A critical moral guide to eradicating teen drug abuse. The "Don't Do It" slogan of Bob Dole's anti-drug campaign might, at first glance, appear to be an ineffective way of addressing the nation's growing drug abuse problem. After all, it is hardly reasonable to believe that a potential drug user will specifically consider these words before deciding whether or not to get high. However, this slogan, and the man behind it, represent a much-needed, values-oriented position on the issue that has been lacking in the Clinton administration. The president's cavalier attitude has been responsible for a dramatic increase in drug abuse among teenagers. While Clinton's baby boomer generation dismissed aggressive anti-drug campaigns as ineffective, the truth is that tough approaches to the problem have proven very effective. The Nixon, Reagan, and Bush administrations are direct examples. By the time Richard Nixon began his first term, marijuana and heroin use had reached an all-time high. In response, he vowed to wage a national attack on narcotics abuse that included reducing the flow of drugs into the country and intensifying drug treatment programs. Nixon began his work by arranging the extradition of known heroin chemists and sent ambassadors to negotiate drug deals with foreign countries. Turkey, which supplies about 80% of the United States' heroin supply, has promised a complete cessation of its production in exchange for $35.7 million in aid. Nationally, the Nixon administration further demonstrated its dedication to the cause by legalizing the use of drugs to combat addiction and encouraging anti-drug commercials and television programs. Although many doubted that these measures would have any impact, they helped dramatically reduce drug abuse. In 1975, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) announced that although the purity of heroin had decreased, the retail price was four times higher. The result has been a sharp decline in heroin abuse. Unfortunately, the Carter administration failed to continue the vigorous anti-drug campaign. In fact, President Carter once supported the legalization of marijuana possession. No wonder that, in the absence of strong moral leadership, half of adolescents were experimenting with drugs in 1979. Fortunately, Reagan was elected at this crucial moment, and was succeeded by George Bush, both of whom strongly supported drug prohibition. Between 1979 and 1992, drug abuse among adolescents fell by half. The fluctuation of drug abuse statistics in accordance with changing political leadership is not accidental. It is a direct reflection of the importance of presidential leadership on this issue. Republican presidents who have adopted an aggressive anti-drug stance have helped dramatically improve the addiction problem. Under their leadership, society's attitude towards drug use has changed. The belief that taking drugs was morally incorrect became increasingly widespread. Above all, they demonstrated that the war on drugs is not a losing battle. Parents, educators and law enforcement officials must not accept drug abuse as a growing and irreversible trend. Unfortunately, the Clinton administration appears to espouse Carter's apathetic position on the issue. For the first part of his term he appointed a surgeon general who expressed support for drug legalization and reduced the amount of resources available to the office.