-------------------------------------------------------------------

Santa Clara County Medical Cannabis Center Update (Peter Baez
And Jesse Garcia Say Today A Judge Refused To Release
The Medical Marijuana Dispensary's Bank Account,
Seized By Police In San Jose, California - Please Send Money)

From: "ralph sherrow" (ralphkat@hotmail.com)
To: ralphkat@hotmail.com
Subject: Peter & Jesse need help
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 01:47:22 PDT

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 20:08:09 +0000
From: "Baez,Garcia" (sccmcc@garlic.com)
To: ralph sherrow (ralphkat@hotmail.com)
Subject: SCCMCC/SJ CLUB

We want to inform all that today the judge ruled against us in getting
our much needed money un-frozen by the D.A.

We could use any and all help financially, as Dr. Mikuriya has told me
he is willing to be an expert witness to my case,
but his fees are high, $2,000 for a half day in court as an expert
witness. My trial begins on 6/16/98 at 8:30 a.m. in San
Jose, Ca. If any out there can help us we would really need it.

If you wish to help us, please send check, cash or M.O. to:
Peter Baez
353 E. 10th St. #E-232
Gilroy, Ca 95020

Thanks...

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Battle Rages Over New Prisons ('Sacramento Bee' Columnist Dan Walters
In 'The Oakland Tribune' Describes California Politicians Maneuvering
To Cope With A System That Lets Voters Mandate New Prisons
Without Mandating New Taxes To Pay For Them)

Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 09:00:16 -0700
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: OPED: Battle Rages Over New Prisons
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Jerry Sutliff
Source: Oakland Tribune
Contact: triblet@angnewspapers.com
Pubdate: Mon, 11 May 1998

BATTLE RAGES OVER NEW PRISONS

CALIFORNIA voters have demanded - by passing the three strikes and you're
out measure, that more felons be locked up for longer terms.

But when it comes to building the prisons to house those felons, voters
have been much less enthusiastic. They rejected the last state prison bond
issue in 1990. Since then, new jails have been constructed through a
convoluted leasing arrangement in which a state agency issues "revenue
bonds" to build prisons, then rents them to the Department of Corrections.

But even that approach has run out of money, and as inmates continue to
pour into the prison system - there are about 150,000 now - it's reaching
the limits of physical capacity.

State prison officials estimate that by 2000, the system will hit 200
percent of design capacity with every non-maximum security cell housing two
inmates and every gymnasium and other space filled with beds.

Nevertheless, Republican Gov. Pete Wllson and the Democrat controlled
Legislature have been locked in a years-long stalemate over whether to
build more new prisons. While Wilson wants them, lawmakers -- including
some Republicans -- have demanded that the administration make operational
changes to reduce prison costs.

It is a game of political chicken, each side accusing the other of running
the risk of court-ordered inmate releases In a couple of years and each
betting that the other will blink first.

The confrontation entered another this year when Wilson proposed that in
lieu of new state prisons, some low-risk inmates be housed in privately
owned and operated facilities.

One skirmish occurred this week in the Senate Governmental Organization
Committee when anti-privatization forces pushed a constitutional amendment
that would prohibit state or local governments from contracting out any
correctional or law enforcement operations.

Although the committee approved the measure, it was mostly an opportunity
for its author, Sen. Bill Lockyer, D-Hayward, to stroke police and guard
unions as he runs for state attorney general. "I want to erect the
appropriate barrier to further privatization," said Lockyer, adding that he
wants to stop the radical expansion of private prisons."

The measure has no chance of making it through the full Senate because that
approval would require a two-thirds vote and GOP senators could easily
block it.

The real battle will be part of the annual struggle to write a new state
budget. The final budget will either authorize contracts with one or more
private prison operators to start the privatization process or block the
effort.

The private prison conflict, meanwhile, is merely one front in the war over
privatization of government functions. Wilson has been trying for years to
contract-out such functions as state highway engineering and the affected
unions have struck back with lawsuits and. most recently, a ballot measure
that would effectively prohibit privatization. The measure, Proposition
224, will be placed before voters next month.

THE private prison companies are assuming that as California's prison
crunch grows worse and the state runs out of time to build its own new
facilities. they will be the only relief valve to prevent large-scale
inmate releases. One large company, Corrections Corporation of America,
already is in the early phases of building three California prisons on
speculation.

The prison firms have deployed squads of lobbyists and public relations
operatives to press their case. But the key is whether the companies can
strike a unionization bargain with the California Correctional Peace
Officers Association, the prison guards' union that is powerful enough to
block privatization.

Dan Walters is a columnist for the Sacramento Bee. His e-mail address is
dwalters@sac-bee.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Regarding Diane Feinstein On State's Powers (List Subscriber Shares A Letter
From California's Senior US Senator, Who Expresses Her Opinions
About Proposition 215 And Medical Marijuana)

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 20:51:44 EDT
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Gerald Sutliff (gsutliff@dnai.com)
To: Multiple recipients of list 
Subject: Regarding Diane Feinstein on states powers

Dear Talkers,

If you ever wondered where the Senior Senator from California stood on the
issue of federal vs. state powers issue, wonder no more. Just read on. The
following is a response to a letter I wrote her complaining about the
federal government coming in and, in effect, nullifying Prop. 215.

She does say, "However, I do and will support a tightly drawn
compassionate use" provision."

I think I'll write and ask what she means by that.

vty, jerry sutliff

***

Dear Mr. Sutliff:

Thank you for writing to me regarding Proposition 215, the medicinal
marijuana initiative and the Cannabis Buyers Club. I appreciate hearing
from you on this$ matter.

As you know, recent news rep&rts have indicated teen drug use rose by 105
percent from 1992 to 1995. The Public Statistics Institute, a highly
regarded non-partisan research center in California, recently found that
emergency room admissions in California related to cocaine abuse reached an
all-time high in 1994. It is in this climate of increasing drug abuse, that
we must evaluate the wisdom of the marijuana initiative.

I opposed Proposition 215 because I believed then and believe now that it
is too broadly worded and virtually legalizes the drug. However, I do and
will support a tightly drawn compassionate use" provision.

Proposition 215 did not define the term "physician" and without a
definition, many non-doctors can qualify. Secondly, the proposition states
that patients can possess or cultivate marijuana for medical use "upon the
written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician." In other
words, no written prescription is required and anyone can say they are
growing marijuana for medicinal use.

The FDA is the proper body to determine which medicines safe and effective
and they have not evaluated the use of marijuana for medical purposes.
Also, there are legal drugs which can be effectively used today to treat
nausea and to diminish pain. Moreover, the National Institute on Drug
Abuse announced that it would welcome requests for to fund research
proposals on this issue.

With respect to concerns about the enforcement of Federal drug laws that
may be contrary to those of the States, a string of court decisions in
recent decades has provided the basis for a far more active federal role
under the Tenth Amendment that historically had reserved "police powers" to
the States.

According to the Congressional Research Service, perhaps the most
significant factor behind the growth of federal police powers has been a
broader interpretation of the Constitution's "commerce clause" (u.s.
Constitution, Art. I, Section 8, Cl. 2), which explicitly gives Congress
power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. A series of court
decisions in this century has established that the impact of intrastate
commerce on interstate commerce may justify a more inclusive approach. In
addition, both Congress and the Court have shown a willingness to view
certain kinds of crime, or disorder on a large scale, as threats to
commerce in and of themselves. Evidently, it is this jurisdiction that
gives Federal law enforcement the power to enforce the Federal drug laws.

Again, thank you for writing. If you have any further comments or
questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office at (202) 224-3841.

With warmest personal regards.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

'Head Shop' Owner Takes Crusade To Court ('Ottawa Citizen' Says Mike Spindloe
Of Saskatchewan Will Challenge The Constitutionality Of A 10-Year-Old
Paraphernalia Law That Makes It A Crime To Sell 'Instruments
For Illicit Drug Use' - Spindloe's Store In Saskatoon Was Raided Last May
By Police Who Took About $4,000 Worth Of Pipes, Scales, Roach Clips,
Rolling Paper And Hemp Cookbooks)

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:03:55 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: Canada: 'Head Shop' Owner Takes Crusade To Court
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Pubdate: Mon, 11 May 1998
Source: Ottawa Citizen (Canada)
Contact: letters@thecitizen.southam.ca
Website: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/
Author: Stephen Bindman, The Ottawa Citizen

'HEAD SHOP' OWNER TAKES CRUSADE TO COURT

Saskatchewan Man Opposes 'hypocritical' Marijuana Laws

Mike Spindloe wanted to make a political statement about Canada's drug laws
when he began selling hash pipes and scales at his Saskatoon record store
three years ago.

Today, about 8,000 pipes later, he hopes to make a legal statement too.

Mr. Spindloe will be in a Saskatchewan court challenging the
constitutionality of a 10-year-old law that makes it a crime to sell
"instruments for illicit drug use."

The so-called drug paraphernalia law carries a maximum fine of $100,000 and
six months in jail for a first conviction and $300,000 and a year for
subsequent offences.

Mr. Spindloe's is the latest battle in the legal war being waged in courts
across Canada to decriminalize marijuana.

"The cannabis laws are wrong and if individual people don't stand up and
try to change them, nothing will ever happen because we have no political
leadership," said the 36-year-old owner of Vinyl Exchange in downtown
Saskatoon, who admits he's been an avid pot smoker for 20 years.

"It's just hypocritical for them to make cannabis illegal at the same time
they sell us tobacco and alcohol. As a recreational drug, it's far less
harmful, both in terms of social consequences and potential physical health
consequences, than either tobacco or alcohol.

"People aren't violent when they smoke dope, they're more than likely to
just grab a movie and a bucket of popcorn."

Mr. Spindloe is represented by Osgoode Hall law professor Alan Young, one
of the leaders of the recent cannabis court crusade.

"This is one more step towards the goal of decriminalization or
legalization, to get the government to reconsider their very misguided and
myopic drug policy as it relates to marijuana," said Mr. Young.

"We will chip away at the whole edifice of narcotics law enforcement. This
is a secondary, more minor offence that we feel it's necessary also to
challenge on constitutional grounds in order to get to the larger picture
of trying to move the government towards a more enlightened drug policy."

Mr. Spindloe's downtown store was raided by Saskatoon police last May and
about $4,000 worth of pipes, scales, roach clips, rolling paper, hemp
cookbooks and cannabis cookbooks were seized.

He was originally charged with selling both instruments and literature for
illicit drug use but the literature charges, related to magazines such as
High Times and Cannabis Canada, were recently dropped.

The law that bans literature about drug use was declared unconstitutional
four years ago by an Ontario judge and never appealed.

Mr. Spindloe says the paraphernalia law is not only a "knee-jerk reaction
to the conservative, right-wing war on drugs in the 1980s," it is
ineffective to boot.

"The law is supposed to somehow prevent people from having access to
cannabis, but it is completely ineffective for that because I'm preaching
to the converted. If I sell somebody a pipe, it's not because they're
thinking of going out and smoking marijuana, it's because they've already
got some and they want something to put it in.

"If I can sell 8,000 pipes without putting so much as a line in the
classifieds in the newspaper, obviously there's a pretty large cannabis
community that's letting each other know about my place by word of mouth."

Unlike the criminal prohibition against marijuana, which dates back to the
1920s, the paraphernalia law is a much more recent parliamentary creation
-- it began life as a private member's bill introduced in 1987 by
Conservative MP and former cop Bob Horner.

Mr. Horner told the Commons his bill, supported by the RCMP, police chiefs
and school principals, would help shut down the hundreds of "head shops"
that sell drug paraphernalia even though the drugs themselves are illegal.

"I believe that there are unscrupulous people who do not care if they leave
a trail of heartbreak behind them. They are in it for the money," the MP
said when he introduced the bill.

"They are in it for the money. They set up these shops next to video
arcades where young people happen to be and they glamourize drug use. They
sell products which tell the youth of our nation that drugs are the
greatest thing that ever happened and that without drugs they cannot get
along."

It is extremely rare for a private member's bill, especially in criminal
matters, to become law and Mr. Young believes MPs "really didn't consider
its implications."

The Criminal Code section defines an instrument for illicit drug use as
"anything designed primarily or intended under the circumstances for
consuming or to facilitate the consumption of an illicit drug."

Since the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not protect economic liberty,
Mr. Young has been forced to challenge the provision as "vague and
overbroad" and therefore contrary to the constitutional guarantee of life,
liberty and security of the person.

In his written submissions, the professor argues the law is too broad
because it converts "innocent instruments into illegal contraband" based on
the intent and use of the purchaser.

"The net of criminality is widened too broadly by the failure of the
legislation to provide any exemptions for instruments used for legitimate
medical use, for scientific research or for the public good.

"(It) overshoots the mark by criminalizing conduct which is unnecessary for
the achievement of the state purpose of curbing and combatting the illicit
drug trade."

During debate, one NDP MP complained the bill was so poorly drafted it
could outlaw things such as razor blades, syringes, bobby pins and even
crisp twenty dollar bills, which can all be used to consume drugs.

Last month, the paraphernalia law was upheld in Newfoundland by a judge who
ruled the prohibition does not "chill" legitimate businesses and Mr. Young
plans similar constitutional challenges later this year on behalf of hemp
stores in Kingston and Stratford, Ont.

"These minor offences are all part of the government's effort to sweep
everything under the carpet, so that people don't talk about drugs --
that's why there's a prohibition on literature -- and people don't sell
items that may encourage or glamourize cannabis use."

There have been a series of constitutional attacks over the past year
against the marijuana prohibition -- the one major success came in December
when an Ontario judge ruled that Terry Parker could cultivate and possess
cannabis to control his epilepsy.

That ruling is being appealed by the federal government, though Justice
Minister Anne McLellan has said Ottawa is studying the issue of
legalization for medicinal purposes.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

'Iron Fist' Of Policing SWAT Team Use Questioned ('Boston Globe'
Gives A Rare Acknowledgement Of The Social Trauma Caused By Police
Special-Weapons-And-Tactics Teams - Funded By Federal Grants,
Money Seized In Drug Raids, And Municipal Budgets,
Once Police Have A SWAT Team It Is Hard To Control
The Urge To Overuse It)

From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: "MN" 
Subject: MN: US MA: 'Iron Fist' Of Policing Swat Team Use Questioned
Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 19:44:42 -0500
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: emr@javanet.com (Dick Evans)
Pubdate: May 11, 1998
Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Contact: letters@globe.com
Website: http://www.boston.com/globe/
Author: Ric Kahn and Zachary R. Dowdy

'IRON FIST' OF POLICING SWAT TEAM USE QUESTIONED

First, Clarence Green lost his wife, Olive, to cancer. Then, he lost most of
his keepsakes of her, the girl next door he had known since she was born.

Gone were photographs of his childhood sweetheart as a raven-haired
teenager, and the 1 1/2-carat diamond ring she wore for 44 1/2 years after
he proposed on bended knee.

The mementos and more were destroyed by a December 1996 fire on Fairmount
Street that was preceded by a loud boom and bright yellow light. Green, 69,
a retired roofer, thought it was a thunderbolt. But he soon learned it was
the flash of Fitchburg's finest: The police Special Response Team had
accidentally set his apartment house ablaze with a stun grenade in its quest
to catch a dangerous drug dealer on the fourth floor. The episode left six
police officers injured, 24 people homeless, and lingering questions about
whether strategies of Special Weapons and Tactics or SWAT teams like the
Special Response unit are over the top. After all, the same SWAT unit was
criticized by civil libertarians two weeks ago for an earlier foray in
Fitchburg. The SWAT team had been called in to arrest a group of young men
in 1993 for lingering on the sidewalk and blocking the public way. The team
had ended up allegedly cursing and kicking some of the men in a police van.

A federal jury in Worcester last month absolved the officers of charges they
violated the suspects' civil rights, but the case exposed a growing practice
of police departments - their use of high-powered SWAT teams to handle
everyday predicaments.

Even as law-enforcement agencies have adopted community policing as the
mantra of the moment, the same police forces are deploying paramilitary
squads as neighborhood crime fighters. In growing numbers, small towns are
forming SWAT units.

''We're seeing the kinder, gentler approach, certainly, but the growth of
the iron fist as well,'' said Peter Kraska, a professor in the police
studies department at Eastern Kentucky University.

In an era when high-risk incidents appear ever more dangerous, many
law-enforcement specialists see the value of having a highly trained squad
at the ready.

''My take on them is that conceptually they're absolutely necessary,'' said
Peter Klinger, a criminologist at the University of Houston. ''A bombing, or
when you have people going into school yards and blowing people away, which
is happening more often these days, demonstrates why. Lack of this kind of
expertise in those situations often leads to disaster.'' But when such
specially trained personnel, pumped up and on high alert, are dispatched on
low-key missions, critics say routine operations can become reckless. ''What
is a SWAT person: Are they a soldier or a cop?'' asks Peter Cassidy, a
Boston industrial analyst who is writing ''Garrison America,'' a book on the
militarization of civic institutions.

''It's a conflict within itself and that's why things go wrong,'' said
Cassidy. ''It increases the number of guys pretending they're GI Joe.'' The
first SWAT team was created by the Los Angeles Police Department in the
mid-1960s, following civil unrest. Since then, the trend has quietly spread
to communities large and small.

Nationally, Kraska said that in 1996, 80 percent of the cities he studied
with populations greater than 50,000 had SWAT teams, while 65 percent of
smaller cities had tactical units.

