-------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional Panel Releases Documents Linking Tobacco Companies
And Scientists ('Chronicle Of Higher Education' Reports The Documents Reveal
Many Studies That Have Been Widely Assumed To Be Valid Were Quietly Funded
By Tobacco Companies, Were Not Peer Reviewed And Were Designed To Understate
The Dangers Of Smoking)
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 12:50:57 -0500
Subject: MN: US: Congressional Panel Releases Documents Linking Tobacco
Companies and Scientists
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family
Source: The Chronicle of Higher Education
Section: Government & Politics
Author: Douglas Lederman
Pubdate: January 9, 1998
Contact: editor@chronicle.com
Website: http://chronicle.com
Note: The Tobacco Documents on the House Web site are at
http://www.house.gov/commerce/TobaccoDocs/documents.html
CONGRESSIONAL PANEL RELEASES DOCUMENTS LINKING TOBACCO COMPANIES AND
SCIENTISTS
Many Of The Studies Were Not Peer Reviewed And Were Designed To Understate
The Dangers Of Smoking
WASHINGTON - A House of Representatives committee last month released
thousands of pages of subpoenaed documents that shed new light on a
long-running campaign by the tobacco industry to quietly influence -- and
sometimes suppress -- scientific research on the health-related effects of
tobacco.
That tobacco companies sponsored academic research is not a surprise; the
industry has long acknowledged using separately incorporated groups to
finance studies that were peer reviewed and, in many cases, scientifically
sound.
The new documents, however, provide new evidence about what has been
revealed only recently: that the tobacco companies, through their lawyers,
funneled money to sponsor research that was not peer reviewed and that was
designed, in many cases, to understate the dangers of smoking.
The fact that the companies' lawyers approved the research enabled the
lawyers to shield the study results from public view, under the legal
principle of attorney-client privilege. That meant that the lawyers could,
if they chose, insure that any unfavorable results never saw the light of
day. The approach also insured that scientists themselves could be kept
from testifying against the industry in court if their research was
critical of tobacco.
Representative Thomas J. Bliley, the Virginia Republican who heads the
House Commerce Committee, subpoenaed the documents in November from four
tobacco companies that are defendants in a lawsuit brought by state
officials in Minnesota. Mr. Bliley made the papers public after the judge
hearing the Minnesota case, Kenneth J. Fitzpatrick, ruled that they were
not protected by attorney-client privilege, because they contained evidence
of crime and fraud.
The top Democrat on the Commerce Committee, Representative John D. Dingell
of Michigan, said in a statement that the papers reveal a "massive funding
of 'helpful' researchers," a process in which, at the direction of their
lawyers, the tobacco companies "appeared to fund the entire livelihood of
dozens of researchers."
A preliminary review of the documents suggests that some scientists and
institutions indeed received significant sums from the "special projects"
funds overseen by the companies' lawyers.
A summary of the money spent from those funds in one year, 1989, shows at
least $1.6-million flowing to about 15 projects. One of the recipients,
Washington University, received $300,000 that year, and as much as $500,000
in other years, to support a cancer-immunology laboratory at its medical
center.
Paul E. Lacy, a professor emeritus of pathology who helped coordinate the
Washington project, said the lab focused on basic research that had
"nothing at all to do with smoking." He said the tobacco companies never
pressured the university or tried to shape its work in any way.
"I think they were enthralled with the research that was being done, though
that may sound corny to you," said Dr. Lacy.
Another beneficiary of the tobacco largesse was Gary L. Huber, who received
funds from the industry for 25 years of work at Harvard University, the
University of Kentucky, and the University of Texas Health Center at Tyler.
In a January 1989 letter released by the House panel, a lawyer for Shook,
Hardy, & Bacon, the Kansas City, Mo., firm that coordinated the
special-projects fund, proposed that it cover as much as half of Dr.
Huber's salary to free him to do a massive review of existing studies on
tobacco.
"Purchase of Dr. Huber's time in this manner will enable him to spend more
time selecting and analyzing the most significant scientific literature for
our use," the letter said. It added that his work would prove "especially
useful" in developing "state-of-knowledge arguments," presumably for use in
liability trials.
Dr. Huber and officials of the Texas health center said they were wary of
accepting money from the tobacco companies and were perplexed about the
lawyers' role. But they secured promises that "we were going to publish our
information freely and openly," said Richard Kronenberg, executive
associate director for clinical affairs at the health center.
Although some of Dr. Huber's work questioned the dangers of tobacco, both
he and Dr. Kronenberg said that over the years he was involved with the
tobacco companies, they had seen no evidence that the companies ever tried
to influence their work or suppress negative reports.
But last year, lawyers for states seeking to sue the tobacco companies
showed Dr. Huber internal tobacco-company documents that convinced him he
had been duped. One document said the companies had sponsored his work at
Harvard as a way of improving "public relations, political relations,
position for litigation, etc." Dr. Huber said the documents also made clear
to him that the tobacco industry had, by withholding damaging information
about its products, "delayed scientific progress by 10 to 15 years."
He decided to testify against the tobacco companies in litigation brought
by state officials in Texas. The companies have sought to suppress his
testimony, citing the fact that the work he did was covered by
attorney-client privilege. A judge will rule on that question soon.
Dr. Kronenberg said that the Texas center would never enter into such an
arrangement today, and no longer accepts tobacco money. "It gets to the
heart of who should support research, and what kinds of research money
should an academic institution take," he said. "Do you take from the
pharmaceutical industry but not tobacco? At this point, I'd say Yes,
because the tobacco industry has shown itself to be corrupt from the
standpoint of manipulating academic institutions and researchers."
Researchers and experts on scientific ethics say deciding whether to accept
tobacco money is one thing; much harder, they say, is resolving issues
raised by Mr. Dingell in a letter he wrote to accompany the recently
published tobacco documents: Do researchers tell their institutions enough
about the "nature of their financial support?" Do universities exert enough
oversight over the nature of the research their scientists conduct?
