Killing Yaa Baa - forget the government

I read the BBC News report "Montana meth ads winning drug battle", a few weeks ago, when it was published on August 22, but remembered it and looked it up again this afternoon. The article describes an unusually successful campaign against abuse of methamphetamine in the US state of Montana, which, despite it's reputation for natural beauty had been devastated by the effects of crystal meth, which is known as "Yaa Baa" in Thailand. Abuse of this highly addictive drug was said to be responsible for half of the crimes that had put people in prison and for half of babies in foster care because their drug addicted mothers could not care for them. But then in just two years, Montana fell from being number 5 to number 39 on the list of US states with meth. problems. The unusual campaign that made this possible had was financed and planned by Tom Siebal, a rich software developer, who lived there and wanted to help his community. He treated the problem as a sales problem, researched the users demand for the drug and applied the same marketing techniques used to sell software and other products to selling the idea that methamphetamine was bad news and best not used. Siebal's campaign has not completely removed the drug, but it has made a very big improvement. 

What I found most unusual in this report is that it was done without any interference from the government. I can't help but wonder: did it work better because the government was not involved? Would it be better for other areas with drug problems to get rid of the failing government "solutions" and let the local community care for itself? 

It reminds me of a change that has occurred amongst the native Australian communities in cities like Sydney over the past ten years or so. Where once they would accept, or demand, government support, many community leaders now see that as unhelpful and they are leading their own drug addicted, alcoholic and crime prone communities to say "No" to government help because it doesn't seem to work, and merely makes the people dependent on the government. 

Would we all be better off if the government did not interfere in our lives so much? Are free market people like Tom Siebal better agents for improving society than communist like governments that make up laws to try to control people's personal lives? 

__________ 

References

Montana meth ads winning drug battle, (2008. August 22). BBC News. Retrieved October 14, 2008 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7576275.stm