[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 64 (Thursday, May 15, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4620-S4621]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                KIDS III

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I have spoken many times in recent 
months on my concerns for the growing threat to our kids from drug use. 
All of our early warning systems are sounding the alarm. All our major 
national reviews of drug trends indicate the emerging pattern. What 
they show is that month by month, day by day, minute by minute, drug 
use among our young people is on the rise. They also make clear that 
attitudes among young people about the dangers of drugs are changing--
for the worse. More and more kids, some as young as 10 and 11, are 
seeing drug use as OK, as no big deal.
  Let's stop for a minute and reflect on just what these facts mean. 
For those of us who remember how the last drug epidemic in this country 
got started, the present trend is truly disturbing. Think for a moment 
on what happened and how it happened. In the late 1970's and early 
1980's, we saw the streets of our inner cities become battlegrounds. We 
saw many of our communities, our schools our public and private spaces 
overwhelmed with violence, addiction, and abuse. We saw families 
destroyed and individual lives shattered. The problem became so serious 
that the public demanded action. The Congress responded with 
comprehensive drug legislation in 1986 and 1988. We supported massive 
increases in public funding to fight back. We still do. To the tune of 
some $16 billion annually at the Federal level alone.
  That problem, the one we spend all this money on, began with our 
kids. It began because we as a country allowed people to sell us on the 
idea that drugs were OK. We bought the idea that individuals could use 
dangerous drugs responsibly.
  The consequence was the drug epidemic of the 1970's and 1980's. An 
epidemic whose long-term effects we are still coping with. Let's remind 
ourselves who the principal audience was that was listening to all the 
talk about responsible drug use. It was kids. It was the baby boom 
generation in their teens who heard the message and took it to heart. 
It was a generation of young people who bought the message. It did not 
take them long to translate the idea that they could use drugs 
responsibility into the notion that they had a responsibility to use 
drugs.
  As a result, today, a large percentage of baby boomers have tried 
drugs. Many of those are today's drug addicts and dealers. Many of them 
are today's parents who feel disarmed in talking to their own kids 
about drug use.
  Today, we are on the verge of making the same mistake again. After 
years of progress in reducing drug use among kids, it is this very 
population that is at risk. Once again, we are seeing the glorification 
of drug use. Increasingly the music our kids are listening to conveys a 
drugs-are-okay message. The normalization of drug use is creeping back 
into movies, advertising, and TV. And who do you think is listening? 
The answer is in the numbers.
  Teenage drug use is now in its fifth year of increases. And the age 
of onset of use is dropping. Our last epidemic started with 16 and 17 
year olds. Today's ``at-risk'' population, the age of onset, is 12 and 
13 year olds.
  One of the major reasons for this is that we have lost our message. 
We have in recent years been inconsistent. And, we are seeing a more 
sophisticated effort by some to once again promote the idea that drug 
use is okay. And they are targeting our young people.
  Nothing brings this home better than an item in the Washington Post 
on 27 April.
  The Sunday's Outlook section had a piece by a young woman in a New 
York City high school. She wrote about a recent drug lecture in her 
health science class. The article, entitled ``Lessons You Didn't Mean 
to Teach Us,'' is arresting. I invite all my colleagues to read the 
piece. I ask unanimous consent that the article be printed in the 
Record at the conclusion or of my remarks.
  The Article official without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See Exhibit.)
  Mr. GRASSLEY. The article is based on a letter this young woman wrote 
to her teacher. She felt compelled to write following a lecture to her 
class by what was billed as a former drug addict. As she says, she 
expected to hear about the dangers of drug use. What she and the class 
got, however, was very different.
  In this case, a very clean-cut looking young man, identified as a 
former addict, spoke. While the teacher was present, the speaker 
evidently did talk about the problems of his personal drug use. Once 
the teacher left the room, though, the message changed. Instead of an 
anti-message, the lecture became a mini-course on drugs, drug use, and 
how to make a killing selling drugs. Among the things the speaker 
passed on was a recipe for a stronger form of cocaine. The speaker 
extolled the virtues of being stoned. He ``raved'' about the incredible 
amounts of money to be made peddling drugs. He left the class with the 
advice that since no one could drug test for alcohol, that it was okay 
to drink.
  The teacher in this particular class, based on negative feedback, has 
decided not to leave classes alone with future guest speakers. 
Unfortunately, as the young woman who wrote about this incident notes, 
the damage is done.
  Mr. President, if you, or any of my colleagues, have not yet read 
this letter, I encourage you to do so. The story that it tells is very 
poignant, and very disturbing. We know that there is a growing 
acceptance of drug use among our children. We can see the reports and 
the story they tell. But what we don't always appreciate is why.
  As this letter makes clear, the drugs-are-okay message is back. I 
would hope that this lecture by this individual was an accident and a 
one-time occurrence. But I am concerned that it is representative of a 
growing effort to influence the young. His talk apparently