Though precise numbers are not available, more than 50 municipalities in
Massachusetts share SWAT teams with other communities or have their own
squad. The communities range from Boston, a metropolis of half a million
people, to Harwich, a town on Cape Cod with a population of 11,000. Funded
by federal grants, money seized in drug raids, and municipal budgets, and
equipped with battering rams, body shields, high-powered weapons and more,
the squads are trained to respond to hostage crises, snipers, and suspects
who are armed or behind a barricade.

Last month, New Bedford's SWAT team got credit for helping to defuse a tense
hostage-taking at a McDonald's. Police, however, say one gunman may have
been fatally shot by patrol officers before the tactical unit arrived. A
second gunman got away, taking two hostages, also before the SWAT unit
arrived. While police defend their units as potent weapons in the war on
crime, critics say they confer on departments a measure of power and
prestige. ''The real reason they have risen in popularity is that they are
highly exciting and alluring to a good portion of the police subculture,''
Kraska said. ''It's intoxicating to go out and do raids on homes like Navy
Seals.'' Like those in other towns, Harwich police said that in 1996 they
formed their unit because they felt they needed a big-city response to the
coming of big-city crime.

''We've started to get more of the problems that folks in the city have been
dealing with for a while,'' said Lieutenant Barry Mitchell, who oversees the
department's Emergency Response Team.

Mitchell said Harwich's 10 Emergency Response Team members are called from
their regular shifts as police officers about once a month to handle
emergencies involving everything from domestic crises to drug dealing. Last
month, the emergency team flew into action after a woman who escaped from a
home on Main Street told them there was a man inside claiming he was Jesus
and threatening to kill her or anyone who entered. As the team plotted
strategy, the man walked to a liquor store across the street. He was tackled
and arrested.

The police posture is that they must always be prepared for the worst, and
that a disciplined SWAT team increases the likelihood of crises being
resolved peacefully.

''It makes a lot more sense to call in people who are expertly trained in
de-escalating the incident,'' said North Andover Police Chief Richard
Stanley, control officer for the regional SWAT team in northeastern
Massachusetts.

But critics say once a department has a SWAT team it is hard to control the
urge to overuse it.

''They were once reserved for the most serious situations,'' said Kraska.
''But the definition of a high-risk situation has gone from the most extreme
barricade or hostage to ... a situation where anyone refusing to come out of
their home is seen as a need to deploy a SWAT team.'' Fitchburg's SWAT team
received its marching orders in 1990: ''To establish an organized response
to unusual high-risk situations, barricaded suspects, hostage situations and
other similar life-threatening events where citizen or officer safety is at
risk.'' That night in 1993, when the group of young men were loitering on
Green Street, was a busy one for the 10-member Fitchburg Special Response
Team. Armed, masked, and dressed in black, the squad had just stormed a
Beech Street Lane apartment, deploying a stun grenade that diverts attention
with a bang and flash. From a previous undercover buy, police expected to
encounter cocaine, and a female drug dealer, armed and behind a heavily
chained door.

What they found was money, the 38-year-old woman, and her two startled
daughters, 15 and 8 years old.

''They'll never trust a cop again,'' said Cassidy. Fitchburg police said
that because the response team was already on call that night and in the
area, it was then summoned to arrest the nine young men, mostly minorities,
who refused to leave the Green Street sidewalk. ''Regardless of how they're
dressed ... no matter what they're called ... they're police officers,''
said Captain Charles Tasca of the Fitchburg police. ''They're charged with
enforcement of law, protection of property. That's what they did that
night.'' Cassidy, however, said such episodes involving SWAT teams can
undermine the public trust that the same officers try to forge through
community policing. A similar situation occurred in Boston in 1994, when a
Boston SWAT team drug raid on the wrong apartment led to the death of the
Rev. Accelyne Williams from a heart attack.

The city paid $1 millon to his widow, but ripples of mistrust against police
remain in the minority community here.

Cassidy suggested SWAT money would be better used on youth outreach.
Clarence Green would agree.

A year-and-a-half ago, the Fitchburg Special Reponse Team targeted and
arrested a drug dealer known to carry a gun who lived in Green's Fairmount
Street apartment house. Before bursting into his apartment, the team flung a
stun grenade to catch him off guard. But the device sparked a fire on the
stuffing of a sofa, the blaze spread, and the apartment building was gutted.
Now, flies hover around the empty lot where Green used to live. Even though
Green had complained to police about the drug dealer in his building, he
said of the special unit: ''I think they went wild over it.'' After the
fire, Green got a $5,000 settlement from the city. Some of the SWAT officers
were cited for bravery.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Tobacco Bill Might Cost More, GOP Study Finds
(According To 'The Orange County Register,' Congressional Republicans
Say The McCain Bill, If Passed, Would Raise $755.3 Billion To $868.9 Billion
In 25 Years Rather Than The Clinton Administration's Estimate
Of $539.9 Billion To $602.2 Billion)

Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 16:36:31 -0700
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Tobacco Bill Might Cost More, GOP Study Finds
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: John W.Black
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/
Pubdate: Mon, 11 May 1998

TOBACCO BILL MIGHT COST MORE, GOP STUDY FINDS

Consumers and tobacco companies would pay hundreds of billions of dollars
more than previously estimated under a tobacco bill to be considered by the
Senate this month, a Republican Policy Committee study said Sunday.

Some lawmakers and the tobacco industry will likely use the study as
ammunition for their arguments against the Senate Commerce Committee's
tobacco bill, drafted by Sen. John McCain, R.-Ariz.

The RPC study said the legislation, if passed, would raise $755.3 billion
to $868.9 billion over the first 25 years of its implementation.

The Clinton administration's Office of Management and Budget has previously
estimated revenues from the McCain bill over 25 years at $539.9 billion to
$602.2 billion.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Tobacco Settlement Fund Battle ('San Francisco Examiner'
Says The Likelihood Of Congress Approving A Massive New Tax Increase
For Smokers Is Decreasing As Lawmakers Quarrel Over Who Would Get The Spoils)

Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:16:50 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Tobacco Settlement Fund Battle
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com
Pubdate: Mon, 11 May 1998
Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA)
Contact: letters@examiner.com
Website: http://www.examiner.com/
Author: Judy Holland

TOBACCO SETTLEMENT FUND BATTLE

Congressional grab for money imperils opportunity for legislative accord

WASHINGTON - Efforts in Congress to curb teen smoking are being endangered
by a fight over how the government should spend the billions of dollars that
any new federal tobacco law would exact from the cigarette companies.

Some lawmakers want the money to pay for tax cuts, boost the Medicare system
or pay down the national debt. President Clinton wants to spend it for child
care tax credits, more teachers and school construction.

The money fight is being exploited by the cigarette makers, which are
claiming in a nationwide advertising campaign that they would be unfairly
taxed by the pending legislation to pay for new government spending. One
recent tobacco industry ad bears the headline, "Big Taxes, Big Government,
There they go again . . ."

Longtime smoking foe Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, called the tug of war
over tobacco dollars "an unseemly fight over money" that has threatened to
distract Congress from its goal of curbing underage smoking.

Rep. John Linder, R-Ga., who favors a narrow teen smoking bill rather than
the sweeping legislation moving through the Senate, said the money fight "is
just another form of greed." He predicted the Senate bill "doesn't have a
prayer of passing the House" because there's no public support for it.

Fearing that money fights could extinguish chances for enacting anti-smoking
legislation, Rep. James Hansen, R-Utah, and Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass.,
introduced legislation that would spread the tobacco money around to some of
the causes being pushed by their colleagues.

The Hansen-Meehan bill - designed to raise about $500 billion over 25 years
from the tobacco industry - would earmark 55 percent to pay down the
national debt, about 35 percent to settle state lawsuits against cigarette
makers and about 10 percent for anti-smoking programs.

Hansen, who along with Meehan co-chairs a House tobacco task force, said
they were besieged by people wanting a share of any tobacco money. The
supplicants included coal miners, asbestos victims, emphysema patients and
those wanting money for Medicare and Medicaid.

"When anybody sees a pot of money, they all throw their line in hoping to
reel one in," Hansen said.

The Senate bill sponsored by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. - which would force
tobacco companies to cough up $516 billion over 25 years - is silent on the
issue of how to spend the money. "We didn't want to have a fight in the
(Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation) committee," McCain said.

McCain said he wants the money to reimburse states for costs of treating
sick smokers, as well as pay for anti-smoking programs, fund federal tobacco
research and help veterans, many of whom got free cigarettes in their
military rations.

But McCain said congressional Republicans won't allow tobacco dollars to pay
for any new spending programs, such as the Clinton administration's proposal
to spend $65 billion for child care tax credits and early childhood
education, more teachers and new school construction.

Clinton insists he won't let tobacco legislation die in a dispute with
Republicans over how to spend money from an increased cigarette tax. "I
would never stand in the way of a tobacco bill that actually reduced
childhood smoking because they disagreed with me about how to invest the
money," he said last week.

Meanwhile, health advocacy groups have their own ideas on how the money
should be spent.

