White House Report Stings Drug Agency On Abilities

New York Times ^ | Feb. 5, 2003 | Eric Lichtblau

[anobjectivist]

Might be a good idea to shift funds from drug collection to drug prevention.

[corkoman]

Uh Oh. This could underminbe all the success we've had fighting the War On Drugs!.

The ones who are really scared right now are all the pols and cops who skim from the WOD $$$. They are desparate to maintain or escalate the WOD.

[headsonpikes]

"The agency lacks clear long-term strategies and goals..."

Oh, I don't know about that...I'd say the goals of steady gubmint paychecks and the strategies of blowing smoke and of general obfuscation to achieve that end are working effectively.

[JohnGalt]

I thought the goal was to build more helicopters in Connecticut for the shooting war the DEA is running down in Columbia?

[JoeSixPack1]

"Typically," Mr. Nadelmann said, "the D.E.A. has gotten a pretty free ride. Nobody was really held to account for the issue of reducing overall drug use. But this suggests some measure of seriousness about actually putting in a set of real criteria."

We knew that. But don't hold your breath.

[steve-b]

In an unusually harsh critique of an agency with a strong global reputation, the White House has questioned the ability of the Drug Enforcement Administration to stem the flow of narcotics and is threatening to give the agency its smallest budget increase in 15 years.

Government Management: "You have utterly failed to do your job, so you only get a small raise this year."

[Protagoras]

Might be a good idea to shift funds from drug collection to drug prevention.

A better idea would be to follow the constitution, and butt out.

[Wolfie]

ping

[headsonpikes]

Follow the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.....

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$...that should give even the densest a clue.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

Officials at the agency and its parent, the Justice Department, said the agency was working to address many of the concerns in the report. They said the report was more a reflection of the agency's failure to communicate its successes than its ability to fight drug trafficking.

"It's not that we're doing things wrong or we've been ineffective," a spokesman, Will Glaspy, said. "It's more that we just need to do a better job of defining our accomplishments."

They should use an analog to the KIA/bodycount measure that MacNamara used so successfully during the Vietnam War. Exact same dynamic here, Feds. It's high time you figured this one out.

[Protagoras]

I don't see all the usual suspects on this thread. Could it be that they leave off the threads where they will have to face up to the failure of the government to stem ilict drug use when they send out their secret email alerts?

[Wolfie]

I expected at least a few "the Times is a leftie mouthpiece (as if it was the newspaper that issued the report), and besides, you like Hillary" comments.

[jmc813]

WOD Ping

[FreeTally]

of an agency with a strong global reputation,

I guess it depends on how you define "Strong". LOL!

The agency lacks clear long-term strategies and goals, its managers are not held accountable for problems, and its financial controls do not comply with federal standards, the review found.

So what's the problem? Sounds like any other government agency.

[steve-b]

Could it be that they leave off the threads where they will have to face up to the failure of the government to stem ilict drug use when they send out their secret email alerts?

I thought they posted their canned insults ("...bla bla bla potheads bla bla bla liberties bla bla bla anarchists bla bla bla...") on any thread with the word "DRUG" in the title. Actually reading the article is strictly optional.

[Protagoras]

I'll bet plenty that they have an email alert list. None of them deny it when I say it. They all show up at the same time on the same threads, I don't believe in coincidences.

[FreeTally]

Oh, this is grand!

They said the report was more a reflection of the agency's failure to communicate its successes than its ability to fight drug trafficking.

"It's not that we're doing things wrong or we've been ineffective," a spokesman, Will Glaspy, said. "It's more that we just need to do a better job of defining our accomplishments."

"we just didn't make it clear that "success" is defined as keeping our jobs and our budget increases." LOL!

This reminds me of the scene from the movie "Office Space" where the main character is explaining the "rounding scam" to Jennifer Aniston in the car, and she says, "and how is that not stealing". He replies, "ok, maybe I'm not explaining this correctly....".

[steve-b]

"It's not that we're doing things wrong or we've been ineffective," a spokesman, Will Glaspy, said. "It's more that we just need to do a better job of defining our accomplishments."

Reminds me of the Rick Berman interview I saw described on Slashdot yesterday, in which he says that he doesn't understand why Star Trek: Nemesis tanked.

It ain't a river in Egypt.

[tacticalogic]

I thought they posted their canned insults ("...bla bla bla potheads bla bla bla liberties bla bla bla anarchists bla bla bla...") on any thread with the word "DRUG" in the title. Actually reading the article is strictly optional.

I believe SOP is to read only enough of the article to attack the source. In this case, as soon as they see "White House", they'll get stuck in a loop, like a dogma chasing it's tail.