[[Page S4621]]

had everything but free samples. As the author of this letter tells us, 
``. . . the way in which he spoke of drugs made them seem appealing and 
beneficial.'' This type of message is not isolated.
  From music to videos to movies and advertisement, we are seeing 
efforts once again to glamorize drugs. We have seen initiatives in 
several states to push drug legalization under various disguises. Just 
recently a micro-brewery in Maryland has begun to market a beer made 
with marijuana seeds under the title ``Hempen.''
  Not too long ago some of our major fashion industry folks began to 
use models with the ``Heroin Chic'' look. We are seeing opinion leaders 
and members of our cultural elite portray drug use as simply a personal 
choice that is harmless and benign. Many of these individuals act as if 
the only issue is for responsible adults to decide for themselves. They 
speak as if it is only adults that we need to think about. This, 
however, is not in fact the case.
  If you do not believe this, talk to parents. Talk to teachers. Talk 
to the health and law enforcement professionals who daily see the 
consequences. Visit the emergency room of your local hospital and talk 
to the doctors and nurses who see every day the effects of drug use.
  Go to a treatment center and sit and talk to some of the patients, 
listen to their stories of how drug use has destroyed their lives, 
their families.
  But most important, listen to what kids are telling us about what is 
happening in their schools. To their friends. Ask them where they get 
their information, and who they listen to. If this letter tells us 
anything, it is that we must listen to our kids, if for no other reason 
so we know whom they are listening to. Above all, we need to do a 
better job at delivering a clear, consistent, no-use message to our 
kids.
  As we move into the appropriations cycle, we need to keep that need 
firmly in mind. We cannot repeat the mistake that we made in the 1960's 
and 1970's. Last time we had a drug epidemic we could claim ignorance. 
We don't have any excuses if we let it happen again.

                               Exhibit 1

                  Lessons You Didn't Mean To Teach Us

       After a former drug abuser came to speak to four 10th-grade 
     health classes at a suburban New York City high school, 16-
     year-old Victoria Slade sent this letter anonymously to her 
     teacher. The teacher subsequently told the classes that, 
     because of negative feedback, she would not leave guest 
     speakers alone with students. Slade has since told the 
     teacher that the letter was from her. It is being reprinted 
     with Slade's permission.
       I am a student in one of your health classes this semester. 
     As a transfer student from a very small private school, I am 
     daily finding out shocking things about the various actions 
     and addictions of my peers. I am currently drug-free, 
     alcohol-free, pot-free, smoke-free, etc. The solid background 
     I received from my previous school ensures that I will remain 
     thus, but I am extremely concerned about my classmates, many 
     of whom I fear are already trying drugs and alcohol. For this 
     reason, I was glad when you announced that the surprise guest 
     speaker was someone who had been addicted to cocaine and 
     marijuana. I expected that seeing what happens to you when 
     you get into drugs would make many students reconsider what 
     they were doing. However, I was sadly mistaken in this 
     assumption.
       The guest speaker entered as a well-dressed, good-looking 
     individual. He was relatively well-spoken and complemented 
     his serious discussion with occasional light humor. He was 
     described as a good student who got into trouble and was 
     saved by his loving teachers. In our eyes, he became the 
     victim of a corrupt police force and government. Soon 
     forgotten was the fact that he got himself into this trouble 
     through the sale and consumption of illegal substances. While 
     you were present in the room, the young man acted in 
     accordance with your wishes: we could relate to him, and so 
     we listened attentively to the important lesson he was 
     teaching us.
       However, once you left the room, this tragic figure opened 
     with the line: ``So, do you guys have any questions? I can 
     tell you anything you want to know about drugs.'' He 
     continued in the same manner, describing the different 
     effects of different drugs: which were best, which made you 
     able to concentrate better, how cocaine kept him awake so he 
     could study. When asked if you could remember what you 
     studied the next day, he responded with an emphatic 
     affirmative. He mentioned that if you studied while under the 
     influence of marijuana, you wouldn't do well on the test 
     unless you were high again while taking it, in which case 
     you would perform to the best of your ability. His 
     explanation for this phenomenon was that you are on a 
     different level of consciousness while high. Furthermore, 
     he assured us that being high on marijuana has no effect 
     on your ability to drive, as your reaction time is not 
     altered by the drug. He described the various types of 
     Ecstasy, explaining that he took the 70-percent drug-
     content one once and became very ill. However, he soon 
     canceled this out by describing the type with 30 percent 
     drug content as ``nice.'' Also, he gave us a recipe for a 
     different, stronger form of cocaine.
       The pleasing physical effect of drugs was not the sole 
     topic of conversation. At one point, someone asked him why he 
     would get into drugs if he was doing well in school and 
     getting good grades. This question led him into a 10-minute 
     exaltation of selling drugs for a living. He raved about the 
     incredible amounts of money he made, mentioning more than 
     twice the fact that he had four nice cars. We were all 
     impressed when he said that he made over $500,000 in just 
     four years of selling drugs. I's sure that those of us who 
     work were thinking contendedly--of our five-dollar-an-hour 
     jobs cleaning the toilets and places like McDonald's and 
     Boston Market.
       Our new role model summed up his report on the world of 
     drugs by telling us that he was still smoking weed until just 
     a few days before. He said he wanted to smoke as much as he 
     could before he had to be clean for the Navy drug test. Also, 
     he informed us that if he had not been caught, he would 
     definitely still be using and dealing drugs now. One of his 
     final bits of advice was that they couldn't screen you for 
     alcohol, so it is okay to drink.
       There were many other appalling statements made by this 
     gentleman which quite disturbed me. As I mentioned earlier, 
     many students at this school are into drugs and alcohol. I 
     think that the idea behind this visit was good: We could live 
     vicariously through this young man, whose life is (or should 
     be) all but destroyed because of drugs. However, the way in 
     which he spoke of drugs made them seem appealing and 
     beneficial. It upsets me to think of how many classes of 
     impressionable youths were influenced by this man--how many 
     minds were made up by his wonderful tale. I hope that you do 
     not promote future visits with this particular guest speaker 
     and thank you for your attention.
           Sincerely,
     A Concerned Student.

                          ____________________