ShadowMonkey - Just Say No to 'Just Say No'

Of Interest

Latest

Just Say No to 'Just Say No'

Written by ShadowMonkey

Tuesday, 29 August 2006

We're used to hearing a lot of very big numbers when it comes to talking about government spending. Billions here, billions there. As taxpayers we have a right to expect results from all that spending of our hard-earned tax money, don't we? Well, how about $1.2 billion dollars spent on an ineffectual advertising over the past eight years to urge America's youth to 'Just Say No' to illegal drug use?

A worthy goal on the surface, you might say. It seems very reasonable to say that it is in the public interest to reduce illegal drug use and, hopefully, the criminal activity surrounding the production and distribution of the drugs. But, again, we have a right to expect the government efforts to produce results -- and this campaign appears to have been a failure. ...perhaps just another example of throwing our tax dollars at a problem without sufficient forethought; of government using money to act in the capacity of parent; of ineffectual government spending on the scale of $1.2 billion.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office, an independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress to investigate how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars, has concluded that the $1.2 billion anti-drug advertising campaign conducted by the government since 1998 does not appear to have helped reduce drug use.

In its August 25, 2006, report entitled "ONDCP Media Campaign: Contractor's National Evaluation Did Not Find that the Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign Was Effective in Reducing Youth Drug Use," the G.A.O. states that "reports and associated documentation leads to the conclusion that... the campaign was not effective in reducing youth drug use, either during the entire period of the campaign or during the period from 2002 to 2004 when the campaign was redirected and focused on marijuana use." It further suggests that the campaign "may have promoted perceptions among exposed youth that others' drug use was normal."

Going as far as to make a recommendation on the spending aspects of this apparently failed program, the G.A.O. report includes the following: "Given that Westat’s evaluation stated the campaign did not reduce youth drug use nationally, Congress should consider limiting appropriations for the campaign, beginning in the 2007 fiscal year budget until ONDCP [Office of National Drug Control Policy] provides credible evidence of a media campaign approach that effectively prevents and curtails youth drug use."

Tom Riley, spokesman for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) says that the GAO report is "irrelevant" to his organization because it is "based on ads from 2½ years ago, and they were effective, too," according to a report in USA Today . "Drug use has been going down dramatically. Cutting the program now would imperil (its) progress," according to Riley.

Hoever, the anti-drug campaign had been criticized before. In 2003, the White House Office of Management and Budget called the campaign "non-performing" and said it had not demonstrated results.

Perhaps it's not that the government should stop trying to reduce illegal drug use. ...maybe it's that throwing money at the problem isn't the answer -- at least not money in this sort of advertising campaign. Maybe a better use for $1.2 billion would be to increase efforts to put suppliers and producers out of business, or to fund peer-based groups that can debate the related issues, or [gasp!] reduce the amount that taxpayers are shelling out in taxes to support government programs.

However the money should be spent, or refunded, or never collected in the first place, the federal government's anti-drug advertising program appears to have failed.

For now, it's Just Say No to 'Just Say No.' Thanks, G.A.O.

Resources: