-No, Don't Legalize Drugs-

U.S. Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders caused quite a stir last Tuesday when she suggested-off the cuff, apparently-that the idea of legalizing drugs ought to be explored. She cited the experience of other countries that have taken this step and seen "a reduction in their crime rate, and ... no increase in their drug-use rate." That, if true, would be a powerful incentive to change in America; but she provided no specific examples and was challenged by expert on this point. Moreover, her statement was quickly criticized by the White House, which emphasized that she did not speak for the president, nor does he share her view.

Dr. Elders is not alone in urging more debate. Mayor Kurt Schmoke of Baltimore proposes that drugs be "medicalized," by which he means that trained health professionals would be allowed to give drugs to addicts as part of a treatment and detoxification program. That is a modest suggestion in comparison with the broader proposal that drugs simply be treated in the same way as tobacco and alcohol-sold competitively and legally with abundant supply and competition-driven price reduction. That is probably the only scenario that would dramatically reduce drug-related crime, for selective legalization, or a system that imposed too many obligations-like treatment-on an addict would not necessarily eliminate the illegal trade that flourishes now.

What would happen if crack cocaine, PCP and pure heroin were as easily available as a pack of cigarettes? The price of narcotics might fall, and the deadly turf battles might abate. But it is reasonable to conclude that many people who do not now use drugs, particularly young people, would try them if the legal barriers were removed. President Bill Clinton cites his own brother's experience in warning about the effect of drugs on the individuals who use them. And if alcoholics are a spectacular menace to public safety when drive cars, operate machinery or assault their own families, would not people high on LSD, crack or some other poison of choice be infinitely more dangerous? It is easy to understand why citizens, and even some government leaders, are so fed up with violent crime that they want to explore the supposedly easy route of drug legalization. Mayor Schmoke points out that 48 percent of Baltimore's homicides last year were drug-related, and that 60 percent of its new AIDS cases arise from intraven

ous drug use. The figures are probably typical of urban America. But the cure, tempting as it is, would be worse than the disease. The drug laws were enacted in the early years of this century because the use of narcotics had caused tremendous health and social problems at every level of society. Enforcing these laws is surely a challenge, but abandoning them would be unacceptable surrender.

-The Washington Post-