Pubdate: Sat, 16 Sep 2000
Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 2000 The New York Times Company
Contact:  229 West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036
Fax: (212) 556-3622
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Forum: http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/
Author: Michael Janofsky
Bookmark: additional articles on DARE are available at 
http://www.mapinc.org/dare.htm and articles on Utah are available at 
http://www.mapinc.org/states/ut.htm

ANTIDRUG PROGRAM'S END STIRS UP SALT LAKE CITY

SALT LAKE CITY, Sept. 14 - For all the decisions Ross C. Anderson has made 
in his first year as mayor of Salt Lake City, none has caused a bigger 
furor than this one: Over the summer, he terminated the city's involvement 
with the antidrug program in public schools known as DARE, saying that it 
was ineffective and a poor substitute for programs that he contends do more 
to discourage drug use by young people.

Reaction was swift. While many residents applauded the decision, Mr. 
Anderson was criticized by parents, teachers, Republicans, even fellow 
Democrats, including the chairman of the state party, Meg Holbrook, and the 
Democratic candidate for governor, Bill Orton.

"I know this is a net political loss for me," Mr. Anderson said in an 
interview this week about his decision to eliminate DARE - Drug Abuse 
Resistance Education - after it had been in Salt Lake City for 10 years. 
"But DARE is a complete fraud on the American people, and has actually done 
a lot of harm by preventing the implementation of more effective programs."

Founded 17 years ago in Los Angeles as a tool to discourage children from 
using illegal drugs, tobacco products and alcohol, DARE classes are now 
part of the curriculums in 10,000 school districts in the United States and 
at schools in 54 other countries, the organization said. Glenn Levant, 
DARE's president and founding director, says a growing number of districts 
are using the program, despite a handful that drop it each year.

But in making Salt Lake one of the largest cities to cut off financial 
support for the program, Mr. Anderson has joined a small but vocal group of 
elected officials who argue that many of the current strategies in the 
nation's war on drugs have done little to reduce the supply or demand for 
illegal drugs.

These officials include several governors - Gary E. Johnson of New Mexico, 
a Republican; Benjamin J. Cayetano of Hawaii, a Democrat; and Jesse Ventura 
of Minnesota, of the Reform Party - as well as mayors, state lawmakers and 
federal judges who have argued for and helped change a variety of laws to 
recognize drug use as a health issue, rather than a criminal justice issue.

As a result, more states are expanding methadone maintenance programs and 
making it easier for people with drug addictions and AIDS to obtain sterile 
needles. In addition, voters in seven states and the District of Columbia 
have approved the use of marijuana for medical purposes, even though the 
federal government had threatened to prosecute doctors who prescribe it.

Mayor Anderson and Governor Johnson, among others, have called for 
decriminalizing the use of marijuana. As a measure of the support for that 
sentiment, voters in Alaska and California's Mendocino County will consider 
November ballot initiatives that would do just that. If the initiatives are 
passed, the two governments will become the first in which the use of 
marijuana cannot be prosecuted, although it remains unclear if federal drug 
laws would take precedence.

In any case, the two initiatives are the first of their kind since 1986, 
when Oregon voters defeated a similar measure by a narrow vote.

"Since Jan. 1, we have had more victories for drug-prevention reform than 
the past 20 years," said Ethan Nadelmann, director of the Lindesmith Center 
Drug Policy Foundation, a New York organization dedicated to creating new 
drug policies.

Utah is an unlikely place for a change in drug policy. It is so 
conservative that Gov. Michael O. Leavitt, a Republican, was booed at his 
state party convention three months ago for supporting a measure that would 
have denied people the right to carry their guns into churches and schools. 
In addition, state lawmakers this year defeated a bill that would have 
allowed public schools to teach sex education.

For his decision to end the drug program, in which police officers visit 
classrooms an hour a week for 17 weeks at a cost to the city of $289,000 a 
year, Mr. Anderson said he had been branded by his critics as "soft on 
crime." This, he said, was despite the fact that he had encouraged the 
superintendent of Salt Lake public schools, Darlene Robles, to select an 
alternative program for the city's 25,000 students.

Mr. Anderson said he based his decision on studies that showed that 
children who had been exposed to DARE were no less likely to use drugs 
later in life than children who had not. Investigating the effectiveness of 
the program and other school antidrug initiatives, Mr. Anderson said he had 
found that "to my amazing dismay, all the peer-reviewed research shows that 
DARE is a complete waste of money and, even worse, fritters away the 
opportunity to implement a good drug-prevention program in schools."

In defending the program, Mr. Levant said Mr. Anderson had ignored the 
short-term benefits of the program, primarily that it discouraged drug use 
by elementary school children. He also argued that in those school 
districts where the program was also taught in middle and high schools, the 
antidrug message was reinforced.

"Just to say memories of elementary school children fade and that's why the 
program has no long-term benefits is unfair," Mr. Levant said.

Kathy Stewart, a police detective in Lehi, Utah, and president of the Utah 
DARE Officers Association, conceded that long-term benefits might be 
difficult to prove. But she said the interaction between police officers 
and children in a school setting fulfilled an important component of 
community policing, allowing officers to build trust with many more 
children than they would in chance meetings on the street.

Ms. Robles, the superintendent, said she had taken a neutral position on 
Mr. Anderson's order but, in compliance with his decision, had put together 
a committee of parents and community leaders that was reviewing options for 
antidrug programs.

Mr. Anderson predicted that once city residents embraced an alternative 
program that might be more effective, criticism would fade.

"I'm not interested in killing a program that works," he said. "But just 
look at the research. My responsibility is to make sure our kids have the 
best drug-prevention program there is. I think that once people in Salt 
Lake City understand what it is I'm doing, most of them will support me."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Thunder