AFP via Getty Images The war on drugs explained By German Lopez germanrlopez germanlopezvoxcom Updated May 8 2016 121pm EDT The US has been fighting a global war on drugs for decades But as prison populations and financial costs increase and drugrelated violence around the world continues lawmakers and experts are reconsidering if the drug wars potential benefits are really worth its many drawbacks What is the war on drugs In the 1970s President Richard Nixon formally launched the war on drugs to eradicate illicit drug use in the US If we can not destroy the drug menace in America then it will surely in time destroy us Nixon told Congress in 1971 I am not prepared to accept this alternative Over the next couple decades particularly under the Reagan administration what followed was the escalation of global military and police efforts against drugs But in that process the drug war led to unintended consequences that have proliferated violence around the world and contributed to mass incarceration in the US even if it has made drugs less accessible and reduced potential levels of drug abuse Hulton Archive via Getty Images Nixon inaugurated the war on drugs at a time when America was in hysterics over widespread drug use Drug use had become more public and prevalent during the 1960s due in part to the counterculture movement and many Americans felt that drug use had become a serious threat to the country and its moral standing Over the past four decades the US has committed more than 1 trillion to the war on drugs But the crackdown has in some ways failed to produce the desired results Drug use remains a very serious problem in the US even though the drug war has made these substances less accessible The drug war also led to several some unintended negative consequences including a big strain on Americas criminal justice system and the proliferation of drugrelated violence around the world While Nixon began the modern war on drugs America has a long history of trying to control the use of certain drugs Laws passed in the early 20th century attempted to restrict drug production and sales Some of this history is racially tinged and perhaps as a result the war on drugs has long hit minority communities the hardest In response to the failures and unintended consequences many drug policy experts and historians have called for reforms a larger focus on rehabilitation the decriminalization of currently illicit substances and even the legalization of all drugs The question with these policies as with the drug war more broadly is whether the risks and costs are worth the benefits Drug policy is often described as choosing between a bunch of bad or mediocre options rather than finding the perfect solution In the case of the war on drugs the question is whether the very real drawbacks of prohibition more racially skewed arrests drugrelated violence around the world and financial costs are worth the potential gains from outlawing and hopefully depressing drug abuse in the US Is the war on drugs succeeding The goal of the war on drugs is to reduce drug use The specific aim is to destroy and inhibit the international drug trade making drugs scarcer and costlier and therefore making drug habits in the US unaffordable And although some of the data shows drugs getting cheaper drug policy experts generally believe that the drug war is nonetheless preventing some drug abuse by making the substances less accessible The prices of most drugs as tracked by the Office of National Drug Control Policy have plummeted Between 1981 and 2007 the median bulk price of heroin is down by roughly 93 percent and the median bulk price of powder cocaine is down by about 87 percent Between 1986 and 2007 the median bulk price of crack cocaine fell by around 54 percent The prices of meth and marijuana meanwhile have remained largely stable since the 1980s Much of this is explained by whats known as the balloon effect Cracking down on drugs in one area doesnt necessarily reduce the overall supply of drugs Instead drug production and trafficking shift elsewhere because the drug trade is so lucrative that someone will always want to take it up particularly in countries where the drug trade might be one of the only economic opportunities and governments wont be strong enough to suppress the drug trade The balloon effect has been documented in multiple instances including Peru and Bolivia to Colombia in the 1990s the Netherlands Antilles to West Africa in the early 2000s and Colombia and Mexico to El Salvador Honduras and Guatemala in the 2000s and 2010s Sometimes the drug war has failed to push down production altogether like in Afghanistan The US spent 76 billion between 2002 and 2014 to crack down on opium in Afghanistan where a bulk of the worlds supply for heroin comes from Despite the efforts Afghanistans opium poppy crop cultivation reached record levels in 2013 On the demand side illicit drug use has dramatically fluctuated since the drug war began The Monitoring the Future survey which tracks illicit drug use among high school students offers a useful proxy In 1975 four years after President Richard Nixon launched the war on drugs 307 percent of high school seniors reportedly used drugs in the previous month In 1992 the rate was 144 percent In 2013 it was back up to 255 percent Still prohibition does likely make drugs less accessible than they would be if they were legal A 2014 study by Jon Caulkins a drug policy expert at Carnegie Mellon University suggested that prohibition multiplies the price of hard drugs like cocaine by as much as 10 times And illicit drugs obviously arent available through easy means one cant just walk into a CVS and buy heroin So the drug war is likely stopping some drug use Caulkins estimates that legalization could lead hard drug abuse to triple although he told me it could go much higher But theres also evidence that the drug war is too punitive A 2014 study from Peter Reuter at the University of Maryland and Harold Pollack at the University of Chicago found theres no good evidence that tougher punishments or harsher supplyelimination efforts do a better job of pushing down access to drugs and substance abuse than lighter penalties So increasing the severity of the punishment doesnt do much if anything to slow the flow of drugs Instead most of the reduction in accessibility from the drug war appears to be a result of the simple fact that drugs are illegal which by itself makes drugs more expensive and less accessible by eliminating avenues toward mass production and distribution The question is whether the possible reduction of potential drug use is worth the drawbacks that come in other areas including a strained criminal justice system and the global proliferation of violence fueled by illegal drug markets If the drug war has failed to significantly reduce drug use production and trafficking then perhaps its not worth these costs and a new approach is preferable How does the US decide which drugs are regulated or banned The US uses whats called the drug scheduling system Under the Controlled Substances Act there are five categories of controlled substances known as schedules which weigh a drugs medical value and abuse potential Universal Images Group via Getty Images Medical value is typically evaluated through scientific research particularly largescale clinical trials similar to those used by the Food and Drug Administration for pharmaceuticals Potential for abuse isnt clearly defined by the Controlled Substances Act but for the federal government abuse is when individuals take a substance on their own initiative leading to personal health hazards or dangers to society as a whole Under this system Schedule 1 drugs are considered to have no medical value and a high potential for abuse Schedule 2 drugs have high potential for abuse but some medical value As the rank goes down to Schedule 5 a drugs potential for abuse generally decreases It may be helpful to think of the scheduling system as made up of two distinct groups nonmedical and medical The nonmedical group is the Schedule 1 drugs which are considered to have no medical value and high potential for abuse The medical group is the Schedule 2 to 5 drugs which have some medical value and are numerically ranked based on abuse potential from high to low Marijuana and heroin are Schedule 1 drugs so the federal government says they have no medical value and a high potential for abuse Cocaine meth and opioid painkillers are Schedule 2 drugs so theyre considered to have some medical value and high potential for abuse Steroids and testosterone products are Schedule 3 Xanax and Valium are Schedule 4 and cough preparations with limited amounts of codeine are Schedule 5 Congress specifically exempted alcohol and tobacco from the schedules in 1970 Although these schedules help shape criminal penalties for illicit drug possession and sales theyre not always the final word Congress for instance massively increased penalties against crack cocaine in 1986 in response to concerns about a crack epidemic and its potential link to crime And state governments can set up their own criminal penalties and schedules for drugs as well Other countries like the UK and Australia use similar systems to the US although their specific rankings for some drugs differ How does the US enforce the war on drugs The US fights the war on drugs both domestically and overseas David McNewGetty Images On the domestic front the federal government supplies local and state police departments with funds legal flexibility and special equipment to crack down on illicit drugs Local and state police then use this funding to go after drug dealing organizations Federal assistance helped us take out major drug organizations and we took out a number of them in Baltimore said Neill Franklin a retired police major and executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition which opposes the war on drugs But to do that we took out the lowhanging fruit to work up the chain to find who was at the top of the pyramid It started with lowlevel drug dealers working our way up to midlevel management all the way up to the kingpins Some of the funding particularly from the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program encourages local and state police to participate in antidrug operations If police dont use the money to go after illicit substances they risk losing it providing a financial incentive for cops to continue the war on drugs Although the focus is on criminal groups casual users still get caught in the criminal justice system Between 1999 and 2007 Human Rights Watch found at least 80 percent of drugrelated arrests were for possession not sales It seems however that arrests for possession dont typically turn into convictions and prison time According to federal statistics only 53 percent of drug offenders in federal prisons and 279 percent of drug offenders in state prisons in 2004 were in for drug possession The overwhelming majority were in for trafficking and a small few were in for an unspecified other category Bloomberg via Getty Images Mexican officials incinerate 130 tons of seized marijuana Internationally the US regularly aids other countries in their efforts to crack down on drugs For example the US in the 2000s provided military aid and training to Colombia in whats known as Plan Colombia to help the Latin American country go after criminal organizations and paramilitaries funded through drug trafficking Federal officials argue that helping countries like Colombia attacks the source of illicit drugs since such substances are often produced in Latin America and shipped north to the US But the international efforts have consistently displaced not eliminated drug trafficking and the violence that comes with it to other countries Given the struggles of the war on drugs to meet its goals federal and state officials have begun moving away from harsh enforcement tactics and toughoncrime stances The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy now advocates for a bigger focus on rehabilitation and less on law enforcement Even some conservatives like former Texas Governor Rick Perry have embraced drug courts which place drug offenders into rehabilitation programs instead of jail or prison The idea behind these reforms is to find a better balance between locking up more people for drug trafficking while moving genuinely problematic drug users to rehabilitation and treatment services that could help them We cant arrest our way out of the problem Michael Botticelli US drug czar said and we really need to focus our attention on proven public health strategies to make a significant difference as it relates to drug use and consequences to that in the United States How has the war on drugs changed the US criminal justice system The escalation of the criminal justice systems reach over the past few decades ranging from more incarceration to seizures of private property and militarization can be traced back to the war on drugs After the US stepped up the drug war throughout the 1970s and 80s harsher sentences for drug offenses played a role in turning the country into the worlds leader in incarceration But drug offenders still make up a small part of the prison population About 54 percent of people in state prisons which house more than 86 percent of the US prison population were violent offenders in 2012 and 16 percent were drug offenders according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics Sentencing Project Still mass incarceration has massively strained the criminal justice system and led to a lot of overcrowding in US prisons to the point that some states such as California have rolled back penalties for nonviolent drug users and sellers with the explicit goal of reducing their incarcerated population In terms of police powers civil asset forfeitures have been justified as a way to go after drug dealing organizations These forfeitures allow law enforcement agencies to take the organizations assets cash in particular and then use the gains to fund more antidrug operations The idea is to turn drug dealers illgotten gains against them But there have been many documented cases in which police abused civil asset forfeiture including instances in which police took peoples cars and cash simply because they suspected but couldnt prove that there was some sort of illegal activity going on In these cases its actually up to people whose private property was taken to prove that they werent doing anything illegal instead of traditional legal standards in which police have to prove wrongdoing or reasonable suspicion of it before they act Kevork DjansezianGetty Images Similarly the federal government helped militarize local and state police departments in an attempt to better equip them in the fight against drugs The Pentagons 1033 program which gives surplus militarygrade equipment to police was created in the 1990s as part of President George HW Bushs escalation of the war on drugs The deployment of SWAT teams as reported by the ACLU also increased during the past few decades and 62 percent of SWAT raids in 2011 and 2012 were for drug searches Various groups have complained that these increases in police power are often abused and misused The ACLU for instance argues that civil asset forfeitures threaten Americans civil liberties and property rights because police can often seize assets without even filing charges Such seizures also might encourage police to focus on drug crimes since a raid can result in actual cash that goes back to the police department while a violent crime conviction likely would not The libertarian Cato Institute has also criticized the war on drugs for decades because antidrug efforts gave cover to a huge expansion of law enforcements surveillance capabilities including wiretaps and US mail searches Your browser does not currently recognize any of the video formats available Click here to visit our frequently asked questions about HTML5 video The militarization of police became a particular sticking point during the 2014 protests in Ferguson Missouri over the police shooting of Michael Brown After heavily armed police responded to largely peaceful protesters with armored vehicle that resemble tanks tear gas and sound cannons law enforcement experts and journalists criticized the tactics Since the beginning of the war on drugs the general trend has been to massively grow police powers and expand the criminal justice system as a means of combating drug use But as the drug war struggles to halt drug use and trafficking the heavyhanded policies which many describe as draconian have been called into question If the war on drugs isnt meeting its goals critics say these expansions of the criminal justice system arent worth the financial strain and costs to liberty in the US How has the drug war contributed to violence around the world The war on drugs has created a black market for illicit drugs that criminal organizations around the world can rely on for revenue that payrolls other more violent activities This market supplies so much revenue that drug trafficking organizations can actually rival developing countries weak government institutions In Mexico for example drug cartels have leveraged their profits from the drug trade to violently maintain their stranglehold over the market despite the governments war on drugs As a result public decapitations have become a particularly prominent tactic of ruthless drug cartels As many as 80000 people have died in the war Tens of thousands of people have gone missing since 2007 including 43 students who vanished in 2014 in a widely publicized case Pedro UgarteAFP via Getty Images But even if Mexico were to actually defeat drug cartels this potentially wouldnt reduce drug war violence on a global scale Instead drug production and trafficking and the violence that comes with both would likely shift elsewhere because the drug trade is so lucrative that someone will always want to take it up particularly in countries where the drug trade might be one of the only economic opportunities and governments wont be strong enough to suppress the drug trade In 2014 for instance the drug war significantly contributed to the child migrant crisis After some drug trafficking was pushed out of Mexico gangs and drug cartels stepped up their operations in Central Americas Northern Triangle of El Salvador Honduras and Guatemala These countries with their weak criminal justice and law enforcement systems didnt seem to have the capacity to deal with the influx of violence and crime The war on drugs drove a lot of the activities to Central America a region that has extremely weakened systems Adriana Beltran of the Washington Office on Latin America explained Unfortunately there hasnt been a strong commitment to building the criminal justice system and the police As a result children fled their countries by the thousands in a major humanitarian crisis Many of these children ended up in the US where the refugee system simply doesnt have the capacity to handle the rush of child migrants Although the child migrant crisis is fairly unique in its specific circumstances and effects the series of events a government cracks down on drugs trafficking moves to another country and the drug trade brings violence and crime is pretty typical in the history of the war on drugs In the past couple of decades it happened in Colombia Mexico Venezuela and Ecuador after successful antidrug crackdowns in other Latin American countries The Wall Street Journal explained Ironically the shift is partly a byproduct of a drugwar success story Plan Colombia In a little over a decade the US spent nearly 8 billion to back Colombias efforts to eradicate coca fields arrest traffickers and battle drugfunded guerrilla armies such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia or FARC Colombian cocaine production declined the murder rate plunged and the FARC is on the run But traffickers adjusted Cartels moved south across the Ecuadorean border to set up new storage facilities and pioneer new smuggling routes from Ecuadors Pacific coast Colombias neighbor to the east Venezuela is now the departure point for half of the cocaine going to Europe by sea As a 2012 report from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime explained one countrys success became the problem of others This global proliferation of violence is one of the most prominent costs of the drug war When evaluating whether the war on drugs has been successful experts and historians weigh this cost along with the rise of incarceration in the US against the benefits such as potentially depressed drug use to gauge whether antidrug efforts have been worth it How much does the war on drugs cost Enforcing the war on drugs costs the US more than 51 billion each year according to the Drug Policy Alliance As of 2012 the US had spent 1 trillion on antidrug efforts AFP via Getty Images The spending estimates dont account for the loss of potential taxes on currently illegal substances According to a 2010 paper from the libertarian Cato Institute taxing and regulating illicit drugs similarly to tobacco and alcohol could raise 467 billion in tax revenue each year These annual costs the spending the lost potential taxes add up to nearly 2 percent of state and federal budgets which totaled an estimated 61 trillion in 2013 Thats not a huge amount of money but it may not be worth the cost if the war on drugs is leading to drugrelated violence around the world and isnt significantly reducing drug abuse Is the war on drugs racist In the US the war on drugs mostly impacts minority particularly black communities This disproportionate effect is why critics often call the war on drugs racist Although black communities arent more likely to use or sell drugs they are much more likely to be arrested and incarcerated for drug offenses Joe PosnerVox When black defendants are convicted for drug crimes they face longer prison sentences as well Drug sentences for black men were 131 percent longer than drug sentences for white men between 2007 and 2009 according to a 2012 report from the US Sentencing Commission The Sentencing Project explained the differences in a February 2015 report Myriad criminal justice policies that appear to be raceneutral collide with broader socioeconomic patterns to create a disparate racial impact Socioeconomic inequality does lead people of color to disproportionately use and sell drugs outdoors where they are more readily apprehended by police One example Trafficking crack cocaine one of the few illicit drugs thats more popular among black Americans carries the harshest punishment The threshold for a fiveyear mandatory minimum sentence of crack is 28 grams In comparison the threshold for powder cocaine which is more popular among white than black Americans but pharmacoligically similar to crack is 500 grams New York Daily News via Getty Images As for the broader racial disparities federal programs that encourage local and state police departments to crack down on drugs may create perverse incentives to go after minority communities Some federal grants for instance previously required police to make more drug arrests in order to obtain more funding for antidrug efforts Neill Franklin a retired police major from Maryland and executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition said minority communities are the lowhanging fruit for police departments because they tend to sell in openair markets such as public street corners and have less political and financial power than white Americans In Chicago for instance an analysis by Project Know a drug addiction resource center found enforcement of antidrug laws is concentrated in poor neighborhoods which tend to have more crime but are predominantly black Project Know Doing these evening and afternoon sweeps meant 20 to 30 arrests and now you have some great numbers for your grant application Franklin said In that process we also ended up seizing a lot of money and a lot of property Thats another cash cow The disproportionate arrest and incarceration rates have clearly detrimental effects on minority communities A 2014 study published in the journal Sociological Science found boys with imprisoned fathers are much less likely to possess the behavioral skills needed to succeed in school by the age of 5 starting them on a vicious path known as the schooltoprison pipeline As the drug war continues these racial disparities have become one of the major points of criticism against it Its not just whether the war on drugs has led to the widespread costly incarceration of millions of Americans but whether incarceration has created the new Jim Crow a reference to policies such as segregation and voting restrictions that subjugated black communities in America What are the roots of the war on drugs Beyond the goal of curtailing drug use the motivations behind the US war on drugs have been rooted in historical fears of immigrants and minority groups The US began regulating and restricting drugs during the first half of the 20th century particularly through the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914 and the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 During this period racial and ethnic tensions were particularly high across the country not just toward African Americans but toward Mexican and Chinese immigrants as well National Library of Medicine As the New York Times explained the federal prohibition of marijuana came during a period of national hysteria about the effect of the drug on Mexican immigrants and black communities Concerns about a new exotic drug coupled with feelings of xenophobia and racism that were all too common in the 1930s drove law enforcement the broader public and eventually legislators to demand the drugs prohibition Police in Texas border towns demonized the plant in racial terms as the drug of immoral populations who were promptly labeled fiends wrote the Timess Brent Staples These beliefs extended to practically all forms of drug prohibition According to historian Peter Knight opium largely came over to America with Chinese immigrants on the West Coast Americans already skeptical of the drug quickly latched on to xenophobic beliefs that opium somehow made Chinese immigrants dangerous Stories of Chinese immigrants who lured white females into prostitution along with the media depictions of the Chinese as depraved and unclean bolstered the enactment of antiopium laws in eleven states between 1877 and 1900 Knight wrote Cocaine was similarly attached in fear to black communities neuroscientist Carl Hart wrote for the Nation The belief was so widespread that the New York Times even felt comfortable writing headlines in 1914 that claimed Negro cocaine fiends are a new southern menace The author of the Times piece a physician wrote The cocaine user imagines that he hears people taunting and abusing him and this often incites homicidal attacks upon innocent and unsuspecting victims He later added Many of the wholesale killings in the South may be cited as indicating that accuracy in shooting is not interfered with is indeed probably improved by cocaine I believe the record of the cocaine nr near Asheville who dropped five men dead in their tracks using only one cartridge for each offers evidence that is sufficiently convincing The LIFE Picture Collection via Getty Images Most recently these fears of drugs and the connection to minorities came up during what law enforcement officials characterized as a crack cocaine epidemic in the 1980s and 90s Lawmakers judges and police in particular linked crack to violence in minority communities The connection was part of the rationale for making it 100 times easier to get a mandatory minimum sentence for crack cocaine over powder cocaine even though the two drugs are pharmacologically identical As a result minority groups have received considerably harsher prison sentences for illegal drugs In 2010 the ratio between cracks sentence and cocaines was reduced from 100to1 to 18to1 Hart explained after noting the New York Timess coverage in particular Over the late 1980s a barrage of similar articles connected crack and its associated problems with black people Entire specialty police units were deployed to troubled neighborhoods making excessive arrests and subjecting the targeted communities to dehumanizing treatment Along the way complex economic and social forces were reduced to criminal justice problems resources were directed toward law enforcement rather than neighborhoods real needs such as job creation None of this means the war on drugs is solely driven by fears of immigrants and minorities and many people are genuinely concerned about drugs effects on individuals and society But when it comes to the war on drugs the historical accounts suggest the harshest crackdowns often follow hysteria linked to minority drug use making the racial disparities in the drug war seem like a natural consequence of antidrug efforts roots What about the band The War on Drugs Theyre pretty great though they dont have much to do with the actual war on drugs But since you mentioned them take a break and listen to a couple songs from their latest album Lost in the Dream The War on Drugs Red Eye Your browser does not currently recognize any of the video formats available Click here to visit our frequently asked questions about HTML5 video The War on Drugs Under the Pressure Your browser does not currently recognize any of the video formats available Click here to visit our frequently asked questions about HTML5 video Bonus from their 2011 album Slave Ambient The War on Drugs Best Night Your browser does not currently recognize any of the video formats available Click here to visit our frequently asked questions about HTML5 video What are the most dangerous drugs This is actually a fairly controversial question among drug policy experts Although some researchers have tried to rank drugs by their harms some experts argue the rankings are often far more misleading than useful In a report published in The Lancet a group of researchers evaluated the harms of drug use in the UK considering factors like deadliness chance of developing dependence behavioral changes such as increased risk of violence and losses in economic productivity Alcohol heroin and crack cocaine topped the chart Anand KatakamVox There are at least two huge caveats to this report First it doesnt entirely control for the availability of these drugs so its likely heroin and crack cocaine in particular would be ranked higher if they were as readily available as alcohol Second the scores were intended for British society so the specific scores may differ slightly for the US David Nutt who led the analysis suggested meths harm score could be much higher in the US since its more widely used in America But drug policy experts argue the study and ranking miss some of the nuance behind the harm of certain drugs Jon Caulkins a drug policy expert at Carnegie Mellon University gave the example of an alien race visiting Earth and asking which land animal is the biggest If the question is about weight the African elephant is the biggest land animal But if its about height the giraffe is the biggest And if the question is about length the reticulated python is the biggest You can always create some composite but composites are fraught with problems Caulkins said I think its more misleading than useful The blunt measures of drug harms present similar issues Alcohol tobacco and prescription painkillers are likely deadlier than other drugs because they are legal so comparing their aggregate effects to illegal drugs is difficult Some drugs are very harmful to individuals but theyre so rarely used that they may not be a major public health threat A few drugs are enormously dangerous in the short term but not so much the long term heroin or vice versa tobacco And looking at deaths or other harms caused by certain drugs doesnt always account for substances such as prescription medications that are Given the diversity of drugs and their effects many experts argue that trying to establish a ranking of the most dangerous drugs is a futile misleading exercise Instead of trying to base policy on a ranking experts say lawmakers should build individual policies that try to minimize each drugs specific set of risks and harms Why are alcohol and tobacco exempted from the war on drugs Tobacco and alcohol are explicitly exempted from drug scheduling despite their detrimental impacts on individual health and society as a whole due to economic and cultural reasons Tobacco and alcohol have been acceptable drugs in US culture for hundreds of years and they are still the most widely used drugs along with caffeine in the nation Trying to stop Americans through the threat of legal force from using these drugs would likely result in an unmitigated policy disaster simply because of their popularity and cultural acceptance In fact exactly that happened in the 1920s In 1920 the federal government attempted to prohibit alcohol sales through the 18th Amendment Experts and historians widely consider this policy popularly known as Prohibition a failure and even a disaster since it led to a massive black market for alcohol that funded criminal organizations across the US It took Congress just 14 years to repeal Prohibition Hulton Archive via Getty Images Alcohol and tobacco are also major parts of the US economy In 2013 alcohol sales totaled 1247 billion excluding purchases in bars and restaurants and tobacco sales amounted to 108 billion If lawmakers decided to prohibit and dismantle these legal industries it would cost the economy billions of dollars and thousands of jobs Lawmakers were well aware of these cultural and economic issues when they approved the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 So they exempted alcohol and tobacco from the definition of controlled substances If these drugs werent exempted tobacco and alcohol would likely be tightly controlled under the current scheduling regime Mark Kleiman one of the nations leading drug policy experts argued both would be considered schedule 1 substances if they were evaluated today since theyre highly abused addictive detrimental to ones health and society and have no established medical value All of this gets to a key point about the war on drugs Policymakers dont evaluate drugs in a vacuum They also consider the socioeconomic implications of banning a substance and whether those potential drawbacks are worth the gains of potentially reducing substance use and abuse But this type of analysis of the pros and cons is also why critics want to end the war on drugs today Even if the drug war has successfully brought down drug use and abuse its effects on budgets civil rights and international violence are so great and detrimental that the minor impact it may have on drug use might not be worth the costs How much of the war on drugs is tied to international treaties If lawmakers decided to stop the war on drugs tomorrow a major hurdle could be international agreements that require restrictions and regulations on certain drugs There are three major treaties the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 the Convention on Psychotropic Drugs of 1971 and the UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988 Combined the treaties require participants to limit and even prohibit the possession use trade and distribution of drugs outside of medical and scientific purposes and work together to stop international drug trafficking Guillermo LegariaAFP via Getty Images There is a lot of disagreement among drug policy experts enforcers and reformers about the stringency of the treaties Several sections of the conventions allow countries some flexibility so they dont violate their own constitutional protections The US for example has never enforced penalties on inciting illicit drug use on the basis that it would violate rights to freedom of speech Many argue that any move toward legalization of use possession and sales is in violation of international treaties Under this argument some governments including several US states and Uruguay are technically in violation of the treaties because they legalized marijuana for personal possession and sales Others say that countries have a lot of flexibility due to the constitutional exemptions in the conventions Countries could claim for instance that their protections for right to privacy and health allow them to legalize drugs despite the conventions When it comes to individual states in the US the federal government argues that Americas federalist system allows states some flexibility as long as the federal government keeps drugs illegal Its pretty clear that the war on drugs was waged for political reasons and some countries have used the treaties as an excuse to pursue draconian policies said Kasia MalinowskaSempruch director of the Open Society Global Drug Policy Program Nevertheless weve seen a number of countries drop criminal penalties for minor possession of all drugs Weve seen others put drugs into a pharmaceutical model including the prescription of heroin to people with serious addictions This seems completely possible within the treaties Pablo PorciunculaAFP via Getty Images Even if a country decided to dismantle prohibition and violate the treaties its unclear how the international community would respond If the US for example ended prohibition theres little other countries could do to interfere theres no international drug court and sanctions would be very unlikely for a country as powerful as America Still Martin Jelsma an international drug policy expert at the Transnational Institute argued that ignoring or pulling out of the international drug conventions could seriously damage Americas standing around the world Pacta sunt servanda agreements must be kept is the most fundamental principle of international law and it would be very undermining if countries start to take an alacarte approach to treaties they have signed they can not simply comply with some provisions and ignore others without losing the moral authority to ask other countries to oblige to other treaties Jelsma wrote in an email So our preference is to To resolve such issues many critics of the war on drugs hope to reform international drug laws in 2016 during the next General Assembly Special Session on drugs There is tension with the taxandregulate approach to marijuana in some jurisdictions MalinowskaSempruch said But its all part of a process and thats why we hope the UN debate in 2016 is as open as possible so that we can settle some of these questions and if necessary modernize the system Until then any country taking steps to revamp its drug policy regime could face criticisms and a loss of credibility from its international peers How do other countries deal with drugs There is a lot of variety in how different countries have adopted the UN conventions ranging from levels of enforcement even more stringent than US drug laws to outright decriminalization Here are a few examples China carries out some of the harshest punishments for illicit drug trafficking In the leadup to International AntiDrug Day Chinese officials unveiled executions and other harsh punishments for drug traffickers in 2014 2013 2012 2010 and 2009 The United Kingdom maintains a classification system similar to Americas scheduling system with criminal penalties set based on a drugs classification For example selling class A substances can get someone up to life in prison while class B sentences are limited to a maximum of 14 years Portugal in 2001 decriminalized all drugs including cocaine and heroin A 2009 report authored by Glenn Greenwald for the libertarian Cato Institute found drug use fell among teenagers in Portugal following decriminalization but use ticked up for young adults ages 20 to 24 Uruguay in 2012 legalized marijuana for personal use and sales to eliminate a major source of revenue for violent drug cartels The government is now working to establish regulations for the sales and distribution of pot The varied approaches show that even though the US has been a major leader in the global war on drugs its model of combating drug use and trafficking domestically is hardly the only option Other countries have looked at the pros and cons and decided on vastly different drug policy regimes with varying degrees of success Whats the case for focusing more on rehabilitation and addiction treatment The most cautious reform to the drug war puts more emphasis on rehabilitation instead of locking up drug users in prison but it does this without decriminalizing or legalizing drugs Allison JoyceGetty Images This is the approach recently embraced by the White Houses Office of National Drug Control Policy which plans to increase funding for rehabilitation programs in the coming years The Obama administration also approved several legal and regulatory reforms including Obamacare that increased access to addiction treatment through health insurance However the federal government still spends billions each year on conventional law enforcement operations against drugs Drug courts which even some conservatives like former Texas Governor Rick Perry R support are an example of the rehabilitationfocused approach Instead of throwing drug offenders into jail or prison these courts send them to rehabilitation programs that focus on treating addiction as a medical not criminal problem The Global Commission on Drug Policy however argues that drug courts can end up nearly as punitive as the full criminalization of drugs because the courts often enforce total drug abstinence with the threat of incarceration Since relapse is a normal part of rehabilitation the threat of incarceration means a lot of nonviolent drug offenders can end up back in jail or prison through drug courts Other countries have taken even more drastic steps toward rehabilitation some of which acknowledge that not all addicts can be cured of drug dependency Several European countries prescribe and administer with supervision heroin to a small number of addicts who prove resistant to other treatments These programs allow some addicts to satisfy their drug dependency without a large risk of overdose and without resorting to other crimes to obtain drugs such as robbery and burglary Researchers credit the heroinassisted treatment program in Switzerland the first national scheme of its kind with reductions in drugrelated crimes and improvements in social functioning such as stabilized housing and employment But some supporters of the war on drugs such as the International Task Force on Strategic Drug Policy argue that these programs give the false impression that drug habits can be managed safely which could weaken the social stigma surrounding drug use and lead more people to try dangerous drugs For drug policymakers the question is whether potentially breaking this stigma and perhaps leading to more drug use is worth the benefit of getting more people the treatment they need Generally drug policy experts agree that this tradeoff is worth it Whats the case for decriminalizing drugs Pointing to the drug wars failure to significantly reduce drug use many drug policy experts argue that the criminalization of drug possession is flawed and has contributed to the massive rise of incarceration in the US To these experts the answer is decriminalizing all drug possession while keeping sales and trafficking illegal a scheme that would in theory keep nonviolent drug users out of prison but still let law enforcement go after illicit drug supplies Mark Kleiman one of the leading drug policy experts in the country once opposed the idea of decriminalization but he warmed up to it after looking at the evidence What Ive learned since then he said is nobodys got any empirical evidence that shows criminalization reduces consumption noticeably Saul LoebAFP via Getty Images Kleiman said decriminalization could be paired with a focus on rehabilitation He advocated for policies like 247 Sobriety Programs that require twicedaily alcohol testing for every single person convicted of drunk driving anyone who fails the test is swiftly sent to jail for a few days In South Dakota alcoholrelated traffic deaths declined by 33 percent between 2006 and 2007 the highest decrease in the nation after implementation of a 247 Sobriety Program In a paper Kleiman analyzed a similar program in Hawaii for illicit drug users Participants in that program had large reductions in positive drug tests and were significantly less likely to be arrested during followups at three months six months and 12 months Nobodys got any empirical evidence that shows criminalization reduces consumption noticeably A 2009 report from the libertarian Cato Institute found that after Portugal decriminalized all drugs people were more willing to seek out rehabilitation programs The most substantial barrier to offering treatment to the addict population was the addicts fear of arrest Glenn Greenwald who authored the paper wrote One prime rationale for decriminalization was that it would break down that barrier enabling effective treatment options to be offered to addicts once they no longer feared prosecution Moreover decriminalization freed up resources that could be channeled into treatment and other harm reduction programs As with heroinassisted treatment programs supporters of the war on drugs argue decriminalization legitimizes and increases drug use by removing the social stigma attached to it But the research doesnt appear to support this point Some drug policy reform advocates and experts however are critical of decriminalization without the legalization of sales Isaac Campos a drug historian at the University of Cincinnati argued that keeping the drug market in criminal hands lets them maintain a huge source of revenue The black market might even be fueled somewhat by the fact that people wont be arrested anymore because maybe more people will use Campos said We dont know if thats the case but its possible The concern for decriminalization supporters is that letting businesses come in and sell drugs could lead to aggressive marketing and advertising similar to how the alcohol industry behaves today This could lead to more drug use particularly among problem users who would likely make up most of the demand for drugs The top 10 percent of alcohol drinkers for example account for more than half the alcohol consumed in any given year in the US Decriminalization then is a bit of a compromise in reforming the war on drugs It would reduce some of the incarceration caused by the drug war but it would continue operations that seek to reduce drug trafficking and hopefully make a drug habit less affordable and accessible Whats the case for legalizing drugs Given the concerns about the illicit drug market as a source of revenue for violent drug cartels some advocates call for outright legalization of drug use possession distribution and sales Exactly what legalization entails however can vary Seth McConnellDenver Post via Getty Images Drug policy experts point out that there are several ways to legalize a drug For example in a January 2015 report about marijuana legalization for the Vermont legislature some of the nations top drug policy experts outlined several alternatives including allowing possession and growing but not sales like DC allowing distribution only within small private clubs or having the state government operate the supply chain and sell pot The report particularly favors a staterun monopoly for marijuana production and sales to help eliminate the black market and produce the best public health outcomes since regulators could directly control prices and who buys pot Previous research found that states that maintained a governmentoperated monopoly for alcohol kept prices higher reduced access to youth and reduced overall levels of use all benefits to public health A similar model could be applied to other drugs There are other options Governments could spend much much more on prevention and treatment programs alongside legalization to deal with a potential wave of new drug users They could require and regulate licenses to buy drugs as some states do with guns Or they could limit drug use to special facilities like supervised heroininjection sites or special facilities in which people can legally use psychedelics But Jeffrey Miron an economist at Harvard University and the libertarian Cato Institute supports full legalization even it means the commercialization of drugs that are currently illegal This he said is the only complete answer to eliminating the black market as a source of revenue for violent criminal groups John MooreGetty Images When asked about full legalization Mark Kleiman a drug policy expert who supports decriminalization pushed back against the concept He said full legalization could foster and encourage more problem drug users Forprofit drug businesses just like alcohol and tobacco companies would prefer heavy users because the heavy users tend to buy way more of their product In Colorados legal marijuana market for example the heaviest 30 percent of users make up nearly 90 percent of demand for pot They are an industry with a set of objectives that flatly contradicts public interest Kleiman said Miron argued that even if sales or distribution are legalized the harder drugs could be taxed and regulated similarly to or more harshly than tobacco and alcohol although he personally doesnt support that approach You could absolutely legalize it and have restrictions on commercialization Miron said Those should be separate questions Kleiman argued the alcohol model has clear pitfalls Alcohol still causes health problems that kill tens of thousands each year its often linked to violent crime and some experts consider it one of the most dangerous drugs Still some evidence suggests the alcohol model could be adjusted to reduce its issues In a big review of the evidence Alexander Wagenaar Amy Tobler and Kelli Komro concluded that increasing alcohol taxes and as a result getting people to drink less alcohol would significantly reduce violence crime and other negative repercussions of alcohol use But theres evidence that the drug war increases prices and decreases accessibility far beyond taxes and regulation could A 2014 study by Jon Caulkins a drug policy expert at Carnegie Mellon University found that prohibition multiplies hard drug prices by as much as 10 times so legalization by eliminating prohibition and allowing greater access to drugs could greatly increase the rates of drug abuse The question of legalization then goes back once again to considerations about balancing the good and the bad Is reducing the rates of drug abuse particularly in the US worth the carnage enabled by the money violent criminal organizations make off the black market for drugs This is a common refrain of drug policy thats repeated again and again by experts A perfect solution doesnt exist so policymaking should focus on picking the best of many bad options There are always choices Keith Humphreys a drug policy expert at Stanford University explained There is no framework available in which theres not harm somehow Weve got freedom pleasure health crime and public safety You can push on one and two of those maybe even three with different drugs but you cant get rid of all of them You have to pay the piper somewhere

