[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 99 (Wednesday, July 22, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8780-S8782]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. DeWINE (for himself, Mr. Coverdell, Mr. Graham, Mr. 
        Faircloth, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Bond, Mr. Helms, Mr. Abraham, Mr. 
        Hutchinson, Mr. Allard, Mr. Frist, Mr. Mack, Mr. Murkowski, Mr. 
        Hatch, Mr. Craig, and Mr. Grassley):
  S. 2341. A bill to support enhanced drug interdiction efforts in the 
major transit countries and support a comprehensive supply eradication 
and crop substitution program in source countries; to the Committee on 
Foreign Relations


                Western hemisphere drug elimination act

 Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce 
legislation proposing a new and comprehensive strategy to deal with one 
of the central challenges facing America's young people--the plague of 
illegal drugs.
  Recently, President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich unveiled 
the latest investment in our war against illegal drug use: a $2 
billion-dollar advertising campaign to send our children a hard-hitting 
message about the life-destroying dangers of drugs.
  Anti-drug ad campaigns like this one are important. But we should 
remember that the creative minds on Madison Avenue are not our best or 
only weapon to get people off drugs. History has proven that a 
successful anti-drug strategy is balanced and comprehensive in three 
key areas: demand reduction (such as education and treatment); domestic 
law enforcement; and international supply reduction.
  Today, though, we are on the wrong side of history. Our overall drug 
strategy is neither balanced nor comprehensive. That's because 
Washington has not done its part. It has not carried out its sole 
responsibility--to reduce the illegal drug imports, either by working 
with foreign governments, or by seizing drugs or disrupting drug 
trafficking routes outside our borders.
  That is why, today, I rise to introduce this legislation. It is a 
bill that will fix our current drug strategy deficit. I, along with 
Senators Coverdell, Graham and 11 other Senators will introduce the 
``Western Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act''--a bill to support enhanced 
drug interdiction efforts in the major transit countries, and support a 
comprehensive supply eradication and crop substitution program in 
source countries.
  Mr. President, this is a $2.6 billion authorization initiative over 
three years for enhanced international eradication, interdiction and 
crop substitution efforts. Let me mention a few highlights of what this 
bill would accomplish, very specifically.
  It would improve our aircraft, maritime and radar coverage of both 
drug-source and drug-transit countries. It would do this by (1) 
authorizing funds for construction, operation and maintenance of 
additional U.S. Customs/Defense aircraft, Coast Guard cutters and 
patrol vessels, and Customs/Coast Guard ``go-fast'' boats for drug 
interdiction efforts; (2) authorizing funds to establish an airbase to 
support counter-narcotics operations in the Southern Caribbean, 
Northern South America, and the Eastern Pacific; and (3) 
authorizing funds to the Department of Defense to restore, operate, and 
maintain critical radar coverage in these regions.

  It would enhance drug-eradication and interdiction efforts in source 
countries--by authorizing funds to the Departments of State and Defense 
to provide necessary resources, equipment, training and other 
assistance needed for the support of eradication and interdiction 
programs in Bolivia, Colombia, Peru and Mexico.
  It would enhance the development of alternative crops in drug-source 
countries, by authorizing funds to the United States Agency for 
International Development to support alternative development programs 
designed to encourage farmers to substitute for narcotic producing 
crops in Bolivia, Colombia, and Peru.
  It would support international law enforcement training--by (1) 
establishing three separate international law enforcement academies 
operated by the Department of Justice, to provide training assistance 
in Latin America, Asia, and Africa; (2) establishing a training center 
for maritime law enforcement instruction, including customs-related 
ports management; and (3) authorizing funds for the promotion of law 
enforcement training and support for Caribbean, Central American and 
South American countries.
  It would enhance law enforcement interdiction operations by 
authorizing funding to the Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Coast 
Guard, and Department of Defense for the support of counter-narcotics 
operations and equipment in drug transit and source countries.
  Mr. President, as you can see, this is a very targeted and specific 
investment. And it is necessary. The budget numbers tell an alarming--
undeniable--story: In 1987, the federal government's drug control 
budget of $4.79 billion was divided as follows: 29% for demand 
reduction programs; 38% for domestic law enforcement; and 33% for 
international supply reduction. This

[[Page S8781]]

funding breakdown was the norm during the Reagan and Bush 
Administrations' war on drugs, from 1985-92.
  During that time, drug interdiction was serious business. President 
Bush even tasked the Defense Department to engage in the detection and 
monitoring of drugs in transit to the U.S. As a member of the House of 
Representatives at that time, I can recall very well the major 
commitment we made to reduce the amount of drugs going into the U.S.
  After President Clinton took office in 1993, his administration 
immediately pursued policies that upset the careful balance in drug 
funding. For example, in 1995, the federal drug control budget of $13.3 
billion was divided as follows: 35% was allocated for demand reduction 
programs; 53% for domestic law enforcement, and 12% for international 
supply reduction. Think of it--only 12% of our drug control budget was 
dedicated to stop drugs from coming to our country--down from 33% in 
1987. Though the overall drug budget increased threefold from 1987 to 
1995, the piece of the drug budget pie allocated for international and 
interdiction efforts had decreased.

  Key components of our drug interdiction strategy were slashed. For 
example, Coast Guard funding for counter-narcotics fell 32% from 1992 
to 1995. Not surprisingly, Coast Guard drug seizures dropped from 
90,335 lbs in 1991 to 28,585 lbs in 1996. In addition, interdiction no 
longer remains a priority within the Department of Defense, which 
currently ranks counter narcotics dead last in importance in its Global 
Military Force Policy.
  What were the results of these two clearly different approaches? The 
Reagan-Bush approach achieved real success. From 1988 to 1991, total 
drug use was down 13 percent. Cocaine use dropped by 35 percent. 
Marijuana use was reduced by 16 percent.
  In contrast, under the Clinton approach, since 1992 overall drug use 
among teens aged 12 to 17 rose by 70 percent. Drug-abuse related 
arrests more than doubled for minors between 1992 and 1996. Since 1992, 
there has been an overall 80 percent increase in illicit drug use among 
graduating high school seniors. Further, in 1995 number of heroin 
related emergency room admissions jumped 58% since 1992. And in the 
first half of 1995, methamphetamine related emergency room admissions 
were 321% higher compared to the first half of 1991.
  The price of drugs also decreased during this time period. For 
instance, the price of a pure heroin gram in 1992 was $1,647--and in 
February 1996 it was only $966 per gram.
  These negative effects have sent shockwaves throughout our 
communities and our homes.
  The rise of drug use is not at all surprising. With the Clinton 
administration's decline in emphasis on drug interdiction, it has 
become easier to bring drugs into the U.S. This makes drugs more 
available and more affordable. The Office of National Drug Control 
Policy reported that small ``pieces'' or ``rocks'' of crack, which once 
sold for ten to twenty dollars, are now available for three to five 
dollars.
  No question, continued investments to deal with the ``demand side'' 
of the drug situation are necessary. We have to find ways to persuade 
Americans, particularly young people, that doing drugs is wrong--that 
it destroys lives, families, schools and communities. As long as there 
is a demand for drugs, education and treatment remain essential long-
term components of our anti-drug efforts.

  Casual drug users also are influenced by price, which is why a 
balanced anti-drug strategy includes fighting drugs beyond our borders. 
The drug lords in South America are well aware that the U.S. is no 
longer pursuing a tough interdiction strategy. I have seen Coast Guard 
operations first hand, and while the Coast Guard and other agencies can 
detect and monitor drug trafficking operations, they usually stand by 
helpless because they lack necessary equipment to turn detection into 
seizures and arrests. Of the total drug air events in the Bahamas from 
April 1997 to April 1998, there was only an 8% success rate in stopping 
drug air flights that have been detected. That means over 92% got away. 
Without doubt, the drug lords can get a larger flow of drugs into the 
U.S.
  With additional resources, we can make it more difficult to import 
illegal narcotics, and drive up the cost for the drug cartels to engage 
in this illicit and immoral practice. Interdiction drives up the 
price--and drives down the purity--of cocaine on the street. Also, 
seizing or destroying a ton of cocaine outside our borders is more cost 
effective than trying to seize the same quantity of drugs at the point 
of sale.
  Mr. President, that is why I think that this bill is absolutely 
essential. The bill can get us back on the right track. I want to take 
this opportunity to acknowledge Representative Bill McCollum's tireless 
efforts and dedication to this initiative. He has shown tremendous 
leadership on anti-drug efforts.
  Mr. President, it is time to reverse the current administration's 
policy and get right with history. It is time we returned to a 
comprehensive, balanced drug control strategy that will put us back on 
a course toward ridding our schools and communities of illegal and 
destructive drugs. The evidence clearly shows that with a balanced 
strategy, we were making great progress. We significantly reduced drug 
use. For the sake of our children, it is time for us to embrace the 
lessons of history, and stop trying to escape them.
 Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I am proud to join Senator DeWine 
and my other colleagues in introducing the Western Hemisphere Drug 
Elimination Act of 1998. This bill will provide an additional $2.6 
billion over a 3-year period to implement a more comprehensive 
eradication, interdiction, and crop substitution strategy for our 
nation's counter-drug efforts.
  The bill will help the United States meet its goal of reducing the 
flow of cocaine and heroin into the U.S. by 80 percent in three years 
by combining a reduction in availability with demand reduction efforts. 
This is accomplished by providing more funding to those doing the heavy 
lifting in this fight--the Coast Guard, the Customs Service, the Drug 
Enforcement Administration, and the Department of Defense.
  The U.S. needs to focus its resources in a comprehensive way to 
protect the entire southern frontier of the United States from San 
Diego to San Juan. Previously, resources were shifted from one part of 
the country to another, alternating between those states along the 
Southwest border and the Caribbean. This created ``gates'' where drug 
smugglers could move their product without fear of U.S. interdiction. 
This bill will provide the necessary resources to eliminate the chinks 
from the anti-drug fence, so that we do not have to choose between 
stopping drug smuggling in one area of the country or another.
  On June 22 of this year, I chaired a field hearing in Miami on behalf 
of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control. The purpose 
was to examine the flow of drugs into the United States through the 
Caribbean into Florida. I wanted to gain a clearer picture of the 
current patterns of narcotics trafficking from the Southwest border 
back to the Caribbean and South Florida, obtain a better understanding 
for what the United States needs to do to increase our anti-drug 
effectiveness, and improve our efforts to stem this flow which 
threatens our youth. We held the hearing on the deck of a U.S. Coast 
Guard Medium Endurance Cutter named the Valiant, which had just 
returned from a seven week counter-narcotics patrol in the Caribbean.
  We selected the Coast Guard venue to underscore a number of very 
important realities in the United States' current strategy to fight the 
drug war. One of our principal interdiction forces--the United States 
Coast Guard--is conducting its mission on vessels such as the Valiant, 
a ship that is more than 30 years old, with an equally antiquated 
surface search radar. The Coast Guard needs new ships and newer radars. 
As I approached the Valiant, I noticed that there were a number of 
weapons systems on board, including two .50 caliber machine guns and a 
25mm chain gun. These weapons reminded me that this effort is indeed a 
war. Despite the words of some officials who prefer not to characterize 
the effort as such, it is indeed. We are fighting a well-organized, 
well-financed, and doggedly determined enemy whose objective is to 
inundate our nation with a chemical weapon that demeans, degrades, and 
defeats the most precious asset we have--our people. What more do we

