A NEW WAR ON DRUG DEMAND?

Will the president oversee a drug-policy shift? Or a shifty drug policy?
America needs the former, and has reason for hope.

President Bush announced a major reordering of priorities last week in the
nation's fight against illegal drugs, pledging an unprecedented effort to
help users beat their habit. Policy shorthand: Fight demand.

At the same time, Bush named as his drug czar a man known for his hard line
on interdiction and incarceration. Policy shorthand: Fight supply.

Wary advocates of more, and more effective, drug treatment - and we count
ourselves among them - might scoff at Bush's policy statement. John
Mitchell's famous admonition when he served as attorney general in the
Nixon administration comes to mind: "Watch what we do, not what we say."

But we hope another Watergate-era political truism will prove more apt:
"Follow the money."

Encouragingly, Bush is proposing to put more money into programs designed
to reduce the nation's voracious appetite for illicit drugs.

The president wants to spend $245 million more next year on drug treatment
and treatment research, $1.6 billion more over five years. He would double
funding, to $350 million over five years, for community- and
workplace-based anti-drug programs.

Such measures would be a welcome start. But they should be seen in context:
Of the $19 billion the federal government alone spends each year fighting
illegal drugs, two-thirds goes to trying to reduce supply. Those efforts
will fail as long as demand remains strong.

The nation desperately needs an infusion of treatment money. According to a
1998 federal survey, of 5 million chronic drug users who needed treatment,
fewer than half - 2.1 million - were getting it.

Weighted against Bush's promises is his one action on the drug-war front
thus far: his appointment of John Walters to head the White House Office of
National Drug Control Policy. Walters is an outspoken proponent of strict
law enforcement.

His views do not preclude greatly increasing drug treatment, however.
Walters supports "coerced treatment" as an option, and has been criticized
for this by what he calls the "therapy-only lobby."

The Roanoke Valley has had some experience with "coerced treatment," in the
form of drug courts. It works.

Perhaps Bush's appointee will, too.