WHAT WILL NEW DRUG POLICY DIRECTOR MEAN FOR THE WAR ON DRUGS?

Just a short time ago, President Bush nominated John Walters as his drug
policy director. What does this mean for the drug war in America?

LEON HARRIS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: President Bush is beefing up his troops in
the so-called war on drugs. Just a short time ago, Mr. Bush nominated John
Walters as his drug policy director. Walters was a deputy in the White
House Office of National Drug Control Policy during the first Bush
administration.

Among other things, Walters is known for taking a hard line against drug
offenders. But some critics are concerned that if confirmed, Walters will
not put enough emphasis on treatment. Well, as for the White House,
officials say the war on drugs needs to be fought on a variety of
fronts. But it could be a tough battle ahead on that.

Joining us now to talk some more about it is Ethan Nadelmann. He is
founder of the Lindesmith Center, a leading drug policy institute, and he
joins us from our New York bureau. Good morning, sir. Thank you for
coming in to talk to us about this.

ETHAN NADELMANN, THE LINDESMITH CENTER: Hi, Leon. Thanks for having me on.

HARRIS: Well, let's have your thoughts on the nomination we just witnessed
moments ago of John Walters.

NADELMANN: Well, it's depressing. I mean anybody can change, but it does
seem as if President Bush has somehow found across the country the one guy
who's going to be more extremist than John Ashcroft when it comes to drug
policy. I mean John Walters has stood very firmly for the proposition that
drug policy should have absolutely nothing to do with public health or
science or, for that matter, the facts. It's all about punishing people
for their sins.

HARRIS: But, you know, we didn't hear...

NADELMANN: That's what I'm concerned about.

HARRIS: When we heard him make his speech just moments ago, he mentioned
addressing problems in people's communities and keeping drugs from kids as
well as handling and treating addiction and those who are addicted to
it. He didn't just talk about interdiction problems.

NADELMANN: Well, Leon, I'll tell you, that's why I never give up hope. You
always hope that somebody is going to change. But John Walters' track
record has been one of talking about communities and kids and then anything
that's pursued is about punishment.

I mean look, the federal drug control budget has more or less remained the
same, two thirds for enforcement interdiction, barely a third for
enforcement and prevention.

John Walters has represented the view that America's drug enforcement
policies should not be held to any bottom line whatsoever. Are you going to
spend another billion on Peru, another $2 billion on Colombia, throw a
billion at the Coast Guard? There's no sense of value in whether or not
these policies have worked.

You look at America, drugs are cheaper, they're purer, they're more
available than ever before. Heroin overdose deaths in this country have
practically doubled since the early 1990s. You know, parents are looking
for honest answers and honest approaches from the government for how to
deal with the problems of teenagers experimenting with drugs. I don't
think we're going to get answers from John Walters.

HARRIS: Well, you know, it's funny you say that because George Bush's own
words this morning, the president here says that he's going to focus
unprecedented attention on reducing demand.

NADELMANN: Yes.

HARRIS: Now, that's exactly what he says and that's what he has charged
John Walters with as a commission we heard this morning alone.

NADELMANN: Well, Leon, I'll tell you, I am not giving up hope. I think
there's a slim chance that President Bush pulls a Nixon goes to China on
drug policy. I mean quite frankly, President Bush in January said that
we've got too many people locked up, we have to address the issue of
mandatory minimums. He pointed out that addiction is an illness and we
need health approaches to that.

You look at Tommy Thompson, the head of HHS. He just appointed an AIDS
czar who basically said look, needle exchange works. We've got to do it,
even though many Republicans won't support that. You know, Bush has
listened to Republican governors who are also telling him we have too many
people behind bars. John Rowland, the governor of Connecticut, has been a
major Republican figure saying we have to stop locking up so many people.

So I'm pessimistic about Walters. I'm pessimistic about the attorney
general, Ashcroft. But I think there is a chance that Bush might begin to
base drug policy at least a little bit on the science and the public health.

HARRIS: Well, let me ask you to respond to this one particular line that I
remember hearing John Walters say this morning, and this is, I guess, to
explain his stance -- and I guess his firm stance on interdiction
efforts. He says that every time we have pushed back on drugs, that the
number of drug users has dropped. In other words, every single time that
the war on drugs, if you will allow that metaphor, has been stepped up,
there have been positive results.

NADELMANN: You know, Leon, I think he's focusing on the bottom line. When
we talk about legal drugs, we make a distinction between the use of drugs
and the abuse of drugs. We recognize that most people who use alcohol
aren't alcohol abusers. That same distinction, if you want to be honest,
also holds true with respect to the illegal drugs. Now, you know, people
will point to the 1980s as a great period of success because the overall
number of drug users dropped from 40 million to 20 million.

But most of that was casual marijuana users and yuppie cocaine users, most
of whom did not have a serious problem with drugs. Meanwhile, crack cocaine
came around, drug related HIV and AIDS came around. We went from 50,000
people behind bars in America on drug charges in 1980 to almost a half a
million today.

So I think focusing simply on reducing the number of drug users is
silly. I mean, look, 50 percent of American high school seniors have tried
marijuana. Let's focus on the real problem. Focus on reducing AIDS, focus
on reducing heroin overdoses, focus on reducing drug related crime, focus
on reducing the number of people behind bars for non-violent offenses.

HARRIS: And those are serious problems, and they will be addressed, no
doubt, by someone, at least. But what I want to ask you about is why it is
you think that this so-called war on drugs is unwinnable?

NADELMANN: Well, they've just got to look at the history and look at the
evidence. We've had this war on drugs going in some respects for just
about a hundred years and yet drugs are cheaper, more available and purer
than ever before. We lock up more people in America on drug charges than
all of Europe locks up for everything, and they have 100 million more
people than we do.

I mean look at the evidence, Leon. Where is the evidence that this stuff
is working? We had 200,000 Americans infected with drug- related HIV AIDS,
much of which could have been prevented if we had simply adopted the same
sensible public health measures that other countries did automatically 10
or 15 years ago.

So I think we're tending to look at this thing in America inside the box.

HARRIS: Well, let me ask...

NADELMANN: Remember the movie "Traffic," where Michael Douglas asked the
people around him when he's playing the drug czar, anybody got any new
ideas, and there's total silence? That's a little bit like what we're
dealing with today. And remember Douglas' farewell speech when he goes the
war on drugs is really a war on our children? That is the drug war in
America today and I'm afraid that John Walters represents the continuation
of that drug war.

HARRIS: Well, those are some strong words, Ethan Nadelmann. We thank you
for sharing them with us this morning. We hope to talk some more about
this perhaps with you as this confirmation process gets underway. Thank
you very much for your time this morning.

NADELMANN: Thank you very much, Leon. Thank you.