| [Edit]
The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), a component of the Executive Office of the President of the United States, was established in 1988 by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act. Its stated goal is to establish policies, priorities, and objectives to eradicate illicit drug use, manufacturing, and trafficking, drug-related crime and violence, and drug-related health consequences in the U.S.
The current director is John P. Walters; his position is ubiquitously nicknamed the Drug Czar. In addition to running the ONDCP, the director evaluates, coordinates, and oversees both the international and domestic anti-drug efforts of executive branch agencies and ensures that such efforts sustain and complement State and local anti-drug activities. The Director advises the President regarding changes in the organization, management, budgeting, and personnel of federal agencies that effect U.S. anti-drug efforts; and regarding federal agency compliance with their obligations under the National Drug Control Strategy, an annual report required by law.
As of mid-2006, there were 111 full-time employees at ONDCP.
top
Funding
In September 2006, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended that salaries and expenses at ONDCP be reduced from $26.6 million in fiscal 2006 to $11.5 million in fiscal 2007, to "more closely reflect actual performance." Committee members said they would request funding for a study of ONDCP by the National Academy of Public Administration. They also ordered a Government Accountability Office study on the distribution of grants. Plus, they directed the Director to provide quarterly updates on travel expenditures, staffing levels and plans for future hirings.
top
High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Program
In 2005, the Bush Administration proposed transferring the $225 million High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Program from ONDCP to the Department of Justice. The program gives additional money to communities with chronic illicit drug sales. According to the Washington Post, "Many lawmakers oppose the transfer for fear the program would become less of a priority."
The latest National Survey on Drug Use and Health reported that [Kevin Freking, "Drug Use Up for Boomers, Down for Teens", Washington Post, September 7, 2006]
+
+
top
Extent of drug use in the U.S.
In September 2006, the office reported that the 2005 survey of 67,500 people found that 8.1 percent reported using an illicit drug in the 30 days prior to being asked about their drug use, which equates to 19.7 million people nationwide (age 12 and older). The percentage was up slightly compared to 2004. Youth drug use declined for the third year in a row.
top
Anti-marijuna advertising
In August 2001, the office told a Congressional committee that its National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign "has been the most visible symbol of the federal government's commitment to drug prevention," and that the office was "investing $7 million a year in performance measurement to determine the effectiveness" of the campaign. The statement by said "We believe there is a strong body of evidence that indicates the campaign is working, as planned, to change drug attitudes, intentions and use."
In 2002, according to a multiyear study by the research firm hired by the office, teen-agers exposed to federal anti-drug ads were no less likely to use drugs for having viewed them, and some young girls said they were even more likely to give drugs a try. Walters blamed poor ads that weren't resonating with teen-agers. Walters promised in Senate testimony in 2002 that he would show results within a year or admit failure, and Congress agreed to extend the campaign through 2003 while cutting funding for the ads from $170 million in 2002 to $150 million in 2003. An entirely new advertising campaign was created.
In February 2005, a research company hired by the office and the National Institute on Drug Abuse reported that the government's ad campaign aimed at dissuading teens from using marijuana, a campaign that cost $1.4 billion between 1998 and 2006, did not work: "greater exposure to the campaign was associated with weaker anti-drug norms and increases in the perceptions that others use marijuana." The research company was paid $42.7 million for the five-year study. After the February 2005 report was received, the office continued the ad campaign, spending $220 million on the anti-marijuana ads in fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
top
Other
According to the University of Michigan's annual Monitoring the Future report, the number of young people using drugs in the U.S. declined by 19 percent between 2001 and 2005 .
While cocaine production in Colombia initially decreased with the onset of Plan Colombia, the United Nations declared that in 2005, despite record levels of eradication by the U.S., coca production increased to about 330 square miles .
top
Paying for embedded anti-drug messages in television shows
In 2000, the Federal Communications Commission, in response to a complaint by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, sent inquiries to five major television networks about ONDCP's practice of offering millions of additional advertising dollars to networks that embedded anti-drug messages in their programming. The House Committee on Government Reform's Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources held hearings on the matter on July 11, 2000.. In December of that year, the FCC ruled that the networks should have identified the Office of National Drug Control Policy as the sponsor of the television programs.
top
State and local decriminalization ballot measures
In December 2002, the Marijuana Policy Project, filed a complaint with the Nevada Secretary of State accusing the Drug Czar John Walters of illegally campaigning against its 2002 ballot initiative to decriminalize possession of up to 3 ounces of cannabis in that state. Specifically, MPP argued that Nevada campaign finance laws required the Drug Czar to reveal how much taxpayer money he had spent to defeat the initiative. In April 2003, the Nevada Attorney General concluded that the Drug Czar was not required to comply with Nevada's campaign finance laws. MPP filed a writ of mandamus as an appeal of the decision. The Nevada Supreme Court issued an order declaring that MPP had "set forth issues of arguable merit" in its writ; however, on August 18, 2004, the Court declared that it was "not satisfied that the court's intervention by way of extraordinary relief is warranted".
A February 24, 2005 MPP press release announced that the group had filed similar complaints in Montana, Oregon, and Alaska, accusing the Drug Czar of failing to make legally required campaign expense disclosures
On October 5, 2004, the drug czar traveled to Oregon for the purpose of opposing Measure 33, a ballot measure designed to expand the state's medical marijuana program. On October 6, ONDCP Deputy Director Scott Burns traveled to Montana to campaign against Initiative 148, the medical marijuana measure passed by voters in November. And on October 13 and 14, Burns traveled to Alaska to oppose Measure 2, a measure to allow the state to tax and regulate the sale of marijuana. All of these trips were widely reported in the local press as being campaign stops in opposition to the reform initiatives.
top
Use of video news releases
In 2005, the Government Accountability Office found that the ONDCP had violated anti-propaganda laws by preparing prepackaged news stories that did not disclose to television viewers that the government had produced them. According to Susan A. Poling, managing associate general counsel at the GAO, "What is objectionable about these is the fact the viewer has no idea their tax dollars are being used to write and produce this video segment."
ONDCP supporters such as Representatives Tom Davis and Mark Edward Souder have dismissed such criticism on the grounds that the ONDCP is expressly authorized by law to conduct anti-drug media campaigns.
top
List of Directors
The title of Director, as well as the office, was created by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988. The position was raised to cabinet-level status in 1993.
top
Legislation and Executive Orders
1993 Executive Order 12880
1996 Executive Order 12992
1996 Executive Order 13023
2000 Executive Order 13165
top
See also
|
|
