Forum; War on Drugs; Part 2

But that's not the question he's asking now, but he's suggesting that people are making lots of money. That's true. People are making because it's illegal, there's even more money being made, you can say. Let me address both of the questions. First of all, the caller's concern for our national drug control strategy is comprehensive. We put an emphasis on aggressive domestic enforcement of our ports and our borders, as well as international programs. We know that there are billions and billions of dollars involved in the drug trade. About a hundred percent of the cocaine that comes to this country comes from our Latin American neighbors. About 70 percent come to Mexico across our borders, but 90 percent that comes through the California border with Mexico. And so we have border guards, customs people, immigration, the military are working to address the drug problem, to keep drugs from coming into the country. But let me kind of put it in perspective. We can't keep people from coming into America illegally. We can't keep people from coming in illegally. If we look at the vastness of our border, our air and the water surrounding our country, we are going to do everything that's humanly possible.

Are we have a change in our strategy? We're going to place more of an emphasis in the source countries themselves. Try to stop the drugs at the source. The logic being, if I could use an analogy, if we want to stop the Hornets from going throughout the neighborhood, you're better off going to the hornets nest and stopping them there. We're doing the same thing with the drug issue, but we have to clearly understand that this is a multibillion dollar industry. Will we be able to stop all the drug from coming to the country? I don't think so. That's why we have to have a balanced approach. If we have an abundance of drugs on the streets of our city with low cost, we're going to have more users. By the same token, unless we can stop Americans from using drugs, we're going to always have the supply. Will you want to say something? Right now? There's enough cocaine to basically fill up every project area in the United States of America. And you're telling us there's people out there trying to stop these people from coming in with all these drugs. They're not doing a good enough job. There needs to be more people. Like I said, this government is one of the most powerful in the whole world. They can't stop drugs from coming in.

They can send they can deploy a military group out to go out into Los Angeles to stop some people from riding. But they can't stop drugs from going into the same projects that the excuse me that that these military men are going into. I mean, it's a shame that I mean, the government ought to be ashamed of itself. Man, that's that's crazy. Well, let me respond to that. As I pointed out earlier, the United States government devotes a tremendous amount of its resources to addressing the drug problem. But consider the fact that we can't stop individuals, people from coming here illegally. You look at the number of people who cross our border every day, and they are human beings, people. Look at how drugs come into the country, they come in a variety of ways, they come into the air, the water coming over the land, they come in containers, the thousands of containers that come into our ports every every day. And so we have to do all of that. We have to work as hard as possible to stop the drugs. We have to work in the source countries where the drugs are grown with it, with the

plants grown. Could we work harder, though, if we, for example, decriminalize marijuana or the different use our resources differently? And some would argue, for example, maybe even made drugs no longer illegal during the Prohibition era, for example, one could argue that we were wasting our time spinning our wheels, going after all that alcohol or marijuana. We do a pretty good job of growing enough marijuana in America. We don't have to export import marijuana. We do a pretty good job here. And so that's really not the issue in terms of drugs coming from other countries. We talk about heroin, we're talking about cocaine. But let's ask ourselves the basic question of what would you want to legalize? Would you want to legalize heroin, LSD, PCP, cocaine, crack cocaine? And also look at the other consequences of legalization. First of all, it's a myth to think that you're going to take crime out of the drug problem. I was just looking at in the paper today and other countries such as Zurich, Switzerland, where they're talking about the real serious problem. The headline, Zurich's Open Drug Policy goes into withdrawal. I visited Amsterdam and I looked in the parks where there are children laying around

looking like zombies. Do we want that in America? I say no. I visited hospitals here in the United States, even in the Bay Area. And I've gone to the wards where babies are born to mothers who are addicted to crack. And I've helped those babies in my arm weighing less than two pounds with tubes going in and out of the bodies, desperately clinging to their lives. Do we want to legalize it? I say no. I visited crack houses where I've seen the misery, the despair and the human degradation. Do we want to legalize it? I say no. I've seen our young people eight, nine, ten years of age that are already addicted to drugs. We want to supply them with drugs for the rest of our lives. I say no subject is drugs. We have some young people with us, as well as Dr. Lieberman as director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Larry, from Oakland, your next caller. Hi. Hi. My question is to the young people. You know, when the doctor suggested had a suggestion about the community policing, I heard both of them with negative responses. And my question to today is no near their suggestions. Where were they willing to do what they think they should do, people in the community, to get these people to help themselves?