[[Page S8782]]

need to know to energize ourselves to fight back?
  The individuals who testified at the field hearing painted a very 
disturbing picture. Consider the following facts:
  The United States Southern Command cannot maintain adequate radar and 
airborne early warning coverage of the region or sustain the right 
number of tracker aircraft to perform its mission to provide counter-
drug support to states in South America and the Caribbean.
  The Joint Interagency Task Force East, located in Key West, Florida, 
does not know the extent of drug smuggling in the Eastern Pacific 
because the Department of Defense has not provided the necessary assets 
to conduct its Detection & Monitoring mission.
  The Coast Guard had to end a very successful counter-narcotics 
operation in the Caribbean, OPERATION FRONTIER LANCE, because of a lack 
of funding.
  The United States Customs Service is limited in its ability to 
capture drug runners in go-fast boats because of a lack of funds to 
procure newer and faster boats, as well as a lack of personnel to 
adequately maintain those go-fast boats currently in service due to 
lack of funding.
  The Drug Enforcement Administration lacks sufficient special agents 
in the Caribbean, as well as accompanying administrative and 
intelligence personnel, because the DEA does not have sufficient funds 
to hire and retain these individuals.
  The South Florida High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area--responsible 
for coordinating and integrating federal, state, and local law 
enforcement agencies' counter-drug efforts--is constrained in its 
ability to conduct investigations by paying overtime salaries because 
of the lack of funding.
  If there is a trend underlying all these problems, it is the lack of 
funds being made available to those agencies responsible for performing 
the supply reduction component of the drug war. By adding resources to 
the supply side of the drug war--more planes, helicopters, radars, 
personnel, and boats--we will eliminate the need to constantly shift 
resources from one area of the country to another. Drug smugglers will 
no longer be able to exploit our weaknesses, such as the lack of Coast 
Guard, Customs, and DEA resources in the Caribbean. South Florida will 
no longer be a gate through which drug smugglers have entry into the 
United States.
  Those responsible for coordinating the national drug control strategy 
say that reducing our own demand for drugs is tremendously important. I 
could not agree more. That is why I was an original co-sponsor of the 
Drug Free Communities Act, and why I took steps to create and fund the 
Central Florida High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area. But addressing 
our demand for drugs is only one part of the solution, and that 
reduction will take time. We must take strong steps to interrupt the 
supply side of the equation as well. And quite frankly, we are not 
doing as much on the supply side as we should, or as much as we can.
  I am committed to seeing that more is done, and this legislation goes 
a long way towards achieving our goals. By restoring the support we 
provide to eradication and interdiction, I believe we can make a 
difference in this war, and the time to make that difference is 
now.
                                 ______