Another "problem" with legalization is that then the government will have to accept that it has to treat those people who become addicts instead of just imprisoning them. But it's not willing to cover them under a Medicare-like healthcare system. Do you think the addicts will afford or could be covered under ACA?
You probably know this already, but treating these addicts would be vastly cheaper than imprisoning them. $31,286 per inmate [1] on average, much higher in some areas (NYC, LA).
> it has to treat those people who become addicts instead of just imprisoning them.
I'm not sure if you're implying that the rate of addiction would increase due to legalization but regarding that claim, the Netherlands and Portugal provide interesting data points.
In Portugal, the rate of addiction decreased after they decriminalized all drugs.
Also, diversion to treatment programs could lead to significant cost savings. Those savings could be invested in treatment programs that are more effective than whatever is available today.
"Research conducted in part by Temple University and published in the online journal “Crime & Delinquency” found that only ten percent of state prisoners who abuse drugs or are drug-dependent receive medically based treatment while incarcerated. If that ten percent had received treatment in community-based programs instead of serving jail time, the prison system would save $4.8 billion - nearly the amount paid out to the Bureau of Prisons. Those savings would nearly triple if just 40 percent of eligible offenders received the same sort of treatment."
"Maryland, for example, saw average costs for offenders decrease from approximately $20,000 to $4,000. The same report on JusticePolicy.org mentioned that the costs for treatment generally range from $1,800 to $6,800, far less than the cost of incarceration. California’s Proposition 36 mandated that those entering the justice system on drug-related offenses be given substance abuse treatment rather than a prison sentence. The state initially spent millions on the first few years of the program but estimated that, at a long-term glance, the program could save the state up to $150 million annually."
