An animated DARE education video begins with a
wide-eyed owl perched on a branch in the moonlight. The sun then rises over
someoneÕs idyllic model of America, over a shiny-clean neighbor- hood of
brightly painted homes with sprite-green lawns and two-car garages. The
children of someoneÕs politically- correct imagination emerge from their homes
and together begin their daily walk to school.
But along the way the
familiar puppy belonging to Police Officer DARE snatches the childrenÕs
collaborative report about drugs and, running off, leads them through a gothic gate,
which slams shut behind them.
So begins their journey
through the Land of Decisions and Choices, a mysterious landscape of eerie winds, mushrooms and gnarled old
trees, where the animated characters of substance abuse lurk and appear along
the rocky path as if in a Disney funhouse. But this wilderness is scary: ÒThis
place is really strange,Ó says one kid.
ÒLetÕs just find that dog and get outta here,Ó says another.
The children are friends,
successfully indoctrinated by DARE education. They influence each other to
Ògive the cold shoulderÓ or Òjust say noÓ to the animated monsters of
addiction.
ÒExcuse me, have you seen a
small dog?Ó one kid asks a psychedelic apparition.
ÒSmall dog? I remember seeing
what my mind told me may have been the eee-looo-zhun of this small dog. But it
wasnÕt his real dogness; there is a difference. What you follow might not be
what you are led by and what leads you may not be followed. You follow?Ó
The monsters of addiction
finally corner the kids in an alley, and the animators -- who have backed
themselves into a corner as well -- give the kids a giant electrical outlet.
Together, in a show of unity and force, the kids pull the plug on the looming substance
beings. In a flash the monsters of addiction vanish. Good wins over evil. The
children cheerfully celebrate an idyllic victory at the head of an idyllic
classroom, with teacher (in a nunÕs habit) and police officer DARE beside them.
So goes the fiction.
For all the time and money put into this one
educational tape, for all its sophistication as it works to capture the
attention of children and to... what? ... to teach them? ... to indoctrinate
them? ... there clearly are problems with the film -- and, more importantly,
with the program of which it is a part.
ItÕs important first to
recognize just how pervasive DARE – the Drugs and Alcohol Resistance
Education Program -- has become. Used in 52 percent of U.S. school districts in
all 50 states, and in 13 foreign countries, the DARE program is an enormous
spider web of classes and outings, summer camps, banquets and awards
ceremonies, all designed ostensibly to keep kids off drugs.
At all levels, the law
enforcement community is deeply involved. DAREÕs greatest visibility -- its
hook -- comes from its use of police officers, both uniformed and
plain-clothed, armed and unarmed, as teachers. As a result, in addition to the
web of programs for kids, there is a vast network of programs for cops. Officers
receive special training and attend DARE workshops and conferences.
To pay for it all, police
departments -- community by community across the country -- apply for and
receive DARE grants, requiring an ever-growing bureaucracy to administrate the
flow of money.
Developed in 1983 as a joint
venture between the Los Angeles Police Department and the LA School Department,
DARE quickly became a key weapon in the drug war arsenal, enjoying a strong
push from former First Lady Nancy Reagan and her Òjust say noÓ campaign.
But now, after 12 years and
billions of dollars spent, DARE is increasingly coming under fire. Support for
the program seems to be weakening even among some police officers. As the whole
of state and federal efforts to address the drug problem have failed to make a
dent in drug trafficking or consumption, DARE appears to be merely one
expensive piece of an entirely ineffectual strategy.
For the most part, critics of
DARE have been written off as ideologues, as marijuana-users pushing a pro-drug
agenda, as cop-haters. The public, meanwhile, appears willing to accept the
pro-DARE hype at face value, showing little interest in debating alternatives
such as decriminalization, and ignoring altogether the potential dangers of
putting an armed, uniform-wearing individual -- a living, breathing
manifestation of the power of the government -- in the position of educator,
role model and confidante.
Missing from the public
discourse is a mighty respect for authoritarianism -- a fear of the police
state -- which should cause members of any democratic society at least to
question the role military and paramilitary forces should be allowed to play in
schools. But letÕs not get bogged down. Not yet. There are many other problems
to consider.
One thing is immediately clear about DARE: it is very
successful at securing and spending money. It has become an industry unto
itself, pumping large sums of cash into a select list of suppliers and feeding
its own self-perpetuating bureaucracy. As with most bureaucratic undertakings,
money is often wasted. In some cases, money is simply being misused.
