Essay: To what extent was Ronald Regan’s War on Drugs a policy failure but a political success from 1981-90?

Section A – Identification and Evaluation of Sources
The purpose of this investigation is to answer the research question, “To what extent was Ronald Regan’s war on drugs a policy failure but a political success from 1981-90?” Two primary sources were used as the premises for analysis and evaluation.
Source A: My Primary source for this Historical investigation is the academic paper “US Foreign Policy and the War on Drugs: Analysis of a Policy Failure” by Bruce Michael Bagley.
The origin of this source is of value because of the fact that Bagley is an esteemed professor and an author of multiple papers on the war on drugs and his current research interests include the effect of international drug trade upon Latin American source countries and their relations with the US. He is a professor of Inter-American Studies at the Graduate School of International Studies, University of Miami. He is Thus, he is a seemingly reliable source for invaluable and pertinent information which will help me answer my research question.
The source explain this “perplexing policy failure” by assessing the “conceptual paradigm upon which the entire anti-drug campaign has been based: realism.” Therefore, the purpose of this source is invaluable in enabling me to analyze the political machinery of this policy failure and consequently answer my research question.
A limitation of the origin is that the source was written in 1988 and so the author does not have the benefit of hindsight in his analysis. This gives the source a more limited scope to assess any successes and failures of policies implemented due to how little time the policies which are under scrutiny had been in effect for when the source was written. As a consequence of the limited time, it is likely that the most pernicious effects of the policies like racial discrimination were not even yet in effect.
A limitation of the purpose is clear from the sources title: Analysis of a Policy Failure. From this us becomes evident that the source will most likely not consider strongly any possible successes in policy. This source’s leaning towards the belief that the policy was a failure suggests that the consequent assumptions the author makes could be a limitation during my evaluation.
Source B: My second primary source is “RONALD REAGAN’S WAR ON DRUGS: A POLICY FAILURE BUT A POLITICAL SUCCESS” by Lotte, Berendje, Rozemarijn, and Westhoff
A value of the origin is that it was written in 2013 and so has the benefit of hindsight. This is instrumental in aiding me to ascertain the political impact of the failure in policy. Hindsight is a value here: all the effects of the policy would be visible in 2013, more empirical data would also likely be available to assess the proposition that it was a policy failure but a political success.
A value of the content is the analysis it presents is varied as well as granular. The content is divided clearly into subtitled chapters. The content rigorously and thoroughly explains the lapses in governmental policy and their impact. The argument presented is concise, precise and compelling offering a substantial amount of information which enables analysis.
A limitation of the origin is that this source is a Master’s thesis written by students and so can contain incomplete analysis with respect to subtopics of advanced complexity.
Section B – Investigation
Sources in Context
Bagley argues that President Reagan’s “war on drugs” was a national security objective which lacked coherent strategy and consistent leadership at the level of policy implementation. Furthermore, he contends that the Reagan administration’s policy failed as it was unable to ‘get tough’ with drug traffickers and third world source-and-transit country governments. For critics like former US Senator Paula Hawkins, Washington’s reluctance to bring the full range of US economic and political power to force the cooperation of foreign governments with US anti-drug campaigns abroad was the critical flaw in Reagan’s conduct during the war on drugs. According to Hawkins and other hardline critics – who believe that the solution to the drug epidemic lies in further escalation of the drug war – the high priority rhetorically assigned to the anti- drug crusade was undercut by federal budgetary constraints and competing domestic and foreign policy concerns.
Nonetheless, awareness of the severity of the drug problem permeated into the minds of the American people by means of the presidential rhetoric. With respect to its political successfulness, President Reagan proclaimed that the war on drugs “is an untold American success story” which was waged primarily on two major fronts – cutting supply and reducing demand. Analysts and civil libertarians propagated that demand rather than supply side policies provided the only real hope for long-term success in suppressing drug trade. This agrees well with the fact that demand policies witnessed minor progress while curtailing supply undeniably failed. Robert DuPont, head of the National Institute on Drug Abuse under President Jimmy Carter acknowledged the profound change in attitude vis-à-vis drug usage.
Americans seemed to be receptive to Nancy Reagan’s appeal to pathos and morality in her “Just say no” campaign which sparked a paradigm shift in drug related ideologies for the middle class and has been regarded as one of the largest policy successes of the war on drugs. “Just Say No” was a powerful tool. It aligned “drugs” (non-specific in terms of type and method of ingestion) with a dangerous and roughly defined “other”, and presented them as the consequence of collective personal failure in affected communities rather than a public health crisis for millions of Americans. However, Michael McGrath notes that ““Just Say No” spread fear and ignorance instead of information, placing all responsibility on the individual while denying them the tools they need to make key decisions.”
