------------------------------------------------------------------- Alert - Feds Planning To Close Buyers Clubs (US Attorney In San Francisco Expected To Issue Decree Closing All Dispensaries In California) X-Sender: email@example.com Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:03:35 -0700 From: Steve Kubby (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: ALERT: FEDS PLANNING TO CLOSE BUYER'S CLUBS AMERICAN MEDICAL MARIJUANA ORGANIZATION (AMMO) Defending The Rights Of Medical Marijuana Patients Friday, January 9, 1998 ALERT: FEDS PLANNING TO CLOSE BUYER'S CLUBS As we predicted in a private letter to the buyer's clubs two weeks ago, a statewide action to seize all assets of the clubs is expected to begin next week. Look for an announcement today at noon from the US Attorney in San Francisco, citing obscure drug laws, to justify their crimes. AMERICAN MEDICAL MARIJUANA ORGANIZATION (AMMO) Defending The Rights Of Medical Marijuana Patients Board of Directors: --Steve Kubby
, --Ed Rosenthal --Laura Kriho For subscription changes, please mail to with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the subject line. NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Details Of Fed Action To Close Clubs (Update Says US Attorney Michael J. Yamaguchi Plans To Seek Injunctions) X-Sender: email@example.com Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 13:08:31 -0700 From: Steve Kubby
Subject: DETAILS OF FED ACTION TO CLOSE CLUBS AMERICAN MEDICAL MARIJUANA ORGANIZATION (AMMO) Defending The Rights Of Medical Marijuana Patients Friday, January 9, 1998 DETAILS OF FED ACTION TO CLOSE CLUBS SAN FRANCISCO. In an announcement today by U.S. Attorney Michael J. Yamaguchi, the Federal government is taking the California Buyer's Clubs to court to get injunctions against them, similar to the original injunction against the SF CBC. Jeff Jones, the Director of the Oakland CBC today issued an urgent appeal for defense funds to assist the 10-15 clubs which have been served by federal agents today. Jones said he and the other staff intend to continue operating. "We are not going to stop providing medical marijuana to patients until we are in jail, or until a system has been established which will provide patients with their medicine," said Jones. SEND DONATIONS TO OAKLAND CBC, P/O BOX 70401 OAKLAND, CA., 94612
------------------------------------------------------------------- US Department Of Justice Press Release Announces Lawsuits Against Six California Cannabis Groups (Image File Posted Elsewhere) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 19:46:57 EST From: Steve Kubby (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: US DOJ Press Release on Clubs Dear All, I have posted today's statement by the U.S. Department of Justice regarding the Federal Civil Suits filed against the Six California Cannabis Clubs: http://www.alpworld.com/AMMO/Clubs.html -sk [Portland NORML notes - The 3-page image file of the US Attorney's press release has the headline, "Federal Civil Suits Filed Against California Cannabis Clubs." It says the suits target six clubs in Northern California, including Dennis Peron's club, Flower Therapy, the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative, Santa Cruz CBC, Ukiah CBC and the Marin Alliance For Medical Marijuana. The lawsuits charge the clubs with violating federal laws against distribution of a controlled substance, claim federal laws supersede state law, and that anyway, the clubs were giving unlimited amounts of pot to nonmedical users. What California jury is going to buy this?]
------------------------------------------------------------------- Yamaguchi Statement - Suit To Close Cannabis Clubs (Text Of Press Release From US Department Of Justice) From: email@example.com Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 13:26:47 -0800 Subject: Yamaguchi Statement- Suit to Close Cannabis Clubs R. Givens notes: The real issue is the persistent violation of the US Constitution by drug prohibition laws and enforcement. The feds have NO authority to meddle in STATE affairs. Neither is there Constitutional authority to regulate medicine. The 10th Amendment reserves these rights to the States *** US Department of Justice United States Attorney Northern District of California FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 9, 1998 FEDERAL SUITS FILED AGAINST CALIFORNIA CANNABIS CLUBS SAN FRANCISCO, CA -- The United States today filed suit to stop the operation of six "cannabis clubs" in Northern California. Michael J. Yamaguchi, the United States Attorney of the Northern California District of California, announced the filing of six civil lawsuits in federal court in San Francisco and San Jose that seek to enjoin the operation of six clubs which openly distribute marijuana to hundreds of individuals each week. The investigation of the cannabis clubs was conducted by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Justice Department's Civil Division and the US Attorney's Office for the northern District of California. The six clubs and ten individuals named in the lawsuits are: Cannabis Cultivators Cooperative Dennis Peron Flower Therapy Medical Marijuana Club John Hudson Mary Palmer Barbara Sweeney Gerald M. Buhrz Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative Jeffrey Jones Santa Cruz Cannabis Buyers Club Ukiah Cannabis Buyers' Club Cherrie Lovett Marvin Lehrman Mildred Lehrman Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana Lynette Shaw The federal lawsuits charge the cannabis clubs with the distribution of marijuana, in violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act. Marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance under the Act, along with heroin, mescaline, LSD, and other drugs that are unsafe for use under medical supervision, have no currently accepted medical use, and have a high potential for abuse. Under the Controlled Substances Act, enacted in 1970, it is unlawful to cultivate, distribute or possess marijuana, except for research approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration. "We have acted to halt repeated and widespread violations of the Controlled Substances Act," Yamaguchi said. California's medical marijuana statute, Proposition 215, has no effect on the applicability of federal drug laws, Yamaguchi noted. Although California appears to have decriminalized the possession and cultivation of marijuana by patients and "caregivers" for purported medical purposes under state law, the federal law governing the distribution, cultivation and possession of marijuana has not changed. "The issue is not the medical use of marijuana, it is the persistent violation of federal law. Under our system of federalism, laws passed by Congress cannot be overridden or supplanted by state law. Federal law continues to prohibit the distribution of marijuana at the cannabis clubs." Yamaguchi said. Federal law requires that drugs may be used for medical purposes only after they have been proven safe, effective and reliable through a rigorous system of research and testing. Before drugs are legally marketed and made available to the public for medical purposes, appropriate tests in controlled studies must show substantial evidence that the drug is both safe and effective for its intended use in treating specified diseases or conditions. Marijuana has no currently accepted medical use in the United States and has not been approved by federal health authorities to treat diseases or conditions. Research into the medical benefits of marijuana, however, is currently being funded by the National Institute of Health. If that or other research indicates that marijuana might be medicinally beneficial, it could not be legally marketed or made available for prescription use until it is reviewed and approved for medicinal use by the Food and Drug Administration. "Until marijuana's medical value is proven and a mechanism is developed for its safe production and distribution, marijuana cannot legally be sold, possessed or distributed in California or anywhere in the United States," Attorney Janet Reno noted. Yamaguchi described the decision to proceed under the civil provisions of the Controlled Substances Act as "a measured approach" that enforces federal law, protects the public health, and sends a clear message regarding the illegality of marijuana cultivation and distribution. "We will continue to review our enforcement efforts on a case by case basis and may choose, in appropriate cases to file criminal charges," Yamaguchi said. While not directly relevant to the issues involved in the federal lawsuits, officials sated that federal investigators determined that the cannabis clubs distributed marijuana to individuals who did not claim to be in severe pain or suffering from serious illness. Moreover, officials said, the clubs were lax in verifying "patient" identifications and doctor's recommendations and did not place limits on the duration of time which a "patient" could purchase marijuana.
