Couple of interesting points. First, the cartels are probably the biggest supporters of the current drug laws. It's like being given a magic bottle that makes

Couple of interesting points. First, the cartels are probably the biggest supporters of the current drug laws. It's like being given a magic bottle that makes money all of the time -- as long as you're willing to use violence, which was never a problem for them. Second, I am not optimistic about the U.S. political system growing a set of cajones anytime soon, but damned if there isn't a tiny bit of movement, from both parties. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48203995/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times/ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48203995/ns/world_news-the_new_y... Third, and most importantly, we're always going to have smuggling. Always had it, always will have it. I think the goal here is to allow a lot of things to be smuggled but to keep the total dollar amount down. The drug trade is tens of billions of dollars, and it involves moving plants that grow as weeds. High-value art, rare fish, or any of a hundred other things really shouldn't be getting that much attention. There simply isn't enough money there to corrupt the system. The key problem (as far as customs goes) is rampant smuggling destroying control over the border. That's the problem to address. (I'd add that legalization would sure help a lot to address it.) We need to decrease the complexity of the customs laws and increase the focus of enforcement. Trying to ban something that huge sections of the population consume, or trying to control tens of thousands of random little items, are both ways to destroy the entire idea of having a customs office in the first place.