The National Methamphetamine
Drug Conference
Keynote Dinner Address
Janet Reno
United States Attorney General
Since I came to Washington, one of the finest events that happened is General McCaffrey becoming the drug czar. He has real energy, common sense, and an ability to bring people together to address the challenge of drug abuse. It is a great pleasure to work with him. Senator Kerrey and Governor Nelson, it is wonderful to return to Nebraska. This is my third trip to a state with leaders dedicated to do something to address drug problems before they become too complicated and cost much money and tragedy. Tom Monaghan is the United States Attorney for Nebraska, and it is a great privilege and pleasure to serve with you. I appreciate your outstanding work for the Department of Justice.
Attorney General Janet Reno speaks about the importance of partnership among federal, state and local officials. |
Tonight, I want to explain what we have done and what we should do to further address the methamphetamine problem. Let us first reflect upon the past. In 1985, we noticed a significant increase in cases coming into the criminal justice system in Dade County. We saw an increase in violence, and we did not know what was happening. We began to hear about crack, but we still did not know what was happening. We slowly began to recognize the connection between the two, but it was too late. I watched crack tear up neighborhoods. I watched violence destroy lives. I watched both cause terrible misery and tragedy in families. I watched the court systems become overwhelmed with crack cases. So when I first heard about methamphetamine, I directed the Department of Justice to work with state and local law enforcement to create a straightforward plan that would keep us ahead of the problem.
Tom Constantine, the outstanding administrator of DEA, suggested we bring state and local law enforcement into the decision-making process because they are on the front line. We put together a strategy based on a partnership in law enforcement with the federal, state and local officers across the country, working together with two-way communication that permits the full exchange of information. The law enforcement strategy permits us to determine who can best handle the case to rid drugs in that community and not worry about turf or who takes credit. Resolving drug problems like crack or methamphetamine, however, cannot be done just community by community. We must approach the problem from a regional and national perspective as well. Key to this strategy is starting with a prevention plan that forms a partnership among law enforcement, treatment and prevention specialists.
But what does prevention mean? I am a child advocate because I read too many pre-sentence evaluations of young people I had convicted for drug abuse. I saw points in their lives where someone could have intervened and made a difference. Whether it is crack, methamphetamine, or alcohol, we must make an investment in the lives of our children if we are going to be serious about prevention. This requires more than telling our young people not to use drugs. We must present our young people with facts and a better understanding of the issue because they are very intelligent. It has been revealing and gratifying to me to meet those people who know how to communicate with young people and who are developing the best prevention strategies and program content. They can truly educate our youth about what drugs can do and why they should not use them.
For a long time, it has bothered me that there is a waiting list for treatment in this country. People are seeking treatment, whether it is for methamphetamine or any other substance of abuse. They want to be treated but are wasting away on a waiting list, in danger of using the drug again. We must develop the capacity to treat addicts in this county as we treat for other illnesses, and this will require treatment specialists to work with other providers to develop the most cost-effective means for doing so. Treatment could include long hospitalizations, or it may mean less expensive drop-in centers. We must find the best, most cost-effective way of treatment rehabilitation.
We must educate this nation that, if someone fails treatment once, it does not mean we necessarily give up. If somebody has cancer and has a recurrence, we do not give up. We must adopt the same philosophy with respect to treatment because we can ultimately prevail if we keep trying in a large number of cases. There are still going to be people who break the law, get caught with drugs, and get arrested. But it is that arrest that can be so important in their rehabilitation. The shock of hearing a police officer advising of their rights or of hearing the jail door lock behind them often precipitates these people into treatment. I went to see some of my clients who were graduates from addiction treatment programs. Many of them got there because of an arrest and because of the fear of what would happen next. That is how we came to design the drug court. It takes many different forms across this country, and it has to be tailored for different substances—methamphetamine in one instance, crack in another—but drug court is an effective carrot-and-stick approach to reducing drug abuse.
We need to expand the concept of drug court, not only to the first offenders charged with possession of a small amount, but to those who are in prison—and who should be in prison—but who are coming out. We must develop a philosophy that says, "If you get yourself cleaned up, and work with us in job training and placement, then we will get you out in an orderly, graduated way. But you are going to be supervised and, if you mess up, you are going to back to prison." We can reform many lives, but we need everyone in this room working to help think through this idea.
We have people who deal in methamphetamine and who kill. These
people—traffickers, major dealers, large-scale distributors—should be put in jail for a long, long time, and that is what my business is about: To enforce and target the major distributors and the people who deal in this misery.
Yet, what else needs to be done? We need to develop and execute a national, comprehensive plan for targeting, prosecuting, convicting, and sentencing rogue chemical companies that supply the precursor drugs in every state across this country. Judging by comments I have heard here tonight, this entire conference has been a wonderful opportunity for people to learn about aspects of the problem. This type of conference can make such a difference in the long-range solution.