------------------------------------------------------------------- War On Patients To Escalate - Federal Government Announces Plan To Raid Cannabis Buyers' Clubs (Marijuana Policy Project Press Release) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 18:28:10 -0500 From: Marijuana Policy Project (MPP@MPP.ORG) Reply-To: MPP@MPP.ORG Subject: Federal Government Announces Plan to Raid Cannabis Buyers' Clubs To: MPPupdates@igc.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 9, 1998 War on Patients to Escalate: Federal Government Announces Plan to Raid Cannabis Buyers' Clubs 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, D.C.-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. *** HOW TO SUPPORT THE MARIJUANA POLICY PROJECT: To support the MPP's work and receive the quarterly "Marijuana Policy Report," please send $25.00 annual membership dues to: Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) P.O. Box 77492 Capitol Hill Washington, D.C. 20013 MPP@MPP.ORG http://www.mpp.org
------------------------------------------------------------------- Clinton Administration Sues Six Marijuana Clubs ('San Jose Mercury News' Notes Last May, A US Judge Blocked Federal Officials From Prosecuting California Doctors, But That Ruling Did Not Stop The Feds From Going After Patients And Their Caregivers) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 07:24:56 -0500 Subject: MN: US CA: Clinton Administration Sues 6 Marijuana Clubs Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn) Source: San Jose Mercury News Author: By Howard Mintz, Knight-Ridder Newspapers. San Jose Mercury News Staff Writer Jeordan Legon contributed to this report. Contact: email@example.com Pubdate: 9 Jan 1998 Editors note: It is unclear (to me) if this has actually been published yet, or just put on the news wire for Knight-Ridder newspapers. CLINTON ADMINISTRATION SUES 6 MARIJUANA CLUBS SAN FRANCISCO -- Putting its weight for the first time behind efforts to undercut California's voter-approved Proposition 215, the Clinton administration Friday filed a flurry of lawsuits seeking to shut down six different Northern California marijuana clubs. The U.S. Justice Department filed the lawsuits in federal courts in San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose, attempting to finally resolve a conflict between federal drug laws and the state ballot initiative approved by voters in November 1996 allowing the sale of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Federal officials did not move to close San Jose's Cannabis Center, though word of the Justice Department's offensive produced some panic among the club's operators and patrons. ``I'm relieved (we were not sued), but I know we're not out of the woods,'' said Peter Baez, the center's executive director. ``The federal government will do everything it takes. I'm sure our time will come.'' The lawsuits name two clubs in San Francisco, including the Cannabis Club owned by Proposition 215 author Dennis Peron, as well as the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, the Santa Cruz Cannabis Buyers Club and operations in Marin and Ukiah, Calif. Justice Department officials are asking the courts to issue injunctions that would force the clubs to stop selling pot, which presumably would put them out of business. Once decided, the lawsuits are expected to have implications for marijuana clubs throughout California, as well as other states, such as Arizona, that have enacted similar laws. In announcing the lawsuits, U.S. Attorney Michael Yamaguchi did not explain what led to the decision to target certain clubs, or why federal officials elected to confine the initiative to the Bay Area. However, other law enforcement officials said Friday that Northern California has been the focal point of the medical marijuana debate and was a logical battleground for determining whether the pot clubs can survive under federal law. The lawsuits hinge on what has always been considered the most vulnerable aspect of Proposition 215 -- that marijuana is illegal under federal law, trumping any state laws permitting its use or sale. ``The issue is not the medical use of marijuana, it is the persistent violation of federal law,'' Yamaguchi said. Despite that potential conflict, California voters approved Proposition 215, which allows the possession and cultivation of marijuana if its use is recommended by a doctor. Since then, medicinal marijuana clubs have opened in more than a dozen cities throughout the state. Even though Peron and other club owners vowed Friday to fight the federal government, most officials familiar with the issue say the Clinton Administration is certain to prevail in court. ``We've known all along that if the feds wanted to come in, there is a conflict of law between California and the feds and the feds rule,'' said Santa Clara County Assistant District Attorney Karyn Sinunu, who supervises the office's policy on the issue. ``It's first-year law student stuff.'' Since the passage of Proposition 215, federal law enforcement officials had for the most part remained on the sidelines while California Attorney General Dan Lungren led the charge against the clubs, particularly against Peron and his operation. In fact, Lungren's efforts were given a boost just a few weeks ago, when a state appellate court in San Francisco ruled that clubs like Peron's cannot sell the drug to patients. Peron, who defiantly called Friday's federal action a ``show of contempt for states' rights,'' has indicated he plans to appeal that ruling next week to the California Supreme Court. Lungren, meanwhile, said through a spokesman Friday that he welcomed the Clinton Administration's decision to move against pot clubs. In an interview earlier this week, Lungren also backed off from earlier pledges to shut down all pot clubs in the state. Instead, he said he would take a selective approach. ``The media has made Dan Lungren the czar against illegal marijuana,'' he said. ``That's just crazy. I don't have the resources to do that.'' Until now, the Clinton administration appeared unsure of how and whether to back Lungren. Federal law enforcement officials have been locked in an internal struggle over how to proceed against California's pot clubs since at least this spring, when Drug Enforcement Administration agents raided San Francisco's Flower Therapy Medical Marijuana Club. Federal sources say that raid provoked heated debate within the Justice Department, with disagreement among agencies over the best way to enforce federal drug laws without appearing to trample on the state's voters, who had enacted Proposition 215. Last May, a San Francisco federal judge described the Clinton administration's drug policy as ``fickle'' when she blocked federal officials from prosecuting California doctors for recommending marijuana to their patients. But that ruling had no impact on how the federal government approached the clubs' sale of the marijuana. Court papers filed in connection with the lawsuits demonstrate that DEA agents about the same time began a five-month undercover investigation to gather evidence that the clubs were violating drug laws by selling marijuana. Yamaguchi said the ultimate decision to file civil lawsuits, as opposed to charging club owners with criminal violations, was a ``measured approach'' to the marijuana sales. According to the government's court papers, DEA agents found that marijuana was being cultivated in some of the clubs and smoked on the premises of others, in addition to selling the drug. Like Lungren, federal officials allege that the clubs have lax standards in distributing marijuana, which under Proposition 215 is supposed to be sold only to patients with medical conditions such as pain and nausea associated with AIDS and cancer. Operators such as San Jose's Baez say their clubs are set up like medical clinics. In fact, the DA's office and San Jose City Attorney Joan Gallo have closely regulated the local cannabis club and found it in compliance with Proposition 215, one reason officials said Friday they believe the Justice Department decided against including Baez's club in its court fight. But even those club operators who must now square off against the Justice Department say they have been wrongly targeted. And they are hoping groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union come to their defense. ``I thought we were one of the tightest run facilities in the state,'' said Jeffrey Jones, head of the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative. ``We've abided by all the local resolutions and have had no problems. I don't know where this came from, but I thought it could happen.'' There is no timetable for the courts to review the Justice Department's lawsuits. The first step in the process may involving consolidating the six cases before the same federal judge.
