From the Encyclopedia Americana,  "Muskie, Edmund S."

Domestic Policies
    Drugs-
    Not since Civil Rights had the Nation been so polarized on a single issue.  Although on foreign policy, the country was generally united behind the idea of fighting the drug supply and preventing it from
entering the country, the country was split on what to do at home.  Treating drug use as a crime or as a disease was the major difference between the two sides.
    With the support of both the President and Congress, Operation Layfette was launched in coperation of the French government.  In the fall of 1977, a series of drug busts aimed at the "French Connection,"
a Marseilles-based heroin industry, were conducted.  At the same time, the Customs Department stepted up its border patrol between Mexico and America.  There was a clear drop in the supply of heroin in America following these actions.
    Another program of the War on Drugs was the Swords to Plowshares program that helped Mexico attack opium producers operating out of Mexico.  Using old equipment from Vietnam and working with the US Military, Mexico began using Agent Orange as a way to destroy opium fields before they were harvested and used to make drugs.  The fact that alternative sources of drugs continued to be created was a testament to the demand for drugs in America.
    The Drug Czar of Muskie's Administration, Dr. Jerome Jaffe, worked endlessly to try to get Congress to focus on treatment, isntead of legal enforcement, as the way to end the drug epidemic.  Parent groups,
however, were very vocal in their demands for a hard line against marijuana use.  Dr. Jaffe found himself being called to take a hard line agaisnt marijuana, a drug he viewed has mostly harmless, while the
public ignored the real threats of heroin and cocaine.
    Under pressure from Republicans and conservative Democrats, President Muskie annouced the creation of YADU (Youths Against Drug Use) to educate children about the dangers of marijuana and provide more funding for policing of public schools for drugs.  Liberal opponents, including Senator Moynihan, opposed this policy that focused on white, middle class school children at the expense of the decaying inner cities where drug use was seen as a root cause of crime.

From "Frontline," an interview with Dr. Jerome Jaffe,

What kind of drug treatment did you pioneer in Chicago? How was it different to what had been done before?
    What we were trying to show was that there wasn't any single best road to recovery from addiction, but that many treatments could work well and synergistically together. We had methadone programs, we
had detoxification programs, and therapeutic communities. We even had a residential program for people on methadone, where they could detoxify.

What was the science of addiction and treatment at that point?
    It was better than it was ten years before, and nowhere near as well established as it is today. There was evidence that methadone treatment was effective. There were some good controlled studies. There was only a belief in the effectiveness of therapeutic communities. The relapse rates for those who stayed for a reasonable period of time were low. But we didn't expect much of detoxification, and we didn't get much from detoxification. The real issue was whether there were some kinds of people who were better suited to one rather than the other. Which ones worked best in the long run? Which did people prefer? I am not certain that anybody can say with absolute certainty, even today, who ought to go into which kind of program.

Were you seeing a relationship between treatment and criminal behavior?
    Lots of the people that we began treating had histories of arrests, and had been in jail. When we did some of the studies on what was happening after treatment, there was a significant reduction in those
kinds of behaviors. But totally apart from what we saw statistically, I knew these people personally. I knew their families. And you could see that their lives were dramatically different when they went into
treatment.

What must we do nationally to treat the drug epidemic?
    What is needed is a program that takes what we did in Chicago, and do it on a national scale.  Given the extent of heroin addiction, methadone treatment should not be considered a small research project.
It is not just an experiment, and it ought to be made more widely available. People are waiting for treatment, and it could have a real benefit for society. At this time, there is very, very little in the way
of treatment support.

From "The Fix" by Michael Massing

    The Muskie Administration was faced with the problem that the parental groups wanted to focus on marijuana, which they saw as a gateway drug, and ignore basic problems with school children such as
alcohol.  In 1978, 72.1 percent of all seniors polled said they had a drink in the past month, nearly double the number that had had a joint. In addition, 40.3 percent said they had taking part in binge drinking
(five or more drinks in one sitting) over the past two weeks.  That was nearly four times the number who had smoked pot daily.  And by all the statistics available, young beer drinkers were far more likely than pot smokers to get into fights, smash up their cars, and engade in casual sex.

From the Encyclopedia Americana,  "Muskie, Edmund S."

Domestic Policies
    Drugs-
    Under the Jaffe code, the unwritten code of conduct for the Special Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention, the focus of the federal ant-drug policy was to deal exclusively with demand-side solutions.
Originally the federeal anti-drug policy would be split 33% going to law enforcement by the Customs Department and other organizations, and 67% going to treating demand.  After battles with Congress however, the budget was changed to be an even 50-50 between law enforcement and treatment.
    Proposals were made by Dr. Jaffe and others to decriminilize marijuana, and then regulate it as alcohol and tobacco were regulated. Parential organizations rallied against this, using false science to show the dangers of marijuana.  Despite the fact that the scientific community supported Dr. Jaffe's stance on the actual dangers of marijuana, parents who had never graduated from high school would be leading the movement against marijuana deciminlization.
    When the administration began to focus on the spreading heroin epidemic, the parential organizations once again rallied against them. Despite evidence that heroin abuse was a root cause of crimes in the
city, while casual marijuana users were less dangerous than people who abused alcohol, the parents saw the administration's focus on heroin as avoiding the topic of marijuana.
    Many conservative Republicans and Democrats opposed the administration for what they saw as a soft line on marijuana.  At the same time, moderate and liberal Democrats who represented areas with a
large suburban vote found themselves being attacked with letters urging them to focus on marijuana.  After the 1978 midterm elections resulted in narrowing the Democrat's margin of rule in the House, Congress was forced to focus on the parential groups' demands for a hard line on marijuana.
    But treatment continued, with the heavy support of President Muskie.  Using Washington DC as a test area, the results were amazing. Originally the crime capital of America, the treatment programs under
Dr. Jaffe reduced crime at a spectacular rate.  In Detroit, Chicago, New York, and other cities that were part of the treatment program, the decrease in crime was similar.  Although worried that the parential
groups were focusing on the wrong drug, Dr. Jaffe was satisifed that heroin demand was going down in America, as was crime.

Back to Part I.

To Part III.

Back to the Main Page.