While that is good news about the scope of the drug bill, it is also a reminder that we have further work on this issue.

I would appreciate if over the next several months you and your staff would look into the manner in which Congress has attempted to deal with the specific items you have mentioned in your testimony.

In light of your priorities listed here and the priorities of Congress included in the drug bill, would you give us your input on whether the legislation meets the criteria you have outlined, and whether there are still some legislative areas that need to be pursued further?

Mr. BLOCK. Very good.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Dymally?

Mr. DYMALLY. Sheriff, you stated that you were waging this fight against drug abuse without any Federal help. This new bill provides some grants for local law enforcement offices, and your Department needs to review that.

Mr. BLOCK. We will be waiting in line, I can assure you.

Mr. RANGEL. As pointed out by Congressman Dymally, it will be up to the individual agencies to convince the municipal and State officials as to the work in these projects, and we don't believe that this is the solution to the problem, but we all believe that this is the first time we have ever established a national strategy.

The administration was very reluctant to accept it, and so to a large extent the success of this problem is going to be dependent upon the type of leadership that is provided by the administration, but it is not a Federal program, so therefore, whatever you are doing in the areas of education and law enforcement, we want to make certain that you can provide the leadership for the rest of the country. Although the dollars will be limited, it may be for the first time they are there.

Mr. Hawkins?

Mr. HAWKINS. Sheriff, in your prepared statement, you mentioned drug prevention programs must become commonplace in every school in America. You also indicated that the Government and the private sector must play an active role in drug abuse education.

It seems to me that is a very remarkable statement. Did I understand you to say that you used Deputy Sheriffs in some of the programs in the schools?

Mr. BLOCK. Yes, sir, we have. At the present time, I have 23 sworn personnel who have been diverted from other assignments who are working with the school districts, with the classroom teachers to present these programs to the fourth, fifth and sixth grade students.

Mr. HAWKINS. Certainly that is commendable. However, do you have enough personnel that you can make people available, diverting them from other duties? Do you think that this is the responsibility of the sheriff's department? Is it a local responsibility? Or is it a responsibility that should be assumed in some way by the Federal Government as well?

Mr. BLOCK. To answer your first question, no, I do not have adequate resources so that I can afford this diversion of resources, but The reality is that we view the growing substance abuse as a single

greatest problem, not only facing this community, but this society, so it is a matter of establishing priorities.

And in response to your second question, whether it is a proper role for us, the answer is, nobody else was doing it so law enforcement has taken on that responsibility.

Mr. HAWKINS. It seems to me that this it is sort of shuffling resources around with no one actually assuming the major responsibility, and many levels of government perhaps ignoring their own responsibility.

Mr. BLOCK. I can give you an example, Congressman. This year, I had legislation introduced that would have diverted 5 percent of the lottery dollars for substance abuse education in the schools.

That recommendation was opposed by almost the entire education community, even the PTA, and their response was that these dollars are needed for traditional education. My response is that before you can educate, you must first create an environment in which learning can take place, and today in our schools, we do not have such an environment, and substance abuse is perhaps the primary causative factor in creating the negative environment that we do have.

Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Parris?

Mr. PARRIS. One quick question for our two law enforcement gentlemen on the panel. This committee has found a frightening increase in the abuse of the substance of choice, the use of crack. Is that true in L.A.?

Is that an increasing problem, the use of that substance?

Mr. BLOCK. It perhaps started here. Here it is the rock cocaine. Somehow, people have focused on this issue of crack and rock cocaine which is taking place in certain communities within the greater community, and yet they seem to think that that is different than sniffing high-grade cocaine through a silver straw.

The reality is that when you are involved in the use of illicit drugs, you are a shareholder in the misery, corruption and all of the negative effects that this drug involvement has, whether it is crack, rock cocaine or high-grade cocaine through the silver straw, as I indicated.

Mr. REINER. I would echo the Sheriff's comments.

Mr. RANGEL. Let me again thank this panel, and ask you to really monitor our recently passed legislation. The success of that legislation is going to depend on what happens at the local and State level.

I cannot overemphasize that it is not a Federal program, a partnership program, and we just want to let you know that we appreciate the fact that you have been in the trenches over the years, and it is hopeful that your Federal Government will be partners in that effort.

I want to thank you for the very special work you are doing in this part of the country, and hope that you will keep in touch with our Select Committee on Narcotics, as well as the local Congress people.

For those of you in the audience, we will give you the address to write and submit your name and address of your organization, and those comments will be welcome.

The second panel is David Amitai and Martha Stewart, House of Uhuru; and Mike Watanabe, director of the Asian-American Drug Abuse Program; and V.G. Guiness, SEY YES, Inc.

Ms. Martha Stewart is not here. The Chair welcomes this panel. We hope we can get a little order in the hearing room. The statements will be made a part of the record, and we ask you to keep your statement to five minutes, and we will start off listening to Mr. David Amitai of the House of Uhuru.

Mr. Amitai?

TESTIMONY OF DAVID AMITAI, HOUSE OF UHURU

Mr. AMITAI. I would like to thank the committee for giving me this opportunity to present my first-hand experience in the treatment of drug addiction.

I am sure I will repeat some of the remarks earlier made, but I would like to give the committee some experience from the treatment standpoint in Los Angeles, and some of the human conditions

Mr. RANGEL. Will you suspend for a minute? Please suspend conversations in the hearing room at this time. I am terribly sorry.

Mr. AMITAI. I am David Amitai, Director of the House of Uhuru's Residential Treatment Program. We have a large program of 65 beds, including pregnant women and infant children. I have been Director of the program now for six years.

During the past six years, there have been dramatic changes in substance abuse in Los Angeles. Six years ago, PCP was a major drug of abuse, today it is cocaine. Six and a half years ago, more men than women sought treatment, today an equal if not greater number of women seek treatment.

And lastly, 61⁄2 years ago, we could help most people who applied for admission into our program. Today, due to the nature and epidemic spread of cocaine addiction, we can help only a small fraction of those seeking our services.

This is the area of my experience I wish to address to this committee and an area I believe to be of the utmost importance and urgency.

Until recently, cocaine was viewed as being benign. Some viewed it as being psychologically addicting and not physically addicting; others viewed it as being physically addicting and not psychologically addicting.

It is now apparent to researchers and clinicians that with the introduction of "free basing," we have entered into a new dimension with cocaine being extremely addicting, both psychologically and physically. Free basing is the practice of inhaling heated vapors of cocaine through a cigarette, or more often, a pipe.

Cocaine hydrochloride, the form of the drug sold on the illicit market, decomposes when it is heated, so users who want the faster and stronger effects produced by smoking, extract pure cocaine alkaloid, the free base.

Today, this form of cocaine is sold in small "rocks," otherwise known as "crack" for as little as $10 on the streets. Tolerance of the user often changes, requiring more and more cocaine to achieve the same effect, or "high."

I do not wish to use my allotted time to discuss the physical and psychological effects of cocaine, but wish to point out that the addictive process is usually very fast, and following two to three hits on a pipe, a person can become hooked or addicted.

Because of this, it is far easier to become addicted and the numbers of addicted persons mushrooms accordingly. It has been shown in laboratories that addicted animals, when given the choice of cocaine or food, often starve to death in using cocaine. One of the strongest human instincts, the sexual drive, is often abandoned.

Users are willing and compelled to do anything to continue the compulsion. Men often turn to selling drugs, after selling all their possessions, and women often turn to selling themselves. And I am not talking of classic prostitution, but normal women, married women and women from religious and traditional backgrounds.

Once a person becomes addicted to cocaine, his or her personality, values and standards radically change. He or she will, if need be, abandon children-indeed, 75 percent of child abuse and neglect cases in Los Angeles are drug-related-abandon family, abandon jobs and abandon their identity.

When the cocaine compulsion becomes severe, treatment is very difficult. The key ingredient in predicting and determining treatment success is one's motivation and commitment to change. Unlike standard medical treatment, one's state of mind is of paramount value.

How or when does a cocaine user seek treatment? Aside from family pressure and legal directives, we really don't know. Apparently, it is when a person sees their life in total ruins and they have reached rock bottom and fear for their life.

It is when they are utterly exhausted and burnt out, yet a breath of reason suddenly emerges; a fleeting moment in time when a pause somehow temporarily disrupts the consuming effects of the drug cocaine.

It is when a women sees her children taken away, seeing herself exploited sexually and tragically; it is when a man sees total rejection and loneliness and death around the next corner.

It is at that moment that we need treatment services available, and more often than not, these services are not available. Our program has anywhere from 50 to 100 phone calls a day from persons who have reached the limits of their endurance, rock bottom, and are begging for help.

Although we have a fine working relationship with the Los Angeles County Drug Abuse Program Office and I highly respect their efforts in providing needed services, there are simply not enough residential beds or sites available. And let me stress that a large portion of cocaine addicts require residential treatment where they are isolated from the cocaine traffic in our streets.

Indeed, if anyone wanted to buy cocaine this minute, within 5 or 10 minutes it could be found anywhere in this city. Too often, the addictive process of cocaine is far too great for a person to withstand the pressure and temptation of the street.

A cocaine user not ready or motivated for treatment will not be responsive to treatment. If we cannot admit into residential treatment those seeking help, what happens? All community-based programs are full with waiting lists for 30 to 60 days. We know that if

we can't help those seeking help, we are giving them the nonverbal message, "Go out and use and abuse some more; go and sell yourself and drugs to others."

We have stopped taking names on our waiting list because we don't want to make false promises. And then, more often than not, when we attempt to contact someone on the waiting list after a few weeks, either he or she cannot be found or he or she is no longer interested.

He or she may be drowning in drugs and is not at that passing moment in time, earlier discussed, when they want help. We must be able to help those seeking help. Many private programs costing $500 per day are not within the reach of those who have lost everything and in equal need. I meet monthly with representatives of other rehabilitation and detoxification services in Los Angeles, and all programs are experiencing similar pressures and similar frus

trations.

All programs are full and all programs have waiting lists from 30 to 60 days.

I believe that, ultimately, prevention is the key. However, are we to say that a smoke-free society is the answer to lung cancer and not treat the cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Prevention will not succeed if we have hundreds or thousands of cocaine-addicted individuals selling cocaine at $10 a rock to support their own addiction.

We find ourselves in a Catch-22 losing battle with the number of those selling cocaine increasing proportionately to the number of those seeking our help, which we cannot provide. We must do the possible, not turn anyone away, and significantly increase the number of treatment spaces.

We must realize that whenever we turn someone away, we have missed a golden and perhaps irretrievable opportunity and are, in effect, condoning that person's continued illicit drug usage and illegal behavior it produces. We must realize that cocaine addiction is a new phenomenon and we must do whatever is humanly possible to curtial its spread.

[The statement of Mr. Amitai appears on p. 103.]

Mr. RANGEL. Thank you, Mr. Amitai.

If you could restrict your statements to five minutes, it will be of great assistance for us to hear all witnesses. Mr. Watanabe?

TESTIMONY OF MIKE WATANABE, DIRECTOR, ASIAN-AMERICAN DRUG ABUSE PROGRAM

Mr. WATANABE. Congressman, I appreciate this opportunity to address you face to face. I have written testimony that I have submitted, and I want to do some summary of that right now.

Mr. RANGEL. The written testimony of all witnesses, without objection, will be entered into the formal record.

Mr. WATANABE. Thank you.

This is an opportune time to correct and make up for the past shortcomings in the drug abuse service delivery system. Drug abuse services have historically been underfunded. This may be related to a view once held that the problem is a passing phenomena and one day will go away. It has not and will not. Public policy