Q&A: DEA BOSS LAUDS STATE EFFORTS

Editor's Note: Staff Reporter Joe Danborn was able to spend some time
Wednesday talking to Asa Hutchinson, the current and possibly outgoing
chief of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, while Hutchinson was in
Mobile.

Asa Hutchinson, the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, visited
Mobile this week to kick off an initiative dubbed IDEA -- Integrated Drug
Enforcement Assistance. The Mobile-Prichard area is the fifth site
nationally for the program, which is aimed at coordinating existing efforts
to stem drug use and crime.

A three-term Republican congressman and former U.S. attorney from Arkansas,
Hutchinson took over the DEA in August 2001, three weeks before the Sept.
11 attacks. Late last month, President Bush nominated him as Under
Secretary of Border and Transportation Security, a top post at the newly
created Department of Homeland Security.

Assuming the U.S. Senate approves him, Hutchinson will leave the DEA after
18 months on the job. Wednesday, he sat down with the Mobile Register to
discuss the changing nature of the DEA and the country's drug scene in
general, as well as how homeland security will help and hurt the anti-drug
efforts. Here are some excerpts:

Q: When you were nominated as DEA chief, you were very vocal about how the
DEA was going to take an increased role in promoting treatment. How would
you grade yourself in terms of the success you've had broadening that focus?

A: Very substantial. I think it's recognized by those in the treatment and
prevention arena as not changing its mission but having a broad
understanding of how it all works together and that the DEA is an advocate
for improved treatment programs, as well as personal involvement in
effective prevention programs. So I think we've really changed the culture
of the DEA.

Q: Where do you think you've failed, and how would you counsel your
successor to get around that?

A: Well, I can't point to areas that we've failed. There's more initiatives
to accomplish. For example, this IDEA initiative right now is in pilot
cities. Eventually, I hope that it is a nationwide effort, that it's a more
comprehensive program or strategy, and that's going to take time. It's
going to take the commitment of my successor.

Q: In this area, no other illegal drug has caused nearly as big a problem
as crack. Lately, though, methamphetamine has just come sweeping through
here, as in Arkansas and other parts of the country. How is what's
happening with meth different from what happened with crack?

A: What's different about it is crack is all brought into our communities.
So you don't have the complicating factor of the labs and all the chemicals
that go with it that add the component of environmental hazards and greater
danger even to children. So meth does the damage of crack to the human
spirit and body, but you've also got a whole host of other problems and
challenges that go with meth production. ... I think it's one of the most
dangerous drugs that are out there today.

Q: Other than increasing penalties for possessing and producing it, what
sorts of things can be done to curb the trend?

A: It has to be addressing the chemicals that go to make methamphetamine,
the precursor chemicals. ... Part of that is getting Canada to regulate
pseudoephedrine. That sounds like a long ways away, but whenever you can
have a meth cook get on the Internet here in Mobile, Alabama, and order
pseudoephedrine from Canada and have it shipped here, it's a problem. ...
And the other part of it is, of course, the education side.

Q: You're a big fan of drug courts for nonviolent, first-time offenders.
Mobile's decade-old drug court was among the first in the country.
Somewhere near half of those who've entered the program have graduated. How
different would the drug use and drug enforcement landscape look if drug
courts were as extensive as you think they should be?

A: Drug courts need to be expanded. I think I cited the fact that there's
about 15 here in Alabama, with 10 more planned. Well, 25 drug treatment
courts are not enough to cover the state of Alabama, and Alabama has been a
leader in it. You look at other states, some of them have even fewer drug
courts and less impact. So we have to get additional federal pilot projects
pushing drug courts.

But also, we have to have the states buy in to help fund it. You can't have
a strong drug treatment court program nationwide without the states
participating by funding those programs. ...

Another part of it is, it's not enough to have a drug treatment court that
refers people to treatment if you don't have the treatment facilities. ...
And that's one of the difficulties, whether it's California or some of the
other states that have mandated treatment -- they have not provided
treatment programs to go along with it. And therefore you just have a
revolving door.