In Massachusetts
specifically, questions are arising even among law enforcement officials about
how the stateÕs DARE money has been allocated and whether various recipients --
the State Police for example -- should be receiving DARE money at all.
All these questions and the
problems they illuminate might be moot if there were sufficient evidence that
DARE is successful in its overriding mission: to keep kids off drugs. But the
evidence is to the contrary.
In the last few years,
studies have indicated that DARE doesnÕt appear to be doing what it sets out to
do. Efforts to bring this issue to the fore, however, have been largely
thwarted.
That is what may be most
alarming; the efficacy of DARE has yet to be debated openly with the taxpayers
who fund the program to the annual tune of $750 million in the United States --
$5 million in Massachusetts alone. Instead, DARE administrators and law
enforcement officials have done a, superb job of dodging bullets and burying
reports. For the most part, DARE boosters have found the national media
perfectly happy to buy a cheer spin.
In Massachusetts, DARE today is funded mostly from the
stateÕs 25-cent-per-pack tax on cigarettes. Since the sin tax was instituted a
few years ago, the state has collected about $100 million annually. The bulk of
the $100 million goes to anti-cigarette campaigns. DARE gets about $5 million a
year.
Ultimately, the state Executive Office of Public Safety has oversight of the stateÕs DARE program and its funding. While Public Safety Secretary Kathleen OÕToole (formerly Lt. Col. OÕToole of the Massachusetts State Police) is nominally in charge of the program, day-to-day oversight has fallen to two of her subordinates: Public Affairs Director Charles McDonald and Programs Director Kevin Harrington. McDonald handles the media; Harrington deals with the logistics of doling out state funds to grant applicants.
Last month the public safety
officials sent out the annual grants -- about $4.5 million to 269 cities and
towns. In a press release issued by her office, OÕToole sounded bullish on
DARE, while introducing her newly created in-house watchdog board: ÒAs we
implement the third year of this tremendously successful statewide program, my
thanks go to the members of the DARE Advisory Board which help review, grade
and make recommendations on grants, as well as provide needed oversight to this
program.Ó
Picked up and run with little
added explanation by news outlets, OÕTooleÕs comments were in some ways an
indirect reference to a Boston Globe investigation the year before. The Globe
discovered that communities throughout the state were misusing DARE money.
In Haverhill, the Glove
reported, police used $774 in DARE funds to buy an air conditioner for the
station. In Newbury, police bought a $200 stapler. Newton police bought $7,602
worth of video and lighting equipment. In Monson, police spent $10,000 on a
personal computer, a portable radio and a pager for each of the two DARE
officers. The Globe quoted one police chief who said many departments view the
DARE money as Òfree cash,Ó with which departments can plug other holes in
funding.
The Globe surfaced other
problems as well. Many small communities with fairly well-contained drug
problems, for example, received large grants, while big cities with
considerably bigger drug problems received little funding. From fiscal Ô94
awards totaling $4,978,549 Public Safety Office printouts show a wide disparity
in grants, with towns like Ashfield, which received $28,190, requesting and
receiving more than Amherst at $14,990 or Agawam at $16, 350. Others, such as
Greenfield and Williamsburg, did not apply. OÕToole had responded to the
GlobeÕs report at the time it was printed: ÒNo question, we need to tighten
procedures. What good is it to have procedures if nobody is going to comply
with them? If weÕre letting that happen, shame on us.Ó She pledged to tighten
controls.
So OÕTooleÕs office created
an advisory board - not an unexpected bureaucratic response. The public safety
officials evened out the allocations this year; big cities generally received
more than smaller cities. The grant applications also may have been more
closely scrutinized. But little else appears to have changed in the last year.
For example, OÕToole seemed
to agree last year that the purchase of electronics equipment was not an
acceptable use of DARE money. ÒThis money is supposed to be spent for direst
service to kids. If some department buys computers, then it better be computers
that the kids themselves get to use,Ó she told the Globe.
But a recent analysis of
expenditure accounts from some 17 local police departments showed continued use
of DARE money to buy computers and electronic components. From June Ô9Õ to July
Ô95, six departments alone spent at leas $15,127 on electronics: Ashfield spent
$1,990 Lee spent $2,330, Northampton spent $7,276; Orange spent $1,109; South
Hadley spent $1,849; Ware spent $4,473.
