European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - September 09, 1989, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Page 10 the stars and stripes saturday september 9,1989 columns Anthony Lewis the sorry financial Story of the Reagan years self indulgence is Good for us that was the message of the Reagan years. And How we wanted to believe  s morning again in America the Reagan to spot said in the 1984 Campaign. We were convinced. Now it is the morning after. The reckoning is starting to come in for those eight years. We Sec that the indulgence in private greed exacted a heavy Public Cost one that will Burden our children and grandchildren. The savings and loan scandal was a squalid Case of private enrichment at Public expense. S & l officials used their depositors Money on worthless Loans and yachts for themselves. Most of the Cost of repaying the insured depositors will fall on us. Mow much it is hard to estimate. President Bush and his people have Don their Best to fudge it. But it will be Well Over $100 billion in the 10 years and More in the decades following. When the Bush administration produced its savings Rescue legislation last Winter it was called a $50 billion plan. That was the amount that was to be raised by Bonds to buy out insolvent institutions. But it did not include the larger sum in interest on the Bonds most of it to be paid by the Public. When the in Gislason was enacted last month it was called a $166 billion res Cue package. That was the sum of Capi Tal interest and other bail out costs Over the next 10 years. But again it May not be High enough. The economist of Lon Don said of the $ 166 billion figure la assumes no More Thrift insolvencies no Rise in interest rates no More withdrawals of Thrift deposits and a healthy input from the Sale of asset owned by the thrifts that have gone bust. All questionable assumptions chances Are that More Cash will be  the congressional budget of fice estimates that Over 30 years the life of the Bush Rescue plan it will Cost $300 billion to close insolvent s & l s. The taxpayers will pay at least three quarters Russell Baker Bush of that $225 billion. President Reagan was not the sole author of the s & l disaster not by an Means. Congress changed the Law to in sure larger Loans and ones of riskier Char Acter. And some members tried to protect dubious savings officials. But the Lone of indulgence was set by Reagan with his antipathy toward government regulation. Another heavy Burden on the future comes from the government s nuclear weapons manufacturing plants. Perhaps because individual greed is not involved this scandal has not made As Many head lines As the s & l troubles. But it is every bit As serious. The weapons plants have been pour ing nuclear Poison into the atmosphere and land around them for years. They require fundamental repairs and the existing risks to health from radioactive waste have to be removed. The Cost is estimated at More than $ 100 billion. Here again the responsibility is not the Reagan administration s alone. Troubles at tit nuclear plants began ear Lier. But they grew flagrant in the last eight years when so Many More weapons were being produced. And the troubles were ignored. Money is not the Only measure of what the Reagan years Cost. The scandals atthe department of housing and Urban development did not produce Large losses to the Treasury by current Stan Dards a Mere $2 billion or so. But they did painful damage to the idea of govern ment assistance for housing. There is no Way that the private hous ing markets can solve the problems of Urban ghettos or the homeless or needy older persons. But any proposal now for government insurance or subsidy will evoke cynical memories of James Watts $400,000 Telephone Calls. The intangible costs of the Reagan years to our Domestic Tranquility Are surely greater than what can be measured in dollars. They arc the costs of hostility to the role of government of indulgence toward private greed of a sensitivity to the needs of the weak in our society. Ronald Reagan saw a hobbesian Jun Gle out there and liked it. He believed with unquestionable sincerity that we would All be better off if the Strong an the Rich were left free to act even at the expense of the less fortunate. Americans Are naturally sceptical of government so it was not surprising that they responded to the Reagan message. But in real life there is no safety or humanity for anyone unless the society As whole is a decent one. Hobbs in the 17th Century said that life without organized society would be Nasty brutish and Short. A new Lofti times drugs image makes legalization unthinkable the idea of legalizing drugs is distasteful for Sev eral reasons. For one it implies government approval of Addic Tive potentially destructive behaviour and is hence immoral Public policy. True the government has legalized alcohol despite its addictive and potentially destructive effects and people who fret about the immorality of government alcohol policy arc widely thought to be quaint. True local governments across the country have legalized gambling too despite its Well known Addic Tive and potentially destructive effects. True Many governments now even run their own legalized versions of what used to be called the rack ets to lure Revenue out of their citizen suckers complain that this is immoral Public policy and you arc Likely to be dismissed As a Crank or worse in a society proud of its ruthless pragmatism As unrealistic about the world we live in. You can t Stop people from gambling is the usual explanation so Why should t the profits go to the state instead of the gangsters True too the government subsidizes the tobacco Industry despite its incessantly trumpeted warning that smoking is addictive and potentially destructive. The logic of legalized alcohol legalized gambling and subsidized smoking argues for legalizing drugs. Yet there is very Little Public support for this logic. The explanation seems to be that there is a stigma attached to drug use and it makes legalizing it Loo distasteful for americans to Bear. Smoking drinking and gambling whether you Call them pleasures or vices have a Long history of being socially acceptable. Our romantic heroes and heroines have smoked taken alcohol and gambled for generations these vices or pleasures were certified Cigali Zabloc by Bette Davis and Humphrey Bogan s cigarettes by William Powell s and Myrna Loy s quart a Day Nick and Nora Charles by the lovable horse players of Guys and dolls by that ultimate cold War swashbuckler James Bond. Drug use has no such glamorous champions unless we go Back to Sherlock Holmes. We have no hesitation whether to Call it pleasure or  All our images of it speak of squalor and death. Drugs the word summons pictures of dead bodies with Needles in their arms memories of tombstones bearing names like Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix. It reminds us of Parr i numb with grief at their children s Graves of this morning s newspaper pictures of youngsters shot Down on the sidewalk. There is no countervailing association Between drugs and wit Charm fun Good times or Romance As there is in All those old images associated with smoke booze and gambling. How can anyone propose legalizing something that yields not even a moment of gaiety to balance so much horror we Are dealing Here with a question of aesthetics. To the substantial classes who write the Laws drug use is repellent ugly and  substantial people decent people Ordinary peo ple As they consider themselves drug use is unredeemed even by such moments of sinful pleasure As they feel in Atlantic City when lighting a cigarette hoisting a Glass of Bourbon and putting $100 Down on the  seem reluctant to admit that their opposition to legalized drugs rests on aesthetic objections. They reach for other arguments in an attempt to seem  instance the problems created by legalizing one drug alcohol arc grave enough Why compound them by legalizing others this ignores the history of alcohol to wit that demand for it has always been so vast in America that the Public will create potentially murderous criminal organizations to Supply it whenever it is legally in  from the daily news of murder smuggling corruption gang warfare and whole neighbourhoods Liv ing in terror demand for drugs now seems so Intens that it is not just our own neighbourhoods that arc imperilled but the very governments of other nations. Yet Public distaste for drug users is such that few politicians dare discuss whether legalization might be a solution much less explore what it might require to work  we get the usual dynamic non solutions More Money for weapons to fight a War on drugs against the suppliers More extensions of police Power More muscle More crackdown. How All this firepower will reduce the apparently insatiable american demand for drugs is  is Clear is the political strategy talk bang bang get  Cotow yet Tumi