You know, to me, you know, responding to the call, the caller before me, the you know, the problem is the demand side. And if we if we look at why is there a demand for it, you know, for the drug use and what's going on with that, and we're looking at solving the problem. So my question is to young people, why is there a demand? Why are these people using and having fun and partying at night? And I mean, I've done it. It's fun. And but I'm also not doing it. And I'm I consider myself a productive person, so I like them to respond. I'll take my response off. We thank you for the call. We've heard some of those responses already. I wonder just if you want to add anything on that score. Well, you said having fun and all that. It's not really all about fun. It's just all about boredom. It's sort of like if you have nothing to do, you're automatically down for whatever comes your way, basically. So it's like drugs. If you take away the demand, no matter how much supplies

come into the neighborhoods, if people know within themselves that it's wrong, then there's not going to be a problem. So what I'm saying is have more money going not to policing, because that's really just like the tip of the iceberg that's that's coming at it at an angle where it's already too late, basically, in my opinion, because first of all, that's going to be wasting money. The jails are already overcrowded. You're putting away people, you're putting away marijuana abusers and people who sell dope and bumping the rapists and murderers. And what I'm saying is that if you want to if you want to stop the problem among youth, would you have to do you have to show them another thing to do? You have to show them another way. And in a lot of cases when I've done a lot of reporting on the subject and the students that I'm talking to and a lot of cases, their parents aren't home half the time and a lot of cases their parents don't show them another way out or another option. So what I'm saying is it is the school's responsibility. If they're in school at all, they're in public school.

Most of these students that I've talked to. So if they are not doing anything and they're not getting anything from their family life, then automatically drugs is going to come into the picture. Let me bring some more of our callers into the picture. Our next caller from Palo Alto. Harran, you're on the air. Yeah, a great show. And I just want to side with one of your previous callers about the supply question, the fact that you see the statement that the United States government cannot stop the supply of drugs and the good doctor's analogy, that we can't stop the supply. Illegal immigrants is obviously an insult to your listeners. We know that too many of our leading citizens make too much money, and that's what the guys in Street noticed, right, sir? I like a Brown disagrees. I disagree with that. If there was a simple solution to the problem, it would have been implemented 30 years ago. This is not an easy, simple problem where you have a silver bullet that will solve it. We have to have a comprehensive approach.

We have to be concerned about joblessness. We have to be concerned about poor educational systems. We have to be concerned about homelessness, adequate health care systems. All of these issues are part and parcel of the problems that we have. I grew up in California. I grew up around Fresno, California, and during the summertime after school, likes to go out and pick cotton and cut grapes. And I had things to do that kept me occupied. I didn't have the boredom because I was working. We had we have to look at making sure that our young people have constructive things to do. The government alone won't address the problem. But one thing I want to repeat again is I have a great concern about what's happening in our Congress right now pending before the Congress. They're probably debating right now is a rescission package. Will that take back money that's already been appropriated if they are successful in doing so? Some fifteen thousand young people will be denied opportunities to engage in a national service program. One hundred thousand women and infants and children will be denied proper nutrition through the Wick program. Women, Infants and Children cuts. Some six hundred fifteen thousand young people will be denied summer jobs.

I believe if you have meaningful employment, you're less likely to get into trouble using drugs. Some forty thousand schools will be denied funds for higher standards and better teaching to cuts and goes to thousand. Some thirty four thousand young people in 17 communities across the country will lose training opportunities through the elimination of Youth Fair Chance programs and probably from my perspective, being the director of the Office of National Drug Control Strategy. Ninety four percent of the school districts will lose funding for keeping drugs out of their schools through the elimination of the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities program. What we have to look at is that there's no one answer. All of this must go together. Getting back to, if I may, to what the caller raised, the sense of the borders and all that. You're saying, in effect, that the borders are set, that there's very little that can be done to have the kind of tight control that some would imagine that the government can provide if they understand this, take a map and look at the border of this country and the vast landmass, the air and the sea.

Let me also point I'm going to the border tomorrow. I'm going to go down and look at what is going on and we're going to announce a new initiative. We're going to use technology to help us address the drug problem. No more balloons. While the balloons have played a very important part, there are aerostats that played a very important part. But we now have advanced technology and we have other means, the radar of tracking airplanes that are coming across the border and bringing the drugs. We have been successful. There are countries, particularly Latin American neighbors, that produce about a thousand metric tons of cocaine per year. We seize about a third of that. And that means that we deprive the drug trafficking organizations of billions and billions of dollars. But we'll probably right when he says there's still so much on the streets that you could cut it with a knife almost anywhere you go. Well, there's plenty of drugs on the streets. The level of drugs have not decreased significantly. We consume about a third in this country and about a third is lost in transit or go to other countries. It's not just a problem for America. This is a global problem. European countries have the same problem. I travel through Mexico and Panama and Peru and Bolivia

and Colombia and Venezuela and I see where they grow the drugs. The farmers are growing the coca leaf. They don't make any money out of it. They can barely make a living. As those gangsters at the head of the drug trafficking organizations are the ones that are making the profits off the drugs. That's what we're trying to do. We're trying to arrest those individuals. They're criminals. Well, while they're exporting misery and despair and poison and all too often death to American streets, we're focusing on arresting them. We've had some success. For example, Pablo Escobar was the criminal in charge of the Medellin cartel. We were Colombia in Colombia. We work with the Colombian government. He was subsequently captured and was killed in a shootout with the police. But we destroyed the Medellin cartel. Now you have the Cali cartel who've taken over the vote, and they're the ones reaping all the benefits that really have any effect on the drug trade as well. It really didn't because the cartel took over the void. Now we're asking the Colombian government to put as much effort into dismantling the Cali cartel as we did the American cartel.

I want to find out why we was laughing and we were more college. What was funny to you? What struck me is he said gangster. I just that you just laughing. OK, I was also wondering why they can the government can stop all these poor people like the Somalians trying to escape the oppression of their country and these poor Cubans and some Haitians from getting over into the country. But when the drugs, it's time for the drugs to come in. It just seemed like. I don't know, they just open up and say, you guys can come in, hurry up and get in here and get back out to go back where you came from. Well, that's not really the case. I visited about two weeks ago on the southwest border, us, what, in Mexico border. And we just stand and look you see cars back for miles and miles, people trying to come across the border. I'm talking about people, not drugs. And every hour there are hundreds of people will rush across the border and the ability to stop them is not there at this time. Where you look lookouts on one side of the border with radios and announcing what the customs people are doing, we are putting more resources on the border. We kicked off a program called Hard Line in order to address the drug problem. So we're going to continue to use the resources at our disposal because we think

to the extent we can reduce the supply of drugs, it gives a chance for our demand reduction programs to take place. But I think the key to all of this is there's no demand, there's no supply. And that's why we're placing such a greater emphasis on reducing the demand for drugs through prevention, education and treatment. That's why we need the support of our Congress. We don't need a wrongheaded approach of taking back the funds. We have a safe and drug free schools programs at the same time that we find drug use among our young people growing up. That's the wrong thing to do. And we all need to take away our jobs for our young people. We need to give them more resources, not less. We have another Dr. Brown who wants to join us here. Good morning. You're on the air. Hi, how are you doing? I have just Dr. Brown and students. We've just completed one of the largest evaluations of the drug education programs in the state of California that's ever been performed. And I'd like to support the students and what they're saying about the programs that they receive in the schools.

Dr. Brown? I have several concerns with the programs and one of them being that when you say you teach them just the facts, our concern and the students concerned was the fact that they really receive our just say no related facts. And really the only intention of these programs is to provide the students with one choice, and that's never to use substances. And what we found in the study was that as the grade level increased, the student anger and dislike for the program increased commensurately. That's the first thing. The second thing is that really we found no evidence of programs suggesting cultural or developmental appropriateness. That is, there was very little, if any, sensitivity to different student cultures and their perceptions of substance use. And we found very little evidence of the program's evolving as students got older. I'd like to get your response. All right, Dr. Brown, thank you for the call.

As I indicated earlier, we know much more about a drug educational program than before. You're sharing with us what you did not find. What I'm suggesting is that we know what the characteristics of a successful program should be. There should be a consistent message from kindergarten to the 12th grade. That message should be no use. The programs must be geared toward the age group we're trying to reach. The program must be culturally relevant. We must provide factual information. If what you're finding is not consistent with that, then I would be inclined to agree with you. You're not the most effective programs. What we need to do is now proceed in correcting the problems that you found so that the people in the state of California will have an effective prevention program. Just for the record, by the way, that Dr. Brown is with the Pacific Institute, just so you know where that research is coming out of, Jeanne is our next caller. She joins us from East Palo Alto. Hi, Jane. I'm a great believer in prevention and policing, both almost equal numbers.

And there was a specific incident that two hours ago where I heard shots, I heard screaming. Somebody climbed over our electronic fence and I called my manager and I called the police and. The police in East Palo Alto have improved greatly in the last two years, but also, Congresswoman, that almost a million dollars for prevention programs in this area. So I know based on my own experience, how much both can do and how important both are. So I think all your guests are right in their own right. We need a basket full, a comprehensive approach, as was said. Well, it's nice that you brought everybody into agreement here and respond to that. Labor ought to have done a very good job in addressing the problem to implement community policing, where police officers out there working with the people and we saw a

difference. Also last year, the Congress passed and in September, the president signed the Crime Control Act. In that act, we had funds for prevention, about eight billion dollars for prevention programs. The House has already approved legislation that would take two point five billion dollars of our prevention money, something to give our children, something to say yes to and allocate that to be on more prison space. I was in a school in Washington, D.C. the other day, and a young lady, very astute, asked me the question, which I asked of the Congress. The question she asked was, if you take the money for prevention and build more prisons, what message are you sending to the young people of this country? If a very astute question that I've asked our Congress people as well, but are taking the rest of the prevention money, rolling it into money we have for the drug courts and the money for the hundred thousand police officers, and they'll give it to the states and a block grant with no strings attached. That means that local jurisdiction, jurisdictions, jurisdiction, addictions can do essentially what they want with the money. And I think that's the wrong thing to do. We have to have a balance.

We have to have police officers because people suffer in the community that the vast, vast majority, the people who live in our inner cities don't use drugs yet. They are often the victims of drug use in terms of the crime and the violence. So we need to make sure that we have policing services. Community policing, in my estimation, is a better way of using police resources, better prevention programs. And the fact that the House is trying to take away all of our prevention money again, to me is outrageous. Wesley Burton, you look like you had something here. Tucker, you've been skimming through that book on the national drug control homework. That's clear. And yeah, this is part of the National Drug Control Strategy. Is reads book is subtitled African-American Male Initiative. This is ONDCP has established a special initiative to study the special problems facing African-American males, especially those problems relating to drugs and violence development, and to develop a range of responses and actions to begin dealing with the most serious of those problems.

That's something I'm doing. Before taking this job, I was a professor at Texas Southern University where I headed a black male initiative program there. The program was designed to help young African-American males in that instance get to college and get out of college with a degree. And we spent a lot of time looking at the problems of young African-American males. Most African-American males are making it. They're not what we see on television where we have the the image of the young African-American male with handcuffs behind being put into the patrol. But that's not the that's not the reality of most African-American males. But all too many are not making it in terms of high school dropouts and in terms of unemployment, in terms of being arrested and part of the criminal justice system. What I want to do is to see what we can do, not only at the federal level, but also the state and local level, also within the African-American community and also even the private resources to help change around a problem. I see with too many young African-American males not making it, we've only got a few minutes left. You said I know you had some questions you wanted to ask Dr. Brown.

Can you pick your best and throw it at him now and a little time we have remaining? Yes. I just wanted to know, you say that you're all for prevention. And I think that that's a good but what I know that when I go home today, what I'm going to see is I'm going to see the more police officers on the street and I'm not really going to see the prevention in the schools. What I wanted to ask you is, when do you think this is really do you think this is going to happen with Congress being so difficult? And what can we do? I think we have to have our voices heard by Congress. Let them know what your concerns are. I'm going to continue to do that. The president's going to continue to express our outrage at the Congress, who's willing to take money from our youth for other purposes? I think it's really hypocritical. It's outrageous for them to take all of the funds that have already been appropriated for our drug free schools program to do other things. We have to have our voices heard. That's the way to get things done. You have representatives if you have a certain position on an issue, then it becomes your responsibility. Your Congress person know what your position is.

I'm going to continue to do that. On that note, positive note indeed. I want to thank all of you for your participation in this morning. Second hour at 4:00 a.m., we were talking about the war on drugs and we've had Dr. Lee Brown with us, who is director of the Office of National Drug Control. And also just in the Caribbean, who is responsible for that tape you heard earlier, what was the music, by the way, when just say the music was an instrumental? Oh, it had Pete Rock and Steve Smooth with the blunt song Total Devastation, a local group from San Francisco and some techno nightcrawlers. You mentioning these names? I'm culturally deprived, but we had to mention that. Jason is a reporter with Youth Radio and a student at Laney College. Wesley Burton has also been with us, a reporter with Youth Radio as well, and a senior at the Street Academy in Oakland. And Will Tarique, who will attend Holy Name College in the fall and is also with youth radio. Thank you all very much for being with us. Uh, I'm sorry, with Youth Outlook. Right. And I appreciate your time. Also appreciate those of you who have been with us as a part of this program listening, remind you that we will be back with you tomorrow. We're going to talk about welfare in our second hour tomorrow.

Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, a former welfare recipient herself, will be our guest, among others. We'll talk with some people who are on welfare or have been on a welfare. Dolores Huerta, the farm workers will be with us. Um, it's not going to be with us. How he's telling me. OK, well, change that. We're going to talk in our first hour about this glass ceiling report and we'll focus in on that. I remind you that you can write us at KQED twenty six one Mariposa Street or fax us at four one five five five three two, two, four one. And again, I thank you all for being with us this second, hour of reform. The program's producers are Robin Gianattassio-Malle, David Minkow and Holly Kernan. KQED FM in San Francisco. Michael Krasny from National Public Radio. In Washington, I'm Ray Suarez and this is Talk of the Nation. President Clinton on reinventing government. We want to combine the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms with both the Bureau of Fisheries and the Interstate Trucking

Commission. We're going to call it the Department of Guys, the chief executive at the Radio and Television Correspondents Association dinner in Washington this week. His appearance overshadowed thanks to his friends in the media by the arrival of O.J. Simpson's house guest, Kato Kaelin. The House has voted to take back promised funding for a wide range of government programs. Henry Cisneros says he'll stay and fight. An interesting week in Washington and overview and your calls next. From National Public Radio News in Washington, I'm Corver Coleman. The House of Representatives has passed a 17 billion dollar spending cuts bill. It slashes 17 billion dollars from government programs, from housing and job training to public broadcasting and the arts. The vote was 227 to two hundred. The cuts are in programs that had already received money. The House Budget Committee is considering far larger cuts of 100 billion dollars over the next five years. Democrats strongly oppose the bill.

They charge the Republicans are robbing the poor to help the rich. The State Department has ordered a partial evacuation of Americans from Karachi, the capital of Pakistan, to U.S. consulate. Workers were murdered there last week. NPR's Ted Clark reports. Under the order, all school age children of U.S. officials in Karachi must leave the city. Other dependents are given the choice of going or staying. They've been authorized to leave if they want to. As for Americans with no ties to the US government, the consulate will help them leave Karachi if they so choose. Commercial transportation is freely available after last week's deadly attack against consulate employees in Karachi. The State Department reviewed the security situation. While there are currently no credible reports of any specific threats against Americans in Karachi, the department said such threats cannot be ruled out. This is Ted Clark in Washington. American astronaut Norm Thagard and two Russian cosmonauts have boarded the Russian Mir space station. Baggot is the first American to fly to the Mir. NPR's Anne Garrels reports from Moscow.

The 51 year old Thagard, a doctor and five time space veteran, has spent more than a year in Russia training for this mission as he began his three month stint aboard the Mir, his wife and three sons listen to the space to ground commentary inside the control room just outside Moscow. The space shuttle Atlantis is scheduled to dock with Mir for the first time in June to pick up Thagard and drop off two Russian cosmonauts. Hoot Gibson, the commander of that mission, was it the Russian Space Center today? He said he was almost speechless at the historical significance of the hook up. U.S. shuttles will very American and Russian crews back and forth for three years until a new space station can be sent aloft by a five nation consortium in late 1997. I'm Anne Garrels in Moscow. President Clinton has announced government regulatory reforms that will cut paperwork for businesses. Mr. Clinton says government will do better by honest business people. His proposals streamline regulation by the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. Clinton made the announcement in a print shop in a Washington, D.C. suburb. The owner, who has filled out 20 forms for toxic emissions, will now have to fill out just one. On Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 28 points at four thousand sixty six. Trading is heavy. This is NPR. Italian Prime Minister Lamberto.