Such questions are crucial at a time of dwindling federal support for
research, said Marcel C. La Follette, a professor of international
science-and-technology policy at George Washington University. "We can't
afford" to stop accepting private research money, she said, "but it's very
important for universities to attack this issue of how funding can be
accepted, how researchers' independence and integrity can be protected
within the institution."
More disclosure by researchers to their institutions, and more oversight of
researchers by the institutions, will help, said Paul J. Friedman, a
professor of radiology at the University of California at San Diego. "But
the protections won't come easily, because when you close one loophole,
somebody finds another.
"To paraphrase, the price of honest research is eternal vigilance."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Colleges Eye Restrictions On Promotions By Brewing Companies ('The Chronicle
Of Higher Education' Reports Administrators On Campuses Across The US
Are Reconsidering Lucrative Relationships Between Their Athletic Departments
And The Alcoholic-Beverage Industry)
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 12:45:44 -0500
Subject: MN: US: Colleges Eye Restrictions on Promotions by Brewing Companies
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family
Source: The Chronicle of Higher Education
Section: Athletics Page: A57
Author: Jim Naughton. Julianne Basinger contributed to this article.
Pubdate: January 9, 1998
Contact: editor@chronicle.com
Website: http://chronicle.com
COLLEGES EYE RESTRICTIONS ON PROMOTIONS BY BREWING COMPANIES
But Lucrative Advertising On Televised Games Is Unlikely To Be Stopped
When McKinley Boston was director of men's athletics at the University of
Minnesota-Twin Cities in 1994, he negotiated a contract with the Miller
Brewing Company that allowed the brewer to install signs in the
university's athletics arenas and to use Minnesota's mascot, the Golden
Gopher, in the company's advertising.
That contract, worth $150,000, expired in June. This past fall, the
university's athletics department asked Dr. Boston, who is now
vice-president for student development and intercollegiate athletics of the
university system, about signing a similar contract, worth $225,000, with a
different brewer.
This time, he said No.
"Being in a new position, I was able to get a big-picture view of what was
happening," says Dr. Boston, who announced his decision last month. Over
the fall, that picture included the alcohol-related deaths of students at
the Louisiana State University and the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology; the need for 14 students from the Twin Cities campus to enter
alcohol-rehabilitation programs; and an increase in alcohol-related
assaults on that campus.
"I just personally felt like it was the right thing to do," Dr. Boston says
of his decision. "I just felt like we were sending students a mixed message."
Because the university's negotiations with the Minnesota Brewing Company
were almost complete, however, he chose not to leave the brewer in the
lurch, and recommended shortening the deal to one year instead of three.
The decision still must be approved by Mark G. Yudof, the system's president.
Administrators in Minnesota are not the only ones rethinking the
relationship between college athletics programs and the alcoholic-beverage
industry.
Last fall, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill joined Baylor
and Brigham Young Universities in the small group of those that refuse
alcohol advertising in their arenas and on radio broadcasts of games.
In November, California State University at Fresno removed from its arena
an inflatable silver tunnel that resembled a can of Coors Silver Bullet
beer after a player had left the men's basketball team to deal with a
substance-abuse problem.
And last month, the Big Ten and Pacific-10 Conferences failed in an effort
to persuade the city of Pasadena not to sell beer at the Rose Bowl.
"I think it is unnecessary and inappropriate for institutions of higher
learning to lend themselves to this kind of advertising, especially given
the kinds of alcohol-abuse problems that most campuses are facing," says
William DeJong, director of the Higher Education Center for Alcohol and
Other Drug Prevention.
Jeff Becker, vice-president for alcohol issues at the Beer Institute, a
lobbying organization sponsored by the industry, says that beer companies
abide by a strict marketing code, and that people like Dr. Boston are
"making a connection between beer signs and alcohol abuse that doesn't exist."
The National Collegiate Athletic Association does not collect information
on its members' relationships with the beer and wine industries. Frank D.
Uryasz, the N.C.A.A.'s director of sports sciences, says most colleges do
not sell beer or wine in their athletics facilities. "But when a college is
using an arena off-campus, then you are going to see beer sales," he adds.
Postseason football games are a case in point. According to Dave Jacobs,
general manager of the Rose Bowl Operating Committee, beer is sold at 15 of
the 16 bowl games recognized by the N.C.A.A. Only the Fiesta Bowl, which is
held on the campus of Arizona State University, does not sell beer. More
than 103,000 fans attended the 1997 Rose Bowl, and purchased about 30,000
beers.
Many institutions that do not sell beer at their games have a commercial
relationship with a brewing company or a local distributor, says Wally
Renfro, director of public affairs for the N.C.A.A. Typically, these
relationships involve arena advertising, but at Fresno, Miller Lite has
sponsored a men's basketball game this season, and the team's coach, Jerry
Tarkanian, appears in advertisements for Budweiser. The university will not
say how much money it receives from the arrangement, in which the beer
company receives extra advertising and a high profile in the program.
Elise Lenox, director of alcohol-abuse prevention at Stanford University,
says she understands the pressure on athletics directors to increase their
budgets. "We are fortunate to have Pepsi as a major sponsor, and that is
the only sign you see on our scoreboard," she says. "But I think that for
schools that aren't well-resourced, it is very tempting to accept the
industry's money."
The prevalence of beer advertising aimed at college students, she argues,
creates "the impression that everyone is drinking all the time," and leads
some students to assume that if they are not drinking alcoholic beverages,
they are missing an important part of collegiate social life.
But Jason Giebel, a junior majoring in advertising at the University of
Minnesota, disagrees. "At our age, we don't get intrigued to try everything
we see," he says. "Just seeing a sign for a beer is not going to make you
want to take a drink."
In 1989, Richard D. Schultz, who was then executive director of the
N.C.A.A., met stiff resistance, both from within the association and
without, when he attempted to reduce the visibility of alcohol advertising
in college athletics.