------------------------------------------------------------------- US Moves To Shut Down California Marijuana Clubs (Version From 'Reuters') Subj: US CA: U.S. Moves To Shut Down California Marijuana Clubs From: Richard Lake
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 23:25:48 -0500 Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family Source: Reuters Pubdate: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 U.S. MOVES TO SHUT DOWN CALIFORNIA MARIJUANA CLUBS SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice filed lawsuits Friday in a bid to shut down six California marijuana distribution clubs on the grounds they violated federal drug laws. The civil lawsuits, filed in federal courts in San Francisco and San Jose, marked the latest legal skirmish to rise from California's Proposition 215, the 1996 voter-approved law that legalized marijuana use for people suffering from AIDS, cancer and other serious ailments. Michael Yamaguchi, U.S. attorney for northern California, told a news conference the clubs were operating outside the boundaries of the federal Controlled Substances Act, which makes it illegal to cultivate, distribute or possess marijuana except for government-approved research. ``The issue is not the medical use of marijuana, it is the persistent violation of federal law,'' Yamaguchi said. ``Under our system of federalism, laws passed by Congress cannot be overridden or supplanted by state laws.'' Local marijuana advocates reacted with outrage and vowed to fight the lawsuits in court. Dennis Peron, maverick founder of San Francisco's Cannabis Buyers Club, said he would appear in federal court in 20 days to fight the government request to shut down his organization. ``Until then, we're going to sell a lot of marijuana to our sick and dying friends who need it,'' Peron said. Peron, a gay Vietnam War veteran who led the successful campaign to legalize medical marijuana use in the state, announced last month plans to run for the office of California governor in 1998. Peron's bid for governor pits him against his longtime nemesis California Attorney General Dan Lungren, the hard-line conservative who was one of the leading foes of Proposition 215.
------------------------------------------------------------------- NORML Opposes Federal Suit To Close California's Medical Marijuana Clubs (California NORML Rebuts The Feds' Specious Excuses And Pledges To Support Legal Efforts To Oppose The Lawsuits) Subj: NORML Opposes Federal Suit to Close California's Medical Marijuana Clubs From: Richard Lake
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 06:02:06 -0500 NORML Opposes Federal Suit to Close California's Medical Marijuana Clubs OAKLAND, Jan. 9, 1998: Declaring its unalterable support for patients' right to medical marijuana, California NORML announced it will do everything in its power to defend Prop. 215 by supporting legal efforts to oppose a federal lawsuit aimed at shutting down California's medical marijuana clubs. The lawsuit, announced by Northern California U.S. District Attorney Michael Yamaguchi, seeks to enjoin distribution of marijuana at six medical marijuana clubs: the San Francisco Cannabis Cultivators' Club, the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Club, San Francisco Flower Therapy, the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana, the Santa Cruz Cannabis Buyers' Club, and the Ukiah Cannabis Buyers' Club. California NORML denounced the suit as an unconscionable federal attack on Californians' right to medical marijuana under Prop. 215. "These six clubs serve 10,000 seriously ill patients in Northern California," said California NORML coordinator Dale Gieringer, "To throw them out on the street hardly serves public health or safety. The only people who profit by this deal are underground street dealers and government drug bureaucrats." Speaking at a press conference at the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Club, Oakland City Councilman Nate Miley emphasized the city's strong support for the club, which is widely regarded as one of the state's model medical marijuana dispensaries. The club has vowed to stay open so long as it can fight the law. In announcing the lawsuit, Yamaguchi claimed that federal law supersedes Prop. 215, stating "The issue is not medical use of marijuana; it is the persistent violation of federal law. " In response, California NORML argues that federal powers are limited by the Tenth and Ninth Amendments so as to protect Californians' right to medical marijuana under Prop. 215. "The federal government is trying to turn the Constitution on its head" argues Gieringer, "Nowhere does the constitution give the federal government power to tell the states what kinds of medicine their citizens may use. It took an amendment to pass alcohol prohibition; where is the amendment banning medical marijuana?" The government's complaint alleges that illegal use of controlled substances such as marijuana has a "substantial and detrimental effect of [sic] the health and general welfare of the American people." However, NORML notes that this is factually incorrect in the case of medical marijuana. The government also alleges that the clubs' activities pose a "substantial and direct effect upon interstate commerce." However, NORML argues that medical marijuana clubs distribute only small, personal-use quantities of marijuana to patients within state, and therefore have no effect on interstate commerce. The government claims that federal agents bought marijuana at the clubs. Clubs believe that agents falsified medical claims, relying on the fact that federal threats against doctors have made it difficult for clubs to obtain verbal verification of physician's recommendations from their offices. The clubs have 20 days to reply to the government's lawsuit in court, unless the government seeks a temporary restraining order to shut them down earlier. Six separate cases have been filed, one for each club. If the courts grant an injunction, clubs will risk federal criminal charges if they continue to operate. Should they continue to operate in civil disobedience of the law, their cases may ultimately be decided by jury trial. *** Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858 // firstname.lastname@example.org 2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114
------------------------------------------------------------------- CASA Report On C-SPAN (McCaffrey And Califano Hint At Sea-Change In US Policy - Incarceration For Drugs 'A Failed Social Policy') Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 07:16:52 EST Subject: CASA Report on CSPAN From: "Clifford Schaffer" (email@example.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) The CASA Report press conference on their recent report is being shown now. The four presenters at the press conference were Colson, Joseph Califano, Barry McCaffrey, and Jeremy Travis, DOJ Charles Colson says that mandatory minimums are the most counterproductive policy possible and that violent criminals are being released in order to jail nonviolent people on mandatory minimums. He also said that drugs were just as available in prisons as on the street. Items below in quotes are direct quotes. McCaffrey said: (I am here to) "stand with him (Califano) again on a CASA study" "nearly 13 million of us use drugs regularly, nearly 4 million who are addicted" "this is a failed social policy" "it has become clear to me that when it comes to drug treatment, the Federal Government won't be the solution" - states will. in 20 of 23 sites more than 60 percent of adult arrestees test positive for some drug. "Fifty percent of the meth users who seek treatment do so because they felt it causes criminal behavior." (paraphrasing) we certainly must have treatment in the criminal justice system "State of Delaware has some incredibly innovative programs." While Colson talked a lot about the mandatory minimums, McCaffrey didn't mention them. McCaffrey's main point was more treatment in prison. Califano talked a lot about the increase in prisoners, saying that soon, 5 percent of all whites, and about 25 percent of blacks would spend some time in prison. He said that more than one million people are in prison because of drug or alcohol related crime. "One of every 144 Americans adults is behind bars for a crime in which alcohol or drugs are indicated." He made it clear that we were spending a lot of money doing it and that most of the increase in the prison population was related to drugs. Califano consistently DID NOT break out the difference between illegal drugs and alcohol, in most of the charts. Then he said, "We didn't understand it until we did this study, but the number one drug implicated in violent crime in America is alcohol." He went through charts on the relation of violent crime and drugs, showing alcohol way ahead of cocaine and heroin. Marijuana was not on the charts. "Race in the prison population - these are some of the most disturbing numbers" (then pointed to a chart which showed equal rates of drug use in all races) "Drugs are the driving force here, not race" "One of the reasons we are filling our prisons is because we are not treating the people in prisons." His next chart was on the gap between needed treatment and available treatment. "These individuals in prison are going to be getting out again, and what are they going to be like when they get out?" (I could swear I had written that direct quote, but . . . .) He then presented a chart showing the payoff in the reduction of crime by drug treatment. If we gave drug treatment to every prisoner who needed it, it would cost 7.8 billion per year. If it worked for ten percent, it would return 8.26 billion. "There isn't a businessman in America who wouldn't salivate at that return." "Mandatory sentencing laws make no sense." "Mandatory sentence laws are really a round-trip ticket back into jail and a life of crime." Califano suggested that any Federal support of state prisons should be conditioned on treatment being available in those prisons. "The cost of building a prison cell in NY State today is $153,000." Charles Hynes, DA, Kings County, NY He stated that huge savings could be had from treatment. Califano: "We are still looking at this population as if they were Bonnie and Clyde, or major drug lords, . .. our prisons are wall to wall with drug addicts and alcoholics. We need a fundamental change in the way we look at them." McCaffrey: "There are probably a quarter of a million people who should not be in prison . . (but should be in treatment) .. . out in the community." "Madame Taxpayer, you are going to like drug treatment in the prison system." Califano: "We do need law enforcement . . . we need to make drugs less available." McCaffrey said that the problem with a drug user probably started when they started smoking pot and using other drugs, triggering a permanent brain change setting themselves up for addiction later. They didn't get it all right, but I heard a lot of things that I and others have been saying in speeches for several years.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Full Text Of CASA Report On C-SPAN Online Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:01:46 EST From: "Kelly T. Conlon" (conlonkt@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA) To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: CASA Report on CSPAN On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Clifford Schaffer wrote: > The CASA Report press conference on their recent report is being shown now. > The four presenters at the press conference were Colson, Joseph Califano, > Barry McCaffrey, and Jeremy Travis, DOJ Full text is available online: http://www.casacolumbia.org/pubs/jan98/contents.htm KTC
------------------------------------------------------------------- CASA Converted? (Assessment Of CASA Press Conference By Mark Greer Of Media Awareness Project) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 06:52:53 -0800 From: Mark Greer (MGreer@mapinc.org) Subject: CASA Converted??? Friends: There was an absolutely fascinating CASA press conference with Joe Califano and Barry McCaffrey and a couple of others on C-Span-II yesterday. I caught a replay late last night. It was the first time I have ever seen these two without being outraged at lies and fabrications. The upshot was that they admitted that the drug use/incarceration model of drug offenders was destined to fail. CASA conducted a survey recently (faxed to many of you by Eric Sterling and the CJPF). They have apparently come to the conclusions that we have known for years. We can't keep putting drug users in prison because we're going broke. They had charts and graphs showing how incarceration rates had increased and how the reason for the increase was drug arrests. They also called attention to the fact that a very high percentage of all criminals use drugs regularly or were under the influence when arrested. They mostly lumped legal and illegal drugs together. They did however show how minuscule the rate of illicit drug use was as a factor in crime as compared to alcohol and admitted that this was a big revelation to them. Marijuana was not mentioned anywhere except that McCaffrey alluded to keeping kids from trying it and obliquely inferred it was a gateway drug but it was very obviously missing as a factor in drug related crime. They did not go so far as to say our drug laws were flawed (directly) but did say that drug treatment in prison, some of the treatment models including a spiritually based program run by one of the other panelists, and drug courts were a wonderful alternative to imprisonment and that the eventual objective of dramatically reducing drug related incarceration was both cost effective and inevitable. This was in my view a major change of policy and seems to be backed by ONDCP and the justice department. They were proud as peacocks at having "discovered" that which we have been preaching for years but I think this marks a fairly significant move in our direction if action is actually taken. The end result of this policy is of course forced treatment and forced drug testing which is as distasteful to most of us as our drug laws are but beginning to undermine the incarceration and prison growth rates could begin to reduce some of the ever increasing growth of the prison and criminal justice system, could begin to erode support for existing drug policy and could reduce the number of individuals who support the incarceration model. I called C-Span and was told that a call back this (Friday) afternoon at 202 626 7963 would get me scheduling info. It will very likely re air this afternoon and/or this week end. I'll try to get it on tape and give a better rundown on what was said but I highly recommend catching it if possible. It appears to be a very significant change in direction and I would like to hear the reaction of others to see if they view this as significant as I did. Mark Greer Media Awareness Project (MAP) inc. d/b/a DrugSense MGreer@mapinc.org http://www.DrugSense.org/ http://www.mapinc.org
------------------------------------------------------------------- A Christmas Miracle? (Another Account Of CASA Press Conference Reports McCaffrey And Califano All But Admitting The Drug War Has Been A Complete Failure, Announcing A 'Second Front In The War On Crime') Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 00:16:33 EST Subject: A Christmas Miracle...? From: "Tom Murlowski" (email@example.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Hi, all- I hope you were all watching C-Span-2 tonight. A press conference took place today at CASA (Center for Alcohol and Substance Abuse). Attending were Gen. Barry McCaffrey and Director Joseph Califano, among others. They stated a commitment to a different approach to drug policy in this country. They called it "The Second Front in the War on Crime". They did everything but admit that the drug war has been a complete failure. Mr. Califano called prisons 'monuments to failure'. Mr. Califano expressed his complete dismay at mandatory sentencing. Mr. Califano stated that over a quarter million federal inmates simply don't belong in prison. They had charts and facts and figures that showed emphatically and repeatedly that present policies JUST DON'T WORK!!! A complete waste of taxpayers money. Treatment is 300% more cost effective and 1000% more efficient at dealing with recidivism. 80% of the federal prison population should be removed from other 'incorrigible prisoners', effectively treated, and returned to society. On and on and on. It was positively surreal. These are the men that dictate drug policy in America, folks. Am I being overly optimistic in thinking that someone in the Clinton administration has finally pulled his or her head out of his or her ass? (My money's on Gen. McCaffrey as the driving force behind this. Remember H.R. 2610?). Can this be the beginning of the end? Or am I being naive and hopeful to a fault? I'm under no illusions. My sweetie's not getting out of jail tomorrow. Legislation needs to be introduced, and fought for, and we have to make sure the current prisoners of the drug war aren't forgotten. We all have to keep up the fight. But whether you're fighting for medical marijuana, full decriminalization, or just to free a loved one from some insane and cruel prison sentence, we have won a significant victory today, I think. I would welcome comments or observations from any of you who caught this press conference today. I almost feel like it was a dream. May the gods smile upon us all. Tom Murlowski Regional Director/Webmaster The November Coalition 5150 Balboa Arms Drive #E14 San Diego, CA 92117 E-mail: email@example.com Web: http://www.november.org
------------------------------------------------------------------- More On New Tack By CASA, McCaffrey And Califano (Where To Look For Transcript Of Report By Public Broadcasting's 'NewsHour With Jim Lehrer' )
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:48:03 -0800 (PST) From: Turmoil
To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: HT: Fwd: A Christmas Miracle? Sender: email@example.com I saw Mr. Califano on PBS (Macneil-Leher) last night, and I was amazed. I thought he sounded all the world like a legalization activist. He maid all the points in this article, in addition he stressed that the NUMBER 1 problem drug, especially in relation to violence was alchohol. He stressed this several times, he had statsitics for the numbers of people arrested under the influence of various drugs. I wish I had a transcript, it was pretty amazing. It looks like on their site, that there may appear a real audio segment in a few days, that would appear at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/realaudio.html Tim *** Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 08:47:47 -0800 (PST) From: Turmoil (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: email@example.com Subject: HT: drugs in prison There is now a transcript of a Jim Lehrer news hour interview with Joseph Califano and Rep. Bill McCollum (R) Florida - at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/jan-june98/prison_1-8.html It's interesting reading. Tim
------------------------------------------------------------------- Califano Sees Some Light (Untitled 'Associated Press' Wire Story On The CASA News Conference) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 19:49:50 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US: Wire: Untitled RE: Califano Sees Some Light Newshawk: Kevin Zeese (firstname.lastname@example.org) Source: Associated Press Pubdate: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 WASHINGTON (AP) -- A group pressing for increased spending on prison drug treatment programs reports that 80 percent of the adults in U.S. prisons are locked up because of criminal activity linked to drug and alcohol abuse. The report by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse urged governments, particularly the states, to spend more money to help those 1.4 million inmates kick their habits before they are returned to society. In addition, the report said prisoners need other services such as job training, health care and religious instruction. ``The most troublesome aspect of these grim statistics is that the country is doing so little about them,'' Joseph Califano, president of the Columbia University-based center, told a news conference Thursday. ``We are talking about an incredibly insane (prison) system that doesn't make that kind of investment.'' At the same gathering, President Clinton's top drug adviser said the government has begun to spend more on treatment as it focused its efforts on keeping the nation's teens and children from turning to drugs. But Barry McCaffrey, director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said the federal government alone can't be the solution. ``This is a law-enforcement no-brainer to move toward treatment,'' he said. The retired Army general said federal spending on treatment programs grew from $1 billion to $3 billion in the last five years and that government is experimenting with new programs. The 281-page drugs report said the tripling of America's prison population, from 500,000 in 1980 to 1.7 million in 1996, was due mainly to criminal acts influenced by drugs and-or alcohol. Most of the inmates, more than 1 million, are housed in state prisons. Of the 1.7 million total, 1.4 million adult men and women were incarcerated for behavior influenced by alcohol or narcotics. Among the 1.4 million are parents of more than 2 million children, the report said. Charles Hynes, the district attorney for Brooklyn, N.Y., said a program allowing drug offenders to seek residential treatment instead of imprisonment had helped 325 people since it began in 1990. More than two-thirds are still employed and paying taxes instead of collecting welfare, he said.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Alcohol Or Drug Link Found In 80 Percent Of US Prisoners ('New York Times' Version Of CASA, Califano And McCaffrey Story) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 19:43:40 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US: NYT: Alcohol or Drug Link Found in 80 Percent of US Prisoners Sender: email@example.com Source: New York Times Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Pubdate: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 Author: Christopher S. Wren ALCOHOL OR DRUG LINK FOUND IN 80 PERCENT OF U.S. PRISONERS NEW YORK -- Illegal drugs and alcohol helped lead to the imprisonment of four out of five inmates in the nation's prisons and jails, a three-year study has found. The report, which was released Thursday by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, determined that of 1.7 million prisoners in 1996, 1.4 million had violated drug or alcohol laws, had been high when they committed their crimes, had stolen to support their habit or had a history of drug and alcohol abuse that led them to commit crimes. But while 840,000 federal and state prisoners needed drug treatment in 1996, the report said, fewer than 150,000 received any care before being released. "The most troublesome aspect of these grim statistics is that the nation is doing so little to change them," Joseph Califano Jr., the chairman of the center that sponsored the report, said in a foreword. Califano, who served as secretary of health, education and welfare under President Jimmy Carter, said that releasing inmates without treating their drug or alcohol addictions was "tantamount to visiting criminals on society." Such negligence, he said, only sustained the market for illegal drugs and supported drug dealers. Alcohol, more than any illegal drug, was found to be closely associated with violent crimes, including murder, rape, assault and child and spousal abuse. Twenty-one percent of state prisoners convicted of violent crimes committed them under the influence of alcohol alone, the report said. Three percent were high on crack or powder cocaine and only 1 percent on heroin. According to the report, 69 percent of federal prisoners, 76 percent of state prisoners and 70 percent of local jail inmates used drugs at least once a week during the month before they were locked up. The report did not deal with drug and alcohol abuse by 3.8 million others on probation and parole, but Mark A.R. Kleiman, a professor of public policy at the University of California at Los Angeles, estimated that people under the supervision of the criminal justice system consumed 60 percent of the cocaine sold in the United States. The report, titled "Behind Bars," said drug abuse fueled recidivism. In state prisons, it said, 81 percent of inmates with five or more convictions have used drugs regularly, compared with 63 percent who had two prior convictions and 41 percent who were first-time offenders. The report also said the number of inmates and prisoners in the nation had more than tripled since 1980. While the link between drugs and crime is already widely accepted, the report made a strong case for doing more to break the connection. Califano said in an interview that imposing long mandatory sentences on addicted drug felons "makes no sense" because it removes their incentive to undergo treatment in order to get out of prison. Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, the retired Army officer who directs the White House's national drug policy, said the study was consistent with a recent Justice Department forecast of drug use, which showed that more than 60 percent of adult males arrested for felonies at 20 of 23 American metropolitan areas had tested positive for at least one illegal drug. The Clinton administration has pushed through legislation that requires states to test prisoners and parolees for drugs in order to receive new federal money for prisons. McCaffrey said he would convene a conference in Washington on March 23 to examine treatment in the criminal justice system. "You've simply got to address compulsive drug-using behavior if you want to reduce crime in America," he said. The report's researchers, led by Steven Belenko, drew upon an array of government documents, including Bureau of Justice statistics and Census Bureau surveys.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Study Links Drugs To 80 Percent Of Incarcerations ('USA Today' Version Of CASA Report Notes By 2000, One Out Of 20 US Residents Will Spend Time In Jail, Including One Out Of 11 Men And One Out Of Four Black Men) Newshawk: KJBLeu (KJBLeu@aol.com) Source: USA Today Author: Gary Fields Pubdate: 9 Jan 1998 Contact: email@example.com STUDY LINKS DRUGS TO 80% OF INCARCERATIONS WASHINGTON - Eighty percent of people behind bars were involved with alcohol or other drugs at the times of the crime, a report says. And, alcohol plays a role in a greater number of violent crimes than crack or powder cocaine, according to the report by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University in New York. The three year study released Thursday found that 1.4 million of the 1.7 million people serving time in the nation's jails and prisons committed crimes while they were high, stole property to buy drugs, have a history of drug or alcohol abuse or are in jail for violating drug or alcohol laws. The 281-page report concludes that criminal activity because of drugs and alcohol is the overwhelming reason the nation's prison population has risen nearly 239% since 1980, when 501,886 people were behind bars. "People think prisons are full of James Cagney types and psychopaths, but they are actually full of alcoholics and drug addicts, and we can deal with that through treatment," says Joseph Califano Jr., president of the center and former secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. But few of the hundreds of thousands of people who could be turned into respectable taxpayers and parents are ever treated, Califano says. Instead, they are released back into the community as criminals. "We're not protecting the public safety because we aren't treating the problem, and we're supporting the illegal drug market because we are just sending customers back." Among the study's findings: - - Taxpayers spent $38 billion in '96 to build and maintain the nation's 4,700 prisons. - - By 2000, one out of 20 U.S. residents will spend time in jail. That includes one out of 11 men and one out of four black men. - - By 2000, taxpayers will pay $100 million a day to incarcerate criminals. - - Repeat offense rates are direcdy linked to drug use. Forty-one percent of first time offenders in state prisons used drugs regularly, while 81% of the people with five or more convictions were habitual drug users. One of the study's key findings is the prevalence of alcohol in violent crimes. Twenty- one percent of the people serving time for violent crimes - including murder, rape, spousal and child abuse and assault - were under the influence of alcohol at the time the crime was committed. Only 3% of the violent offenders were under the influence of crack or powder cocaine. Jack Levin, director of the Program for the Study of Violence and Social Conflict at Northeastern University in Boston, says the role of alcohol in violence is not surprising. Neither is the fact that most people ignore that role, he says. "It's easy to look at crack addicts as devants and perverts prone to violence," he says. "It's much harder to see people at a cocktail party that way because that requires us to look at ourselves."
