The President's
National Drug Control Strategy
March 2004
Introduction
Two years ago, the President�s first National
Drug Control Strategy reported the unsettling
news that for the sixth straight year, more
than 50 percent of 12th graders had used
an illegal drug at least once by graduation.
In his 2002 State of the Union address, the
President set a national goal of reducing
youth drug use by 10 percent within two years.
It was an ambitious goal, and to many it
seemed improbable in light of the string of
serial increases that preceded it. Yet that goal
has been met.
The most recent Monitoring the Future survey
of high school students shows an 11 percent drop
in the past-month use of illicit drugs between
2001 and 2003 (see Figure 1). Monitoring the
Future, which measured behavior at the 8th,
10th, and 12th grades found significant reductions
among all three levels.
This finding represents the first decline in drug
use across all three grades in more than a decade.
Moreover, it is a decline now in its second year.
These remarkable survey results apply to nearly all
of the most commonly used substances, but
particularly to marijuana and dangerous
hallucinogens. Use of the �rave� drug MDMA
(Ecstasy) has been cut in half, while LSD use
has dropped by nearly two-thirds, to the lowest
level measured in nearly three decades.
Figure 1: Past-Month Use of Any Illicit Drug by 8th, 10th, and 12th Graders Combined
Source: Monitoring the Future, 2003
These findings confirm the wisdom of a balanced
strategy, with appropriate emphasis on treatment,
prevention, and enforcement. The decline in
LSD use, for instance—after a period of rapid
growth during the 1990s followed a law
enforcement-led disruption of U.S. supply.
Declines in Ecstasy use are the result of successful
prevention efforts, as the understanding of the
harm caused by this drug has increased over the
past two years. Finally, individuals striving to
overcome their drug use often need the assistance
of a drug treatment program, and we are working
to make such treatment more available.
The decrease in youth drug use means that
400,000 fewer young people are using drugs today
than in 2001. Less drug use means better school
performance, stronger families, and fewer young
people lost to a life of addiction and degradation.
Fewer users mean that kids are safer and their
families are more secure. When we push drug use
down, we not only save lives and improve
communities, we make an investment that pays
dividends for years to come, because the
likelihood that young people will ever use drugs
plummets dramatically if they do not start using
during their school years.
Figure 2: Past-Month Use of MDMA (Ecstasy), by Grade
Source: Monitoring the Future, 2003
Among the Monitoring the Future survey�s findings:
-
Any illicit drug: Use of any illicit drug in the past
30 days (�current� use) among students declined
11 percent, from 19.4 to 17.3 percent. Similar
trends were seen for past-year use (down 11
percent) and lifetime use (down 9 percent).
-
Marijuana: Use of marijuana—the illicit drug
most commonly used among youth, the drug
principally responsible for dependence among
young people, and the drug of primary interest
to the National Youth Anti-Drug Media
Campaign—also declined significantly. Pastyear
and current use both declined 11 percent;
lifetime use declined 8.2 percent.
-
Ecstasy and LSD: The use of the hallucinogens
LSD and Ecstasy among youth has plummeted.
Lifetime use of LSD fell 43 percent, to 3.7
percent, and past-year and current use both
dropped nearly two-thirds. Past-year and
current use of Ecstasy were both cut in half.
-
Inhalants: Lifetime and past-year use of
inhalants declined 12 and 11 percent,
respectively. Past-year use of inhalants among
8th graders was up 14 percent between 2002
and 2003—the only increase reported by
Monitoring the Future during that period.
-
Amphetamines: Use of amphetamines, including
methamphetamine, dropped 17 percent for
both past-year and current use.
-
Alcohol: The use of alcohol, the most commonly
used intoxicant among youth, also declined, with
past-year and current use both declining 7 percent.
Reports of having �been drunk� declined 11
percent in each of the three prevalence categories.
-
Impact of Anti-Drug Advertising: Exposure to antidrug
advertising (of which the Media Campaign
is the major contributor) has had an impact on
improving youth anti-drug attitudes and
intentions. Youth in all three grades surveyed
(8th, 10th, and 12th) say that such ads have
made their attitudes less favorable toward drugs to a
�great extent� or �very great extent,� and made
them less likely to use drugs in the future.
|
NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY GOALS
|
Two-Year Goals: |
A 10 percent reduction in current use of
illegal drugs by 8th, 10th, and 12th graders.
A 10 percent reduction in current use of
illegal drugs by adults age 18 and older. |
|
Five-Year Goals: |
A 25 percent reduction in current use of
illegal drugs by 8th, 10th, and 12th graders.
A 25 percent reduction in current use of
illegal drugs by adults age 18 and older.
|
Progress toward youth goals will be measured from the baseline established by the Monitoring the Future survey
for the 2000�2001 school year. Progress toward adult goals will be measured from the baseline of the 2002 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. All Strategy goals seek to reduce current use of any illicit drug.
(Use of alcohol and tobacco products, although illegal for youths, is not captured under �any illegal drug.�)
|
These gains are a new foundation for saving more
lives. The difference we are now making will be
felt in the life of each young person not victimized
by drugs, and in the families and communities in
which they live. When our Nation pushes back
against illegal drugs, the problem recedes.
Moreover, when fewer Americans use drugs,
international drug traffickers are denied profits
and power. Our international partners recognize
that the United States is doing its part to drive
down demand. Our allies in Latin America
have shown genuine leadership in this fight.
President Uribe in Colombia and President Fox
in Mexico both fight drug trafficking because
they understand that no country is free when it
suffers from the corruption and terror the drug
trade fosters.