"The beer companies were major advertisers for some of our members, and we
got a lot of pressure from breweries other than those that sponsored the
telecasts," says Mr. Schultz, who is now president of the U.S. Olympic
Committee.
He succeeded in persuading the membership and the television networks to
lower the proportion of beer-and-wine advertising to one minute per hour on
telecasts of N.C.A.A. championships; restricting the space devoted to beer
and wine in the programs and scorecards for N.C.A.A. championships to 14
per cent; and prohibiting beer companies from sponsoring championships.
"That was as far as we could go," he says, "because of the networks.
"They had concerns about their contracts with advertisers, and their sales,
and certain First Amendment rights that they believed everybody had."
CBS did not respond to telephone calls. Ronnie Faust, director of corporate
communications at ESPN, which also televises N.C.A.A. championships, says
the network does not "divulge financial figures."
Mr. Schultz left the N.C.A.A. in 1993, and the issue has not been pursued
by his successor, Cedric W. Dempsey.
The restrictions have had little impact on the amount of alcohol
advertising on college-sports broadcasts, because the rights to
regular-season games are controlled not by the N.C.A.A., but by individual
conferences, most of which have no restrictions on such advertising.
Because the beer industry is perhaps the biggest commercial supporter of
college athletics, the development of restrictions is unlikely, says Joel
Nielsen, associate athletics director at Wake Forest University.
"For the networks to turn them away, that would be cutting their own
throats," he says. "And for the conferences to request it would be
shortsighted. Your rights fees would go way down."
Without some kind of collective action, however, Ms. Lenox of Stanford says
it will be difficult for individual institutions to break "this link that
has been established through the years between sports -- collegiate and
professional -- and beer."
A bill sponsored by U.S. Representative Joseph P. Kennedy II, a
Massachusetts Democrat, would restrict the content of alcohol advertising
between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Its aim is to minimize children's exposure to
cartoon-like advertising characters such as the Bud-Light penguin and the
Budweiser frogs. The measure is currently before the House Commerce
Committee, and an aide to the Congressman says its prospects are "not
particularly bright."
Nor is the issue on the N.C.A.A.'s agenda. "I find it hard to imagine that
our membership would begin to develop legislation that on a national basis
would restrict the members in their relationship with advertisers," says
Mr. Renfro of the N.C.A.A.
That pleases Mr. Becker, of the Beer Institute. "If you had to choose the
best audience in the world for a beer advertiser, it is 21-to-34-year-old
men who participate in sports and are avid sports fans," he says.
The fit with the college-football audience, he says, is "hand in glove."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Week Online With DRCNet, Issue Number 24 (Weekly News
From The Drug Reform Coordination Network)
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 19:52:00 EST
Sender: drc-natl@drcnet.org
From: DRCNet
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: The Week Online with DRCNet, Issue #24
THE WEEK ONLINE WITH DRCNet
January 9, 1998 -- ISSUE #24
( To subscribe to this list visit
http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html or
http://www.stopthedrugwar.org.)
We've extended our year-end offer for free copies of
Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Facts -- just donate $30 or more
to DRCNet, and we'll send you a copy of the book, worth
$12.95, plus a year's membership worth $25. Send your
checks to: DRCNet, 2000 P St., NW, Suite 615, Washington,
DC 20036, or use our secure credit card form at
http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. A LOOK AHEAD AT 1998
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#look
2. WAR ON PATIENTS TO ESCALATE: Federal Government
Announces Plan to Raid Cannabis Buyers' Clubs
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#cbc
3. DRCNET EXCLUSIVE: BRITISH EURO-MP's ORDERED BY BLAIR TO
VOTE AGAINST COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR E.U. DRUG
POLICY
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#eu
4. ANN LANDERS, ANTHONY LEWIS TRASH DRUG WAR: DRCNet
subscribers are urged to respond!
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#annlanders
5. CANDLE CORRECTION
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#candle
6. GIULIANI PLEDGES A "DRUG FREE NEW YORK"
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#giuliani
7. HEROIN IN NEW ENGLAND - CHEAPER, PURER THAN EVER
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#heroin
8. FEDERAL ANTI-DRUG AD CAMPAIGN TO HIT AIRWAVES
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#airwaves
9. AMERICA "WORKS WITH" HER INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#partners
10. U.S. COUNTERNARCOTICS BASE TO REPLACE AIR FORCE BASE
WHEN PANAMA CANAL IS TURNED OVER
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#panama
11. SIGNATURE DRIVE UNDERWAY FOR INDUSTRIAL HEMP BALLOT
INITIATIVE IN CALIFORNIA
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#hempinit
12. UK: HOME SECRETARY'S SON FOUND DEALING CANNABIS,
LEGALIZATION DEBATE RAGES
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#straw
13. AUSTRALIAN COPS: "POLICING IS NOT THE ANSWER"
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#australia
14. "SMOKE A JOINT, LOSE A LIMB?": Pending Mississippi Bill
Threatens Dismemberment For Convicted Drug Violators
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#limb
15. STUDENT SUSPENSION OVERTURNED
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#advil
16. JURY NULLIFICATION BALLOT INITIATIVE IN CALIFORNIA
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#jury
17. JOB OPPORTUNITY AT DPF
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#job
18. EDITORIAL: A "DRUG FREE NEW YORK"? C'MON RUDY.
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/1-9.html#editorial
================
1. A LOOK AHEAD AT 1998
Hello again, and Happy New Year to all of our friends and
subscribers. Thanks to everyone who took the time to e-mail
their holiday wishes to us. Please know that although many
of you told us how happy you were to have us around, we are
even happier to have you out there, writing letters, sending
us your local stories and generally raising your voices
against this disastrous War.
While 1997 was certainly an exciting year for the reform
movement, it is beginning to look as if 1998 will turn out
to be THE year that the war becomes an albatross hanging
around the necks of its supporters. Mandatory minimum
sentences, medical marijuana and needle exchange all figure
to see positive movement at both the state and federal
levels this year in the US, and cannabis legalization will
be one of the major issues in Europe over the next twelve
months.