Bill Novelli, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a coalition
of major health groups and anti-smoking advocates, said he hopes $3.5
billion would be spent for anti-smoking measures, to help the Food and Drug
Administration regulate tobacco and to fund research on tobacco addiction.

John Garrison of the American Lung Association said the money fight has
obscured the real reason for a cigarette price increase: to make smoking too
expensive for minors.

(c)1998 San Francisco Examiner

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Deported Criminals Stream Back Into The US By The Thousands
('San Francisco Chronicle' Says The Number Of Illegal Aliens
Who Are Deported, Only To Return And Be Arrested Again,
Is Increasing Rapidly And Expensively)

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:51:56 -0700
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Deported Criminals Stream Back Into the U.S.
by the Thousands
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Pubdate: Mon, 11 May 1998
Author: Bill Wallace, Chronicle Staff Writer

DEPORTED CRIMINALS STREAM BACK INTO THE U.S. BY THE THOUSANDS

Hector Feliz-Esparza, a 25-year-old illegal immigrant from Mexico, was
deported on Jan. 8, 1997, following his conviction in Redwood City on drug
and weapons charges.

Five months later, Feliz-Esparza was arrested in the Bay Area again for
drunk driving. He now faces federal immigration charges that could put him
in a U.S. prison for up to 10 years.

Feliz-Esparza is one of thousands of illegal immigrants arrested in the
United States each year -- even though they have been arrested here before
and then deported.

These revolving-door deportation cases pose a serious challenge to law
enforcement agencies and cost taxpayers millions of dollars each year. And
with the number of such cases apparently rising, federal officials are
beginning to change the way the cases are prosecuted.

Federal officials call them ``1326'' cases, referring to the criminal code
section the illegal immigrants are charged with violating.

It appears the lure is the fact that crossing back into California is so
easy -- and the criminal rewards are so lucrative.

``When you are talking about people from Mexico who are burglars or robbers
or drug dealers, there's a tremendous pull factor for those individuals to
keep coming back because it is simply more profitable for them to ply their
trade in the United States,'' said Russ Bergeron, a spokesman for the U.S.
Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Although the Justice Department does not keep separate statistics on the
prosecution of criminal deportees who return to the United States, spot
checks of federal judicial districts in California suggest the number of
1326 cases is getting larger.

In San Diego, for example, the U.S. Attorney's office prosecuted 1,606 of
the cases last year -- an increase of more than 20 percent in the past
three years. And federal border jurisdictions like Texas, Arizona and
Washington state are also handling a growing number of the cases.

In the rest of California, 1326 cases represent a smaller -- but still
significant -- portion of each U.S. attorney's criminal caseload. In Los
Angeles, for example, federal prosecutors filed 127 of the cases last year,
almost one out of every nine criminal cases the office prosecuted.

Mrozek said the Los Angeles office screens cases carefully and prosecutes
only the deportees with the longest and most serious criminal records.

Even in the Bay Area, nearly 600 miles from the Mexican border, prosecution
of previously deported criminals forms a major portion of the U.S.
attorney's caseload. Last year, the local U.S. Attorney's office processed
around 200 criminal returnee cases, according to Chief Assistant U.S.
Attorney Steven Shefler.

``We consider this a serious problem,'' Shefler said.

According to statistics released by the U.S. Justice Department in October,
federal immigration officials deported 50,165 aliens for involvement in
criminal activity during fiscal year 1997. Nearly twothirds of them had
been convicted of crimes considered aggravated felonies and 43 percent had
committed drug offenses.

On the surface, it would seem simpler and cheaper to deport these criminals
instead of prosecuting them as felons and sending them to U.S. prisons. But
federal officials said sending criminal deportees back to their native
country -- where they are free to return again -only encourages them to
keep violating the law.

Assistant U.S. Attorney John Kraemer, who oversees the San Diego federal
border crimes unit, noted that handing out minor jail sentences to criminal
returnees does not keep them from returning to the United States.

``We found that filing misdemeanors was worthless in terms of deterrent
value,'' Kraemer said.

He said his district replaced that approach with a fast-track program
designed to speed resolution of the 1326 cases. The get-tough method
requires defendants to waive indictment, a formal presentencing report, and
a variety of appellate rights (a typical requirement in plea bargain
arrangements). In exchange, the defendants agree in advance to a fixed
sentence that is less than the maximum that could be imposed.

Because so many time-consuming steps are eliminated, cases are generally
resolved in a matter of a few months.

``The stakes have gone up now. If you are deported and you come back and
are arrested again, you could do as much as . . . 10 years,'' Kraemer said.

