Page images
PDF
EPUB

to enable the Federal Government to attain its objectives within a definite time limit. It will develop an overall Federal strategy for drug abuse programs.

At the present time no single agency has an overall view of the drug problem or even clear-cut responsibility for one complete segment of it. Program funding levels within each agency are relatively small and evaluation systems which would provide the basis for policy development are either rudimentary or simply do not exist.

Let me make clear that the program efforts which are carried out by a number of agencies have very real utility. What is lacking is a clear sense of direction and strategy. The Special Action Office will have the capacity to function across agency lines. It will provide a resource capacity to fill in program gaps as they emerge, particularly in the areas of research and information requirements. Section 5c of H.R. 9264 provides authority for the Director of the Special Action Office to exercise all or part of many Federal acts as they relate to drug abuse prevention. This includes the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act of 1966, the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, the Drug Abuse Education Act of 1970, the Community Mental Health Centers Act, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, the Manpower Development and Training Act of 1962, the Public Health Service Act, and title 38 of the United States Code dealing with the authorities of the Veterans' Administration.

In most cases, however, the Special Action Office will not implement programs under these authorities itself, with its own staff. Instead, it will arrange for implementing operations to be carried out by other Federal agencies through carefully defined working agreements. In the case of activities now in operation, the Office is authorized to take over direct responsibility for all significant, identifiable programs. The Director will prepare the Federal budget for funds for all programs for which he assumes responsibility and justify this consolidated budget before Congress. He will also develop and introduce new programs where necessary and include these in the consolidated Office budget.

In many agencies, however, activities relating to some portion of the drug abuse problem may be part of some broader program where the drug abuse portion cannot be managed and funded separately by the Special Action Office. In these cases, the Special Action Office will provide policy and program guidance based on direct research and on evaluation of programs carried out by other agencies, to assist those agencies in making their programs more effective.

As part of its strategy building, the Office's determination as to which agencies should have primary responsibility for handling segments of the drug abuse problem. These determinations will offer the Federal Government an opportunity to enhance the program efforts already underway by building on their expertise, and to enhance those showing most evidence of effectiveness by allocating additional resources to them. In this way, optimum resource use can be expected. If an agency should insist on funding programs which are not considered to be of high priority, the Office would have the authority and the responsibility, to require conformance with its policy and to redirect those resources.

The Office will implement its strategy primarily through working agreements with other agencies and departments, which will set forth specific objectives to be accomplished, the resources to be allocated and the time frame within which results can be expected. The agreements will provide for systematic reporting procedures, as well as external evaluations by the Special Action Office.

The Office will also be empowered to make grants and contracts both directly to other Federal agencies, State, local, and private organizations and indirectly, through other Federal agencies. In addition, the Office will provide guidance and technical support to State, local, industry, and private programs; and will develop a national data bank that will provide statistics for use by all organizations working on drug abuse control programs. Obviously, the issue of confidentiality will

arise. We intend to work out mechanisms that will insure the utmost confidentiality.

The comprehensiveness of the Special Action Office's role in the field of drug abuse control will insure the maximum effectiveness of our drug abuse control resources. This emphasis on rehabilitating the drug user will match other emphasis being placed on law enforcement under the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, to deal with the supply of illegal drugs.

The Special Action Office will have a relatively small but highly qualified team of technical and management people. Its Director will report to the President. We envision a staff of 120 people at the end of the first year, with an executive staff numbering 10 persons, including the Director, the Deputy Director, the assistant directors, and excepted positions. The technical staff will have 65 professionals, such as doctors, psychologists, sociologists, as well as program managers, attorneys, and economists. Administrative and clerical support will be provided by 45 nonprofessionals.

No general field structure is planned for the Office because of the highly specialized and policy-oriented nature of its operation. Monitoring and oversight of programs, particularly those research programs designed to fill gaps, will require fairly heavy travel, and the support and administrative budget will reflect this. Similarly, the budget will reflect funding for contracts for software development and equipment rental in connection with the sizable information collection, analysis, and dissemination effort anticipated for the National Data Center.

The President has indicated to us all the high priority which he feels the problems of drug abuse and drug addiction hold in our Nation. He has, as a prior action to the establishment of the Special Action Office on drug abuse programs, set up a special office in the White House by Executive order pending passage of this legislation. I am now working from that office to become familiar with the present Federal efforts and programs and to begin the development and implementation of our overall strategy.

I am certain we are all aware of the magnitude of the problem. We must now move rapidly to confront the issue. I am aware that more than 100 bills dealing with drug abuse are now before the Congress. Many of these bills include innovative and sound, concepts. Many of these concepts are found in this bill. Furthermore, we have, in this bill, deliberately set ourselves a very short time limit within

66-841-72-pt 1- -13

which we must show marked progress. Every day we lose exacerbates the problem. We need the authority and funds to move ahead now. I urge the Congress to give us those tools as quickly as possible.

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you very much, Dr. Jaffe, for your statement. We will question first under the 5-minute rule and then come back, because I know there will be many questions.

I think before we start questioning, though, if you could set forth for us, as you see it, the problem that exists today, the drug abuse problem in the military, if you have had conferences with them, here at home, the extent of this problem, and if you could set this forth for us now, I think it would be helpful.

Dr. JAFFE. Well, essentially we are dealing with a range of problems. It is not merely a problem of heroin use, but it is a problem of a wide variety of citizens from varying backgrounds at varying ages using different kinds of drugs. It is neither appropriate or good strategy to assume that one can approach this very diverse set of problems with a single, pat formula. We certainly don't want to lock up the housewife who, for whatever reason, is taking too many pills. Nor, on the other hand, do we want to assume that everyone who is using illicit drugs is simply a misguided citizen. We have to have the range and the flexibility to realize and to view this problem in its full complexity. Now the problem with servicemen using different drugs is in a sense part of the wide range of problems on the national level. For the time being, some of them happen to be overseas, but many of them will soon be returning home and will be part of the problems at the national level. They will be citizens, as are those who never served.

The problem, as I see it, is one of set priorities and recognizing that this problem has more or less exploded on the scene, that our diffused Federal effort is not presently able to cope with it, and often we are going to have to say this is the critical problem. Perhaps it will be reducing the problem of heroin in the urban areas, because that may be the problem that exacts the greatest toll in misery and in crime. Other problems will not be ignored, but will be given a lower priority for the time being until we can amass the energy to come to grips with them, and the resources.

Mr. ROGERS. Are you saying, then, that heroin is the first problem to be dealt with?

Dr. JAFFE. In all the discussions I have had with people in communities and legislatures, there seems to be a consensus that that is the problem that exacts the greatest toll, among those who use the drug, and from the citizens among whom they live, both in terms of the debility, the loss of productivity, and the crimes committed in connection with the use of the drug. That doesn't mean that is our exclusive focus.

Mr. ROGERS. I understand. What is the estimated heroin-addicted population in the United States? Can you give us any estimate?

Dr. JAFFE. Yes, we can certainly talk about the varying ways that one can estimate that problem, but I should preface my remarks by saving that one of the needs that we see with high priority is that the development of the data bank which would permit us to estimate the

numbers of experimenters and, shall we say, severely dependent heroin users a national data bank. We need that.

Mr. ROGERS. I understand. Could you give us a figure now as to what the estimated population of heroin addiction is in this country? Dr. JAFFE. The best estimate we have is somewhere between 200,000 to 250,000.

Mr. ROGERS. I notice, too, that you say the Armed Forces had the problem, mainly overseas. Do you feel there is not that problem within the continental United States within the armed services?

Dr. JAFFE. Well, I think within the continental United States the problem among servicemen is probably no greater than it is among the civilian population from which they are drawn.

Mr. ROGERS.. You think there is not a heavier use within the military than there is in the civilian population?

Dr. JAFFE. That is my frank estimate of the situation. I don't think that in the continental United States that heroin is as available in, let's say, large service camps as it is in urban areas, but certainly hard data on that are not available.

Mr. ROGERS. Yes.

Finally, let me ask you this, I think it would be well to put it into context here: How do you define, or in general terms explain, the difference between the experimental or the casual user and the addict as to how much is used and how often, and how long does it take a man to become addicted to heroin?

Dr. JAFFE. Well, these are rather complex operational definitions. I can tell you that if I am having difficulty, so is the World Health Organization. They were planning a special committee this year to bring together some experts from all over the world to try to define what is a case of drug dependence, how can we create a data bank if we haven't fully defined the problem. What we can say is that people can use a drug once or twice and not become dependent. Why is it that some people will use it and then use it more and more and more until clearly there is no argument that they are heavily dependent, they have become compulsive users? Where, along that continuum from occasional use to regular, compulsive use, we would define one person as being an addict and another person as an experimenter, is again not clear.

Mr. ROGERS. What about heroin?

Dr. JAFFE. If we want to talk about physical dependence, per se, how long can you use a drug before you find that when you stop your experience withdrawal symptoms, we have to recognize that the process probably begins with the first dose. That doesn't mean that one dose makes someone dependent. It simply means that when you use the drug the body's biochemical response begins.

Now, it builds up so that with repeated use it builds up to the point where, when you stop the drug, the intensity of that response may make it very difficult for an individual to voluntarily stop. Now, then you are beginning to deal with capacity of an individual to tolerate this conflict and to tolerate this internal anxiety and distress that the cessation of the drug generates. That may range, for different individuals, from a matter of a week or 2 weeks to, for some people, several weeks. But use of a drug like heroin over a period of several weeks, and

I am talking about repeatedly, every day, makes it difficult to stop, particularly if the quality of the drug is such that high doses are being used.

Mr. ROGERS. I see.

Mr. Satterfield?

Mr. SATTERFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Dr. Jaffe, I wish to join in welcoming you here this morning. This is a problem that is of great concern to this subcommittee, and we feel that more effort ought to be directed toward what you are addressing yourself to.

I must admit that I am a little bit staggered to consider the scope and the power and authority that we are talking about in terms of this new special office. I would like to direct my attention and my remarks to your comments with respect to servicemen.

Do you feel that a serviceman who has a drug problem or an addiction who comes back to this country and is released from the service should be treated just as every other citizen? Do you feel that he ought to receive treatment as a veteran in the veterans hospital system? Dr. JAFFE. First of all, regardless of his veteran status he is a citizen, and therefore should have available to him all of the facilities that are available to civilians and we intend to make those available to all civilians.

However, I think he should also have priority until there are adequate facilities available in programs specifically designed for vet

erans.

Mr. SATTERFIELD. I ask that question primarily because I notice the power and authority in terms of planning, laying down policy direction, management, funding, and priorities in terms of veterans hospitals system under title 38 would be delegated to the office to be set up under H.R. 9264, and I am curious to know to what extent do you envision that this Office will actually make policy for the Veterans' Administration, or the veterans hospital program or medical program under title 38.

Dr. JAFFE. The policy authority of this Office is restricted to policy for drug abuse programs, and the idea here is that the veteran eventually is a citizen, and that the veterans' programs have to articulate with civilian programs, so that the wide variety of programs available can be made available to the veteran, and so that he can move back and forth between veterans' programs and civilian programs with continuity, and that there has to be this interdigestation of programs for servicemen, for veterans, for civilians so that people don't begin to fall between the cracks of our multiple agencies.

Mr. SATTERFIELD. Are you aware of the fact that the veterans' programs for servicemen, for veterans, for civilians, so that people don't pect to have 32 in operation?

Dr. JAFFE. Yes; I am aware, and the accelerated development of those additional 27 centers is part of the initiative that we have taken. Mr. SATTERFIELD. I am interested to know, and the point of my question is, to what extent would this new office plan determine policy for the Veterans' Administration, direct the operation of these drug centers and actually involve itself in the management of the VA hospitals wherein these centers are located?

« PreviousContinue »