Training is essential in every aspect surrounding methamphetamine. We must train federal prosecutors who may not know the distribution issues. We must train DEA and FBI agents, and we have to do more for the state and local law enforcement. These are real heroes, quite frankly. They are on the front lines on so many different issues. They may catch a robber one night, and the next night stumble upon a lab. They are protecting us, and we must provide them with training they need to protect themselves and to do the job properly.
There are a number of initiatives under way, but we must do more. What can we do to provide better support, training and assistance for state and local law enforcement, for laboratory assistants and experts? What can we do to provide the technical expertise necessary to ensure safe laboratory takedowns? How can we better train state chemists and forensic scientists on the issues they face under cross-examination? I really appreciate the opportunity to hear from you what we can do to improve training.
One of the characteristics General McCaffrey and I share in common is a desire for information—to know who is doing what. It gratifies me to see representatives of NDIC here, to see the attention paid to the necessity for developing a good, solid intelligence base of history and of current information. On a nationwide basis, we can then focus on the priorities, agree on the priorities and work together across the country with federal, state and local prosecutors and successfully take down trafficking organizations.
I have told DEA Administrator Tom Constantine that I will try to find more resources for his agency. When state and local law enforcement does not have the capacity to take down a lab or is unfamiliar with the problem, or if it is a small jurisdiction that has never had the problem before, we must ensure the DEA will have the necessary resources to respond. That is a big order, but it is something we must be able to provide, and we are going to do everything we can. If we are having problems along those lines, I want to hear about it.
We still need to decide what is necessary in legislation. Prosecutors across the country came back to us with recommendations as to what was necessary and urged increased sentences of methamphetamine and some chemical traffickers. They urged large fines for those who knowingly sell chemicals to traffickers, and they asked to further heighten regulatory controls. Last August, Congress passed the Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996. It directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to increase the penalties for trafficking methamphetamine and precursor chemicals and to consider higher penalties for clandestine lab operators who mishandle ignitable, corrosive and toxic chemicals that pose a risk to public safety and to the environment.
The sentencing guidelines actually issued do not go quite as far as we would like, but they will result in higher penalties, and I think they will make a difference. Again, I think it is important we work together to develop any additional legislation necessary. For the agents who have been on the front lines and the prosecutors who handle these cases, if there is corrective action that needs to be taken, let us work together to come up with legislation that can make a difference.
The regulatory aspects of our strategy seem arcane some of the time, but they are among the most important and effective tools we have because methamphetamine must be synthesized from precursor chemicals. Regulatory control of a select group of chemicals poses great promise in curbing clandestine manufacturing. A law passed last October will tighten controls by limiting the resale of drug products containing precursors or chemicals such as ephedrine and pseudoephedrine. The regulatory aspects of the law do not become effective until this October. Proposed DEA regulations will soon be ready for publication.
We will need to examine the impact of the new law, and, in particular, whether the law's regulatory exemptions for pseudoephedrine and ephedrine sold in blister packs is effective or is being exploited by the traffickers. We need to make sure we hear from everyone across this country as to how we develop the most effective regulations possible.
We have many problems that affect Mexico as well. The General and I worked together and had an excellent visit to Mexico. I had one of the best meetings to date with the Attorney General of Mexico, who is very sensitive to these issues, is very forthright and is trying hard. We are making progress. We have a long way to go together, but I think we are on the way.
What have the successes been? Jeremy Travis's latest figures from the Drug Use Forecasting System indicate methamphetamine use dropped in the arrestee population, so we may be having some success and deserve a pat on the back. Then someone says, "Maybe it's ephedrine that is being used now." Let us find out and understand what is happening. Whether it is fewer arrests or hospital emergency room admissions, we need to know why the data are changing. The problem may have become more rural in nature, and we are not seeing it because we do not measure outside the cities. Therefore, let us approach this inquiry from a scientific point of view and develop the information we need to make the best judgment.
It is wonderful to listen to you, and I will go back with lists that are good bases for action. Tom Monaghan, what you and the other United States Attorneys have done to develop regional strategies against methamphetamine is truly commendable. The more we can help local law enforcement, the better. We want to be your partners. We do not want the credit; we just want to do everything we can to support you and get the job done.
I do not know the answers, but I do know, if we take the knowledge in this room from treatment professionals, prevention specialists and law enforcement officials and use that knowledge, we can make a difference. If we work together as partners and do the job, based not on the credit, but what is in the best interest of this nation, we can prevent a tragic situation such as with crack. I saw neighborhood after neighborhood and community after community brought to its knees by a terrible substance. If we work together, we will be able to look back with pride about how law enforcement, prevention, and treatment came together to defeat this terrible drug problem.
To everyone in this room, all I can say is thank you for your dedication to this issue and for all that you do for your communities. All of you are little lower than angels. Thank you for your attention.
