POINT OF VIEW: ON DRUG ISSUE, PREVENTION WORKS

The old saying, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure," seems to
have been forgotten when it comes to the issue of illegal drugs.

Take Darryl Strawberry and Robert Downey Jr. The former baseball All-Star
and the Oscar-nominated actor both are in drug treatment programs, their
careers and lives forever damaged. What do you suppose they would pay for
the chance to change the decisions they made regarding drugs?
Unfortunately, that's a chance they don't have, but we have a chance to
influence the drug decisions the kids of today are making, and as a nation
we don't have to pay much for this chance at all.

In 1998, the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign was launched with
bipartisan congressional support. This program uses federal funds to buy
prime broadcast time and print space for anti-drug ads created by the
Partnership for a Drug- Free America, guaranteeing them consistent exposure
in the right media to deliver their messages to kids.

These ads are created by some of the best minds in advertising. The same
people who sell sneakers and jeans through advertising are using their
creativity to persuade kids to reject drugs -- and it's working. Research
published in the American Journal of Public Health found teens exposed to
heavy doses of anti-drug ads are 26.7 percent less likely to use marijuana.
Further, after years of steady increases, teen drug use has declined since
the campaign launched. This year, Congress allocated $185 million -- about
1 percent of the federal anti-drug budget -- to the Office of National Drug
Control Policy to administer the campaign. With 23.6 million teens in
America, that's just $7.84 per teen. Given the results, this is the most
cost-effective investment our government has ever made to prevent drug abuse.

However, while congressional funding for the effort has stayed constant
since 1998, media inflation has increased the cost of placing an ad by as
much as 45 percent. To keep anti-drug messages in the media with the same
level of impact, or to address Oklahoma's ongoing problem with
methamphetamine, more funding is needed.

Americans may want lower taxes, but not at the expense of protecting kids:
83 percent of those surveyed say Congress should keep the current level of
funding for the campaign, and nearly half said it's a good idea to invest
even more.

Anti-drug ads alone won't solve the drug problem. Parents, teachers,
religious leaders and other community members all need to get the message
to kids about the risks of drugs. But spending $8 a year per teen can go a
long way if it taps into the enormous influence mass media has on teens.
It's an ounce of protection for the Darryl Strawberrys and Robert Downeys
of today, an investment that may mean we won't have to spend a pound of
cure on them tomorrow.