RHETORIC, BUDGET PRIORITIES ARE AN UNEVEN MATCH

WASHINGTON - Two days before Christmas, several senior Clinton
administration officials gathered in the office of National Security
Adviser Samuel R. Berger to discuss an unusual idea for the Colombian
drug-fighting package.

The Office of Budget and Management suggested taking $100 million from the
$1.3 billion in Colombian aid and earmarking it toward treatment of US
addicts.

Around the room, almost everyone said no. But OMB officials persisted,
believing that the $100 million might boost chances of the bill's passage
as well as give a rare opportunity to put extra money into treatment for US
addicts. They wanted the input of Barry R. McCaffrey, the US drug czar.

Later that day, McCaffrey turned them down, too.

In an interview last week, he said the $100 million wouldn't help pass the
Colombian aid package.

"The whole thing is silly. It's minor politics," McCaffrey said. "This is
the Andean ridge program. We are going to have intellectual clarity and
integrity in what we are doing. This isn't a puck we are slapping around. I
want them [Congress] to look at this and examine it on its own merits ...
and not throw sweeteners in there."

But for advocates of more treatment, McCaffrey's decision once again
underscored the gap between his rhetoric and his budget priorities. While
McCaffrey has eloquently and forcefully called for more money for drug
treatment, advocates say it is telling that a plan for substantial new
dollars for treatment came from outside the Office of National Drug Control
Policy.

Instead, McCaffrey's major focus domestically in the drug war has been on
prevention, including an unprecedented $1 billion five-year media campaign
that places in-your-face antidrug ads on prime time television. Recent
disclosures that his office reviewed TV scripts as a way of vetting
messages on drugs drew widespread criticism, but McCaffrey has since taken
the offensive, saying his office didn't censor any script and that fighting
for antidrug themes is what his job is supposed to do.

It is a far cry from the days of "Just Say No," the Nancy Reagan-embraced
abstinance theory that had such little impact on hard-core addicts. But
under McCaffrey, there have been many changes in the drug policy office,
including a huge funding increase.

In four years, his budget has gone from $13 billion to a proposed $19.2
billion next year. While treatment dollars have increased by 26 percent
over that time, the share of the overall budget devoted to treatment has
decreased slightly, to 18 percent from 19 percent.

By contrast, when President Nixon declared war on drugs in 1971 he put
two-thirds of his funding into treatment. The results were dramatic.
Between 1971 and 1973, national crime rates dropped, the number of
drug-related arrests fell, the number of federal inmates decreased, and
record numbers of addicts sought and received treatment.

Since 1980, the war on drugs has shifted to punishing offenders, border
surveillance, and fighting production at the source countries.

With 50 federal agencies controlling parts of the drug budget, the drug
czar has few chances to alter the funding equation.

In rare cases, his office receives discretionary funds. After taking office
in 1996 and pledging to "focus as a priority ... reducing consumption"
among hard-core users, McCaffrey received $250 million in reallocated
Pentagon funds. His decision at that time was to put $202 million of it
into interdiction efforts in Latin America.

Even as he extols the virtues of comprehensive solutions, however, he stops
short of calling for treatment for all addicts who want it -- an
unsuccessful initiative attempted by his predecessor, Lee Brown.

"McCaffrey wants some odd number of [Blackhawk] helicopters in Colombia,
but that has nothing to do with what we are doing here," said Michael J.
Kineavy, director of Boston's employee assistance programs in the Mayor's
Office of Neighborhood Services. "There's a huge disconnect from what I see
in the streets and what is happening in Washington. One of the key issues
for us is treatment on demand."

Asked why he didn't back treatment on demand, McCaffrey said, "We have. We
are. We're doing it."

Facts show otherwise. Federal figures indicate that only 2.1 million of the
nation's 5.7 million addicts received treatment in 1997.

Globe reporter John Donnelly can be reached at j_donnelly@globe.com.