While most claim they need
computers to track student progress, monitor programs, develop DARE materials,
proposals and reports, officers have privately indicated that Òdatabase
developmentÓ and Òstudent trackingÓ are surveillance operations in disguise.
Similarly, video palmcorders and photo equipment used to record DARE sessions
for later use can, and some say will, be used for street , school and community
surveillance.
If the level of control in
Boston has improved, it is still hard to make sense of some of line items,
particularly lines marked ÒmiscellaneousÓ or Òother.Ó
For example, Pittsfield spent
more than $3,000 last year for conference-related activities. It turns out the
money was spend on car rentals in Orlando, Fla. And stays at a Hyatt Regency.
How the trip fit into a local DARE program is hard to imagine.
ThereÕs all sorts of spending
going on, some of it hard to square with what began as a classroom-based drug
resistance program: Holyoke spent some $3,300 for three day trips to the Mt.
Tom water slide and $2,160 for summer camp instructors to stay at a Holiday inn
for 10 days. Ware spent $1,458 on an office chair and file cabinets.
OrangeÕs DARE program paid
$350 for two New England Patriots as guest speakers, $210 for the limousine
that brought them (Critics argue that football players make poor role models.)
Orange spent $2,184 on something called the Orange Police Cadet Program.
While OÕToole may have
brought some small improvements to the oversight of DARE spending, three major
allocations remain outside her purview. Last year, the Mass Criminal Justice
Training Council was awarded $214, 826; the Department of Public Health
$250,000; and the State Police$391,157.
The Department of Public
Health funds are, in effect, rerouted money, to the degree that DPH disburses
money from the tobacco tax in the first place. The Training Council funding
also strikes some as excessive. But the State Police funding is most curious of
all, even among some law enforcement officials. Northampton Police Chief
Russell Sienkiewicz, for example, still hasnÕt been given what he would
consider a good explanation for the allocations.
ÒSince when do the State
Police do DARE Programs?Ó Sienkiewiez asked rhetorically. ÒNo one can clearly
answer how the dollar figures were arrived at, but State Police and Criminal
Justice Training Council awards are a mystery to me. I put in a few phone calls
to see where that money went. I got no answers. The [Criminal Justice] Training
Council is responsible for officer training, and thatÕs a lot of money for an
agency that doesnÕt have any responsibility to schools or municipal
governments. And I donÕt see a huge influx of troopers coming in to teach about
DARE.Ó State Police sources defend the expenditure.
ÒOver the past three years
weÕve taught over 20,000 students,Ó said Sgt. Brian OÕHara, State Police DARE
coordinator in Lowell. ÒWe have 13 DARE officers assigned across the state and
weÕve worked in over 46 communities, with officers working from K to 12th
grade.Ó
But as often is the case when
talking to public officials about DARE, there is a growing hesitancy to get
behind the program completely.
ÒI donÕt think I belong in
the classroom,Ó OÕHara said. ÒIÕd like to see less police. We have a major
problem and weÕre addressing it with Band-Aids.Ó
And mighty expensive
Band-Aids at that, in large part because police work at a fairly healthy hourly
rate - particularly when theyÕre working overtime.
Statewide last year, DARE
overtime exceeded $601,555, or 12 percent of all fiscal Ô94 DARE money. State
Police were the big spenders at $49.484. Municipalities with big DARE over-
time bills include Auburn at $17,520; Foxboro at $31,300; Hampden at $14,442;
Lincoln at $15,000; Longmeadow at $14,856; Pembroke at $12,863; Pittsfield at
$13,929; Shrewsbury at $15,840Ó South Hadley at $9,584; Webster at $12,595; and
West Springfield at $17,334.
Of the 17 local departments
reviewed, PelhamÕs report of DARE expenditures stood head and shoulders above
the rest. While Pittsfield sent a one-page ÒreportÓ listing only major category
totals for its $39,965 grant, Pelham carefully documented how it used a grant
one-10th the size - $3,978 to be specific
ÒWe donÕt do cream puffs,Ó
said Pelham
Selectman Jeanne Shumway.
ÒThe chief s not going to ask for something that he canÕt justify. He takes
things very literally. He asked for what he needed. What shocks me is how some
other towns can justify the things they spend this money on - itÕs like
stealing the childrenÕs future.Ó
Perhaps it goes without
saying, but itÕs not just public agencies who are sharing the DARE loot.
