Senator PFEIFER. That has been one of the complaints in the past, Senator. What I have seen so far in terms of these funds, I think there is going to be less restriction. I do think it is important for the Federal Government to set some national priorities as to how much should go for education, how much should go for treatment, how much should go for law enforcement. Otherwise, you are going to have a lot of log-rolling going on.

I do think that is helpful in terms of the long-term solutions. It is extremely important that we focus on education and the Federal funds that I understand will be coming to Ohio, it is my understanding will be close to $20 million just for education. It will go a long way in assisting us in providing good educational programs. We have got to make drugs go out of style. It should not be trendy, it should not be fashionable.

Chairman GLENN. That issue is on the education side.

Senator PFEIFER. That is really where the education approach should be.

Chairman GLENN. What is working in that regard in the schools? What is working and what isn't?

Senator PFEIFFER. I think, as Senator Pfeifer said earlier, the DARE program is working, and that is a solid education program. Chairman GLENN. Does that program have enough money hooked up with it to do it right?

Senator PFEIFER. In every school.

Senator PFEIFFER. I don't believe that anything we are doing in the drug area has enough money, but I don't know that we are willing to pay the price to provide the appropriate level of money. If you talk to prosecutors, they do-well, if you are going to convict a drug pusher, you have got to have good evidence. You have got to have a good investigative force; that means more police and sheriffs. You have got to have the prosecutors well staffed. That means more personnel. And once you get a conviction, you have got to have a place to put the person. Education needs more money, treatment needs more money.

Chairman GLENN. Drug education program, they say that is working in the schools.

Senator PFEIFFER. That is working in the Ohio schools.

Senator PFEIFER. Yes.

Chairman GLENN. Does that specific part, then, if that is working, is that going to be the final solution? Does that mean you don't have to do anything after that?

Senator PFEIFER. It does not. In my home town the Rotary Club raises money to provide funds for the DARE officer, and that is good, because there is local involvement raising the money, but we don't have DARE officers in every school. It is only in some schools. It is an excellent program when you have a well-trained officer who has good people skills coming in in uniform in the classroom. That is one good program that works well.

There is another program that is less advisable that is used in a lot of schools upon request. That is apparently with older students where there is a problem. There is a lot that we have been doing in the past that is just a waste of money, however. DARE program is particularly good when you have a good officer with good people skills.

Chairman GLENN. One last question, and then we will move on to the mayors. I don't know how many we have today. I saw Mayor Rinehart just a moment ago.

We hear stories about turf battles between State and Federal officials that are in charge of drug programs. How can we improve that coordination between Federal and State agencies? Is that a major problem with you, Jan?

Senator LONG. No, I think we ran into this when we were talking about Senator Meshel's proposal, and we are talking about additional drug prosecutors who seek special drug courts and drug prosecutors. Certainly, when we went around to various communities to talk about these proposals, and current judges and prosecutors indicated that that really wasn't necessary in many instances, that what was necessary was additional resources for the existing judicial structure or more resources for the existing prosecution systems.

So I think that, yes, inherently there is going to be turf wars, and I think the only solution to something like that is the kinds of summits that have existed at our national level where leaders get together and make a conscious decision that if we are going to win this war we have to rid ourselves of any territorial struggles and have to work together in, as I mentioned earlier, the united effort, to not to care who gets credit for the victory, not care about who gets credit for ending the drug war. We have got to make sure that our leaders or law-enforcement officials cooperate in all respects.

Chairman GLENN. Rick, do you have any comments on the turf battles back and forth between officials at different levels and whether that is impeding more than helping the process?

Senator PFEIFFER. My sense in Ohio is we don't have any significant turf battles. If we do, it's a leader-ship issue. The person in charge just has to say, "We are going to do it," and keep going up the ladder a few times until the main officer says, "We are going to do it this way, folks, or you are going to leave the job.

