Drug War Chronicle Book Review: "Lies, Damned Lies, and Drug War Statistics: A Critical Analysis of Claims Made by the Office of National Drug Control Policy," by Matthew Robinson and Renee Scherlen (2007, State University of New York Press, 268 pp., $27)
(We reprint our widely-read book review of three weeks ago. Please click here to order a copy through our latest membership offer.)
There is probably not a single drug reformer alive who, at some point, has not sputtered into his coffee cup upon hearing some inane pronouncement from drug czar John Walters. We know what he is saying is wrong and unjustifiable. Sometimes we even go to the effort of thoroughly debunking one of his outrageous claims. It's not that hard to do, really, but up until now, no one had thoroughly deconstructed the claims made by the Office of National Drug Control Strategy (ONDCP, the drug czar's office), testing them against the norms of science and reason.
That has changed with the recent publication of "Lies, Damned Lies, and Drug War Statistics," by Appalachian State University Associate Professor of Criminal Justice Matthew Robinson and Associate Professor of Political Science Renee Scherlen. Since the annual National Drug Control Strategy reports put out by ONDCP form the basis for crafting federal drug policy, this pair of professors decided to systematically put to the test the claims made by ONDCP as a foundation for those policies.
ONDCP misrepresents 'Just Say No' connection, 2003 strategy (graphic appears courtesy Prof. Robinson)
In order to gauge the accuracy of ONDCP pronouncements, the authors look at three broad sets of claims made by ONDCP: Claims of success in reducing drug use, claims of success in "healing" America's drug users, and claims of success in disrupting drug markets. Robinson and Scherlen examine the annual National Drug Strategy reports beginning in 2000 and extending through 2005 to look at what ONDCP says it is accomplishing in these three broad areas. These three categories describe what it is ONDCP is supposed to be achieving, but, as the authors so comprehensively illustrate, ONDCP is all too ready to resort to deceptive and misleading information.
Let's take claims of success in reducing drug use, for instance. In the 2001 National Drug Strategy, ONDCP produces a chart that shows a dramatic downward trend in teen drug use in the mid-1980s before remaining essentially stable throughout the 1990s. But since ONDCP and its mandate didn't exist before 1988, the chart is misleading. What it really shows is that throughout ONDCP's tenure, it has failed in its stated goal of reducing teen drug use.
Similarly, in the 2003 National Drug Strategy, in an effort to justify its prevention campaigns, ONDCP sought to show that Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" campaign was effective in reducing teen drug use. But to do so, ONDCP relied solely on data involving 18-to-25-year-olds. Since the "Just Say No" campaign was aimed at kids, using data about young adults is "a selective and inappropriate use of statistics," as Robinson and Scherlen so gently put it.
ONCDP also has the curious habit of mentioning "successes" in one year, but failing to revisit them in following years when the numbers don't back them up. In 2000 and 2001, for example, ONDCP crowed about declining marijuana use, even though national drug surveys failed to back it up except in selective categories. But in the annual reports from 2002 to 2005, with marijuana use remaining steady, ONDCP doesn't make any specific claims regarding rates of marijuana use, nor does it provide easily accessible charts or figures. As Robinson and Scherlen note, "Indeed, it appears ONDCP ignores statistics that point to outcomes counter to the drug war."
Robinson and Scherlen go on to systematically dissect ONDCP claims about reducing drug use, "healing" drug users, and disrupting drug markets. Sometimes, they even find that the claims are justified, but this is rarely the case. What the authors repeatedly demonstrate is that ONDCP is unable or unwilling to accurately report its failures to achieve its goals and is willing and able to resort to statistical chicanery to cover up those failures.
In the final two chapters of the book, Robinson and Scherlen attempt a fair assessment of the drug war and ONDCP's ability to meet its self-imposed drug war goals, and offer a series of recommendations for what a more rational drug policy might look like. For one thing, the authors suggest, ONDCP ought to be either terminated or removed from the White House. For an accurate rendition of the numbers regarding drug use, they must be removed from the hothouse political atmosphere of the White House. Currently, the authors argue, ONDCP acts as a "generator and defender of a given ideology in the drug war."
"Lies, Damned Lies, and Drug War Statistics" is surprisingly easy to read, and Robinson and Scherlen have done a huge favor not only to critics of current drug policy by compiling this damning critique of ONDCP claims, but also to anyone interested in how data is compiled, presented, and misused by bureaucrats attempting to guard their domains. It should be required reading for members of Congress, though, sadly, that is unlikely to happen.
digg
redditIt should be required reading for members of Congress.
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 12:10pmI'd be happy if they would read the bills they sign into law, though, sadly, that is unlikely to happen.
Everybody's doing it . . .
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 12:20pmRecreational drugs can't get any more popular than they are now, so prohibition isn't needed any more.
Prohibition turned me On!!!
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 2:20pmLike the first poster I thank Prohibition for bringi dope to my attention ata time I was really getting into booze. the law worked out well for me. kinda ironic....
Spinning?
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 4:41pmPoor Harry J must be spinning in the grave. If it wasn't for him the phrase "recreational drugs" wouldn't even exist. Strange how bad law always does the opposite of what's it's expecteded to do.
The timeliness of this
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 5:03pmThe timeliness of this book's advent couldn't be better; last year the Government Accounting Office gave the ONDCP a bureaucratic black eye for exactly the practices this book evidently covers. The recommendations of the report were unusually punitive: they suggested that the ONDCP staff have their salaries cut if they couldn't prove their efficacy in stemming illegal drug usage. Immediately afterwards, in a bald-faced move to protect its slice of the fed budget, the ONDCP launched a propaganda assault to attempt to blunt the criticism of its' recorded ineffectiveness by claiming that such studies as Monitoring the Future vindicated their policies. But the writing's on the bureaucratic wall, and nothing that ONDCP tries to do can erase the evidence of past failures.
The Statistical Game to Prey on the Poor While Gov't Porks Away!
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 03/21/2007 - 1:18pmVery refreshing information. As a 53 year-old, third generation of being in an environment of "recreational drugs" and now a son in prison for (the first one in the family) distribution & intent to sell drugs and carrying a weapon. He was incarcerated for 1 year in solitaire confinement before he was 18 to wait till he turned of age to be sentenced finally for 10 years (5 years time/ 5 years parole) for a weight of a 8 ball (X & crack) and 2 concealed weapons without the clip. I am not making excuses for stupidity. My head told me the first time to keep him in juvenile hall but knowing that statistics are for the government to manipulate, I didn't do the tuff-love thing. However, he was/is used to send out the message that the state and the feds to do not play when it comes to keeping up with statistics. I know folks that have been in more dealings and somehow are not incarcerated as long. Money plays a big part for expensive legal proceedings. The corrupt government to play the statistical game has always been a mystery to me. When I took criminology in undergrad school, I would wonder who is double-checking the statistics. Finally, the statistical game is being used to expose the truth. I love you all for bringing some justice at least in writing for now.
I don't understand why this
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 05/24/2007 - 11:02amI don't understand why this program would be cut when it seems to be saving us money. It's cheaper to support people outside of prison. Some may be say drug users are getting what they deserve, but we have to look at the cost to society if this program is not funded. compare our drug discounts .
The right price
Comment posted by Anonymous on Mon, 06/25/2007 - 2:05pmI cannot understand how a $27 book could be gave as free for a donation of $32. Stopthedrugwar did not manage to buy some low prices books to gave them for the same price? It came to me that this book's price is more prohibited than the actual drug prices
Well i tend to take the side
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 06/26/2007 - 10:35amWell i tend to take the side of drug addicts, this is the time when they need the most the society. Judging them is not an option. The least we can do is to convince them to attend a drug rehab treatment
.
addiction is not synonymous with occasional responsible use
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 05/23/2008 - 2:51pmdrug addiction- substance abuse- is often erroneously used interchangeably with responsible recreational use. this has to stop. the DSM-IV lists separate diagnostic terms and separate codes for substance addiction and substance intoxication.
years of research (or years of working in mental health hospitals) have made it clear that substance addiction- drug abuse- rarely is experienced in the absence of other quite debilitating emotional or behavioral syndromes. although even the strongest correlation has little construct validity to suggest that one problem is the cause of the other, qualitative analysis of case after case suggests that drug addiction, like many other self- destructive behaviors, is a symptom of a serious psychological problem, rather than being an independent problem itself.
just more smoke and mirrors... johnson and nixon and reagan and clinton and the bushes and the rest of them try to blur the differece between using drugs as brain candy and using them as an escape hatch.
more lies, more hypocrisy. its a disgrace that after 40 years and trillions and trillions of dollars, they think we are stupid enough to believe they can actually stop it? do they think we are stupid enough to believe that they really want it stopped? after all, with no crack cocaine, how can they justify concentrating urban minority race youth into prison camps?
halloween costume
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 09/22/2007 - 10:14pmPlease, find sexy halloween costume here
Learning to look beyond the "successes"
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 01/29/2008 - 2:12pmWorking in the drug rehab industry, I have become desensitized by the term successes. Many treatment centers bost unlikely numbers of success. It seems maybe according to this book that maybe some of these unlikely numbers are brought on by drug control strategy numbers.
Big Cheese!!!
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 04/04/2008 - 1:13pmUnfortunately there are some cheap killing drugs like “cheese heroin” which will force any decent drug rehab to face a sad reality: people won’t live to attend their programs.
This really needs to be said
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 05/16/2008 - 12:45amI think it's very important to say that drug addiction will recur over and over if it's not correctly treated with the right combination of medical and psychological guidance by trained professionals. It may be possible to quit drugs in the short term without seeking realistic drug rehab treatment, but only a good drug rehab center can honestly provide you with the tools needed to stay clean for the remainder of your life.
maybe i dont want to stay clean
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 05/23/2008 - 3:04pmi use drugs recreationally. i do not have an addiction. i do not engage in self-destructive behavior. i have never stolen to get high, i have never neglected my responsibilities to get high. i have never gone hungry so i could spend my last 50 on a gram. i don't need to "stay clean for the remainder of my life" to be a well- adjusted, responsible, loving parent, and intelligent contributing member to society.
i hate to seem confrontational, but your title line "this really needs to be said," quite frankly needs to never be said if its addressed to everyone that uses drugs, suggesting responsible recreational use of a plant in the privacy of my own home is a de facto problem.
if you want to stay clean, that's your right and i won't tell you that the way you live your life is wrong. please don't insinuate that i am defective if i happen to have a different philosophy.
Dear Maybe I don't want to stay clean
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 06/11/2008 - 5:38pmWhile you may honestly believe that you are not addicted to drugs and that you have never neglected your responsibilities, etc., you are on your way down. It is understandable that you are tired of hearing that recreational drug use is wrong, but most people cannot maintain control and do in fact become addicted.
Once you admit you have a problem, getting into a drug rehab like www.gatehouseacademy.com is the only viable choice for you. For now you may feel that you have control, but you are most likely self-medicating because you have an undiagnosed disorder such as depression or ADHA. You will eventually find yourself dependent and when you do, I hope that you will seek help.
Effective Drug Treatment
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sun, 06/22/2008 - 2:08pmSolutions for Addiction
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sun, 06/22/2008 - 2:10pmInstead of arguing about who is right or wrong we need to work together to find drug and alcohol rehabilitation like cocaine treatment for people addicted to cocaine.
Substance addiction
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 06/28/2008 - 8:04amThe addiction of drug effects according to the type of substance addicted like nicotine, caffeine etc. This rehab center provides treatment according to substance adducted so that the patient can easily overcome from addiction.
The Solution
Comment posted by Anonymous on Mon, 06/30/2008 - 2:26pmThe method the Government uses to control drugs and shape drug policy is incompetent and has been that way for a great many years. There will always be drugs and drug users (hence addiction treatment centers). Attempting to disrupt the flow of drugs into this country is an impossible task to accomplish. The Government needs to spend more time on drug prevention and funding drug rehabs. There are many Americans who want and need drug treatment but will die this year from drug addiction due to lack of funds for treatment or waiting to enter Government programs. If the U.S. Government spent a tenth of the money it spends attempting to disrupt the drug trade on drug programs and treatment America would be a much different place.
.org
Prohibition's Hidden Virtue?
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 12:08pmI love to toke, and I'll do it to my dying day; weird thing, though, it was its legal status that got me interested enough to check it out, in the first place.
Had it been legal, I wouldn't have bothered.