After Outcry, White House Budget Preserves Funds to Fight Opioid Epidemic

The president's 2018 proposal offers relatively small trims to drug control office

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

After an outcry, the Trump administration has rolled back a proposed gutting of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, instead asking for relatively small trims to the office and largely preserving two main grant programs.

President Trump’s 2018 budget—released Tuesday—is just a proposal; Congress actually allocates government spending.

Still, the budget outlines the administration’s priorities, and an email leaked earlier this month showed that Trump was considering cutting the office’s $364 million budget by 95 percent. Those cuts would have eliminated two major grant programs the office coordinates: the drug-free communities program, which helps build coalitions to decrease substance use, and the high-intensity drug-trafficking area programs, which helps state and local law enforcement agencies fight drug trafficking.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Instead, the Trump administration is proposing allocating $244 million to the drug-trafficking program, down from $247 million in the 2017 budget. For the communities program, the administration wants to spend $92 million, compared to $95 million last year.

For the operations of the office, Trump is proposing a $2 million trim, from $20 million to $18 million.

Politico first reported the revised plans for the office’s budget.

After the potential cuts were disclosed, Trump administration officials, while noting that the proposal was just preliminary, defended any spending cuts by saying that the office duplicated work done by other federal agencies. But supporters of the office — which is led by an official commonly called the “drug czar”—argued that by working across the government, it actually ensures a more coordinated effort among the agencies.

The office in recent years has been helping lead the government’s fight against the growing opioid epidemic, which Trump has said is a priority of his. This month, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway and Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price traveled around the country on a listening tour related to the crisis, and faced questions about whether cutting the drug control office betrayed the administration’s vow to tackle opioid addiction.

Officials from both parties, especially people who had worked in the office in previous administrations and those from states hard hit by the opioid epidemic, had criticized gutting the agency as short-sighted.

The Trump administration has not yet nominated a director for the office.

Republished with permission from STAT. This article originally appeared on May 23, 2017

STAT delivers fast, deep, and tough-minded journalism. We take you inside science labs and hospitals, biotech boardrooms, and political backrooms. We dissect crucial discoveries. We examine controversies and puncture hype. We hold individuals and institutions accountable. We introduce you to the power brokers and personalities who are driving a revolution in human health. These are the stories that matter to us all.

More by STAT

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe