Methamphetamine - DOC by sofiaie

VIEWS: 246 PAGES: 13

									         Methamphetamine
Policy Analysis and Policy Alternatives

 “Creating Meth-Free Communities”




                                             Colleen K. Copple
                                                      Principal
                           Strategic Applications International
                                               James E. Copple
                                         Senior Policy Analyst
                 Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation
                                                    Kim Bailey
                                        Intern/Duke University
                 Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation
                                                 Calverton, MD
                                                     July, 2005
Executive Summary

        Methamphetamine was first produced in Japan in 1919. While its use in the United
States began in the 1930s, it did not start to become an epidemic until the 1960s. In the 1990s,
Mexican drug trafficking organizations entered the U.S and took control of the production and
distribution of meth with their “super labs” that were able to produce large quantities in a
short period of time.

        The three largest federal laws passed in the United States regarding Methamphetamine
are the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, the Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996, and
the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 2000. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970
made meth a Schedule II drug and made it illegal to produce or consume the drug without a
prescription. The Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996 established limitations on key
precursor chemicals and increased criminal penalties for those in possession of the drug. The
Anti-Proliferation Act of 2000 reduced the amount of pseudoephedrine that could be
purchased and created programs to train and educate.

        A study by the Society for the Study of Addiction to Alcohol and Other Drugs found
that ephedrine and pseudoephedrine regulations substantially reduced the number of
methamphetamine-related hospital admissions. However, the results were only temporary
until the producers found alternative supplies of precursors.

        The main supplier of methamphetamine to the United States is Mexico while Canada
is a major supplier of precursor chemicals. The Asian-Pacific region has a large incidence of
methamphetamine use. Burma is the largest producer of methamphetamine tablets while
China is the largest crystal methamphetamine producer. Thailand is a large consumer of the
drug with up to one in five Thais having used meth at least once in their lifetime. While
Mexico is the primary supplier of meth to the U.S., Asia provides a large source of crystal
methamphetamine.

        Methamphetamine use is a growing problem in the United States. The number of
Americans who have reported trying methamphetamine at least once in their lifetime has risen
from 9.4 million in 1999 to 12.3 million in 2003 according to the National Household Survey
on Drug Abuse. In 2004, Monitoring the Future found that 6.2% of twelfth graders in the U.S.
have tried methamphetamine at least once in their lifetime.

        According to the National Association of Counties, methamphetamine is the largest
drug problem in 58 percent of counties in the United States. To combat this problem, state
governments are drafting legislation of their own. Oklahoma was the first state to pass
legislation in 2004 requiring medicines containing pseudoephedrine to be sold by a licensed
pharmacist with customers showing photo ID and signing a written document. Several states
have followed Oklahoma’s example. In 2005, Senators Talent and Feinstein introduced the
Combat Meth Act that would create a federal law similar to the one already present in
Oklahoma.

       It has been shown that limiting the availability of precursor chemicals reduces the
amount of methamphetamine abuse. Therefore, a strong federal law restricting the sale of over
the counter cold medicines containing pseudoephedrine should be created. However,

                                                                                                2
producers will continue to find new ways to produce the drug and new sources of precursors.
The United States should focus on limiting international sources of precursor chemicals.

Outline

        This paper will give a background to the Methamphetamine problem in the United
States and describe how it developed. It will discuss the policies that have been passed in
order to intervene in the use of the drug in the United States. The Current Status section will
outline the methamphetamine problem that is still facing the United States and will
demonstrate the need for more policy intervention. Policy that has been introduced but has yet
to be decided on is summarized in the following section. Much of the proposed policies focus
on domestic production and distribution, however this problem spans the globe. The section
on alternatives discusses policies that focus on foreign sources of methamphetamines and its
precursor chemicals. Lastly, this paper will outline the impact of methamphetamine
internationally.

History

      Methamphetamine was first produced in Japan in 1919.
      1930s: Used medically in the U.S. for narcolepsy, attention deficit disorder, obesity,
       and fatigue.
      1940s: Japanese, German, British, and United States’ governments distributed
       methamphetamine pills to soldiers during World War II to keep them alert and
       aggressive on long missions.
      1950s: Methamphetamine was manufactured legally and used for nonmedical reasons
       by truck drivers, students, and athletes in the United States.
      1980s: Crystallized methamphetamine, “ice”, was smuggled from Taiwan and South
       Korea into Hawaii in the beginning of the decade. By the late 1980s, it had spread to
       the U.S. mainland.
      Originally, methamphetamine clandestine labs were operated independently by outlaw
       motorcycle gangs.
      Mid-1990s: ethnic Mexican drug trafficking organizations operating “super labs” in
       Mexico and California took control of the production and distribution of
       methamphetamine in the U.S. which resulted in a significant increase in the supply of
       the drug.

Policy Interventions

      Controlled Substances Act of 1970: Made methamphetamine a Schedule II drug and
       restricted its legal production. Schedule II means it is highly addictive and its
       prescription is limited. It is prescribed in low doses and without a refill for narcolepsy,
       ADHD, and obesity. This act made it illegal to produce, distribute, or consume meth
       without a prescription.
      A Bill to prevent the manufacturing, distribution, and use of illegal drugs, and
       for other purposes (H.R.5210): Sponsored by Representative Thomas Foley. Became
       Public Law No: 100-690 on November 18, 1988. (100th Congress)
      Chemical Diversion and Trafficking Act of 1989: Amendment added to the
       Controlled Substances Act. It imposed “reporting, record keeping, and import/export

                                                                                                3
      notification requirements for regulated transactions in controlled chemicals.” It
      regulated ephedrine and pseudoephedrine in bulk powder form.
    Crime Control Act of 1990 (S.3266): A bill to control crime. Sponsored by Senator
      Joseph Biden. Passed on November 29, 1990.
    Violent Crime Control Act of 1991 (S.1241): Sponsored by Senator Joseph Biden.
      Incorporated into H.R.3371 as an amendment and passed on November 21, 1991.
      “Authorizes appropriations for grants to State and local law enforcement agencies,
      continues Federal-State funding formula for such agencies, and permits the use of
      grants to State and local governments for participation in multi-jurisdictional drug task
      forces.”
    Domestic Chemical Diversion and Control Act of 1993: Implemented in 1995. It
      regulated the distribution of products in which ephedrine was the only active
      medicinal ingredient. It established DEA registration requirements of all those who
      imported, exported, or distributed the primary chemicals used in the manufacture of
      controlled substances, such as meth.
    Domestic Chemical Diversion Control Act of 1993 (H.R.3216): Sponsored by
      Representative Bart Stupak. Became Public Law No: 103-200 on December 17, 1993.
      “To amend the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 to
      control the diversion of certain chemicals used in the illicit production of controlled
      substances such as methamphetamine.”
    Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996: Introduced by Senator Feinstein, signed
      into law by President Clinton in October 1996. The law establishes new controls over
      chemicals necessary to manufacture methamphetamine and it increases criminal
      sentences for possession and distribution of methamphetamine and specialized
      equipment used to make it. It regulated the distribution of products that included
      ephedrine in combination with other active medical ingredients. In 1997, the Act
      regulated products that included pseudoephedrine, regardless of whether the products
      contained other active medicinal ingredients.
    Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996 (S.1965): Sponsored by
      Senator Orrin Hatch. Became Public Law No: 104-237 on September 17, 1996. “A bill
      to prevent the illegal manufacturing and use of methamphetamine.”
    Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 2000: “Reduces threshold of
      pseudoephedrine and phenylpropanolamine drug products, provides tools to assist
      enforcement in preventing illegal manufacturing, creates programs to train officials to
      handle toxic wastes left behind by manufacturers, creates prevention programs that
      will educate communities and schools, and provides funding to expand
      methamphetamine research to understand how to treat addicts.”
Thomas. Library of Congress.< http://thomas.loc.gov.>

Current Status

      According to the DEA, methamphetamine is the number one drug of choice in rural
       America.
      U.S. production, trafficking, and abuse are concentrated in the west, southwest, and
       Midwest although it is spreading to the East coast.
      National Association of Counties conducted two surveys on methamphetamine:
          o The Criminal Effect of Meth on Communities:
                  Of the 500 law enforcement agencies that responded to the survey, 58
                     percent said that meth was their largest drug problem.
                                                                                              4
                   Meth related crimes have resulted in more than half of the arrests made
                    in 17 percent of the counties in the survey.
       o The Impact of Meth on Children:
                Increased out of home placements due to meth were reported by 40
                    percent of the child welfare officials in the survey.
                Many children of meth users are born with birth defects, neglected,
                    sexually abused, or suffer harmful side effects from the production of
                    the drug if they live near a lab.
               www.naco.org
   Mexico is the primary supplier of methamphetamine to the United States. Asia
    supplies crystal meth and “ya-ba” (meth tablets) to the U.S.
   Meth use is rising:
       o 1994-1997 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse found that in 1994
           1.8% of Americans have used meth at least once in their lifetime while in 1997
           2.5% reported using meth at least once.
       o 1999 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse found that 9.4 million (4.3%)
           Americans have used meth at least once.
       o 2001 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse reported 9.6 million
           Americans having tried meth at least once.
       o 2002 National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that more than 12 million
           (5.3%) Americans have tried meth at least once.
       o 2003 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: 12.3 million Americans ages
           12 and older reported trying methamphetamine at least once in their lifetime.
       www.oas.samhsa.gov/nhsda.
   Monitoring the Future, 2004: 6.2% of twelfth graders in the U.S. have tried
    methamphetamine in their lifetime.




   According to the DEA and the National Clandestine Laboratory Database, the number
    of clandestine meth labs seizures has increased from 7,438 in 1999 to 15,994 in 2004.




                                                                                         5
   Methods of production are available on the Internet or in underground publications.
   Impact of Legislation:
       o A study by James Cunningham and Lon-Mu Liu from the Society for the
           Study of Addiction to Alcohol and Other Drugs looked at the impacts of
           federal ephedrine and pseudoephedrine regulations on methamphetamine-
           related hospital admissions. This study found that ephedrine and
           pseudoephedrine regulations stopped the rise in and substantially reduced
           methamphetamine-related hospital admissions. However, each reduction was
           followed by a resurgence in admissions beginning 6-24 months later. This was
           probably due in part to producers accessing alternative supplies of precursor
           chemicals. The Drug Enforcement Administration reports that producers are
           now importing precursors from foreign nations in order to evade regulations,
           resulting in a recent rise in hospital admissions.




       (Impacts of federal ephedrine and pseudoephedrine regulations on methamphetamine-related
       hospital admissions, James K. Cunningham & Lon-Mu Liu.
       <http://www.scausa.com/add_450.pdf>)

       o The Domestic Chemical Diversion Control Act allowed the DEA to deny or
         revoke a company’s registration without proof of criminal intent. Following its
         implementation in 1995, the DEA shut down two suppliers of
         methamphetamine precursors that had been supplying more than 50% of the
         precursors used nationally. This action had a substantial though temporary
         impact on methamphetamine’s price and purity, adverse health outcomes, and
         crime. Price jumped from $30 to $100 per gram, purity fell from 90% to 20%,

                                                                                                  6
              and hospital admissions decreased by 35%. The effects were temporary due to
              producers finding other sources of precursors. (The War on Drugs:
              Methamphetamine, Public Health, and Crime, Carlos Dobkin & Nancy
              Nicosia http://people.ucsc.edu/~cdobkin/papers/Methamphetamine.pdf)

          Methamphetamine-related Emergency Room Admissions




              www.dea.gov

          o The number of meth labs seizures increased from 10 to 1,300 between 1994
            and 2003. The Oklahoma laws requiring medicine containing pseudoephedrine
            to be sold behind counters have been credited in reducing the number of
            methamphetamine labs seizures by 80% in Oklahoma in 2004 according to the
            Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Control.

Proposed Policy Intervention

       The following bills have been introduced into Congress and are still being considered.

      Combat Meth Act (S.103 (Passed, attached to Patriot Act): Introduced by Senators
       Jim Talent and Dianne Feinstein. It moves pseudoephedrine, the primary ingredients
       in methamphetamine, behind pharmacy counters and requires consumers to sign their
       names and show their IDs at point of sale. It provides new resources to help law
       enforcement fight methamphetamine in America’s neighborhoods.
      Arrest Methamphetamine Act of 2005 (S. 430): Introduced by Senator Maria
       Cantwell and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary on February 17, 2005. This
       bill provides for programs to deal with the manufacture, sale, and use of
       methamphetamine and to improve the capacity of state and local government
       institutions to carry out such programs. This bill urges the President to negotiate
       bilateral agreement with the Canadian government to curb the Northern Border
       methamphetamine precursor trafficking problem.
      Clean, Learn, Educate, Abolish, Neutralize, and Undermine Production
       (CLEAN-UP) of Methamphetamines Act (H.R. 13): Introduced by Mr. Kennedy on
       January 4, 2005. This bill is “to respond to the illegal production, distribution, and use
       of methamphetamines in the United States, and for other purposes.” It covers
       environmental protection, education, prevention, treatment, and enforcement.


                                                                                                7
     Exile Meth Act (S. 102, H.R. 313): Introduced by Representative Roy Blunt on
      January 25, 2005. It was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and
      Homeland Security. It provides grants to states to combat methamphetamine abuse.
    Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005 (H.R.798): Introduced on
      February 15, 2005 by Representative Bart Gordon. It was placed on the Union
      Calendar, Calendar No. 23. It is “to provide for a research program for the remediation
      of closed methamphetamine production laboratories.”
    Amendments to the Controlled Substances Act: Methamphetamine Precursor
      Control Act of 2005 (H.R.1056) was introduced on March 2, 2005 by Darlene
      Hooley. It was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland
      Security. It is to amend the Controlled Substances Act with respect to the distribution
      of pseudoephedrine. The Methamphetamine Reduction Act of 2005 (H.R. 1083)
      was introduced into the House on March 3, 2005 by Representative Dan Boren. It was
      referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. It is to
      amend the Controlled Substances Act with respect to the regulation of ephedrine
      alkaloids, including ephedrine and pseudoephedrine. The Protection of Children
      from Methamphetamine Act of 2005 (H.R. 1395) was introduced in the House on
      March 17, 2005 by Representative Darlene Hooley. It was referred to the
      Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. It is to amend the
      Controlled Substances Act to provide a minimum mandatory prison sentence for
      manufacturing methamphetamine on properties where children reside. The
      Methamphetamine Abuse Prevention Act of 2005 (H.R. 1446) was introduced into
      the House on March 17, 2005 by Representative Mark Souder. Its purpose is “to
      amend the Controlled Substances Act to eliminate the safe-harbor exception for
      certain packaged pseudoephedrine products used in the manufacture of
      methamphetamine, and for other purposes.” It covers methamphetamine precursors,
      resources for enforcement, and grant programs.
    Comprehensive Methamphetamine Response Act (H.R.1055): Introduced March 2,
      2005 by Representative Darlene Hooley. It was referred to the Subcommittee on
      Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. It is to provide for the designation and
      funding of high intensity methamphetamine abuse and trafficking areas.
   Thomas. Library of Congress.< http://thomas.loc.gov.>