In June, the United Nations will be holding its first-ever
Special Session of the General Assembly on the issue of
narcotics. This will be an event which will capture the
world stage, and plans are already in the works for a
weekend of protest events to take place around the globe to
coincide with the opening of the session. DRCNet will be
participating in a leadership role in those plans, and will
be providing ongoing info on the developments to this list.
So stay tuned.
In November, voters in a number of states will be voting on
drug policy-related ballot measures. This will provide an
opportunity not only to change laws, but to widen the debate
on the national stage. Our subscribers have already
contributed mightily to the growth of that debate, and, with
aggressive plans getting underway to promote this service
and bring in thousands of new subscribers, that impact will
increase exponentially this year.
So stay tuned, and stay active. The tide has turned and
momentum is now in our favor. With the drug warriors
certain to furiously defend the faltering regime to which
their stars are hitched, it is more important than ever to
make our case, and to make it well. Keep in mind that one
day your children or grandchildren will learn in school
about this sad chapter in the history of American and global
justice and compassion, and you will be able to tell them
with well-deserved pride that you were a part of the
solution. And that will be a message which will serve them
well.
Adam and Dave
================
2. WAR ON PATIENTS TO ESCALATE: Federal Government
Announces Plan to Raid Cannabis Buyers' Clubs
The following is a press release from the Marijuana Policy
Project, http://www.mpp.org:
San Francisco -- Today the U.S. Department of Justice
announced its plan to shut down the dozens of not-for-profit
medicinal marijuana dispensaries, known as Cannabis Buyers'
Clubs (CBCs), throughout California. CBC workers who refuse
to comply will be arrested.
"The Clinton administration plans to subvert the will of
California voters by arresting the courageous caregivers who
help seriously ill patients obtain medicinal marijuana,"
said Chuck Thomas, director of communications for the
Washington, DC-based Marijuana Policy Project. "Ironically,
CBCs would not even be needed if the federal government
would allow licensed pharmacies to distribute medicinal
marijuana."
Proposition 215, passed by California voters in November
1996, calls on the "federal and state governments to
implement a plan to provide for the safe and affordable
distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need."
While state and federal prosecutors have been working to
subvert Proposition 215, numerous city and county
governments throughout California have established
regulations to allow tightly controlled CBCs to operate.
"Local governments have passed laws to allow CBCs to give
patients a safe, affordable supply of marijuana," said the
MPP's Chuck Thomas. "CBCs undercut organized crime --
patients no longer need to buy their medicine from drug
dealers on street corners. How dare the cruel, power-hungry
federal government interfere with local laws that work?
This 'Washington-knows-best' attitude results in drug
policies that do nothing but harm."
When the government starts raiding CBCs, the Marijuana
Policy Project hopes that the media will resist the urge to
focus on the one or two flamboyant CBCs. The public should
know that the vast majority are professional, well-
regulated, and tightly controlled.
(Stay-tuned to the DRCNet rapid-response-team for info on
how to help with this situation.)
================
3. DRCNET EXCLUSIVE: BRITISH EURO-MP's ORDERED BY BLAIR TO
VOTE AGAINST COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR E.U. DRUG
POLICY
DRCNet has learned, from sources within the European
Parliament, that all 60 of British Labour's EP members have
received direct orders from 10 Downing Street to vote
against the adoption of the recommendations contained in the
report prepared by the EU Parliamentary Commission on Drugs.
The report's recommendations included the adoption of a
harm-reduction approach to the use of drugs and the
decriminalization of possession of cannabis, among other
things. You can read the report online at
http://www.drugtext.nl/eu/drugseu.html. (DrugText is
maintained by DRCNet advisory board member Mario Lap, our
source for this exclusive.)
The vote, which is tentatively scheduled for Monday, January
12, comes at a time when the debate over the legal status of
cannabis has reached a furious boil in the UK. (See story
below.)
In addition, the Blair government has apparently ordered the
60 to vote in support of Swiss Amendments to the report
which would reaffirm a strict Prohibitionist stance. These
amendments will be available online soon, and DRCNet will
keep you updated.
================
4. ANN LANDERS, ANTHONY LEWIS TRASH DRUG WAR: DRCNet
subscribers are urged to respond!
1998 has just begun and already it is becoming apparent that
this will be the year when the Drug War loses its sacrosanct
status as a policy above question in respectable circles.
In the past two weeks, both Ann Landers, the scion of
sensible heartland values, and Anthony Lewis, nationally
syndicated columnist, have taken the opportunity to lambaste
America's repressive and counter-productive drug policy.
Ms. Landers' criticisms were leveled in, of all places, her
annual Christmas column, in which she said, in part:
"The 'war on drugs' has turned out to be a colossal failure.
The number of homicides is staggering. Guns and knives are
standard equipment among teenagers.... While alcohol is
still the most abused drug of all, marijuana and stronger
substances like crack cocaine and heroin are common-place in
junior and senior high schools. The dropout rate is
appalling. Why should a kid stay in school when he can get
rich dealing drugs? This is the message that too many young
people are getting."
Ms. Landers' brave stance presents an enormous opportunity
to educate millions of people, both in the US and abroad,
who are concerned about "drugs" but who have not given a
thought to the wisdom of Prohibition. It is imperative that
she hear from us, and that we make it clear that drug policy
reform is vital to both the health of nations and the well-
being of children. Contact information (including e-mail)
for Ms. Landers is included below.
Anthony Lewis, in his column of Monday, January 5,
highlighted Ethan Nadelmann's recent piece in Foreign
Affairs magazine. Lewis' piece ran in papers across the
country, including The New York Times, the Boston Globe, and
the International Herald-Tribune.
