The Failure of the Office of National Drug Control Policy

As an insider in the nation's war against drugs, I spent almost fifteen years in the executive office of the President. Eleven of these years were in the Office of National Drug Control Policy where I served four of the nation's so-called drug czars preparing the federal drug control budget, writing many of the national drug control strategies, and conducting performance measurement and analysis of the efficacy of those strategies. I left government in 2000, but continue to be highly involved in shaping drug policies and measuring performance in drug policy both nationally and internationally.

In the latest 2008 National Drug Control Strategy, the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) -- the federal executive office agency charged with shaping this nation's national drug control strategy -- claims that America has reached a turning point in the war on drugs. In reality, we have little reason to believe a significant change has occurred. ONDCP based its claim on declining use for youth -- a trend that long precedes this administration's tenure -- but ignores the lack of progress with regard to adult drug use, rates of drug addiction, the inaccessibility of substance abuse treatment, and new emerging drugs of demand such as pharmaceutical drugs and methamphetamine. If America is to be successful in the fight against drugs, the first priority for the next administration -- Republican or Democrat -- must be to reinventing ONDCP as an effective policy office capable of leading the nation's struggle with drugs.

In the 1980's, the United States essentially focused on supply reduction, largely in response to a cocaine epidemic, and with the belief that source and transit zone interdiction was the most effective means of reducing drug use in the United States. By the 1990's we had learned that interdiction was a relatively ineffective way of reducing drug use -- and expensive besides. So we focused our efforts on demand reduction. Now, at the beginning of the new millennium we have...inexplicably...come to believe again that source and transit zone interdiction is an effective way to reduce drug use in America. There is no evidence to support this belief. And it is all the more surprising that we have refocused our efforts in this way at a time when many of the major drugs of abuse -- including marijuana, methamphetamine, and controlled pharmaceuticals, are produced domestically.

The central task of ONDCP -- and what must now become the central political debate -- is determining how best to combine and fund the five essential ingredients of drug control policy: prevention, treatment, domestic law enforcement, international or source country programs, and interdiction.

Though Congress created ONDCP to formulate research-driven and performance-based policy, assess and modify policy through performance measures, and give a precise accounting of the federal drug control budget, ONDCP fails at all of those tasks. In the 90's ONDCP created a performance measurement system for evaluating the effects of its policies on drug use, drug availability, and the negative consequences of drug use; however, this decade, no such performance measurement system has been utilized. As a consequence, policy is now flying blind resulting in lost opportunities for more success.

Simply put: the cornerstone of all evidence-based policy driven by reliable performance data. Currently, ONDCP has failed to establish baseline measures link to the ingredients of an effective drug policy. This is inhibiting our nation's ability to better assess future action. The first step of any administration must be to reassert ONDCP as the flagship substance abuse organization by instituting a performance measurement system to allow Congress, the American people, and ONDCP itself access to crucial data. To stay ahead of emerging drug trends, ONDCP must once again make knowledge development, data systems and research a priority. Leading drug use indicators must steer drug control policy rather than outdated trends.

Second, ONDCP's budgetary role must be fixed. A review of the Federal drug control budget for this decade shows the following: the Administration's drug control budget since FY02 has emphasized supply reduction programs over demand reduction programs; resources for supply reduction (interdiction of drugs, source country programs, and law enforcement), grew by almost 57% from the FY 02 baseline level to the FY 09 request now before Congress; and by comparison, demand reduction resources (prevention and treatment, including resources for research for agencies like the National Institute on Drug Abuse) grew by only 2.7 percent--prevention is actually cut 25 percent.

This budget trend runs counter to what research would otherwise suggest: that efforts to reduce demand are best addressed through treatment and prevention rather than supply reduction.ONDCP must fully exercise its budgetary authority. Working with the Office of Management and Budget to formulate and distribute an accurate drug control budget to implement its policy priorities is the only way to ensure that research findings are reflected in the drug control budget.

Finally, a new administration must retool and reemphasize ONDCP as an effective policy leadership organization. Right now, ONDCP administers many programs that could be better managed by other federal agencies responsible for drug program administration. ONDCP rediscover its roots by again becoming a leader in policy formulation to develop a drug policy that is evidence-based and includes performance measurement to hold it accountable for results. An outdated organizational structure reflecting the 1980's cocaine war must be abandoned in favor of one that addresses today's multifaceted drug threat, recognizing that drug use occurs in drug markets where the most common drugs are more often domestically produced. Programs which distract from ONDCP's policy-setting mission must be jettisoned to agencies more suited to those particular tasks (e.g. Drug Free Communities to SAMHSA). ONDCP must focus exclusively on policy and budget.

The new administration will face a unique opportunity to reshape American drug policy. ONDCP must develop a strategy that is research- and performance-based. It must present a federal drug control budget that emphasizes effective programs that support an evidence-based, comprehensive drug control policy. It is now up to the next president, be he or she Democrat or Republican, to enable ONDCP to meet the nation's needs to reduce drug use and its damaging consequences.

Comments

[Brinna]

Did it ever occur to you, Mr. Carnevale, that the so called War on Drugs may be creating the demand. Try to follow this logic:

1. Drugs become illegal.
2. Only criminals sell drugs.
3. Criminals are not under any regulation.
4. Criminals will sell to your children.
5. Criminals will try to get you hooked on drugs which are actually addictive, therefore increasing demand.
6. Criminals like drugs to be scarce because they can charge more.
7. Criminals kill people who stop them from making money.
Vs.
1. Drugs become legal
2. Only reputable sources are allowed to supply drugs.
3. The sources are highly regulated.
4. These sources cannot sell to your children.
5. These sources supply information to users about therapy, rehabilitation and voluntary intervention options, and alternative ways to solve problems instead of drugs.
6. Supply and demand is no longer a factor in drug sales.
7. Criminals cannot compete, and leave the drug market alone (how many criminals sell diapers?).

Do I also need to mention that cannabis use (by population percentage) is lower in the Netherlands, where cannabis is available in highly regulated coffee shops, then in the US with all of our interdiction and almost 800,000 cannabis-associated arrests per year.

[StephenBarry]

I need a spliff right about now. I can't hack the business news !!

[NorCalNative]

John, I have asked this question of my Senator, Dianne Feinstein and I would like to put it to you.

Why will Congress not do their job and reclassify cannabis? We cannot continue to view cannabis as an illegal drug without medical benefits as long as the law is clear on this one point. The requirement to change cannabis from an illegal to a legal drug under supervision of a phyisician is this:

"Current known medical use." That's all that Congress needs to act on this issue. Yet, for years they have chosen to ignore science and the medical community. Under the existing laws and regulations of the United States "current" medical marijuana use under medical supervision is taking place.

So, I ask you, why hasn't Congress acted to make this change? The law requires it but they are ignoring it. How do these types of actions help or improve the hyprocisy of the War on Drugs?

[KillTheMessenger]

But, but, but... we now have new spy satellites and UAVs! Now we can see every drug dealer in the world as they transport the stuff. And we can drop bombs at any time anywhere in the world. Look how great that works in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan!

Just kidding.

[illinoisan]

Spoken like a true bureaucrat.

The mission of the ONDCP is as fundamentally flawed as the racist law on which it is based, the Contolled Substances Act. The ONDCP should be disbanded and replaced by an national commission charged with formulating a common sense drug policy that would replace prohibition with regulation.

Drug use is as old as mankind. Efforts to abolish drug abuse only compound its negative effects without delivering on the promise to abolish it. Our whole strategy against drugs is based on the notion that you can make use of certain drugs so costly that people will lose interest in consuming them. 100 years of pursuing this strategy has proven it to be utterly without merit.

[cdembrey]

Decriminalize drugs, and TAX drugs!!! A win - win situation for everyone! Except maybe prison guards.

The Republicans are always looking for ways to get government out of our lives. This is one way to do it!

[mgloraine]

I've got a better plan: abolish the ONDCP and put the money and people being wasted there to work on some of the REAL problems this country faces. Every aspect of the so-called "war on drugs" is intended to divert the attention of American taxpayers and voters from the crime and corruption which runs rampant through criminal Republican administrations, as well as providing a cover story for the seizing of private property and squandering of billions in tax dollars. Business as usual for the federal government.

All of the other phony "agencies" which squander our money or funnel tax dollars to Republican crooks likewise need to be abolished, the money saved and the people either put to actual work for once, or compelled to look for a real job in the private sector instead of gorging at the federal trough. Those agencies include the DEA, the CIA, the NSA, the "Department of Homeland Security", ICE, ATF, and others.

All of the fake "drug czars" are interested in enriching themselves at everyone else's expense, but they know and care little or nothing about drugs, their use, and their users. All of the people in the "enforcement" cabal are hoodlums and thugs, who are interested in stealing drugs from others so that they can sell and use the drugs themselves; the DEA is a government sponsored mafia and terrorist organization which brings violence and lawlessness to the streets while accumulating shame and failure for our nation as a whole.

[oldpotsmuggler]

"Drugs" is a big word. One person"s drug is another persons "pick me up", "take the edge off", "pain reliever" etc.

Drug users are largely benign. Drugs are a mixed bag of "benefits" and "harms. Drug warriors, on the other hand, are an unmitigated evil.

These are the folks, for example, that are losing the Afghanistan armed conflict for us. Afghanistan ratchets down several notches as a problem if we defund the other side of the hostilities by legalizing heroin. Instead, we keep the money spigot turned on for folks who are perfectly content to spend billions on low tech weapons to use to kill Americans, Russians, or any other flavor of outside intruder. And then we further accommodate them by keeping a steady supply of targets just hanging around waiting until someone wants to take a shot at us. It's a war of attrition, and they use our own propensity to overly regulate to mind altering substances as their main weapon against us. It's like martial arts where the size, momentum, etc. of the opponent is converted to an advantage.

Taliban is like U.S. gang bangers. Being all tough and hanging out with the guys is fun as long as it means free room board, and a gun. Cut off the money supply, though, and then it just becomes sitting around getting cold and hungry for nothing.

