EDITORIAL: THE DRUG CZAR - A DIFFERENT KIND OF ATTACK ON DRUGS

America's drug czar dropped into town this week, sounding more like an
evangelist than a dictator. Indeed, retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey can talk
for hours without ever mentioning the war on drugs. Instead, the general
seems set on waging a kinder, gentler -- and shrewder -- sort of battle:
not against drug users, but against the scourge of addiction. It's worth
hoping he's serious.

In fact, it's essential to hope, because this country very much needs a
shift away from the wasteful nonsense that has long dominated U.S. drug
policy. For decades the government has poured billions into interdiction
and enforcement, with no measurable impact on drug sales or use. Prisons
and jails are bursting with drug addicts, who resume their self-destructive
habits the minute they're back on the streets.

That approach flies in the face of science and human nature, demonizing
rather than rehabilitating America's 4 million chronic, compulsive drug
abusers. But "if you're addicted to drugs," McCaffrey says, "it's not
because you're a bad person -- or lack willpower. It's because you're
dominated by a changed neurochemistry."

What to do? Emphasize treatment, says McCaffrey: "It's more effective than
cancer treatment," he points out, "and it's cheap." Use the
criminal-justice system not just to punish, McCaffrey urges, but to nudge
drug abusers into rehab programs: "You don't have to choose between strong
social disapproval of drug use and drug treatment." Capitalize on the
success of specialized drug courts -- like Judge Kevin Burke's acclaimed
Hennepin County experiment -- which keep close tabs on drug offenders and
coax them toward clean living: "The drug court concept isn't perfect," says
McCaffrey, "but it works better than anything else we have ever tried."

If McCaffrey is keen on reforming drug abusers, he's positively obsessional
about preventing drug use before it starts. Kids who get through
adolescence without trying drugs, he notes, rarely end up with
chemical-dependency problems. So McCaffrey has called upon teenagers' most
faithful companion -- the television -- for help in persuading them. He's
launched a sophisticated, five-year media blitz to dampen the allure of all
manner of drugs, from nicotine and alcohol to marijuana and heroin. The
campaign is thoughtful, compelling and -- if the ad experts are right --
could work very well to sour kids on drug use.

Of course, as McCaffrey himself is quick to point out, this ad campaign is
likely to cause a crisis. "We're going to produce a tremendous demand for
something that isn't there," he says. "We have 50 percent of the drug
treatment services in this country that we need. I think people will be
outraged when they realize that."

If McCaffrey is really sincere about shifting the focus of America's
response to drug abuse, he must do much more than talk. He must act to
ensure that drug treatment is readily available to all. He must fix the
many gaps and imbalances that still plague America's simplistic drug
policy. He must consider whether it really makes sense to spend two-thirds
of the federal drug budget on dubious "supply reduction" efforts -- and
only a third of the total on prevention, treatment and research.

If McCaffrey really believes in waging a different kind of attack on drugs,
shouldn't he want a dramatically different sort of budget?

© Copyright 1998 Star Tribune.

Checked-by: Richard Lake