O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O B O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


Data shows a surprising campus free speech problem leftwingers being fired for their opinions Does political correctness really crush conservative speech on campus The data suggests no By Zack Beauchamp zackbeauchamp zackvoxcom Aug 3 2018 930am EDT Students protesting a Milo Yiannopoulos event at Cal State Fullerton David McNewGetty Images The American college campus we are led to believe is a dangerous place If you say what you really think particularly as a conservative a mob of young social justice warriors will come for your faculty position or invitation to speak on campus Entire books and online magazines are premised on the idea that political correctness is sweeping the American university threatening both higher education and the broader right to free speech But a data analysis from March by the director of Georgetown Universitys Free Speech Project suggests that this crisis is more than a little overblown There have been relatively few incidents of speech being squelched on college campuses and theres in fact limited evidence that conservatives are being unfairly targeted The Free Speech Projects researchers had cataloged more than 90 incidents since 2016 that fit their criteria for a persons free speech rights being threatened Of those 90 about twothirds took place on college campuses These incidents range from a speaker being disinvited to a faculty member being fired over allegedly offensive comments to a studentrun play being canceled over concerns it would offend The raw numbers here should already raise questions about the socalled political correctness epidemic According to the Department of Education there are 4583 colleges and universities in the United States including two and fouryear institutions The fact that there were roughly only 60 incidents in the past two years suggests that free speech crises are extremely rare events and dont define university life in the way that critics suggest Moreover theres a consistent pattern in the data when it comes to conservatives one that tells a different story than you hear among free speech panickers Most of the incidents where presumptively conservative speech has been interrupted or squelched in the last two or three years seem to involve the same few speakers Milo Yiannopoulos Ben Shapiro Charles Murray and Ann Coulter Sanford Ungar the projects director writes In some instances they seem to invite and delight in disruption What Ungar is suggesting here is that the campus free speech crisis is somewhat manufactured Conservative student groups invite speakers famous for offensive and racially charged speech all of the above speakers fit that bill in a deliberate attempt to provoke the campus left In other words theyre trolling When students react by protesting or disrupting the event the conservatives use it as proof that theres real intolerance for conservative ideas The other key thing that emerges from the Georgetown data according to Ungar is that these protests and disruptions dont just target the right Our data also include many incidents generally less wellpublicized where lowerprofile scholars speakers or students who could be considered to be on the left have been silenced or shut down he writes Examples include Princeton professor KeeangaYamahtta Taylors commencement speech being canceled after receiving death threats for criticizing President Donald Trump and the president of Sonoma State University apologizing for allowing a black student to read a poem critical of police violence at commencement Theres little reason according to Ungar to conclude from any of this that conservative views are uniquely unwelcome on campus One among many untested concepts he writes is whether the survey results would be different if conservative student groups instead of repeatedly inviting campus visitors who have built a brand of disruption were to sponsor serious intellectual dialogue with thinkers on the right What free speech crisis Ungar notes that his data is preliminary and not necessarily a full or representative sample So we cant put too much weight on the Georgetown findings However its strikingly consistent with what other academics and free speech watchdogs have found when they looked into the issue Jeffrey Sachs a political scientist at Canadas Acadia University put together a database of all incidents where a professor was dismissed for political speech in the United States between 2015 and 2017 Sachss results published by the leftlibertarian Niskanen Center actually found that leftwing professors were more frequently dismissed for their speech than conservative ones Jeffrey SachsNiskanen Center The profree speech Foundation for Individual Rights in Education keeps a database of speaker disinvitations from campuses It finds only a handful of disinvitations somewhere between 20 and 42 in every year between 2011 and 2017 The highest singleyear spike from 21 in 2015 to 42 in 2016 is mostly the work of one provocateur launching an intentionally inflammatory college tour 11 of the 42 disinvitations were for a single speaker Breitbart editor and rightwing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos FIREs Alex Morey writes His controversial Dangerous Faggot Tour traveled to colleges across the country this year and seemed to prompt a new report of attempted censorship in some form or another each week Thats not to say that there arent disturbing incidents on campuses Robby Soave an editor at the libertarian magazine Reason and a good personal friend of mine has unearthed some troubling examples of students and faculty tossing free speech ideals to the side But I keep coming back to the denominator here There are well over 4000 colleges and universities in the United States And multiple attempts to catalog free speech incidents on campus from different sources keep coming up with numbers in the dozens And of those dozens a fairly large percentage of the targets are liberals and a fairly large percentage of the others were conservative speakers who seem to have come to campus with the intent of provoking students Its possible that these few incidents have a broader chilling effect that no one is willing to advance conservative positions on campus because of Milo Yiannopouloss chilly reception during his speaking tour But the mere existence of conservative campus publications across the country would strongly suggest that isnt true Conservative students and faculty have plenty of venues through which they can and do speak Some campus free speech critics I suspect arent operating in good faith For them the entire debate is a way to attack universities as hopelessly and dangerously liberal to undermine higher education for nakedly partisan reasons Indeed four Republicancontrolled state governments have set up new rules for political speech in public universities in response to concerns about free speech At least seven other state legislatures are considering doing the same efforts that the New York Times reports are funded in part by bigmoney Republican donors in a growing and wellorganized campaign that has put academia squarely in the crosshairs of the American right In Wisconsin the strictest of these states rules drafted by the state universitys board of regents allow students to be expelled if they are found to have disrupted the speech of other students three times Protecting free speech on campus by expelling students for their political activism just what the First Amendments drafters intended Clarification An unclear phrasing in the original piece suggested that liberal professors are at higher risk of being dismissed for political views that conservatives The intent was to say they are more frequently dismissed for their views A separate phrasing did not reflect the date of the original publication of Ungars data analysis which was in March 2018 This piece has been updated to clarify both points