Methamphetamine is becoming an epidemic within several states in the United States. The
National Association of Counties conducted two surveys, The Criminal Effect of Meth on
Communities and The Impact of Meth on Children which demonstrate the growing domestic
problem of methamphetamine. The surveys concluded that there has been an 87 percent
increase in meth related arrests and that meth is a major cause of child abuse and neglect
resulting in placement in foster homes. (National Association of Counties. www.naco.org.) In
order to combat this issue, States have begun to pass their own legislation limiting production
of meth.
     State Legislation: Oklahoma was the first state to pass legislation in April 2004,
        requiring medicines containing pseudoephedrine to be sold by a licensed pharmacist
        and customers to present photo id and sign a written documentation of transaction.
        Other states that have passed similar legislation are Oregon, Kansas, Missouri, Iowa,
        Tennessee, Michigan, Colorado, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana,
        South Dakota, North Dakota, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. In total,
        there are 44 states that have passed or are considering laws that limit the sales of
        pseudoephedrine.

                                                                                              8
Alternatives

        Much of the proposed policy interventions in the Congress concentrate on domestic
production and distribution. As the sources within the United States are limited, producers
search outside of the country for the necessary precursor chemicals. The abundance of meth
labs in Mexico and precursor chemicals in Canada make for easy access. The United States
needs to recognize all of the outside sources of the drug and its precursors in order to fully
manage the problem. The U.S. is not the only country facing a methamphetamine epidemic; it
is a widespread problem.

      Focus on limiting foreign sources of methamphetamines and its precursor chemicals:
          o Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 (H.R. 2330): Sponsored by
              Representative Tom Lantos. Became Public Law 108-61 on July 28, 2003.
              This law “prohibits importation into the U.S. of any article that is a product of
              Burma until the President determines and certifies to Congress that Burma has
              met certain conditions including that it has made efforts to adhere to its
              obligations under international counternarcotics agreements and to take
              measures to stop the manufacture and export of methamphetamines.”
          o H.CON.RES.317: Introduced by Representative George Radanovich on
              February 6, 2002 and referred to the House Committee on International
              Relations. Expresses the “sense of Congress that the President should open a
              dialogue with the Government of Canada to discuss the smuggling of large
              quantities of pseudoephedrine from Canada into the United States.”
          Thomas. Library of Congress.< http://thomas.loc.gov.>


International Impact of Methamphetamine

China
    Drug abuse continues to rise: in 2004, there were 1.6 million registered addicts which
      is double that of 1995, 74% of these addicts are youths
    Primary producer of crystal methamphetamine, “ice”, in Asia.
    One of the largest producers of precursor chemicals.
    Monitors all 22 of the chemicals on the 1988 UN Drug Convention watch list.
      (www.usinfo.org)
    Has made efforts to control the diversion of the precursor chemicals. These efforts
      include passing legislation and immediately enforcing the new regulations (February
      2000) and joining up with the DEA in several diversion-control efforts.
      (www.usdoj.gov)
    June 2004: published authoritative five-year plan to tackle its drug problem.

Burma
    Primary producer of methamphetamine tablets (“Ya-Ba”). (www.usdoj.gov)
    Began methamphetamine production in the mid-1990s to supplement the income from
      heroin trafficking.
    United Wa State Army (UWSA) is heavily involved in manufacturing and distributing
      synthetic drugs and is immune from government action. (www.ncgub.net)
                                                                                              9
      UWSA provides security for methamphetamine labs in Wa territory and for caravans
       distributing the drugs.
      Drug gangs operate freely within Burma along its borders with China and Thailand.
      It is the primary supplier of methamphetamine to Thailand; produces 80% of the
       tablets consumed in Thailand.
      2000: government of Burma pursued cautious, low-risk counternarcotics program, but
       it was ineffective.
      2002: banned import, sale, and use of 25 precursor chemicals and related substances
       used in the production of methamphetamine. However, Burma has yet to take effective
       measures against methamphetamine production and trafficking.