ÒBecause DARE is a certified
program, you have to use certain companies,Ó said Pelham Chief Ed Fleury. ÒItÕs
a certified monopoly with a lot of big business interests and big corporate
sponsors like Kentucky Fried Chicken.Ó And where big business is involved,
money talks.
ÒBefore Hanna-Barbara got
into it and changed the logo to a lion, DARE used to be represented by bears,Ó
Fleury continued, adding that such direct corporate involvement hasnÕt always
been well received. ÒAt the national level, a lot of people are unhappy about
the politics,Ó he said.
One of the major players at
the national level is a non- profit called DARE America, which provides
training to police officers and supplies a wide range of DARE materials and
paraphernalia. In addition to being one of DAREÕs biggest boosters, DARE
America works to give the program a certain uniformity, particularly when it
comes to merchandising.
Not surprisingly then, in an analysis of 17 local police departments, DARE America came out a big winner. A significant amount of DARE money also paid for goods and materials purchases from a select group of local vendors; much of spending went for more advertising and merchandising.
Seven departments alone spent
more than $15,000 on T-shirts.
Tens of thousands of dollars were also spent on DARE pins; bumper stickers;
mugs; squeeze bottles; buttons; caps,, pens; pencils; brochures; rulers; wrist
bandsÕ, magnets; emblems; banners; and other miscellaneous paraphernalia.
On the one hand, the DARE
programs seem to feed the ethic of consumption and waste. DARE administrators
might do well to heed the words of the DARE song: ÒThe worldÕs a different
place/ where life becomes a race/ and unlike the world of past/ our kids grow up
too fast/ so what they see in store/ is the threat of bombs and war/ and the
deadly game theyÕre taught/ is that happiness is bought.Ó
But it is also important to
recognize that this vast merchandising - as it is in any corporate enterprise -
is a form of propaganda, a means of creating and controlling public perception.
Most local police departments, it is worth noting, also used public funds to
purchased pro-DARE ads in local newspapers.
After 12 years, there is one
overarching question about DARE. In a recent interview, Pelham Police
Chief Fleury posed it
rhetorically: ÒDoes DARE prevent drug abuse?Ó Fleury acknowledged that he
doesnÕt really know. ÒBut I have a hard time spending tax dollars on bumper
stickers and buttons. IÕm more conservative ,Ó he said.
It is clear that Fleury is
not entirely sold on the way the DARE program is working. ÒThe creation of
grants and the distribution of grants means more complications and more reports
and more jobs and less money to do the job thatÕs needed,Ó Fleury said.
ÒInstead, you have to tell a pretty story. YouÕve got to be a fiction writer
and a sweet talker to get the grant money. I just want to do the job.Ó
But it is not clear that the
job can be done this way - if the job is to keep kids off drugs.
In October 1994, a three-year
study conducted for the National Institute of Justice- the research are of the
U.S. Department of Justice - found that while DARE may well improve kidsÕ
attitudes toward police, the program had not had a measurable effect on drug
abuse
The report, done by the
Research Triangle Institute, author of hundreds of highly regarded government
studies in the past, stood up under peer review. Researchers noted that their
study was based in part on all previous studies, and that in every case the conclusions
had been just about the same: DARE has no effect on drug use.
But the study was buried. The
government did release the most reaffirming findings from the report: DARE was
popular with kids and parents, and there was tremendous political support for
its expansion. But in the end, NIJ refused to publish the report, claiming that
it had not met the governmentÕs Òhigh standards of methodological rigor.Ó
On the local level, DARE
boosters are quick to note that the justice department steeped away from last
yearÕs study. At the Executive Office of Public Safety, Charles McDonald
instead offers a survey by Northeastern University. Its findings are fairly
clear: DARE is very popular; parents believe it is effective in reducing drug
use an in improving relations between young people and police officers.
That public policy therefore
follows public opinion is to be expected, even if public money has been used to
shape public opinion in the first place.
As it exists today -
materialistic an superficial - DARE is little equipped to directly benefit
kids.
Ironically, the most powerful
programs yet developed with DARE funs have been to gets kids, particularly
urban kids, away from their normal surroundings and into the woods and onto the
rivers. (See related story) Here, kids see that escape, peace-of-mind,
solitude, harmony, are all possible without the use of drugs.