O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

free speech problem
american college campus


The Impact The Impact is a weekly narrative podcast about the consequences that laws have on real peoples lives hosted by Sarah Kliff You can listen to it and more Vox podcasts here Download 0000 0000 Playlist Dec 14 2018 Denmarks paternity leave problem Dec 7 2018 The incredible shrinking city Nov 30 2018 Leaving Baltimore behind Nov 23 2018 What schools look like when we fund them fairly Nov 16 2018 Food fight Denmark gives new fathers paid leave Why do so few take it By Jillian Weinberger Sarah Kliff and 2 others December 14 13 of Voxs best podcast episodes of 2018 By Byrd Pinkerton December 6 Baltimore is starkly segregated by race and class A housing program is trying to change that By Jillian Weinberger November 30 Lawsuits and slashed tires Vermonts school funding battle By Sarah Kliff Byrd Pinkerton and 2 others November 23 Healthy options or soda taxes How two cities are tackling obesity By Sarah Kliff Byrd Pinkerton and 2 others November 16 Seattles radical plan to fight big money in politics By Sarah Kliff November 5 Sit in a circle Talk to other pregnant women Save your babys life By Sarah Kliff November 2 The wait is over The Impact is back next week By Sarah Kliff October 26 11 podcast episodes to broaden your mind over Labor Day weekend By Julie Bogen August 31 The US maternal death rate is unacceptably high It doesnt have to be By Byrd Pinkerton Sarah Kliff and 3 others December 4 Is this the best way to care for patients with severe mental illness By Jillian Weinberger Amy Drozdowska and 2 others November 27 Robot uteruses and the quest to end unintended pregnancy By Byrd Pinkerton Sarah Kliff and 2 others November 20 Opioids often arent a great way to treat chronic pain So what is By Sarah Kliff Byrd Pinkerton and 2 others November 13 How wellintentioned doctors helped create the opioid epidemic By Sarah Kliff Byrd Pinkerton and 2 others November 7 Its 2017 Why does medicine still run on fax machines By Sarah Kliff Byrd Pinkerton and 2 others October 30 How a change in hospital policy saved thousands of lives By Sarah Kliff Byrd Pinkerton and 2 others October 23 A BandAid a 629 ER bill and a hard truth about American health care By Sarah Kliff and Byrd Pinkerton October 16 The Impact Voxs new podcast launches October 16 By Sarah Kliff October 9 Video How smooth jazz took over 90s radio Why fixing the US bail system is tricky Auld Lang Syne explained Explainers Green Book builds a feelgood comedy atop an artifact of shameful segregation Yikes More in Explainers

B I B I O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


1 26 Overview Amenities Reviews Map Availability CIBONEY 4007 VIEWS VIEWS VIEWS FROM THIS 3 BEDROOM CONDO Miramar Beach FL USA Condo 1100 sq ft Bedrooms 3 Sleeps 7 Bathrooms 2 Half Baths 0 Min Stay 3 nights Bedrooms 3 Bathrooms 2 Sleeps 7 This is a fantastic 3bedroom 2 bathroom condo that accommodates 7 comfortably This condo is spacious and recently updated It offers a new sleeper sofa in the living room The living room steps off to the private balcony where you can enjoy catching a miraculous sunset over the Gulf of Mexico The master bedroom offers a KING size bed and spacious master bathroom You will enjoy waking up to the sunrises in this comfortable king size bed The guest bedroom also offers a KING size bed with the 2nd bathroom just outside the bedroom door The 3rd small room would be great for a child or teenager It offers a twin bed with a small tv The fully stocked kitchen opens up to the dining area and living room The property offers private beach access bbq grills free wifi a community pool and tennis courts for your enjoyment Restaurants shopping and entertainment are all within your reach from this complex Call us today and start enjoying relaxing with white sand between your toes and your favorite drink off your balcony Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms Sleeps 7 Property Manager Beach Bums Vacation Rentals Member Since 2005 Ask Manager a Question Response rate 100 Response time within one hour Speaks english Calendar last updated Jan 7 2019 Amenities Satellite or Cable Washer Dryer TV Internet Air Conditioning Parking Heater Bathrooms 2 Bathrooms Location Type Beach Beach View General Air Conditioning Heating Linens Provided Washing Machine Clothes Dryer Parking Internet Elevator Free Wifi Kitchen Dishwasher Refrigerator Stove Oven Microwave Coffee Maker Toaster Dishes Utensils Entertainment Satellite Cable Outside Balcony Pool Spa Communal Pool 6 Reviews Excellent 435 1 6 of 6 Great location 55 Stayed Jun 2018 Jennifer O Condo was clean Very close to beach access Beds were comfortable Great view from the balcony Walking distance to restaurants ice cream and souvenir shopping Kitchen was stocked with cooking essentials One suggestion would be to have some info for guests on restaurants and stores near by how and where to rent beach chairsumbrellas etc Overall we enjoyed our stay Submitted Jun 26 2018 Owners Response Awesome Thank you so much for your review We are thrilled that you had a good time We look forward to having you be our guest again and thank you for the suggestions PS We have loads of info in our office on area restaurants things to do and places to see Our office is located onsite at Ciboney Great place ugly price 45 Stayed Jun 2018 Emily A Mississippi Place was nice clean and just a cross walk over to the beach with private gate The stove was wobbly thank goodness I didnt need to use it and the reviews about cleaning myself before leaving the condo made me paranoid i would get charged for any little piece of trash So I cleaned everything before leaving Because the fees tacked onto the actual amount was outrageous 4 days 3 nights 630 400 more in cleaning fees insurance VRBO fee 100 and taxes for state and city I will find another place that is owned by owner and not by Submitted Jun 14 2018 Owners Response Thank you for your review We are glad you found the condo clean and enjoyed your stay Anytime you have an issue stove just let us know Wed be happy to come take care of it for you Also all you had to do at departure is throw your towels in the bathroom floor and make sure no trash or food was left in condo Thank you for taking such great care of this property and we would love to have you be our guest again Amazing Location 45 Stayed May 2018 Sean H Dothan AL USA This was the first time weve stayed at this unit Ciboney It was better than average We had some issues when we first arrived The master bedroom closet door fell off and there was no kitchen garbage can Beach Bums said they couldnt get anyone to fix the closet door which was no biggy since we put it inside the closet They brought us a kitchen garbage can promptly It really helps that Beach Bums management company is in the parking lot of our unit Ciboney We usually stay on the 2nd floor but this unit was on the 4th Submitted May 31 2018 had a great time 55 Stayed May 2017 Robyn S Madison GA Enjoyed our weekend stay The condo was across the street from beach and had private access for ciboney It was really close to access I have stayed at ocean front places with a longer walk It had a nice balcony with great ocean view Was not an overly large unit but was perfect for 4 adults and 2 small kids The 3rd bedroom is a twin and more like a big closet but again was fine for the kids We didnt use the pool since the water was so clear and beautiful Would use again Submitted Jun 20 2017 Ciboney 4007 45 Stayed May 2017 Beach Bums V We loved this very spacious condo The room was clean and the decor was cheerful and the views from the balcony were incredible We had a blast during our stay Did a little fishing and sight seeing The folks in the office were friendly and we will back for sure Submitted Jun 19 2017 Fue muy adecuado para mi familia estuvimos cómodos 45 Stayed Jul 2018 Oscar Z Esta muy bien las instalaciones en general gracias por todo Submitted Aug 3 2018 Owners Response Thank you for staying with Beach Bums Vacation Rentals We hope that you enjoyed your stay Please give us a call next time you come to Destin Wed love to have you be our guest again 1 6 of 6 Map Miramar Beach FL USA Availability Rates are subject to change without notice Taxes Cleaning Fee and Reservation Fee 6105 are not included in above rental rates

