I don't think it is the right direction when harmful drugs can be consumed legally as per state laws.
I agree, alcohol really is an awful drug.
As for congress, are you that naive you believe all the misinformation and deceit some of them employ to make something positive sound as bad as possible in order to make it fit their own personal agenda?
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/09/18/3569325/cbo-projects-drug-sentencing-reform-would-save-billions-but-this-senator-doesnt-like-math/?This month, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that reforming federal drug laws to reduce draconian sentences would save $4 billion in just the first ten years. The Department of Justice has projected even greater savings of $7.4 billion.
But Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) didn’t mention any of that when he issued a press release this week citing potential increased costs of the bipartisan Smarter Sentencing Act. “Sentencing Bill Puts Taxpayers On The Hook For Another Billion Dollars,” the headline blares. Grassley cites costs of $1 billion in potential public benefits for inmates who are released — without factoring in the $4 billion-plus savings that will more than cover that cost. “The ‘smarter’ in the bill title clearly doesn’t mean ‘smarter’ budgeting or crime reduction,” Grassley says. His reasoning, essentially, is that we shouldn’t set these individuals free, because they might access health care and food stamps, and then cost the government some money.
But it’s Grassley who isn’t doing the math. The CBO breaks it down like this. The Smarter Sentencing Act will save $4 billion in prison costs, largely by facilitating shorter drug sentences and reducing a federal prison population that has grown 780 percent since 1980. The CBO notes that much of that savings comes from the health and food costs the government is alreading bearing for every single person in prison. When inmates are released early, they will also cost the government some money if they access health care programs and food stamps. This could cost the government $1 billion. In other words, the government is already paying food and health care costs for inmates. If those inmates are released, the government would reap significant savings, but some of them might still access some health care and food services that cost the government money, but a lot less money, and generate net savings of more than $2.9 billion in just the first ten years.
I'm guessing he's got an 'interest' in the private prison industry. Have you ever looked into that epic money-spinner? There is a reason why your country has the highest percentage of prison inmates per capita, and it ain't because they are all bad-ass criminals. It's one of the most profitable industries in the US, with income being derived from both government and the inmates themselves through cheap/free labour for factory-line production of goods they can sell for far less than a regular company, you know, that employs regular people.
So, perversely, the more people you throw in prison, the fewer jobs will be available for regular citizens because the prison industrial complex puts manufacturing companies out of business by using slave labour.