Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323153849
label
National Drug Control Strategy--Folders 1/27/92 [OA 7567] [3]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323153849
contentType
document
title
National Drug Control Strategy--Folders 1/27/92 [OA 7567] [3]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13795-009
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323153849
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a8599b98fce1a6b4
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S; 2010-1073-F
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron Files, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13795
Folder ID Number:
13795-009
Folder Title:
National Drug Control Strategy--Folders 1/27/92 [OA 7567] [3]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
22
2
6
&
HUMAN Y SERVICES SERVICE USA
Photo Copy Preservation
NIDA
AT
Issued by the Press Office of the National Institute on Drug Abuse
I
5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857
NATIONAL INSTITUTE
301-443-6245
ON DRUG ABUSE
Capsules
NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR DRUG ABUSE SURVEY
1975 - 1991
"MONITORING THE FUTURE SURVEY"
The 1991 survey on drug use and related attitudes of America's high school seniors is the
17th in an annual series which began in 1975. These surveys are conducted through an
ongoing national research and reporting program entitled "Monitoring the Future: A
Continuing Study of the Lifestyles and Values of Youth." The program is conducted by the
University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research and is funded by the National Institute
on Drug Abuse (NIDA). NIDA's annual support for the Monitoring the Future program is
approximately $3 million.
The study is referred to as the High School Senior Survey, since each year approximately
16,000 high school seniors are surveyed, 15,483 in 1991. For the first time, in 1991, a
representative sample of approximately 18,000 eighth grade students in 162 private and
public schools and 16,000 tenth grade students in 122 public and private schools were also
surveyed.
Each year about 6,600 members of previous participating graduating classes, one to ten years
past high school, are surveyed by mail. The annual national samples of college students
(numbering about 1,400) are part of the followup studies. College students are defined as
high school graduates one to four years past high school enrolled full time in a two year or
four year college or university.
PROCEDURES AND CONTENT
Data from high school seniors are collected during the spring of each year. Data collection
takes place in public and private high schools selected to provide an accurate cross section of
high school seniors throughout the United States, except in Alaska and Hawaii.
The survey covers prevalence of drug use among American high school seniors and trends in
use. Sixteen classes and subclasses of drugs are covered, including alcohol, cigarettes
(illegal for minors), anabolic steroids, and nonprescription stimulants as well as illicit drugs.
Also included are questions on age of first use, trends in use at earlier grade level, intensity
of drug use, attitudes and beliefs among seniors concerning various types of drug use, and
their perceptions of certain relevant aspects of the social environment. Most questions, such
as those concerning drug use, are asked of all participants. Some questions dealing with
attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions are asked of about one-fifth of the respondents.
C-85-01
Revised January 1992
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public
Health
Service
Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration
High School Senior Survey Trends in Lifetime Prevalence
Percent Who Ever Used
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
54.2
50.9
50.2
47.2
43.7
40.7
36.7
Marijuana/Hashish
47.3
52.8
56.4
59.2
60.4
60.3
59.5
58.7
57.0
54.9
Inhalants
NA
10.3
11.1
12.0
12.7
11.9
12.3
12.8
13.6
14.4
15.4
15.9
17.0
16.7
17.6
18.0
17.6
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
18.2
17.3
17.2
17.7
18.2
18.0
18.1
20.1
18.6
17.5
18.6
18.5
18.0
11.1
11.1
10.1
9.8
8.4
8.1
7.9
8.6
4.7
3.2
3.3
2.1
1.6
Amyl & Butyl Nitrates
NA
NA
NA
NA
16.3
15.1
13.9
14.3
14.1
13.3
13.3
12.5
11.9
10.7
10.3
9.7
10.3
8.9
9.4
9.4
9.6
Hallucinogens
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
17.7
15.6
15.3
14.3
13.6
12.3
12.1
11.9
10.6
9.2
9.9
9.7
10.0
LSD
11.3
11.0
9.8
9.7
9.5
9.3
9.8
9.6
8.9
8.0
7.5
7.2
8.4
7.7
8.3
8.7
8.8
2.9
PCP
NA
NA
NA
NA
12.8
9.6
7.8
6.0
5.6
5.0
4.9
4.8
3.0
2.9
3.9
2.8
Cocaine
9.0
9.7
10.8
12.9
15.4
15.7
16.5
16.0
16.2
16.1
17.3
16.9
15.2
12.1
10.3
9.4
7.8
Crack
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.4
4.8
4.7
3.5
3.1
NA
NA
14.0
12.1
8.5
8.6
7.0
Other Cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Heroin
2.2
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.3
0.9
Other Opiates*
9.0
9.6
10.3
9.9
10.1
9.8
10.1
9.6
9.4
9.7
10.2
9.0
9.2
8.6
8.3
8.3
6.6
2
26.4
32.2
35.6
35.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants*
22.3
22.6
23.0
22.9
24.2
Stimulants Adjusted*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
27.9
26.9
27.9
26.2
23.4
21.6
19.8
19.1
17.5
15.4
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.7
3.3
Sedatives*
18.2
17.7
17.4
16.0
14.6
14.9
16.0
15.2
14.4
13.3
11.8
10.4
8.7
7.8
7.4
7.5
6.7
Barbiturates*
16.9
16.2
15.6
13.7
11.8
11.0
11.3
10.3
9.9
9.9
9.2
8.4
7.4
6.7
6.5
6.8
6.2
Methaqualone*
8.1
7.8
8.5
7.9
8.3
9.5
10.6
10.7
10.1
8.3
6.7
5.2
4.0
3.3
2.7
2.3
1.3
Tranquilizers*
17.0
16.8
18.0
17.0
16.3
15.2
14.7
14.0
13.3
12.4
11.9
10.9
10.9
9.4
7.6
7.2
7.2
91.3
92.2
92.0
90.7
89.5
88.0
Alcohol
90.4
91.9
92.5
93.1
93.0
93.2
92.6
92.8
92.6
92.6
92.2
Cigarettes.
73.6
75.4
75.7
75.3
74.0
71.0
71.0
70.1
70.6
69.7
68.8
67.6
67.2
66.4
65.7
64.4
63.1
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.0
2.9
2.1
Inhalants Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites.
Hallucinogens Adjusted for underreporting of PCP.
Stimulants Adjusted to exclude inappropriate reporting of nonprescription stimulants.
Only use not under a doctor's orders included.
Terms:
Ever Used: Used at least one time.
Used in Last Year: Used at least once in the 12 months prior to the survey.
Used in Last Month: Used at least once in the 30 days prior to the survey.
Used Daily: Used 20 or more times in the month before the survey.
Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse, Monitoring the Future Study, 1991.
High School Senior Survey Trends in Annual Prevalence
Percent Who Used in Last Twelve Months
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
40.6
38.8
36.3
33.1
29.6
27.0
23.9
Marijuana/Hashish
40.0
44.5
47.6
50.2
50.8
48.8
46.1
44.3
42.3
40.0
Inhalants
NA
3.0
3.7
4.1
5.4
4.6
4.1
4.5
4.3
5.1
5.7
6.1
6.9
6.5
5.9
6.9
6.6
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
8.9
7.9
6.1
6.6
6.2
7.2
7.5
8.9
8.1
7.1
6.9
7.5
6.9
Amyl & Butyl Nitrates
NA
NA
NA
NA
6.5
5.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
4.0
4.0
4.7
2.6
1.7
1.7
1.4
0.9
Hallucinogens
11.2
9.4
8.8
9.6
9.9
9.3
9.0
8.1
7.3
6.5
6.3
6.0
6.4
5.5
5.6
5.9
5.8
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
11.8
10.4
10.1
9.0
8.3
7.3
7.6
7.6
6.7
5.8
6.2
6.0
6.1
LSD
7.2
6.4
5.5
6.3
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.1
5.4
4.7
4.4
4.5
5.2
4.8
4.9
5.4
5.2
1.2
PCP
NA
NA
NA
NA
7.0
4.4
3.2-
2.2
2.6
2.3
2.9
2.4
1.3
1.2
2.4
1.4
Cocaine
5.6
6.0
7.2
9.0
12.0
12.3
12.4
11.5
11.4
11.6
13.1
12.7
10.3
7.9
6.5
5.3
3.5
Crack
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.1
3.9
3.1
3.1
1.9
1.5
Other Cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9.8
7.4
5.2
4.6
3.2
Heroin
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.4
Other Opiates*
5.7
5.7
6.4
6.0
6.2
6.3
5.9
5.3
5.1
5.2
5.9
5.2
5.3
4.6
4.4
4.5
3.5
Stimulants*
16.2
15.8
16.3
17.1
18.3
20.8
26.0
26.1
24.6
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
20.3
17.9
17.7
15.8
13.4
12.2
10.9
10.8
9.1
8.2
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
1.4
Sedatives*
11.7
10.7
10.8
9.9
9.9
10.3
10.5
9.1
7.9
6.6
5.8
5.2
4.1
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
Barbiturates*
10.7
9.6
9.3
8.1
7.5
6.8
6.6
5.5
5.2
4.9
4.6
4.2
3.6
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.4
Methaqualone*
5.1
4.7
5.2
4.9
5.9
7.2
7.6
6.8
5.4
3.8
2.8
2.1
1.5
1.3
1.3
0.7
0.5
Tranquilizers*
10.6
10.3
10.8
9.9
9.6
8.7
8.0
7.0
6.9
6.1
6.1,
5.8
5.5
4.8
3.8
3.5
3.6
Alcohol
84.8
85.7
87.0
87.7
88.1
87.9
87.0
86.8
87.3
86.0
85.6
84.5
85.7
85.3
82.7
80.6
77.7
Cigarettes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.9
1.7
1.4
Inhalants Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites.
Hallucinogens Adjusted for underreporting of PCP.
Stimulants Adjusted to exclude inappropriate reporting of nonprescription stimulants.
Only use not under a doctor's orders included.
Terms:
Ever Used: Used at least one time.
Used in Last Year: Used at least once in the 12 months prior to the survey.
Used in Last Month: Used at least once in the 30 days prior to the survey.
Used Daily: Used 20 or more times in the month before the survey.
Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse, Monitoring the Future Study, 1991.
High School Senior Survey Trends in 30-day Prevalence
Percent Who Used in Past Month
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
Marijuana/Hashish
27.1
32.2
35.4
37.1
36.5
33.7
31.6
28.5
27.0
25.2
25.7
23.4
21.0
18.0
16.7
14.0
13.8
Inhalants
NA
0.9
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.2
2.5
2.8
2.6
2.3
2.7
2.4
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.2
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.6
3.0
3.2
3.5
3.0
2.7
2.9
2.6
Amyl & Butyl Nitrates
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.4
1.8
1.4
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.3
1.3
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.4
Hallucinogens
4.7
3.4
4.1
3.9
4.0
3.7
3.7
3.4
2.8
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.3
4.4
4.5
4.1
3.5
3.2
3.8
3.5
2.8
2.3
2.9
2.3
2.4
LSD
2.3
1.9
2.1
2.1
2.4
2.3
2.5
2.4
1.9
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.9
0.5
PCP
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.4
1.4
1.4
1.0
1.3
1.0
1.6
1.3
0.6
0.3
1.4
0.4
Cocaine
1.9
2.0
2.9
3.9
5.7
5.2
5.8
5.0
4.9
5.8
6.7
6.2
4.3
3.4
2.8
1.9
1.4
Crack
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
1.6
1.4
0.7
0.7
Other Cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.1
3.2
1.9
1.7
1.2
Heroin
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
Other Opiates*
2.1
2.0
2.8
2.1
2.4
2.4
2.1
1.8
1.8
1.8
2.3
2.0
1.8
1:6
1.6
1.5
1.1
Stimulants*
8.5
7.7
8.8
8.7
9.9
12.1
15.8
13.7
12.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10.7
8.9
8.3
6.8
5.5
5.2
4.6
4.2
3.7
3.2
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.6
0.6
Sedatives*
5.4
4.5
5.1
4.2
4.4
4.8
4.6
3.4
3.0
2.3
2.4
2.2
1.7
1.4
1.6
1.4
1.5
Barbiturates*
4.7
3.9
4.3
3.2
3.2
2.9
2.6
2.0
2.1
1.7
2.0
1.8
1.4
1.2
1.4
1.3
1.4
Methaqualone*
2.1
1.6
2.3
1.9
2.3
3.3
3.1
2.4
1.8
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.2
0.2
Tranquilizers*
4.1
4.0
4.6
3.4
3.7
3.1
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.5
1.3
1.2
1.4
Alcohol
68.2
68.3
71.2
72.1
71.8
72.0
70.7
69.7
69.4
67.2
65.9
65.3
66.4
63.9
60.0
57.1
54.0
Cigarettes
36.7
38.8
38.4
36.7
34.4
30.5
29.4
30.0
30.3
29.3
30.1
29.6
29.4
28.7
28.6
29.4
28.3
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.8
0.1
0.8
Inhalants Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites.
Hallucinogens Adjusted for underreporting of PCP.
Stimulants Adjusted to exclude inappropriate reporting of nonprescription stimulants.
Only use not under a doctor's orders included.
Terms:
Ever Used: Used at least one time.
Used in Last Year: Used at least once in the 12 months prior to the survey.
Used in Last Month: Used at least once in the 30 days prior to the survey.
Used Daily: Used 20 or more times in the month before the survey.
Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse, Monitoring the Future Study, 1991.
High School Senior Survey Trends in Daily Use
Percent Who Used Daily in the Last 30 Days
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
Marijuana/Hashish
6.0
8.2
9.1
10.7
10.3
9.1
7.0
6.3
5.5
5.0
4.9
4.0
3.3
2.7
2.9
2.2
2.0
Inhalants
NA
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.5
Amyl & Butyl Nitrates
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.2
Hallucinogens
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.1
LSD
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
PCP
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
Cocaine
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
Crack
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
Other Cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
Heroin
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
Other Opiates*
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
Stimulants*
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.7
1.2
1.1
1.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
I
Stimulants Adjusted*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
UI
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
1
Sedatives*
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Barbiturates*
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
Methaqualone*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Tranquilizers*
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
Alcohol
Daily
5.7
5.6
6.1
5.7
6.9
6.0
6.0
5.7
5.5
4.8
5.0
4.8
4.8
4.2
4.2
3.7
3.6
5+ drinks in a row/
last 2 weeks
36.8
37.1
39.4
40.3
41.2
41.2
41.4
40.5
40.8
38.7
36.7
36.8
37.5
34.7
33.0
32.2
29.8
Cigarettes
Daily
26.9
28.8
28.8
27.5
25.4
21.3
20.3
21.1
21.2
18.7
19.5
18.7
18.7
18.1
18.9
19.1
18.5
Half-pack or more
per day
17.9
19.2
19.4
18.8
16.5
14.3
13.5
14.2
13.8
12.3
12.5
11.4
11.4
10.6
11.2
11.3
10.7
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.2
0.1
Inhalants Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites.
Hallucinogens Adjusted for underreporting of PCP.
Stimulants Adjusted to exclude inappropriate reporting of nonprescription stimulants.
.
Only use not under a doctor's orders included.
Terms:
Ever Used: Used at least one time.
Used in Last Year: Used at least once in the 12 months prior to the survey.
Used in Last Month: Used at least once in the 30 days prior to the survey.
Used Daily: Used 20 or more times in the month before the survey.
Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse, Monitoring the Future Study, 1991.
The following tables are part of the nationwide survey of drug use among high school seniors, conducted annually for the National
Institute on Drug Abuse by the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research. Each year since 1977, some participants from
C-86-6
all previously graduated high school classes have been followed through the use of mailed questionnaires. These follow-up surveys
include a sample of about 1,200 full time American college students one to four years past high school.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Alcohol Drug
Trends in Annual Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
Percent who used in the last twelve months
Capsules
NIDA
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
Approx. Wtd. N =
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Any Illicit Druge
56.2
55.0
49.5
49.8
45.1
46.3
45.0
40.1
37.4
36.7
33.3
29.2
Any Illicit Drug
Other Than Marijuanaᶜ
32.3
31.7
29.9
29.9
27.2
26.7
25.0
21.3
19.2
16.4
15.2
13.2
Marijuana/Hashish
51.2
51.3
44.7
45.2
40.7
41.7
40.9
37.0
34.6
33.6
29.4
26.5
Inhalantsᵇ
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.8
2.4
3.1
3.9
3.7
4.1
3.7
3.9
3.5
Hallucinogens
8.5
7.0
8.7
6.5
6.2
5.0
ON DRUG ABUSE
6.0
5.9
5.3
5.1
5.4
6.3
NATIONAL INSTITUTE
LSD
6.0
4.6
6.3
4.3
3.7
2.2
3.9
4.0
3.6
3.4
4.3
5.1
Cocaine
16.8
16.0
17.2
17.3
16.3
17.3
17.1
13.7
10.0
8.2
5.6
3.6
Crackᶜ
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
2.0
1.4
1.5
0.6
0.5
MDMA ("Ecstasy"){
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.3
2.3
0.9
Heroin
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
Other Opiates
5.1
4.3
3.8
3.8
3.8
2.4
4.0
3.1
3.1
3.2
2.9
2.7
Stimulantsᵃ
22.4
22.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted
NA
NA
21.1
17.3
15.7
11.9
10.3
7.2
6.2
4.6
4.5
3.9
Crystal Methamphetamine8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
Sedatives
8.3
8.0
8.0
4.5
3.5
2.5
2.6
1.7
1.5
1.0
NA
NA
Barbituratesᵃ
2.9
2.8
3.2
2.2
1.9
1.3
2.0
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.4
1.2
Methaqualone®
7.2
6.5
6.6
3.1
2.5
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.5
0.2
NA
NA
Tranquilizers®
6.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
3.5
3.6
4.4
3.8
3.1
2.6
3.0
2.4
Alcohol
90.5
92.5
92.2
91.6
90.0
92.0
91.5
90.9
89.6
89.6
89.0
88.3
Cigarettes
36.2
37.6
34.3
36.1
33.2
35.0
35.3
38.0
36.6
34.2
35.5
35.6
Revised January 1992
NOTES: NA indicates data not available.
Abuse. and Mental Health Administration
"Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
bThis drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1980 - 1989, and in five of the six questionnaire forms in
1990 - 1991. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 1170.
This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1986, in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987 - 1989,
and in all six forms in 1990 - 1991.
ᵈBased on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
'Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants,
barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
'This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1989, and in two of the six questionnaire forms in 1990 - 1991.
Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
8This drug was asked about in two of the six questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
301-443-6245
5600 Fishers Lane. Rockville, Maryland 20857
Issued by the Press Office of the National Institute on Drug Abuse
Trends in Thirty-day Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
Percent who used in the last thirty days
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
Approx. Wtd. N =
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
37.6
31.3
29.3
27.0
26.1
25.9
22.4
18.5
18.2
15.2
15.2
Any Illicit Druge
38.4
Any Illicit Drug
Other Than Marijuanaᶜ
20.7
18.6
17.1
13.9
13.8
11.8
11.6
8.8
8.5
6.9
4.4
4.3
Marijuana/Hashish
34.0
33.2
26.8
26.2
23.0
23.6
22.3
20.3
16.8
16.3
14.0
14.1
Inhalantsᵇ
1.5
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.3
0.8
1.0
0.9
Hallucinogens
2.7
2.3
2.6
1.8
1.8
1.3
2.2
2.0
1.7
2.3
1.4
1.2
LSD
1.4
1.4
1.7
0.9
0.8
0.7
1.4
1.4
1.1
1.4
1.1
0.8
Cocaine
6.9
7.3
7.9
6.5
7.6
6.9
7.0
4.6
4.2
2.8
1.2
1.0
Crackᶜ
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.3
MDMA ("Ecstasy")f
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.3
0.6
0.2
Heroin
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
Other Opiates
1.8
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.4
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.6
Stimulantsᵃ
13.4
12.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted
NA
NA
9.9
7.0
5.5
4.2
3.7
2.3
1.8
1.3
1.4
1.0
2
Crystal Methamphetamine8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
Sedativesᵃ
3.8
3.4
2.5
1.1
1.0
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.2
NA
NA
Barbiturates
0.9
0.8
1.0
0.5
0.7
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.3
Methaqualoneᵃ
3.1
3.0
1.9
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
NA
NA
Tranquilizersᵃ
2.0
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.9
1.0
1.1
0.8
0.5
0.6
76.2
74.5
74.7
Alcohol
81.8
81.9
82.8
80.3
79.1
80.3
79.7
78.4
77.0
Cigarettes
25.8
25.9
24.4
24.7
21.5
22.4
22.4
24.0
22.6
21.1
21.5
23.2
NOTES: NA indicates data not available.
"Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
bThis drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1980 1989, and in five of the six questionnaire forms in
1990 1991. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 1170.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987 1989, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990 - 1991.
ᵈBased on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
'Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants,
barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
'This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1989, and in two of the six questionnaire forms in 1990 1991.
Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
8This drug was asked about in two of the six questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15 1992
DRAFT
1991 Survey Results
from
Monitoring the Future
January 7, 1992
Notes: 1. Young adult data tables (for 19-28 year-olds) have a few drugs for which the data
are still being run. These entries are shown as NT for "not tabulated."
2. Comparison of the usage rates across the 8th, 10th, and 12th grade students
suggest that for some of the psychotherapeutic prescription-type drug classes, the
younger respondents may have been more likely to include non-prescription drugs
(specifically, for sedatives and narcotics other than heroin). For example, they
may have included cough syrups not containing narcotics. For this reason, we
believe the results for the younger children on these drugs need to be viewed with
some skepticism at this point. Also for this reason, indexes of illicit drug use
have not been included in Table A.
a
at
DRAFT
TABLE A, ROUGH DRAFT
Lifetime, Annual, 30-Day, and Daily Prevalence of
Various Types of Drugs
-
1991
Lifetime
Annual
30-Day
Daily
8th
10th
12th
8th
10th
12th
8th
10th
12th
8th
10th
12th
Marijuana/Hashish
10.2
23.4
36.7
6.2
16.5
23.9
3.2
8.7
13.8
0.2
0.8
2.0
Inhalants
17.6
15.7
17.6
9.0
7.1
6.6
4.4
2.7
2.4
0.2
0.1
0.2
Inhalants adj.
18.0
-
-
6.9
-
-
-
2.6
-
-
-
0.5
Amyl/Butyl Nitrites
1.6
-
0.9
-
-
0.4
-
-
-
-
-
0.2
Hallucinogens
3.2
6.1
9.6
1.9
4.0
5.8
0.8
1.6
2.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
Hallucinogens adj.
-
-
10.0
-
-
6.1
-
-
2.4
-
-
0.1
LSD
2.7
5.6
8.8
1.7
3.7
5.2
0.6
1.5
1.9
0.0
0.0
0.1
PCP
-
-
2.9
-
-
1.4
-
-
0.5
-
-
0.1
Other Psyche
1.4
2.2
3.7
0.7
1.3
2.0
0.3
0.4
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
Cocaine
2.3
4.1
7.8
1.1
2.2
3.5
0.5
0.7
1.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
"Crack"
1.3
1.7
3.1
0.7
0.9
1.5
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.1
Other Cocaine
2.0
3.8
7.0
1.0
2.1
3.2
0.5
0.6
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.1
Heroin
1.2
1.2
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
Other Opiates
9.3
10.6
6.6
5.5
6.5
3.5
2.3
2.6
1.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Stimulants, adj.
10.5
13.2
15.4
6.2
8.2
8.2
2.6
3.3
3.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
Ice
-
-
3.3
-
-
1.4
-
-
0.6
-
-
0.1
-
-
Sedatives
-
6.7
-
-
3.6
-
-
1.5
-
0.1
-
Barbiturates
6.0
8.1
6.2
3.4
4.4
3.4
1.4
1.7
1.4
0.1
0.0
0.1
Quaaludes
1.3
-
-
0.5
-
-
0.2
-
-
0.0
-
-
Tranquilizers
3.8
5.8
7.2
1.8
3.2
3.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.1
Alcohol
Any use
70.1
83.8
88.0
54.0
72.3
77.7
25.1
42.8
54.0
0.5
1.3
3.6
5+ drinks in
last 2 weeks
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12.9
22.9
29.8
are
Cigarettes
Any use
44.0
55.1
63.1
-
-
-
14.3
20.8
28.3
7.2
12.6
18.5
-
-
-
I
-
3.1
6.5
10.7
1/2pack +/day
-
-
-
-
Steroids
1.9
1.8
2.1
1.0
1.1
1.4
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.0
0.1
0.1
-
Smokeless Tobacco
22.2
28.2
-
-
-
-
6.9
10.0
-
-
-
Been Drunk
26.7
50.0
65.4
17.5
40.1
52.7
7.6
20.5
31.6
0.2
0.2
0.9
Footnotes to this table to follow.
5
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
DRAFT
TABLE B
Harmfulness of Drugs as Perceived by Students, 1991
Percentage saying "great risk"
Q. How much do you think people
risk harming themselves
(physically or in other
ways), if they
8th Grade
10th Grade
12th Grade
Try marijuana once or twice
41.9
30.9
27.1
Smoke marijuana occasionally
60.0
49.9
40.6
Smoke marijuana regularly
86.8
84.3
78.6
Try "crack" once or twice
65.7
73.4
60.6
Take "crack" occasionally
86.0
91.1
76.5
Try cocaine powder once or twice
58.0
61.5
53.6
Take cocaine powder occasionally
80.4
85.3
69.8
Try inhalants once or twice
38.3
40.3
NA
Take inhalants regularly
69.9
74.4
NA
Try steroids
67.4
70.1
65.6
Take smokeless tobacco regularly
38.0
42.6
NA
Try one or two drinks of an
alcoholic beverage (beer,
wine, liquor)
11.2
9.1
9.1
Take one or two drinks nearly
every day
32.3
36.5
32.7
Have five or more drinks once
or twice each weekend
60.3
55.4
48.6
Smoke one or more packs of
cigarettes per day
52.6
61.3
69.4
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNTIL feb 15, 1992
DRAFT
TABLE C
Disapproval of Drug Use by Students, 1991
Percent who disapprove or strongly disapprove
Q. Do you disapprove of people who
8th Grade
10th Grade
12th Grade
Try marijuana once or twice
87.0
76.1
68.7
Smoke marijuana occasionally
91.9
85.4
79.4
Smoke marijuana regularly
94.6
92.2
89.3
Try "crack" once or twice
94.6
95.1
92.1
Take "crack" occasionally
96.3
96.9
94.2
Try cocaine powder once or twice
94.0
93.0
88.0
Take cocaine powder occasionally
96.1
96.4
93.0
Try inhalants once or twice
88.9
89.3
NA
Take inhalants regularly
95.0
95.5
NA
Try steroids
92.9
92.9
90.5
Take smokeless tobacco regularly
83.7
78.7
NA
Try one or two drinks of an
alcoholic beverage (beer,
wine, liquor)
52.5
38.1
29.8
Take one or two drinks nearly
every day
83.5
82.4
76.5 as
Have five or more drinks once
or twice each weekend
86.5
77.6
67.4
Smoke one or more packs of
cigarettes per day
84.3
80.4
71.4
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNT!! Feb 15, 1992
DRAFT
TABLE D
Perceived Availability of Drugs, 1991
Percentage saying fairly easy or very easy to get
Q. How difficult do you think
it would be for you to get.
8th Grade
10th Grade
12th Grade
Marijuana
28.1
57.6
83.3
LSD
14.0
27.0
39.5
PCP
12.3
20.1
27.6
"Crack"
15.7
28.9
39.9
Cocaine Powder
16.0
29.6
46.0
Heroin
12.6
19.8
30.6
Other narcotics
15.7
24.6
34.6
Amphetamines
23.4
37.4
57.3
Barbiturates
21.0
32.6
42.4
Tranquilizers
17.0
27.9
40.8
Cigarettes
75.8
90.7
NA
Alcohol
66.6
84.3
NA
Crystal Methamphetamine
12.5
17.7
22.3
Steroids
17.2
31.1
54.1
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
TABLE 6
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
DRAFT
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
Lifetime Prevalence of Use of Various Types of Drugs
by Subgroups, Class of 1991
(Entries are percentages)
MJ INᵃ,ᵇ NITᶜ HLb LSD PCPᶜ COK CRK ocd HER OP sMᵉ SEᶜ BRB QUᶜ TRN ALC CIG IC STD
All Seniors
36.7
17.6
1.6
9.6
8.8
2.9
7.8
3.1
7.0
0.9
6.6
15.4
6.7
6.2
1.3
7.2
88.0
63.1
3.3
2.1
Sex:
11.5
10.6
3.5
8.8
3.7
7.8
1.2
7.0
14.9
7.0
6.5
1.4
6.7
88.2
63.5
3.8
3.6
Male
40.3
20.8
2.3
Female
32.8
14.3
1.0
7.5
6.8
2.3
6.6
2:4
5.8
0.6
6.2
15.9
6.1
5.7
0.8
7.5
87.9
62.5
2.8
0.4
College Plans:
None or under 4 yrs
43.6
20.7
2.4
12.1
11.2
3.8
10.7
5.1
9.0
1.2
7.9
20.5
8.6
8.3
1.1
8.4
89.5
70.5
4.1
2.8
1.7
Complete 4 yrs
33.8
16.5
1.3
8.5
7.7
2.7
6.4
2.3
5.8
0.9
6.1
13.4
5.7
5.2
1.3
6.8
87.6
59.8
3.0
Region:
Northeast
40.4
18.1
1.3
10,8
9.4
3.3
7.8
2.8
6.7
0.7
6.6
13.7
5.3
5.1
1.3
6.0
91.9
64.8
2.4
1.4
1.7
6.0
91.3
67.7
2.9
2.3
North Central
39.3
19.7
1.5
10.1
9.2
2.8
6.7
2.7
5.6
1.3
7.1
18.5
5.5
6.0
South
31.2
15.1
2.0
6.7
6.3
2.9
6.5
2.7
5.9
0.7
5.4
13.9
7.3
6.7
1.3
8.2
85.5
61.1
2.2
2.2
West
39.3
18.7
1.5
12.7
11.7
2.8
11.5
4.8
10.8
0.9
8.0
15.6
6.8
6.5
0.7
8.0
84.5
59.2
6.5
2.1
Population Density:
Large SMSA
36.1
15.2
1.6
8.5
7.2
3.6
8.0
2.6
7.3
0.8
6.4
11.8
5.2
4.7
1.4
5.5
88.2
61.5
3.1
1.8
12.3
11.6
2.6
8.9
3.8
8.0
1.0
7.2
16.5
7.7
7.0
1:3
8.4
89.8
64.1
3.9
2.1
Other SMSA
41.4
19.4
1.6
Non-SMSA
29.4
16.7
1.7
5.9
5.4
2.8
5.8
2.5
5.0
0.9
5.8
16.8
6.4
6.0
1.2
6.6
84.9
62.9
2.5
2.2
Parental Education:
1.0-2.0 (Low)
38.0
18.7
2.0
8.8
8.0
2.8
9.5
5.0
8.6
1.1
6.0
17.3
7.9
7.9
0.6
8.4
86.2
65.0
3.8
2.8
1.1
2.5-3.0
36.8
17.9
1.1
9.0
8.1
2.7
8.2
3.1
7.1
0.8
6.6
16.7
6.4
6.3
0.7
7.6
88.6
63.6
3.1
3.5-4.0
36.8
17.3
1.9
9.6
8.8
2.7
7.8
3.3
7.1
0.8
6.6
16.1
6.5
5.9
1.5
6.3
88.9
63.8
3.1
2.2
5.5
1.2
7.1
87.6
60.9
3.8
2.6
4.5-5.0
35.5
17.6
1.1
9.5
8.6
2.2
6.6
2.4
5.8
0.9
6.7
14.0
5.8
5.5-6.0 (High)
38.0
18.1
2.3
11.6
11.1
4.5
6.9
2.2
6.5
0.9
7.2
11.4
7.2
5.9
1.5
7.0
89.3
63.2
2.2
1.0
NOTE: See Table 9 for sample sizes.
