Our upcoming issue 37.4 features the following editorial on the United States’ addiction crisis and the 2016 Presidential Election. Our hope is to spark conversation about utilizing all the evidence-based tools at our nation’s disposal to aid prevention and treatment.

Please read and distribute widely.

Left, Right, and Meeting in the Middle: Addressing Addiction is Something We Can Agree About
Arthi K. Narayanan, John D. Harding Jr, Shaddy K. Saba, James Conley, and Adam J. Gordon
Substance Abuse

Abstract: The United States faces an addiction health crisis. Presidential election cycles in the United States are cause for creation of political party platforms. These platforms provide general stances and specific policies on a variety of issues. We undertook a review of the addiction policies of the 2016 Republican and Democratic platforms. Despite differences in focus, we found more similarities than differences between the two. We call upon those in political power to use every evidence-based policy at their disposal to promote addiction treatment and prevention.

There are some fabulous online resources to assist reviewers in the peer review process. Taylor and Francis recently published this nice review. In addition, at the 2015 AMERSA meeting, Editors of the Substance Abuse journal (Binswanger, Pugatch, Gordon) presented a workshop, “Reviewing the review: practical tips to make a manuscript peer review work for you.” The audience was packed (over 20 participants) and highly lauded for its content.

We at the journal highly regard external peer reviewers. As such, we present an annual award to the scholar who provided the “best” peer review during the year. The awardee is presented a trophy and certificate at the annual AMERSA meeting. In addition, ALL external peer reviewers are recognized in the journal by name published an annual editorial since 2014. When recognized, these articles also discuss our journal’s policies on Improving the Peer Review Process and Interdisciplinary Scholarship.

Thank you to all our reviewers over the past 3 years. Your critical reviews and suggestions have substantially improved the quality of the manuscripts reviewed and the quality of the journal.