US: OPED: 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.