Senator PFEIFER. It would be my sense, also, Senator, that today the relationship between Federal law enforcement and local law enforcement is much improved over what it was a few years ago. Just a few years ago the FBI was a bunch of glory guys and the local law enforcement guys had to do all the foot work and the FBI comes in and takes the credit when they have major crimes. Today they are working in all kinds of task forces on a very cooperative basis.

There is one problem that is causing internal turf disputes, it's a problem for us in State law. It may be a problem to some extent in Federal law, and that is what happens to forfeited funds and property and what happens to fine money when you make a major bust and you get this property. Then sometimes a fairly unseemly turf war breaks out over who should get those funds, and we are having to look-and I think you probably need to look at the Federal level again to determine whether those forfeiture provisions and those fine provisions may be driving the allocation of money manpower in law enforcement in ways that we never intended. But that is something I think we can and should work out.

Chairman GLENN. Well, I am particularly concerned about the way it works out, and I am particularly concerned that we do the

things that are going to prevent this from ever getting started, at the kid level, the high school level. I think that peer pressure can persuade them not to use instead of to use, but that is a very difficult thing to do. I don't know how we can go about it specifically. I am interested in some of the programs that you indicate are working, and perhaps we need to put more Federal money into programs like that, since it is long-term. We will never be able to interdict everything, we will not be able to stop it completely. We are not going to be able to catch enough distributors to solve the problem long term. It is going to come, as you pointed out, in your opening remarks, Rick, as the demand goes down. That is the basic problem.

So what is working at the school level is of particular concern. If you have any further ideas on that, I would appreciate your keeping in touch with us so we can make sure that we get enough funding specifically pinpointed into those areas. They say 70 percent of the money is going for law enforcement and interdiction and much as I deplore that, I supported it in the past, I think maybe some of those dollars would be better spent on some of the programs that are working at the school level, so we don't just generate this into the next generation so we can somehow start preventing some of this.

The White House is scheduled to have a White House conference on Monday, I believe, to discuss alcohol policy. I have worked with the Surgeon General, too. He conducted a year-long study on drunk driving and came out with some recommendations and laid those before the Governmental Affairs Committee at hearings we held for that purpose. I already have on my desk in Washington the proposed new legislation we are going to be putting in as a result of the Surgeon General's report. We are trying to address that part of the problem; the legal drug problem as well as the illegal drug problem

So I appreciate your being here this morning. Thank you very much. This has been very interesting. We will be working closely together. If there is anything else you can do to keep us informed on this. Thank you very much.

I don't know how many people are here from our next panel. I saw Mayor Rinehart a moment ago. The Honorable George Voinovich, the Mayor of Cleveland. I don't know whether George has arrived or not. I understand that he will be here about eleven, so we will go ahead and proceed. Next is Captain Jackie Flannery, Chief of Police of the City of Hamilton and the Honorable Cindy Lazarus, Councilwoman, City of Columbus. So if you will all come up to the witness table this morning, I would appreciate it.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. We welcome you this morning. This is your building and your castle. I feel like I am usurping your territory. Here is a councilwoman and the mayor who hold forth in this room from time to time. Where is your chair? Right over here? You should be occupying that box this morning and not down at the witness table. But we welcome you all this morning and appreciate your being here.

In my opening statement this morning I went into some detail on how we, in Washington, view the problem, what we have done in the way of funding, and where we see some of the strengths of the

programs that have been put out and some of the weaknesses. We feel that the mayors, council people and local people perhaps have not had an adequate forum in this war on drugs. I questioned in my opening remarks whether we really consider this as a war or whether it's sort of a of a popgun war. Whatever it is, it's got to be taken seriously. I am particularly concerned about the things that you are finding effective in creating peer pressure not to use, so that we can get a handle on this.

I frankly don't think. That even if we put all the military that we have into trying to seal our borders, it would not solve the problem. The Coast Guard is saying that it estimates that we only pick up about 5 percent of the illicit drugs coming into this country. I certainly plan to support the continuation of allow effects. But that means that as large and important as our efforts are, they are not going to be the final solution to the problem. We are interested in particular in what is working at the State level, the city level, the council level, the local police level, and the mayor's level. Mayor Voinovich will join us shortly. I understand he is expecting to be here about eleven. We welcome your statement, Mayor Rinehart. If you will lead off, I will appreciate it.