------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family
Source: The Chronicle of Higher Education Section: Government & Politics Author: Douglas Lederman Pubdate: January 9, 1998 Contact: email@example.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: firstname.lastname@example.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: email@example.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."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Drug Prohibition To Blame (Letter To Editor Of 'Houston Chronicle' Rebuts Paper's Opinion That Drugs Are Destroying American Users While Corrupting Law Enforcement And Politicians) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 22:23:43 -0800 Subject: MN: US TX: PUB LTE: Drug Prohibition to Blame Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Art Smart
Source: Houston Chronicle Contact: email@example.com Pubdate: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 Website: http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/ DRUG PROHIBITION TO BLAME The Chronicle's Dec. 30 editorial ("Anti-drug force") said illegal drugs are "destroying a generation of young American users, while corrupting law enforcement and politicians in Latin America countries from Mexico to Colombia." I have devoted most of my life to studying drugs and you're wrong. Drug prohibition causes corruption -- the drugs themselves are incapable of it. Corruption caused by drug prohibition occurs all over the world, and is not confined to Latin America. A rational drug policy, requiring all drugs to be regulated by government agencies instead of allowing them to be manufactured and peddled by criminals with little or no interest in the public's welfare, would reduce the harm currently being caused by drugs and would eliminate the harmful effects of drug prohibition. G. Alan Robison Executive Director, Drug Policy Forum, Houston
------------------------------------------------------------------- Judicial High In California - By William F. Buckley, Jr. (The Conservative Columnist Thinks The DEA Overstepped In Stealing The Computer Of Millionaire Author And Medical-Marijuana Patient Peter McWilliams) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 23:21:51 -0500 Subject: MN: US CA: Judicial High In California - by William F. Buckley, Jr. Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family
Source: Medical Marijuana Magazine Contact: http://www.marijuanamagazine.com/ Editors note: Our newshawk writes: "This is a piece written by William F. Buckley (certainly a "brand name" journalist) and posted on Peter McWilliams' web site." We do not, as a rule, post items from publications which are only web based. This is an exception. JUDICIAL HIGH IN CALIFORNIA Long live California, even if we aren't always sorry we don't live there. The news two days ago was something on the order of a Whiskey Rebellion mounted by Californians who want to smoke their cigarettes, dammit, and to hell with that new law that makes smoking illegal except in your own cellar. Where will it end? The scent of rebellion has reached New York City, where the mayor has hesitated to sign the new law making it illegal to advertise cigarettes within a thousand feet of a school-building. Do we have the beginning of a national movement? And of course California is the crucible of the medical marijuana movement. That mess makes the Augean stables look like spilt tea. What happened is Proposition 215, passed in November of 1996. What it says is that a doctor can authorize in writing or orally the use of marijuana by any patient seeking relief from the assorted pains marijuana usefully addresses; and authorized patients may cultivate their own supply of marijuana. The law has been criticized for reasons implausible and plausible. It is, really, quite dumb for lay critics of marijuana to prattle on about how there are other means (pills) to bring equivalent relief to those who suffer. That question is as easily disposed of as taking the testimony of one or one hundred people who have tried the pill without effect, but get relief from smoking marijuana. On the other hand it is obviously true that people who egged on Proposition 215 professing only concern for the afflicted are, many of them, just plain rooters for marijuana legalization. Which brings the story to Peter McWilliams. I have for him the reverence you have (those of you who use word processors) for the person who introduced you to the computer. He wrote a book about computers so lucid and engaging it became a best-seller. He went on to become a syndicated columnist on cyberworld, but simultaneously he pressed other pursuits, poetical, photographic, and philosophical. He is the absolute Number One anarchist in America on matters having to do with personal conduct. He has paid a heavy price for pursuing his passions, suffering now from AIDS and from cancer. Now Peter McWilliams is a publisher (Prelude Press) whose books have made ten appearances on the New York Times best-seller list, and this time around he retained one Todd McCormick to do a book on marijuana growing -- for the afflicted. Mr. McCormick proceeded to grow, in a pasture behind a little house in Bel Air purchased with money advanced by McWilliams, not one marijuana plant but four thousand. McCormick had had experience in Amsterdam and was engaged in writing a book on the general subject. Bang! Six thirty in the morning, nine DEA agents crash into McWilliams' house finding him at work on his computer. They simultaneously tell him he is not under arrest and handcuff him. They spend three hours going over every piece of paper in his house (they find one ounce of marijuana, which is within the California legal limit) and walk away with his computer. That is the equivalent of entering the New York Times and walking away with the printing machinery. Well, the ACLU, which is right twice a day, is on to the McWms' ((sic)) case and is asking the right questions and there will be interminable arguments and counter-arguments, and a certain amount hangs on the outcome, given that a finding of guilt on all counts including conspiracy to manufacture and sell marijuana could put McWilliams away with a life sentence and a four million dollar fine. There are those who believe that is going too far; on the other hand there are also those who believe that 24 hours in the cooler is also going too far, to say nothing of nine agents at 6:30 A. M. barging into your house with handcuffs. There is, obviously, a judicial shortcircuit in play here. California says something that sounds like Okay. On the one hand there is the federal war on drugs, with General Barry McCaffrey up there like George S. Patton defying all obstacles to pressing his war. The difference is that Patton succeeded and McCaffrey is not succeeding and never will. Anthony Lewis of the New York Times reminds us that in 1980 the Feds spent $4 billion on the drug war, now $32 billion and the number of people in jail on drug charges went up by the same multiple of eight: from 50,000 to 400,000. How to proceed? Not, one hopes, with more dawn break-ins and removal of computers. Peter McWilliams reports an ironic turn. For his illness he smokes every day. But after you do that for a few weeks you cease to get a high. Marijuana becomes just something that stops nausea, eases pain, reduces intraocular pressure, relaxes muscles, and takes the "bottom" out of a depression. So where do we go from here? To jail?
