ANTI-DRUG ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN A FAILURE, GAO REPORT SAYS

Drug Czar Disputes Results of Study

WASHINGTON -- A $1.4 billion anti-drug advertising campaign conducted
by the U.S. government since 1998 does not appear to have helped
reduce drug use and instead might have convinced some youths that
taking illegal drugs is normal, the Government Accountability Office says.

The GAO report, released Friday, urges Congress to stop the White
House's National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign unless drug czar John
Walters can come up with a better strategy. President Bush's budget
for 2007 asks Congress for $120 million for the campaign, a $20
million increase from this year.

Walters' office disputed the study and noted that drug-use rates
among youths have declined since 1998. A 2005 survey by the
University of Michigan indicated that 30% of 10th-graders reported
having used an illicit drug the previous year, down from 35% in 1998.

The GAO report is "irrelevant to us," says Tom Riley, spokesman for
the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). "It's
based on ads from 2 1/2 years ago, and they were effective, too. Drug
use has been going down dramatically. Cutting the program now would
imperil (its) progress."

The report was addressed to Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., the chairman of the
Appropriations subcommittee that handles ONDCP, and Sen. Patty Murray
of Washington, the panel's top Democrat. Neither senator was
available for comment.

The media campaign, which purchases TV time, radio spots and
newspaper ads, changed its advertising theme last year. The old
approach said parents and informed teens were "the Anti-Drug." The
latest version encourages teens to be "above the influence."

The report by the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, confirmed
the results of a $43 million, government-funded study that found the
campaign did not work. That evaluation, by Westat Inc. and the
University of Pennsylvania, said parents and youths remembered the
ads and their messages. But the study said exposure to the ads did
not change kids' attitudes about drugs and that the reduction in drug
use in recent years could be attributed more directly to a range of
other factors, such as a decline in high school dropouts.

The Westat study also said youths could interpret the ads to suggest
that marijuana use is more common than it actually is.

The anti-drug campaign had been criticized before. In 2003, the White
House Office of Management and Budget called the campaign
"non-performing" and said it had not demonstrated results.

Walters criticized the methodology cited in the GAO report. He said
Westat wanted proof of a direct link between the ads and decreases in
drug use among teens, which is difficult to show.

The drug czar's office "is being held to a standard that no other ...
advertiser can be held to," says Steve Pasierb of the Partnership for
a Drug-Free America, which helps coordinate the ad campaign.