TESTIMONY OF DANA G. RINEHART, MAYOR, COLUMBUS, OH 1

Mr. RINEHART. Thank you very much, Senator. You are not usurping anything from me, because I never sit on that side of the rail. I am down in the "hole" every month. But we are delighted to have you here in City Hall. It is an honor to have this attention on this critical subject here in Columbus.

I want to tell you right now we are sorry about the snow, but economically, Senator, just for the record, I want to underscore the fact that you are now economically in the sunspot of the frost belt, because, as you well know and the record should reflect, this is now the largest city in the State, the 18th largest in the country. It is bigger than Cincinnati or Cleveland but beyond that it is the youngest major city in the nation.

Columbus has a median age of only 27 years old, and that is why, Senator, a little over a year ago, we asked the kids in Columbus, with the help of the Columbus Public Schools, to write letters to us and tell us what they think, what is their opinion about drug abuse, the so-called war on drugs, and so on. We were overwhelmed with the response. We got over 7,500 letters here in a very short time period, a lot of them very personal and confidential. They took this challenge, most all of them, very seriously. They were cooperative and serious, sometimes you could read anger into them and frustration and fear and, sadly, some of the personal stories they told were just crushing.

They were so responsive to the questions, Senator, that we sent those letters, all 7,500 of them, up to Ohio State University and asked the University to assist us in performing a theme analysis or a content analysis of the letters, and they did. And we provided you this morning a copy for the Committee of the content analysis of the letters from the students.2

1 See p. 125 for Mayor Rinehart's prepared statement.

1 See p. 180.

Without going through all this-and I know we don't have the time for that-the basic thrust of this was that the students believe that the law or those in authority should do more to solve the problem. They don't believe that we are committed, government, Congress, city council, the state government, school governments, they don't think we are committed to eliminating drug abuse in their community, and they feel very frustrated and, in many cases, weak.

Now, this project led to a summer-long series of meetings here in City Hall with people from virtually all walks of life united through their profession or their avocation, teachers, judges, prosecutors, police officers. We met in small groups, as I mentioned, all summer long, and out of that came a consensus document which we didn't write hardly any of it, they wrote virtually all of it, and this just came out, called, "Changing Attitudes. The Columbus Consensus on Drug Policy." 1

We thought we were going to come up with a final draft, Senator, but we ended up getting so much input from the people and it is going on this very morning through the Mayor's Action Center, through letters that have come in, people coming in and petitions and all kinds of communication, that we decided to label this one, "working draft." So we don't have a final draft yet, but this provided a foundation for us to move forward at the local level.

Next year we recommend that the City Council-and Councilwoman Lazarus is the chairman of our Finance Committee, and we are in budget hearings right now, but we have recommended almost a $4 million commitment in local funds to meeting the goals set forth in this document that was essentially put together by people in the community.

There are four areas in this, Senator, and I am not going to go through all of them. I would just like to touch on them if I might, four areas that people feel very strongly about in our community. One, of course, is the area of education, of prevention. The second one deals with changing current law. A third one deals with law enforcement. Those four areas represent the outline of this document and also the presentation that we made back to the people after we completed this research.

Basically people want tougher laws, and they think the government is slow and weak in getting the job done. They are not talking about

Chairman GLENN. Is this the basic report [indicating booklet entitled "Changing Attitudes"]?

Mr. RINEHART. Yes, sir, that's it.

We basically want streamlined laws and tougher laws. Secondly, with respect to education, they feel that we need to do more than we are doing. In the programs like DARE that was talked about here just a few minutes ago, the "Just Say No" Program for the little kids, things like that are very popular in the community. The area of enforcement is one where we need to do a lot of work. That is primarily a local effort, drug raids, crack house raids, undercover

1 See p. 196.