Lewis' column is titled "The Noble Experiment" (a reference
to America's failed alcohol prohibition) and it closes with
the following paragraph: "A good many Americans, including
police chiefs and doctors, believe that it is time for a
change in our failed drug policy. It is our political
leaders who are afraid to change. It will take someone with
the courage to say that the emperor has no clothes - someone
like Senator John McCain - to end our second, disastrous
noble experiment."
We at DRCNet urge all of you to take a moment to send a note
to Ms. Landers, papers which carried the Lewis column, and
to Senator McCain (to urge that he take Mr. Lewis' advice
and stand up on the issue.)
CONTACT INFO: You can send letters to Ann Landers, c/o
Chicago Tribune, 435 North Michigan Avenue, P.O. Box 11562,
Chicago, IL 60611.
Reaction to the Anthony Lewis piece can be sent to your
local paper, if it was carried, or else e-mail to
letters@nytimes.com.
Senator John McCain can be contacted at 241 Russell Senate
Office Building, Washington, DC 20510,
senator_mccain@mccain.senate.gov.
You can read Ethan Nadelmann's article from Foreign Affairs
at http://www.lindesmith.org/library/foreigna.html
================
5. CANDLE CORRECTION
In issue #23 of The Week Online, we told you about the
"Light in the Window" campaign being promoted by the
November Coalition, designed to draw attention to the
hundreds of thousands of non-violent drug offenders who are
in prison. However, we neglected to acknowledge the person
and organization who originated it: Richard J. Schimelfenig
of the Delaware Cannabis Society and Delaware NORML. The
idea seems to be catching on and spreading. Please visit
the original light in the window web site at
http://hempman.home.mindspring.com/Families.html.
================
6. GUILIANI PLEDGES A "DRUG FREE NEW YORK"
On January 1, former federal prosecutor Rudolph Giuliani
took the oath of office to begin his second and final term
as Mayor of New York City. As expected, drugs were high on
his list of priorities.
"Four years from now, when the next mayor of New York City
stands here, I want the newspapers and the magazines around
the nation to be writing about how New York City led America
to a drug-free America."
Giuliani promised to hire an additional 1,600 cops, and to
get more aggressive against the drug trade. These promises
come on the heels of a Guiliani initiative to crack down on
drug sales within Washington Square Park, famous centerpiece
of Manhattan's Greenwich Village. Over the past several
weeks, both buy-and-bust and sell-and-bust operations have
been run in the park, which encompasses two square blocks.
Aaron Wilson of the Partnership for Responsible Drug
Information, a New York-based organization promoting a
dialogue on drug policy, told The Week Online, "The
Washington Square Park initiative demonstrates, in
microcosm, the problems with enforcement-based policies.
The dealers are still around the park, but now they're on
the side streets, where people live. It's the classic push-
down, pop-up problem. You can install surveillance cameras,
as Giuliani is already doing, and chase the trade around,
but it doesn't go away, it just moves." Wilson added, "And
the entire strategy ignores the fact that most of the drug
trade in New York is conducted indoors, with beepers and
home delivery, or through networks of friends. Guiliani's
road to a 'drug-free New York' will be littered with the
lives of thousands more young African Americans and Latinos,
which is not the way that rational people should want to
ring in the new millennium."
================
7. HEROIN IN NEW ENGLAND - CHEAPER, PURER THAN EVER
On December 31, Reuters News Service reported that New
England is now the fastest-growing US market for Colombian
heroin. George Festa, DEA special agent in charge of New
England told Reuters "The purity of the product is what
really concerns us. We've made street buys with purity of
95%, even 97%."
That level of purity simply dwarfs the potency of heroin
available in the past. This trend has had two major
effects. The first is that heroin can now be snorted or
smoked, rather than injected, which tends to cut down on the
sharing of syringes, and thus the spread of AIDS. The other
side, however, is that the ability to use heroin without
injecting it could lure new users who would not have tried
the drug otherwise. Reuters reports that bags of heroin are
available on the streets of Boston for as little as $4. The
skyrocketing purity, the low price, and the fact that large
quantities of Colombian heroin are making it all the way up
to New England is a striking indication of just how
ineffective the strategies of interdiction and enforcement
have been in controlling the black market.
George Kenney, a long-time harm-reduction advocate now
working with Community of Color Outreach in Roxbury
Massachusetts, told The Week Online, "There's certainly no
shortage of heroin on the streets up here, and they're
right, it is cheap. The state health department has finally
started a pilot needle exchange program, and it seems to be
going well, but its not enough to address the problem.
There are so many sea ports up here, its just impossible to
keep the stuff out. We need to get less punitive, and start
spending more time thinking about how to reach people where
they are, instead of threatening them and chasing them back
into the shadows, so that we can help them to move into
recovery, or at least help them to stabilize their lives so
that they can prepare to make the decision to get clean."
================
8. FEDERAL ANTI-DRUG AD CAMPAIGN TO HIT AIRWAVES
This week will, or should, mark the beginning of the Federal
Government/Partnership for a Drug Free America mass media
campaign. The campaign, which will combine up to
$195,000,000 of taxpayers' money with matching donations
from business and media entities, will kick off in twelve
test cities, er, soon. The campaign was originally
scheduled to begin last October, and was later put off until
December.
The campaign will feature ads on TV and radio, as well as an
Internet presence, which has yet to be formally outlined.
Commenting on the Internet portion of the plan, Drug Czar
Barry McCaffrey told CNN's Sunday Morning, "we're going to
go on the Net and talk to children and their parents about
why drugs will kill you."
In the past, the Partnership's ads have been criticized for
being based on hysteria, rather than on facts, and that
these tactics tend to lead kids to disregard otherwise
important information on the real dangers of specific
substances.
Dr. Joel Brown, Director of the Center for Educational
research and Development, and author of "In Their Own Words"
as study of California's school-based anti-drug program,
told The Week Online, "As a scientist, there is no evidence
that media campaigns prevent anyone from using drugs. What
we need to do is to begin the process of providing help to
the kids that need it, and to provide real, factual
information about these substances so that we can avoid the
tragedies which come from a lack of knowledge."