O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


PHP mkdir Function Complete PHP Filesystem Reference Definition and Usage The mkdir function creates a directory This function returns TRUE on success or FALSE on failure Syntax mkdirpathmoderecursivecontext Parameter Description path Required Specifies the name of the directory to create mode Optional Specifies permissions By default the mode is 0777 widest possible access The mode parameter consists of four numbers The first number is always zero The second number specifies permissions for the owner The third number specifies permissions for the owners user group The fourth number specifies permissions for everybody else Possible values to set multiple permissions add up the following numbers 1 execute permissions 2 write permissions 4 read permissions recursive Optional Specifies if the recursive mode is set added in PHP 5 context Optional Specifies the context of the file handle Context is a set of options that can modify the behavior of a stream added in PHP 5 Tips and Notes Note The mode parameters is ignored on Windows platforms Example php mkdirtesting Complete PHP Filesystem Reference COLOR PICKER HOW TO Tabs Dropdowns Accordions Side Navigation Top Navigation Modal Boxes Progress Bars Parallax Login Form HTML Includes Google Maps Range Sliders Tooltips Slideshow Filter List Sort List SHARE CERTIFICATES HTML CSS JavaScript PHP jQuery Bootstrap XML REPORT ERROR FORUM Top 10 Tutorials HTML Tutorial CSS Tutorial JavaScript Tutorial How To Tutorial W3CSS Tutorial Bootstrap Tutorial SQL Tutorial PHP Tutorial jQuery Tutorial Python Tutorial Top 10 References HTML Reference CSS Reference JavaScript Reference W3CSS Reference Bootstrap Reference SQL Reference PHP Reference HTML Colors jQuery Reference Python Reference Top 10 Examples HTML Examples CSS Examples JavaScript Examples How To Examples W3CSS Examples Bootstrap Examples PHP Examples jQuery Examples Angular Examples XML Examples Web Certificates HTML Certificate CSS Certificate JavaScript Certificate jQuery Certificate PHP Certificate Bootstrap Certificate XML Certificate W3Schools is optimized for learning testing and training Examples might be simplified to improve reading and basic understanding Tutorials references and examples are constantly reviewed to avoid errors but we can not warrant full correctness of all content While using this site you agree to have read and accepted our terms of use cookie and privacy policy Copyright 19992019 by Refsnes Data All Rights Reserved Powered by W3CSS

O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


Supporters and opponents of Central Maine Powers proposed hydropower project testify to the Public Utilities Commission By Paul Dwyer Posted Wed 1021 PM Oct 17 2018 Updated Wed 1156 PM Oct 17 2018 HALLOWELL Maine WABI The Maine Public Utilities Commission held a public hearing tonight on Central Maine Powers proposed project to bring hydropower from Quebec through Maine into Massachusetts More than 100 people signed up to testify to the PUC on the proposed New England Clean Energy Connect It would bring 1200 megawatts of hydropower from HydroQuébec to New England Supporters say it will create thousands of jobs bring in increased tax revenue and lower energy costs for Mainers Being able to get stability on that energy market is huge says Manchester resident William Purington II And then secondary piece to that is the job piece Having the opportunity to employ that many people in trades in Maine For them to continue to grow stay close to home provide for their families that piece is huge I feel its important that we look at this not just as to whether were allowing pass through to Massachusetts but what were doing to assure gridreliability and the opportunity to put more sources on the Maine grid to benefit Maine rate payers says Newport County Commissioner Andre Cushing Opponents say it will hurt the environment and take away from Maines tourism appeal Theres going to be negative impacts to wetlands wildlife habitat says Caratunk resident Sandra Howard Also if you think about the predominant economy in Northern Somerset county were talking about tourism recreational tourism And so having a permanent and massive scar going through that area will be a detriment to the scenic value To throw in a corridor with powerlines is just going to drag people back to where they left not why theyre here says Clifford Stevens owner of Moxie Outdoor Adventures This was the last public hearing for the PUC They will make their decision in the coming months Several fire departments fight Greenbush structure fire

O O O O O O O O B I O O O B I I O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

hydropower project
public utilities commission
paul dwyer


The West African Examinations Council This prerequisite is required and should be installed seperately Biometrics Prerequisite for either 32 bit Installation or 64 bit Installation The following prerequisites are required and are installed automatically on click of Install Button below Windows Installer 31 Microsoft Visual Basic PowerPacks 100 Microsoft NET Framework 4 x86 and x64 Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 Report Viewer If these components are already installed you can launch the application now Otherwise click the button below to install the prerequisites and run the application

O B I I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


Waksman Institute of Microbiology Waksman News Featured News Messing Elected to National Academy of Inventors Assistant Professor at the Waksman Institute at Rutgers University has a multitude of responsibilities in the areas of teaching service and scholarship Career Assistant Professor Research The next antibiotic might come straight from a brown bears mouth Research Catalysts of Change Now Accepting Applications Were Hiring Now accepting applications Applicants must have a PhD or equivalent degree and be eligible for full tenured or tenuredtrack academic positions Welcome Located on Busch Campus of Rutgers The State University of New Jersey the Waksman Institute of Microbiology is an interdisciplinary research institute devoted to excellence in research Focus areas include developmental biology cell biology biochemistry structural biology genetics and genomics Waksman supports the educational mission of Rutgers University Our researchers hold faculty appointments in academic departments As faculty our researchers believe in nurturing students at every level from high school though outreach and postdoctoral through fellowships Dr Joachim Messing

B I I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I I I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


Working at Walford We invite dedicated passionate and inspirational professionals to join us at the School Home About Walford Employment Current Employment Opportunities There are no current vacancies About Walford Principals Welcome History Executive Leadership Strategic Direction Why a Girls School Location Facilities Employment Overview

O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O B O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O


Browse by state Community Pharmacy 201 S 1300 E Salt Lake City UT 84102 8017369309 Make this your store Cross streets Southeast corner Pharmacy services only Shop Photo are not available at this location Pharmacy Hours Sun Jan 06 Closed Closed today Mon Jan 07 830AM 530PM Tue Jan 08 830AM 530PM Pharmacy Services Prescriptions 116 years of experience and still innovating how you fill prescriptions Refill Prescriptions now Faxing a prescription Your health care provider will need to call the pharmacy for the fax number Vaccinations Schedule an appointment or walk in at your convenience Flu Pneumonia Tdap See more vaccinations Other Pharmacy Services Transplant Support HIVAIDS Support Hepatitis Support Find everything you wanted to know about this store Yes No

O O O O O O O O O B I I O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O