The basic message, as I see it, is that our current drug laws...
Target the wrong people: the pawns on the street instead of the people making huge profits usually residing in other countries.;
In the wrong way: Instead of re-integrating users into society, our laws actually work to prevent re-integration by taking away opportunities such as education, employment, etc.;
And for no good reason: Even hard drugs are probably less detrimental to well-being than most people realize. I hate the word "addiction", but Benevie quotes some stats about the rate of heroin and crack users who are "addicted" being a percentage only in the 30's, and that most heroin users, for example, are able to be pretty high functioning and keep their day job. Benevie notes that Obama could have served 10 years had he been caught using cocaine.
---
I'd love to know what percentage of economists favor legalization. I am positive the rate is higher than most professions, and I would guess the total rate is above 50%, but please let us know in the comments if you can find a figure. (On a side note, I am annoyed by the term "legalization" because the suffix -ation sounds like it's asking government to do something; legalization is only asking the government to stop doing anything until they can prove why doing something makes sense.)
Milton Friedman (not exactly a centrist) articulates the case for legalization better than most, as is usually the case.
Craig Newmark is an economist I have a lot of respect for, but legalization is one of the few areas where we disagree. He took some heat for posting his views in 2006, but I think his arguments against legalization are well-reasoned and deserving of careful consideration by any legalization advocate.