Personally, I'd do that before I'd send three more brigades of fighters.

[WorkingClass]

The war on drugs must continue. Its an essential part of the greater war on freedom. And its working.

[KillTheMessenger]

I love the way you use sarcasm.

[Independent voter]

In a nation where 1 out of every 100 people is in prison it is time to stop trying to make social policy with jail time.

If marijuana were decriminalized 30,000 Americans would stop being imprisoned for possesion every year and marijuana smuggling over the Mexican border would stop instantly.

Yet our government continues the Reefer Madness mentality because companies like BUD, RJR and GSK don't want the American people to grow their own smiles in the tomato garden. Better to drinka sixpack, smoke a camel or take some oxycodone.

No politician has the courage to do the right thing.

[justobserve]

"If marijuana were decriminalized 30,000 Americans would stop being imprisoned for possesion every year and marijuana smuggling over the Mexican border would stop instantly."
Do you really believe what you said?
Smuggling would stop immediately or it keeps going to the USA but is legal so it is not called "smuggling"?
The main problem with drugs here is the attitude that drugs are not bad.
Where there are no problem with drugs in the general population, such as Asia, people view drug users with disdain. Maybe the same way in the USA people look at welfare/foodstamp recipients as a case of not in control of your life.
Here, movie stars, rich people use it and it is called "recreational drug" to add glamor to it.
That is the real problem.
And of course, once people use it, they will keep using it even though they said it is not addictive.
It makes one wonder!

[RoloTomassi]

Your comment is one of the most clueless comments I've seen on this issue.

Read a book for god's sake; this isane issue of a "war on drugs" is too costly and too idiotic for people like you to cast about randomly making absurd comments.

[noneIn2008]

Another false government program to control the people and make everyone a criminal.
When will we learn that getting the government involved makes things worse 90% of the time.
At least special interests can grow fat creating programs for drug eradication, training and weapons to foreign countries.

Let's hear Obama step up on decriminalizing victimless crimes

[KillTheMessenger]

Drug use is not a victimless crime. At the very least the drug user is the victim, and usually not just the victim of their own drug use. Having said that, education and social support go a long way to rehabilitate these victims. And these can only be provided by government. There is no business model in the world that can, or should, make a profit on the helpless.

[moldy]

"There is no business model in the world that can, or should, make a profit on the helpless."

I'm sorry but think about the prison industry and the drug testing industry please. Who in the hell do you think they get their employment from? Do you see how our SWAT teams have popped up in every town in this country? For what? Busting down doors to MAKE A PROFIT ON THE HELPLESS! Prisons are growing faster than schools and we are paying for it!

please visit leap.org

[Novista]

For any drug, there are users and abusers, true of alcohol and everything else. Maybe 'power' is the worst drug of all -- yet I've seen no call for a 'war on power'.

I've read that since Nixon's 'war on drugs' arose, it's cost America one trillion dollars -- and there are more and better drugs available than ever. Truly, the 'war on drugs' outcome has been a triumph for a real 'free market', albeit illegal. Supply-and-demand in the illicit trade creates windfall profits and corruption. I suspect those who believe in business as usual on a failed policy must be profiting by it ...

[stavros]

True drug war speak coming from a drug warrrior.
If you really want "to enable ONDCP to meet the nation's needs to reduce drug use and its damaging consequences", three things come to mind:

1. Legalize drugs.
2. Tax drugs.
3. Shut down the ONDCP.

[glarblBlarbl]

You say:
The central task of ONDCP -- and what must now become the central political debate -- is determining how best to combine and fund the five essential ingredients of drug control policy: prevention, treatment, domestic law enforcement, international or source country programs, and interdiction.

Why have five ingredients when you could have a much better product with just three: Tax, Regulate, and Treat. Get rid of all the black market violence, ensure that dangerous drugs are not sold to children(!), and help those who cannot help themselves. Seems a lot more rational to me, unless of course your goal is to have the world become a Police State where people are afraid to walk down the street.

[glarblBlarbl]

Well, it is nice to hear someone formerly in the establishment finally admit that the ONDCP has been operating without using valid data throughout its history.

Unfortunately the drug problem will always be exacerbated by Prohibition, and the ONDCP is statutorily obligated to work against any efforts to end this worst policy failure since slavery. Good data will only prove them wrong, so they will never use good science.

The ONDCP needs to be abolished along with the Controlled Substances Act. Not only are the effects of the policy morally reprehensible, the underlying assumptions are indefensible. It assumes that only approved drugs can be used responsibly, that adults are incapable of exercising rational thought when it comes to certain drugs. It proclaims that the government should control the suffering of its people, that it is immoral to use marijuana recreationally but that alcohol magically produces girls in bikinis. The effects are there for all to see: the US imprisons more people than any other country both in gross numbers and by percentage of the population. Prohibition is responsible for the huge racial imbalance in the prisons as well. The murder rate more than doubles in times of prohibition.

I say to you that it is preferable to lose someone to overdose than it is to lose them to murder. Overdoses can be prevented by education and antidotes. Murders are encouraged by Prohibition.