Thailand
    Up to one in five Thais have used methamphetamine at least once in their lifetime.
    Estimated 2-3 million drug users in Thailand. Methamphetamine accounts for 70% of
       all drug addictions. (www.drugpolicy.org)
    Hospital admissions for methamphetamine psychosis have increased: 500 in 1996 to
       5,500 in 2001. (www.drugabuse.gov)
    According to the US Department of State, Thailand is home to the worst abuse of
       amphetamine-type stimulants.
    Methamphetamine investigations in Thailand rose from 1,025 in 1988 to 125,335 by
       1998 and 187,479 in 2001.
    In 2002, about 800 million methamphetamine pills were smuggled into Thailand.
    Methamphetamine is the main threat to Thailand’s national security according to the
       country’s officials.
    Drug Policy: if found in possession, imprisoned for 1-10 years and fined large sums of
       money. For producers and dealers, the highest penalty is capital punishment.
       (www.drugpolicy.org)
    Have set up training programs in drug counseling and prevention for school teachers
       and community and have established community anti-drug centers.

Taiwan
    In 2004, continued to see rapid increase in distribution and use of crystal
       methamphetamine.
    Taiwan-based organizations are exporting skilled lab technicians to manufacture large
       quantities of methamphetamine in other countries.
    Primary sources of methamphetamine for Taiwan: China, North Korea, Thailand.
    Government does not regard drug use as chief problem, so there is no direct policy.
    Legislative Yuan in 2003: passed legislation containing more severe punishments and
       stricter prosecutorial guidelines in 2004. (http://hongkong.usconsulate.gov)
    Program in which samples of seized narcotics are shared with other law enforcement
       authorities, including the DEA, is now in effect.

North Korea
    Methamphetamine production began in 1996 after heavy rains decreased income from
       poppy production.
    Methamphetamine production occurs in the Democratic People’s Republic of North
       Korea (DPRK).


                                                                                         10
      U.S. military estimates that North Korea’s annual drug exports have risen to at least
       $500 million from $100 million a few years ago. (www.usembassy.it)
      As of March 2005, U.S. aid to North Korea is limited to food and humanitarian
       assistance.

Japan
    Intravenous methamphetamine became epidemic immediately after World War II
      when military supplies became available to the public.
    1949: Ministry of Health prohibited the production of stimulants in tablet or powder
      form but not in liquid form. Injecting became the most common method of
      methamphetamine use.
    1954: Peak of methamphetamine use in Japan. Estimated 500,000-2 million people
      using methamphetamines.
    2001: Estimated 600,000 addicts and 2.18 million casual users of methamphetamines.
    Major producer of 60 types of precursor chemicals. Ephedrine is strictly controlled
      under Japanese law.
    Not a major producer of drugs, but has one of the largest methamphetamine
      consumption rates in Asia. Ten to 20 metric tons of imported methamphetamine were
      consumed in 2000. (http://japan.usembassy.gov)

Canada
    One of the largest producers of pseudoephedrine; primary source of it for U.S.
    2003: New legislation, Control of Precursor and Other Substances Frequently Used in
       the Clandestine Production of Controlled Substances, was passed. Aimed at reducing
       the flow of Canadian precursor chemicals to meth labs in the United States. American
       police have noticed a large decrease in seizures of Canadian pseudoephedrine since
       then.
    2004: “Operation Brain Drain” led by DEA and Canadian authorities targeted
       Canadian bulk distributors of ephedrine. It resulted in 90 arrests and the seizure of
       $3.5million, 92.6 pounds of methamphetamine, 2,735 pounds of ephedrine powder,
       1.7million ephedrine pills, and 62 pounds of precursor chemicals.
       (www.usembassycanada.gov)

Australia
    Methamphetamine use and prevalence of labs have increased over the past five years.
    Methamphetamine is highly available in Australia.
    Number of illegal labs producing methamphetamine located in Australia has increased
       during 2001-2002. (www.usdoj.gov)
    Amphetamines, predominantly methamphetamine, are second most commonly used
       illicit drug type after cannabis.
    9% of Australians have tried methamphetamine in their lifetime, half a million have
       taken it in the past year.
    By age 16-17, 8-10% of students have used the drug. (www.ndlerf.gov.au)

Mexico
   Increase in the production of methamphetamine in Mexico is a result of increased
      demand in the United States and increasingly strict chemical controls and enforcement
      efforts in California.

