PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

Drug Demand Reduction Act

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 20, 1998

TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Targeted Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Programs Subtitle A: National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign Subtitle B: Drug-Free Prisons and Jails Subtitle C: Drug-Free Schools Quality Assurance Title II: Statement of National Antidrug Policy Subtitle A: Congressional Leadership in Community Coalitions Subtitle B: Rejection of Legalization of Drugs Subtitle C: Report on Streamlining Federal Prevention and Treatment Efforts Drug Demand Reduction Act - Title I: Targeted Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Programs - Subtitle A: National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign - Drug-Free Media Campaign Act of 1998 - Requires the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy to: (1) conduct a national media campaign for the purpose of reducing and preventing drug abuse among young people in the United States; and (2) use appropriated funds for media that focuses on, or that includes specific information on, prevention or treatment resources for consumers within specific local areas. (Sec. 103) Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) authorized and prohibited uses of funds; and (2) matching and reporting requirements. (Sec. 105) Authorizes appropriations. Subtitle B: Drug-Free Prisons and Jails - Drug-Free Prisons and Jails Act of 1998 - Requires the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance to establish a model substance abuse treatment program for substance-involved offenders by providing financial assistance to grant recipients and evaluating the success of programs conducted pursuant to this subtitle. Limits grant awards and administrative costs. (Sec. 114) Sets forth requirements for grant applications, review and approval of awards, permissible uses of funds, and evaluation and reporting requirements. Requires the Director to establish minimum criteria for program evaluation. (Sec. 118) Authorizes appropriations from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund. Subtitle C: Drug-Free Schools Quality Assurance - Drug-Free Schools Quality Assurance Act - Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require the chief executive officer of each State or other entity designated to be responsible for education activities to: (1) establish a standard of quality for drug, alcohol, and tobacco prevention programs implemented in public schools in the State in accordance with specified criteria (including a comparison of the rate of illegal use of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco by students enrolled over a specified period, the rate of suspensions or expulsions, program effectiveness, parental and community involvement, and the extent of review of existing community drug, alcohol, and tobacco prevention programs before implementation); and (2) identify and designate, upon application by a public elementary or secondary school, any such school that achieves such standard as a quality program school. Sets forth provisions regarding requests for a quality program designation and public notification. Title II: Statement of National Antidrug Policy - Subtitle A: Congressional Leadership in Community Coalitions - Expresses the sense of the Congress that the individual Members of the House of Representatives should establish community-based anti-drug coalitions in their congressional districts or should actively support such coalitions that already exist. Subtitle B: Rejection of Legalization of Drugs - Expresses the sense of the Congress that: (1) the States and their citizens should reject drug legalization; and (2) each State should make efforts to be drug-free. Subtitle C: Report on Streamlining Federal Prevention and Treatment Efforts - Expresses the sense of the Congress that: (1) Federal Government efforts to reduce the demand for illegal drugs in the United States are frustrated by the fragmentation of those efforts across multiple departments and agencies; and (2) improvement of those efforts can best be achieved through consolidation and coordination. Requires the Director of National Drug Control Policy to prepare and submit to specified congressional committees a report evaluating options for increasing the efficacy of Federal drug prevention and treatment programs and activities. Requires such report to include a thorough review of the activities and potential consolidation of existing Federal drug information clearinghouses. Authorizes appropriations.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT

Committees

  • Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.

    2. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S12722-12723)

    3. Introduced in Senate

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

    Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    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.2647 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.2647 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.2647 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.2647 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.

    View full prompt & sources