Unquestionably the most comprehensive initiative in modern US history to lower domestic demand and reduce flow of drugs abroad came in the form of the Anti- Drug Act passed by congress and signed by the president in 1986. This legislation increased by $ 1.7 billion the total federal budgetary authorizations for the anti-drug campaign. However, almost three quarters of new funds were allocated to expand enforcement, extradition and substitution programs which pertained to supply as opposed to one forth dedicated to education, prevention, treatment and rehabilitation which were concerned with demand. The fact that the Reagan administrations drug war was supply centric is a hallmark of its policy inadequacy. As H. Hogan elucidated, the fact that budget cuts when passed were only made toward demand side implementation reaffirms the administration’s supply-side priorities.
Another significant influence on the direction in which Reagan veered his anti-drug policies was realism – the conceptual roots of the war on drugs. Both Reagan and his hardline critics shared the same predilection for supply side policies as a consequence of realism. Taking the inherently anarchic and conflictual nature of the international system as a given, realists contend that hegemonic powers, such as the United States, must assume responsibility for enforcing international law and preserving order, or run the risk of allowing the international system to lapse into chaos, instability, and inter-state warfare. From this perspective, the United States not only has the right but also the duty to use its dominant leader- ship position and superior power capabilities to persuade (compel) subordinate states to cooperate on issues such as the war on drugs, for failure to do so could endanger US national security and, ultimately, the stability of the international system as a whole.
A significant reason for the political successes of the war on drugs was the media support. The Administration worked together with the American media to pitch the War on Drugs to the public. White House staff records show that the Administration maintained close contact with networks such as PBS and ABC to ensure that drugs were portrayed negatively in their programs and series (Carlton Turner Files, 1984).
The Administration also maintained close contact with the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences. The Academy was actively promoting ongoing awareness of the problems of drug abuse; its goal was to reflect this awareness in almost all its broadcasts.
It had become increasingly popular to broadcast “real life stories” of drug users and how their life changed as a result of their drug use. All of these messages were aimed at creating an image in the mind of the American public that drugs caused great damage and that people needed to steer clear of them. Working very closely with broadcasting networks, the Reagan Administration was able to keep drugs on the public’s mind and, therefore, it believed this would allow for the maintenance of support for the War on Drugs and its policies. The focus was on the younger generation in the United States, as these youngsters were the leaders of the future and were statistically the group at highest risk of drug use. Research showed that this tactic actually had a very positive effect in changing young people’s attitudes regarding drugs. Reports also show that not only attitudes changed because of the media but also behavior, as they made young citizens less likely to use or try drugs (Johnston, 1993).
The young black male had, during the War on Drugs, become the face of crime. Research shows that in comparison to their white counterparts, African American high school seniors consistently have lower rates of licit and illicit drug and substance use. This statistic also holds true for all school age groups (Johnston, 1991). Although statistically there was no evidence to show that African Americans used drugs more than their white peers, due to overrepresentation in drug related news items, they had become misrepresented. Reporters would come back with images of black “crack whores” and black “crack babies” along with black young male drug dealers. The media flooded the audience with images of African American citizens involved in drug scenes. These images led to preconceived notions that drug use was mainly common amongst African American groups in society and not amongst the white people in the community.
fig a. Drug arrests over time
The figure illustrates the policy changes and their resulting change in the American politicala climate by showing the spike in drug related arrests in adults from 1981-89 during the Reagan administration.
The war on drugs is undeniably one of the most controversial campaigns enacted by a president. As evaluated through the sources, this essay proposes that to a significant extent, the war on drugs was a policy failure but nonetheless a political success. The Reagan War on Drugs and the overall harsher on drugs and tougher law enforcement seemed to be the perfect way to respond to and to promote a sense of public responsibility in a country that needed to clean up its act. Although the goal of the War on Drugs was a noble one, it left the United States with arguably more victims than by the time of its initiation.
Section C – Reflection
This investigation provided me with a more holistic view on historical analysis. Working with sources to construct a meaningful and cogent argument with regard to my research question felt like piecing together a complex and dynamic puzzle.
The sheer measure of examination into Modern USA has made an abundance of data accessible, both helping and testing students of history. This test comes as relevance determination. While attempting to precisely speak to the idea of Reagan government and consequently uncover whether it was flawed in policy or not, I scrutinized the degree to which a student of history can develop a goal history. In fact, certain data appeals to us more than other, while others are disregarded, and historians are always tested to choose the one’s which best clarify the period. I knew about this in my own examination and chosen facts dependent on how they affirmed each other to make an intelligible picture of Regan administation
In building a contention from the picked sources and realities, I was provoked to consider the
issue of elucidation that faces the historian. As featured by my investigation, examinations of the USA government have been ruled by Economic and Social speculations, representing an unmistakable challenge in abstaining from being over-impacted by their exploration; rather new points ought to be considered, as Bruce Bagley did while proposing an interrelation between both speculations, something which I endeavored to investigate