You asked how this would change the landscape. It would change it
dramatically, because you're going to reduce the addict population that has
been the hardcore, recurring problem that we have not dealt with
effectively in the last 20 years.

Q: Several of the agencies that have been fighting the war on drugs -- the
Customs Service, the Coast Guard -- are shifting their efforts to the war
on terrorism. The FBI is, for all intents and purposes, getting out of the
drug business altogether. The president, the attorney general and you have
all linked drugs to terror, but it still appears the DEA will have a pretty
significant gap to plug. What resources will the DEA need to continue to
fulfill its purpose?

A: Adjustments are going to be made within federal law enforcement. ... As
these different agencies focus on counterterrorism and increased security
on the borders, there is a benefit that comes to our drug enforcement
efforts. So it's not a matter of a dollar-for-dollar shift. ... We need to
let the dust settle a little bit and then look at what additional resources
are needed and where they need to go.

Q: To follow up on that, local agencies like the Mobile Police Department
have been having a hard time maintaining their ranks. Without as much
direct federal help on the drug front, how can they expect to avoid being
swamped?

A: Well, the fact is, they're swamped. You're right. I mean, you have the
local police agencies that generally have budget constraints that prevent
hiring more officers, and they have more responsibilities. ... The federal
government cannot come in and make up that gap.

So I think we have to forge strong partnerships that are effective. I think
one of the examples is what we're doing today, where we try to work smarter
rather than simply pour more resources in that many times our governments
do not have.

Q: Critics of the Homeland Security legislation complain that it emphasizes
law enforcement at the expense of civil liberties within the country and
that it may be threatening the rights of legitimate immigrants on the
borders. What's your response to that?

A: We never want to violate the civil liberties that are protected under
the Constitution. I know that's a general statement, but whenever you look
at our immigrant population, for example, immigrants make up America. We
are a land of immigrants. We don't want that to change.

But at the same time, we have security issues that we have to make sure
that ... our borders are protected. So it's a constant balancing of those
two tugging values we have in our country. I think Attorney General
Ashcroft has had to deal with that, and we're going to have the new
Homeland Security that's going to have to deal with it as well. If you look
at the legislation, my mandate is to protect the borders of the United
States from terrorists. ...

I know that's a general answer, but that's all I can give, because I'm not
confirmed by the United States Senate yet. (laughter)

Q: Mayor Dow has pushed hard to make Mobile a tourist destination, from
cleaning up downtown to promoting cruise ship terminals. He envisions
cruise lines between Mobile and Mexico and even Cuba. As you just said, you
have a mandate to protect and secure the borders. Is there a conflict
there? Is that going to make it more difficult for people who are trying to
open the borders somewhat?

A: You can call it a conflict. That's not the word I would use. It is a
natural fact of life, whether you're looking at what the mayor is trying to
do in Mobile or whether you're looking at the commerce that has to flow
through the land borders. We have to keep the economy moving. ... So we
have to protect our borders and our security through better technology,
better information, better targeting of our inspection services. ... That's
something that we want to be able to emphasize -- improved, advanced
technology, as well as intelligence that allows us to target those boats or
vessels or entities that might come in and do us harm.

Q: Mobile's got a small Border Patrol office, but it is responsible for
everything from the Louisiana line to Tallahassee or so. We also have a
Secret Service office and a pretty sizable Coast Guard presence. All of
those will come under the Homeland Security umbrella. Will we be able to
see those offices doing things differently around Mobile?

A: I'm not going to comment specifically as to specific things you may see
change down the road. Those decisions are still subject to discussions. ...
But the mandate is for the new department to increase the coordination of
these different agencies that have responsibilities on our borders and
ports, to make sure that communication flows, and that if there is an
incident, that the command and leadership structure is clear. ... But as to
how we get to that objective, you'll have to wait and see.