Figure 3: Treating Drugs Like Alcohol and Cigarettes?
Current Users by Substance (in thousands)
Current Users Who are Dependent (in thousands)
*Dependence on cigarettes is based on daily use.
Source: National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002
Counseling Despair
The findings are more than just good news for
American families; they counter the arguments
of defeatists that an engaged public cannot make
a difference in the fight to protect our youth.
Those who would legalize the use of illicit drugs
tend to fall back on familiar arguments, perhaps
the most common of which is that we should
treat illegal drugs �like we treat alcohol or
cigarettes.� They neglect to point out that there
are 120 million regular drinkers in the United
States and some 61 million smokers (see Figure
3). The comparable figure for illegal drugs is
about 20 million—a large number to be sure,
but far smaller than would be the case if drugs
were legal.
Although sometimes acknowledging that illicit
drug use would probably rise if drugs were
legalized, critics of our current, balanced drug
policy also neglect to note that the greatest
suffering, the greatest impact of cheap, legal drugs
would be felt by the young and the poor. An
especially vulnerable group is people with
co-occurring mental disorders, since drug users
are more likely to develop mental problems,
while individuals with mental disorders are more
likely to use illegal drugs than the population
at large.
Some argue that the Federal Government is
spending vast sums on drug interdiction and
enforcement while drug treatment and education
programs receive pennies on the dollar. A
corollary myth holds that the goal of drug control
policy is to �arrest our way� out of the drug
problem, filling America�s prisons with masses
of low-level drug offenders.
As the Strategy lays out in more detail, the
President�s drug control budget request for fiscal
year 2005 proposes to spend 45 percent of the
drug control budget on drug treatment and
prevention, including new funding in support of
the President�s commitment to increase spending
on drug treatment (the fiscal year 2005 treatment
request is $2.3 billion, a 6 percent increase over
2004). The Budget apportions the remaining 55
percent among law enforcement budgets,
international programs, drug-related intelligence
spending, and interdiction activities.
We are a long way from seeking to �arrest our
way� out of the drug problem. Only a small
percentage of drug arrestees are ever sent to
prison, and the vast majority of those behind bars
for drug offenses are guilty of substantial
trafficking, not possession. Indeed, one of the
more promising trends in the criminal justice
system is the creation of drug courts, which refer
those in need of treatment not to incarceration
but to genuine help, and which offer hundreds of
thousands of arrestees the prospect of zero prison
time, provided they attend counseling and drug
treatment sessions. The fiscal year 2005 budget
supports this policy innovation with an increase of
$32 million for drug courts.
Figure 4: Drug Violation Arrests Accounted for 11 Percent of All Arrests in 2002
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation
According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission,
the median quantity involved in federal cocainetrafficking
cases is 3,016 grams for powder and 62
grams for crack cocaine—more than 600 �rocks�
of crack. The relevant figures for heroin and
marijuana are 649 and 58,060 grams,
respectively—enough, in either case, for tens of thousands of
doses. The additional claim that law enforcement
agencies are focused on locking up individuals for
possession of, as opposed to trafficking in, illegal
drugs is likewise inaccurate. In fiscal year 2001,
the most recent year for which there is data, out of
24,299 Federal drug cases, there were just 384
federal possession convictions for cocaine,
marijuana, and heroin combined.
Legalization proponents dismiss such facts,
even as they minimize the harm drug users
inflict on themselves, and on family and
community. They focus instead on the supposed
harm inflicted on the individual and community
by the government, particularly law enforcement.
Yet the cost of drug use overwhelmingly falls
not simply on the drug user—although users
certainly pay a high price—but also on spouses,
parents, society, and taxpayers.
We invite the skeptics to attend a few meetings of
a local Al-Anon chapter and listen to what families
in their own communities are going through on
a daily basis. They should listen closely to what
has helped these families� drug-using loved ones
start to get well. As psychiatrist Robert DuPont
notes, �They are unlikely to hear that the answer
was more drugs in their neighborhoods.�
The President�s
Management Agenda:
Budgeting for Results
The budget volume that accompanies this
National Drug Control Strategy presents
performance information for each of the drug
control programs. As part of this Administration�s
effort to integrate budget and performance,
the new drug budget, first presented last year in
the National Drug Control Strategy, not only ties
to identifiable line items in the President�s Budget
but also includes key performance information
for each program. The performance information
presented here was used by the Administration
to formulate the fiscal year 2005 budget.
Building on agency efforts under the Government
Performance and Results Act, and working with
the Office of Management and Budget in
implementing its Program Assessment Rating
Tool (PART), the Office of National Drug
Control Policy has made data on program
performance central to budget decisionmaking.
In the President�s fiscal year 2004 budget,
programs comprising about one-third of the
drug budget were assessed.With new assessments
conducted for the fiscal year 2005 budget and
updates of prior assessments, 45 percent of the
drug budget was assessed.
The goals of the National Drug Control Strategy
and its three national priorities—Stopping Use
Before It Starts, Healing America�s Drug Users,
and Disrupting the Market—drive the budgeting
process. Each program�s effectiveness in
contributing to the accomplishment of those goals
helps determine its resource level. Demonstrably
effective programs receive continued support.
Ineffective programs and programs for which
results have not been demonstrated have action
plans for improvement and, in some cases,
reduced resource levels.
By integrating program goals and effectiveness
information into the National Drug Control
Strategy, the Administration has laid the
foundation for increased accountability for Federal
funds and enhanced program performance.
Last Updated: March 29, 2004