"Data based on five questionnaire forms.
b Unadjusted for known underreporting of certain drugs. See text for details.
Data based on one questionnaire form.
d Data based on four questionnaire forms.
e Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
Data based on two questionnaire forms.
Parental education is average acore of mother's education and father's education reported on the following scale: (1) Completed grade school or less, (2) Some high
school, (3) Completed high school, (4) Some college, (5) Completed college, (6) Graduate or professional school after college. Missing data was allowed on one of the two
variables.
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
TABLE 7
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS NOT FOR PUBLIC
PREPART Febis, 15, 1992
Annual Prevalence of Use of Various Types of Drugs
DRAFT
by Subgroups, Class of 1991
(Entries are percentages)
MJ
INᵃ,ᵇ
NIT
HLb
LSD
PCPᶜ
COK
CRK
OCᵈ
HER
OP
SMᵉ
SEC
BARB
QUᶜ
TRN
CIGh
1
ALC
IC
std
All Seniors
23.9
6.6
0.9
5.8
5.2
1.4
3.5
1.5
3.2
0.4
3.5
8.2
3.6
3.4
0.5
3.6
77.7
I
1.4
1.4
Sex:
Male
27.2
8.2
1.2
7.5
6.8
2.2
4.1
1.8
3.7
0.6
3.9
8.3
3.5
3.4
0.5
3.5
79.0
-
1.9
2.4
Female
20.1
5.0
0.7
3.9
3.4
0.5
2.6
1.0
2.4
0.3
3.1
7.9
3.4
3.2
0.3
3.6
76.2
-
0.9
0.2
College Plans:
11.0
4.4
4.3
0.4
4.2
79.8
1.9
2.1
None or under 4 yrs
27.6
7.7
1.3
7.0
6.4
2.3
4.9
2.3
4.0
0.5
3.8
I
Complete 4 yrs
22.0
6.3
0.8
5.3
4.7
1.1
2.8
1.1
2.8
0.4
3.5
7.0
3.0
2.9
0.4
3.4
77.0
-
1.2
1.2
Region:
6.1
1.7
3.8
1.3
3.4
0.2
3.2
6.5
2:8
2.8
0.4
3.0
83.5
-
1.1
1.2
Northeast
28.2
6.7
0.7
7.0
North Central
26.1
8.6
1.0
6.5
5.9
1.2
3.2
1.5
2.9
0.8
4.2
10.1
3.7
3.5
0.6
3.0
82.5
-
1.4
1.4
South
18.1
5.0
1.2
3.7
3.4
1.6
3.0
1.2
2.8
0.4
2.7
7.9
3.6
3.6
0.5
4.0
73.2
-
1.0
1.7
0.3
73.8
2.2
1.0
West
26.8
6.8
0.6
7.3
6.5
1.0
4.4
1.8
3.9
0.3
4.4
7.8
3.6
3.3
4.4
-
Population Density:
Large SMSA
24.3
5.2
0.9
5.1
4.3
1.9
4.1
1.2
3.7
0.4
3.3
6.2
2.5
2.4
0.5
2.5
77.9
-
1.3
1.1
1.7
3.3
0.4
3.9
8.4
4.2
3.9
0.5
4.1
80.0
1.7
1.4
Other SMSA
27.5
7.8
0.7
7.7
7.0
1.0
3.7
-
Non-SMSA
17.5
5.8
1.3
3.3
3.0
1.7
2.5
1.2
2.5
0.6
3.1
9.5
3.3
3.3
0.4
3.7
73.8
1
0.8
1.6
Parental Education:
22.4
6.1
0.9
4.9
4.3
0.9
3.5
1.6
3.5
0.5
3.8
9.5
3.6
3.6
0.0
4.0
73.7
-
1.0
2.0
1.0-2.0 (Low)
2.5-3.0
22.5
6.6
0.5
4.9
4.4
1.4
3.8
1.5
3.5
0.4
3.2
9.1
3.8
3.7
0.5
3.6
78.1
-
1.1
0.6
24.0
6.1
1.3
6.2
5.5
1.4
3.7
1.7
3.2
0.4
3.7
8.9
3.0
3.0
0.2
3.1
78.9
I
1.2
1.6
3.5-4.0
6.5
3.4
3.3
0.7
3.9
77.7
1.8
1.6
4.5-5.0
23.8
7.4
0.9
6.1
5.3
1.2
3.1
0.9
2.7
0.6
3.6
-
5.5-6.0 (High)
28.2
7.1
0.3
7.3
7.1
1.8
2.4
1.1
2.4
0.5
4.1
5.7
4.2
3.6
0.6
4.0
80.3
I
1.0
0.5
NOTE: See Table 9 for sample sizes.
"Data based on five questionnaire forms.
b Unadjusted for known underreporting of certain drugs. See text for details.
ᶜData based on one questionnaire form.
d Data based on four questionnaire forms.
e Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
Data based on two questionnaire forms.
Parental education is an average score of mother's education and father's education reported on the following scale: (1) Completed grade school or less, (2) Some high school, (3) Completed high
echool; (4) Some college, (5) Completed college, (6) Graduate or professional school after college. Missing data was allowed on one of the two variables.
h Annual prevalence is not available.
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
TABLE 8
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
Thirty-Day Prevalence of Use of Various Types of Drugs
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
by Subgroups, Class of 1991
DRAFT
(Entries are percentages)
MJ INᵃ,ᵇ NITᶜ HLb LSD PCPᶜ COK CRK ocᵈ HER OP SMᵉ SEᶜ BRB QUᶜ TRN ALC CIG ICᶜ std
All Seniors
13.8
2.4
0.4
2.2
1.9
0.5
1.4
0.7
1.2
0.2
1.1
3.2
1.5
1.4
0.2
1.4
54.0
28.3
0.6
0.8
Sex:
Male
16.1
3.3
0.6
8.1
27
0.9
1.7
0.9
1.6
0.3
1.0
3.0
1.5
1.5
0.2
1.2
58.4
29.0
1.0
1.5
Female
11.2
1.6
0.1
1.1
1.0
0.2
0.9
0.5
0.7
0.1
1.1
3.2
1.3
1.3
0.2
1.4
49.0
27.5
0.1
0.0
College Plans:
None or under 4 yrs
15.8
3.2
0.5
2.5
2.1
1.1
2.1
1.2
1.7
0.2
1.1
4.8
1.9
1.9
0.3
1.5
57.1
38.1
0.7
1.4
0.7
Complete 4 yrs
12.5
2.2
0.3
2.0
1.7
0.31
1.1
0.5
1.0
0.2
1.1
2.6
1.4
1.3
0.2
1.3
52.7
24.2
0.5
Region:
Northeast
17.6
2.2
0.7
3.1
2.5
0.9
1.3
0.8
1.0
0.1
1.2
2.7
1.1
1.1
0.0
1.2
59.6
30.5
0.5
0.8
North Central
14.9
2.9
0.4
2.4
2.0
0.7
1.2
0.6
1.1
0.5
1.3
3.8
1.4
1.4
0.3
1.0
59.7
34.6
0.7
1.0
South
9.7
2.1
0.3
1.2
1.2
0.3
1.2
0.5
1.2
0.1
0.8
3.2
1.8
1.6
0.4
1.6
49.1
25.4
0.3
1.0
West
15.7
2.4
0.0
2.6
2.3
0.3
1.8
0.9
1.5
0.1
1.2
2.8
1.7
1.6
0.1
1.5
49.7
23.2
0.9
0.4
Population Density:
Large SMSA
14.3
1.8
0.3
1.6
1.3
0.8
1.5
0.6
1:3
0.2
1.0
2.4
1.2
1.1
0.4
0.9
52.9
26.2
0.3
0.7
3.1
2.7
0.2
1.6
0.8
1.3
0.2
1.2
3.0
1.7
1.6
0.3
1.5
55.7
29.3
0.7
0.9
Other SMSA
16.3
2.9
0.4
Non-SMSA
9.0
2.1
0.3
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.2
0.9
4.1
1.5
1.5
0.0
1.5
52.0
28.6
0.6
0.8
Parental Education8
1.0-2.0 (Low)
11.7
2.7
0.0
2.2
1.7
0.3
1.8
1.0
1.8
0.3
1.3
3.6
1.9
1.9
0.0
2.1
49.9
31.3
0.3
1.7
0.3
2.5-3.0
12.9
2.5
0.3
1.6
1.5
0.6
1.3
0.7
1.1
0.2
1.0
3.6
1.6
1.6
0.4
1.2
53.3
28.7
0.6
3.5-4.0
13.8
1.9
0.7
2.1
1.8
0.5
1.4
0.8
1.1
0.0
1.0
3.4
1.1
1.1
0.2
0.9
54.3
28.4
0.5
0.9
4.5-5.0
13.7
2.7
0.3
2.4
2.0
0.7
12
0.5
0.9
0.4
1.1
2.7
1.5
1.4
0.1
1.5
54.8
26.9
0.8
1.1
5.5-6.0 (High)
17.6
2.5
0.0
3.4
2.9
0.2
0.9
0.5
1.0
0.2
1.5
2.0
1.6
1.4
0.2
1.4
58.0
27.1
0.3
0.5
NOTE: See Table 9 for sample sizes.
Data based on five questionnaire forms.
b Unadjusted for known underreporting of certain drugs. See text for details.
c Data based on one questionnaire form.
Data based on four questionnaire forms.
e Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
Data based on two questionnaire forms.
8 Parental education is an average score of mother's education and father's education reported on the following scale: (1) Completed grade school or less, (2) Some high
school, (3) Completed high school, (4) Some college, (5) Completed college, (6) Graduate or professional school after college. Missing data was allowed on one of the two
variables.
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
DRAFT
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
TABLE 9
Thirty-Day Prevalence of Daily Use of Marijuana, Alcohol, and Cigarettes
by Subgroups, Class of 1991
Percent who used daily in last thirty days
Alcohol
Cigarettes
N
5+
b
One
Half-pack
(Approx.)
Marijuana
Daily
drinks
or more
or more
All Seniors
15000
2.0
3.6
29.8
18.5
10.7
Sex:
Male
7400
3.0
5.3
37.8
18.8
11.6
Female
7200
0.9
1.6
21.2
17.9
9.5
College Plans:
None or under 4 yrs
4000
3.3
5.4
34.4
28.4
18.7
Complete 4 yrs
10300
1.4
2.9
27.9
14.1
7.1
Region:
Northeast
2800
2.4
3.3
33.4
20.9
12.9
North Central
4000
1.9
3.9
34.6
23.0
14.1
South
5100
1.8
4.1
26.3
16.4
8.9
West
3100
2.1
2.7
26.3
13.9
7.2
Population Density:
Large SMSA
3600
1.9
3.3
28.6
16.7
10.2
Other SMSA
7200
2.5
3.5
30.1
19.0
10.7
Non-SMSA
4200
1.2
4.1
30.4
19.0
11.1
Parental Education a
1.0-2.0 (Low)
1500
2.3
4.2
26.8
21.2
12.5
2.5-3.0
4100
2.4
4.1
29.9
19.8
12.4
3.5-4.0
4200
1.8
3.0
30.4
18.5
10.7
4.5-5.0
3100
1.7
3.1
29.9
16.2
7.9
5.5-6.0 (High)
1500
1.6
4.1
30.6
16.1
9.0
a Parental education is an average score of mother's education and father's education reported on the following scale: (1) Completed
grade school or less, (2) Some high school, (3) Completed high school, (4) Some college, (5) Completed college, (6) Graduate or
professional school after college. Missing data was allowed on one of the two variables.
b This measure refers to use of five or more drinks in a row in the past two weeks.
TABLE 10
DRAFT
Trends in Lifetime Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
Percent ever used
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. N =
9400
15400
17100
17800
15500
15900
17500
17700
16300
15900
16000
15200
16300
16300
16700
15200
15000
Any Illicit Drug Use
55.2
58.3
61.6
64.1
65.1
65.4
65.6
65.8
64.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
b
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
64.4
62.9
61.6
60.6
57.6
56.6
53.9
50.9
47.9
44.1
-3.8ses
Any Illicit Drug Other
Than Marijuana
36.2
35.4
35.8
36.5
37.4
38.7
42.8
45.0
44.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
b
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
---
-
-
-
41.1
40.4
40.3
39.7
37.7
35.8
32.5
31.4
29.4
26.9
-2.5ss
Marijuana/Hashish
47.3
52.8
56.4
59.2
60.4
60.3
59.5
58.7
57.0
54.9
54.2
50.9
50.2
47.2
43.7
40.7
36.7
-4.0ase
d
Inhalants
NA
10.3
11.1
12.0
12.7
11.9
12.3
12.8
13.6
14.4
15.4
15.9
17.0
16.7
17.6
18.0
17.6
-0.4
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
18.2
17.3
17.2
17.7
18.2
18.0
18.1
20.1
18.6
17.5
18.6
18.5
18.0
-0.5
Amyl & Butyl Nitrites
f,g
NA
NA
NA
NA
11.1
11.1
10.1
9.8
8.4
8.1
7.9
8.6
4.7
3.2
3.3
2.1
1.6
-0.5
Hallucinogens
16.3
15.1
13.9
14.3
14.1
13.3
13.3
12.5
11.9
10.7
10.3
9.7
10.3
8.9
9.4
9.4
9.6
+0.2
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
17.7
15.6
15.3
14.3
13.6
12.3
12.1
11.9
10.6
9.2
9.9
9.7
10.0
+0.3
LSD
11.3
11.0
9.8
9.7
9.5
9.3
9.8
9.6
8.9
8.0
7.5
7.2
8.4
7.7
8.3
8.7
8.8
+0.1
PCP
NA
NA
NA
NA
12.8
9.6
7.8
6.0
5.6
5.0
4.9
4.8
3.0
2.9
3.9
2.8
2.9
+0.1
Cocaine
9.0
9.7
10.8
12.9
15.4
15.7
16.5
16,0
16.2
16.1
17.3
16.9
15.2
12.1
10.3
9.4
7.8
-1.6ss
"Crack
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.4
4.8
4.7
3.5
3.1
-0.4
Other cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
14.0
12.1
8.5
8.6
7.0
-1.6ss
Heroin
2.2
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.3
0.9
-0.4s
Other opiates
9.0
9.6
10.3
9.9
10.1
9.8
10.1
9.6
9.4
9.7
10.2
9.0
9.2
8.6
8.3
8.3
6.6
-1.7ess
Stimulants
22.3
22.6
23.0
22.9
24.2
26.4
32.2
35.6
35.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
27.9
26.9
27.9
26.2
23.4
21.6
19.8
19.1
17.5
15.4
-2.1ss
1
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.7
3.3
+0.6
Sedatives
k,m
18.2
17.7
17.4
16.0
14.6
14.9
16.0
15.2
14.4
13.3
11.8
10.4
8.7
7.8
7.4
7.5
6.7
-0.8
Barbiturates
16.9
16.2
15.6
13.7
11.8
11.0
11.3
10.3
9.9
9.9
9.2
8.4
7.4
6.7
6.5
6.8
6.2
-0.6
k,m
Methaqualone
8.1
7.8
8.5
7.9
8.3
9.5
10.6
10.7
10.1
8.3
6.7
5.2
4.0
3.3
2.7
2.3
1.3
-1.0s
Tranquilizers
17.0
16.8
18.0
17.0
16.3
15.2
14.7
14.0
13.3
12.4
11.9
10.9
10.9
9.4
7.6
7.2
7.2
0.0
Alcohol
90.4
91.9
92.5
93.1
93.0
93.2
92.6
92.8
92.6
92.6
92.2
91.3
92.2
92.0
90.7
89.5
88.0
-1.5
Cigarettes
73.6
75.4
75.7
75.3
74.0
71.0
71.0
70.1
70.6
69.7
68.8
67.6
67.2
66.4
65.7
64.4
63.1
-1.3
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.0
2.9
2.1
-0.8
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: B =.05, BS =.01, 886 =.001. NA indicates data not available.
Use of "any illicit drugs" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or tranquilizers not under
doctor's orders.
b Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
c Use of "other illicit drugs" includes any use of hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's
orders.
di Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1976-1988; N is four-fifths of N indicated. Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1989-1991; N is five-sixths of N indicated.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text for details:
Data based on a single questiqunaire form; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1979-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989-1991.
h Question text changed elightly in 1987.
Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text for details.
Data based on two questionnaire forms in 1987-1989; N is two-fifths of N indicated in 1987-1988 and two-sixths of N indicated in 1989. Data based on six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
Data based on a single questionnaire form in 1987-1989; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1987-1988 and one-aixth of N indicated in 1989. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1990-1991; N is four-sixths
of N indicated.
Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
Data based on two questionnaire forms; N is two-sixths of N indicated. Steroid data based on a single questionnaire form in 1989-1990.
Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1975-1988, six questionnaire forms in 1989, and one questionnaire form in 1990-1991; N is one-sixth of N indicated in 1990-1991
TABLE 11
DRAFT
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
Trends in Annual Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Percent who used in last twelve months
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
"90-"91
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. N -
9400
15400
17100
17800
15500
15900
17500
17700
16300
15900
16000
15200
16300
16300
16700
15200
15000
Any Illicit Drug Use
45.0
48.1
51.1
53.8
54.2
53.1
52.1
50.8
49.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
49.4
47.4
45.8
46.3
44.3
41.7
38.5
35.4
32.5
29.4
-3,1sse
Any Illicit Drug Other
Than Marijuana
26.2
25.4
26.0
27.1
28.2
30.4
34.0
33.8
32.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
b
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
30.1
28.4
28.0
27.4
25.9
24.1
21.1
20.0
17.9
16.2
-1.7a
29.6
27.0
Marijuans/Hashish
40.0
44.5
47.6
50.2
50.8
48.8
46.1
44.3
42.3
40.0
40.6
38.8
36.3
33.1
23.9
-3.1as
d
Inhalants
NA
3.0
3.7
4.1
5.4
4.6
4.1
4.5
4.3
5.1
5.7
6.1
6.9
6.5
5.9
6.9
6.6
-0.3
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
8.9
7.9
6.1
6.6
6.2
7.2
7.5
8.9
8.1
7.1
6.9
7.5
6.9
-0.6
f.g
Amyl/Butyl Nitrites
NA
NA
NA
NA
6.5
5.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
4.0
4.0
4.7
2.6
1.7
1.7
1.4
0.9
-0.5
5.9
-0.1
Hallucinogens
11.2
9.4
8.8
9.6
9.9
9.3
9.0
8.1
7.3
6.5
6.3
6.0
6.4
5.5
5.6
5.8
h
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
11.8
10.4
10.1
9.0
8.3
7.3
7.6
7.6
6.7
5.8
6.2
6.0
6.1
+0.1
LSD
7.2
6.4
5.5
6.3
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.1
5.4
4.7
4.4
4.5
5.2
4.8
4.9
5:4
5.2
-0.2
PCP 8
NA
NA,
NA
NA
7.0
4.4
3.2
2.2
2.6
2.3
2.9
2.4
1.3
1.2
2.4
1.2
1.4
+0.2
5.3
3.5
-1.8ess
Cocaine
5.6
6.0
7.2
9.0
12.0
12.3
12.4
11.5
11.4
11.6
13.1
12.7
10.3
7.9
6.5
"Crack"
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.1
3.9
3.1
3.1
1.9
1.5
-0.4
Other cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9.8
7.4
5.2
4.6
3.2
-1.4885
Heroin
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.4
-0.1
k
4.4
4.5
3.5
-1.0ss
Other opiates
5.7
5.7
6.4
6.0
6.2
6.3
5.9
5.3
5.1
5.2
5.9
5.2
5.3
4.6
Stimulants
16.2
15.8
16.3
17.1
18.3
20.8
26.0
26.1
24.6
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
bk
Stimulants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
20.3
17.9
17.7
15.8
13.4
12.2
10.9
10.8
9.1
8.2
-0.9
1
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
1.4
+0.1
k,m
3.6
3.6
0.0
Sedatives
11.7
10.7
10.8
9.9
9.9
103
10.5
9.1
7.9
6.6
5.8
5.2
4.1
3.7
3.7
Barbiturates
10.7
9.6
9.3
8.1
7.5
6.8
6.6
5.5
5.2
4.9
4.6
4.2
3.6
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.4
0.0
k,m
0.7
0.5
-0.2
Methaqualone
5.1
4.7
5.2
4.9
5.9
7.2
7.6
6.8
5.4
3.8
2.8
2.1
1.5
1.3
1.3
Tranquilizers
10.6
10.3
10.8
9.9
9.6
8.7
8.0
7.0
6.9
6.1
6.1
5.8
5.5
4.8
3.8
3.5
3.6
+0.1
82.7
80.6
77.7
-2.9ss
Alcohol
84.8
85.7
87.0
87.7
88.1
87.9
87.0
86.8
87.3
86.0
85.6
84.5
85.7
85.3
Cigarettes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.9
1.7
1.4
-0.3
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: B =.05, 88 =.01, 888 =.001. NA indicates data not available.
Use of "any illicit drugs" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or tranquilizers not under
doctor's orders.
b
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
c Use of "other fllicit drugs" includes any use of hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's
orders. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1976-1988; N is four-fifths of N indicated. Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1989-1991; N is five-aixths of N indicated.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text for details.
Data based on a single questionnaire form; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1979-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989-1991.
h Question text changed slightly in 1987.
Data based on a single questionnaire form in 1986; N is one-fifth of N indicated. Data based on two questionnaire forms in 1987-1989; N is two-fifths of N indicated in 1987-1988 and two-sixths of N indicated
Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text for details.
Data based on a single questionnaire form in 1987-1989; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1987-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1990-1991; N is four-sixths
in 1989. Data based on six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
N indicated.
Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
Data based on two questionnaire forms; N is two-sixths of N indicated. Steroid data based on a single questionnaire form in 1989-1990.
Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1975-1988, six questionnaire forms in 1989, and one questionnaire form in 1990-1991. N is one-sixth of N indicated in 1990-1991.
TABLE 12
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
DRAFT
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
Percent who used in last thirty days
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. N -
9400
15400
17100
17800
15500
15900
17500
17700
16300
15900
16000
15200
16300
16300
16700
15200
15000
Any Illicit Drug Use
30.7
34.2
37.6
38.9
38.9
37.2
36.9
33.5
32.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
32.5
30.5
29.2
29.7
27.1
24.7
21.3
19.7
17.2
16.4
-0.8
-
Any Illicit Drug Other
19.2
-
-
-
-
Than Marijuana
15.4
13.9
15.2
15.1
16.8
18.4
21.7
18.4
-
-
-
-
b
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
17.0
15.4
15.1
14.9
13.2
11.6
10.0
9.1
8.0
7.1
-0.9a
-
-
-
14.0
13.8
-0.2
Marijuana/Hashish
27.1
32:2
35.4
37.1
36.5
33.7
31.6
28.5
27.0
25.2
25.7
23.4
21.0
18.0
16.7
d
Inhalants
NA
0.9
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.2
2.5
2.8
2.6
2.3
2.7
2.4
-0.3
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.2
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.6
3.0
3.2
3.5
3.0
2.7
2.9
2.6
-0.3
f.g
Amyl/Butyl Nitrites
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.4
1.8
1.4
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.3
1.3
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.4
-0.2
2.2
2.2
0.0
Hallucinogens
4.7
3.4
4.1
3.9
4.0
3.7
3.7
3:4
2.8
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
h
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.3
4.4
4.5
4.1
3.5
3.2
3.8
3.5
2.8
2.3
2.9
2.3
2.4
+0.1
1.9
1.9
0.0
LSD
2.3
1:9
2.1
2.1
2.4
2.3
2.5
2.4
1.9
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.8
PCP
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.4
1.4
1.4
1.0
1.3
1.0
1.6
1.3
0.6
0.3
1.4
0.4
0.5
+0.1
2.8
1.9
1.4
-0.5s
Cocaine
1.9
2.0
2.9
3.9
5.7
5.2
5.8
5.0
4.9
5.8
6.7
6.2
4.3
3.4
"Crack
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
1.6
1.4
0.7
0.7
0.0
NA
1.9
1.7
1.2
-0.5ss
Other cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.1
3.2
Heroin
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
k
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.1
-0.4s
Other opiates
2.1
2.0
2.8
2.1
2.4
2.4
2.1
1.8
1.8
1.8
2.3
2.0
1.8
Stimulants
8.5
7.7
8.8
8.7
9.9
12.1
15.8
13.7
12.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.2
4.6
4.2
3.7
3.2
-0.5
Stimulants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10.7
8.9
8.3
6.8
5.5
1
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.6
0.6
0.0
k,m
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.5
+0.1
Sedatives
5.4
4.5
5.1
4.2
4.4
4.8
4.6
3.4
3.0
2.3
2.4
2.2
1.4
Barbiturates
4.7
3.9
4.3
3.2
3.2
2.9
2.6
2.0
2.1
1.7
2.0
1.8
1.4
1.2
1.4
1.3
1.4
+0.1
k.m
0.5
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.0
Methaqualone
2.1
1.6
2.3
1.9
2.3
3.3
3.1
2.4
1.8
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.6
Tranquilizers
4.1
4.0
4.6
3.4
3.7
3.1
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.5
1.3
1.2
1.4
+0.2
65.3
63.9
60.0
57.1
54.0
-3.1s
Alcohol
68.2
68.3
71.2
72.1
71.8
72.0
70.7
69.7
69.4
67.2
65.9
66.4
Cigarettes
36.7
38.8
38.4
36.7
34.4
30.5
29.4
30.0
30.3
29.3
30.1
29.6
29.4
28.7
28.6
29.4
28.3
-1.1
NA
NA
NA
0.8
1.0
0.8
-0.2
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: $ =.05, BB =.01, ass =.001. NA indicates data not available.
Use of "any illicit drugs" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or tranquilizers not under
doctor's orders.
b Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
Use of "other illicit drugs" includes any use of hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990); or tranquilizers not under a doctor's
orders. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1976-1988; N is four-fifths of N indicated. Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1989-1991; N is five-sixths of N indicated.
Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text for details.
Data based on a single questionnaire form; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1979-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989-1991
Question text changed slightly in 1987.
h Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text for details.
Data based on two questionnaire forms in 1987-1989; N is two-fifths of N indicated in 1987-1988 and two-sixths of N indicated in 1989. Data based on six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
Data based on a single questionnaire form in 1987-1989; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1987-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1990-1991; N is four-sixths
of N indicated.
Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
Data based on two questionnaire forms; N is two-sixths of N indicated. Steroid data based on a single questionnaire form in 1989-1990.
Date based on five questionnaire forms in 1975-1988, six questionnaire forms in 1989, and one questionnaire form in 1990-1991; N is one-sixth of N indicated in 1990-1991.
NOI FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
TABLE 13
DRAFT
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Daily Use of Various Types of Drugs
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS, NOT FOR PUBLIC
Percent who used daily in last thirty days
Feb 15, 1992
Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-91
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. N -
9400
15400
17100
17800
15500
15900
17500
17700
16300
15900
16000
15200
16300
16300
16700
15200
15000
Marijuana/Hashish
6.0
8.2
9.1
10.7
10.3
9.1
7.0
6.3
5.5
5.0
4.9
4.0
3.3
2.7
2.9
2.2
2.0
-0.2
Inhalants
NA
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
-0.1
0.3
0.3
10.3
0.5
+0.2
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
c,d
Amyl & Butyl Nitrites
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.2
+0.1
0.1
Hallucinogens
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.1
-0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
LSDCCd
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.0
Cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
Other cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Heroin
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
h
Other opiates
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
h
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.7
1.2
1.1
1.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted h,i
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
-0.1
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
h,k
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Sedatives
0.3
h
Barbiturates
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
h,k
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Methaqualone
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
Tranquilizers
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Alcohol
4.8
5.0
4.8
4.2
4.2
3.7
3.6
-0.1
Daily
5.7
5.6
6.1
5.7
6.9
6.0
6.0
5.7
5.5
4.8
5+ drinks in a row/
last 2 weeks
36.8
37.1
39.4
40.3
41.2
41.2
41.4
40.5
40.8
38.7
36.7
36.8
37.5
34.7
33.0
32.2
29.8
-2.4
Cigarettes
19.1
18.5
-0.6
Daily
26.9
28.8
28.8
27.5
25.4
21.3
20.3
21.1
21.2
18.7
19.5
18.7
18.7
18.1
18.9
Half-pack or more
17.9
19.2
19.4
18.8
16.5
14.3
13.5
14.2
13.8
12.3
12.5
11.4
11.4
10.6
11.2
11.3
10.7
-0.6
per day
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.2
0.1
-0.1
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: B =.05, 88 =.01, 888 =.001. NA indicates data not available. Any apparent inconsistency between the change estimate and the
& Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1976-1988; N is four-fifths of N indicated. Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1989-1991; N is five-sixths of N indicated.
prevalence estimates for the two most recent classes is due to rounding error.
b Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text for details.
Data based on a single questionnaire form; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1979-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989-1991.
Question text changed alightly in 1987.
Data based on two questionnaire forms in 1987-1989; N is two-fifths of N indicated in 1987-1988 and two-sixths of N indicated in 1989. Data based on six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text for details.
Data were based on a single questionnaire form in 1987-1989; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1987-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1990-1991; N is four-
sixths of N indicated.
h Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
Data based on two questionnaire forms; N is two-aixths of N indicated. Steroid data based on a single questionnaire form in 1989-1990.
Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1975-1988, six questionnaire forms in 1989, and one questionnaire form in 1990-1991; N is one-sixth of N indicated in 1990-1991.
