Located in the Executive Office of the President, the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) was created by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 to coordinate the federal government's War on Drugs. The principal responsibilities of the Director of ONDCP, who is often referred to as the "drug czar," include establishing policies, objectives, and priorities for the National Drug Control program; annually promulgating the National Drug Control Strategy and coordinating and overseeing the strategy's implementation by the respective drug control agencies of the federal government; making recommendations to the President regarding changes in the organization, management, budgets, and allocation of federal personnel engaged in drug enforcement; consulting with and assisting state and local governments with respect to their relations with federal drug control agencies and programs; appearing before committees and subcommittees of Congress to represent the drug policies of the executive branch; and notifying any federal drug control agency if its policies are not in compliance with the National Drug Control Strategy and transmitting a copy of the notification to the President. ONDCP's first reauthorizing act, in 1994, produced limited amendments to the agency's original enacting legislation. It strengthened the Director's powers to influence the allocation of funds and personnel within and between federal drug control departments and agencies. It prohibited presidentially appointed ONDCP officials from participating in federal election campaign activities, except for making contributions to individual candidates. It required the Director to include, in every National Drug Control Strategy, an evaluation of the effectiveness of federal drug control efforts during the preceding year, and it mandated specific measures of effectiveness that the evaluation would include. It required the Director to assess periodically the accuracy of drug use statistics and the factors that restrict the availability of treatment services, and to propose corrective remedies. ONDCP was reauthorized again in 1998 when Congress rewrote the agency's statutory mandate. This time, Congress took advantage of the opportunity, through staff studies and several hearings, to assess the progress of the antidrug effort and to develop specific, measurable goals for reducing drug consumption and drug-related crime in the United States. Annual reports to Congress containing specified measures of progress in implementing the National Drug Control Strategy were again required of ONDCP. This second ONDCP reauthorization act expired during the first session of the 108 th Congress on September 30, 2003. Despite the act's sunset provision, however, Congress continued to appropriate funds to keep the agency alive until H.R. 6344 , the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2006, was signed into law ( P.L. 109 - 469 ) on December 29, 2006, reauthorizing ONDCP through FY2010. More detail and analysis of ONDCP's third reauthorizing statute can be found below. The nomination of Seattle police chief R. Gil Kerlikowske to be Director of National Drug Control Policy in the Obama Administration was received in the Senate on March 16, 2009, and referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. At his confirmation hearing on April 1, Kerlikowske promised "restoration of the vitality of the Office of National Drug Control Policy" by building "consensus on how best to use interdiction efforts, law enforcement, treatment, prevention, and sound research to achieve measurable results in reducing drug use and its consequences." He went on to state, "There will be a renewed focus on evidence-based approaches to reduce demand for drugs, through prevention as well as treatment." The full Senate considered and approved his nomination by a vote of 91-1 on May 7, 2009. On April 10, 2009, President Obama announced his selection of A. Thomas McLellan to be Deputy Director of ONDCP. A University of Pennsylvania psychology professor and a noted expert on addiction and treatment, his nomination, along with that of Kerlikowske, was taken by some as a sign of a shift in federal drug control policy from a primary emphasis on law enforcement and drug interdiction to a tilt toward demand reduction measures such as prevention, treatment, and harm reduction. The position of Deputy Director, along with three other deputy directors—one each for demand reduction, supply reduction, and state and local affairs—also require Senate confirmation. The three additional nominations are pending. The Senate Committee on the Judiciary and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will continue in their roles of authorization and oversight of ONDCP and its programs. ONDCP's authorization will expire at the end of FY2010. Reauthorization bills therefore will likely be introduced and considered by the 111 th Congress. ONDCP appropriations fall under the jurisdiction of the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittees in both chambers. Certain ONDCP programs, such as the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign—which evaluation studies have shown does not work as intended —might continue to receive close scrutiny by both appropriating and authorizing committees in the 111 th Congress, as they have in recent congresses. In the House, both authorization and oversight of ONDCP lie within the jurisdiction of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Accordingly, that committee's Domestic Policy Subcommittee, chaired by Representative Kucinich, held an oversight hearing on March 12, 2008, entitled "The National Drug Control Strategy for 2008, the Fiscal Year 2009 Drug Control Budget, and Compliance with the ONDCP Reauthorization Act of 2006: Priorities and Accountability at ONDCP." The stated purpose of the hearing was to examine (1) the priorities of the 2008 National Drug Control Strategy, (2) the priorities of the FY2009 national drug control budget, and (3) ONDCP's compliance with the reauthorization act, especially the revised budgetary reporting requirements and the mandated performance measurement system. In his opening statement, Chairman Kucinich set forth issues concerning "ONDCP's accountability and overall effectiveness" to be covered at the hearing, including the lack of transparency and accountability at ONDCP, which impairs ONDCP's and Congress's ability to determine which federal drug control programs are effective in combating drug abuse; the failure of ONDCP to include in the national drug control budget "all funding requests for any drug control activity, including costs attributable to drug law enforcement activities such as prosecuting and incarcerating federal drug law offenders," as required by the reauthorization act; ONDCP's unwillingness "to comply with the standards of accountability Congress has imposed" in providing Congress with the reports mandated by the reauthorization act; the difficulty faced by Congress in determining whether progress is being made in combating drug abuse because ONDCP "doesn't employ consistent or useful performance measures and frequently shifts its policy goals"; and the imbalance in the national drug control budget between supply-side programs (such as source-country eradication and interdiction) and demand-side initiatives (such as prevention and treatment), with the supply side receiving a growing share of the budget "despite research that demonstrates that demand-side approaches are generally more cost-effective than supply-side approaches." Chairman Kucinich also noted that the written testimony of the principal witness at the hearing, then-ONDCP Director John P. Walters, "entirely omits discussion of ONDCP's compliance with the Reauthorization Act despite repeated clear requests that these issues be addressed." The prepared testimony of the other two hearing witnesses, however, did cover the concerns of the subcommittee. Former ONDCP official John Carnevale expressed his disagreement with the Bush Administration's emphasis on supply reduction: By the 1990's we had learned that interdiction was a relatively ineffective way of reducing drug use—and expensive besides. So we focused our efforts on demand reduction. Now, at the beginning of the new millennium we have—inexplicably—come to believe again that source and transit zone interdiction is an effective way to reduce drug use in America. There is no evidence to support this belief.... In short, what we now know is that so long as there is a demand for illicit drugs, supply will follow. He pointed out "significant shortcomings" in ONDCP's meeting of its statutory obligations and said, "As a result of these failures, ONDCP is no longer seen as a serious player in the drug issue." He outlined some ways to restructure the agency so that it might regain "a meaningful role in shaping drug policy in the next Administration," such as moving some of its programs to other drug control agencies so that ONDCP could return to being a policy office. According to Dr. Carnevale: ONDCP must rediscover its roots. By this statement, I mean that ONDCP should again focus on becoming a leader in policy formulation on behalf of the President to allow the Administration to develop a drug policy that is evidence-based and includes performance measurement to hold it accountable for results. The final hearing witness, Economist Rosalie Liccardo Pacula, co-Director of the Drug Policy Research Center at the RAND Corporation, testified on what research says about the reasonableness of the Bush Administration's priorities of national drug control. In her view, the 2008 National Drug Control Strategy supports programs in several areas that "have already been shown to be completely ineffective" or that have "never been scientifically proven to be effective and which on analytic grounds seem unlikely to be successful." These include efforts in Colombia and Afghanistan intended to decrease the supplies in the United States of cocaine and heroin, respectively; random student drug testing; and the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. According to Dr. Pacula, research conducted at RAND and elsewhere shows that source-country crop eradication and interdiction efforts along with prevention and education programs work best in emerging drug markets at the early stages of a drug epidemic. Later in the cycle, after the size of the market for a particular drug has grown, the epidemic reaches its mature phase and the number of new users declines.