Asked, by CNN's Sunday Morning whether he still believes in
interdiction, McCaffrey answered that "you still have to
work with our international partners," but "that's going to
be a supporting aspect of a prevention, treatment strategy."
DRCNet would note that of the more than $17 Billion in 1997
federal anti-drug spending, less than one third was
earmarked for education, prevention and treatment combined.
You can find Dr. Brown's study, "In Their Own Voices" on the
Lindesmith Center web site, at http://www.lindesmith.org.
================
9. AMERICA "WORKS WITH" HER INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS
This Week, the San Francisco Chronicle reports on the work
of Father Leonidas Moreno, a Catholic priest in the town of
Pavarando, in northwestern Colombia. Pavarando has recently
become a virtual refugee camp, housing as many as 10,000
people who have fled the southern part of the country to
escape violence and death at the hands of paramilitary
groups and aerial bombardments by the Colombian army in the
province of Riosucio.
The Center for Research and Popular Education told The
Chronicle that a campaign, begun in mid-December by
paramilitary groups, aims to "cleanse" the Riosucio region
of political insurgents and their alleged supporters, and
has led to the massacre of dozens of peasants.
It is well-known, though rarely admitted, that the
paramilitary groups are aligned with elements in Colombia's
military. It is also widely understood that these groups
perform much of the "dirty work" of a military that has
gotten a great deal of international attention due to its
abominable record on human rights. Late last year, the
Clinton Administration agreed to provide $150 million
dollars in military aid and equipment to Colombia to support
its "anti-narcotics" efforts in the southern half of the
country. The real purposes for which the equipment would be
used was muddled by Colombian officials however who told the
press that it was free to use it however it saw fit within
the southern, rebel-controlled half of the country.
According to a Human Rights Watch report cited in the
Chronicle article, paramilitary groups grew and multiplied
soon after the US government sent a team of CIA and US
Military "advisors" to Colombia to improve the "efficiency
and effectiveness" of their military. The report also notes
that this cooperation between the US advisors and the
Colombian military "provided a blueprint for... a secret
network that relied on paramilitaries not only for
intelligence but to carry out murder."
The brutality of these groups is also well-documented, with
innumerable reports of the killing, often by machete, of
women and children, as well as live dismemberments.
Coletta Youngers of the Washington Office on Latin America
spoke with The Week Online about the situation in Colombia.
"The paramilitary groups originally emerged out of an
alliance between the Colombian military and the landowning
and economic elites, who set up what were then known as
Vigilantes. Major drug traffickers, of course, represent a
portion of those elites. The groups were legal, and
operated in outright cooperation with the military until the
late 1980's when they were outlawed. Ties to the military
remained strong after that, although those relationships
vary from region to region."
"As to the military aid that the US recently promised to
Colombia, that aid has been delivered only to the police,
navy and air force. The aid which has been earmarked for
the army has been held up because under the Leahy bill, the
US government is prohibited by law from providing assistance
to individual military units which have been responsible for
human rights violations and which have not been held
accountable by trial. Due to the recent spate of massacres
in the southern, coca-growing region of the country, they
are still searching for a unit of the Colombian army which
would be eligible under this provision."
You can visit the web site of the Washington Office on Latin
America at http://www.wola.org. Human Rights Watch has a
site at http://www.hrw.org.
================
10. U.S. COUNTERNARCOTICS BASE TO REPLACE AIR FORCE BASE
WHEN PANAMA CANAL IS TURNED OVER
On December 22, Panamanian officials announced that
negotiations had been completed which would turn Howard Air
Force base into a "multi-national" anti-narcotics center
rather than have it revert to Panamanian control when the
canal is turned over in 1999. 2,000 US troops will be
stationed at the base.
================
11. SIGNATURE DRIVE UNDERWAY FOR INDUSTRIAL HEMP BALLOT
INITIATIVE IN CALIFORNIA
Signatures are now being collected throughout the state of
California for a 1998 ballot initiative which would legalize
the cultivation of hemp for industrial purposes in that
state. 433,269 valid signatures will be required to qualify
the initiative for the ballot in November of '98. The
initiative was proposed by Sam H. Clauder II.
For more information, or to send a donation, contact:
Sam H. Clauder II cdpr@gte.net
Alan Mason grassroots@worldnet.att.net
Clifford Schaffer schaffer@smartlink.net
NOTE: DRCNet will let you know as soon as the language of
the initiative is available on the net.
================
12. UK: HOME SECRETARY'S SON FOUND DEALING CANNABIS,
LEGALIZATION DEBATE RAGES
For nearly two weeks, the question was the talk of Britain:
"Who was the prominent cabinet minister whose son was caught
dealing cannabis to an investigative journalist?" British
law forbids the publication of the names of minors accused
of crimes, and so a court order had been issued which
effectively banned the naming of the government official.
But in an age of electronic communications, governments are
finding that of all prohibitions, the prohibition of
information is hardest of all to enforce. In fact, by the
time the court order was lifted, and it was revealed in the
British press that the minister in question was none other
that drug warrior Home Secretary Jack Straw, there was
barely a soul in England who had not already heard the news.
Straw's 17 year-old son allegedly sold approximately $17
worth of cannabis to a reporter who was following up on a
tip she had received concerning the young man's activities.
The reporter subsequently went to local police to turn over
the small bag of marijuana, and to tell them how she had
gotten it. She was immediately arrested for possession. At
this time, neither the youth nor the reporter are expected
to face more than a stern warning from the magistrate.
But the implications of the incident have gone much deeper
than the legal outcome of the case. Britain, awash in a
debate over the legal status of cannabis ever since the
Independent on Sunday newspaper began its highly publicized,
and widely supported legalization campaign in September, is
now in the throes of a raging national argument. Straw,
whose office is ultimately responsible for drug control
policy in Britain, had already been at the center of the
storm with his repeated admonitions that legalization of
cannabis was simply out of the question, and assurances that
it would not happen. Recent events have not made his job as
PM Tony Blair's drug war mouthpiece any easier.
Straw will get to share some of the burden now, however, as
this week marked the official beginning of the term of the
UK's first Drug Czar, Jack Hellawell. Hellawell, along with
Straw, has been buffeted in recent months with calls for a
Royal Commission to study the issue. True to the
prohibitionist M.O. however, they have steadfastly refused
to consider naming a commission, even as they claim that
they "welcome debate". Many members of Parliament in
England, including several from Blair's Labour Party, have
called for a change in the law. And despite the wishes of
the ruling party, and prohibitionists across England, that
call seems to be getting louder.
A recent call-in poll by The People newspaper found 83% of
respondents in favor decriminalization. And while polls of
that type are notoriously unscientific, the result at least
indicates that proponents of change are more actively
concerned with the issue than their opponents. Combined
with the stunning recent recommendations out of the French
Ministry of Health conference on drug policy, as well as the
report by the European Union Parliament's committee on drug
policy and other related events on the Continent, the issue,
and the call for reform, is not going to go away anytime
soon. We'll keep you posted.
================
13. AUSTRALIAN COPS, "POLICING IS NOT THE ANSWER"
On Jan. 2, the Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence, a
group made up of many of the nation's chiefs of police,
released a stunning report on the prospects (or, rather, the
lack thereof) for enforcement to have an impact on the
problems associated with drugs. The report notes that
despite vastly increased spending, law enforcement has
failed to make a dent in either supply or demand, and
indicates that upholding the law is in many cases harmful
and counterproductive. "On one hand, there is the public
expectation that they (police officers) will uphold the law
and proceed against drug offenders," the report says, "on
the other hand, it is widely recognized that street-level
policing can actually lead to harm to both drug users and
society."
The report notes that cannabis laws, and their enforcement,
may well have the effect of pushing users toward the
purchase and use of harder drugs, and points out that
efforts targeting drug dealers had been singularly
ineffective. It goes on to cite the steady increase in
availability, and decline in price of drugs on the street as
just one indicator of the failure of enforcement as a tool
of drug policy. The report comes several months after the
federal government cancelled, at the last minute, a proposed
experiment in heroin maintenance modeled on the successful
Swiss trials. That decision brought much condemnation from
both inside and outside the government. Australian press
reports at the time claimed that the US State Department had
made substantive back-room threats against Australia's legal
opiate industry if the trials were held.
To find out more about the reform movement in Australia,
visit the web site of Family and Friends for Drug Policy
Reform at http://www.wps.com.au/druglawreform/.
================
14. "SMOKE A JOINT, LOSE A LIMB?": Pending Mississippi Bill
Threatens Dismemberment For Convicted Drug Violators
(This story reprinted with permission of the NORML
Foundation, http://www.norml.org).
Jan. 8, 1998, Jackson, MS: Persons found guilty of
possessing marijuana in Mississippi could face the removal
of a limb if proposed legislation becomes law. House Bill
196, introduced by Rep. Bobby Moak (R-Lincoln County),
authorizes "The removal of a body part in lieu of other
sentences imposed by the court for violations of the
Controlled Substances Law."
NORML Executive Director R. Keith Stroup called the measure
"political posturing at its most extreme. This is a truly
barbaric proposal that shocks the conscience." Moak told
reporters that he introduced the legislation because he felt
the state wasn't doing enough to combat drug use. Moak
admits, however, that the measure has slim chances of
passing. Provisions in the bill mandate that the convicted
person and the court "must agree on which body part shall be
removed."
================
15. STUDENT SUSPENSION OVERTURNED
-Peter Kempner for DRCNet
On Jan. 7, 1998 the Fairfax County Virginia School Board
reversed itself and rescinded the five-day suspension, and a
thirty-day suspension from extracurricular activites, of a
twelve year-old student on charges of possession of drugs.
The suspension, originally imposed under the school's "zero-
tolerance" policy, had so angered the girl's family that
they had retained an attorney to fight it. In the end, the
charges were dropped at a hearing presided over by Don P.
Sheldon the school districts Area I superintendent. In his
decision Sheldon wrote "Because of her otherwise unblemished
disciplinary record, her good academic record, and the
particular facts involved, I have decided to clear Nicole of
this charge and not impose any disciplinary action." The
offending substance? Advil.
The school policy under which the suspension was originally
imposed makes no differentiation between illegal drugs such
and legal medications. In addition, Regulation 2102.3,
which describes the types of "nonprescription drug not
authorized as medication" includes "aspirin, Tylenol,
gargles, ear drops, eye washes, ointments, Pepto-Bismol,
cough suppressants and the like." The attorney for the
student told the Washington Post, "We're not disputing the
regulation in regard to illegal drugs, or even prescription
medications ... We're talking about the fact that school
officials are interpreting the policy to cover all kinds of
.. products. From that standpoint, a student could never
know what is right or wrong."
The incident which brought on the charges took place on a
school bus when another girl asked the student whether she
had something for a headache. The student pulled a small
bottle of Advil from her bag, but remembering school policy
against handing out medications, decided not to give the
pills to her schoolmate. It was too late, however, as the
bus driver had seen the bottle and promptly reported it to
school authorities.
(Read about similar incidents and other youth issues in
issue #1 of Highlights from the Week Online, at
http://www.drcnet.org/highlights/highlights1.html#youth.)
================
16. JURY NULLIFICATION BALLOT INITIATIVE IN CALIFORNIA
-Peter Kempner for DRCNet
This week in Buena Park California, Reverend Wiley Drake of
the First Southern Baptist Church announced plans to launch
a ballot drive to place on the ballot an initiative aimed at
giving jurors the option to reject unjust laws. The measure,
if passed, would require judges to instruct jurors that they
have the right "to acquit the defendant, or find him/her not
liable for damages" if they, the jury, find that a law is
unjust or that the application of it would be unjust.
Drake and the First Southern Baptist Church were each found
guilty in July 1997 of four misdemeanor counts of violating
city laws by housing the homeless at the church. The pastor
claims that jurors on the case later apologized "for their
misguided conviction" in the case.
This is not the first time that the doctrine of "jury
nullification" has been touted as a citizen-based solution
to fighting unjust laws. Law school professor Paul Butler
from the George Washington University Law School has been
teaching his students jury nullification for years as a way
to fight unjust drug laws which he feels disproportionately
target African Americans and other minorities. Many critics
of jury nullification say that if passed this initiative
would be found unconstitutional because it violates a
person's right to equal protection under the law.
================
17. JOB OPPORTUNITY
Leading drug policy reform organization seeks highly skilled
master's-level public policy director. Must understand
major reform issues: medical marijuana, pain control, asset
forfeiture, mandatory minimums. Will build coalitions,
develop action strategies and coordinate advocacy efforts
with new allies to advance shared agenda. Will prepare
testimony and policy papers. Exceptional communication
skills, familiarity with public health and criminal justice
issues essential. Send resume and salary requirements to:
Public Policy Search, Drug Policy Foundation, 4455
Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite B-500, Washington, DC 20008-
2328. (A more lengthy description of the position will be
made available on the DRCNet web site next week.)
================
18. EDITORIAL: A "DRUG FREE NEW YORK"? C'MON RUDY.
It was a bitter cold New Year's Day in New York City, and
Rudolph Giuliani, former US Attorney, had just taken the
oath of office to officially begin his second, and by law
his final term as mayor. His inaugural speech, delivered to
a group of 5,000 shivering but loyal supporters, was vintage
Rudy.
In it, Giuliani took much of the credit for the 30%
reduction in crime during 1997. That the reduction in crime
mirrored a stunning national trend, or that much of it can
be explained by factors which are out of the control of
politicians, were not mentioned. This came as no surprise,
however, as Giuliani has amassed such a reputation for
expansive self-evaluation that New York Magazine is
currently running an ad campaign which describes their
publication as "perhaps the only good thing in New York for
which Rudy hasn't taken credit." (Last month a state court
threw out Giuliani's lawsuit against the magazine for the
unauthorized use of his name.)
But perhaps the statement which showed the greatest level of
hubris (in New York we call it "chutzpa") was not one in
which Giuliani took credit for something he had done, but
one in which he anticipated credit for something he plans to
do. Standing in his suit jacket on that bitterly cold
podium, Rudy said (with a straight face, we're told) "Four
years from now, when the next mayor of New York City stands
here, I want the newspapers and magazines around the nation
to be writing about how New York City led America to a Drug-
Free America." As a first step toward his planned
annointment as the St. Patrick of the Drug War, Giuliani
plans to hire 1,600 additional cops.
To be sure, Rudy had been less than secretive since his re-
election in November about his plans to focus on drugs in
his second term. As a prelude, a police initiative had
already been operating whose goal is to eliminate drug-
dealing from Washington Square Park, in the middle of
Greenwich Village. Reporters from local papers who have
visited the park have indicated that this effort isn't going
very well, with "smoke" still being offered regularly to
visitors in and around the famous site. But Giuliani has
reiterated his determination to clear the park of dealers,
going so far as to install surveillance cameras at various
locations and instituting reverse stings, or "sell-and-
busts" with undercover officers posing as dealers and
arresting would-be buyers of nickel and dime bags.
The operation in the park, and the difficulties in making it
work, only serve to illustrate the absurdity of a "drug-
free" New York City, much less a drug-free America.
Washington Square Park is two square blocks of relatively
open real estate, with very few places for drug dealers to
hide. The fact that intense focus on even this tiny area,
out of a city of enormous geographical size and a population
of around 8 million, cannot make the drugs disappear, ought
to show Rudy that even he cannot make the Drug War work.
Rudolph Giuliani's hopes for receiving credit for leading
all of America toward "drug-freeness" from his office in
City Hall are an indication of his future plans. A rising
star in the Republican Party despite their well-documented
spats over such issues as his endorsement of Democrat Mario
Cuomo in the New York's last gubernatorial race, Rudy has
set his sights on national office. The buzz in New York
political circles is that his next race will be for the
governorship, with an eye toward the White House. That
governorship is currently held by George Pataki, the man who
defeated Mario Cuomo in a result which surprised many
people, not least of whom, Rudolph Giuliani. Pataki is also
said to be interested in a run for the White House.
But the question, albeit one which would have sounded
ludicrous a very short time ago, is whether a staunch
prohibitionist, one who continues to tout a law-enforcement
approach to the drug problem, will even be electable by the
time Rudy is ready to run for President. Judging by
international events, and the rising movement for reform in
America, the War, at least as Rudy knows it, could well be
over by then. Or at least it should be seriously winding
down. Where will Rudy and his sell-and-bust operations be
then?
To be fair, Giuliani probably does not belong to the most
vile class of drug warrior. He is, in the words of long-
time reform activist Aaron Wilson, a "true believer." From
all indications, Rudy honestly thinks that enough firepower,
or surveillance, or prisons, can win the war. The question,
then, is whether his enormous ego will prevent him from
learning from his mistakes, and from the mistakes of others.
Because if not, there is a good chance that he will make the
error of trying to prove himself right at all costs --
arresting and brutalizing thousands upon thousands of his
own constituents in an attempt to beat them into submission.
Such tactics, in arguably the most important city in the
free world, could shine a huge spotlight on the inherent
failure of Prohibition, and greatly hasten its demise. But
perhaps this wouldn't hurt Rudy's chances for national
office at all. Because if that happens, and the Drug War
ends, he'll be totally justified in taking the credit.
Adam J. Smith
Associate Director
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[End]
to 1998 Daily News index for January 8-14