------------------------------------------------------------------- Washington A Test Market For Anti-Drug Ads ('Washington Post' Notes The Federal Government Is Funding An Anti-Drug Series Of Television Ads Debuting In Washington, DC) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 16:56:08 EST Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: "Kelly T. Conlon"
To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: "This is your Brain on Drugs"... its baaaack! The fact that the rhetoric of the PDFA hasn't progressed much further beyond the "fried egg" commercial of the late 1980s is remarkable. What are these guys smoking? Source: Washington Post Contact: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm Pubdate: Friday, January 9, 1998 Author: Maria Elena Fernandez, Washington Post Staff Writer WASHINGTON A TEST MARKET FOR ANTI-DRUG ADS The woman in the commercial smashes an egg to show what a brain on drugs looks like, then claims the yolk dripping from the frying pan is what a body on drugs feels like. Then she goes on a rampage breaking plates and glasses, declaring: "This is what your family goes through." The television ad -- part of a $195 million anti-drug advertising campaign launched by the White House and aimed at America's youth -- was one of four spots previewed yesterday by 200 fourth-, fifth- and sixth-graders at Lafayette Elementary School in Northwest Washington. The fast-paced, thought-provoking ads, which began airing on local television stations in Washington last night, will be viewed locally in 11 other cities before they are shown nationally in June.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Marijuana Clogs Lungs With Tar (Letter To Editor Of 'Toronto Star' Cites Evidence Disproving Contention Of Canadian Council On Drug Abuse) From: email@example.com (Matt Elrod) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Sent: LTE: Marijuana clogs lungs with tar Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 10:50:30 -0800 Sent To - 'Toronto Star' Lines: 42 To the editor, Concerning the letter of Jan. 9 from Fred Bruford of the Council on Drug Abuse, (Marijuana clogs the lungs with tar), Mr. Bruford cited a 1988 study by Dr. Donald P. Tashkin of UCLA which he claims concluded, "marijuana smokers inhaled into their lungs three times as much tar as did tobacco smokers." This is not correct. The study compared the tar content of cannabis leaves, (not the commonly smoked flowers), to the tar content of tobacco, and concluded that, back in 1988, cannabis leaves contained, on average, three times more tar that tobacco leaves. It did not conclude that cannabis smokers inhaled three times as much tar as tobacco smokers. A later eight-year study of cannabis smokers by Dr. Tashkin, published in Vol. 155 of the American Journal of Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine (1997), concluded, "Neither the continuing nor the intermittent marijuana smokers exhibited any significantly different rates of decline in [lung function]" as compared with those individuals who never smoked marijuana. The study went on to say, "No differences were noted between even quite heavy marijuana smoking and nonsmoking of marijuana." These findings starkly contrasted with those experienced by a control group of tobacco-only smokers who suffered a significant rate of decline in lung function. A study completed over four years ago, (NTP TR 446, NIH Publication No. 94-3362, U.S. D.H.H.S., National Toxicology Program.), gave huge doses of the primary therapeutic constituent of cannabis, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), to rats and mice by stomach tube, and looked for cancers and other evidence of toxicity. In both mice and rats, in both males and females, "the incidence of benign and malignant neoplasms ... were decreased in a dose-dependent manner", meaning that the more THC the animals were given, the fewer tumors they developed. This may be due in part to THC being an extremely potent stimulant of the natural, (and prohibited), cancer fighting hormone melatonin. Matthew M. Elrod Phone: 250-[867-5309] 4493 [No Thru] Rd. Email: email@example.com Victoria, B.C. V9C-3Y1 [Elrod is responding to this letter, appearing in the same day's 'Toronto Star'] >Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org >Pubdate: Friday, 09 January 1998, Letters, page A21 >Source: Toronto Star >Contact: LetterToEd@thestar.com > >It is outrageous that Terry Parker was given a platform >under the header "Letter of The Day" to give false >information about marijuana (Marijuana long known as a lung >cleaner, Dec. 31). > >The accurate reality about the effects of marijuana on the >lungs was established in 1988 by researcher Dr. Donald P. >Tashkin of UCLA, California. His study concluded that >marijuana smokers inhaled into their lungs three times as >much tar as did tobacco smokers. > >When his study was published, Tashkin said: "The bottom line >is that smokers of just a couple of joints a day cannot lull >themselves into a false sense of security that they will >escape the pulmonary consequences of smoking just because >they're smoking so few joints." > >The true information is that marijuana clogs the lungs! > >Fred Burford >Council on Drug Abuse >Toronto
------------------------------------------------------------------- Marijuana-Growing Causes Fire ('Not Uncommon For Us To Find Marijuana At A Fire, But It Is Unusual To Find An Operation Of This Scale,' Says Firefighter In London, Ontario, According To 'London Free Press') From: email@example.com (Matt Elrod) Subject: Marijuana-growing causes fire Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 08:54:20 -0800 Lines: 51 Source: London Free Press (Ontario) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org January 9, 1998 MARIJUANA-GROWING CAUSES FIRE CREDIT: By Jonathan Sher -- Free Press Reporter It's not often firefighters joke about the smell of smoke but it's not every day they're called to extinguish a fire caused by a large-scale marijuana operation. "We were tripping over stuff. There were pot plants everywhere," London District Fire Chief John Griffeth said of a fire Thursday at a home on Huron Street. The rented house was sparsely furnished with a television and refrigerator, leaving the rest of the residence for a pot-growing operation, firefighters said. The fire was sparked by electrical cords used to power the pot operation, Griffeth said. Firefighters arrived at the residence about 8:30 a.m. and put out the fire within 15 minutes. GROWING IN BEDROOMS "It was almost a laboratory. The pot was growing upstairs in several bedrooms . . . . There were extension cords, water hoses, ventilation, upstairs and downstairs. The pot was bagged in the basement," he said. "It was definitely too big for just personal use -- it was for distribution." "It's not uncommon for us to find marijuana at a fire. But it is unusual to find an operation of this scale," he said. No one was found at the residence. London police seized the marijuana and have launched an investigation. Griffeth said police know the identity of the renter, but did not disclose his name. The fire began from an electrical cord that went through a floor joist to the basement, the fire marshal's office determined. Burning inside the floor, the fire produced thick smoke that caused $50,000 damage, Griffeth said. But while a part of the basement ceiling collapsed, the marijuana plants escaped unscathed.
------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: email@example.com 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 firstname.lastname@example.org. Senator John McCain can be contacted at 241 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510, email@example.com. 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 firstname.lastname@example.org Alan Mason email@example.com Clifford Schaffer firstname.lastname@example.org 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------
The articles posted here are generally copyrighted by the source publications. They are reproduced here for educational purposes under the Fair Use Doctrine (17 U.S.C., section 107). NORML is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit educational organization. The views of the authors and/or source publications are not necessarily those of NORML. The articles and information included here are not for sale or resale.
Comments, questions and suggestions.Reporters and researchers are welcome at the world's largest online library of drug-policy information, sponsored by the Drug Reform Coordination Network at: http://www.druglibrary.org/
Next day's news
Previous day's news
to 1998 Daily News index for January 8-14
to Portland NORML news archive directory
to 1998 Daily News index (long)
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/980109.html