Advocates for demand reduction programs -- addiction treatment and prevention -- have long complained that the federal drug budget skews too sharply toward supply reduction, e.g. law enforcement and interdiction. The release of the 2006 National Drug Control Strategy and accompanying budget proved to be no exception, but now the Bush administration's Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) is hearing tough criticism from law-enforcement groups, as well.

The National Narcotics Officers Associations Coalition (NNOAC), which in the past has boasted of its involvement in drafting the National Drug Control Strategy, recently issued a statement criticizing the ONDCP for a lack of leadership on issues like methamphetamine use, for budget cuts to the Byrne drug law-enforcement program, and a proposed relocation of the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) program that could water down its anti-drug focus.

"No one understands the drug threat more than the members of the NNOAC, and yet we were never included in any of the discussions regarding budget cuts or response to emerging drug threats," wrote NNOAC President Ronald E. Brooks in a March 10 letter to coalition members. "While the NNOAC has long supported [ONDCP] Director [John] Walters, first in his bid for confirmation to the important cabinet level position of drug czar and later in his efforts to support student drug testing, in his response to the threat of marijuana, and in the fight against drug legalization, we have been unable to understand his refusal to sit at the table to discuss issues with us."

"It is difficult to comprehend that our nation's drug czar, the person who should serve as our advocate within the Administration has abandoned state and local law enforcement when he supported elimination of Byrne and the removal of the HIDTA Program to [the Department of] Justice," wrote Brooks, who cited a "lack of leadership" at ONDCP and said the NNOAC was working for a "change of leadership" at the drug czar's office.

NNOAC also wrote to the heads of the House and Senate budget committees in late February, asking that the $1.1-billion Byrne grant program be retained and fully funded, saying it has "demonstrated clear and outstanding results." Cited successes included establishing multi-jurisdictional drug task forces that have closed thousands of meth labs and seized more than $250 million in drug-related cash and property.

Interdiction Funding Soars as Prevention Dollars Shrivel

Meanwhile, critics continue to point out the unequal split between demand and supply reduction in the administration's latest anti-drug plan: 35.5 percent of the anti-drug funding in the FY2007 Bush budget would go to treatment and prevention, while 64.5 percent is earmarked for interdiction and law enforcement. In 2001, supply reduction accounted for 53 percent of the budget, compared to 47 percent for demand reduction.

"Using 2001 as a baseline -- the year ONDCP uses to benchmark the success of its drug strategy -- the federal drug-control budget shows an increasing emphasis on supply reduction programs, particularly those targeting our borders and reaching out into source countries," noted Carnevale Associates in its annual assessment of ONDCP's anti-drug strategy. 

"Over the FY 2001-FY 2007 period, demand reduction increased $49 million, or 1.1 percent, whereas supply reduction increased by $3.2 billion, or 66.1 percent," the report said. "Over this period, ONDCP has placed its greatest emphasis on international or source-country programs and drug interdiction. International program resources grew by 137 percent between FY 2001 and FY 2007. Interdiction programs grew by 64 percent."

Meanwhile, funding for prevention programs fell 21 percent between 2001 and 2007; funding for treatment rose 17 percent, the Carnevale report said. 

NAADAC, the Association of Addiction Counselors, called the FY2007 Bush drug budget "disheartening," noting that the under-funding of anti-drug programs is compounded by the administration's plan to eliminate the Community Development Block Grant and the Preventive Health Block Grant, and slash half a billion dollars from the Social Services Block Grant.

"Funding for many critical health programs would be dramatically reduced and many of the cuts would have a crippling impact on addiction services and treatment," NAADAC said.