Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here

take action
For every $1 states spend dollar sign on substance misuse and addiction, 94 cents go to shovel up the consequences instead of for treatment and prevention. TELL YOUR LEGISLATORS

What Can I Do?



Continuing Education
Free online courses for addiction counselors LEARN ONLINE

Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP

 

Final Bush National Drug Control Strategy Released
January 23, 2009

Share Share Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Feature
by Bob Curley

As Barack Obama was inaugurated with great fanfare and drug czar John Walters and other Bush Administration officials exited the halls of power in Washington, D.C., the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy quietly released the 2009 National Drug Control Strategy and Making the Drug Problem Smaller, 2001-08, a report on drug-use trends during the Bush administration.

Once an occasion for great fanfare, the release of this year's drug strategy barely caused a ripple of interest, doubtless owing to its lame-duck status. Predictably, President Bush's final drug strategy document serves less as a guide to the future than a recap of the anti-drug approach taken by the outgoing administration and an opportunity to claim some victories in the drug war as conducted during the last eight years.

Citing his 2002 commitment to "turn the tide against a problem that truly threatens everything good about our country," Bush said, "As we prepare to pass this noble charge to a new team of leaders, we can look back with satisfaction on what we have achieved together as a nation. From community coalitions to international partnerships, we pursued a balanced strategy that emphasized stopping initiation, reducing drug abuse and addiction, and disrupting drug markets."

Bush said that teenage drug use had declined 25 percent since 2001, and that his Access to Recovery voucher program had allowed 260,000 people to get treatment. "Through law-enforcement cooperation and international partnerships, the United States has caused serious disruptions in the availability of drugs such as cocaine and methamphetamine, reducing the threat such drugs pose to the American people, while also denying profits to drug traffickers and terrorists," he wrote.

The 2009 report claims success in each facet of the "balanced strategy" cited by Bush.

"The National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign, state-level prescription drug monitoring programs, and community-based coalitions nationwide have made a substantial impact on the progress of prevention efforts," according to the document. "The results of drug-testing programs have been particularly encouraging. Random drug testing substantially lowered rates of substance abuse in the military, in the workplace, and in sports. Now an increasing number of schools are implementing promising nonpunitive random drug testing programs to reinforce drug-free lifestyles for their students.

On the treatment front, the strategy highlights the expansion of drug courts and screening, brief intervention and treatment program (SBIRT). As for supply-reduction efforts -- by far the largest piece of Bush's anti-drug program -- the report cites "impressive results in the interdiction of drugs and drug-related finances."

"Years of close cooperation with the government of Colombia have led to a dramatic reduction in the threat posed by narcoterrorists operating there," according to the 2009 National Drug Control Strategy. "Enhanced cooperation with the government of Mexico already has diminished the power of drug traffickers and will be critical to a long-term solution for securing our shared border."

Much of this is open to dispute. A recent evaluation of the Drug-Free Communities program concluded that communities served by anti-drug coalitions saw faster declines in drug use than those which did not, for example, but there is little such data to support the efficacy of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. The Bush administration's funding and outreach around school-based drug testing has led some districts to implement testing programs, but relatively few have outlived -- or been established exclusive of -- federal grant funding.

Like President Bush, President Obama has expressed strong support for drug courts, and SBIRT programs tend to be universally praised. However, Bush's claim to have weakened Mexico's drug cartels is especially dubious given the current carnage taking place in the border regions of Mexico, and it remains to be seen if the Obama administration continues to pour billions into overseas drug interdiction and other law-enforcement activities that dominated the Bush drug-control budget, or reallocates resources to domestic treatment and prevention efforts.

Looking ahead, the final Bush drug strategy takes one last swipe at the boogeyman of "well-funded legalization advocates" that ONDCP claims are threatening the international consensus that "illicit drug abuse has significant social and health consequences which require strict regulation." The document commends the work of delegates to the September 2008 inaugural World Forum Against Drugs, who "announced their intention to create a permanent organization to combat drug-legalization efforts around the world."

It's doubtful that the Obama administration -- which already has embraced harm-reduction tactics like needle exchange -- will take such a strident view of drug-policy reformers, although legalization advocates are unlikely to get the open-door invitation some may have hoped for.

The extent to which Obama diverges from the Bush approach to the drug war should become clearer when he names his own "drug czar" to take over as ONDCP director. Meanwhile, we're left with a caretaker interim ONDCP director and a strategy document that's likely bound for a short trip to the circular file of history.  

SHARE   

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by jud on 26 Jan 09 09:44 AM EST
The second paragraph, beginning: "Once an occasion..." was petty, and added nothing substantive for readers' uderstanding of the report. I expected more professionalism.

Posted by James on 26 Jan 09 10:32 AM EST
I appreciate President Bush's attention to substance abuse problems during his presidency. Admitting to past problems with alcohol and promoting recovery was a significant, symbolic act that provided a national recognition of the dangers of substance abuse. I also appreciate the support given faith-based programs through new, national support. Many faith-based programs are proving to be more cost efficient through the greater use of volunteers and local support, rather than being dependent only on government funding.

Posted by Shannon Rooney on 26 Jan 09 01:19 PM EST
The apparent bias in "Looking ahead, the final Bush drug strategy takes one last swipe at the boogeyman of 'well-funded legalization advocates'" disappoints me. I've always assumed that Join Together believed its readership intelligent enough to make good decisions based on simple, straightforward facts.

Posted by Bert Massiah on 26 Jan 09 02:21 PM EST
The only long term solution is legalization. Accompanied by clear regulations that pertain to all aspects of the production and distribution of all drugs and most importantly a strict ban on all advertising about use of drugs. If you want more info contact me.

Posted by Winds of Change... on 26 Jan 09 03:57 PM EST
It is the responsibility of each individual to be well informed on the pros/cons of legalizing or decriminalizing certain drugs. JT is very open-minded to let anti-drug war comments be posted. Those who don't stay informed on both sides of the issue might be swayed by comments from individuals whose self-serving goal is to be able to get high legally without caring who is harmed. If we don't stay informed and draw your own conclusions we might not like the way the winds of change blow on this issue. Here are some highly respected resources which do a great job of presenting both sides of the issue. http://www.iowastatedaily.com/articles/1997/11/06/import/19971106-archive9.txt http://www.duke.edu/~sgr5/p2.htm http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richardson-report/obama-marijuana-legalization-122308 http://www.stateuniversity.com/blog/permalink/The-Problems-With-Legalizing-Marijuana.html http://economics.about.com/od/incometaxestaxcuts/a/marijuana.htm

Posted by Brinna Nanda on 26 Jan 09 11:34 PM EST
Actually, I think it is shows great open-mindedness on the part of JT to publish such flaming prohibitionist letters. My friends, look around you. Your civil liberties are in great danger. You have to urinate in order to get or keep a job. Prison stocks are traded on Wall Street. The Prison Guard Union lobbies against drug courts! Thousands of people are dying in Mexico. 1 in 100 American adults are in prison. We have 5% of the worlds population, and 25% of its prison population. By criminalizing drug use, the government tells you what you can and cannot put in your own sovereign body. Funding for drug prohibition comes from breweries, big pharma, infrared imaging equipment manufacturers. Doesn't this worry you? Do you really feel any safer? Drug use is a public health issue, and should be treated as such. Drugs should be given to those that are addicted, in highly regulated programs (and I don't mean methadone). Cannabis (which is less addictive than caffeine!) should be legalized and regulated through taxation, age restriction and education. Now, that is Drug Reform worth doing.

Posted by Kathleen on 27 Jan 09 02:54 PM EST
Legalization of alcohol has certainly not reduced problems. Why would it be an effective solution to other drugs and their problems? Legalizing marijuana will only add more toxic second-hand smoke at a time when we are finally reducing problems related to second hand tobacco smoke. It would seem a huge step backwards to me.

Posted by Greg on 28 Jan 09 04:08 PM EST
Actually Kathleen, legalization of alchool reduced volent crime drmatically, created funds to educate kids, and to pay for treatment for those tha become addicted. Making alcohol illegal did very little to stop consumption, and killed or destroyed more lives then alcohol alone ever could. As a side note, becuase its illgal and drug dealers don't card, 90% of all teenagers have access to marijuana while only 75-80% have access to alcohol and ciggarettes. Regulating it means keeping it out of the hands of kids.

Posted by Kathleen on 29 Jan 09 04:26 PM EST
Greg, Where are you getting your data? The last YRBS (2007) data show that 75% of high school students have had a drink of alcohol,44.7% in the last 30 days. The stats for marijuana show 38% have tried it, and 19.7% in the last month. I have looked at every survey I am aware of, and have not found a single one that shows more kids using marijuana than alcohol. I have been a health educator in a school for 29 years, and my own experience has been with far more kids having problems with legal, including prescription drugs, than illegal. My experience is that the access to substances legal far exceeds illegal. Alcoholism is certainly more common than dependence on any other substance.

SUBMIT A COMMENT:

Note: Comments are now held for moderator approval. More info

Name:

Comment:
(limit 250
words)

Enter this word
(help):
Change

GUIDELINES: 
Please keep comments on-topic, courteous, clean, non-commercial, and within the word limit.
Read the complete guidelines