDCP study explains that
"Studies of addicts of expensive drugs such as heroin
and cocaine entering treatment consistently find that on the
order of a third of them rely on illegal activities, such
as drug dealing and manufacture, property crime and commercial
sex, to buy drugs and make a living."(5) Similarly, the
figures concerning premature death are derived from cases
involving diseases such as TB, hepatitis B and C and HIV/AIDS,
diseases associated with chronic dependency on heroin and
cocaine and other factors not commonly associated with marijuana
use.
The health care costs associated with drug abuse represent
a much smaller share of the economic and social costs of drug
abuse, $15.8 billion or 8.7%. These costs include nearly $6
billion for community based treatment services, $3.7 billion
for HIV/AIDS related services, $1.4 billion for hospital and
ambulatory care services, and $1.2 billion for federal prevention
services. Marijuana use does account for portions of the treatment
and prevention expenditures, however it should be noted that
in 2005, for example, 56.7% of treatment referrals for marijuana
were generated by the criminal justice system.(6) Many of
the economic costs of marijuana use are actually generated
by contemporary marijuana policies.
The cost of goods and services lost to crime is the only
category of the economic costs of drug abuse that is substantially
related to marijuana use, and here primarily through the costs
of enforcing the nation's marijuana laws. Criminal Justice
Systems and Other Public Costs are estimated by the ONDCP
report to be $36.4 billion, including $14.2 billion for state
and local corrections facilities, $9.8 billion for law enforcement
expenses, and $6.2 billion for federal supply reduction activities.
These expenses are calculated on a simple percentage basis,
that is, the percentage share of drug related arrests also
represents the percentage share of overall justice system
expenses. Marijuana arrests accounted for 45% of all drug
arrests in 2002(7), for example, and consequently account
for $16.4 billion in law enforcement costs.
When addressing costs associated with incarceration, law
enforcement, and supply reduction it is important to note
that these are costs associated with the implementation of
current public policies that are brought about by the existing
laws criminalizing marijuana use. These are not effects of
marijuana use. These are the costs and effects of marijuana
laws. These are measures of policy output AND NOT indications
of policy effectiveness or impact. This is an elementary aspect
of policy analysis. For example, a recent university textbook
in public administration explains that:
"[F]rom the perspective of policy analysis, it is
crucial not to confuse policy outputs with policy outcomes.
The outputs do not tell us much about the performance or
the achievement of a stated objective . . . only a naïve
political observer would assume that a governmental purpose
is achieved because a statute is enacted, an administrative
agency is empowered, or funds are spent. Too much has been
learned about the limits of government to assume that the
output necessarily has the intended outcome."(8)
The impact of contemporary marijuana policy in the United
States can be examined by looking at the reports on marijuana's
supply, availability, price, and usage over the last twenty
years as well as the economic and social costs associated
with these impacts. This long term perspective is necessary
to offset the tendency of policy officials such as the Director
of ONDCP to focus on marginal changes in these indicators
and present them to the public as evidence of successful policies,
particularly when it comes to the subject of marijuana control.
|