“At last, the nation allegedly has turned the corner in the war on drugs. In May, 1998, Attorney General Janet Reno and Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin announced more than 100 indictments and the seizure of about $150,000,000 from Mexican banks, representing a successful conclusion to the ‘the largest, most comprehensive drug money laundering case in history ’(Boaz).” Surely the drug lords are shaking in their boots, right? Wrong. When was the last time one did not hear on the news about “the largest bust ever in central Indiana” or “the greatest crack-down in California’s history?” By ending prohibition, the United States could begin to close the racial barrier, preserve our Constitutional rights, decrease crime and the spread of AIDS, save the taxpayer money, open up drug markets for free trade and more competition, and turn out a profit while endorsing prevention and substance control —all the things that the!
             war on drugs is either not doing or making worst.
             To thoroughly understand the war on drugs, one must investigate its history and the history of drugs. In the 19th century, the drugs used in medicine, tonics, and consumer products contained now-illegal substances. Then the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 required the listing of all ingredients in medical products. Later, the Harrison Narcotic Act, a taxing measure, attained legal control over opium and cocaine users and distributors. Sure, this gesture of forming commercial and medical standards seemed progressive for the somewhat newly established United States. But the true backing for the prohibition came from a less-than-honest motive. The truth is that the taxing and forbidding of narcotics came from an inflamed fear of minorities and foreigners. “Opium was associated with the Chinese. In 1937, the Marijuana Tax Act targeted Mexican immigrants (Shenk).” “Cocaine is often the...