ANTI-DRUG ADS A WASTE, AUDITORS SAY

The government's anti-drug ad campaign has not been proved to deter
children from using drugs, and lawmakers should consider reducing
funding for the $1.2 billion program, congressional auditors said Friday.

The Government Accountability Office based its recommendation on its
review of an independent evaluation of the media campaign by Westat
Inc.

The government has spent about $1.2 billion since 1998 on scores of
television, print and radio ads designed to discourage drug use among
youth. The ads also describe parents as the anti-drug. President Bush
requested another $120 million for next year.

Westat found the ads had no "significant favorable effects" in
deterring children from trying marijuana or in getting them to stop.
Rather, it found that more 12- to 13-year-olds were trying the drug
after seeing the ads, the GAO said.

Congress first authorized funding for the media campaign with the
expectation that changes in youth behavior would be evident within
three years. But early analysis was inconclusive, and the government
contracted with Westat Inc., a research company, to evaluate the program.

A draft of the report was submitted last year. The GAO sought to
verify whether Westat's analysis was credible, and confirmed that it
was.

The ads are quite common. A recent television ad, for example, shows a
nurse standing over a boy who appears to have his fist stuck in his
mouth. The boy mumbles something, and the nurse translates: "Yesterday
my friends told me to smoke some pot and I did. Then today they said I
should try and fit my fist into my mouth. It fits but I can't get it
out."

The agency that oversees the media campaign, the White House Office of
National Drug Control Policy, took issue with several aspects of
Westat's evaluation.

John Walters, director of the office, said the study was ill-suited to
judge the effect of an ad campaign. The findings also have limited
relevance because they are more than two years old, he said in a
written response to the GAO's findings.

Walters said establishing a direct relationship between advertising
exposure and outcomes is virtually impossible.

"We have dealt with criticism of the campaign from adversaries,
including those who advocate the legalization of drugs," he said. "And
we have periodically needed to place these findings in context,
especially because all major youth surveys report declining teen drug
use."