                                                                                               11
      Mexico-based transnational criminal organizations have become the primary
       distributors in the U.S. of methamphetamine and its precursor chemicals.
      “Super labs” capable of producing hundreds of pounds of methamphetamine on a
       weekly basis have been set up in Mexico and California.
      Southwest border is a major point of entry for about 70% of all illicit drugs smuggled
       into the U.S. by Mexican trafficking groups. (www.fas.org)

Philippines
     Crystal methamphetamine, known as shabu locally, is the most commonly used drug
       in the country. It is the most popular drug of abuse according to the International
       Narcotics Control Board.
     While most of the country’s meth is imported from China, production in the
       Philippines is growing. (www.chr.asn.au)
     Exports to Japan, Australia, Korea, U.S., Guam, and Spain.

New Zealand
   Since the early 1990s, this country has seen an increase in the availability and use of
      amphetamine-type stimulants.
   Meth labs shut down by the police have increased from 2 to 146 from 1996 to 2003.
      (www.police.govt.nz)

Brazil
    There are an estimated 25,000 registered chemical factories, trade, and transport
       companies that deal in processing chemicals as well as precursors for making Ecstasy
       and methamphetamine in Brazil.
    Most of the methamphetamine in Brazil is smuggled in from Argentina and Europe.

Argentina
    According to the UNODC, Argentina has experienced an increase in
       methamphetamine use since 1999.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are above and beyond the various legislative strategies
currently being considered by Congress.

           1. Congress should introduce a comprehensive legislative strategy to support state
              and community efforts to eradicate methamphetamine production and use.
           2. Congress needs to reinvigorate and reconstitute the Congressional Meth
              Caucus.
           3. Congress with assistance from national non-profit organizations and for-profit
              entities (public/private partnerships) should establish a National Training and
              Technical Assistance Center that creates a one-stop shop for training and TA
              that becomes a resource related to the diverse and multi-faceted aspects of
              methamphetamine.
           4. Federal agencies addressing methamphetamine need to drive coordination
              among various non-profit organizations involved in child endangerment, policy
              analysis, training, summit development and implementation, treatment
              alternatives (drug courts), and clandestine lab clean-up.
                                                                                              12
           5. Congress should instruct the Office of National Drug Control Policy to direct
               30 percent of its funding for the national media campaign to raising awareness
               about the dangers and harms associated with methamphetamine use.
           6. Congress should fund a national impact study on the costs and consequences of
               methamphetamine production and use.
           7. Evaluating and researching the impact of meth on the Gay Community and its
               influence on the spread of HIV/AIDS.
           8. Fully fund the COPs office with specific instruction to develop community
               policing models to address methamphetamine in local communities.
           9. Fully fund demand reduction strategies within the Drug Enforcement
               Administration to assist communities in comprehensive prevention and
               enforcement efforts.
           10. Enhance treatment programs and strategies for rural communities severely
               impacted by meth.
           11. Supplement foster care initiatives addressing the issues of meth-exposed
               children.
           12. Explore the role of technology (electronic ID verification) in the purchase of
               all precursor chemicals used in the production of methamphetamine.
           13. SAMHSA/DEA/NIJ should fund research on the international protocols related
               to meth production and meth use throughout the world.

These are a few additional recommendations and strategies necessary to develop a
comprehensive approach to eradicating methamphetamine in America’s communities. The
key strategies must be comprehensive; include private/public partnerships; coordination of
strategies at the Federal, State and Local levels of government; and science or research based.




Acknowledgements: The principal authors of this analysis wish to thank and acknowledge
the work of Kim Bailey, PIRE Intern and student at Duke University for her research and
work on this initiative.




                                                                                             13

								
To top