The Federal drug control budget is the product of
budget proposals and appropriations for more than 50
Federal agencies. The budget supports the five goals and
thirty-one objectives of the National Drug Control Strategy
and is structured to make progress toward the targets
outlined in the Performance Measures of Effectiveness
(PME) system. This chapter provides a broad perspective
on the state of federal drug control spending and highlights
spending in key drug control functional areas
from an historical perspective. In addition, funding priorities
for the National Drug Control Program are
briefly reviewed, and a new ONDCP initiative to
improve the integrity and reliability of drug control
budget accounting across the government is described.
Historical Perspective
For FY 2000, approximately $18.8 billion was appropriated
for federal drug control programs, including
supplemental funding of $1.3 billion to support Plan
Colombia and drug control activities in the Andean
region. The FY 2000 appropriations represent an
increase of $6.9 billion, or 58 percent, over the FY 1992
level of $11.9 billion. The majority of the funding
increases were achieved during the FY 1996—FY 2000
period, and funding for every major functional category
of drug control programs, with the exception of domestic
law enforcement, experienced larger increases in
funding during this period.
Appropriations for International and Interdiction
programs declined between 1992 and 1996. From
FY 1996 to FY 2000, however, funding for these two
functions increased by 46 percent and 432 percent,
respectively. The increase in International programs is
largely, but not entirely, accounted for by enactment of
the $1.3 billion FY 2000 supplemental, based on an
Administration request, to support Plan Colombia.
Interdiction and international efforts support the Strategy’s
Goal 4, “Shield America’s air, land, and sea frontiers
from the drug threat,” and Goal 5, “Break foreign and
domestic drug sources of supply.” Major initiatives
include the Andean coca reduction initiative, Southwest
border enhancements for Border Patrol personnel and
Customs Service non-intrusive technology systems,
and enhancements for Caribbean drug interdiction
operations.
Prevention funding was essentially stable between FY
1992 and FY 1996. Between FY 1996 and FY 2000, prevention
funding increased by 48 percent—second only to
the percentage increase in international funding.
Increases for prevention programs were targeted at Goal
1 of the Strategy, “Educate and enable America’s youth to
reject illegal drugs as well as alcohol and tobacco.” The
establishment of ONDCP’s youth media campaign,
funding for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration’s (SAMHSA) State Incentive Grants
program, increased funding for Youth Tobacco prevention
in the Department of Health and Human Services
and additional funding for Office of Justice Programs
drug prevention activities represent several of the key
budget priorities supporting the Strategy.
Treatment funding increased by 18 percent between
FY 1992 and FY 1996 and 26 percent between FY 1996
and FY 2000. Drug treatment funding primarily supports
Goal 3 of the Strategy, “Reduce the health and
social costs to the public of illegal drug use.” A major
new treatment program in SAMHSA, the Treatment
Capacity Expansion Program, along with funding
enhancements for the SAMHSA substance abuse block
grant and criminal justice treatment programs, all
received significant funding increases over the last four
years.
Domestic Law Enforcement funding increased by 42
percent between FY 1992 and FY 1996. From FY 1996
to FY 2000, funding for these activities increased by a
more modest 22 percent. Domestic law enforcement
activities primarily support Goal 2 of the Strategy,
“Increase the safety of America’s citizens by substantially
reducing drug-related crime and violence.” Funding
enhancements for domestic law enforcement activities
have supported several key investigations and intelligence
initiatives within the Drug Enforcement Administration
and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In addition,
ONDCP’s High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Program
has been expanded to thirty-one HIDTA areas, up
from fifteen in FY 1996.
Several factors (in addition to the Plan Colombia supplemental
noted above) account for the increased
spending, particularly after FY 1995. One major reason,
especially for the increases in domestic law enforcement,
is the effect of the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994, which was enacted with Presidential
and bipartisan Congressional support and
provided a balance between law enforcement, prevention
programs, and tough new sanctions in federal law. The
1994 Act authorized funding to support, among other
things: putting 100,000 police officers on the streets in
community policing programs; the establishment of drug
courts to provide supervision and specialized services to
offenders with rehabilitation potential; expanded substance
abuse treatment for federal and state prisoners;
additional federal agents to secure our borders; and grant
programs to help prevent our Nation’s youth from using
drugs. The Act also established a new Violent Crime
Reduction Trust Fund as a source of funding for programs
authorized in the legislation. Much of the
subsequent funding increases for drug control programs
are attributable, in part, to enactment of this bill.
A second factor contributing to the increased funding
was process begun by ONDCP in 1996 for developing a
10-year National Drug Control Strategy, a 5-year budget to
support the Strategy, and the Performance Measures of
Effectiveness (PME) to assess progress towards the goals
of the Strategy. In addition, ONDCP began to issue
funding priorities to guide the development of agency
drug control budgets. The establishment of this comprehensive
process has enabled to work in concert with drug
program agencies, the Office of Management and Budget,
and the Congress to achieve funding increases for
drug control programs.
Federal Funding Priorities
By law (21 U.S.C. § 1703(b)(8)), ONDCP must provide,
by July 1 of each year, drug control funding
priorities to the heads of departments and agencies with
responsibilities under the National Drug Control
Program. These funding priorities are to cover a five-year
planning period. On June 28, 2000, ONDCP provided
the Cabinet with a summary of drug control funding priorities
for FY 2002 to FY 2006. The funding priorities
cited by ONDCP include the following critical program
areas:
- Support for Plan Colombia and drug control activities
in the Andean region—The democratically elected
government of Colombian President Andres Pastrana
devised a comprehensive, integrated strategy, Plan
Colombia, to address Colombia’s drug and interrelated
social and economic troubles. The United States’
involvement in Plan Colombia has five components,
centered around reducing the supply of Colombian
drugs to the United States: implementing the Colombia
initiative in southern coca growing areas; increased drug
interdiction; greater support of Colombian National
Police eradication efforts; alternative economic development;
and assistance to boost Colombia’s local and
national governing capacity, including enhanced justice
and human rights protection. In FY 2000, Congress
provided emergency supplemental appropriations of
$1.3 billion for Plan Colombia.
- National Youth Anti–Drug Media Campaign—The
Media Campaign uses paid media messages to change
youth attitudes about drug use and its consequences.
Targeted, high impact, paid media ads—at both the
national and local levels—are the most cost effective,
quickest means of changing drug use behavior through
changes in adolescent perceptions of the danger and
social disapproval of drugs. It is also the most cost effective
means of reaching baby-boomer parents who may
be ambivalent about sending strong anti-drug messages
to their children.
- Community Coalitions—This effort provides technical
assistance to community groups on forming and sustaining
effective community and anti-drug coalitions
that prevent the use of illegal drugs, alcohol, and
tobacco by youth. Sustained and comprehensive prevention
efforts at the community level are required to
deliver a constant and effective anti-drug message.
- Criminal Justice Treatment Programs. This priority
will increase the capacity of the criminal justice system
to refer addicts and heavy drug users to treatment and
rehabilitation and employ sanctions and incentives to
foster treatment retention, compliance and completion.
Activities involve extensive collaboration between public
safety and public health officials and focus primarily on
non-incarcerated and post-incarcerated juvenile and
criminal justice populations. Through drug testing,
sanctions, and treatment programs, the number of persons
who come into contact with the criminal justice
system will be reduced by decreasing the number of
repeat drug-related offenders.
- Drug Courts.—The criminal justice system often fails
to subject nonviolent, substance-abusing adult and juvenile
offenders to intervention measures that provide the
sanctions and services necessary to change their behaviors.
The Drug Court program uses the coercive power
of the court to force abstinence and alter behavior with a
combination of escalating sanctions, mandatory drug
testing, treatment, and strong aftercare programs.
- Close the Public System Treatment Gap—This priority
is aimed at reducing the gap between those who are
actively seeking substance abuse treatment and the
capacity of the public treatment system. This will be
accomplished through a variety of approaches, including
grant assistance to increase treatment capacity, with a
focus on targeted treatment capacity, adolescent treatment,
and outreach for chronic users and addicts,
including their families. The gap will also be addressed
by efforts to promote parity for substance abuse treatment
through health insurance programs.
- School Drug-Prevention Programs—The Strategy has
focused national attention on the need to educate and
enable America’s youth to reject illegal drugs as well as
alcohol and tobacco. Support for effective drug education
programs is critical for changing attitudes and behaviors.
This funding priority includes programs implemented by
the Department of Education in conjunction with other
federal agencies that support local educational agencies
and communities in developing programs that create safe,
disciplined, and drug-free learning environments and
promote healthy childhood development.
- High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Programs—Over the five-year planning period, ONDCP’s
HIDTAs will continue activities that will improve their
efficiency and effectiveness through improved intelligence
and resource sharing among local, state, and
federal law enforcement agencies, resulting in a reduction
of illegal drug availability and related violent crime.
- Southwest Border Programs—This initiative is associated
with improved security and enhanced drug
interdiction along all U.S. air, land, and sea frontiers
and at all ports-of-entry. Controlling borders and ports-of-entry is vital in order to ensure the rule of law and
prevent the flow of illegal drugs. This priority includes
support for the Immigration and Naturalization Service,
Customs, Coast Guard, and other federal law
enforcement agencies, as well as coordination with state
and local agencies along the border. This priority also
includes advanced technologies, which unequivocally
identify the presence of drugs and contraband in cargo,
containers and conveyances at ports-of-entry.
- Intelligence Architecture Support—The General
Counterdrug Intelligence Plan (GCIP), approved by
the President on February 6, 2000, is the Administration’s
blueprint to streamline and enhance intelligence
and law enforcement information sharing throughout
the national counterdrug community. Among the
GCIP’s 73 action items is the creation of a three-tiered
coordination and problem-resolution mechanism,
which includes a policy guidance committee at the Cabinet
level, an interagency coordination group, and a full
time interagency support staff. This three-tiered mechanism
will ensure effective and collaborative counterdrug
intelligence sharing across the drug law enforcement,
interdiction, policy, and intelligence communities. It
will also oversee the implementation of the GCIP, to
include action items that support various intelligence,
interdiction, and drug law enforcement activities.
- Regional Interdiction Architecture—This program
area centers on efforts to infuse U.S. interagency interdiction
forces with high-technology capabilities and
complete activities to reestablish counterdrug support
capabilities resident in U.S. military bases in Panama
and other locations throughout the region. This priority
supports regional counterdrug operations through aviation
and maritime operations support, pierside
destructive search support, small unit training, and
small boat operations and training.
Drug Budget Accounting Improvements
The National Drug Control Budget includes funding
in over 50 federal agencies and accounts. Each agency
takes responsibility for carefully accounting for its drug
control resources. For the drug budget to be a helpful
tool for policymakers, the Congress and the public, it
must be presented with an appropriated degree of accuracy
and consistency. To ensure the integrity of the
methods used to account for drug spending, part of the
1998 law (21 U.S.C. § 1704(d)) that reauthorized the
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) mandates
that the Director of ONDCP shall, “(A) require the
National Drug Program agencies to submit to the Director
not later than February 1 of each year a detailed
accounting of all funds expended by the agencies for
National Drug Control Program activities during the
previous fiscal year, and require such accounting to be
authenticated by the Inspector General for each agency
prior to submission to the Director; and (B) submit to
Congress not later than April 1 of each year the information
submitted to the Director … [by the agencies].”
In order to implement this law, since April 1999
ONDCP has worked closely with agency Chief Financial
Officers (CFO) and Inspectors General (IG) to develop
the form and content of agency drug accounting reports.
As a result of this interagency process, on December 17,
1999, ONDCP issued to all drug control agencies a Circular,
Annual Accounting of Drug Control Funds. This Circular
focuses on disclosures and assertions that each agency must
make regarding its drug budget methodology. Generally,
drug control funding is not separately accounted for in
agency financial systems of record. Drug funding is an estimate,
based on individual agency drug methodologies for
attributing a portion of agency budgets to drug control
activities, such as treatment, prevention, interdiction, and
several other drug control functions. Therefore, apart from
the accuracy and reliability of agency financial systems, the
most important aspect of each agency’s drug funding calculations
is its drug budget methodology.
Although many agencies were able to complete this
exercise successfully for FY 1999, the first year covered by
this requirement, some agencies had difficulty in presenting
a detailed accounting of funds that could be
authenticated by their IG. To address the deficiencies
identified in agency drug budget methodologies,
ONDCP has embarked on an effort to improve these
important calculations so that they more accurately reflect
counterdrug activities across the government. These
improvements will be an iterative process, which will
occur over the next few fiscal years.
ONDCP is committed to improving the accuracy and
reliability of all financial data associated with the drug
control program of the President. In support of this,
ONDCP has contracted with independent experts to
assist in the analysis of drug budget deficiencies highlighted
by Department IGs. This is part of ONDCP’s
continuing work with agencies to improve their reporting
on critical drug-related financial statistics. ONDCP
will keep the public apprised of progress in this area and
fully disclose any modifications to agency drug budget
accounting that would significantly affect how this information
is presented. The annual accounting of drug
control funds now required by law will serve as a valuable
tool to assist in these important efforts.
FY 2000 appropriations are used in this chapter because
precise numbers for FY 2001 drug appropriations were not
available at the time the Strategy was prepared. For FY 2002,
the incoming Administration will submit a proposed budget,
including funding for drug control programs. That
budget proposal is expected in Spring 2001.
