Since I said "how alcohol is currently regulated", I fail to see your point:
b. Regulate them all in a manner similar to how alcohol is currently regulated.
"Dry" states, however, found that alcohol was being shipped in from "wet" states. They petitioned the federal government for help and Congress passed the Webb-Kenyon Act, forbidding this activity. It wasn't effective, and Prohibition soon followed.
And that was a huge flop. What followed was much more sensible.
What makes you think it would be any different with drugs?
We are already at the Prohibition stage, using your alcohol comparison. If it follows in alcohol's staggering path, then I see no reason that prohibition would be reimposed.
What's the difference between how alcohol is currently regulated by the states and the way it was regulated before Prohibition?
The only difference I see is that, today, alcohol is legal in all states. The only way your scheme would work is if all states legalized all drugs. Without that, we'll have a similar "flop".