Crack epidemic

The crack epidemic refers to a six year period between 1984 and 1990 in the United States during which there was a huge surge in the use of crack cocaine in major cities, and crack-houses all over the USA. Fallout from the crack epidemic included a huge surge in addiction, homelessness, murder, theft, robbery, and long-term imprisonment. The first effects of the epidemic started in the early 1980s, but the DEA officially classifies the time of the epidemic starting in 1984 and ending in 1990, in what can be considered to be the height of the epidemic.

The epidemic affected all major American cities. Among the cities most severely impacted were Chicago, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles and New York. According to New York Senator Charles Schumer, "Twenty years ago, crack was headed east across the United States like a Mack truck out of control, and it slammed New York hard because we just didn't see the warning signs."

History
In the early 1980s, the majority of cocaine being shipped to the United States, landing in Miami, was coming through the Bahamas. Soon there was a huge glut of cocaine powder in these islands, which caused the price to drop by as much as 80 percent. Faced with dropping prices for their illegal product, drug dealers made a shrewd business decision to convert the powder to "crack," a solid smokeable form of cocaine, that could be sold in smaller quantities, to more people. It was cheap, simple to produce, ready to use, and highly profitable for dealers to develop. As early as 1981, reports of crack were appearing in Los Angeles, San Diego, Houston, and in the Caribbean.

Initially, crack had higher purity than street powder (until crack later became "blow-up" or "whip dope"). Around 1981, powder cocaine was available on the street at an average of 55 percent purity for $100 per gram, and crack was sold at average purity levels of 80-plus percent for the same price. In some major cities, such as New York, Los Angeles, Detroit, and Philadelphia, one dosage unit of crack could be obtained for as little as US$2.50. Never before had any form of cocaine been available at such low prices and at such high purity. More important from a marketing standpoint, it produced an instant high and its users became addicted in a very short time.

Crack appeared in Miami in 1982, and at first was considered to be only a Miami phenomenon. That was proven wrong when it first appeared in New York City in December, 1983. By 1986, crack had a strong hold on the ghettos of New York City. The distribution and use of the drug exploded that same year and by the end of 1986, was available in 28 states and the District of Columbia. According to the 1985-1986 National Narcotics Intelligence Consumers Committee Report, crack was available in Los Angeles, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, New York City, Chicago, St. Louis, Atlanta, Boston, Kansas City, Miami, Newark, San Francisco, Buffalo, Dallas, Denver, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Seattle, and Portland, OR.

In 1985, cocaine-related hospital emergencies rose by 12 percent, from 23,500 to 26,300. In 1986, they increased 110 percent, from 26,300 to 55,200. Between 1984 and 1987, cocaine incidents increased fourfold. By 1987, crack was reported to be available in the District of Columbia and all but four states in the US.

Some scholars have cited the crack "epidemic" as an example of a moral panic, noting that the explosion in use and trafficking of the drug actually occurred after the media coverage of the drug as an "epidemic."

Impact by region
Crack Cocaine arrived earlier on the West Coast but the drug's worst impact was on the Northeastern and Middle Atlantic States. Crack was also found to be a much bigger problem in big cities than in smaller cities. 70% of the impact of crack was felt in large cities, and the rates per capita were 10 times higher in larger cities than in the rest of the nation.

Researchers found that during the time period studied, cities with the worst crack problems were, New York, NY; Baltimore, MD; Chicago, IL; Newark, NJ; Washington, D.C.; Los Angeles, CA; Oakland, CA; Philadelphia, PA; New Orleans, LA; Boston, MA; San Francisco, CA; Newport News, VA; Seattle, WA; and Portland, OR. The states with the worst problems were Maryland and New York.

Crime
Rather than the drug use itself, the greatest social costs of crack were associated with prohibition-related violence. Research by two prominent economists from the University of Chicago, Steven Levitt (co-author of Freakonomics and winner of the 2003 John Bates Clark Medal) and Kevin Murphy (winner of the 1997 John Bates Clark Medal) suggest that crack was the most prominent factor contributing to the rise and fall of social ills in the African American and Latino communities between 1980 and 2000.


 * "Between 1984 and 1994, the homicide rate for black males aged 14 to 17 more than doubled, and the homicide rate for black males aged 18 to 24 increased nearly as much. During this period, the black community also experienced an increase in fetal death rates, low birth-weight babies, weapons arrests, and the number of children in foster care."

The reasons for these increases in crime was due mostly to the fact that distribution for the drug occurred mainly in low-income inner city neighborhoods. This gave many inner city residents the opportunity to move up the "economic ladder" in a free drug market that allowed dealers to charge a low minimum price. The basic reason for the rise of crack was economic.


 * "Evidently, crack cocaine use and distribution became popular in cities that were in social and economic chaos such as Los Angeles and Atlanta. 'As a result of the low-skill levels and minimal initial resource outlay required to sell crack, systemic violence flourished as a growing army of young, enthusiastic inner-city crack sellers attempt to defend their economic investment.' (Inciardi, 1994) Once the drug became embedded in the particular communities, the economic environment that was best suited for its survival caused further social disintegration within that city. An environment that was based on violence and deceit as an avenue for the crack dealers to protect their economic interests."

End of the epidemic
Violence from the Crack Epidemic ended as suddenly as it had begun. Reasons for the drop in crime are not officially known. According to some reports, increase in police had nothing to do with the end of the epidemic as cities with no police change saw the effect of the epidemic appear suddenly. According to Alan Fox, dean of the college of criminal justice at Northeastern University, "'Probably the most important factor [in the drop in crime] was the change in drug markets' -- that is, dealers no longer needed to fight over turf for selling the new product, because the boundary lines were now established."

Other reports say that the crack epidemic ended because many young kids had seen the effects on their parents and older siblings. Rappers also began to popularize marijuana, a soft drug, which does not come with the devastating effects of crack, a hard drug. During the 1990s, being called a crackhead became an insult in urban culture. Many young kids from the new generation stayed away from crack and never tried it themselves. Alfred Blumstein, a criminologist from Carnegie Mellon University stated the following factors for the end of the epidemic:


 * "There are four major factors in the drop in crime," he says. "No. 1 has been getting guns out of the hands of kids, No. 2 has been the shrinking of the crack markets and their institutionalization. Third is the robustness of the economy. There are jobs for kids now who might otherwise be attracted to dealing." In last place, Blumstein says, is the criminal justice response, or as he puts it, "incapacitation related to the growth of incarceration."