TIP QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
TABLE 18
feb 15, 1992
DRAFT
Trends in Harmfulness of Drugs as Perceived by Seniors
Percentage saying "great risk"
Q. How much do you think people
risk harming themselves
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
(physically or in other
of
of
of
of
of
ways), if they
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Try marijuana once or twice
15.1
11.4
9.5
8.1
9.4
10.0
13.0
11.5
12.7
14.7
14.8
15.1
18.4
19.0
23.6
23.1
27.1
+4.0ss
Smoke marijuana occasionally
18.1
15.0
13.4
12.4
13.5
14.7
19.1
18.3
20.6
22.6
24.5
25.0
30.4
31.7
36.5
36.9
40.6
+3.7s
Smoke marijuana regularly
43.3
38.6
36.4
34.9
42.0
50.4
57.6
60.4
62.8
66.9
70.4
71.3
73.5
77.0
77.5
77.8
78.6
+0.8
Try LSD once or twice
49.4
45.7
43.2
42.7
41.6
43.9
45.5
44.9
44.7
45.4
43.5
42.0
44.9
45.7
46.0
44.7
46.6
+1.9
Take LSD regularly
81:4
80.8
79.1
81.1
82.4
83.0
83.5
83.5
83.2
83.8
82.9
82.6
83.8
84.2
84.3
84.5
84.3
-0.2
Try PCP once or twice
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
55.6
58.8
56.6
55.2
51.7
-3.5
31.3
32.1
32.8
33.0
35.7
34.0
33.5
47.9
51.2
54.9
59.4
59.4
0.0
Try cocaine once or twice
42.6
39.1
35.6
33.2
31.5
Take cocaine occasionally
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
54.2
66.8
69.2
71.8
73.9
75.5
+1.6
69.2
71.2
73.0
74.3
78.8
79.0
82.2
88.5
89.2
90.2
91.1
90.4
-0.7
Take cocaine regularly
73.1
72.3
68.2
68.2
69.5
Try "crack" once or twice
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
57.0
62.1
62.9
64.3
60.6
-3.7s
Take "crack" occasionally
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
70.4
73.2
75.3
80.4
76.5
-3.96s
Take "crack" regularly
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
84.6
84.8
85.6
91.6
90.1
-1.5
Try cocaine powder once or twice
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
45.3
51.7
53.8
53.9
53.6
-0.3
Take cocaine powder occasionally
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
56.8
61.9
65.8
71.1
69.8
-1.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
81.4
82.9
83.9
90.2
88.9
-1.3
Take cocaine powder regularly
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Try heroin once or twice
60.1
58.9
55.8
52.9
50.4
52.1
52.9
51.1
50.8
49.8
47.3
45.8
53.6
54.0
53.8
55.4
55.2
-0.2
70.9
72.2
69.8
71.8
70.7
69.8
68.2
74.6
73.8
75.5
76.6
74.9
-1.7
Take heroin occasionally
75.6
75.6
71.9
71.4
70.9
Take heroin regularly
87.2
88.6
86.1
86.6
87.5
86.2
87.5
86.0
86.1
87.2
86.0
87.1
88.7
88.8
89.5
90.2
89.6
-0.6
29.7
26.4
25.3
24.7
25.4
25.2
25.1
29.1
29.6
32.8
32.2
36.3
+4.1s
Try amphetamines once or twice
35.4
33.4
30.8
29.9
29.7
Take amphetamines regularly
69.0
67.3
66.6
67.1
69.9
69.1
66.1
64.7
64.8
67.1
67.2
67.3
69.4
69.8
71.2
71.2
74.1
+2.9
30.9
28.4
27.5
27.0
27.4
26.1
25.4
30.9
29.7
32.2
32.4
35.1
+2.7
Try barbiturates once or twice
34.8
32.5
31.2
31.3
30.7
Take barbiturates regularly
69.1
67.7
68.6
68.4
71.6
72.2
69.9
67.6
67.7
68.5
68.3
67.2
69.4
69.6
70.5
70.2
70.5
+0.3
Try one or two drinks of an
alcoholic beverage (beer,
3.8
3.5
4.2
5.0
4.6
6.2
6.0
6.0
8.3
9.1
+0.8
wine, liquor)
5.3
4.8
4.1
3.4
4.1
4.6
4.6
Take one or two drinks nearly
every day
21.5
21.2
18.5
19.6
22.6
20.3
21.6
21.6
21.6
23.0
24.4
25.1
26.2
27.3
28.5
31.3
32.7
+1.4
Take four or five drinks nearly
65.7
64.5
66.5
69.7
68.5
69.8
70.9
69.5
-1.4
every day
63.5
61.0
62.9
63.1
66.2
65.5
66.8
68.4
69.8
Have five or more drinks once
or twice each weekend
37.8
37.0
34.7
34.5
34.9
35.9
36.3
36.0
38.6
41.7
43.0
39.1
41.9
42.6
44.0
47.1
48.6
+1.5
Smoke one or more packs of
66.0
68.6
68.0
67.2
68.2
69.4
+1.2
cigarettes per day
51.3
56.4
58.4
59.0
63.0
63.7
63.3
60.5
61.2
63.8
66.5
Approx. N =
(2804)
(2918)
(3052)
(3770)
(3250)
(3234)
(3604)
(3557)
(3305)
(3262)
(3250)
(3020)
(3315)
(3276)
(2796)
(2553)
(2549)
NOTE: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: 8= .05, 68 = .01, 888 = .001. NA indicates data not available.
Answer alternatives were: (1) No risk, (2) Slight risk, (3) Moderate risk, (4) Great risk, and (Б) Can't say, drug unfamiliar.
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNTIL Febis 1992
TABLE 19
DRAFT
Trends in Proportions of Seniors Disapproving of Drug Use
Percentage "disapproving"a
Q. Do you disapprove of people
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
(who are 18 or older) doing
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
each of the following
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Try marijuana once or twice
47.0
38.4
33.4
33.4
34.2
39.0
40.0
45.5
46.3
49.3
51.4
54.6
56.6
60.8
64.6
67.8
68.7
+0.9
Smoke marijuana occasionally
54.8
47.8
44.3
43.5
45.3
49.7
52.6
59.1
60.7
63.5
65.8
69.0
71.6
74.0
77.2
80.5
79.4
-1.1
Smoke marijuana regularly
71.9
69.5
65.5
67.5
69.2
74.6
77.4
80.6
82.5
84.7
85.5
86.6
89.2
89.3
89.8
91.0
89.3
-1.7
Try LSD once or twice
82.8
84.6
83.9
85.4
86.6
87.3
86.4
88.8:
89.1
88.9
89.5
89.2
91.6
89.8
89.7
89.8
90.1
+0.3
Take LSD regularly
94.1
95.3
95.8
96.4
96.9
96.7
96.8
96.7
97.0
96.8
97.0
96.6
97.8
96.4
96.4
96.3
96.4
+0.1
Try cocaine once or twice
81.3
82.4
79.1
77.0
74.7
76.3
74.6
76.6
77.0
79.7
79.3
80.2
87.3
89.1
90.5
91.5
93.6
+2.1s
Take cocaine regularly
93.3
93.9
92.1
91.9
90.8
91.1
90.7
91.5
93.2
94.5
93.8
94.3
96.7
96.2
96.4
96.7
97.3
+0.6
Try heroin once or twice
91.6
92.6
92.5
92.0
93.4
93.5
93.5
94.6
94.3
94.0
94.0
93.3
96.2
95.0
95.4
95.1
96.0
+0.9
Take heroin occasionally
94.8
96.0
96.0
96.4
96.8
96.7
97.2
96.9
96.9
97.1
96.8
96.6
97.9
96.9
97.2
96.7
97.3
+0.6
Take heroin regularly
96.7
97.5
97.2
97.8
97.9
97.6
97.8
97.5
97.7
98.0
97.6
97.6
98.1
97.2
97.4
97.5
97.8
+0.3
Try amphetamines once or twice
74.8
75.1
74.2
74.8
75.1
75.4
71.1
72.6
72.3
72.8
74.9
76.5
80.7
82.5
83.3
85.3
86.5
+1.2
Take amphetamines regularly
92.1
92.8
92.5
93.5
94.4
93.0
91.7
92.0
92.6
93.6
93.3
93.5
95.4
94.2
94.2
95.5
96.0
+0.5
Try barbiturates once or twice
77.7
81.3
81.1
82.4
84.0
83.9
82.4
84.4
83.1
84.1
84.9
86.8
89.6
89.4
89.3
90.5
90.6
+0.1
Take barbiturates regularly
93.3
93.6
93.0
94.3
95.2
95.4
94.2
94.4
95.1
95.1
95.5
94.9
96.4
95.3
95.3
96.4
97.1
+0.7
Try one or two drinks of an
alcoholic beverage (beer,
wine, liquor)
21.6
18.2
15.6
15.6
15.8
16.0
17.2
18.2
18.4
17.4
20.3
20.9
21.4
22.6
27.3
29.4
29.8
+0.4
Take one or two drinks nearly
every day
67.6
68.9
66.8
67.7
68.3
69.0
69.1
69.9
68.9
72.9
70.9
72.8
74.2
75.0
76.5
77.9
76.5
-1.4
Take four or five drinks nearly
every day
88.7
90.7
88.4
90.2
91.7
90.8
91.8
90.9
90.0
91.0
92.0
91.4
92.2
92.8
91.6
91.9
90.6
-1.3
Have five or more drinks once
or twice each weekend
60.3
58.6
57.4
56.2
56.7
55.6
55.6
58.8
56.6
59.6
60.4
62.4
62.0
65.3
66.5
68.9
67.4
-1.5
Smoke one or more packs of
cigarettes per day
67.5
65.9
66.4
67.0
70.3
70.8
69.9
69.4
70.8
73.0
72.3
75.4
74.3
73.1
72.4
72.8
71.4
-1.4
Approx. N =
(2677)
(2957)
(3085)
(3686)
(3221)
(3261)
(3610)
(3651)
(3341)
(3254)
(3265)
(3113)
(3302)
(3311)
(2799)
(2566)
(2547)
NOTE: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: 8 = .05, 88 = .01, 888 = .001.
"Answer alternatives were: (1) Don't disapprove, (2) Disapprove, and (3) Strongly disapprove. Percentages are shown for categories (2) and (3) combined.
The 1975 question asked about people who are "20 or older."
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS NOT FOR PUBI IC
DRAFT
Feb 15, 1992
TABLE 25
Trends in Perceived Availability of Drugs, All Seniors
Percentage saying drug would be "Fairly
easy" or "Very easy" for them to get
Q. How difficult do you think
it would be for you to
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
get each of the following
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
types of drugs, if you
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
wanted some?
87.8
87.4
87.9
87.8
90.1
89.0
89.2
88.5
86.2
84.6
85.5
85.2
84.8
85.0
84.3
84.4
83.3
-1.1
Marijuana
Amyl & Butyl Nitrites
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
23.9
25.9
26.8
24.4
22.7
-1.7
LSD
46.2
37.4
34.5
32.2
34.2
35.3
35.0
34.2
30.9
30.6
30.5
28.5
31.4
33.3
38.3
40.7
39.5
-1.2
27.7
27.6
-0.1
PCP
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
22.8
24.9
28.9
Some other psychedelic
47.8
35.7
33.8
33.8
34.6
35.0
32.7
30.6
26.6
26.6
26.1
24.9
25.0
26.2
28.2
28.3
28.0
-0.3
Cocaine
37.0
34.0
33.0
37.8
45.5
47.9
47.5
47.4
43.1
45.0
48.9
51.5
54.2
55.0
58.7
54.5
51.0
-3.5e
"Crack"
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
41.1
42.1
47.0
42.4
39.9
-2.5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
52.9
50.3
53.7
49.0
46.0
-3.0
Cocaine powder
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Heroin
24.2
18.4
17.9
16.4
18.9
21.2
19.2
20.8
19.3
19.9
21.0
22.0
23.7
28.0
31.4
31.9
30.6
-1.3
Some other narcotic
28.7
29.4
29.6
30.4
30.0
32.1
33.1
32.2
33.0
35.8
38.3
38.1
34.6
-3.5s
(including methadone)
34.5
26.9
27.8
26.1
Amphetamines
67.8
61.8
58.1
58.5
59.9
61.3
69.5
70.8
68.5
68.2
66.4
64.3
64.5
63.9
64.3
59.7
57.3
-2.4
60.0
54.4
52.4
50.6
49.8
49.1
54.9
55.2
52.5
51.9
51.3
48.3
48.2
47.8
48.4
45.9
42.4
-3.5s
Barbiturates
Tranquilizers
71.8
65.5
64.9
64.3
61.4
69.1
60.8
58.9
55.3
54.5
54.7
51.2
48.6
49.1
45.3
44.7
40.8
-3.9s
Approx. N =
(2627)
(2865)
(3065)
(3598)
(3172)
(3240)
(3578)
(3602)
(3385)
(3269)
(3274)
(3077)
(3271)
(3231)
(2806)
(2549)
(2476)
NOTE: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: 5 = .05, as = .01, 888 - .001. NA indicates data not available.
Answer alternatives were: (1) Probably impossible, (2) Very difficult, (3) Fairly difficult, (4) Fairly easy, and (5) Very easy.
DRAFT
TABLE 37
Trends in Lifetime k Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among Respondents of Modal Age 19-28
(Entries are percentages)
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
REEMISSION OF AUTHORS NOT-FOR IBLIC.
Percent who used in lifetime
Feb 15,1992 feb
'90-'91
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(6900)
(6800)
(6700)
(6600)
(6700)
(6600)
h
Any Illicit Drugh
70.5
69.9
67.9
66.4
64.5
62.2
-2.3ss
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
48.4
47.0
44.6
42.7
40.8
37.8
-3.0sss
Marijuana
66.5
66.0
63.8
62.8
60.2
58.6
-1.6
b
Inhalants
b,s
12.3
12.7
12.6
13.2
12.5
13.4
+0.9
Inhalants, Adjusted
18.6
15.7
15.0
NA
13.5
NT
NT
Nitrites
12.6
6.9
6.2
NA
1.9
NT
NT
Hallucinogens
18.5
17.1
17.0
15.9
16.1
15.7
-0.4
Hallucinogens, Adjusted
20.1
17.2
17.2
NA
16.5
NT
NT
LSD
14.6
13.7
13.8
12.7
13.5
13.5
0.0
PCP
8.4
4.8
5.0
NA
2.5
NT
NT
Cocaine
32.0
29.3
28.2
25.8
23.7
21.0
-2.78ss
Crackᶜ
NA
6.3
6.9
6.1
5.1
4.8
-0.3
Other Cocaine
NA
28.2
25.2
25.4
22.1
19.8
-2.3as
MDMA ("Ecstasy")
NA
NA
NA
3.3
3.7
3.2
-0.5
Heroin
1.3
1.3
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.0
Other Opiates
10.7
10.6
9.8
9.6
9.4
9.3
-0.1
Stimulants, Adjusted a,d
32.3
30.8
28.8
25.3
24.4
22.4
-2.0ss
Crystal Methamphetamine ("Ice")"
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.5
2.9
+0.4
Sedatives
16.7
15.0
13.2
12.1
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
a
11.1
9.7
8.9
7.9
8.7
8.2
-0.5
a
Methaqualone
13.1
11.6
9.7
8.7
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
17.6
16.5
15.1
13.5
12.9
11.8
-1.1s
Alcohol
94.8
94.9
94.8
94.5
94.3
94.1
-0.2
Cigarettes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
f
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
1.1
1.2
NT
NT
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
8 - .05, SS = 01, sas . .001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1986-89, and five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-
1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 5500.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription
stimulants.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text.
This drug was asked about in one questionnaire form. Total N in 1991 is approximately 1200.
g Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text.
h Use of "any illicit drug" includes any-use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates,
stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 is approximately 2400.
This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in four of the six questionnaire forms in
1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 4200.
k. Lifetime prevalence is uncorrected for any cross-time inconsistencies in responding. See text.
DRAFT
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
DRAFT
TABLE 38
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 992
Trends in Annual Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among Respondents of Modal Age 19-28
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in last twelve months
'90-'91
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(6900)
(6800)
(6700)
(6600)
(6700)
(6600)
h
Any Illicit Drugh
41.9
39.3
36.3
32.8
30.7
27.0
-3.7sss
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
27.0
23.9
21.3
18.3
16.7
14.3
-2.48ss
Maryuana
36.5
34.8
31.8
29.0
26.1
23.8
-2.3as
Inhalants
1.9
2.1
1.8
1.9
1.9
2.0
+0.1
b,e
Inhalants, Adjusted
3.0
2.8
2.4
NA
2.1
NT
NT
Nitrites
2.0
1.3
1.0
NA
0.4
NT
NT
Hallucinogens
4.5
4.0
3.9
3.6
4.1
4.5
+0.4
Hallucinogens, Adjusted
4.9
4.1
3.9
NA
4.2
NT
NT
LSD
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.7
3.3
3.8
+0.5
PCP
0.8
0.4
0.4
NA
0.2
NT
NT
Cocaine
19.7
15.7
13.8
10.8
8.6
6.2
-2.4sss
c
Crack
3.2
3.1
3.1
2.5
1.6
1.2
-0.4s
Other Cocaine
NA
13.6
11.9
10.3
8.1
5.4
-2.7sss
MDMA ("Ecstasy")
NA
NA
NA
1.4
1.5
0.8
-0.7a
Heroin
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
Other Opiates
3.1
3.1
2.7
2.8
2.7
2.5
-0.2
Stimulants, Adjusted
10.6
8.7
7.3
5.8
5.2
4.3
-0.9s
Crystal Methamphetamine ("Ice")"
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.4
0.3
-0.1
Sedatives
a
3.0
2.5
2.1
1.8
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
2.3
2.1
1.8
1.7
1.9
1.8
-0.1
Methaqualone
1.3
0.9
0.5
0.3
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
5.4
5.1
4.2
3.7
3.7
3.5
-0.2
Alcohol
88.6
89.4
88.6
88.1
87.4
86.9
-0.5
Cigarettes
40.1
40.3
37.7
38.0
37.1
37.7
+0.6
f
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
0.5
0.3
NT
NT
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
8 .05, is - .01, 588 = .001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here:
b This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1986-89 (N was four-fifths of N indicated), and five of the
six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 5500.
This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1986, in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89,
and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription
stimulants.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text.
This drug was asked about in one questionnaire form. Total N in 1990 is approximately 1200:
g Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text.
h Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates,
stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 is approximately 2400.
j This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in four of the six questionnaire forms in
1990-1991: Total N in 1991 is approximately 4200.
DRAFT
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITAT'ON WITHOUT
DRAFT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS NOT FOR PUBLIC
TABLE 39
RELEASE UNTIL
Feb 15,1992 Feb 1992
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among Respondents of Modal Age 19-28
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in last thirty days
90-91
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(6900)
(6800)
(6700)
(6600)
(6700)
(6600)
h
Any Illicit Drug
25.8
23.4
20.5
17.7
15.9
15.1
-0.8
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
13.0
10.7
9.5
7.5
6.0
5.4
-0.6
Marijuana
22.0
20.7
17.9
15.5
13.9
13.5
-0.4
b
Inhalants
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
-0.1
be
Inhalants, Adjusted
0.7
0.9
0.9
NA
0.7
NT
NT
Nitrites
0.5
0.5
0.4
NA
0.1
NT
NT
Hallucinogens
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.1
0.9
1.1
+0.2
Hallucinogens, Adjusted
1.4
1.2
1.1
NA
1.0
NT
NT
LSD
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.8
+0.2
PCP
0.2
0.1
0.3
NA
0.2
NT
NT
Cocaine
8.2
6,0
5.7
3.8
2.4
2.0
-0.4
Crack
NA
1.0
1.2
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.0
Other Cocaine
NA
4.8
4.8
3.4
2.1
1.8
-0.3
MDMA¹
NA
NA
NA
0.4
0.2
0.1
-0.1
Heroin
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
-0.1
Other Opiates"
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
-0.1
a,d
Stimulants, Adjusted
4.0
3.2
2.7
2.1
1.9
1.5
-0.4
Crystal Methamphetamine("Ice")
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.0
-0.1
Sedatives
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.5
NA
NA
NA
a
Barbiturates
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.5
-0.1
Methaqualone
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.1
0.9
-0.2
Alcohol
75.1
75.4
74.0
72.4
71.2
70.6
-0.6
Cigarettes
31.1
30.9
28.9
28.6
27.7
28.2
+0.5
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
0.2
0.1
NT
NT
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
5 = .05, as = .01, sss = .001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1986-89 (N was four-fifths of N indicated), and five of the
six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 5500.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription
stimulants.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text:
This drug was asked about in one questionnaire form. Total N in 1991 is approximately 1200.
g Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text.
h Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogene, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates,
stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 is approximately 2400.
This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in four of the six questionnaire forms in
1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 4200.
DRAFT
NOT FOP QUOTATION OP CITATION
TABLE 40
PERMISSION.OF AUTHORS
Feb 15, 1992
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Daily Use of Various Types of Drugs
DRAFT
Among Respondents of Modal Age 19-28
(Entries are percentages)
Percent using daily
in last thirty days
'90-'9
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(6900)
(6800)
(6700)
(6600)
(6700)
(6600)
Marijuana
4.1
4.2
3.3
3.2
2.5
2.3
-0.2
b
Inhalants
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Inhalants, Adjusted b,e
0.0
0.0
0.0
NA
0.1
NT
NT
f
Nitrites
0.0
0.0
0.1
NA
0.1
NT
NT
Hallucinogens
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Hallucinogens, Adjusted
0.0
0.0
0.0
NA
0.0
NT
NT
LSD
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
PCP
0.0
0.0
0.1
NA
0.1
NT
NT
Cocaine
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
+0.1
Crack
NA
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Other Cocaine
NA
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
+0.1
MDMA ("Ecstasy")
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Heroin
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Other Opiates
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Stimulants, Adjusted a,d
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Crystal Methamphetamine ("Ice")"
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sedatives
a
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Methaqualone
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Alcohol
Daily
6.1
6.6
6.1
5.5
4.7
4.9
+0.2
5+ drinks in a row
in last 2 weeks
36.1
36.2
35.2
34.8
34.3
34.7
+0.4
Cigarettes
Daily
25.2
24.8
22.7
22.4
21.3
21.7
+0.4
Half-pack or more per day
20.2
19.8
17.7
17.3
16.7
16.0
-0.7
f
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
B = .05, as - .01, 888 - .001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated. Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is
included here.
b This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1986-89, and five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-
1991: Total N in 1991 is approximately 5500.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription
stimulants.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text.
This drug was asked about in one questionnaire form. Total N in 1991 is approximately 1200.
g Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text.
DRAFT
h
Any apparent inconsistency between the change estimate and the prevalence estimates for the two most recent classes is due
to rounding.
This drug was asked about in two questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 is approximately 2400.
This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in four of the six questionnaire forms in
1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 4200.
DRAFT
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15 1992
TABLE 53
Trends in Lifetime Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in lifetime
'90-'91
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N -
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Any Illicit Drug
69.4
66.8
64.6
66.9
62.7
65.2
61.8
60.0
58.4
55.6
54.0
50.4
-3.6
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
42.2
41.3
39.6
41.7
38.6
40.0
37.5
35.7
33.4
30.5
28.4
25.8
-2.6
Marijuana
65.0
63.3
60.5
63.1
59.0
60.6
57.9
55.8
54.3
51.3
49.1
46.3
-2.8
Inhalants
10.2
8.8
10.6
11.0
10.4
10.6
11.0
13.2
12.6
15.0
13.9
14.4
+0.5
Hallucinogens
15.0
12.0
15.0
12.2
12.9
11.4
11.2
10.9
10.2
10.7
11.2
11.3
+0.1
LSD
10.3
8.5
11.5
8.8
9.4
7.4
7.7
8.0
7.5
7.8
9.1
9.6
+0.5
Cocaine
22.0
21.5
22.4
23.1
21.7
22.9
23.3
20.6
15.8
14.6
11.4
9.4
-2.0
Crackᶜ
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.3
3:4
2.4
1.4
1.5
+0.1
MDMA ("Ecstasy")8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.8
3.9
2.0
-1.9
Heroin
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.3
0.5
+0.2
Other Opiates
8.9
8.3
8.1
8.4
8.9
6.3
8.8
7.6
6.3
7.6
6.8
7.3
+0.5
Stimulants
29.5
29.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants, Adjusted
NA
NA
30.1
27.8
27.8
25.4
22.3
19.8
17.7
14.6
13.2
13.0
-0.2
h
Crystal methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.0
1.3
+0.3
Sedatives
13.7
14.2
14.1
12.2
10.8
9.3
8.0
6.1
4.7
4.1
NA
NA
NA
Barbituratesᵃ
8.1
7.8
8.2
6.6
6.4
4.9
5.4
3.5
3.6
3.2
3.8
3.5
0.3
Methaqualone
10.3
10.4
11.1
9.2
9.0
7.2
5.8
4.1
2.2
2.4
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
15.2
11.4
11.7
10.8
10.8
9.8
10.7
8.7
8.0
8.0
7.1
6.8
-0.3
Alcohol
94.3
95.2
95.2
95.0
94.2
95.3
94.9
94.1
94.9
93.7
93.1
93.6
+0.5
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
s= .05, as =.01, sss = 001.
NA indicates data not available.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1980-89, and in five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N
in 1991 (for college students) is 1170.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
e Data are uncorrected for cross-time inconsistencies in the answers.
Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants,
barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1989, and in two of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in
1991 (for college students) is 470.
hThis drug was asked about in two of the six questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
DRAFT
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
DRAFT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNTIL Feb 15, 1992
TABLE 54
Trends in Annual Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in last twelve months
'90-'91
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N -
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Any Illicit Druge
56.2
55.0
49.5
49.8
45.1
46.3
45.0
40.1
37.4
36.7
33.3
29.2
-4.1a
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
32.3
31.7
29.9
29.9
27.2
26.7
25.0
21.3
19.2
16.4
15.2
13.2
-2.0
Marijuana
51.2
51.3
44.7
45.2
40.7
41.7
40.9
37.0
34.6
33.6
29.4
26.5
-2.9
b
Inhalants
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.8
2.4
3.1
3.9
3.7
4.1
3.7
3.9
3.5
-0.4
Hallucinogens
8.5
7.0
8.7
6.5
6.2
5.0
6.0
5.9
5.3
5.1
5.4
6.3
+0.9
LSD
6.0
4.6
6.3
4.3
3.7
2.2
3.9
4.0
3.6
3.4
4.3
5.1
+0.8
Cocaine
16.8
16.0
17.2
17.3
16.3
17.3
17.1
13.7
10.0
8.2
5.6
3.6
-2.0s
Crackᶜ
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
2.0
1.4
1.5
0.6
0.5
-0.1
MDMA ("Ecstasy")
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.3
2.3
0.9
-1.4
Heroin
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Other Opiates
5.1.
4.3
3.8
3.8
3.8
2.4
4.0
3.1
3.1
3.2
2.9
2.7
-0.2
Stimulants Stimulants, Adjusted
22.4
22.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
21.1
17.3
15.7
11.9
10.3
7.2
6.2
4.6
4.5
3.9
-0.6
Crystal methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
0.0
Sedatives
8.3
8.0
8.0
4.5
3.5
2.5
2.6
1.7
1.5
1.0
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
2.9
2.8
3.2
2.2
1.9
1.3
2.0
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.4
1.2
-0.2
Methaqualone
7.2
6.5
6.6
3.1
2.5
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.5
0.2
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
6.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
3.5
3.6
4.4
3.8
3.1
2.6
3.0
2.4
-0.6
Alcohol
90.5
92.5
92.2
91.6
90.0
92.0
91.5
90.9
89.6
89.6
89.0
88.3
-0.7
Cigarettes
36.2
37.6
34.3
36.1
33.2
35.0
35.3
38.0
36.6
34.2
35.5
35.6
+0.1
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
a = .05, as = .01, ass = .001.
NA indicates date not available.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b This drug was'asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1980-89, and in five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N
in 1991 (for college students) is 1170.
This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1986, in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six
forms in 1990-1991.
di Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
e Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants,
barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1989, and in two of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in
1991 (for college students) is 470.
⁸This drug was asked about in two of the six questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
DRAFT
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHO
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS NOT
DRAFT
RELEASE
UNTIL
Feb 15, 1992
TABLE 55
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in last thirty days
'90-'91
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Any Illicit Druge
38.4
37.6
31.3
29.3
27.0
26.1
25.9
22.4
18.5
18.2
15.2
15.2
0.0
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
20.7
18.6
17.1
13.9
13.8
11.8
11.6
8.8
8.5
6.9
4.4
4.3
-0.1
Marijuana
34.0
33.2
26.8
26.2
23.0
23.6
22.3
20.3
16.8
16.3
14.0
14.1
+0.1
b
Inhalants
1.5
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.3
0.8
1.0
0.9
-0.1
Hallucinogens
2.7
2.3
2.6
1.8
1.8
1.3
2.2
2.0
1.7
2.3
1.4
1.2
-0.2
LSD
1.4
1.4
1.7
0.9
0.8
0.7
1.4
1.4
1.1
1.4
1.1
0.8
-0.3
Cocaine
6.9
7.3
7.9
6.5
7.6
6.9
7.0
4.6
4.2
2.8
1.2
1.0
-0.2
c
Crack
NA
NA.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.3
+0.2
MDMA ("Ecstasy")
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.3
0.6
0.2
-0.4
Heroin
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
+0.1
Other Opiates
1.8
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.4
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.6
+0.1
Stimulants
13.4
12.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
a,d
Stimulants, Adjusted
NA
NA
9.9
7.0
5.5
4.2
3.7
2.3
1.8
1.3
1.4
1.0
-0.4
Crystal methamphetamine8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sedativesᵃ
3.8
3.4
2.5
1.1
1.0
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.2
NA
NA
NA
a
Barbiturates
0.9
0.8
1.0
0.5
0.7
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.3
+0.1
Methaqualone
3.1
3.0
1.9
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
2.0
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.9
1.0
1.1
0.8
0.5
0.6
+0.1
Alcohol
81.8
81.9
82.8
80.3
79.1
80.3
79.7
78.4
77.0
76.2
74.5
74.7
+0.2
Cigarettes
25.8
25.9
24.4
24.7
21.5
22.4
22.4
24.0
22.6
21.1
21.5
23.2
+1.7
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
8 = 05. as = 01, sas - 001.
NA indicates data not available.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b This question was asked in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1980-89, and in five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in
1991 (for college students) is 1170.
c This question was asked in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991
d Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
e Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants,
barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1989, and in two of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in
1991 (for college students) is 470.
This drug was asked about in two of the six questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 (for college students)
DRAFT
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CITATION WITHOUT
DRAFT
PERMISSION OF AUTHORS. NOT FOR PUBLIC
RELEASE UNTIL Feb.15, 1992
TABLE 56
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Daily Use
for Marijuana, Cocaine, Stimulants, Alcohol, and Cigarettes
Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used daily in last thirty days
'90-'91
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Marijuana
7.2
5.6
4.2
3.8
3.6
3.1
2.1
2.3
1.8
2.6
1.7
1.8
+0.1
Cocaine
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Stimulants
0.5
0.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants, Adjustedᵃ,b
NA
NA
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Alcohol
Daily
6.5
5.5
6.1
6.1
6.6
5.0
4.6
6.0
4.9
4.0
3.8
4.1
+0.3
5+ drinks in a row
in last 2 weeks
43.9
43.6
44.0
43.1
45.4
44.6
45.0
42.8
43.2
41.7
41.0
42.8
+1.8
Cigarettes
Daily
18.3
17.1
16.2
15.3
14.7
14.2
12.7
13.9
12.4
12.2
12.1
13.8
+1.7
Half-pack or more
per day
12.7
11.9
10.5
9.6
10.2
9.4
8.3
8.2
7.3
6.7
8.2
8.0
-0.2
NOTES: For all drugs not included here, daily use is below 0.5% in all years. Level of significance of difference between the two
most recent years:
8 =.05, ss =.01, ass = 001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
DRAFT
HHS NEWS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Mona Brown (301) 443-6245
Monday, January 27, 1992
Jim Miller (301) 443-8956
HHS Secretary Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., today announced that
the federal government's 17th annual survey of high school
seniors shows significant decreases in drug use from 1990 to
1991, with the rate of "any illicit drug use within the past
year" down from 33 percent to 29 percent -- or approximately half
the 1980 rate.
"I am pleased and proud to report," Secretary Sullivan said,
"that drug use by America's seniors in 1991 stood at its lowest
level since our senior surveys began in 1975."
"Overall, the High School Senior Survey agrees with the
findings on adolescents in the 1991 National Household Survey on
Drug Abuse -- we are making substantial and significant progress
in reducing adolescent drug use in the United States," said
Governor Bob Martinez, Director of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy.
The survey was conducted by the University of Michigan's
Institute for Social Research under a grant from the National
Institute on Drug Abuse, a component of the Alcohol, Drug Abuse,
and Mental Health Administration. In 1991, the researchers
surveyed 15,483 seniors from public and private school graduating
(More)
2
classes of 1991. It showed statistically significant decreases*
in:
O "current" use (within last 30 days) of:
- cocaine, down from 1.9 percent in 1990 to 1.4 percent
in 1991, a drop of 73 percent since 1980,
- alcohol, down from 57 percent to 54 percent, a
25 percent drop since 1980,
O "annual" use of:
- any illicit drugs, down from 33 percent in 1990 to
29 percent in 1991,
- alcohol, down from 81 percent in 1990 to 78 percent
in 1991,
- marijuana, down from 27 percent to 24 percent between
1990 and 1991, half the rate of 1980,
- cocaine, down from 5.3 percent in 1990 to 3.5 percent
in 1991, a drop of nearly three-quarters since 1980,
O
"lifetime" use of:
- any illicit drugs, down from 48 percent in 1990 to
44 percent in 1991,
- cocaine, down from 9.4 percent in 1990 to 7.8 percent
in 1991,
- marijuana, down from 41 percent in 1990 to 37 percent
in 1991,
- heroin, down from 1.3 percent in 1990 to 0.9 percent
in 1991.
