Drug Czar Responsibility and Accountability Act of 1998
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 1, 1998
Drug Czar Responsibility and Accountability Act of 1998 - Amends Federal law to expand the responsibilities of the Director of National Drug Control Policy to include: (1) establishing Federal policies, objectives, goals, priorities, and performance measures for the National Drug Control Program, and for each Program agency, which shall include targets for reducing the levels of overall unlawful drug use, adolescent unlawful drug use, and drug-related emergency room incidents to January 19, 1993 levels; (2) requiring the submission of specified reports from Program agencies; (3) making recommendations to Program agency heads on the implementation of Federal counter-drug programs; (4) taking actions to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance in any form that is listed in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act and that has not been approved for medical use by the Food and Drug Administration; and (5) ensuring that drug prevention and drug treatment research and information is effectively disseminated by Program agencies to State and local governments and nongovernmental entities involved in demand reduction. States that certain surveys of drug use among young people in the United States shall not be prohibited under any law. (Sec. 4) Expands the powers of the Director, to include: (1) requiring the heads of Program agencies to provide the Director with statistics, studies, reports, and any other information regarding Federal control of drug abuse; and (2) making recommendations to the National Drug Control Center on the specific projects that the Director determines will enhance the effectiveness of the National Drug Control Strategy. (Sec. 5) Revises National Drug Control Strategy requirements to include: (1) comprehensive, research-based, specific, long-range goals and performance measures (including specific annual targets expressed in terms of precise percentages) for reducing drug abuse and the consequences of drug abuse in the United States; (2) four-year projections for Program priorities, including budget priorities; and (3) the review of international, Federal, and private sector drug control activities (currently, State and local drug control activities). Revises requirements for the assessment of the reduction of drug availability by certain measurements. Sets forth requirements with respect to the establishment of performance measures by the Director. (Sec. 7) Extends the authorization of appropriations for the Office of Drug Control Policy until September 30, 1999. (Sec. 8) Directs the Director to submit a report to the Congress including: (1) proposed goals, targets, performance measures and specific initiatives with respect to the Program, including the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Program; and (2) proposals to coordinate the efforts of all Program agencies.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.2028 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.2028 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.2028 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.2028 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.