KIDS AND THE POLITICS OF THE DRUG WAR

This month House Speaker Newt Gingrich and President Clinton unveiled a
five-year, $1 billion advertising campaign to combat adolescent drug use.
Between cartoons, America's kids will be bombarded with federally-sponsored
anti-drug commercials. But while Republicans and Democrats pat each other
on the back for "knocking America upside the head" on the dangers of drug
use, both parties are guilty of grandstanding on the teen drug problem
without contributing substantially to the solution.

As a stepmother of two boys, I am extremely concerned about teen drug use.
Over the past six years, drug use among the nation's youth has continued to
climb - despite zealous investment and commitment to the War on Drugs. We
currently spend $17 billion annually on the drug war, yet half of America's
youth report using an illegal drug before graduating from high school. For
the past decade, government surveys have shown that at least 82 percent of
high school seniors found marijuana "fairly easy" or "very easy" to obtain.

The President and his Drug Czar would have us believe we are fighting the
War on Drugs to protect America's youth. However, no solid research exists
to demonstrate that multi-million dollar anti-drug campaigns like the one
launched last week change adolescent behavior. And, if they do, it's not
clear that the change is always for the better.

Since viewing the ads, my 14-year-old and 10-year-old have learned it is
possible to get high from everyday household products. How many other
children who would never have considered such products as intoxicants now
have the notion planted in their heads? This is not the type of education I
want for my children.

Research has shown that when it comes to anti-drug messages, scare tactics
do not work on kids. D.A.R.E., or Drug Abuse Resistance Education, the
nation's most widely implemented youth anti-drug program, is a prime
example.

Study after study has concluded that D.A.R.E. fails to prevent youth drug
use. Even more disturbing, recent research indicates that the $650
million-a-year program, which uses uniformed police officers to promulgate
often exaggerated and misleading claims, may actually be harming kids by
creating distrust among teenagers and ostracizing children most in need of
help.

While D.A.R.E. does not reduce adolescent drug use, it does expand law
enforcement budgets. Some police officials repay the funding with photo-ops
during election season. Politicians get a two-for-one deal with our tax
dollars: campaign photos with children as well as with police officers.
What we do not get is a drug policy that protects our children.

Politicians today are more interested in using children as props than in
examining the reality of how their policies impact young people. Research
shows the most effective way to prevent youth substance abuse is through
alternative activity programs which keep kids engaged after school.
Unfortunately, our leaders still see political profit in shouting "Drug
War" surrounded by children and police. When adolescent drug use goes up
again next year, they can just shout it louder. They've been doing it for
decades.

As voters, we must not reward politicians who feed their political careers
in the name of the Drug War. We must demand that our political leaders
start addressing drug issues seriously. The first step is to recognize the
Drug War is not working. The second step is to examine the complex social
and health issues that contribute to our current drug problem and to
develop programs and solutions that respond appropriately. In the meantime,
let's have a moratorium on using children as political props while we
develop a drug policy which truly protects our youngest citizens.