"Moreover, there were no increases in any drug category from
1990 to 1991, Secretary Sullivan said.
"This is the best news we have had since these surveys
began,' he continued. "It means that the Nation's prevention and
education efforts are paying off in genuine progress, and that we
are creating an environment in which even trying drugs is
becoming unacceptable."
Among "the very positive trends," Secretary Sullivan said,
there are two areas "where we have concerns because previous
gains appear to be leveling off":
(More)
3
O "current" users of crack, down 56 percent since the
Administration took office, has leveled off at 0.7 percent of
seniors,
O "daily" users of alcohol, while down by almost half from
the earlier peak, remained at 3.6 percent from 1990 to 1991.
Frederick K. Goodwin, M.D., ADAMHA administrator, said, "In
these two areas, we have reached a point where the remaining
users are more likely to represent an addicted or addiction-prone
population, often combined with other problems, who will require
more outreach and better treatment based in continued research
discoveries."
James O. Mason, M.D., assistant secretary for health and
head of the U.S. Public Health Service, said, "Our young people,
with good sense, have responded to the evidence that drugs can
limit their futures. Decreased drug use will mean a more able
and competitive new generation of workers, doctors, scientists,
teachers and managers for our nation -- and for this we have
hundreds of volunteer organizations and civic groups, along with
hundreds of broadcast outlets, newspapers and magazines, to
thank. They have joined the federal government in producing a
mighty educational campaign -- that is working.
"But this is no time to let down our guard. Nor should we
forget that there are persisting problems among drop-outs and
other groups that need attention."
(More)
4
High School Senior Perceptions
Students have an increased understanding of the harm posed
by drugs. For instance, the 1991 survey found an increase in the
percentage of seniors who perceive "great risk" in trying
marijuana "once or twice," (23 percent in 1990 and 27 percent in
1991) and in smoking marijuana "occasionally" (37 percent in 1990
and 41 percent in 1991).
However, the survey found a small decrease in perception of
harmfulness from occasional crack use among 1991 seniors. "While
9 out of 10 seniors realize the danger of regular crack use, it
is disturbing to see that a number of them (approximately 1 in 4)
do not appreciate the harmful effects of occasional use,"
Dr. Mason said.
Other Survey Results
O Current use of hallucinogens by high school seniors, while
less than half its earlier peak, remained steady at 2.4 percent
over the last year.
"Current use of LSD remained at 1.9 percent in 1991,
disputing anecdotal reports of increased LSD use, Dr. Goodwin
said.
O Current use of inhalants declined from 2.7 percent in 1990
to 2.4 percent in 1991. However, this decline was not
statistically significant.
O There has been little change in the proportion of high
school seniors who use cigarettes, which has remained around
19 percent since 1984. The proportion of seniors who smoke a
half-pack or more daily also has not changed from 11 percent
since 1986.
The study also showed decreases in annual use of illicit
drugs by seniors in the class of 1991. Fewer than 30 percent of
seniors had used any illicit drug "within the past year, down
from 53 percent in 1980. Only 24 percent of seniors reported
annual use of marijuana in 1991, compared to 49 percent in 1980,
and use of alcohol within the past year dropped from 88 percent
in 1980 to 78 percent in 1991. (In the survey, the category "any
illicit drug use" did not include alcohol and cigarette use.)
Eighth and Tenth Grade Drug Use
In 1991 the high school survey sample was expanded to
include approximately 18,000 eighth and 16,000 tenth graders for
the first time.
(More)
5
"The National Institute on Drug Abuse made a deliberate
effort to expand the 1991 study in order to provide baseline
information for future tracking of drug use from an earlier age.
It is well known that very early drug use is a predictor of later
abuse and addiction. Further, these data will allow us to study
such questions as the relationship of drug use to dropping out of
school," Dr. Goodwin said.
The first findings on these age groups show that within the
last 30 days:
O alcohol was used by 25 percent of eighth graders and
43 percent of tenth graders (compared to 54 percent of seniors),
O cocaine was used by 0.5 percent of eighth graders and
0.7 percent of tenth graders (1.4 percent of seniors).
Binge drinking -- 5 or more drinks at one sitting -- within
the last two weeks was reported by 13 percent of eighth graders
and 23 percent of tenth graders (30 percent of seniors).
"Some of these findings, such as the fact that almost one
quarter of tenth graders report binge drinking, are very
troubling. However, these new data can help focus our prevention
efforts in order to maintain the positive trends we are so
pleased to see in 1991,' said Dr. Goodwin.
Followup Data on Former Survey Participants
The survey also includes data on drug use from a sample of
6,600 members of previous graduating classes one to 10 years
after leaving high school. Followup data on these young adults
19-28 years old show decreases in annual use of any illicit drug,
which decreased from 31 percent in 1990 to 27 percent in 1991.
Annual marijuana use declined from 26 percent in 1990 to 24
percent in 1991. Other illicit drugs showing decreases in annual
use in the 1991 survey include cocaine -- both crack and
powdered -- MDMA ("Ecstasy"), and stimulants.
Followup data on those young adults who are now in college
showed that annual use of any illicit drug was down from
33 percent in 1990 to 29 percent in 1991, and of cocaine from
5.6 percent to 3.6 percent.
The Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration and its
component, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, are within the
Public Health Service grouping of agencies within HHS.
* -- All changes in use cited in this press release are
statistically significant, unless otherwise noted.
###
Any Illicit Drug Use
80
Lifetime
60
Annual
Percent
40
Current
20
0
1975
1980
1985
1990 1991
Year
Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse, Monitoring the Future, 1991
A22110S0121a
Cocaine Use
20
Lifetime
15
Annual
Percent
10
Current
5
0
1975
1980
1985
1990 1991
Year
Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse, Monitoring the Future, 1991
A22\IOS0121b
HUMAN
SERVICES
HEALTH
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
or
Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and
Mental Health Administration
Rockville MD 20857
STATEMENT BY FREDERICK K. GOODWIN, M.D.
ADMINISTRATOR
ALCOHOL, DRUG ABUSE, AND MENTAL HEALTH ADMINISTRATION
PRESS CONFERENCE
HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR SURVEY
JANUARY 27, 1992
It is a pleasure to welcome you, on behalf of the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental
Health Administration (ADAMHA), whose National Institute on Drug Abuse has
supported the High School Senior Survey for the past 17 years.
Today's report highlights patterns of drug use by the graduating class of 1991.
In addition, we are able to provide you with new data regarding the use of drugs
by 8th and 10th grade children and an update that continues our longitudinal
monitoring of drug use behaviors among the adult population--now approaching
their middle years--who completed high school a decade or more ago, during the
peak years of the drug epidemic.
As a public health administrator, it is, indeed, gratifying to be able to use the
past tense when referring to the "peak years" of adolescent and young adult drug
use in this country. The significant declines from 1990 to 1991 reported today
continue the steady downward trends of the past several years.
That is, a majority of students today are declining to experiment with any of the
panoply of illicit drugs; moreover, increasing numbers of youngsters are making
informed, early decisions about behaviors that, in many instances, will preclude
2
their future legal use of nicotine and will greatly moderate their use of
alcohol. Prevention programs that draw on sound, credible information from a
wide variety of sources about the negative consequences of drug use do work for
the majority of kids.
While the changes in rates from 1990 to 1991 are statistically significant, they
tend not to be dramatic when presented to the public. For example, a drop from
1.9 to 1.5 percent in current cocaine use may seem small. However, it is
precisely reductions of that scale, consistently over the past several years,
that add up to a 73 percent reduction in current use of cocaine since 1980; a 60
percent drop in current marijuana use over the same period, and a 25 percent drop
in under-age alcohol use.
The gradual but fundamental shift in students' perceptions of the harmfulness of
drugs reflects the impact of the information that apparently has taken hold among
the young. We know from behavioral research that if we can communicate
information that contributes to preventing first use of substances during years
that tend naturally to be characterized by risk-taking or impulsive, even defiant
behavior--that is, if we can help them through their high risk period--then most
young adults will never be prone to later drug use.
Of course, any satisfaction that we may feel from a public health perspective
should be tempered by an awareness of the challenges that lie ahead. Even when
we consider the 60 and 70 percent cumulative reductions in various categories of
drug use, the data indicate that nearly 30 percent of our high school population
is still involved in some level of drug experimentation or use. That tells us,
first, that we need to keep up the education and prevention efforts; we need to
4
than is early intervention in the context of cancer, heart disease, or clinical
depression.
For those of you who will be analyzing and writing about these data in the days
and weeks ahead, let me make a distinction between the high-risk core of drug
users that I have just described, and those persons who account for what we
describe as a "cohort effect" in drug use patterns and adverse consequences.
All of our survey instruments point to a bubble in the demographic charts which
represent a fairly discrete group of individuals who were high school students
from the late 1970s to the mid-80s, who now--after 5 to 10 years of continued
drug use--show up disproportionately in indices of adverse medical consequences
and psychological or social disruptions.
Certainly, a sub-group within this cohort is subject to some of the same highly
specific risk factors that I mentioned a moment ago. A larger proportion,
however, are individuals who were first introduced to drugs in an era when use
was socially condoned, if not romanticized. Out of the very large pool of
adolescents and young adults who were introduced to drugs during that era, a
substantial number simply, over time, got caught in the trap of addiction. They
constitute as persuasive an argument I can think of for continued education and
prevention programs.
Please feel free to contact the appropriate ADAMHA and NIDA offices at your
convenience, if you wish further information about these data. Thank you.
3
keep broadening and strengthening the base of peer and community censure that is
proving to be fundamentally successful in changing the tide.
Second, the negative figures--that is, the percentages that indicate continued
drug use--confirm what we have learned from other epidemiologic survey and
research instruments. I'm referring principally to the National Household Survey
of Drug Use, reported earlier this month, and the Drug Abuse Warning Network
(DAWN) survey that keeps us informed of the adverse consequences of drug use as
mirrored in the Nation's hospital emergency rooms.
All of these sources confirm that we are confronting a more vulnerable population
comprised of persons who, for reasons we are beginning to elucidate, are more
addiction-prone, including those who are resistant to the interventions now
available. Here, we need to shift our focus, in our research and our development
of treatment strategies, from a concern with a large, undifferentiated population
to a targeting of individual vulnerability factors.
Among the most critical factors are the presence of a mental disorder, often
unrecognized and untreated; a family history of substance abuse; or persistent
conduct disorders characterized by impulsivity/aggression in childhood--a pattern
that serves as a common stem cell for later subsequent substance abuse and/or
violence. Research leads such as these will enable us to target early
interventions to those at greatest risk. For people with specific familial,
behavioral, or clinical vulnerabilities, it is likely that early intervention
focused on a susceptibility to addiction will prove no less critical to prognosis
The University of Michigan
News and Information Services
412 Maynard
Ann Arbor, Michigan
48109-1399
January 25, 1992 (16)
Contact: Terry Gallagher
Phone: (313) 747-1847
Most forms of drug use decline among American
high school and college students, U-M survey reports.
Smoking remains stable. Steroid use down.
Rates are high in 8th and 10th grades.
FOR RELEASE AT 2 P.M. MONDAY, JANUARY 27, 1992
EDITORS: Results of this survey will be presented at 2 p.m.
Monday (Jan. 27) at a news conference at the Old Executive
Office Building in Washington, D.C. Lloyd D. Johnston,
principal investigator of the study, will join Dr. Louis W.
Sullivan, secretary of the Department of Health and Human
Services; Bob Martinez, director of the Office of National
Drug Control Policy; and others. For further information
about the study's findings, contact Johnston at the U-M
Institute for Social Research, (313) 763-5043.
ANN ARBOR
The nation continues to make progress in
its effort to reduce illicit drug use among young people,
according to research scientists at The University of
Michigan's Institute for Social Research.
Reporting the results of their 17th national survey of
American high school seniors, and 12th national survey of
American college students, social psychologists Lloyd D.
Johnston, Patrick M. O'Malley, and Jerald G. Bachman
conclude that most of the news this year is good.
"We have tended to forget about the war on drugs this
year, as other urgent issues like the Gulf War, the hostage
situation, and the state of the economy have dominated the
news," states Johnston, "but drugs are still a real and
present issue for millions of American young people and
their families. Fortunately, we have continued to make
steady progress in dissuading our young people from being
involved with illicit drugs."
The proportion of high school seniors using any illicit
drug in the prior year fell from 33 percent to 29 percent
(more)
(16) Drug Survey
Page 2
between 1990 and 1991, and was down considerably from the
peak level of 54 percent in 1979. Similarly, among college
students the use of any illicit drug in the prior year
(i.e., annual prevalence) fell from 33 percent to 29 percent
between 1990 and 1991, down from a peak of 56 percent in
1980.
Marijuana is still the most widely used illicit drug
and accounts for some of the decline. Among seniors, annual
use fell from 27 percent in 1990 to 24 percent in 1991, down
from a peak of 51 percent in 1979. For college students,
the decline in marijuana use was from 29 percent to 27
percent, down from a high of 51 percent in 1980 and 1981.
But the proportion using some illicit drug other than
(usually in addition to) marijuana during the prior year is
also declining, the U-M survey reports. Among the seniors,
the proportion using an illicit drug other than marijuana
fell from 18 percent to 16 percent between 1990 and 1991,
down from a peak of 34 percent in 1981. Similarly, the
statistic for college students fell from 15 percent to 13
percent, down from a peak of 32 percent in 1980.
Several of the specific classes of other illicit drugs
showed changes in 1991.
Cocaine use among seniors fell from 5.3 percent to 3.5
percent annual prevalence between 1990 and 1991, down from a
peak of 13.1 percent in 1985. Among college students, it
fell from 5.6 percent in 1990 to 3.6 percent in 1991, from a
peak of 17 percent in 1986.
Crack cocaine use among seniors fell from 1.9 percent
to 1.5 percent annual prevalence between 1990 and 1991, from
a peak of 4.1 percent in 1986. Among college students, who
never attained very high levels of crack use, use fell from
0.6 percent to 0.5 percent annual prevalence between 1990
and 1991, down from a peak of 2.0 percent in 1987. Neither
of these one-year 1990 to 1991 changes is statistically
significant, but both suggest a continuation of a longer-
term decline, according to the U-M survey.
Opiates other than heroin, taken as a class, fell from
4.5 percent to 3.5 percent between 1990 and 1991, down from
a peak of 6.4 percent in 1977 among seniors. Among college
(more)
(16) Drug Survey
Page 3
students, use fell from 2.9 percent to 2.7 percent between
1990 and 1991, down from a peak of 5.1 percent in 1980.
Most of the other illicit drug use rates are down by a
less than statistically significant amount (e.g.,
stimulants, inhalants, and MDMA [ecstasy]), or fairly stable
at a quite low level of use (e.g., PCP, heroin, crystal
methamphetamine ["ice"], barbiturates, sedatives,
methaqualone, and tranquilizers). (Tables 1 through 4 give
the data on high school seniors for all drugs and Tables 8
through 11 do the same for college students.)
"Two of the most recent drugs to threaten have been
'ice' and 'ecstasy' (MDMA), but our data suggest that they
never gained much of a foothold in these populations,"
comments Johnston. "That may be partially explained by the
fact that young people have become more cautious about drugs
in general. Also, in the case of ice, its similarity to
crack very likely deterred use among the great majority, who
already recognize crack as dangerous."
For some years the investigators have interpreted the
decline in many of these classes of drugs (in particular,
marijuana and cocaine) as resulting from the increasing
concerns young people have about the hazards of using these
drugs. "Peer disapproval of many drugs has also increased,"
Johnston notes, "perhaps in part because they are now seen
as more dangerous. In any case, we believe these changes in
perceived risk and peer norms have been the major
determinants of the downturn, not a reduction in supply."
Throughout the life of the study the great majority of
high school seniors have said that marijuana would be fairly
easy for them to get, and until 1989 the perceived
availability of cocaine actually had been rising (see Table
7). Since 1989, however, there has been some decline in the
numbers of seniors who say cocaine would be fairly easy for
them to get (from 59 percent in 1989 to 51 percent in 1991).
The investigators believe one reason for this decline in
perceived availability is that many fewer seniors these days
have friends who use, and friendship circles are an
important source of access to many drugs.
There was little further change in 1991 in the
proportion seeing "great risk" associated with cocaine use,
(more)
(16) Drug Survey
Page 4
and even some indication among seniors that the risk
associated with crack had fallen somewhat. "This may be due
in part to the sharp drop-off in public attention being paid
to crack over the past year," notes Johnston.
Several drugs showed a continuation of longer-term
increase in perceived risk: these included marijuana,
amphetamines, and barbiturates (the barbiturate change was
not significant in 1991). Others showed rather little
change in 1991: cocaine in general, cocaine powder,
specifically, and heroin. For PCP there was a decline in
perceived risk for the first time, though not a
statistically significant one.
Among seniors, disapproval of the use of these drugs is
at very high levels, setting limits on the possible amount
of further change, the investigators say. For example, over
90 percent of the seniors disapprove of even trying LSD,
barbiturates, cocaine, or heroin. Eighty-seven percent
disapprove of trying amphetamines, and 69 percent now
disapprove of trying marijuana. "These represent
considerable changes over the past decade in the
acceptability of using any of these drugs," notes Johnston,
"even though there was rather little further change in
1991. "
There was one statistically significant change: the
proportion of seniors disapproving of even trying cocaine
rose from 92 percent to 94 percent between 1990 and 1991, up
from a low of 75 percent in 1981. Johnston adds, "We tend
to forget how widely accepted cocaine was in many circles
just a decade ago, and how few people believed it was a
dangerous and addicting drug. "
Johnston thinks that one drug which bears watching is
LSD, since use of it has not declined among seniors since
the early 1980s and because there appears to be some upward
drift in use, especially among college students. Annual
prevalence rose among college students from 3.4 percent in
1989 to 5.1 percent in 1991. "Remember that this is one of
the earliest drugs to fall from popularity because of
concern about adverse effects such as flashbacks, bad trips,
and possible neurological and chromosomal damage," he says.
"However, these were the concerns of an earlier generation.
(more)
(16) Drug Survey
Page 5
LSD and its effects have not been that widespread or
attended to in recent years, making vicarious learning from
the experiences of others less likely to occur among today's
young people."
Use of the legal drugs, cigarettes and alcohol, remains
widespread among American young people, the U-M survey says.
Over half of the 1991 high school seniors (54 percent) drank
an alcoholic beverage during the prior month. Close to a
third (30 percent) reported at least one instance in the
prior two weeks of having five or more drinks in a row
(called "binge drinking" here).
However, both of these troubling statistics continued
their longer-term declines in 1991, the investigators say.
The proportions who drank at all in the prior month fell by
3 percent from the 1990 level, and by 18 percent from the
1980 peak level of 72 percent. Work by O'Malley has shown
that this decline is due in part to the adoption of a 21-
year-old minimum drinking age in many states. The
proportion of seniors who engaged in binge drinking also
fell by more than 2 percent in 1991. While this one-year
change is not quite statistically significant, it continues
a longer-term decline from a peak level of 41 percent in
1981 to 30 percent in 1991. "Clearly this decline in
adolescent drunkenness translates into fewer lives being
lost in drunk-driving accidents," the investigators state.
Among American college students, however, there has
been much less change in active drinking rates, and in binge
drinking. In 1991, 75 percent of the college student sample
said they consumed alcohol during the prior month (no change
from 1990 and down only modestly from the peak level of 83
percent in 1982). Binge drinking during the past two weeks
was reported by 43 percent of the college students in 1991,
just about where it has been since the study's first survey
of college students in 1980. "While the moderation message
for alcohol seems to have reached most sectors of society,"
Johnston says, "college students appear to have been
insulated from it to a considerable degree. Of course, the
extent to which they are so aggressively targeted by beer
advertising and promotion may have a lot to do with that
fact. " The investigators note that alcohol consumption has
(more)
(16) Drug Survey
Page 6
fallen considerably not only among high school seniors but
also among college-age young adults who are not in college.
(See Tables 12-15 for young-adult data.)
Cigarette smoking among both high school and college
students also seems to be bucking the trend toward lowered
drug use. "Considering what we know about the deadly health
consequences of smoking, the number of young people who
still begin the habit is shockingly high, " asserts Johnston.
"We can predict with a fair degree of certainty that
hundreds of thousands of youngsters in this year's
graduating class are going to die as the result of a
long-term pattern of use of this drug which they began in
childhood or adolescence. The same can be said for last
year's class and next year's. It is a tragedy beyond
comprehension, yet in the main it is met with silence."
Nearly 30 percent of all seniors (28.3 percent) report
that they have smoked in the past month, down only 1 percent
from 10 years earlier, and nearly one in five seniors (18.5
percent) already smokes daily, down less than 2 percent from
10 years earlier (20.3 percent in 1981). Even among the
college students, who are far less likely to smoke than
their non-college age peers, nearly a quarter reported
smoking in the past month (23.2 percent), and one in seven
smokes daily (13.8 percent), reflecting no change in either
statistic since the mid-1980s.
"Considering the growing disapproval of smoking in
society at large, the number of restrictions that have been
enacted in recent years, and the decline in nearly all other
forms of drug use, the fact that smoking is not declining is
really very surprising---an anomaly," Johnston adds. As
with alcohol, he believes that the massive advertising and
promotion of the product has had an important effect on
young people.
Anabolic steroids became an issue of public health
concern in the late 1980s and were added to the U-M study's
coverage in 1989. Since then there has been a very gradual
(not statistically significant) decline in lifetime and
annual prevalence. Some 1.4 percent of the 1991 seniors say
they have used steroids at least once in the prior year,
down from 1.7 percent in 1990 and 1.9 percent in 1989.
(more)
(16) Drug Survey
Page 7
Among males, who account for most of the steroid use, the
proportions using in the prior year were 2.8 percent in
1989, 2.6 percent in 1990, and 2.4 percent in 1991. Only
about two-thirds of the seniors see the use of steroids as
very dangerous.
National samples of eighth and tenth grade students
were included in the survey for the first time in 1991, so
no trend data are yet available for these age groups. "In
the early stages of the drug epidemic, drug use was much
higher among college students than among high school
students, who in turn had much higher rates than middle and
junior high school students," observes Johnston. "Today the
rates for college and high school students are nearly
identical, while the rates for eighth and tenth graders are
not as different as most people might guess from those for
seniors." (Table 16 compares the usage rates for all drugs
across the three grade levels.)
Discussing the drugs approximately in the order in
which their use tends to be initiated:
Cigarettes: Some 44 percent of the eighth graders, who
have a modal age of 13, have already tried cigarettes.
Smoking in the past 30 days is reported by 14 percent of
eighth graders, 21 percent of tenth graders, and 28 percent
of 12th graders.
Alcohol: Drinking in the past year is reported by 54
percent of eighth graders, 72 percent of tenth graders, and
78 percent of 12th graders. Some 70 percent of the eighth
graders say they have at least tried alcohol, 27 percent
report having gotten drunk at least once, and 13 percent
report having consumed five or more drinks in a row in just
the prior two weeks.
"Clearly, drinking, which is illegal for all of these
children, starts young and progresses fast for many of
them," according to Johnston.
Inhalants: "Inhalant drugs such as glues, aerosols,
and butane are readily available to youngsters through legal
channels," Johnston says. "Furthermore, they are cheap and
young people don't yet fully appreciate the dangers of using
them. Therefore their use is relatively common at young
(more)
(16) Drug Survey
Page 8
ages." Some 9 percent of the eighth graders report use in
the prior year, compared with 7 percent of both the tenth
and 12th graders. Nearly one in five of the eighth graders
(18 percent) have at least tried an inhalant.
Marijuana: There is more of an age differentiation on
marijuana, which tends to be the first of the illegal drugs
tried, according to the U-M survey. Of the eighth graders,
only 6 percent report use in the prior year, compared with
17 percent of the tenth graders and 24 percent of the
seniors.
"Beyond marijuana, drugs are not usually initiated in
any particular order, except that some of the most
dangerous, like cocaine, crack, and heroin, tend to come
late in the sequence," Johnston notes.
Stimulants: A fair proportion of younger students say
they have tried stimulants (specifically amphetamines, which
are prescription-controlled drugs). Eleven percent of the
eighth graders, 13 percent of the tenth graders, and 15
percent of the 12th graders report some use.
LSD: Some LSD use may be found at all grade levels,
with 2.7 percent of the eighth graders reporting any
experience in their lifetime, 5.6 percent of the tenth
graders, and 8.8 percent of the 12th graders.
Cocaine and Crack: Relatively few students initiate
cocaine use by eighth grade (2.3 percent lifetime
prevalence) or tenth grade (4.1 percent); for crack the
numbers are lower still: 1.3 percent and 1.7 percent,
respectively.
Heroin: Reported heroin experience is low in all
grades, but actually slightly higher in the lower grades
than in 12th grade. This is very likely due to the fact
that few of the eventual school dropouts have left school by
eighth or tenth grade, whereas most have left by 12th grade.
Lifetime prevalence is 1.2 percent for both eighth and tenth
grades, compared with 0.9 percent for 12th grade.
Steroids: While the use of anabolic steroids is
relatively low at all grade levels, there is very little
difference among the grades. For example, the lifetime
prevalence rates for eighth, tenth, and 12th grades,
respectively, are 1.9 percent, 1.8 percent, and 2.1 percent.
(more)
(16) Drug Survey
Page 9
For just the boys in these grade levels, the corresponding
rates are 3.0 percent, 3.1 percent, and 3.6 percent. While
use appears to be trending down among seniors, it is too
early to tell for the lower grades.
Summing up this year's findings, Johnston states:
"Certainly the downward trends in illegal drug use among
high school seniors and college students are good news,
although the use of LSD, in particular, bears watching.
Still, the absolute levels of drug use, especially at the
lower grades, remain a cause for concern and demonstrate
that we've still got a way to go in the battle against
drugs.
"The stabilization of smoking initiation rates at high
levels among our young people is a matter of the greatest
public health concern, given the immense amount of illness
and death which will predictably result from it. The
situation as it stands is intolerable and cries out for
major action on the part of our whole society. We should no
longer allow the politics of tobacco to immobilize us
because, quite literally, the lives of our children are at
stake. "
The study, titled "Monitoring the Future," is conducted
by the U-M's Institute for Social Research under research
grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Data
collections have been carried out in the spring of each year
since 1975 with self-completed, confidential questionnaires
being administered in classrooms by U-M research staff.
Panels of respondents are randomly selected for follow-up
questionnaires, which are sent every year through the mail.
In 1991, 15,500 seniors were surveyed in 136 high schools,
as well as 6,600 graduates from the previous ten graduating
classes, which had modal ages of 19-28. Within the second
group, 1,400 college students were identified who were 1-4
years past high school and were actively enrolled full-time
in a 2-year or 4-year college; they constitute the "college
student" sample. Similar sample sizes were obtained in the
same way in previous years.
Trend data have been reported for high school seniors
since 1975, college students since 1980, and 19-28 year olds
(who are all high school graduates) since 1986. In 1991,
national samples of eighth and tenth graders were added to
the study design for the first time. A total of 18,300
eighth graders in 162 middle and junior high schools were
surveyed, as well as 16,000 tenth graders in 122 high
schools.
######
(LJohnston; JBachman; Malley; ISR). (R1-3; ISR; Ed1, 2A; RTsp)
[drugsurv]
TABLE 1
Trends in Lifetime Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Percent ever used
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. N =
9400
15400
17100
17800
15500
15900
17500
17700
16300
15900
16000
15200
16300
16300
16700
15200
15000
Any Illicit Drug Use
b
55.2
58.3
61.6
64.1
65.1
65.4
65.6
65.8
64.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
64.4
62.9
61.6
60.6
57.6
56.6
53.9
50.9
47.9
44.1
-3.8sss
Any Illicit Drug Other
Than Marijuana
b
36.2
35.4
35.8
36.5
37.4
38.7
42.8
45.0
44.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
41.1
40.4
40.3
39.7
37.7
35.8
32.5
31.4
29.4
26.9
-2.58s
Marijuana/Hashish
47.3
52.8
56.4
59.2
60.4
60.3
59.5
58.7
57.0
54.9
54.2
50.9
50.2
47.2
43.7
40.7
36.7
-4.0sss
d
Inhalants
NA
10.3
11.1
12.0
12.7
11.9
12.3
12.8
13.6
14.4
15.4
15.9
17.0
16.7
17.6
18.0
Inhalants Adjusted
17.6
-0.4
NA
f,g
NA
NA
NA
18.2
17.3
17.2
17.7
18.2
18.0
18.1
20.1
18.6
17.5
18.6
18.5
18.0
-0.5
Amyl & Butyl Nitrites
NA
NA
NA
NA
11.1
11.1
10.1
9.8
8.4
8.1
7.9
8.6
4.7
3.2
3.3
2.1
1.6
-0.5
Hallucinogens
16.3
15.1
13.9
14.3
14.1
13.3
13.3
12.5
11.9
10.7
10.3
9.7
10.3
8.9
9.4
9.4
9.6
+0.2
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
17.7
15.6
15.3
14.3
13.6
12.3
12.1
11.9
10.6
9.2
9.9
9.7
10.0
+0.3
LSD,
11.3
11.0
9.8
9.7
9.5
9.3
9.8
9.6
PCP1,8
8.9
8.0
7.5
7.2
8.4
7.7
8.3
8.7
8.8
+0.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
12.8
9.6
7.8
6.0
5.6
5.0
4.9
4.8
3.0
2.9
3.9
2.8
2.9
+0.1
Cocaine
9.0
9.7
10.8
12.9
15.4
15.7
16.5
16.0
16.2
16.1
17.3
16.9
15.2
12.1
10.3
9.4
7.8
-1.6ss
"Crack
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.4
4.8
4.7
3.5
3.1
-0.4
Other cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
14.0
12.1
8.5
8.6
7.0
-1.68s
Heroin
2.2
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.3
0.9
-0.4s
k
Other opiates
9.0
9.6
10.3
9.9
10.1
9.8
10.1
9.6
9.4
9.7
10.2
9.0
9.2
8.6
8.3
8.3
6.6
-1.7888
k
Stimulants
b.k
22.3
22.6
23.0
22.9
24.2
26.4
32.2
35.6
35.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
27.9
26.9
27.9
26.2
23.4
21.6
19.8
19.1
17.5
15.4
-2.188
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.7
3.3
+0.6
Sedatives
k,m
k
18.2
17.7
17.4
16.0
14.6
14.9
16.0
15.2
14.4
13.3
11.8
10.4
8.7
7.8
7.4
7.5
6.7
-0.8
Barbiturates
k,m
16.9
16.2
15.6
13.7
11.8
11.0
11.3
10.3
9.9
9.9
9.2
8.4
7.4
6.7
6.5
6.8
6.2
-0.6
Methaqualone
8.1
7.8
8.5
7.9
8.3
9.5
10.6
10.7
10.1
8.3
6.7
5.2
4.0
3.3
2.7
2.3
1.3
-1.0s
k
Tranquilizers
17.0
16.8
18.0
17.0
16.3
15.2
14.7
14.0
13.3
12.4
11.9
10.9
10.9
9.4
7.6
7.2
7.2
0.0
Alcohol
90.4
91.9
92.5
93.1
93.0
93.2
92.6
92.8
92.6
92.6
92.2
91.3
92.2
92.0
90.7
89.5
88.0
-1.5
Cigarettes
73.6
75.4
75.7
75.3
74.0
71.0
71.0
70.1
70.6
69.7
68.8
67.6
67.2
66.4
65.7
64.4
63.1
-1.3
1
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.0
2.9
2.1
-0.8
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: 8 =.05, ss =.01, 888 =.001. NA indicates data not available.
Use of "any illicit drugs" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or
b
tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
c Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
Use of "other illicit drugs" includes any use of hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or tranquilizers
d not under a doctor's orders.
e Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1976-1988; N is four-fifths of N indicated. Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1989-1991; N is five-sixths of N indicated.
Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text for details.
