Review of Lies, Damned Lies and Drug War Statistics by Matt B. Robinson and Renee G. Scherlen (SUNY Press, 2007).
Posted in Reader Blogs by Randall Shelden on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 7:54pm
Reviewed by Randall G. Shelden, UNLV
Looking back on my career and what I have learned there is a rather
consistent theme in my thinking and writing about the subject of crime
and justice. It might go something like this: we have a system in place
that has a vested interest in keeping crime (including drug use) at a
certain level. All sorts of careers and a lot of money (literally tens
of billions of dollars each year) are dependent upon a steady supply of
offenders - even if they have to pass new laws creating new categories
of offenders (this especially applies to drugs). This is why many have
used such terms like "crime control industry" or "criminal justice
industrial complex."
Agencies within this complex can sort of "have their cake and eat it
too" in that they can have it both ways: when what they do is clearly
failing they can merely claim that the problem still exists and they
need to continuing doing the same thing (with more money of course).
Obviously when things are going well they can take responsibility. This
is the pattern with local police departments and in fact the entire
system, namely that when crime is down they take credit because of some
program in place; however, when crime goes up, they can shift
responsibility to all sorts of variables. Favorites include a growing
population in their jurisdiction (which is not usually that relevant),
a growing youth or "crime risk" population (again, not that critical),
"broken" or "dysfunctional" families and, two of my favorites, "outside
influences" (e.g., gangs moving) or "liberal programs."
Another way of putting this is that, as Jeff Reiman has observed, nothing succeeds like failure!
A friend once told me something he learned when studying for his
MBA. It is called "optimal starting and stopping points." What this
means is that in order to bolster your argument or to make a case that
what you are doing is working you pick out a time period that best
represents your success and avoid time periods that do not.
So it has been with the Office of National Drug Control Policy
(ONDCP) and Matt Robinson and Renee Scherlen do an exceptional job of
showing exactly this in Damned Lies and Drug War Statistics. They do
this by critically examining six years (2000-2006) of the National Drug
Control Strategy. They read through each and every annual report,
looking especially for both accurate and inaccurate use of statistics
and evidence of honesty and dishonesty in each report. They examined
each and every claim made by ONDCP and evaluated ONDCP's stated goals
(e.g., reducing drug use and drug availability).
What they found for each year, almost without exception, was an
almost total misuse of some very simple statistics (e.g., from various
annual drug surveys, such as NHSDA, ADAM, MTF). They discovered that in
many instances ONDCP employed the "optimal starting and stopping
points." For instance, Robinson and Scherlen found that for the 2000
strategy report ONDCP uses a baseline of 1985 that shows a decline in
drug use from that year to 1999. Yet the ONDCP was not started until
1988 and the largest drop in drug use was between 1985 and 1988, with
the rate remaining steady for the rest of the decade. Other reports use
1979 as a starting point (the peak of drug use).
On another occasion the ONDCP claims to prove that George Bush's
goal during his 2002 "State of the Union speech of a 10% reduction of
drug use by youth within two years was met, but uses a time period that
started one year prior to Bush's speech!
The authors also found numerous instances where they cite declines
in youth drug use during a certain period, but ignore the fact that
drug use was increasing among adults. In some cases the ONDCP
reproduces a chart that clearly shows drug use increasing, but fail to
comment on this rather obvious evidence of failure. On the other hand,
on some occasions the ONDCP readily admits "disturbing trends" such as
the fact that throughout the decade of the 1990s drug use among 8th,
10th and 12th graders (Monitoring the Future) is "close to record
highs." Yet in this case, the ONDCP sort of ignores such an obvious
failure and instead uses this as evidence of a need to get tougher in
the war on drugs! Nothing succeeds like failure! Robinson and Scherlen
note that ONDCP tends to "celebrate declines even when they are
short-term or occurred a decade ago, and downplay increases unless they
are being used to create alarm" (p. 66). More examples like this are
presented throughout this book.
Perhaps more importantly, even when there are some decreases in drug
use, ONDCP fails to provide any evidence that this is because of what
they did. Moreover, like I said above concerning police departments,
Robinson and Scherlen note that "ONDCP only takes credit when drug use
trends decline, but takes no responsibility when drug use trends
increase" (p. 68).
One of the most important chapters in this book is chapters 5 and 6
where they examine ONDCP's claims of success in "healing America's drug
users and disrupting drug markets" and claims concerning the costs of
the drug war. In these two chapters Robinson and Scherlen also
critically examine ONDCP claims about the nature of the drug problem
itself. First, ONDCP fails to differentiate between drug use and drug
abuse and instead claims that "Drug use promises one thing but delivers
something else – something sad and debilitating for users, their
families, and their communities. The deception can be masked for some
time, and it is during this time that the habit is 'carried' by users
to other vulnerable young people." This is an outlandish claim totally
lacking empirical foundation. As Robinson and Scherlen correctly note,
drug use does not lead to such outcomes and in fact the majority of
youths who use drugs do so only a few times and quit completely in
their early 20s (p. 96). Such a conclusion is a general consensus by
drug experts – obviously a group ONDCP fails to consult! ONDCP also
claims that drug testing is effective, yet can cite only anecdotal
evidence (such as a statement by one woman based upon a one
conversation with a grocery bagger – see p. 102) and ignore
comprehensive studies that find that it clearly does not work (e.g., as
cited on the Monitoring the Future web site). This is called
"confirmation bias" – selecting evidence that supports your position
while ignoring contrary evidence.
The ONDCP clearly has failed to disrupt drug markets and there has
been a steady decline in the price of illegal drugs, as Robinson and
Scherlen clearly show with charts taken from ONDCP's report. Yes, you
read this correctly: ONDCP reproduces charts that show prices falling
yet fail to make any statement that suggests that their goal of raising
prices by disrupting drug markets is not working! This is one of the
best points about the Robinson and Scherlen book in that they use
readily available data – some reproduced by ONDCP – which clearly
contradict ONDCP's claims!
Robinson and Scherlen also examined claims about the costs of drugs
and the drug war. Once again, they demonstrate that ONDCP misuses
statistics. Here the authors show that the bulk of the costs of drugs
stems from the drug war itself and the fact that some drugs have been
criminalized.
I could go on and on with more examples. Suffice it to say that
Robinson and Scherlen have provided a thorough critique of the claims
made by those in charge of the drug war. This book will no doubt prove
to be a valuable resource for those trying to make sense of a war that
has created so much havoc within our society. Incidentally, the first
two chapters provide the reader with an excellent overview on the how
the drug war came to be, including a brief history of anti-drug
legislation. For those not familiar with this history, these chapters
will provide much needed information to fill this gap. Read it, learn
from it, use it.
Randall G. Shelden is Professor of Criminal Justice, University of
Nevada-Las Vegas, where he has been a faculty member since 1977. He is
the author or co-author of several books, including Girls, Delinquency
and Juvenile Justice (3rd edition), with Meda Chesney-Lind (which
received the Hindelang Award for outstanding contribution to
Criminology in 1992); Youth Gangs in American Society (3rd ed.), with
Sharon Tracy and William B. Brown (both with Wadsworth); Controlling
the Dangerous Classes: A History of Criminal Justice (2nd forthcoming,
Allyn and Bacon); Criminal Justice in America: A Critical View, with
William B. Brown (a revised edition of this book is forthcoming with
Waveland Press). His most recent book is Delinquency and Juvenile
Justice in American Society (Waveland Press). His web site is: www.sheldensays.com.
|