BEACHHEAD IN THE DRUG WAR: EVERYTOWN, USA

BURKE -- The 1999 Household Survey on Drug Abuse delivered both good and
bad news to President Clinton's drug czar -- and to Virginians.

Retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey is quick to point out that nationally
"teen drug use is down significantly for two straight years, and the survey
clearly shows that our drug prevention efforts [among teens] are working."
But the new data also confirm that among adults, drug use has gone up, and
that victory on the home front is still a long way off.

For the first time since 1971, the survey provides state-level data. In
Virginia, for example, as many as 45,000 of the state's 12- to 17-year-olds
used an illicit drug during the 30 days preceding the survey date. Among
the population age 18 and older, 219,000 Virginians are estimated to use
drugs. These numbers are a stark reminder of the tragic human side of the
drug war being fought within families and in the workplace.

The survey raises public-policy questions, too. If McCaffrey is eager to
take credit for the success of his prevention programs, why isn't he
working harder to shift federal resources from his failing drug
interdiction efforts along the nation's borders and into Virginia's
underfunded -- but big payoff -- teen-prevention and adult-treatment programs?

For decades, massive drug-interdiction efforts on land and sea and in the
air have failed to cut the flow of drugs into the United States. If these
efforts had succeeded, drug prices would have been gone up. In fact,
federal studies indicate that U.S. street prices for cocaine and heroin
fell during the 1990s.

Yet, since 1990, two thirds of the annual federal drug-control budget has
funded interdiction and law-enforcement actions. This year, a whopping $12
billion (of $18 billion) is being spent on cutting the supply of drugs,
leaving only $6 billion for demand-reduction and prevention programs.

Why do demand-reduction programs like teen education and adult treatment
continue to be shortchanged by Washington?

First, American policymakers want to show evidence that they are doing
something -- even if that something has little to do with solving actual
problems. Public officials, in other words, earn more kudos putting tax
revenues into highly visible, short-range, get-tough law enforcement than
funding less visible, long-term teen education and adult-rehab programs.

The media reinforce this trend. We are unlikely to read about, or see on
the TV news, coverage of the opening of a new drug-treatment facility in
Richmond. But an account of a shoot-out at sea in which the Coast Guard
seizes a drug-laden ship bound for Miami always gets good play. The result:
The American people receive a skewed view of what a sound drug policy ought
to look like.

In addition, the historical division of la-bor between the 50 states and
the national government drives federal policies toward an action-packed,
drug-interdiction strategy. Protecting borders is a traditional function of
the federal government.

States, on the other hand, are expected to focus on education and social
welfare. As long as Washington sets drug policies, we are destined to
repeat mistakes and cling to the ill-fated national approach to the problem.

And as long as members of Congress back a national drug policy that trades
the promise of long-term success for the appearance of short-term gains, an
interdiction-dominated strategy that has filled our prisons will continue
to overshadow a humanitarian drug strategy based on helping hometown men,
women, and children with well-funded education and services centers.

The strategy to stop drugs from entering the United States is doomed.
Victory will be won on the state and local fronts, in Roanoke, Newport
News, and Fairfax City. It is in these places that Americans can learn to
free themselves from drug dependency. Once the hometown demand for drugs is
cut off, the supply lines from Colombia and elsewhere will dry up.

Let's stop wasting billions of dollars a year on a strategy that does not
work. It's time for the drug czar to put his money where his mouth is. It's
time cost-effective drug-prevention and treatment programs get the
financial backing they deserve.