ItÕs strange then that the
DARE education video should portray wild nature as scary, foreign and - in
habited by the looming monsters of addiction - inherently evil. To kids, it
sends a message that the wilderness is dangerous and, by extension, that the
increasingly violent landscape of civilization is Òsafe.Ó
This is an illusion fostered
by a system that transforms an issue of public health welfare into one of
criminal justice and national security. In this vision, the Land of Decisions
and choices is a land where all decisions will be made for you an where - if
corporations, politicians and the poser elite continue to have it their way -
it will never occur to you that anything called ÒchoiceÓ could ever previously
have exited.
DARE To Say No
How are municipalities
actually spending their DARE grants? Given public information laws, I didnÕt
think it would be very hard to find out I was wrong.
Whether intentionally
obstructive or merely too busy to help, public safety officials at all levels
seemed reluctant to share public information about DARE.
On Jan. 4, 1995 I wrote to
some 21 central and western Massachusetts police departments seeking records of
fiscal Ô94 DARE grant expenditures 9per Mass General Laws, statues 950 CMR
32:03 and 950CMR 32:08, which
designate information open and available to the public). Under state law, I
noted, departments are required to respond within 10 days.
By Jan. 24, after I further
contacted many departments by phone, only four had responded.
In a Feb. 6, 1995 letter to
Mary Schwind, Acting Supervisor for Public Records at the Mass Office of the
Secretary of the Commonwealth, I noted: More than half of the police departments
had not responded at all; responses were general, incomplete or vague; several
requested advance payment of exorbitant copy and search fees (the law does
allow for ÒreasonableÓ fess); two police departments refused to comply.
By Feb. 30, staff lawyers
assigned by the SecretaryÕs Office to contact various police departments had
informed them, that, by law, they must provide the information. Unwilling to
comply in a timely and reasonable manner up front, several police chiefs were
further angered at being Òturned in to the state.Ó
The Buckland Police
Department, for example, responded with Òa bill in advance [$34.10] which must
be paid under law for your request. This bill reflects the lowest paid officer
that will be doing the research, copying and mailing of all requested records.Ó
On Feb. 6, I sent a letter to
the Executive Office of Public Safety,, the oversight agency for DARE, seeking
grant expenditures information. The response, slow in coming, was general and
vague in nature. State DARE administrators were not available to answer my
follow-up questions. All inquiries were funneled through Charles McDonald, a public elations specialist,
Detailed information about he state Police and Criminal justice Training
Council expenditures, first requested in writing ON Feb. 25, later in
subsequent phone calls, and in-person on Sept. 25, still has not been provided.
In the end I was able to get
some information. But in the course of my investigation more than 100 letters
to state officials were left unanswered. Faxes promised were never sent. Follow
-up calls led to new promises unfulfilled.
ÔIf something worksÉÕ
For all its problems, the
DARE program surely hs had its share of success stories, many having nothing at
all to do with drugs.
Some police departments have
developed programs that may well outlive the DARE program from which they grew.
South HadleyÕs program
offering 150 kids a limited Òwilderness experienceÓ on the Connecticut River is
a good example - the expense of more than $3,466 for five aluminum canoes
notwithstanding.
ÒNo program is perfect, but
nothing else seems to have worked,Ó said South Hadley Police Chief William
Schenker. ÒI am especially proud of the ÔOutdoor AdventureÕ aspects of our
program. The positive response that the canoe trips generated among our young
people is amazing. I only wish more adults would participate to alleviate the
need for police officers on an overtime basis. Money could be used elsewhere.Ó
How many civilian workers an
how many hours of activities could be sponsored with last yearÕs $601,555 DARE
overtime? At least 60,155 hours at $10 an hour. Similarly, in fiscal Ô94, South
Hadley provided eight canoe trips with some 15 to 18 kids each Translating
overtime ($9,584) to paid adult positions yields 958 hours at $10 an hour With
four adults for every 15 kids, this translates to 39 outings of 6 hours each.
ÒWe shall continue the canoe trips,Ó said Chief Schenker. ÒIf something works, why fix it? We plan to expand the out-door theme by taking hikes and bicycle trips within our budgetary restraints. Feed-back from youth involved indicates they realize the importance of good physical health more than ever .And we have observed eagles and other wildlife, gone fishing and swimming, cooked outdoors and genuinely enjoyed each othersÕ company.Ó