Data based on a single questionnaire form; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1979-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989-1991.
h g Question text changed slightly in 1987.
Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text for details.
j Data based on two questionnaire forms in 1987-1989; N is two-fifths of N indicated in 1987-1988 and two-sixths of N indicated in 1989. Data based on six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
Data based on a single questionnaire form in 1987-1989; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1987-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1990-
k 1991; N is four-sixths of N indicated.
Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
Data based on two questionnaire forms; N is two-sixths of N indicated. Steroid data based on a single questionnaire form in 1989-1990.
Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1975-1988, six questionnaire forms in 1989, and one questionnaire form in 1990-1991; N is one-sixth of N indicated in 1990-1991.
TABLE 2
Trends in Annual Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Percent who used in last twelve months
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
1975
'90-'91
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
Approx. N =
9400
15400
17100
17800
15500
change
15900
17500
17700
16300
15900
16000
15200
16300
16300
16700
15200
15000
Any Illicit Drug Use a
45.0
48.1
51.1
53.8
54.2
53.1
52.1
50.8
49.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
49.4
47.4
45.8
46.3
44.3
41.7
38.5
35.4
Any Illicit Drug Other
32.5
29.4
-3.1888
Than Marijuana
b
26.2
25.4
26.0
27.1
28.2
30.4
34.0
33.8
32.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
30.1
28.4
28.0
27.4
25.9
24.1
21.1
20.0
17.9
16.2
-1.78
Marijuana/Hashish
40.0
44.5
47.6
50.2
50.8
48.8
46.1
44.3
42.3
40.0
40.6
38.8
d
36.3
33.1
29.6
27.0
23.9
-3.1ss
Inhalants
NA
3.0
3.7
4.1
5.4
4.6
4.1
4.5
4.3
5.1
Inhalants Adjusted
5.7
6.1
6.9
6.5
5.9
6.9
6.6
NA
NA
-0.3
f,g
NA
NA
8.9
7.9
6.1
6.6
6.2
7.2
7.5
8.9
8.1
7.1
Amyl/Butyl Nitrites
6.9
7.5
6.9
NA
NA
-0.6
NA
NA
6.5
5.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
4.0
4.0
4.7
2.6
1.7
1.7
1.4
0.9
-0.5
Hallucinogens
11.2
9.4
8.8
Hallucinogens Adjusted h
9.6
9.9
9.3
9.0
8.1
7.3
6.5
6.3
6.0
6.4
5.5
5.6
5.9
NA
5.8
NA
-0.1
NA
NA
11.8
10.4
10.1
9.0
8.3
7.3
7.6
7.6
6.7
LSD,
5.8
6.2
6.0
6.1
7.2
+0.1
6.4
5.5
6.3
PCP¹⁸
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.1
5.4
4.7
4.4
4.5
5.2
4.8
4.9
NA
5.4
5.2
NA
-0.2
NA
NA
7.0
4.4
3.2
2.2
2.6
2.3
2.9
2.4
1.3
1.2
2.4
1.2
1.4
+0.2
Cocaine
5.6
6.0
7.2
9.0
12.0
12.3
12.4
11.5
11.4
11.6
"Crack"
13.1
12.7
10.3
7.9
6.5
5.3
NA
3.5
NA
-1.8sss
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.1
3.9
Other cocaine
3.1
3.1
1.9
NA
1.5
NA
-0.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9.8
7.4
5.2
4.6
3.2
-1.48ss
Heroin
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
Other opiates k
0.4
-0.1
5.7
5.7
6.4
6.0
6.2
6.3
5.9
5.3
5.1
5.2
5.9
5.2
5.3
4.6
4.4
4.5
3.5
-1.0ss
Stimulants
b,k
16.2
15.8
16.3
17.1
18.3
20.8
26.0
26.1
24.6
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted
NA
NA
I
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
20.3
17.9
17.7
15.8
13.4
12.2
10.9
Crystal Methamphetamine
10.8
9.1
NA
8.2
NA
-0.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
k,m
NA
NA
1.3
1.4
+0.1
Sedatives
k
11.7
10.7
10.8
9.9
9.9
10.3
10.5
9.1
7.9
6.6
5.8
5.2
4.1
Barbiturates
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
k,m
10.7
0.0
9.6
9.3
8.1
7.5
6.8
6.6
5.5
5.2
4.9
4.6
4.2
3.6
3.2
Methaqualone
3.3
3.4
5.1
3.4
0.0
4.7
5.2
4.9
5.9
7.2
7.6
6.8
5.4
3.8
2.8
2.1
1.5
1.3
1.3
0.7
0.5
-0.2
Tranquilizers
10.6
10.3
10.8
9.9
9.6
8.7
8.0
7.0
6.9
6.1
6.1
5.8
5.5
4.8
3.8
3.5
3.6
+0.1
Alcohol
84.8
85.7
87.0
87.7
88.1
87.9
87.0
86.8
87.3
86.0
85.6
84.5
85.7
85.3
82.7
80.6
77.7
-2.9ss
Cigarettes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.9
1.7
1.4
-0.3
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: 8 =.05, 88 =.01, 888 =.001. NA indicates data not available.
b tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
Use of "any illicit drugs" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or
c Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
d not under a doctor's orders.
Use of "other illicit drugs" includes any use of hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or tranquilizers
e Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1976-1988; N is four-fifths of N indicated. Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1989-1991; N is five-sixths of N indicated.
Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text for details.
Data based on a single questionnaire form; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1979-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989-1991.
h Question text changed slightly in 1987.
i Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text for details.
Data based on a single questionnaire form in 1986; N is one-fifth of N indicated. Data based on two questionnaire forms in 1987-1989; N is two-fifths of N indicated in 1987-1988 and two-
j
sixths of N indicated in 1989. Data based on six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
Data based on a single questionnaire form in 1987-1989; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1987-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1990-
k
1991; N is four-sixths of N indicated.
Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
Data based on two questionnaire forms; N is two-sixths of N indicated. Steroid data based on a single questionnaire form in 1989-1990.
Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1975-1988, six questionnaire forms in 1989, and one questionnaire form in 1990-1991. N is one-sixth of N indicated in 1990-1991.
TABLE 3
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Percent who used in last thirty days
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. N =
9400
15400
17100
17800
15500
15900
17500
17700
16300
15900
16000
15200
16300
16300
16700
15200
15000
Any Illicit Drug Useᵃ
30.7
34.2
37.6
38.9
38.9
37.2
36.9
33.5
32.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
32.5
30.5
29.2
29.7
27.1
24.7
21.3
19.7
17.2
16.4
-0.8
Any Illicit Drug Other
Than Marijuana
b
15.4
13.9
15.2
15.1
16.8
18.4
21.7
19.2
18.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adjusted Version
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
17.0
15.4
15.1
14.9
13.2
11.6
10.0
9.1
8.0
7.1
-0.98
Marijuana/Hashish
27.1
32.2
35.4
37.1
36.5
33.7
31.6
28.5
27.0
25.2
25.7
23.4
21.0
18.0
16.7
14.0
13.8
-0.2
d
Inhalants
NA
0.9
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.2
2.5
2.8
2.6
2.3
2.7
2.4
-0.3
Inhalants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
f,g
NA
3.2
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.6
3.0
3.2
3.5
3.0
2.7
2.9
2.6
-0.3
Amyl/Butyl Nitrites
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.4
1.8
1.4
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.3
1.3
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.4
-0.2
Hallucinogens
h
4.7
3.4
4.1
3.9
4.0
3.7
3.7
3.4
2.8
2.6
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
0.0
Hallucinogens Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.3
4.4
4.5
4.1
3.5
3.2
3.8
3.5
2.8
2.3
2.9
2.3
2.4
+0.1
LSD,
2.3
1.9
2.1
2.1
2.4
2.3
2.5
2.4
1.9
1.5
PCP ¹,8
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.9
0.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.4
1.4
1.4
1.0
1.3
1.0
1.6
1.3
0.6
0.3
1.4
0.4
0.5
+0.1
Cocaine
1.9
2.0
2.9
3.9
5.7
5.2
5.8
5.0
4.9
5.8
6.7
6.2
4.3
3.4
2.8
1.9
1.4
-0.5s
"Crack"
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
1.6
1.4
0.7
0.7
0.0
Other cocaine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.1
3.2
1.9
1.7
1.2
-0.5ss
Heroin
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
k
Other opiates
2.1
2.0
2.8
2.1
2.4
2.4
2.1
1.8
1.8
1.8
2.3
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.1
-0.4s
Stimulants
8.5
7.7
8.8
8.7
9.9
12.1
15.8
13.7
12.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10.7
8.9
8.3
6.8
5.5
5.2
4.6
4.2
3.7
3.2
-0.5
Crystal Methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.6
0.6
0.0
Sedatives
k,m
k
5.4
4.5
5.1
4.2
4.4
4.8
4.6
3.4
3.0
2.3
2.4
2.2
1.7
1.4
1.6
1.4
1.5
+0.1
Barbiturates
k,m
4.7
3.9
4.3
3.2
3.2
2.9
2.6
2.0
2.1
1.7
2.0
1.8
1.4
1.2
1.4
1.3
1.4
+0.1
Methaqualone
2.1
1.6
2.3
1.9
2.3
3.3
3.1
2.4
1.8
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.0
k
Tranquilizers
4.1
4.0
4.6
3.4
3.7
3.1
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.5
1.3
1.2
1.4
+0.2
Alcohol
68.2
68.3
71.2
72.1
71.8
72.0
70.7
69.7
69.4
67.2
65.9
65.3
66.4
63.9
60.0
57.1
54.0
-3.1s
Cigarettes
36.7
38.8
38.4
36.7
34.4
30.5
29.4
30.0
30.3
29.3
30.1
29.6
29.4
28.7
28.6
29.4
28.3
-1.1
1
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.8
1.0
0.8
-0.2
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: S =.05, 88 =.01, 888 =.001. NA indicates data not available.
Use of "any illicit drugs" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or
b tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
c
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
Use of "other illicit drugs" includes any use of hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (excluded since 1990), or tranquilizers
d not under a doctor's orders.
e Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1976-1988; N is four-fifths of N indicated. Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1989-1991; N is five-sixths of N indicated.
Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text for details.
Data based on a single questionnaire form; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1979-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989-1991.
h Question text changed slightly in 1987.
Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text for details.
j Data based on two questionnaire forms in 1987-1989; N is two-fifths of N indicated in 1987-1988 and two-sixths of N indicated in 1989. Data based on six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
Data based on a single questionnaire form in 1987-1989; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1987-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989. Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1990-
k
1991; N is four-sixths of N indicated.
Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
Data based on two questionnaire forms; N is two-sixths of N indicated. Steroid data based on a single questionnaire form in 1989-1990.
Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1975-1988, six questionnaire forms in 1989, and one questionnaire form in 1990-1991; N is one-sixth of N indicated in 1990-1991.
TABLE 4
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Daily Use of Various Types of Drugs
Percent who used daily in last thirty days
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
1975
'90-'91
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
Approx. N =
9400
15400
17100
17800
change
15500
15900
17500
17700
16300
15900
16000
15200
16300
16300
16700
15200
15000
Marijuana/Hashish
6.0
8.2
9.1
10.7
10.3
9.1
7.0
6.3
5.5
5.0
4.9
4.0
3.3
2.7
2.9
2.2
2.0
Inhalants
a
-0.2
NA
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
Inhalants Adjusted
0.2
0.3
0.2
NA
-0.1
c,d
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
Amyl & Butyl Nitrites
0.3
0.5
NA
+0.2
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.2
+0.1
Hallucinogens
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Hallucinogens Adjusted
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
NA
0.0
NA
NA
NA
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.2
LSD
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.1
-0.2
PCPc,d
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
NA
0.0
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
Cocaine
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.3
"Crack"
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
NA
0.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Other cocaine⁸
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
NA
0.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Heroin
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
Other opiates h
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
h
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
Stimulants
h,i
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.7
1.2
1.1
1.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants Adjusted
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
Crystal Methamphetamine
0.3
0.2
0.2
NA
0.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Sedatives
h,k
NA
0.1
0.1
-0.1
h
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Barbiturates
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
h,k
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Methaqualone
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
h
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Tranquilizers
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Alcohol
Daily
5.7
5.6
6.1
5.7
6.9
6.0
6.0
5.7
5.5
4.8
5.0
4.8
4.8
4.2
5+ drinks in a row/
4.2
3.7
3.6
-0.1
last 2 weeks
36.8
37.1
39.4
40.3
41.2
41.2
41.4
40.5
40.8
38.7
36.7
36.8
37.5
34.7
33.0
32.2
29.8
-2.4
Cigarettes
Daily
26.9
28.8
28.8
27.5
25.4
21.3
20.3
21.1
21.2
18.7
19.5
18.7
18.7
18.1
Half-pack or more
18.9
19.1
18.5
-0.6
per day
17.9
19.2
19.4
18.8
16.5
14.3
13.5
14.2
13.8
12.3
12.5
11.4
11.4
10.6
11.2
11.3
10.7
-0.6
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.2
0.1
-0.1
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: S =.05, SS =.01, 888 =.001. NA indicates data not available. Any apparent inconsistency between the change
a estimate and the prevalence estimates for the two most recent classes is due to rounding error.
b Data based on four questionnaire forms in 1976-1988; N is four-fifths of N indicated. Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1989-1991; N is five-sixths of N indicated.
c Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text for details.
d Data based on a single questionnaire form; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1979-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989-1991.
Question text changed slightly in 1987.
e Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text for details.
g Data based on two questionnaire forms in 1987-1989; N is two-fifths of N indicated in 1987-1988 and two-sixths of N indicated in 1989. Data based on six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
Data were based on a single questionnaire form in 1987-1989; N is one-fifth of N indicated in 1987-1988 and one-sixth of N indicated in 1989. Data based on four questionnaire forms in
h
1990-1991; N is four-sixths of N indicated.
Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
Data based on two questionnaire forms; N is two-sixths of N indicated. Steroid data based on a single questionnaire form in 1989-1990.
Data based on five questionnaire forms in 1975-1988, six questionnaire forms in 1989, and one questionnaire form in 1990-1991; N is one-sixth of N indicated in 1990-1991.
TABLE 5
Trends in Harmfulness of Drugs as Perceived by Seniors
Percentage saying "great risk"⁸
Q. How much do you think people
risk harming themselves
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
(physically or in other
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
ways), if they
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Try marijuana once or twice
15.1
11.4
9.5
8.1
9.4
10.0
13.0
11.5
12.7
14.7
14.8
15.1
18.4
19.0
23.6
23.1
27.1
+4.0ss
Smoke marijuana occasionally
18.1
15.0
13.4
12.4
13.5
14.7
19.1
18.3
20.6
22.6
24.5
25.0
30.4
31.7
36.5
36.9
40.6
+3.7s
Smoke marijuana regularly
43.3
38.6
36.4
34.9
42.0
50.4
57.6
60.4
62.8
66.9
70.4
71.3
73.5
77.0
77.5
77.8
78.6
+0.8
Try LSD once or twice
49.4
45.7
43.2
42.7
41.6
43.9
45.5
44.9
44.7
45.4
43.5
42.0
44.9
45.7
46.0
44.7
46.6
+1.9
Take LSD regularly
81.4
80.8
79.1
81.1
82.4
83.0
83.5
83.5
83.2
83.8
82.9
82.6
83.8
84.2
84.3
84.5
84.3
-0.2
Try PCP once or twice
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
55.6
58.8
56.6
55.2
51.7
-3.5
Try cocaine once or twice
42.6
39.1
35.6
33.2
31.5
31.3
32.1
32.8
33.0
35.7
34.0
33.5
47.9
51.2
54.9
59.4
59.4
0.0
Take cocaine occasionally
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
54.2
66.8
69.2
71.8
73.9
75.5
+1.6
Take cocaine regularly
73.1
72.3
68.2
68.2
69.5
69.2
71.2
73.0
74.3
78.8
79.0
82.2
88.5
89.2
90.2
91.1
90.4
-0.7
Try "crack" once or twice
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
57.0
62.1
62.9
64.3
60.6
-3.7s
Take "crack" occasionally
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
70.4
73.2
75.3
80.4
76.5
-3.9ss
Take "crack" regularly
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
84.6
84.8
85.6
91.6
90.1
-1.5
Try cocaine powder once or twice
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
45.3
51.7
53.8
53.9
53.6
-0.3
Take cocaine powder occasionally
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
56.8
61.9
65.8
71.1
69.8
-1.3
Take cocaine powder regularly
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
81.4
82.9
83.9
90.2
88.9
-1.3
Try heroin once or twice
60.1
58.9
55.8
52.9
50.4
52.1
52.9
51.1
50.8
49.8
47.3
45.8
53.6
54.0
53.8
55.4
55.2
-0.2
Take heroin occasionally
75.6
75.6
71.9
71.4
70.9
70.9
72.2
69.8
71.8
70.7
69.8
68.2
74.6
73.8
75.5
76.6
74.9
-1.7
Take heroin regularly
87.2
88.6
86.1
86.6
87.5
86.2
87.5
86.0
86.1
87.2
86.0
87.1
88.7
88.8
89.5
90.2
89.6
-0.6
Try amphetamines once or twice
35.4
33.4
30.8
29.9
29.7
29.7
26.4
25.3
24.7
25.4
25.2
25.1
29.1
29.6
32.8
32.2
36.3
+4.1s
Take amphetamines regularly
69.0
67.3
66.6
67.1
69.9
69.1
66.1
64.7
64.8
67.1
67.2
67.3
69.4
69.8
71.2
71.2
74.1
+2.9
Try barbiturates once or twice
34.8
32.5
31.2
31.3
30.7
30.9
28.4
27.5
27.0
27.4
26.1
25.4
30.9
29.7
32.2
32.4
35.1
+2.7
Take barbiturates regularly
69.1
67.7
68.6
68.4
71.6
72.2
69.9
67.6
67.7
68.5
68.3
67.2
69.4
69.6
70.5
70.2
70.5
+0.3
Try one or two drinks of an
alcoholic beverage (beer,
wine, liquor)
5.3
4.8
4.1
3.4
4.1
3.8
4.6
3.5
4.2
4.6
5.0
4.6
6.2
6.0
6.0
8.3
9.1
+0.8
Take one or two drinks nearly
every day
21.5
21.2
18.5
19.6
22.6
20.3
21.6
21.6
21.6
23.0
24.4
25.1
26.2
27.3
28.5
31.3
32.7
+1.4
Take four or five drinks nearly
every day
63.5
61.0
62.9
63.1
66.2
65.7
64.5
65.5
66.8
68.4
69.8
66.5
69.7
68.5
69.8
70.9
69.5
-1.4
Have five or more drinks once
or twice each weekend
37.8
37.0
34.7
34.5
34.9
35.9
36.3
36.0
38.6
41.7
43.0
39.1
41.9
42.6
44.0
47.1
48.6
+1.5
Smoke one or more packs of
cigarettes per day
51.3
56.4
58.4
59.0
63.0
63.7
63.3
60.5
61.2
63.8
66.5
66.0
68.6
68.0
67.2
68.2
69.4
+1.2
Approx. N =
(2804)
(2918)
(3052)
(3770)
(3250)
(3234)
(3604)
(3557)
(3305)
(3262)
(3250)
(3020)
(3315)
(3276)
(2796)
(2553)
(2549)
NOTE: a Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: 8 = .05, 88 = .01, 888 = .001. NA indicates data not available.
Answer alternatives were: (1) No risk, (2) Slight risk, (3) Moderate risk, (4) Great risk, and (5) Can't say, drug unfamiliar.
TABLE 6
Trends in Proportions of Seniors Disapproving of Drug Use
Percentage "disapproving"ᵃ
Q. Do you disapprove of people
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
(who are 18 or older) doing
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
each of the following?ᵇ
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Try marijuana once or twice
47.0
38.4
33.4
33.4
34.2
39.0
40.0
45.5
46.3
49.3
51.4
54.6
56.6
60.8
64.6
67.8
68.7
+0.9
Smoke marijuana occasionally
54.8
47.8
44.3
43.5
45.3
49.7
52.6
59.1
60.7
63.5
65.8
69.0
71.6
74.0
77.2
80.5
79.4
-1.1
Smoke marijuana regularly
71.9
69.5
65.5
67.5
69.2
74.6
77.4
80.6
82.5
84.7
85.5
86.6
89.2
89.3
89.8
91.0
89.3
-1.7
Try LSD once or twice
82.8
84.6
83.9
85.4
86.6
87.3
86.4
88.8
89.1
88.9
89.5
89.2
91.6
89.8
89.7
89.8
90.1
+0.3
Take LSD regularly
94.1
95.3
95.8
96.4
96.9
96.7
96.8
96.7
97.0
96.8
97.0
96.6
97.8
96.4
96.4
96.3
96.4
+0.1
Try cocaine once or twice
81.3
82.4
79.1
77.0
74.7
76.3
74.6
76.6
77.0
79.7
79.3
80.2
87.3
89.1
90.5
91.5
93.6
+2.1s
Take cocaine regularly
93.3
93.9
92.1
91.9
90.8
91.1
90.7
91.5
93.2
94.5
93.8
94.3
96.7
96.2
96.4
96.7
97.3
+0.6
Try heroin once or twice
91.5
92.6
92.5
92.0
93.4
93.5
93.5
94.6
94.3
94.0
94.0
93.3
96.2
95.0
95.4
95.1
96.0
+0.9
Take heroin occasionally
94.8
96.0
96.0
96.4
96.8
96.7
97.2
96.9
96.9
97.1
96.8
96.6
97.9
96.9
97.2
96.7
97.3
+0.6
Take heroin regularly
96.7
97.5
97.2
97.8
97.9
97.6
97.8
97.5
97.7
98.0
97.6
97.6
98.1
97.2
97.4
97.5
97.8
+0.3
Try amphetamines once or twice
74.8
75.1
74.2
74.8
75.1
75.4
71.1
72.6
72.3
72.8
74.9
76.5
80.7
82.5
83.3
85.3
86.5
+1.2
Take amphetamines regularly
92.1
92.8
92.5
93.5
94.4
93.0
91.7
92.0
92.6
93.6
93.3
93.5
95.4
94.2
94.2
95.5
96.0
+0.5
Try barbiturates once or twice
77.7
81.3
81.1
82.4
84.0
83.9
82.4
84.4
83.1
84.1
84.9
86.8
89.6
89.4
89.3
90.5
90.6
+0.1
Take barbiturates regularly
93.3
93.6
93.0
94.3
95.2
95.4
94.2
94.4
95.1
95.1
95.5
94.9
96.4
95.3
95.3
96.4
97.1
+0.7
Try one or two drinks of an
alcoholic beverage (beer,
wine, liquor)
21.6
18.2
15.6
15.6
15.8
16.0
17.2
18.2
18.4
17.4
20.3
20.9
21.4
22.6
27.3
29.4
29.8
+0.4
Take one or two drinks nearly
every day
67.6
68.9
66.8
67.7
68.3
69.0
69.1
69.9
68.9
72.9
70.9
72.8
74.2
75.0
76.5
77.9
76.5
-1.4
Take four or five drinks nearly
every day
88.7
90.7
88.4
90.2
91.7
90.8
91.8
90.9
90.0
91.0
92.0
91.4
92.2
92.8
91.6
91.9
90.6
-1.3
Have five or more drinks once
or twice each weekend
60.3
58.6
57.4
56.2
56.7
55.6
55.5
58.8
56.6
59.6
60.4
62.4
62.0
65.3
66.5
68.9
67.4
-1.5
Smoke one or more packs of
cigarettes per day
67.5
65.9
66.4
67.0
70.3
70.8
69.9
69.4
70.8
73.0
72.3
75.4
74.3
73.1
72.4
72.8
71.4
-1.4
Approx. N =
(2677)
(2957)
(3085)
(3686)
(3221)
(3261)
(3610)
(3651)
(3341)
(3254)
(3265)
(3113)
(3302)
(3311)
(2799)
(2566)
(2547)
NOTE: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: 8 = .05, 88 = .01, 888 = .001.
Answer alternatives were: (1) Don't disapprove, (2) Disapprove, and (3) Strongly disapprove. Percentages are shown for categories (2) and (3) combined.
The 1975 question asked about people who are "20 or older."
4
TABLE 7
Trends in Perceived Availability of Drugs, All Seniors
Percentage saying drug would be "Fairly
easy" or "Very easy" for them to get
Q. How difficult do you think
it would be for you to
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
get each of the following
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
'90-'91
types of drugs, if you
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
wanted some?
Marijuana
87.8
87.4
87.9
87.8
90.1
89.0
89.2
88.5
86.2
84.6
85.5
85.2
84.8
85.0
84.3
84.4
83.3
-1.1
Amyl & Butyl Nitrites
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
23.9
25.9
26.8
24.4
22.7
-1.7
LSD
46.2
37.4
34.5
32.2
34.2
35.3
35.0
34.2
30.9
30.6
30.5
28.5
31.4
33.3
38.3
40.7
39.5
-1.2
PCP
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
22.8
24.9
28.9
27.7
27.6
-0.1
Some other psychedelic
47.8
35.7
33.8
33.8
34.6
35.0
32.7
30.6
26.6
26.6
26.1
24.9
25.0
26.2
28.2
28.3
28.0
-0.3
Cocaine
37.0
34.0
33.0
37.8
45.5
47.9
47.5
47.4
43.1
45.0
48.9
51.5
54.2
55.0
58.7
54.5
51.0
-3.5s
"Crack"
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
41.1
42.1
47.0
42.4
39.9
-2.5
Cocaine powder
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
52.9
50.3
53.7
49.0
46.0
-3.0
Heroin
24.2
18.4
17.9
16.4
18.9
21.2
19.2
20.8
19.3
19.9
21.0
22.0
23.7
28.0
31.4
31.9
30.6
-1.3
Some other narcotic
(including methadone)
34.5
26.9
27.8
26.1
28.7
29.4
29.6
30.4
30.0
32.1
33.1
32.2
33.0
35.8
38.3
38.1
34.6
-3.5s
Amphetamines
67.8
61.8
58.1
58.5
59.9
61.3
69.5
70.8
68.5
68.2
66.4
64.3
64.5
63.9
64.3
59.7
57.3
-2.4
Barbiturates
60.0
54.4
52.4
50.6
49.8
49.1
54.9
55.2
52.5
51.9
51.3
48.3
48.2
47.8
48.4
45.9
42.4
-3.5s
Tranquilizers
71.8
65.5
64.9
64.3
61.4
59.1
60.8
58.9
55.3
54.5
54.7
51.2
48.6
49.1
45.3
44.7
40.8
-3.9s
Approx. N =
(2627)
(2865)
(3065)
(3598)
(3172)
(3240)
(3578)
(3602)
(3385)
(3269)
(3274)
(3077)
(3271)
(3231)
(2806)
(2549)
(2476)
NOTE: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent classes: B = .05, 88 = .01, 888 = .001. NA indicates data not available.
a Answer alternatives were: (1) Probably impossible, (2) Very difficult, (3) Fairly difficult, (4) Fairly easy, and (5) Very easy.
TABLE 8
Trends in Lifetime e Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in lifetime
'90-'91
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Any Illicit Drug,
69.4
66.8
64.6
66.9
62.7
65.2
61.8
60.0
58.4
55.6
54.0
50.4
-3.6
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
42.2
41.3
39.6
41.7
38.6
40.0
37.5
35.7
33.4
30.5
28.4
25.8
-2.6
Marijuana
65.0
63.3
60.5
63.1
59.0
60.6
57.9
55.8
54.3
51.3
49.1
46.3
-2.8
b
Inhalants
10.2
8.8
10.6
11.0
10.4
10.6
11.0
13.2
12.6
15.0
13.9
14.4
+0.5
Hallucinogens
15.0
12.0
15.0
12.2
12.9
11.4
11.2
10.9
10.2
10.7
11.2
11.3
+0.1
LSD
10.3
8.5
11.5
8.8
9.4
7.4
7.7
8.0
7.5
7.8
9.1
9.6
+0.5
Cocaine
22.0
21.5
22.4
23.1
21.7
22.9
23.3
20.6
15.8
14.6
11.4
9.4
-2.0
Crack
c
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.3
3.4
2.4
1.4
1.5
+0.1
MDMA ("Ecstasy")8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.8
3.9
2.0
-1.9
Heroin
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.3
0.5
+0.2
Other Opiates
8.9
8.3
8.1
8.4
8.9
6.3
8.8
7.6
6.3
7.6
6.8
7.3
+0.5
Stimulants
a,d
29.5
29.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Stimulants, Adjusted
h
NA
NA
30.1
27.8
27.8
25.4
22.3
19.8
17.7
14.6
13.2
13.0
-0.2
Crystal methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.0
1.3
+0.3
Sedatives
a
13.7
14.2
14.1
12.2
10.8
9.3
8.0
6.1
4.7
4.1
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
a
8.1
7.8
8.2
6.6
a
6.4
4.9
5.4
3.5
3.6
3.2
3.8
3.5
-0.3
Methaqualone
10.3
10.4
11.1
9.2
9.0
7.2
5.8
4.1
2.2
2.4
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
15.2
11.4
11.7
10.8
10.8
9.8
10.7
8.7
8.0
8.0
7.1
6.8
-0.3
Alcohol
94.3
95.2
95.2
95.0
94.2
95.3
94.9
94.1
94.9
93.7
93.1
93.6
+0.5
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
8 = .05, 88 = .01, 888 =.001.
NA indicates data not available.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
ᵇThis drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1980-89, and in five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N
in 1991 (for college students) is 1170.
ᶜThis drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
e Data are uncorrected for cross-time inconsistencies in the answers.
Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants,
barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1989, and in two of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in
1991 (for college students) is 470.
h
This drug was asked about in two of the six questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
TABLE 9
Trends in Annual Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in last twelve months
'90-'91
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Any Illicit Druge
56.2
55.0
49.5
49.8
45.1
46.3
45.0
40.1
37.4
36.7
33.3
29.2
-4.1s
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
32.3
31.7
29.9
29.9
27.2
26.7
25.0
21.3
19.2
16.4
15.2
13.2
-2.0
Marijuana
51.2
51.3
44.7
45.2
40.7
41.7
40.9
37.0
34.6
33.6
29.4
26.5
-2.9
b
Inhalants
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.8
2.4
3.1
3.9
3.7
4.1
3.7
3.9
3.5
-0.4
Hallucinogens
8.5
7.0
8.7
6.5
6.2
5.0
6.0
5.9
5.3
5.1
5.4
6.3
+0.9
LSD
6.0
4.6
6.3
4.3
3.7
2.2
3.9
4.0
3.6
3.4
4.3
5.1
+0.8
Cocaine
16.8
16.0
17.2
17.3
16.3
17.3
17.1
13.7
10.0
8.2
5.6
3.6
-2.0s
c
Crack
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.3
2.0
1.4
1.5
0.6
0.5
-0.1
MDMA ("Ecstasy")
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.3
2.3
0.9
-1.4
Heroin
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Other Opiates
5.1
4.3
3.8
3.8
3.8
2.4
4.0
3.1
3.1
3.2
2.9
2.7
-0.2
Stimulantsᵃ
22.4
22.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
a,d
Stimulants, Adjusted
NA
NA
21.1
17.3
15.7
11.9
10.3
7.2
6.2
4.6
4.5
3.9
-0.6
Crystal methamphetamine
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.1
0.0
Sedativesᵃ
8.3
8.0
8.0
4.5
3.5
2.5
2.6
1.7
1.5
1.0
NA
NA
NA
Barbituratesᵃ
2.9
2.8
3.2
2.2
1.9
1.3
2.0
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.4
1.2
-0.2
a
Methaqualone
7.2
6.5
6.6
3.1
2.5
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.5
0.2
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
6.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
3.5
3.6
4.4
3.8
3.1
2.6
3.0
2.4
-0.6
Alcohol
90.5
92.5
92.2
91.6
90.0
92.0
91.5
90.9
89.6
89.6
89.0
88.3
-0.7
Cigarettes
36.2
37.6
34.3
36.1
33.2
35.0
35.3
38.0
36.6
34.2
35.5
35.6
+0.1
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
S = .05, 88 = .01, 888 = .001.
NA indicates data not available.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1980-89, and in five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N
in 1991 (for college students) is 1170.
ᶜThis drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1986, in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six
forms in 1990-1991.
d
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
e Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants,
barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
fThis drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1989, and in two of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in
1991 (for college students) is 470.
This drug was asked about in two of the six questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
TABLE 10
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in last thirty days
'90-'91
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N -
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Any Illicit Druge
38.4
37.6
31.3
29.3
27.0
26.1
25.9
22.4
18.5
18.2
15.2
15.2
0.0
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
20.7
18.6
17.1
13.9
13.8
11.8
11.6
8.8
8.5
6.9
4.4
4.3
-0.1
Marijuana
34.0
33.2
26.8
26.2
23.0
23.6
22.3
20.3
16.8
16.3
14.0
14.1
+0.1
b
Inhalants
1.5
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.3
0.8
1.0
0.9
-0.1
Hallucinogens
2.7
2.3
2.6
1.8
1.8
1.3
2.2
2.0
1.7
2.3
1.4
1.2
-0.2
LSD
1.4
1.4
1.7
0.9
0.8
0.7
1.4
1.4
1.1
1.4
1.1
0.8
-0.3
Cocaine
6.9
7.3
7.9
6.5
7.6
6.9
7.0
4.6
4.2
2.8
1.2
1.0
-0.2
Crack
c
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.3
+0.2
MDMA ("Ecstasy"
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.3
0.6
0.2
-0.4
Heroin
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
+0.1
Other Opiates a
1.8
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.4
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.6
+0.1
Stimulants
13.4
12.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
a,d
Stimulants, Adjusted
NA
NA
9.9
7.0
5.5
4.2
3.7
2.3
1.8
1.3
1.4
1.0
-0.4
Crystal methamphetamine⁸
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sedatives
3.8
3.4
2.5
1.1
1.0
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.2
NA
NA
NA
a
Barbiturates
0.9
0.8
1.0
0.5
0.7
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.3
+0.1
a
Methaqualone
3.1
3.0
1.9
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
2.0
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.9
1.0
1.1
0.8
0.5
0.6
+0.1
Alcohol
81.8
81.9
82.8
80.3
79.1
80.3
79.7
78.4
77.0
76.2
74.5
74.7
+0.2
Cigarettes
25.8
25.9
24.4
24.7
21.5
22.4
22.4
24.0
22.6
21.1
21.5
23.2
+1.7
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
5 = .05. 88 = .01, 888 = .001.
NA indicates data not available.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b This question was asked in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1980-89, and in five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in
1991 (for college students) is 1170.
ᶜThis question was asked in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
e Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates, stimulants,
barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
f, This drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1989, and in two of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in
1991 (for college students) is 470.
This drug was asked about in two of the six questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 (for college students) is 470.
TABLE 11
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Daily Use
for Marijuana, Cocaine, Stimulants, Alcohol, and Cigarettes
Among College Students 1-4 Years Beyond High School
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used daily in last thirty days
'90-'91
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(1040)
(1130)
(1150)
(1170)
(1110)
(1080)
(1190)
(1220)
(1310)
(1300)
(1400)
(1410)
Marijuana
7.2
5.6
4.2
3.8
3.6
3.1
2.1
2.3
1.8
2.6
1.7
1.8
+0.1
Cocaine
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Stimulants
a
0.5
0.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
a,b
Stimulants, Adjusted
NA
NA
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Alcohol
Daily
6.5
5.5
6.1
6.1
6.6
5.0
4.6
6.0
4.9
4.0
3.8
4.1
+0.3
5+ drinks in a row
in last 2 weeks
43.9
43.6
44.0
43.1
45.4
44.6
45.0
42.8
43.2
41.7
41.0
42.8
+1.8
Cigarettes
Daily
18.3
17.1
16.2
15.3
14.7
14.2
12.7
13.9
12.4
12.2
12.1
13.8
+1.7
Half-pack or more
per day
12.7
11.9
10.5
9.6
10.2
9.4
8.3
8.2
7.3
6.7
8.2
8.0
-0.2
NOTES: For all drugs not included here, daily use is below 0.5% in all years. Level of significance of difference between the two
most recent years:
8 =.05, 88 =.01, 888 =.001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription stimulants.
TABLE 12
Trends in Lifetime k Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among Respondents of Modal Age 19-28
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in lifetime
'90-'91
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(6900)
(6800)
(6700)
(6600)
(6700)
(6600)
h
Any Illicit Drugh
70.5
69.9
67.9
66.4
64.5
62.2
-2.3ss
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
48.4
47.0
44.6
42.7
40.8
37.8
-3.0sss
Marijuana
66.5
66.0
63.8
62.8
60.2
58.6
-1.6
Inhalants
12.3
12.7
12.6
13.2
12.5
13.4
+0.9
Inhalants, Adjusted
18.6
15.7
15.0
NA
13.5
14.1
+0.6
Nitrites
12.6
6.9
6.2
NA
1.9
1.4
-0.5
Hallucinogens
18.5
17.1
17.0
15.9
16.1
15.7
-0.4
Hallucinogens, Adjusted
20.1
17.2
17.2
NA
16.5
16.0
-0.5
LSD
14.6
13.7
13.8
12.7
13.5
13.5
0.0
PCP
8.4
4.8
5.0
NA
2.5
3.1
+0.6
Cocaine
32.0
29.3
28.2
25.8
23.7
21.0
-2.7sse
Crack
NA
6.3
6.9
6.1
5.1
4.8
-0.3
Other Cocaine
NA
28.2
25.2
25.4
22.1
19.8
-2.3ss
MDMA ("Ecstasy")
NA
NA
NA
3.3
3.7
3.2
-0.5
Heroin
1.3
1.3
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.0
Other Opiates
10.7
10.6
9.8
9.6
9.4
9.3
-0.1
Stimulants, Adjusted
32.3
30.8
28.8
25.3
24.4
22.4
-2.0ss
Crystal Methamphetamine ("Ice")"
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.5
2.9
+0.4
a
Sedatives
16.7
15.0
13.2
12.1
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
11.1
9.7
8.9
7.9
8.7
8.2
-0.5
Methaqualone
13.1
11.6
9.7
8.7
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
17.6
16.5
15.1
13.5
12.9
11.8
-1.1s
Alcohol
94.8
94.9
94.8
94.5
94.3
94.1
-0.2
Cigarettes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
f
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
1.1
1.2
1.7
+0.5
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
8 = .05, 88 = .01, 888 = .001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1986-89, and five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-
1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 5400.
ᶜThis drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription
stimulants.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text.
fThis drug was asked about in one questionnaire form. Total N in 1991 is approximately 1300.
g Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text.
h
Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates,
stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
i This drug was asked about in two questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 is approximately 2600.
jThis drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in four of the six questionnaire forms in
1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 4100.
k Lifetime prevalence is uncorrected for any cross-time inconsistencies in responding. See text.
TABLE 13
Trends in Annual Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among Respondents of Modal Age 19-28
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in last twelve months
'90-'91
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(6900)
(6800)
(6700)
(6600)
(6700)
(6600)
h
Any Illicit Drugh
41.9
39.3
36.3
32.8
30.7
27.0
-3.7889
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
27.0
23.9
21.3
18.3
16.7
14.3
-2.4sss
Marijuana
36.5
34.8
31.8
29.0
26.1
23.8
-2.3ss
Inhalants
1.9
2.1
1.8
1.9
1.9
2.0
+0.1
Inhalants, Adjusted
3.0
2.8
2.4
NA
2.1
2.2
+0.1
f
Nitrites
2.0
1.3
1.0
NA
0.4
0.2
-0.2
Hallucinogens
4.5
4.0
3.9
3.6
4.1
4.5
+0.4
Hallucinogens, Adjusted
4.9
4.1
3.9
NA
4.2
4.6
+0.4
LSD
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.7
3.3
3.8
+0.5
PCP
0.8
0.4
0.4
NA
0.2
0.3
+0.1
Cocaine
19.7
15.7
13.8
10.8
8.6
6.2
-2.4sss
Crackᶜ
3.2
3.1
3.1
2.5
1.6
1.2
-0.4s
Other Cocaine
NA
13.6
11.9
10.3
8.1
5.4
-2.7sss
MDMA ("Ecstasy")"
NA
NA
NA
1.4
1.5
0.8
-0.7s
Heroin
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
Other Opiates
3.1
3.1
2.7
2.8
2.7
2.5
-0.2
Stimulants, Adjusted
10.6
8.7
7.3
5.8
5.2
4.3
-0.9s
Crystal Methamphetamine ("Ice")¹
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.4
0.3
-0.1
Sedatives
3.0
2.5
2.1
1.8
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
a
2.3
2.1
1.8
1.7
1.9
1.8
-0.1
Methaqualone
1.3
0.9
0.5
0.3
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
5.4
5.1
4.2
3.7
3.7
3.5
-0.2
Alcohol
88.6
89.4
88.6
88.1
87.4
86.9
-0.5
Cigarettes
40.1
40.3
37.7
38.0
37.1
37.7
+0.6
f
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
0.5
0.3
0.5
+0.2
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
8 = .05, 88 = .01, 888 = .001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b
This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1986-89 (N was four-fifths of N indicated), and five of the
six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 5400.
ᶜThis drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1986, in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89,
and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription
stimulants.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text.
This drug was asked about in one questionnaire form. Total N in 1990 is approximately 1300.
g Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text.
h Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates,
stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 is approximately 2600.
j This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in four of the six questionnaire forms in
1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 4100.
TABLE 14
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Various Types of Drugs
Among Respondents of Modal Age 19-28
(Entries are percentages)
Percent who used in last thirty days
'90-'91
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(6900)
(6800)
(6700)
(6600)
(6700)
(6600)
h
Any Illicit Drugh
25.8
23.4
20.5
17.7
15.9
15.1
-0.8
Any Illicit Drug
Other than Marijuana
13.0
10.7
9.5
7.5
6.0
5.4
-0.6
Marijuana
22.0
20.7
17.9
15.5
13.9
13.5
-0.4
b
Inhalants
0.4
0.6
0.6
Inhalants, Adjusted b,e
0.5
0.6
0.5
-0.1
0.7
0.9
0.9
NA
0.7
0.6
-0.1
f
Nitrites
0.5
0.5
0.4
NA
0.1
0.0
-0.1
Hallucinogens
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.1
0.9
1.1
+0.2
Hallucinogens, Adjusted
1.4
1.2
1.1
NA
1.0
1.2
+0.2
LSD,
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.8
+0.2
PCP
0.2
0.1
0.3
NA
0.2
0.1
-0.1
Cocaine
8.2
6.0
5.7
3.8
2.4
2.0
-0.4
Crack
NA
1.0
1.2
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.0
Other Cocaine
NA
4.8
4.8
3.4
2.1
1.8
-0.3
MDMA
NA
NA
NA
0.4
0.2
0.1
-0.1
Heroin
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
-0.1
Other Opiates
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
-0.1
Stimulants, Adjusted
4.0
3.2
2.7
2.1
1.9
1.5
-0.4
Crystal Methamphetamine("Ice")
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1
0.0
-0.1
Sedatives
a
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.5
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.5
-0.1
a
Methaqualone
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.1
0.9
-0.2
Alcohol
75.1
75.4
74.0
72.4
71.2
70.6
-0.6
Cigarettes
31.1
30.9
28.9
28.6
27.7
28.2
+0.5
f
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
0.2
0.1
0.2
+0.1
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
8 = .05, ss = .01, 888 = .001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated.
a Only drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is included here.
b
This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1986-89 (N was four-fifths of N indicated), and five of the
six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 5400.
ᶜThis drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription
stimulants.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text.
fThis drug was asked about in one questionnaire form. Total N in 1991 is approximately 1300.
g Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text.
h
Use of "any illicit drug" includes any use of marijuana, hallucinogens, cocaine, and heroin, or any use of other opiates,
stimulants, barbiturates, methaqualone (until 1990), or tranquilizers not under a doctor's orders.
This drug was asked about in two questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 is approximately 2600.
jThis drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in four of the six questionnaire forms in
1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 4100.
TABLE 15
Trends in Thirty-Day Prevalence of Daily Use of Various Types of Drugs
Among Respondents of Modal Age 19-28
(Entries are percentages)
Percent using daily
in last thirty days
'90-'91
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
change
Approx. Wtd. N =
(6900)
(6800)
(6700)
(6600)
(6700)
(6600)
Marijuana
4.1
4.2
3.3
3.2
2.5
2.3
-0.2
b
Inhalants
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
Inhalants, Adjusted b,e
0.0
0.0
0.0
NA
0.1
0.0
-0.1
f
Nitrites
0.0
0.0
0.1
NA
0.1
0.0
-0.1
Hallucinogens
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Hallucinogens, Adjusted
0.0
0.0
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
LSD
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
PCP
0.0
0.0
0.1
NA
0.1
0.0
-0.1
Cocaine
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
+0.1
Crack
NA
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Other Cocaine
NA
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
+0.1
MDMA ("Ecstasy")
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Heroin
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Other Opiates
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Stimulants, Adjusted
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
Crystal Methamphetamine ("Ice")'
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sedatives
a
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
NA
NA
NA
Barbiturates
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Methaqualone
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
NA
NA
NA
Tranquilizers
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Alcohol
Daily
6.1
6.6
6.1
5.5
4.7
4.9
+0.2
5+ drinks in a row
in last 2 weeks
36.1
36.2
35.2
34.8
34.3
34.7
+0.4
Cigarettes
Daily
25.2
24.8
22.7
22.4
21.3
21.7
+0.4
Half-pack or more per day
20.2
19.8
17.7
17.3
16.7
16.0
-0.7
f
Steroids
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
NOTES: Level of significance of difference between the two most recent years:
8 = .05, 88 = .01, 888 = .001.
NA indicates data not available, NT indicates data not yet tabulated. ᵃOnly drug use which was not under a doctor's orders is
included here.
b This drug was asked about in four of the five questionnaire forms in 1986-89, and five of the six questionnaire forms in 1990-
1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 5400.
ᶜThis drug was asked about in two of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in all six questionnaire forms in 1990-1991.
d
Based on the data from the revised question, which attempts to exclude the inappropriate reporting of non-prescription
stimulants.
e Adjusted for underreporting of amyl and butyl nitrites. See text.
This drug was asked about in one questionnaire form. Total N in 1991 is approximately 1300.
g Adjusted for underreporting of PCP. See text.
h Any apparent inconsistency between the change estimate and the prevalence estimates for the two most recent classes is due
to rounding.
i This drug was asked about in two questionnaire forms. Total N in 1991 is approximately 2600.
j
This drug was asked about in one of the five questionnaire forms in 1987-89, and in four of the six questionnaire forms in
1990-1991. Total N in 1991 is approximately 4100.
TABLE 16
A Comparison of Drug Usage Rates for 8th, 10th, and 12th Graders in 1991*
Lifetime
Annual
30-Day
Daily
8th
10th
12th
8th
10th
12th
8th
10th
12th
8th
10th
12th
Approx. N =
17500
14800
15000
17500
14800
15000
17500
14800
15000
17500
14800
15000
Marijuana/Hashish
10.2
23.4
36.7
6.2
16.5
23.9
3.2
8.7
13.8
0.2
0.8
2.0
Inhalants
17.6
15.7
17.6
9.0
7.1
6.6
4.4
2.7
2.4
0.2
0.1
0.2
Inhalants adj.
-
-
18.0
-
-
6.9
-
-
2.6
-
-
0.5
Amyl/Butyl Nitrites
-
-
1.6
-
-
0.9
-
-
0.4
-
-
0.2
Hallucinogens
3.2
6.1
9.6
1.9
4.0
5.8
0.8
1.6
2.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
Hallucinogens adj.
-
-
10.0
-
-
6.1
-
-
2.4
-
-
0.1
LSD
2.7
5.6
8.8
1.7
3.7
5.2
0.6
1.5
1.9
0.0
0.0
0.1
PCP
-
-
2.9
-
-
1.4
-
-
0.5
-
-
0.1
Other Psychs
1.4
2.2
3.7
0.7
1.3
2.0
0.3
0.4
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
Cocaine
2.3
4.1
7.8
1.1
2.2
3.5
0.5
0.7
1.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
"Crack"
1.3
1.7
3.1
0.7
0.9
1.5
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.1
Other Cocaine
2.0
3.8
7.0
1.0
2.1
3.2
0.5
0.6
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.1
Heroin
1.2
1.2
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
Stimulants, adj.
10.5
13.2
15.4
6.2
8.2
8.2
2.6
3.3
3.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
Ice
-
-
3.3
-
-
1.4
-
-
0.6
-
-
0.1
Tranquilizers
3.8
5.8
7.2
1.8
3.2
3.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.1
Alcohol
Any use
70.1
83.8
88.0
54.0
72.3
77.7
25.1
42.8
54.0
0.5
1.3
3.6
5+ drinks in
last 2 weeks
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12.9
22.9
29.8
Cigarettes
Any use
44.0
55.1
63.1
—
-
-
14.3
20.8
28.3
7.2
12.6
18.5
1/2pack+/day
-
—
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
3.1
6.5
10.7
Steroids
1.9
1.8
2.1
1.0
1.1
1.4
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.0
0.1
0.1
Smokeless Tobacco
22.2
28.2
-
-
-
I
6.9
10.0
-
-
-
-
Been Drunk
26.7
50.0
65.4
17.5
40.1
52.7
7.6
20.5
31.6
0.2
0.2
0.9
*See Table 1 for relevant footnotes. For 8th and 10th graders, all questions are based on the full sample except for smokeless tobacco
which is based on one of two questionnaire forms (N is approximately one-half of N indicated).
FIGURE 1
Marijuana: Trends in Perceived Availability,
Perceived Risk of Regular Use,
and Prevalence of Use in Past Thirty-Days
All Seniors
50
100
Availability
90
40
80
Risk
70
30
60
a
Use
50
20
40
RISK & AVAILABILITY
Use
30
10
20
10
0
0
1975
'77
'79
'81
'83
'85
'87
'89
'91
Use: % using once or
Risk: % saying great risk
Availability: % saying fairly
more in past 30 days
of harm in regular use
easy or very easy to get
FIGURE 2
Cocaine: Trends in Perceived Availability,
Perceived Risk of Trying,
and Prevalence of Use in Past Year
All Seniors
50
100
90
40
80
70
Risk
30
60
Use
50
Availability
a
20
40
RISK & AVAILABILITY
a
30
10
20
Use
10
0
0
1975
'77
'79
'81
'83
'85
'87
'89
'91
Use: % using once or
Risk: % saying great risk
Availability: % saying fairly
more in past 12 months
of harm in using once or twice
easy or very easy to get
Figure 3
Use of Selected Drugs by 8th, 10th, and 12th Graders in 1991
60
60
8th grade
50
50
10th grade
12th grade
40
40
Percent
30
28.3
Percent
30
20.8
20
20
18.5
14.3
12.6
10
10
7.2
0
0
Use of Cigarettes in Past Thirty Days
Daily Use of Cigarettes in Past Thirty Days
60
60
50
50
40
40
Percent
30
Percent
30
23.9
20
16.5
20
10
6.2
10
1.1
2.2
3.5
0
0
Use of Marijuana In Past Year
Use of Cocaine in Past Year
60
60
52.7
50
50
40.1
40
40
Percent
30
Percent
30
20
20
17.5
9.0
10
7.1
6.6
10
0
0
Use of Inhalants in Past Year
Being Drunk or Very High in Past Year
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Executive Office of the President
Photo copy Preservation
OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
Washington, D.C. 20500
REMARKS OF GOVERNOR BOB MARTINEZ
AT THE
RELEASE OF
THE NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY:
A NATION RESPONDS TO DRUG USE
January 27, 1992
I want to welcome all of you here today for the release of the
President's 1992 National Drug Control Strategy: A Nation Responds
to Drug Use. In developing this Strategy, we sought and received
counsel not only from Federal Departments and agencies, but also
from the Congress, State and local officials, professionals in law
enforcement, prevention, treatment, and international affairs,
business organizations, charitable enterprises, parent groups, and
private individuals throughout the land.
When President Bush came into office, most people in this
country thought that doing something about the drug problem was
beyond the power of government. Many worried that the President
would stumble on this issue. Some may have hoped he would.
But the President boldly announced the first National Drug
Control Strategy in his first television address to the Nation.
And we can all take pride in the fact that under this
Administration the drug problem in America has improved
dramatically. We are making lifesaving strides against drug use in
this country. The statistics speak for themselves:
O
When this Administration took office, 14.5 million
Americans were current users of drugs. By 1991, over 2
million had stopped using drugs, a drop of over 16
percent.
O
In 1988, over 2.9 million Americans were current users of
cocaine. By 1991, over a million had stopped using
cocaine, a drop of over 35 percent.
o
The number of current users of marijuana dropped by about
2 million, or over 16 percent.
The best news concerns our young people. Among persons
12 - 17 years of age, current use of any illicit drug is
down more than 25 percent since 1988. According to the
results from the latest High School Senior Survey, drug
use by high school seniors has dropped to its lowest
level since the survey began in 1975. Current cocaine
use, for example, is down significantly from 1.9 percent
in 1990, to 1.4 percent in 1991. All this means we are
shutting down the pipeline into drug addiction.
These statistics are more than mere numbers. Reduced drug use
means less suffering, less pain, and less drain on America's
spirit, neighborhoods, families, businesses, and schools.
The Administration has committed enormous fiscal resources to
fight the war on drugs. Between 1989 and 1992, Federal anti-drug
funding rose from $6.6 billion to $11.9 billion. The number of
Federal personnel deployed in this fight rose from under 41,000 to
over 63,000.
But let's not forget the efforts of the States, cities, and
towns, as well as businesses, non-profit organizations, religious
institutions, and individuals across this land who have worked
quietly and tirelessly to rid their neighborhoods and communities
of the plague of drug use and drug crime.
The fourth National Drug Control Strategy: A Nation Responds
to Drug Use recognizes the contributions of those outside the
Federal government -- indeed, it relies on them. It takes
cognizance of the impressive progress we are making against drug
use in this country. But it also recognizes that drug use is still
too high, and that among certain parts of our population drug use,
though decreasing, is decreasing at an inadequate rate.
We are fighting a two-front war, in other words. Against one
front -- casual use -- we are making great progress. Against the
other -- hard-core use -- the going is tougher.
We must marshal every resource against the two fronts of this
war, and the Strategy does exactly that:
O
It encourages casual users to quit and encourages non-
users to refrain from starting by continuing to fund
large block grant programs in prevention, treatment, and
law enforcement that assist the mainstream population.
O
It addresses the problems of hard-core drug use through
targeted programs in prevention and treatment, including
the Capacity Expansion Program and Drug Emergency Grants.
This Strategy, unlike its predecessors, lays out in a more
direct and graphic way the actions that will be taken to combat
drugs. But the fundamental principle of the National Strategy
remains firm: to reduce drug use through a combination of supply
and demand policies and programs. Like its predecessors, this
Strategy recognizes the key roles of Federal, State, and local
governments, the private sector, and communities and individuals
across the Nation.
The Strategy calls for applying pressure across all fronts of
the drug war simultaneously, recognizing that prevention is the
only answer in the long run, but that in the short run increased
interdiction, international, and law enforcement efforts are
necessary, as well as treatment for those currently using drugs.
It declares that as a Nation we must:
Establish meaningful and effective programs to prevent
people from using drugs in the first place;
Provide effective treatment for those who need it and can
benefit from it;
Hold users accountable for their actions and thereby
deter others from using drugs;
Target and dismantle drug trafficking organizations;
Arrest and prosecute street-level drug dealers as well as
their superiors;
Provide swift and certain punishment for those convicted
of drug crimes;
Disrupt the flow of drugs, related chemicals, and drug
money;
Engage other nations in efforts to reduce the growth,
production, and distribution of drugs;
Support basic and applied research in behavior, medicine,
and technology; and
Improve our intelligence capabilities in order to attack
drug trafficking organizations better.
To carry out these objectives, the President is seeking $12.7
billion in drug-related funding, a $6.1 billion (93 percent)
increase since the beginning of the Administration, and a $776
million (6.5 percent) increase over Fiscal Year 1992. If the
President's Fiscal Year 1993 request is fully funded, State and
local governments will receive about $3.5 billion for drug control
programs, including drug law enforcement, treatment, and prevention
efforts.
I am confident that with perseverance we will prevail. I
congratulate you on your achievements so far, and I call upon you
to carry on the fight until we do prevail.
Thank you.
PAST MONTH USE OF ANY ILLICIT DRUG
AMONG ADOLESCENTS
(estimates in thousands of users)
2,000
1,866
1,500
1,622
1
1.370
1,000
500
0
1988
1990
1991
1-27-92
SOURCE: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.
ONDCP
Estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.
FEDERAL ANTI-DRUG FUNDING
1989-1993
14
13
$12.7
$12.0
12
11
$10.8
DOLLARS IN BILLIONS
10
$9.5
9
8
7
$6.6
6
5
4
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1-27-92
SOURCE: ONDCP
ONDCP
NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY
GOAL:
REDUCE DRUG USE
REDUCE DRUG
REDUCE DEMAND
AVAILABILITY
FOR DRUGS
TARGET
TARGET
TARGET
DETER
FREE
ORGANIZATIONS
SUPPLY
STREET
NEW
CURRENT
NETWORKS
ORGANIZATIONS
USERS
USERS
DESTROY
PRODUCTION
DESTROY
INFRASTRUCTURE
RESTRICT ROUTES/
MODES OF TRANSIT
WORK WITH
HOST AND
TRANSIT COUNTRIES
ARREST
INVESTIGATE
PROSECUTE
SCHOOLS
WORKPLACE
COMMUNITIES
MEDIA
EXPAND
CAPACITY
IMPROVE
QUALITY
1-27-91
SOURCE: ONDCP
ONDCP
PAST MONTH USE OF ANY ILLICIT DRUG
(estimates in thousands of users)
20,000
15,000
14,479
12,948
12,647
12,163
10,000
9,734
9,203
5,000
0
1988
1990
1991
ALL USERS
UNDER 35
1-27-92
SOURCE: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.
ONDCP
Estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.
TRENDS IN ADOLESCENT COCAINE USE
1985-1991
(annual use as measured by three indicators)
14%
12.7
13.1
12%
11.5
10.9
10.6
10.3
10%
7.9
8%
6.5
5.9
6%
5.2
4.2
5.3
4%
2.9
3.5
2.2
2%
1.5
0%
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
HOUSEHOLD SURVEY
HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR SURVEY
PARTNERSHIP IMPACT SURVEY
(percent of 12-17 year-olds)
(percent of seniors)
(percent of 13-17 year-olds)
1-27-92
SOURCE: NIDA, 1988, 1990 HOUSEHOLD SURVEY; 1990 HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR SURVEY;
ONDCP
GORDONS BLACK CORP. 1990 PARTNERSHIP SURVEY.
PAST MONTH USE OF ILLICIT DRUGS, 1979-1991
Estimated percentage of persons 12 and older.
PERCENT
16
13.7
14
12.3
12.7
12.1
12
11.0
10
9.4
08
7.3
6.4
6.2
06
5.1
5.9
4.8
04
2.9
2.4
2.3
02
1.5
0.8
0.9
0
1979
1982
1985
1988
1990 1991
ANY ILLICIT DRUG USE
MARIJUANA USE
COCAINE USE
1-27-92
SOURCE: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.
ONDCP
Estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.
CURRENT USE OF ANY ILLICIT DRUG
AMONG ADOLESCENTS
AND HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS, 1982-1991
5.5
100%
5.0
90%
4.5
80%
4.0
70%
3.5
60%
MILLIONS OF USERS
3.3M
3.0
2.6M
50%
2.5
40%
32.5%
29.7%
1.9M
2.0
30%
PERCENTAGE OF USERS
1.6M
1.4M
1.5
20%
21.3%
17.2%
0.5
16.4%
10%
0.0
0%
1982
1985
1988
1990
1991
12-17 YEAR OLDS
SENIORS
1-27-92
SOURCE: HOUSEHOLD SURVEY, 1991; SENIOR SURVEY, 1991.
ONDCP
PAST MONTH USE OF COCAINE
(estimates in thousands of users)
3,500
3,000
2,923
2,500
2,542
2,000
1.892 1
1,500
1,601
1,420
1,369
1,000
500
0
1988
1990
1991
ALL USERS
UNDER 35
1-27-92
SOURCE: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.
ONDCP
Estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.
FREQUENT* USE OF COCAINE
(estimates in thousands of users)
1,200
1,000
800
862
855
767
600
662
606
554
400
200
0
1988
1990
1991
ALL USERS
UNDER 35
1-27-92
SOURCE: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.
*FREQUENT USE IS DEFINED AS A TENDENCY WITHIN
ONDCP
Estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.
THE PAST YEAR TO USE COCAINE ON A WEEKLY BASIS.
PAST MONTH USE OF MARIJUANA
(estimates in thousands of users)
14,000
12,000
11,616
10,000
10,069
10,206
9,721
8,000
8,063
7,293
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
1988
1990
1991
ALL USERS
UNDER 35
1-27-92
SOURCE: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.
ONDCP
Estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.
DRUG-RELATED EMERGENCY ROOM MENTIONS
250,000
200,000
187,970
173.208
150,000
159,624
133,541
100,000
114,940
108,210
50,000
0
Q2: 1989
Q2: 1990
Q2: 1991
TOTAL MENTIONS
UNDER 35
1-27-92
SOURCE: NIDA, DAWN, October 1991 data file.
ONDCP
Estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.
EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF ADULT DRUG USERS
PAST MONTH USE OF ANY ILLICIT DRUG
BY PERSONS 18-AND-OLDER
(estimates in thousands of users)
12,000
10,000
9,540
8,000
8,405
7,499
6,000
4,000
3,778
3,007
2,922
2,000
0
1988
1990
1991
EMPLOYED USERS
UNEMPLOYED USERS
EMPLOYED INCLUDES FULL- AND PART-TIME WORKERS.
1-27-92
UNEMPLOYED INCLUDES BOTH PERSONS OUT OF WORK
SOURCE: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.
AND LOOKING FOR WORK, AND PERSONS OUT OF WORK
ONDCP
Estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.
AND NOT LOOKING FOR WORK.
FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL BUDGET
BY MAJOR ACTIVITY
FY 1993
FY 1989
International and
Interdiction
International and
Interdiction
$3.0 BILLION
$4.1 BILLION
24%
32%
Demand
Reduction
$1.7 BILLION $2.0 BILLION
27%
31%
Demand
Reduction
$5.6 BILLION
$2.8 BILLION
Domestic Law
44%
43%
Enforcement
Domestic Law
Enforcement
Total Federal Drug
Total Federal Drug
Control Funds = $6.6 billion
Control Funds = $12.7 billion
1-27-92
SOURCE: ONDCP
ONDCP
PROGRAMS TARGETING AT-RISK GROUPS
AND HARD-CORE USERS
Crack
Pregnant/
Babies &
Postpartum
Job
Community
Abondoned
Women &
Partnerships
Infants
Corps
Head
Infants
Start
ADMS
Block Grant
Emergency
Protection
Set-Asides
Crisis
Education
Area Grants
Emergency
Grants
Runaway
Homeless
& Homeless
Demon-
Youth
AT-RISK
strations
GROUPS
AND
AIDS
HARD-CORE
Outreach
Infants
Demos
USERS
& Familles
HIV
Capacity
Prevention
Expansion
Among
IVDUs
Treatment
Youth
Improvement
Early
Gang
Childhood
DFSC State
Women/
High-Risk
Education
Grants
Drug
Children
Youth
(Gov's
Elimination
Residential
set-aside)
Grants
Demos
Total FY 1993 Funding for Programs Targeting At-Risk Groups
and Hard-Core Users: $1.2 Billion
1-27-92
SOURCE: ONDCP
ONDCP
FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS TARGETING
AT-RISK GROUPS AND HARD-CORE USERS
FY 93
FY 89
Other Federal Drug
Control Programs
Other Federal Drug
Control Programs
$1,200
At-Risk Groups
(9.4%)
& Hard-Core Users
$339
At-Risk Groups
(5.1%)
& Hard-Core Users
$11,529
$6,253
All Federal Drug Control Funds = $6.6 billion
All Federal Drug Control Funds = $12.7 billion
Funding for Programs Targeting At-Risk Groups
and Hard-Core Users FY 1989-FY 1993: Increase of 254%
1-27-92
ONDCP
SOURCE: ONDCP
FEDERAL DRUG PROGRAM ASSISTANCE
TO STATE & LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
FY 1993
ALL OTHER
ASSISTANCE TO
FEDERAL
STATE & LOCAL
DRUG CONTROL
GOVERNMENTS
PROGRAMS
$9.2 Billion (72%)
$3.5 Billion (28%)
TOTAL FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL
FUNDS: $12.7 BILLION
1-27-92
SOURCE: ONDCP
ONDCP
OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY
*
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
Washington, D.C. 20500
NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY IV
A NATION RESPONDS TO DRUG USE
FACT SHEET
Progress continues in the war on drugs, particularly among
persons 12-17 years of age (thus shutting down the pipeline that
leads to addiction) Between 1988 and 1991:
Current overall drug use dropped 13 percent; current
adolescent drug use dropped 27 percent.
Occasional use of cocaine dropped 22 percent; adolescent
cocaine use dropped an astounding 63 percent.
Current users of marijuana dropped by about 2 million since
1988, a drop of over 16 percent.
Among persons 12 - 17 years of age, current use of any
illicit drug is down more than 25 percent since 1988, and,
according to the High School Senior Survey, drug use by high
school seniors has dropped to its lowest level since the
survey began in 1975.
Student approval of occasional marijuana and cocaine use
dropped by 29 percent and 47 percent respectively.
Federal drug seizures in 1991 continue to be substantial,
with figures totaling several hundred thousands of pounds of
cocaine, heroin, and marijuana seizures.
The war on drugs requires a substantial fiscal commitment, one
fully met by this Administration:
Funding has increased by 93 percent under President Bush --
$12.7 billion for Fiscal Year 1993.
28 percent of the Federal drug control budget -- $3.5
billion -- is devoted to State and local government drug
control programs. For example:
-- Community Partnership Grants: $113.9 million (up 15
percent over 1992) to assist communities in developing
drug prevention strategies.
-- Public Housing Drug Elimination Grants: $165 million
to assist residents in mobilizing against drugs.
-- $656.9 million for educational prevention programs.
-- $60.3 million (double the FY 1992 level) for Drug
Emergency Grants to focus on schools with significant
drug and drug-related violence problems.
-- $61.9 million for DEA State and Local Task Forces.
$2.3 billion for treatment programs (up 20 percent over 1991
and double the FY 1989 level).
Treatment capacity for at least 1.9 million people
nationwide in Fiscal Year 1993.
Total funding for prevention activities will rise to more
than $1.6 billion in FY 1993, more than double the FY 1989
level.
Nearly $480 million in military, law enforcement, and
economic assistance to Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia.
O
$399.1 million for OCDETFs (up 10 percent over 1992, and 86
percent over the FY 1990 level).
We are fighting drugs on two fronts: casual use and hard-core
use. We are making progress on the first front; progress is
coming more slowly and unevenly on the second front. The
Strategy continues to support block grants that have been
effective in providing services to the mainstream population. To
ensure hard-to-reach populations are reached, the Strategy also
supports categorical grants: $374.4 million in 1993.
January 25, 1992
January 8, 1992
OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY
SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) is
responsible for establishing drug policies, objectives, and
priorities to unify a diversity of anti-drug activities and
efforts into a single, comprehensive plan of action. This plan
is published annually as the President's National Drug Control
Strategy.
The overall policy goal of the National Drug Control
Strategy is to reduce the level of drug use in this country.
Each Strategy identifies major objectives by which to attain this
goal. Federal Departments with drug-related missions submit
implementation plans to ONDCP outlining the steps to achieve
Strategy objectives. ONDCP approves each plan and then oversees
progress in implementing these plans.
The following list of accomplishments highlights Federal
agency progress on implementing the 1989, 1990, and 1991 Strategy
objectives in the following areas: Drug Use; Treatment;
Prevention; State and Local; Criminal Justice; Information and
Intelligence; High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas;
International; Budget; and Management.
DRUG USE
The National Drug Control Strategy established short- and
long-term numerical goals for reducing drug use. The goals,
established for January 1991, were all exceeded. All but one of
the goals established for FY 1992 were met. Significant progress
was made with young people -- the front end of the drug addiction
pipeline -- and overall drug use continued to decline.
Since the Administration took office, current overall drug
use declined from 14.5 million to 12.6 million in 1991. Cocaine
use declined from almost 3 million to 1.9 million over the same
period. Among persons 12 to 17 years old, current use of any
illicit drug is down more than 25 percent since 1988.
TREATMENT
The National Drug Control Strategy identifies twin goals of
expanding and improving drug treatment to treat the casualties of
the drug epidemic and to reduce associated drug-related costs.
Expanded Treatment Capacity: As a result of efforts to
expand the availability of treatment, Federal funding of
treatment has increased from 70,000 slots treating 196,000
persons in 1989 to a projected 111,000 slots treating 311,500
individuals in 1993.
Treatment Campus Demonstration Projects: To increase
treatment capacity, and demonstrate model approaches and research
improvements in treatment techniques, the 1990 and 1991 National
Drug Control Strategies included an initiative to fund large
treatment centers that offer a variety of drug treatment
approaches and the opportunity to evaluate and compare them. The
Office for Treatment Improvement has awarded grants to Texas and
New Jersey. Together these projects will have the capacity to
treat up to approximately 950 individuals at any one point with
aftercare provided as a follow-up to the treatment received at
the campus.
Target Cities Cooperative Agreements: The September 1989
National Drug Control Strategy announced the Administration's
intention to channel assistance to communities that are among the
hardest hit by the drug problem. Since then, demonstration
projects have been established in eight communities designated as
crisis areas to improve their treatment systems by expanding
treatment, establishing central intakes, making more rigorous
assessments of client needs, and training and otherwise improving
treatment program staff. The projects involve coordination of
State drug offices together with local government officials and
providers in order to improve delivery of services.
Critical Populations Grants: This program is funding the
development of 80 projects in 35 States expected to become
national prototypes for delivering comprehensive therapeutic
services and aftercare to critical populations, including
adolescents, the homeless, residents of public housing, and those
with multiple health problems. Examples of funded services
include enhanced outreach efforts, staff training, psychological
and psychiatric services, and educational and vocational
counseling.
Criminal Justice Treatment Program:
Treating Drug Offenders -- Recognizing that a high
proportion of offenders have drug problems, in FY 1991 the
Administration directed funds for treatment in Federal
prisons, which should treat up to 14,500 offenders per year.
In addition, it is estimated that there will be 3,863
offenders in the Residential Drug Treatment Program by the
end of FY 1992, and approximately 5,000 by 1995.
In addition, Department of Justice grants help States and
local jurisdictions develop programs that screen their
2
corrections populations for drug problems, refer them to
appropriate treatment services, continue to monitor drug
using and criminal behaviors through intensive supervision
and drug testing, and keep them engaged in drug treatment.
O Expanded and Improved Treatment in Federal Prisons -- Prior
to the National Drug Control Strategy, there were no
comprehensive treatment programs in Federal prisons. As a
result of the President's Strategy, the Federal Bureau of
Prisons has greatly expanded its treatment capacity to make
treatment available to those who need it, want it, and can
benefit from it. At present, some treatment is available in
every Federal prison.
Expanded Veterans Affairs Treatment Programs: The
Department of Veterans Affairs has steadily expanded its services
for drug addicted veterans. The Department documented increases
in inpatient visits, outpatient visits, and compensated work
therapy visits. Currently, treatment services are available at
virtually every VA medical center. The VA is also undertaking a
rigorous evaluation of their treatment system, examining the
effectiveness of their services, and evaluating the
implementation of the system's long-term expansion.
Treatment Evaluation: The Department of Health and Human
Services is studying how to improve the effectiveness of
treatment. The Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study will study
20,000 clients admitted to 50 treatment programs across the
nation. A parallel study of adolescent treatment will examine
6,000 adolescents.
The Drug Abuse Services Research Survey was conducted to
survey 1,200 drug treatment providers nationwide in order to
examine critical problems in service delivery including waiting
lists, treatment for pregnant women, how methadone is managed,
and drug testing of clients. A national sample of 2,300
treatment patients is being surveyed to study the outcome of
treatment.
PREVENTION
Neither Federal government programs nor money can solve the
drug problem. ONDCP, through the National Drug Control Strategy,
offers extensive attention and advice to and challenges States,
localities, and the private sector to join with the Federal
government to reduce drug use in this country.
Community Partnership Program: The President's 1990
National Drug Control Strategy announced a new initiative to
combat drug use at the local level. It is anticipated that by
the end of FY 1991, approximately 290 community partnerships will
3
be established with Federal funds. Community partnerships bring
together schools, housing authorities, law enforcement,
businesses, service organizations, health providers, and others
to coordinate local drug prevention efforts.
Public Housing Drug Elimination Grant Program: The 1990
National Drug Control Strategy announced a new initiative to
assist public housing agencies and residents in eliminating the
threat of drugs from public housing. Funding for HUD's Drug
Elimination Grant program has increased from $8.2 million in
1989 to approximately $165 million in 1992.
At the end of FY 1991, approximately 900 grants were
awarded to public housing agencies for such activities as
innovative drug education and treatment, counseling, referral,
and outreach; support of tenant patrols acting in cooperation
with local law enforcement agencies; physical improvements
designed to enhance security; and employment of security
personnel and investigators.
HUD Training programs: HUD has provided general training in
how to eliminate drugs in public housing to more than 2,000
housing authorities/staff, residents, and local service providers
and agencies.
High Risk Youth Grants: Between 1989 and 1992,
approximately 590 Federal grants targeting youth at high-risk for
using drugs have been awarded. These programs include prevention
projects for youth in the juvenile justice system, parental and
family involvement in preventing drug use, and prevention
strategies targeting children of substance abusers.
Youth Gang Drug Education and Prevention Grants: A
demonstration grant program in FY 1989 resulted in prevention
programs targeting youth gangs. It is anticipated that
approximately 50 grants will be awarded in FY 1992. Federal
funding in this program helps organizations and communities
effectively address the escalating problems of youth gangs
committing drug-related crimes. Initial results of a national
evaluation of funded programs are anticipated in early 1992.
Runaway/Homeless Youth Drug Prevention Demonstration Grants:
Since 1988, a series of programs to extend drug prevention
outreach to runaway teens has been created. Initiatives include
a demonstration grant program that will award approximately 200
grants in FY 1992 to youth shelters and programs serving runaway
teens, training for runaway shelter operators and staff, and
evaluation studies of prevention practices targeting drug-using
runaway teens.
Pregnancy Research Demonstration Grants: A national network
of research studies targeting substance using pregnant women and
4
their infants has been created. The 20 researcher-initiated
grants are collaborating on research designs, instruments, and
are pooling data. The results of the research will be used to
identify effective strategies for preventing drug use during
pregnancy and improving the health of infants affected by
maternal drug use.
Maternal Drug Use and Newborns: Two national studies of the
most innocent victims of drug use -- newborn babies -- have begun
to produce results. We will soon have significantly improved
estimates of the extent of fetal exposure to illicit drugs.
Critically necessary information is being yielded about the
consequences of fetal drug exposure that will guide development
of effective treatment protocols.
Abandoned Infants Assistance Act Grants and the Human
Development Services Coordinated Discretionary Grants Program for
Boarder Babies: To respond to the crisis of drug-affected
infants abandoned in hospitals around the country, 24
demonstration grants have been awarded to prevent abandonment,
train hospital staff, and expedite adoption of abandoned babies.
Emergency Child Abuse Prevention Demonstration Grants: This
program, which was established for the first time in FY 1991,
awarded over 90 grants. Projects will train child protection
staff to identify and intervene with children at-risk of abuse
and neglect by drug-using parents and test innovative strategies
for resolving family crisis where drugs are involved.
AIDS/HIV Outreach: NIDA has 41 community-based programs
throughout the United States to study and change the high-risk
behaviors of intravenous-drug users (IVDUs) who were not enrolled
in drug treatment. Since FY 1988, over 40,000 individuals have
been reached, and 42 percent of the IVDUs reached had never
previously enrolled in a formal drug treatment program. Overall,
31 percent of those IVDUs reached entered treatment. Of those
who had never previously been in treatment, 23 percent entered
treatment. The Centers for Disease Control uses approximately
5.6 percent of its AIDs budget to provide HIV Prevention Outreach
Services for injecting drug users and their partners.
Prevention Research Grants: An applied prevention research
program has been developed that has produced more than 50
researcher-initiated research grants targeting school drug
prevention and comprehensive community drug prevention. In
response to the 1990 National Drug Control Strategy, NIDA awarded
one minority prevention research center grant in FY 1990 and a
second one in FY 1991.
Firm Drug Prevention Programs and Policies: As a result of
legislation prepared by the Administration and passed by Congress
in 1989, schools, colleges, and universities are now required to
5
have in place comprehensive drug prevention programs as a
condition of receiving Federal funding. To date, more than
15,500 local educational agencies have been certified as being in
compliance (only six have not). The Department of Education is
continuing to monitor compliance of the regulations on an annual
basis.
Publications: To create sound, practical guidance on
strategies for preventing drug use, the Department of Education
(ED) has produced a drug prevention curriculum, a college
president's handbook on maintaining drug-free campuses, and a
parent's handbook on raising their children to be drug-free. The
response to these publications has been overwhelming.
STATE AND LOCAL
National Conferences on State and Local Drug Policy: The
Office of National Drug Control Policy sponsored national
conferences in 1990 and 1991 bringing together over a thousand
individuals involved in developing and implementing drug policy
at the Federal, State, and local level. These conferences:
Provided a mechanism for input to the President's National
Drug Control Strategy.
Showcased State and local anti-drug abuse programs for
possible replication.
Promoted integration of services and policies at all levels
of government.
Informed participants of funding and programmatic
initiatives at the Federal, State, and local level.
Volunteerism in the War on Drugs: Several major initiatives
to stimulate volunteerism in drug prevention activities have been
initiated. The Office of National Service has recognized 50
anti-drug programs as "Points of Light." The President's Drug
Advisory Council has been instrumental in organizing the Campaign
for a Drug-Free Society, a nonprofit organization dedicated to
encouraging volunteerism in the war on drugs. The Volunteer
Training Center will train grassroots volunteers. ACTION
requires private sector participation in all of their drug
alliance grants. ONDCP has also been active in recruiting
volunteers. We have been working with members of the faith
community and the AFL-CIO to develop anti-drug programs.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Denial of Federal Benefits: Section 5301 of the Anti-Drug
Abuse Act of 1988 allowed State and Federal judges to suspend the
6
eligibility of individuals convicted of drug-related offenses.
Under the leadership of ONDCP and DOJ, a list of over 460
deniable benefits from 53 agencies was compiled and State and
local prosecutors and courts were informed of the provisions of
the law and how to implement it.
Money laundering: ONDCP focused attention and resources on
attacking the financial infrastructure of drug trafficking
organizations as the most effective way to injure and dismantle
these enterprises. This strategy has been advanced through
ONDCP's Drug-Related Financial Crimes Policy Group, the
Roundtable of Experts, a white paper to be published, funding
HIDTA initiatives focused specifically on money laundering, and
supporting resource enhancements for IRS in enforcing money
laundering statutes, the establishment of FinCEN and its
development of financial analytical capabilities, and a
multiagency financial operations team at DEA to disrupt the
financial infrastructure of the Colombian cartels.
Indictments for money laundering violations, asset
forfeitures, and other financial enforcement actions are at record
levels and continuing to increase. Internal Revenue Service
compliance efforts involving trades and businesses resulted in
civil penalties of $4.5 million, seizures of hundreds of cars,
and a number of prosecutions. Seizures of currency, bank
balances, and other assets are up 28 percent over last year, with
over 460 million deposited into the Asset Forfeiture Fund -- over
the last six years more than $1.5 billion has been deposited into
the fund.
Stronger Immigration Laws: In its proposed Strategy
Implementation Bill of 1990, ONDCP incorporated a series of
revisions to the Immigration Laws to address the serious problem
of foreign national involvement in drug-related crime. A number
of these proposed amendments were incorporated in the Immigration
Act of 1990, including provisions for expedited deportation
procedures for drug traffickers. The provisions strengthened the
immigration laws with respect to the national drug control effort
and provided for general arrest powers for INS officers and
agents.
Cocaine Interdiction: The production of cocaine HCL
increased from an estimated 829 metric tons in 1988, to 836
metric tons in 1989, and 873 metric tons in 1990. However,
during this period, our overall interdiction efforts, both U.S.
Federal and foreign efforts, resulted in the seizure of an
increasing percentage of the available cocaine. Between 1988 and
1990, seizures of cocaine rose from 11 percent to 23 percent.
7
Special Federal and Joint Enforcement Initiatives:
OCDETF's Operation Polar Cap, a joint FBI, DEA, IRS, and
Customs money-laundering case, resulted in the arrest of 170
people, the seizure of $120 million in assets, and the
elimination of an $800 million money-laundering operation.
Operation White Mare, a joint operation involving the FBI,
DEA, the New York and Hong Kong Police Departments, and the
Royal Canadian Mounted Police, resulted in the arrest of 59
subjects affiliated with international heroin and cocaine
trafficking groups, and the seizure of $4.5 million in cash
and heroin valued at over $1 billion.
Operation Southern Star, involving the U.S. Marshals Service
and 28 State and local law enforcement agencies, resulted in
the arrest of 3,743 criminals and the seizure of more than
$5.5 million in cash and property. Operating in High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas -- including Miami,
Houston, Los Angeles, and the Southwest Border cities of San
Diego and San Antonio -- Southern Star arrest teams also
seized guns, drugs, and other contraband valued at
approximately $7.2 million.
Operation Wintersnow. In the fall of 1990, ONDCP responded
to intelligence reports indicating a buildup of drugs along
the Southwest Border and brought together key agencies in a
call for quick counteraction. Providing $2.5 million of
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area funds, ONDCP supported
Operation Wintersnow, which brought 350 additional officers
to the border for a 90-day intensive interdiction operation.
Inspections were intensified and new techniques were used to
keep smugglers off balance. Twenty additional canine teams
were deployed at key ports of entry, surveillance
operations were conducted between ports, and tactical
intelligence support was enhanced. The effort paid off as
almost 4,000 pounds of cocaine and over 180,000 pounds of
marijuana were seized.
INFORMATION AND INTELLIGENCE
ONDCP quickly realized that the increasing number of
intelligence functions and activities established to support the
drug control effort demanded considerable coordinative efforts.
Principal among the immediate needs was increased sharing and
dissemination of information.
Improved Drug Information Sharing: To improve information
sharing between the law enforcement agencies and the foreign
intelligence communities, the Counternarcotics Center has been
8
established. Especially effective are programs and processes to
focus intelligence collection and analysis capabilities against
the major cocaine cartels and their operations.
Improved Drug Information Dissemination: Initiatives to
expand ADP and communications capabilities among the various LEA,
Defense, and Foreign Intelligence Communities have significantly
enhanced the flow of timely and actionable intelligence, both
tactical and strategic.
HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Program: In
accordance with the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, ONDCP planned
and implemented the HIDTA Program, applying increased Federal
resources to disrupt and dismantle drug trafficking organizations
in five geographical areas responsible for much of the Nation's
drug supply. ONDCP developed program policy and established the
coordinating mechanism necessary to foster the coordinated
operations of Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies
in New York, Miami, Houston, Los Angeles, and along the entire
Southwest Border. ONDCP directly funded the HIDTA Program in the
amount of $193 million in its first three years, increasing the
number of Federal law enforcement agents in these areas
establishing multi-agency task forces and intelligence operations
improving existing programs and purchasing sophisticated
equipment for use by all law enforcement agencies in the HIDTAs.
The HIDTA Program has substantially contributed to the
enthusiasm and coordination and cooperation among the law
enforcement agencies involved. In Los Angeles alone, the HIDTA
program has brought together more than 80 Federal, State, and
local agencies to fight drug trafficking organizations.
INTERNATIONAL
International Drug Policy and Implementing Strategies:
International drug policy to motivate other countries to engage
their resources to defeat trafficking and strengthen political
will has been effective. The following initiatives have been
undertaken:
Assistance to the Colombian Ministry of Justice to help
reform the judicial system, judicial protection program, and
provide training in evidence gathering and case development.
Expanded assistance to improve the capabilities of Bolivian
prosecutors and specialized narcotics courts.
9
Negotiations with Laos that resulted in their modifying
their previous policies and committing publicly to drug
control activities, including a six-year narcotics crop
control project.
Support to the OPBAT enforcement programs of the
governments of the Bahamas, Turks, and Caicos has denied
traffickers a significant operations area and forced a shift
of trafficking to the south, farther away from the U.S.
Treaties and Bilateral Agreements:
As a result of the Cartagena Summit, the United States
signed agreements with the Andean nations on tax information
exchange, asset sharing, public awareness, weapons control,
and extradition.
A bilateral "umbrella" agreement signed with Peru
established trafficking. a comprehensive approach to fighting drug
Agreements with Peru, Bolivia, and Panama ensure precursor
and essential chemicals are used for legitimate purposes.
We are negotiating such agreements with Colombia and
Ecuador.
Signed a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty and bilateral
customs agreement with Argentina to help speed
investigations and prosecutions of narcotics offenses.
Signed a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty with Panama for
sharing information, such as government records and bank
documents, about the proceeds of criminal activities,
including drug offenses.
Economic Support:
Supported establishment of crop substitution programs in the
Chapare coca sector of Bolivia.
Developed the Andean Trade Initiative -- trade measures
designed to assist the Andean region's transition to
legitimate economies.
The Administration proposed the Andean Trade Preferences Act
to provide duty free access for exports from Colombia,
Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador.
INM will spend about $11 million in Asian heroin countries
in FY91 to encourage and support drug control programs.
10
Increased International Resources:
Fiscal Year 1991 Military Assistance to the Andean nations:
Foreign Military Financing grants totalled almost $83
million; International Military Education and Training
totalled $4.0 million.
DOD and the foreign intelligence community have devoted
considerable resources to improve drug intelligence
capabilities.
BUDGET
Budget Certification: ONDCP is required by law to review
and certify budget submissions of the drug control agencies. We
have executed this responsibility. In the Fiscal Year 1992
budget cycle, ONDCP reviewed 83 agency budgets and just completed
certifying about an equal number of FY 1993 budgets.
Reprogramming Approvals: The law further requires ONDCP to
review and approve all drug-related reprogrammings over $5
million proposed by any drug control agency. We do this on an
ongoing basis. To date, we have reviewed over 20 reprogramming
proposals.
Reprogramming and Transfer Reports to Congress: The law
requires ONDCP to report to Congress on any reprogrammings and
transfers approved in the past quarter or anticipated for future
quarters. To date, we have sent more than ten such reports to
the Congress; in addition, we have sent to Congress four special
quarterly reports on obligations pursuant to a requirement in the
1990 Transportation Appropriations Bill.
MANAGEMENT
ONDCP has taken a number of steps to ensure that demand- and
supply-reduction activities are implemented appropriately and
efficiently and to carry out and oversee the implementation of
the President's National Drug Control Strategy.
Improving Coordination of Federal Supply and Demand
Reduction Efforts. ONDCP is responsible for coordinating and
overseeing the implementation by National Drug Control Program
agencies of the policies, objectives, and priorities established
in the National Drug Control Strategy. Therefore, ONDCP
established a network of committees and working groups to
coordinate the full range of Federal supply and demand reduction
efforts, including the Demand and Supply Reduction Working
Groups, chaired by the ONDCP Deputy Directors of Demand Reduction
and Supply Reduction respectively, and the Research and
Development Committee, chaired by the Director of ONDCP.
11
The ONDCP Supply Reduction Working Group coordinates and
oversees implementation by National Drug Control Program agencies
of supply-related policies, objectives, and priorities. It
oversees efforts in the following areas:
The Border Interdiction Committee is an interagency forum
that coordinates the strategies and operations to interdict
drugs between source and transit countries and at our
border.
The Public Land Drug Control Committee coordinates Federal,
State, and local drug control programs on Federal lands.
The Southwest Border and the Metropolitan High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Committees coordinate anti-
drug law enforcement efforts in these areas.
The ONDCP Demand Reduction Working Group coordinates and
oversees implementation by National Drug Control Program agencies
of demand reduction policies, objectives, and outreach activities
in the areas of treatment, education and prevention, workplace,
and international demand reduction.
The research and development working committees provide
policy guidance for the research and development efforts of the
Federal drug control agencies and oversees the activities of the
following ONDCP research and development working committees:
The Data Committee works to improve the relevance,
timeliness, and usefulness of drug-related data collection,
research studies, and evaluations in both demand- and
supply-related areas.
The Medical Research Committee coordinates policy and
general objectives on medical research conducted in the
Federal drug control agencies, and promotes the
dissemination of findings from that research.
The ONDCP Science and Technology Committee is chaired by the
ONDCP Chief Scientist who oversees counter-drug research and
development, testing, and evaluation activities throughout
the Federal government. The Committee oversees the
following working groups: the Automated Data Process Working
Group; the Communications Interoperability Working Group;
the Contraband Detection Working Group; the Taggant Working
Group; the Technology Coordination Working Group; and the
Sensor and Surveillance Working Group.
These organizations meet regularly to create joint policies as
well as provide direction to operational counter-drug and demand-
reduction activities. As a result, communication and cooperation
12
among the Federal supply- and demand-reduction agencies have
improved significantly.
Improved Coordination of Research and Development: Under
the auspices of ONDCP's research and development working
committees, the following was accomplished:
Prepared the "Comprehensive Plan for use of Existing Federal
Research and Development Facilities for Civilian Law
Enforcement," a report to Congress on ONDCP's plans to
enlist Federal research laboratory support for the
development of technology to assist law enforcement in the
war on drugs.
Reduced duplicative projects by cataloging and summarizing
over 140 existing counter-drug enforcement research efforts.
Conducted a three-day workshop for the private sector
research and development industry to inform them of and
enlist their support for law enforcement's technological
needs.
Funded and participated in the decision-making process to
select 54 separate drug law enforcement-related research
projects.
Established the Counter-Narcotics Technology Assessment
Center.
Promoted Federal laboratory, industry, and academia drug
enforcement technology development at twelve national or
regional conferences.
Approved and provided oversight for the plan to purchase
more than $134 million in communications equipment (FY89
through FY91). Under this plan, the Department of Defense
purchased the equipment for loan to the law enforcement
agencies to provide critical telecommunications
interoperability.
Integration of DOD Into Counter-Drug Activities: When
Congress directed the Department of Defense to join the war on
illegal drugs, ONDCP helped coordinate and define the role the
military would play. ONDCP facilitated the establishment of
standard operating procedures between DOD and the agencies by
helping to develop the "National Counter-Drug Planning Process,"
which is now in use.
Marijuana Eradication: In response to concerns about
marijuana cultivation on public lands and in consideration of the
fact that more than one-third of our nation's land mass is owned
by the Federal government, ONDCP established the Public Lands
13
Drug Control Committee (PLDCC). The PLDCC brings together law
enforcement officials from all Federal landowners, together with
key Federal, State, and local law enforcement program managers.
In 1990, about 1.1 million cultivated plants totaling $2 billion
to $3 billion were eradicated on Federal lands, a 37 percent
increase over 1989. The final figures for 1991 are not in yet,
but by all indications it was again a banner year.
Operation Wipeout, a PLDCC-designed multiagency operation
based in Hawaii, proved the effectiveness of new techniques in
aerial eradication. More than 750,000 plants, representing about
85 percent of the summer cannabis crop of Hawaii, were
eradicated. In prior years, using normal eradication techniques,
law enforcement officials were able to eradicate only 25 percent
of the summer crop. The technology developed for Operation
Wipeout was offered to State and local authorities; this led to
more efficient eradication operations during 1991.
Policy Coordinating Committee for Narcotics: ONDCP chairs a
body in the National Security Council to bring conceptual and
operational unity to international counternarcotics programs.
This committee is responsible for increasing the level of
coordination among agencies with law enforcement and national
security functions.
Data Enhancement: ONDCP established the Committee on Data
Collection, Evaluation, and Information Dissemination and
associated working groups that:
Developed an inventory of all Federal drug-related data sets
and evaluation efforts.
Identified and established priorities for eliminating gaps
and flaws in the ability of Federal data sets and collection
efforts to measure the scope of the drug problem.
Established priorities for improving policy-relevance,
timeliness, scope, and methodology of data in four distinct
areas: drug use and outcome, workplace, criminal justice,
and prevention and treatment.
Improved the timeliness of the National Drug Abuse and
Treatment Unit Survey by moving to annual data collection;
developed a methodology for improving the coverage of both
private and public treatment facilities in the survey.
Initiated a survey of treatment facilities and clients to
resolve a lack of data; the survey will now be conducted
every two years.
Provided technical expertise to discussions on improving the
Household Survey (the leading drug use indicator).
14
Developed and implemented plans for many technical
improvements to the Household Survey, such as increasing the
sample size, to provide more reliable drug use statistics.
Developed recommendations to improve the High School Senior
Survey (a leading drug indicator), including the extension
of the survey to younger students, to provide measures of
drug use among teens.
Developed a mechanism for conducting quick response surveys,
beginning in Fiscal Year 1992, in response to the dynamic
needs of policy officials.
Developed an inventory of workplace drug use policies and
procedures, with a goal of collecting statistics on the
existence and effectiveness of workplace drug use policies.
Identified special populations from which to collect data
(such as college students and the homeless) to provide a
complete picture of the drug-using population, and tasked
the appropriate Federal agencies to develop the surveys and
collect the data.
Strategy Development: ONDCP has developed three National
Drug Control Strategies, increasing resources both conceptually
and operationally and unifying the wide range of agencies and
programs previously spread throughout the Federal government.
Strategy Implementation: Congress directed ONDCP to
identify the objectives, policies, and priorities for the
National Drug Control Program, and to coordinate and oversee
their implementation by the various drug control agencies. In
the three editions of the Strategy, ONDCP identified
approximately 259 objectives. Each objective was assigned a lead
agency to develop an implementation plan that ONDCP approved.
White Papers, Bulletins, and Technical Papers: To provide
information about, data on, and suggestions for drug policy
documents: decisions and program guidelines, ONDCP published a series of
Understanding Drug Treatment: Outlined the complex and
highly technical field of drug treatment to guide plans to
build a better drug treatment system.
Leading Drug Indicators: Described, evaluated, and
interpreted the leading statistical indicators of America's
drug problem. The document facilitated a broader and more
dispassionate data. view of the latest available drug-related
15
State Drug Control Status Report: Listed 18 key
State laws and policies and five quantitative measures of
performance on drug issues. The report indicated which
States had enacted such laws or measures.
Building a Drug Free Workforce: Recommended model State
drug-free workplace legislation.
Federal Drug Grants to States: Provided an overview of
Federal drug grant programs and how they assist State and
local drug enforcement, treatment, and prevention efforts.
A detailed description of the grant-making process was also
provided to assist States in making proper use of the
various grant programs.
Directory of Federal Anti-Drug Grants: Catalogued Federal
programs that make drug-related grants to States,
localities, and private agencies. The Directory will be
updated and published annually.
DOJ Drug Grants to States: Provided updated information on
the Department of Justice grant application and award
process, including awards made for FY 1991 and expenditures
from grant awards made from FY 1987 to FY 1990. Also
included was information on how grant funds are used,
including amounts to local governments, for administrative
costs and for multi-jurisdictional task forces.
Drug Treatment Capacity Expansion Program: Discussed issues
related to the Capacity Expansion Program and articulated
the Administration's position on treatment expansion.
Cost of Drug Testing: Described the Administration's
proposed legislation to require States to formulate and
implement a comprehensive drug testing program for targeted
classes of defendants arrested, confined, or on probation or
parole. Such programs would be required as a condition for
States to receive BJA formula grants.
Report on High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas: Presented
an overview and evaluation of the HIDTA program, including
funding plans and resource tables.
What America's Users Spend on Illegal Drugs: Provided an
estimate of the amount spent on illegal drugs, developed
from both a supply and demand perspective.
Drug Information Clearinghouses: ONDCP recognized the need
to minimize the overlap among several Federal clearinghouses.
Accordingly, ONDCP and the Departments of HHS, Justice,
Education, and HUD have taken steps to ensure coordination of
these clearinghouses. In 1991, the public was given access to
16
drug information from all clearinghouses through a single toll-
free 800 telephone number.
Reports to Congress: ONDCP is required by law to submit
various reports to Congress. We have completed all required
reports:
December 1989 -- submitted a report to Congress on the
desirability of reorganizing certain elements of the Justice
Department for drug control purposes, in accordance with
Section 1053 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988.
January 1990 -- submitted a report to Congress on the
desirability of reorganizing the Federal Government for drug
control purposes, in accordance with Section 1008 of the
Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1989.
February 1990 and April 1990 -- submitted a two-part report
on evaluations of drug control programs.
17
activities to coordinate their efforts, and makes
Strategy are concerned. BSLA encourages State
recommendations to the Director regarding
and local governments to carry out the pro-
funding levels, budget priorities, and manage-
grams and policies outlined in the National
ment decisions. OSR also consults with State
Drug Control Strategy, as well as private sector
and local law enforcement entities to enhance
initiatives that complement the Strategy. BSLA
Office of
cooperation, avoid duplication and reinforce
is also responsible for monitoring and promoting
local operations.
coordination and cooperation among Federal,
OSR chairs the Supply Reduction Working
State and local anti-drug programs.
National Drug
Group, a high level policy coordination group
The Office of National Security Affairs
composed of senior policy officials of the Fed-
(ONSA) coordinates drug-related national se-
eral supply reduction agencies.
curity and international affairs matters for the
Control Policy
OSR also chairs the Science and Technology
Federal government. ONSA is the Office of
(S&T) Working Committee of the ONDCP Re-
National Drug Control Policy's point of contact
search and Development Committee. The
for the Department of State, the National Se-
mission of this Committee is to identify, de-
curity Council, the Department of Defense,
velop, coordinate, and facilitate S&T efforts
and for other departments or agencies that
related to the accomplishment of the
have international narcotics-related responsi-
Administration's overall National Drug Control
bilities. ONSA coordinates the development of
Strategy drug supply reduction objectives.
our foreign counter-drug strategies and re-
The Committee seeks to promote better co-
source prioritization. ONSA is also responsible
ordination among Federal agencies,
for ensuring that our foreign counter-drug
recommends to ONDCP policies and priorities
strategies are implemented in accordance with
for anti-drug-related research and develop-
the National Drug Control Strategy.
ment, assists agencies in effectively acquiring
UNUM
and using new technology to detect and sup-
press illegal drugs and related commodities,
and oversees ADP and communications plan-
For additional information write to:
ning and implementation.
The Committee concentrates on efforts to
Public Affairs Office
expand the roles of industry, of the academic
Office of National Drug Control Policy
community, and of other nations in the devel-
Executive Office of the President
opment and exchange of drug-related
Washington, DC 20500
technology.
The Bureau of State and Local Affairs
(BSLA) serves as principal spokesman and
Public and press inquiries
advocate for the National Drug Control Strat-
may be directed to:
egy to State and local governments; serves as a
(202) 467-9890
clearinghouse within ONDCP on State and
Executive Office
local drug programs, policies, and develop-
ments; and advises the Director of ONDCP on
Congressional inquiries
of the President
the views of State and local officials where
may be directed to:
development, formulation, implementation and
(202) 467-9850
coordination of the National Drug Control
HISTORY
rity Affairs. The responsibilities of each office
"America's fight against illegal drug use
reflect each of the major tasks of the war on
cannot be won on any single front alone;
ONDCP was created by the Anti-Drug Abuse
drugs.
Act of 1988 to advise the President on a national
The Office of Demand Reduction (ODR) has
it must be waged everywhere-at every
drug control strategy, a consolidated drug
responsibility for the areas of drug education
level of government-Federal, State, and
control budget, and other management and
and prevention, drug treatment, workplace
local-and by every citizen in every
organizational issues. The Office was estab-
policies and programs, international demand
community across the country. We will
lished in the Executive Office of the President.
reduction, and related research. ODR is re-
take back our streets-neighborhood by
With the enactment of the legislation, ONDCP
sponsible for coordinating and overseeing the
assumed the responsibilities of the National
implementation by Federal agencies of the
neighborhood, block by block, child by
Drug Policy Board, National Narcotics Border
policies, programs, and priorities of the National
child."
Interdiction System, and the White House Drug
Drug Control Strategy, and participating in the
George Bush
Abuse Policy Office.
process of developing budgetary and other
ONDCP is headed by a Director, appointed
policies for governmental agencies engaged in
by the President with the advice and consent of
demand reduction.
the Senate. The first Director of ONDCP was
ODR chairs the Demand Reduction Work-
MISSION
William J. Bennett, who served in this position
ing Group, a high-level policy coordination
from March 1989 to November 1990. The
group composed of senior policy officials of the
The principal purpose of the Office of Na-
second Director, Bob Martinez, was confirmed
Federal demand reduction agencies.
tional Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) is to
by the Senate on March 21, 1991. The Director
ODR also chairs the Medical Research
establish policies, priorities, and objectives for
is responsible for annually promulgating a
Working Committee of the ONDCP Research
the Nation's drug control program, with the
National Drug Control Strategy to be submit-
and Development Committee. The mission of
overall goal of significantly reducing the pro-
ted to Congress by the President by February 1
this Committee is to identify, develop, coordi-
duction, availability, and use of illegal drugs
each year. In September 1989, ONDCP sub-
nate, and facilitate accomplishment of the
both here at home and abroad.
mitted the first Strategy.
Administration's overall National Drug Control
In order to achieve this goal, ONDCP is
Strategy objectives in the areas of drug control
charged with producing the National Drug
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
research. It works to coordinate interagency
Control Strategy, which directs the Nation's
efforts, eliminate duplicate programs, stimu-
anti-drug efforts and establishes a program, a
With a staff of approximately 150 and an
late sponsorship of multi-agency projects,
budget, and guidelines for cooperation among
annual budget of about $16 million, ONDCP is
develop new initiatives, suggest appropriate
the Federal, State, and local entities involved.
small and capable of rapid response to chang-
funding levels and sources of such funding for
By law, the Director of ONDCP is also re-
ing situations. Some 40 members of the staff
R&D activities, and oversee the implementa-
sponsible for evaluating, coordinating, and
are detailees from a variety of Federal and State
tion of the overall research agenda and specific
overseeing both international and domestic
agencies (e.g., the Drug Enforcement Adminis-
research initiatives.
anti-drug efforts by all executive branch agen-
tration, Department of Health and Human
The Office of Supply Reduction (OSR) is
cies, and ensuring that such efforts sustain
Services, U.S. Customs Service, State Depart-
responsible for those portions of the National
and complement State and local anti-drug
ment, New York and Washington D.C. Police
Drug Control Strategy that pertain to domestic
activities. The Director advises the President
Departments, etc.), who bring with them ex-
drug law enforcement, including special ini-
regarding necessary changes in the organiza-
pertise in their respective subject areas and
tiatives to address drug problems in five "High
tion, management, budgeting, and personnel
linkages to their home agencies.
Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas," the overall
allocation of all Federal agencies involved, and
ONDCP is divided into four principal offices
criminal justice system, interdiction, money
notifies the President if these agencies are not
-the Office of Demand Reduction, Office of
laundering, intelligence, and certain interna-
in compliance with their obligations under the
Supply Reduction, the Bureau of State and
tional programs. OSR works closely with other
National Drug Control Strategy.
Local Affairs, and the Office of National Secu-
Federal agencies involved in supply reduction
National
Drug Control
Strategy
A Nation Responds to Drug Use
Executive
Summary
January 1992
Past Month Use of Illicit Drugs, 1979-1991
16
13.7
14
12.7
12.3
12.1
12
11.0
10
9.4
Percent
8
7.3
6.4
5.9
6.2
6
5.1
4.8
4
2.9
2.4
2.3
2
1.5
0.8
0.9
0
1979
1982
1985
1988
1990
1991
Any Illicit Drug
Marijuana
Cocaine
Source: NIDA National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, 1991
National Drug
Control Strategy
Executive Summary
The 1992 National Drug Control Strategy - submitted by the
President to Congress in accordance with the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of
1988 - shows that more money, attention, thinking, research,
legislative and government action, cooperative effort, and manpower
are being applied to the drug problem than at any time in American
history. In every relevant area, more work is being done than ever
before: against the encroachment of drugs into our schools, families,
neighborhoods, and businesses; against the medical problems of
addiction; against drug production and trafficking overseas; against
smuggling at our borders; and against drug crime in our streets and
communities. The lesson from the war on drugs is that if you have a
comprehensive plan - the National Drug Control Strategy - and keep
the pressure on, good consequences follow.
The results of such efforts are encouraging as progress in the war
on drugs continues.
When this Administration took office, 14.5 million Americans were
current users of drugs. By 1991, over 2 million had stopped using
drugs, a drop of over 16 percent.
In 1988, over 2.9 million Americans were current users of cocaine.
By 1991, over a million had stopped using cocaine, a drop of over
35 percent.
The number of current users of marijuana dropped by about 2
million, or over 16 percent.
The best news concerns our young people. Among persons 12-17
years of age, current use of any illicit drug is down more than 25
percent since 1988. This means we are shutting down the pipeline
that leads from casual use into drug addiction.
National Drug Control Strategy
1
Executive Summary
But it has become increasingly clear that the war on drugs is being
fought on two fronts: casual use and hard-core use. We are continuing
to make substantial progress on the first front.
The second front is that of chronic, addictive drug use. This is the
front with which we are most familiar: open-air drug markets, crack
houses, drug-exposed infants, abused and neglected children, gang
violence, decaying neighborhoods, and drive-by shootings. Chronic
users are the most resistant to anti-drug messages and progress on
this front will continue to be slow and uneven. As the charts on page 3
show, hard-core use has become increasingly concentrated in our
inner-city and minority neighborhoods. Treatment and education
stand little chance of succeeding if they must compete in a
neighborhood where drug dealers flourish on every corner. That is why
in communities hardest hit by the drug problem, law enforcement
efforts. are essential if demand reduction efforts are to succeed.
Perceived Risk and Use of Cocaine Among
High School Seniors, 1982-1991
70
60
50
Percent
40
30
20
10
o
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
% Saying "great risk" if used once or twice
% Acknowledging cocaine use in past year
Source: NIDA High School Senior Survey
2
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
Total Emergency Room Drug Mentions by DAWN
City Hospital Site, @2:89-Q2:91
60,000
55,982
50,000
50,308
45,041
40,000
Total Mentions
36,196
30,000
28,014 28,859
20,000
10,000
0
Inner City
Suburban
Q2: 1989
Q2: 1990
Q2: 1991
Source: NIDA Drug Abuse Warning Network, 1991
Total Emergency Room Drug Mentions by Race, @2:89-Q2:91
120,000
110,852
100,000
101,099
97,245
80,000
Total Mentions
60,000
45,569
40,000
42,038
35,934
20,000
17,517
12,221 13,366
0
White
Black
Hispanic
Q2: 1989
Q2: 1990
Q2: 1991
Source: NIDA Drug Abuse Warning Network, 1991
National Drug Control Strategy
3
Executive Summary
The 1992 National Drug Control Strategy addresses both fronts:
It keeps pressure on casual users by continuing to fund large
block grant programs in prevention, treatment, and law
enforcement that assist the mainstream population.
It addresses the problems of hard-core drug use through targeted
programs in prevention and treatment (e.g., the Capacity
Expansion Program and Drug Emergency Grants). Under the
Administration's 1993 proposal, nearly two million hard-core users
would be treated in Fiscal Year 1993.
The fundamental principle of the National Strategy remains firm:
to reduce drug use through a combination of supply and demand
policies and programs. The Strategy calls for applying pressure across
all fronts of the drug war simultaneously, recognizing that prevention
is the only answer in the long run, but that in the short run it is
necessary to provide drug treatment and to continue this
Administration's program of interdiction, international, and law
enforcement efforts.
The Strategy declares that as a Nation we must:
Establish meaningful and effective programs to prevent people
from using drugs in the first place;
Provide effective treatment for those who need it and can benefit
from it;
Hold users accountable for their actions and thereby deter others
from using drugs;
Target and dismantle drug trafficking organizations at home and
abroad;
Prosecute drug dealers and traffickers;
Punish those convicted of drug crimes;
Disrupt the flow of drugs, related chemicals, and drug money;
4
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
Engage other nations in efforts to reduce the growth, production,
and distribution of drugs;
Support basic and applied research in behavior, medicine, and
technology; and
Improve our intelligence capabilities in order to attack drug
trafficking organizations better.
There are many ways to measure commitment, and money isn't
always the best criterion. But winning the war on drugs requires a
substantial Federal commitment of funds, a commitment fully met by
this Administration. For Fiscal Year 1993, the President is seeking
$12.7 billion in drug-related funding - a $6.1 billion (93 percent)
increase since the beginning of the Administration and a nearly $780
million (6 percent) increase over Fiscal Year 1992. Like its
predecessors, this Strategy recognizes the key roles of State and local
governments. If the President's Fiscal Year 1993 request is fully
funded, State and local governments will receive about $3.5 billion
from the Federal government for drug control programs, including
drug law enforcement, treatment, and prevention efforts. Additional
detail on the drug control budget is available in the National Drug
Control Strategy Budget Summary.
National Drug Control Budget, 1981-1993
14
$12.7 Billion
12
10
Budget Authority
(in billions of dollars)
8
$6.6 Billion
6
4
$1.5 Billion
2
0
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
Fiscal Year
Domestic
International/
Enforcement
Border Control
Demand Reduction
Source: ONDCP, 1992
National Drug Control Strategy
5
Executive Summary
Highlights from the 1992
National Drug Control Strategy
Deterring New and Casual Users
One of the most important goals of the National Drug Control
Strategy is to prevent Americans, especially the young, from ever using
drugs. For those who have started, the goal is to get them to stop.
Preventing drug use is a shared, rather than a wholly Federal,
responsibility. The Federal government continues to support broad-
based prevention efforts directed at the mainstream population. It also
targets hard-to-reach groups that have not responded well to such
efforts.
Schools have a major role to play in prevention. The Strategy calls
for not only informing our children about the harmful effects of drugs
but for an unambiguous school policy that drug use will not be
tolerated. Alcohol, illegal for those under 21, is still the substance most
abused by our youth. This Strategy sharpens the focus on the
prevention of alcohol use by underage youth.
While schools can do a great deal to deter student drug use, our
anti-drug message is stronger, more consistent, and more credible
when entire communities are involved as well: families, businesses,
churches and synagogues, the criminal justice system, the media, and
others. The Strategy calls for full mobilization by these groups in the
war against drugs.
Drug Prevention in the Community
$113.9 million for Community Partnership Grants to assist
communities in developing comprehensive prevention strategies to
address drug and alcohol problems - a 15 percent increase over
1992.
$165 million for Public Housing Drug Elimination Grants to assist
public housing communities in mobilizing against drugs.
Increased attention to the problem of underage alcohol and
tobacco use, including suggested legislation to restrict the
availability of these substances to children.
6
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
Federal Budget Authority for Drug Prevention
Activities, 1989-1993
2000
1800
1784
1707
1633
1600
1400
1366
Millions of Dollars
1200
1000
806
800
600
400
200
0
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1 Requested
Source: ONDCP, 1992
Drug Prevention in the Schools
$656.9 million for educational prevention programs - an increase
of $48 million since 1991.
$60.3 million for the Drug Emergency Grant Program, doubling
the 1992 level, to focus on schools with significant drug and drug-
related violence problems.
A call for institutions of higher education to rid their campuses of
drug use and alcohol abuse.
Proposed legislation to designate Head Start classroom sites as
part of a drug-free zone.
Increasing emphasis on prevention programs to combat steroid
use.
National Drug Control Strategy
7
Executive Summary
Use of Alcohol in the Last 30 Days, 1988-1991
100
80
77.0
76.2
74.5
75.0
63.9
60.0
60
57.1
54.0
Percent
40
20
0
1988
1989
1990
1991
High School Seniors
College Students
Source: NIDA High School Senior Survey, 1991
Prevention in the Workplace
Continued calls for every employer - and small businesses in
particular - to implement a comprehensive drug-free workplace
program, including, where appropriate, drug testing.
Continued cooperation with the private sector to develop workplace
programs, including information dissemination and research, to
help employees and employers understand better the impact of
drug use in the workplace.
8
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
Freeing Current Users
When prevention efforts fail, individuals often need help to stop
using drugs. If the treatment system is to do the job required of it, it
must be expanded and improved. Despite increases in the Nation's
treatment capacity, there is still a shortfall. Furthermore, treatment
capacity is not always available in areas with the greatest need, while
in other areas, treatment services are underutilized.
To improve the quality of treatment services, the Strategy calls for
accountability by treatment providers through the establishment of
national treatment outcome criteria and data collection and reporting
requirements for publicly funded programs. It also calls for
accountability by State treatment providers as a requirement for
continued participation in the ADMS Block Grant program.
As drug use declines in the mainstream population, the Strategy
calls for special emphasis on those persons most in need of drug
treatment - including pregnant women, intravenous drug users,
adolescents, and those in the criminal justice system.
Expanded Treatment System Capacity
Continued growth in Federal funding for treatment programs: $2.3
billion in 1993, up 20 percent since 1991.
Increasing capacity to at least 1.9 million people nationwide in
Fiscal Year 1993.
Continued support for the ADMS Block Grant to maintain and
enhance treatment capacity.
Funding for categorical grants to increase the number of drug
treatment slots for areas and populations in greatest need of
treatment.
Continued support for Treatment Campuses to offer a variety of
treatment approaches, enhanced treatment capacity, improved
treatment quality, and an evaluation of the efficiency of different
treatment methods.
National Drug Control Strategy
9
Executive Summary
Improved Quality of Treatment
Publication of regulations to standardize State applications for the
ADMS Block Grant.
Identification of treatment outcome criteria and measurable
characteristics of treatment programs that are predictive of
positive outcomes.
Development of model treatment protocols and standards for
treatment providers.
Continued support for the State Systems Development Program to
provide technical assistance to the States to develop data on the
prevalence of drug use and the availability of treatment and
prevention programs.
Federal Budget Authority for Drug 1 Treatment and
Related Research, 1989-1993
2.5
2.3
2.0
2
1.9
1.7
Billions of Dollars
1.5
1.2
1
0.5
o
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1
Funding for the Departments of Health and Human Services
Source: ONDCP, 1992
and Veterans Affairs and other Federal agencies
10
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
Targeting Hard-to-Reach Populations
Encouragement to States to give priority to pregnant women and
other high-risk groups in slots financed with CEP Grants.
Continued support for residential treatment demonstration
programs specifically designed for women and their children.
Encouraging or requiring pregnant addicts to enter treatment
whenever they become involved with the criminal justice system.
Development of treatment guidelines and protocols for pregnant
and adolescent substance abusers.
Mandating plans that require States to identify shortage areas and
report on their progress in meeting these needs.
$4.9 billion for total AIDS funding, including that specifically
directed at drug-related cases, for outreach, screening, initial
medical care, and drug treatment.
Treatment and the Criminal Justice System
Increased capability of the criminal justice system to identify, refer,
and monitor offenders in treatment.
Mandating plans that require States to include comprehensive
drug testing in their criminal justice system.
Research and Development
Continued emphasis on drug use treatment research.
Continued research on innovative community-based treatment
strategies and development of comprehensive support services.
$48 million for continued development of medications to treat
addictions.
National Drug Control Strategy
11
Executive Summary
Focus on the Organization
Few threats are more costly in terms of human life and the U.S.
economy than the drugs that threaten our citizens and national
security. The presence of drugs on our streets and neighborhoods is
the result of a long and complex process, carefully controlled by
networks of drug trafficking organizations. To eliminate the supply of
drugs, it is necessary to identify these networks, determine their most
vulnerable points, and dismantle them. Drug organizations are
organized at three levels:
Core organizations: responsible for all phases of drug trafficking,
from production to distribution;
Secondary organizations: subsidiaries of core organizations that
usually perform only one function, such as transportation, money
laundering, or drug distribution within a single region; and
Local organizations: responsible for distributing the drugs within
a localized area.
The Strategy calls for working with and motivating other countries
to act vigorously to curtail domestic drug supply and demand, and to
work cooperatively with other nations to end the international
trafficking of illicit drugs. Continued efforts will be made to prevent the
diversion of precursor and essential chemicals, destroy clandestine
labs, halt the illegal export of munitions, and to cut off drug traffickers
from foreign and domestic financial systems.
Targeting Core Organizations
Approximately $480 million in military, law enforcement, and
economic assistance to Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia.
Encouragement to source countries to strengthen their laws, legal
institutions, and programs to apprehend and bring drug traffickers
and drug money launderers to justice.
12
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
Targeting heroin trafficking groups, with particular emphasis on
law enforcement efforts in New York City, the most significant
heroin importation and distribution center in the United States.
Continued diplomatic initiatives to expand hemispheric trade.
Targeting Secondary Organizations
Continued sharing of forfeited assets with cooperating State and
local law enforcement - $630 million shared in the last two years.
$399.1 million for Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces
(up 10 percent over 1992).
Continued vigorous enforcement of the Chemical Diversion and
Trafficking Act - in 1990, Colombians imported 70 percent fewer
chemicals from the United States than in 1988.
Continued destruction of domestic clandestine labs - 387
destroyed in 1991.
Origin of Colombian Imports of Cocaine
1
Producing Chemicals, 1988-1990
100
82.2
80
66.3
60
54.6
Percent
48.4
40
33.4
20
14.9
0
0.3
2.9
0
1988
1989
1990
United States
Europe
Others
1
Acetone, ethyl ether, methyl ethyl ketone,
potassium permanganate, and toluene
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration, 1991
National Drug Control Strategy
13
Executive Summary
Continued pressure on violators of Federal explosives and firearms
laws through Operation EXODUS and the International Traffic in
Arms Regulations program.
Continued eradication of the domestic marijuana supply - 128
million cultivated plants destroyed, 8,717 arrests made, and $48
million in assets seized in 1991.
Targeting Illegal Financial Operations
Improved intelligence and data analysis capabilities.
Coordination of criminal investigations and prosecutions of
suspected money laundering activities with law enforcement
efforts directed at the trafficking organization. Nearly $630 million
in cash and property obtained from drug traffickers through the
use of Federal asset forfeiture laws in 1991.
Effective regulation and legislation at the Federal and State level.
Promotion of international cooperation.
14
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
Focus on the Supply Networks
The primary goal of interdiction is to deny the drug smuggler the
use of air, land, and maritime routes. Where possible, law enforcement
authorities will seize drugs, drug-related money, illegal munitions, and
chemicals and arrest those engaged in smuggling activities. High-value
individuals and shipments are targeted.
To do this, the Strategy calls for a comprehensive information-
based approach to Federal air, maritime, and land interdiction, and
enhanced border systems, operations, and activities.
Restricting Routes and Modes
Establishment of an effective air and maritime surveillance system
along the southern U.S. border, in The Bahamas, and in Puerto
Rico. Ten aerostat radars are already in place.
Reintroduction of proposed legislation to make it a criminal offense
to fail to obey the order of an authorized Federal law enforcement
officer to land an aircraft or bring-to a vessel.
Continued diplomatic negotiations to enhance international
cooperation against smugglers.
Continued research and development efforts to make law
enforcement activities more cost effective.
Continued designation of the Southwest Border as a High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Area.
Restricting Transshipment
Encouragement to transit countries to strengthen their laws, legal
institutions, and programs to apprehend and bring drug traffickers
and drug money launderers to justice.
Continued targeting and dismantling of major drug transportation
organizations.
Continued support (including equipment and training) to Mexico's
Northern Border Response Force.
National Drug Control Strategy
15
Executive Summary
Continued support to OPBAT in the Caribbean - 14,500 pounds
of cocaine and over 2,000 pounds of marijuana seized by OPBAT
operations in 1991.
Continued support to Operation Cadence in Guatemala - over 12
tons of cocaine seized since July 1991.
16
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
Focus on the Street Dealer
Attacking the retail street-level drug dealer is an integral part of
the Strategy for dismantling drug trafficking organizations. The
Strategy's plan of attack against retail drug dealers has two basic
elements: arresting dealers (and deterring others who would take their
place) and prosecuting and incarcerating them.
The arrest of street dealers is primarily the responsibility of State
and local law enforcement agencies. The Federal government assists
them in several ways: by coordinating efforts against trafficking
organizations that operate in more than one State; by funding
innovative approaches to removing street dealers; by lending technical
expertise in specialized investigative techniques; and by sharing
information.
Rapidly increasing numbers of arrests of drug dealers have caused
a growing strain on the capacity of courts to prosecute them and on
the capacity of prisons to hold them once convicted. Federal, State,
and local governments must develop creative ways to cope with the
growing strain, such as the use of special "drug courts" and
alternatives to incarceration.
Investigation and Arrest
Continue to assist States and localities by providing over $400
million in grant funding to States through Bureau of Justice
Assistance for use as "seed money" for new law enforcement
efforts.
Weed and Seed program to target communities hit hardest by
drugs to eliminate drug dealers from an area while simultaneously
working to create economic opportunities in that area.
$61.9 million for Drug Enforcement Administration State and
Local Task Forces (60 percent increase over 1991).
Federal task forces such as Project Achilles and Project Triggerlock
to target gangs and others who use firearms in the course of
committing drug trafficking crimes.
National Drug Control Strategy
17
Executive Summary
Federal Outlays from Justice Formula
Drug Grants to States, 1988-1991
90
80
70
60
Millions of Dollars
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
1988
1989
1990
1991
Fiscal Year and Quarter
Source: ONDCP, 1991
Encouragement for all States to pass laws against drug
paraphernalia and laws treating as adults juveniles who engage in
drug trafficking.
Prosecution and Punishment
Continued increase in the number of prosecutors, public
defenders, judges, and support staff at the Federal, State, and
local level.
Increased use of special management techniques, such as unit
management, as prison populations increase.
Increased use of alternative sentencing measures, such as "boot
camps" and electronic home monitoring devices.
Bureau of Justice Assistance grants to States conditioned on the
implementation of comprehensive drug testing in their criminal
justice systems.
Probation, supervised release, and parole for Federal prison
inmates conditioned on passage of drug tests.
18
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas
Many cities in the United States are experiencing substantial drug
use problems, but the large-scale drug trafficking activities in New
York, Miami, Houston, Los Angeles, and along the Southwest Border
warrant their designation as High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas
(HIDTAs). The goal of the HIDTAs is to identify and dismantle drug
trafficking organizations, thereby alleviating the drug problem
throughout the entire Nation.
Five Areas Designated as HIDTAs
$50 million to support ongoing Federal programs in Fiscal Year
1993.
In addition to the appropriation for HIDTA activities, $1.6 billion
for other drug-related programs in the HIDTA areas in Fiscal Year
1993.
Total Anti-Drug Funding in HIDTAs, 1989-1993
2
1.8
1.6
1.606
1.529
1.4
1.403
Billions of Dollars
1.225
1.2
1
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1989
1990
1991
1
1992
1993
1 Requested
Source: ONDCP. 1992
National Drug Control Strategy
19
Executive Summary
National Drug Control Budget Summary
Budget Authority (Millions of Dollars)
1991
1992
1993
Actual
Estimate
Request
ACTION
$12.5
$12.3
$13.4
Agency for International Development
202.9
279.0
260.9
Department of Agriculture
Agricultural Research Service
6.4
6.7
6.7
U.S. Forest Service
9.7
9.4
9.3
16.1
16.1
16.1
Department of Defense
1,042.5
1,274.6
1,223.4
Department of Education
683.1
715.6
751.0
Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children and Families
106.3
111.0
121.5
Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental
1,557.0
1,609.9
1,793.9
Health Administration
Centers for Disease Control
29.3
28.8
31.5
Food and Drug Administration
6.5
6.7
7.0
Health Care Financing Administration
190.5
201.5
231.5
Indian Health Service
35.3
35.2
37.0
1,924.9
1,993.1
2,222.3
Department of Housing and
150.0
165.0
165.0
Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Bureau of Indian Affairs
14.7
22.7
19.4
Bureau of Land Management
6.9
8.9
10.3
Fish and Wildlife Service
1.0
1.0
1.1
National Park Service
11.3
11.1
10.8
Office of Territorial and International Affairs
1.7
1.5
1.1
35.7
45.2
42.7
The Judiciary
294.1
347.7
429.9
Department of Justice
Assets Forfeiture Fund
421.1
421.0
439.0
U.S. Attorneys
161.6
188.7
215.9
Bureau of Prisons
1,027.5
1,293.5
1,454.4
Criminal Division
18.5
17.2
17.2
Drug Enforcement Administration
692.4
720.2
819.3
Federal Bureau of Investigation
180.3
231.4
243.7
Immigration and Naturalization Service
130.7
138.0
156.5
INTERPOL
1.3
1.8
1.9
U.S. Marshals Service
202.5
210.3
227.8
Office of Justice Programs
535.7
543.5
530.2
20
National Drug Control Strategy
Executive Summary
National Drug Control Budget Summary
Budget Authority (Millions of Dollars)
1991
1992
1993
Actual
Estimate
Request
Department of Justice (continued)
Organized Crime Drug Enforcement
334.5
363.4
399.1
Task Forces
Support of U.S. Prisoners
135.1
153.4
187.9
Tax Division
1.2
1.3
1.5
3,842.4
4,283.7
4,694.5
Department of Labor
67.6
73.2
72.6
Office of National Drug Control Policy
104.3
126.7
79.1
Small Business Administration
0.1
0.2
0.7
Department of State
Bureau of International Narcotics Matters
150.0
171.5
173.0
Bureau of Politico/Military Affairs
107.6
121.2
140.8
Emer. in the Dip. and Consular Service
0.0
0.5
0.8
257.6
293.2
314.6
Department of Transportation
U.S. Coast Guard
718.6
672.1
679.1
Federal Aviation Administration
23.8
26.1
35.6
National Highway Traffic
7.2
8.2
9.4
Safety Administration
749.6
706.3
724.1
Department of the Treasury
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
123.2
131.5
141.3
U.S. Customs Service
674.1
759.3
752.9
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
20.8
16.3
18.8
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
12.8
14.4
18.2
Internal Revenue Service
93.2
102.8
111.1
U.S. Secret Service
53.6
44.7
62.9
977.6
1,069.0
1,105.2
U.S. Information Agency
7.3
8.0
8.4
Department of Veterans Affairs
473.1
544.2
590.6
Total Federal Program
$10,841.4
$11,953.1
$12,714.3
Weed and Seed
14.4
Total Federal Program
$10,841.4
$11,953.1
$12,728.7
(Incl. Weed and Seed)
National Drug Control Strategy
21
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Executive Office of the President
Washington, D.C. 20500