Dear Readers, I have sent the following to U.S. Rep. Marge Roukema (5th District-NJ) and her Democratic opponent, Linda Mercurio; to U.S. Rep. Steve Rothman (9th District-NJ) and his Republican opponent, Joe Tedeschi; and to NJ U.S. Rep. Bob Franks and his opponent for the New Jersey U.S. Senate, Jon Corzine: Dear (Representative) (Mr.)(Mrs.), I am writing this as an open letter to the candidates of both major parties seeking election or reelection to the U.S. House of Representative from New Jersey's 5th and 9th Districts and for the state's seat in the U.S. Senate. It is scheduled to appear in my "Ask Dr. Bill" column in the October 4, 2000 editions of the Suburbanite and the Twin-Boro News. These papers (certainly not my column) may not have the "bang" of The New York Times, but they do reach a typical cross section of the kind of folks whose votes you will need if you are to win in November. What's my problem? My problem is that you who are now campaigning for reelection, as well as those who are wanabees have, so far, made no reference to what I view as the number one health problem still facing this country... the continuing national drug epidemic. The subject was not mentioned in either party platform and barely noted in either presidential nominee's acceptance speech.....it's as if this intractable social and criminal problem has simply gone away. Not one of you seem willing to mount "the bully pulpit" and remind the public that the problem has NOT gone away. Perhaps that very lack of attention by our political leaders can explain why polls show that the "drug problem" is no longer included in the top ten public issues. Alcohol and other drugs still kill over 100,000 people a day.... 300 a week! They still fill our hospital beds...they still are the chief ingredients of crime in the U.S. In your (our) district; in your (our) state, alcohol and drug abuse is still a major cause of auto accidents, of family breakups, of lost productivity, and of spousal and child abuse. Those of you presently in office have already approved the projected 2001 national drug control budget of $19.2B. According to the National Drug Control Strategy 2000 Annual Report, 67% of that budget is dedicated to domestic law enforcement, interdiction, and international strategies. The remaining funds are allocated to treatment and prevention efforts (only 20% and 13% respectively). The allocation percentages among these three areas has remained almost the same over the past two decades. Now, the president has authorized an additional $1.3 billion for an anti-drug aid package in Columbia which may not only be dangerous but it will simply not work. Why do I say that? In 1995, Gilberto Rodriguez, leader of the Cali Cartel, was arrested, then said to be "the beginning of the end of the Cali drug mafia." In 1987, Carlos Lehder, the Medellin Chief Honcho, was brought to trial in the U.S. and imprisoned for life. In 1993, the succeeding "Mister Big" of the Madellin cartel, Pablo Escobar, was caught and killed by Columbian troops. On each occasion, the then U.S. Drug Czar would gleefully announce "victory" over evil drug traffickers......As each of these cartels came into power they assumed control of 80% of the cocaine shipped into the United States, worth over $2 Billion per year. ....and, in spite of these "victories," there has been no decrease in the cocaine traffic! Now comes "Plan Columbia." The president buys protection for the his party against charges by the far right that they are "soft on drugs." That, and acceptance of this move by members of Congress of both parties, fosters the illusion that Washington is doing everything possible to cope with a problem that shows no sign of going away. "Plan Columbia" and the skewed allocation of funds in the drug control budget are, in my mind, the equivalent of an addict's state of denial, blocking honest attempts to come to terms with the real problem: how to reduce the tremendous demand for drugs by the American public. Here is what I am asking: I am asking that you and your staff conduct a thorough, honest, independent appraisal of the drug situation and see if you don't then agree with my view that the present approach to the problem, in spite of the inflated rhetoric about waging "war" on drugs, is inadequate. I am asking you to become actively, politically involved and support a change in allocations in the 2001 drug budget to target drug-abuse education, treatment and rehabilitation and an enlightened approach to law enforcement. No, I am not seeking support for the so-called "legalization" of drugs....I just want our elected officials to get back on track and actively work to lessen the drug burden on American society. I look forward to a response before your constituents enter their voting booths.   PART II updated 10/24/00 Dear Readers: I have been able to dig up some material which gives us a hint of what each candidate might do about the nation's drug problem if elected next Tuesday. My guess for the lack of attention to the subject during the presidential campaign is that each candidate fears that he will be accused of being "soft on drugs" if he pulls back on continuing the present interdiction and punishment policies. Here goes: On Governor Bush's Web-site: "Governor Bush will support character education in our schools, effective drug prevention programs in our communities, and faith-based drug treatment programs that transform lives. *In Texas, he launched the Texas Right Choices campaign to teach our children the importance of making right choices in life. That includes saying no to drugs and alcohol, which can destroy their lives. (Dr. Bill note: That's all on the demand side) "On the supply side, Governor Bush will improve interdiction and stop drugs before they reach our children. *He will help countries like Bolivia and Peru in promoting crop substitutes. *He will work with banks to prevent money laundering. *He will use better intelligence and surveillance to track and catch drug smugglers before they reach our borders. *He will continue to work with Mexico to cooperate more closely on interdiction. * He will ensure that the INS hires the full allotment of Border Patrol agents required under law. Right now, the GAO reports that the INS had "a net shortfall of 594 agents for the 3-year period ending September 30, 1999." Governor Bush will hire more agents, and will reform the INS to better focus on its job of defending our border. *He supports the $1.3 billion in aid to Colombia that Congress has passed and the President has signed. He believes this money should be used to help the Colombian government protect its people, fight the drug trade, halt the momentum of the guerillas, and bring about a sensible and peaceful resolution to the conflict ravaging that country." Excerpts from Al Gore's Speech on Crime in Atlanta, GA, May 2,2000: "......... I will launch a sweeping anti-crime strategy to make our families safe and secure..... in the 1980's and early 90's, Washington was deadlocked-caught between those who thought the only answer was to be tougher on criminals, and those who thought the only answer was to be tougher on the causes of crime.......... "I will reform a justice system that spills half a million prisoners back onto our streets each year-many of them addicted to drugs, unrehabilitated, and just waiting to commit another crime. ....Stopping the revolving door of recidivism is the key-both to crime control and prison overcrowding.......test prisoners for drugs while they are in jail and break up the drug rings inside.. We have to expand drug treatment within our prisons;.... treatment is ten times more effective in reducing serious crime than today's approaches.....we should make a simple deal with prisoners: before you get out of jail, you have to get clean....to stay out, you'd better stay clean......(by imposing) strict supervision of those who have just been released-and insisting that they obey the law and stay off drugs....these measures will reduce the size of our prison population.... "I'll lead a national crusade to dry up drug demand, hold up drugs at the border, and break up the drug rings that are spreading poison on our streets.... I'll fund more drug courts, to speed justice for drug-related crime....I'll expand drug treatment for at-risk youth..... Some have argued that we should save scarce dollars by cutting back on drug treatment, and investing that money in other crime-fighting measures believed to warrant a higher priority. I believe this is a false savings. If we deny drug-addicted criminals treatment, we shouldn't be surprised when many of them commit more crimes, to keep paying for the habit that has imprisoned their souls. . "But none of this will work if the American people do not take more personal responsibility-in (their) own neighborhoods, in (their) own families, in (their) own words and deeds.....Parents have to become more involved in the lives of their children-and teach them the fundamental lessons of decency and character, of responsibility and citizenship."