Voting Out the Drug War

Voting Out the Drug War

Along with marijuana decriminalization in other states, the success of Proposition 36 in California is a ray of hope for those trapped in the abyss of the War on Drugs.


As a filmmaker committed to addressing the injustices of the “war on drugs” and its devastating impact on American communities, I awoke on November 7 to a renewed sense of purpose. Beyond working to support the movement for marijuana reform in Colorado, Massachusetts and Washington, I had traveled to California in the week leading up to election day to work for the passage of Proposition 36, a vital piece of legislation that reduces the severity of California’s notorious “three strikes” law. By voting to amend the law so that offenders with two nonviolent “strikes” against them cannot henceforth receive a life sentence for a third strike that is petty or nonviolent, Californians have sent a resounding signal to the rest of the country: it is possible to retreat from the tragic excesses of America’s criminal justice nightmare. The same state that helped lead the way into the darkness of draconian sentencing for nonviolent crimes has begun, it seems, to lead us back toward the light. And because every state has its own special brand of excess when it comes to the treatment of nonviolent offenders, as California goes, so, I hope, will go the nation.

In my new film, The House I Live In, I try to understand how this country became a land without pity in our treatment of drug crime. We are the world’s leading jailer, with more of our citizens behind bars than any other country on earth. The statistics speak volumes. Over forty years, the “war on drugs” has cost a trillion dollars and accounted for 45 million drug arrests. Yet for all that, America has nothing to show but a legacy of failure. Drugs are cheaper, purer, more available and used by more and younger people today than ever before. Perhaps this explains why any mention of the issue was notably absent from this year’s presidential campaign. Ever since Richard Nixon declared the “war on drugs” in 1971 and proved the electoral power of anti-crime rhetoric, politicians of both parties have known, as sure as they know where their bread is buttered, that talking tough on crime is smart politics. But what happens when people begin to acknowledge that the war is a total failure? What if politicians are starting to realize that associating themselves with this loser is just plain bad politics?

In making my film, I wanted to travel beyond the statistics, so I visited more than twenty-five states to meet people at all levels of the drug war whose lives have been affected by our misguided laws and vast prison system. What I found on the ground was nothing short of shattering. Wherever I went, everyone involved—prisoners, cops, judges, jailers, wardens, medical experts, senators—all described to me a system out of control, a predatory monster that sustains itself on the mass incarceration of fellow human beings. Their crimes, most often the nonviolent use or sale of drugs in petty quantities, have become such a warping fixation for our prison-industrial complex that they are often punished more severely than violent crimes.

So where do we go from here? How do we fix this? After so many years and with so many lives already affected, there’s no silver bullet. But for me and many others working to restore sanity to the criminal justice system, Prop 36—a small step for California—may indeed prove a giant step for the nation. Every state has a hand in our drug-war disaster, since every state has its share of excessive policies and practices in law enforcement and the courts. All of these can and should be challenged by a justice-seeking electorate.

Last I checked, every state is also facing a budget crisis. And herein lies perhaps one of the best pathways toward the light. California voters have not only set the stage for greater justice and smarter law enforcement; they will also save the state more than $100 million a year in wasteful criminal justice spending. Yes, fiscal conservatism can go hand in hand with a concern for justice and human dignity. Suddenly, Grover Norquist and Chris Christie have common cause with Al Sharpton and Russell Simmons. 

This is why the ranks of those opposed to the drug war are growing (even Pat Robertson recently voiced his opposition, echoing Brad Pitt, one of my film’s executive producers). What this means is that reformers can now turn from California to other states across the country and offer them a win/win: by reducing excesses in their criminal justice systems—like stop-and-frisk in New York City—they too can improve the quality of mercy in their states, produce greater public safety and save vast sums of money at the same time. Who can argue with that?

George Zornick reports that Barney Frank and Ron Paul have joined forces to pressure Obama about the federal stance on the new state marijuana laws.



Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy