« PreviousContinue »
ucts. It is of increasing concern that the advertisements are targeting minority populations, particularly youth.
Ultimately the decision to use or not to use drugs, alcohol and tobacco is made by the individual. Thus it is important to provide appealing alternatives to these substances.
The issue of billboard advertising arose throughout the course of the committee's investigation. In Detroit, 52 percent of the 4,144 billboards advertise alcohol and tobacco products.27 Impressionable youth are faced with social pressures associated with drinking and smoking. As "gateway” drugs, a casual attitude toward “legal” drugs is fostered; neither fear nor concern about illicit drugs such as crack cocaine is instilled. Billboard advertising of alcohol and to bacco products increasingly is focused near poor neighborhoods and schools. In Chicago, Father Pfleger noted that “Within a 10 block radius of St. Sabina School, an African American school, there are 118 billboards advertising alcohol and tobacco. Within a 10 block radius of St. Thomas More School, an all white school, there were 3." 28
The belief that there is an excessive proliferation of tobacco and liquor promotion in communities of color as a matter of economics is not shared by the industries, which claim that their marketing approaches do not discriminate by community.
While communities are increasingly voicing concern about the saturation of alcohol and tobacco advertising in primarily African American and Hispanic neighborhoods, many organizations, including newspapers and professional civic associations in these communities, rely on corporate contributions from the alcohol and tobacco industry.
A 1989 study conducted by Simmons Market Research Bureau found that 34 percent of African Americans smoke, compared with 28 percent of white people and 27 percent of Hispanics. Sixty-four percent of white people drink alcohol as compared with 60 percent of African Americans and 63 percent of Hispanic people. According to Matthew Myers, director of the Coalition on Smoking or Health, tobacco takes it greatest toll in the communities of color, yet until recently, very few members of these communities have spoken out vociferously. Dr. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, has spoken out on minority health issues and the effects of tobacco use, but his concerns have not triggered administration resources to address the escalation of smoking-related diseases suffered by the African American community. Neither have his comments pressured companies to limit the concentrated advertising in minority communities.
The barrage of advertising increases acceptance which contradicts public health messages and prevention efforts. One private sector media effort to dispel the positive images of alcohol, tobacco and substances of abuse is the Media-Advertising Partnership for a Drug Free America. With the help of OSAP and other federal entities working on substance abuse, this private sector organization, comprised of a coalition of volunteers, seeks to create, produce and
27 Hearings before the Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security and the Subcommittee on Government Information, Justice, and Agriculture, December 14, 1989, pp. 48-49.
28 Pfleger, op. cit., p. 4.
35-911 0 - 90 - 2
show anti-drug messages in all American media. According to the Media-Advertising Partnership, which is overseen by a Management Board comprised of key advertising, marketing and media executives, its mission is to change attitudes toward illegal drug use, specifically marijuana, cocaine and crack, and thereby change be havior and reduce demand.
While the ads have appeared across the country and in many languages, representatives from communities of color claim that they were not as effective as originally presumed since communities targeted had very little input regarding content, focus and symbolism. The types of substances advertised in the media frequently do not relate to the particular substance abuse problems the communities are experiencing, and featured role models are not accepted by the particular community.
Another area of increasing concern is the way in which the drug problem is depicted by the news media in the United States. Witnesses pointed out that poor urban communities were much maligned by reports that portray the drug epidemic as exclusively an urban poor problem involving African Americans and Hispanics. Critics believe that the media has a responsibility to report on the many facets of the drug culture, since it is a heterogeneous problem facing all Americans. 4. Prevention programming
For the purposes of this report, the focus is on the prevention efforts of the two federal entities with the largest budgets charged with carrying out the majority of prevention-related work, the Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration (ADAMHA) of the Department of Health and Human Services of which the Office of Substance Abuse Prevention (OSAP) is part; and the Department of Education.
It should be noted that 19 federal entities have budgets to carry out substance abuse prevention efforts, including: the Office of the National Drug Control Strategy; Special Forfeiture Fund; the Alco hol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration; the Centers for Disease Control; Human Development Services; Family Support Administration; Department of Defense; Department of Education; Department of Housing and Urban Development; Department of Labor; Bureau of Land Management; National Park Service; Bureau of Indian Affairs; Office of Territorial and International Affairs; ACTION; Agency for International Development; Drug Enforcement Agency; Office of Justice Programs; and, Federal Aviation Administration.
Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration The Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration (ADAMHA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) conducts prevention-related services and research out of its three institutes, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), and the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH); and out of the Office of Substance Abuse Prevention (OSAP).
National Institute on Drug Abuse According to testimony before the committee, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) conducts prevention research to improve the ability to prevent drug abuse. The prevention research program includes: (1) etiological research to identify relevant biologic, behavioral, and social precursors to drug use and abuse and (2) intervention research to test, under controlled conditions the efficacy of theory-based prevention interventions.
Research conducted by NIDA shows that drug prevention can result in meaningful changes in perception of drug-related harm, social disapproval of use, anti-drug attitudes, improved social skills, and decline in use for those exposed to comprehensive drug prevention programs and drug-free social norms. NIDA's work serves as a key source of information for the Office of Substance Abuse Prevention in the development of early intervention and prevention strategies.
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) conducts and sponsors extramural research programs concerned with the reduction of alcohol-related problems. This research includes: (1) a Prevention Research Branch that presents new research agendas and monitors more than 75 investigator-initiated grants; and (2) a Prevention Research Center in Berkeley, California that focuses on environmental interventions.
The research underway includes: the effects of the price and availability of alcoholic beverages on alcohol problems and their reduction; the consequences of beverage advertising and counter advertising; worksite strategies to prevent alcohol problems and identify them in their early stages; the effectiveness of youth-oriented prevention programs in schools and the community; interventions targeted toward special populations including ethnic populations, women and the elderly; and, strategies that can be implemented by primary care physicians and other health professionals.
National Institute on Mental Health The National Institute on Mental Health (NIMH) conducts research and prevention activities related to mental health issues, some of which indirectly relate to, and effect, substance abuse prevention efforts. Of the three institutes under ADAMHA, NIMH is least involved with substance abuse prevention efforts.
Office of Substance Abuse Prevention The Office of Substance Abuse Prevention (OSAP) was created by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 as part of the Office of the Administrator of ADAMHA in response to the growing concern about drug and alcohol abuse problems in the United States, to promote prevention strategies and provide the public with information about substance abuse, and to take responsibility for operation of the National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information, provide community technical assistance contracts, and manage a grant program for high risk youth.
OSAP works primarily with outside sources, and with NIDA and NIAAA to translate basic and clinical research findings into information and techniques to be used in the early intervention and prevention of substance abuse in community settings. More than any other prevention-related federal entity, OSAP has become the most responsive player in developing community-based prevention programming strategies.
The Anti-Drug Act of 1988 significantly expanded the scope of OSAP by establishing it as a separate entity along-side NIDA, NIAAA and NIMA within ADAMHA, increasing its responsibilities to include four new programs, and broadening its mandate to include a greater community-wide focus. The four programs are: Model Demonstrations for Pregnant and Post Partum Women and Their Infants; Community Youth Activity; Conference Grants; and Training
The Fiscal Year 1990 appropriation added three more programs including the Community Partnership Demonstration; Communication Grants; and, the National Evaluation of Prevention and Education Approaches to Reduce Drug Abuse.
Dr. Elaine Johnson is the Associate Administrator for Prevention in ADAMHA and Director of OSAP. She is responsible for promoting the prevention-related programs of ADAMHA's Institutes and for coordinating such programs among the Institutes and other public and private entities. Dr. Johnson has established credibility at the community level for Federal Government prevention efforts.
While the NIAAA conducts alcohol-related prevention activities, it does not have a budget for National Drug Control Strategy activities since alcohol and alcoholism problems are not part of the Administration's formal drug control strategy. Similarly, NIMH indirectly provides substance abuse prevention information and does not receive drug strategy funds.
Department of Education The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-570) was amended by P.L. 100-297, the Hawkins/Stafford Elementary and Secondary School Improvement Amendments of 1988 and reenacted as Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). Prevention programming in The Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act Amendments of 1989 (P.L. 101-226) and Title V of ESEA as amended by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 are the responsibility of the Department of Education.
According to the Department of Education, they administer the following the major programs:
(1) State and Local Grants Program is a formula grant program which allocates funds to states taking into account school-age population and Chapter 1 funding. Each state's allocation is divided between the state educational agency and the Office of the Governor. At least 90 percent of the funds must be allocated to local educational agencies to improve anti-drug abuse education, prevention, early intervention, and rehabilitation referral programs. The Governor of each state provides financial support for anti-drug abuse efforts to parents groups, community-based organizations or other public or private non
profit entities. No less than 50 percent of the Governor's funds must be used for programs benefiting high-risk youth.
(2) Audiovisual Grants Program funds were awarded in 1987 to be developed and distributed to elementary and secondary schools for drug abuse education and prevention activities. These are close-captioned videotapes with brief teacher guides, and were first distributed to all school districts for the 1988-89 school year. Several of the tapes targeting elementary and junior high school students are available in Spanish.
(3) Discretionary Grants for Institutions of Higher Education are the responsibility of the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) and the Drug-Free Schools and Communities staff in the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE). FIPSE has distributed 297 grants since Fiscal Year 1987 to educational institutions to develop, operate, implement, and improve drug education and prevention programs for students enrolled in these schools. OESE is responsible for grants distribution to support demonstration programs in drug and alcohol abuse education and prevention for use in elementary and secondary schools.
(4) Programs for Indian Youth are administered under a Memorandum of Understanding between the Departments of Education and Interior to provide elementary and secondary schools on reservations operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs with anti-alcohol and drug abuse education and prevention services.
(5) Programs for Native Hawaiians are organizations serving Hawaiian natives designated by the Governor to receive funds for drug prevention and education activities.
(6) Regional Centers Program: In 1987, the department awarded five cooperative agreements for three years to fulfill the requirements of the Act, authorizing the department to support regional centers to: train school teams to assess and combat drug and alcohol abuse problems; assist state educational agencies in coordinating and strengthening alcohol and drug abuse education and prevention programs; assist local educational agencies and institutions of higher education in developing training programs for educational personnel; and, evaluate and disseminate information on effective substance abuse, education prevention programs and strategies. In the Fall of 1990, five additional centers will be awarded funds to collect and disseminate information on regional center activities and model alcohol and drug education and prevention activities, provide technical assistance to the centers, and coordinate and support national workshops and conferences.
(7) Discretionary School and Personnel Training Grants Program provides financial assistance to state educational agencies, local educational agencies, and institutions of higher education to establish, expand, or enhance programs and activities for the training of teachers, administrators, guidance counselors, and other school personnel on drug and alcohol abuse education and prevention. Programs are coordinated through the state agency for higher education or state educational agency