Appendix IV Bureau of Justice Statistics

Appendix IV Bureau of Justice Statistics

INTRODUCTION

The Bureau of Justice Statistics is an agency of the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC. In a 1993 report entitled Drugs, Crime, and the Justice System, the bureau presented an overview of how the U.S. justice system attempts to combat illegal drugs.

Many areas of society are included in the overview. Here we present summarized data in easy to review format, with new, post-1990 information provided by Mark Kleiman and Thai Ishizuka-Capp, both from the Drug Policy Analysis Program, School of Public Policy and Social Research, University of California, Los Angeles. Much of the information offered here is fully discussed throughout the alphabetical entries of the encyclopedia—in Volumes 1, 2, and 3. Consult the Index at the end of this volume for references to items of further interest.

POLICIES, STRATEGIES, AND TACTICS USED TO CONTROL THE ILLEGAL DRUG PROBLEM

POLICIES

Prohibition is the ban on the distribution, possession, and use of specified substances made illegal by legislative or administrative order and the application of criminal penalties to violators.

Regulation is control over the distribution, possession, and use of specified substances. Regulations specify the circumstances under which substances can be legally distributed and used. Prescription medications and alcohol are the substances most commonly regulated in the U.S.

STRATEGIES

Demand reduction strategies attempt to decrease individuals' tendency to use drugs. Efforts provide information and education to potential and casual users about the risks and adverse consequences of drug use, and treatment to drug users who have developed problems from using drugs.

Supply reduction focuses diplomatic, law enforcement, military, and other resources on eliminating or reducing the supply of drugs. Efforts focus on foreign countries, smuggling routes outside the country, border interdiction, and distribution within the U.S.

User accountability emphasizes that all users of illegal substances, regardless of the type of drug they use or the frequency of that use, are violating criminal laws and should be subject to penalties. It is closely associated with zero tolerance.

Zero tolerance holds that drug distributors, buyers, and users should be held fully accountable for their offenses under the law. This is an alternative to policies that focus only on some violators such as sellers of drugs or users of cocaine and heroin while ignoring other violators.

TACTICS

Criminal justice activities include enforcement, prosecution, and sentencing activities to apprehend, convict, and punish drug offenders. Although thought of primarily as having supply reduction goals, criminal sanctions also have demand reduction effects by discouraging drug use.

Prevention activities are educational efforts to inform potential drug users about the health, legal, and other risks associated with drug use. Their goal is to limit the number of new drug users and dissuade casual users from continuing drug use as part of a demand reduction strategy.

Taxation requires those who produce, distribute, or possess drugs to pay a fee based on the volume or value of the drugs. Failure to pay subjects violators to penalties for this violation, not for the drug activities themselves.

Testing individuals for the presence of drugs is a tool in drug control that is used for safety and monitoring purposes and as an adjunct to therapeutic interventions. It is in widespread use for employees in certain jobs such as those in the transportation industry and criminal justice agencies. New arrestees and convicted offenders may be tested. Individuals in treatment are often tested to monitor their progress and provide them an incentive to remain drug free.

Treatment (therapeutic interventions) focus on individuals whose drug use has caused medical, psychological, economic, and social problems for them. The interventions may include medication, counseling, and other support services delivered in an inpatient setting or on an outpatient basis. These are demand reduction activities to eliminate or reduce individuals' drug use.

HISTORIC MILESTONES IN EARLY U.S. DRUG CONTROL EFFORTS

Drugs of abuse have changed since the 1800s—most rapidly over the past quarter century Problems with opiate addiction date from widespread use of patent medicines in the 1800s. The range of drugs included opium, morphine, laudanum, cocaine, and, by the turn of the century, heroin. The tonics, nostrums, and alleged cures that contained or used such drugs were sold by itinerant peddlers, mail order houses, retail grocers, and pharmacists. There also was unrestricted access to opium in opium-smoking dens and to morphine through retailers.

When morphine was discovered in 1806, it was thought to be a wonder drug. Its use was so extensive during the Civil War that morphine addiction was termed the "army disease." The availability of the hypodermic syringe allowed nonmedicinal use of morphine to gain popularity among veterans and other civilians. After 1898, heroin was used to treat respiratory illness and morphine addiction in the belief that it was nonaddicting.

In the 1880s coca became widely available in the U.S. as a health tonic and remedy for many ills. Its use was supported first by the European medical community and later by American medical authorities. In the absence of restrictive national legislation, its use spread. Initially cocaine was offered as a cure for opiate addiction, an asthma remedy (the official remedy of the American Hay Fever Association), and an antidote for toothaches.

By 1900, in the face of an estimated quarter of a million addicts, State laws were enacted to curb drug addiction. The major drugs of abuse at the time were cocaine and morphine.

MAJOR FEDERAL ANTIDRUG BILLS, ENACTED 1984-2000

The 1984 Crime Control Act—

expanded criminal and civil asset forfeiture laws
amended the Bail Reform Act to target pretrial detention of defendants accused of serious drug offenses
established a determinate sentencing system
increased Federal criminal penalties for drug offenses

The 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act—

budgeted money for prevention and treatment programs, giving the programs a larger share of Federal drug control funds than previous laws
restored mandatory prison sentences for large-scale distribution of marijuana
imposed new sanctions on money laundering
added controlled substances' analogs (designer drugs) to the drug schedule
created a drug law enforcement grant program to assist State and local efforts
contained various provisions designed to strengthen international drug control efforts.

The 1988 Anti-Drug Abuse Act—

increased penalties for offenses related to drug trafficking, created new Federal offenses and regulatory requirements, and changed criminal procedures
altered the organization and coordination of Federal antidrug efforts
increased treatment and prevention efforts aimed at reduction of drug demand
endorsed the use of sanctions aimed at drug users to reduce the demand for drugs
targeted for reduction drug production abroad and international trafficking in drugs

The Crime Control Act of 1990—

doubled the appropriations authorized for drug law enforcement grants to States and localities
expanded drug control and education programs aimed at the Nation's schools
expanded specific drug enforcement assistance to rural States
expanded regulation of precursor chemicals used in the manufacture of illegal drugs
provided additional measures aimed at seizure and forfeiture of drug trafficker assets
sanctioned anabolic steroids under the Controlled Substances Act
included provisions on international money laundering, rural drug enforcement, drug-free school zones, drug paraphernalia, and drug enforcement grants.

"Smoke a Joint, Lose your License" Bill (passed as Public Law 101-516) of 1990—

required that each State must either: enact laws that mandate suspending or revoking for six months the driver's license of any person convicted of controlled substance violations; or pass a resolution in both houses of the State legislature, accompanied by a written certification from the Governor acknowledging his agreement, that the State does not wish to enact the law
failure to do one of these results in a 10% loss of the State's federal highway funds.

Gramm Amendment (Senate Amendment 4935 to the Welfare Reform package) in 1996—

denied for life Federal assistance-based cash aid and food stamps to anyone convicted of felony drug charges
applied to future felony drug convictions, and States have the ability to opt out of the program if they enact legislation to do so

Higher Education Act of 1998—

delayed or denied Federal financial aid eligibility to any individual convicted of a State or Federal drug offense
established that drug possession convictions result in ineligibility for one year (first offense), two years (second offense), or indefinitely (third offense), and that drug sale convictions result in ineligibility for two years (first offense) or indefinitely (second offense)
provided that students may receive early restoration of benefits by completing a treatment program that fulfills yet-to-be-announced Dept. of Education regulations
specified that ineligibility applies to all forms of Federal financial aid, including grants, student loans, and work-study

Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 1999 (effective August 23, 2000)—

established that in order to seize assets, the government must prove that property is related to a crime, as opposed to property owners' having to prove that their property is "innocent"
created an "innocent owner defense," whereby property owners who are either unaware of or unsuccessfully try to stop criminal activity on their property can recover the property
eliminated the cost-bond requirement, which previously required property owners to pay $5,000 or 10 percent of the seized property's value to contest seizure in court
provided compensation for property damage caused by federal agents and extended the time for filing a claim to contest a forfeiture