The San Diego program has been very successful, Kraemer said, and is
credited by local law enforcement agencies with suppressing a great deal of
crime in San Diego.

``We've done around 4,700 of these cases this way now, and there are 4,700
people in prison who aren't out on the street committing new crimes,'' he
said. ``The word definitely gets around.''

Kraemer said San Diego established its program without increasing the size
of its prosecuting staff, requiring additional judges or spending more on
detention facilities.

In other California jurisdictions, however, 1326 prosecutions are processed
like any other criminal case: Each requires the filing of a criminal
complaint and a federal grand jury indictment. Each indictment requires
spending thousands of taxpayer dollars.

In addition, local, state and federal resources committed to tracking down,
prosecuting and incarcerating criminal deportees who have unlawfully
returned to the United States cannot be used to provide other law
enforcement services.

Nor do the court costs associated with these cases necessarily end after a
conviction. Except in San Diego, guilty verdicts or sentences are sometimes
appealed, adding additional legal fees to the taxpayers' bill.

For example, in 1997 Ignacio Gonzalez-Valencia appealed the seven-year
prison sentence he received for his 1326 case in Sacramento, even though
the maximum he could have received was 22 years.

Last month, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld the
sentence -- but only after a transcript of the original case had been
prepared and Gonzalez- Valencia's appeal had been heard by a three-judge
panel of the appellate court.

1998 San Francisco Chronicle

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Mexican Druglords Have Turned To Commercial Ventures To Bring Their Goods
Across The Border ('Orange County Register' Article With Tautological Headline
Says A Confidential Report By Operation Alliance, The Task Force
Led By The US Customs Service, Has Concluded That The North American
Free Trade Agreement Has Made It Easier Than Ever For Mexican Traffickers
To Smuggle Drugs, And American Authorities Aren't Doing Enough
To Counter The Fast-Growing Threat)

From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: "MN" 
Subject: MN: Mexico: Mexican Druglords Have Turned To Commercial Ventures
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 07:53:37 -0500
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Pubdate: May 11, 98
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/
Author: Tracey Eaton

Mexican Druglords Have Turned To Commercial Ventures To bring their goods
across the border.

MEXICO CITY -The North American Free Trade Agreement has made it easier than
ever for Mexican traffickers to smuggle drugs, and American authorities
aren't doing enough to counter the fast-growing threat, a U.S. task force
has concluded.

Sophisticated drug gangs are investing in everything from trucking companies
and rail lines to warehouses and shipping firms to shield their trafficking
activities, according to a confidential report by Operation Alliance, a task
force led by the U.S. Customs Service.

Drug traffickers are using "commercial trade-related businesses...to exploit
the rising tide of cross-border commerce," said the 63-page report, "Drug
Trafficking, Commercial Trade and NAFTA on the Southwest Border.'

While many U.S. officials avoid even talking about potential free-trade ties
to trafficking, Mexican smugglers have been busy hiring consultants to learn
how to take advantage of NAFTA, some former drug agents say.

Authors of the report, nearly two years in the making, say they weren't out
to judge NAFTA, seeking instead to know if traffickers were exploiting legal
trade to further their illicit enterprises.

What they found is that drug gangs have learned they can get more done with
an MBA than an AK-47.

The report, marked "law-enforcement sensitive," says traffickers were so
gung-ho about free trade they began studying its intricacies even before
NAFTA was approved Jan. 1, 1994.

"If drug traffickers are researching NAFTA, it would be wise for more in the
law-enforcement community to do the same," it adds.

The free trade agreement is aimed at wiping out all tariffs among the United
States, Mexico and Canada by 2008. Its supporters say it has been a great
success, doubling trade between Mexico and the United States to $168
billion.

They dispute the suggestion that the trade agreement has boosted drug
trafficking.

"There's no question that drugs are continuing to go across the border. But
you can't pin the rap on NAFTA. That's a simplistic leap that some people
make," said a Senate source who requested anonymity.

Even before NAFTA, traffickers routinely hid drugs in commercial shipments.
But some former drug agents say free trade has given smugglers the upper
hand.

"If you believe NAFTA has not adversely affected the fight against drug
traffickers, then you must believe in the tooth fairy," said Tom Cash, a
former high-level DEA official.

The sheer volume of U.S.-bound cargo, some 400 million tons per year, makes
it harder to find contraband, he and others said.

Border inspectors are under intense pressure to speed the flow of people and
goods, he said, and can't always do thorough inspections.

Mexican traffickers are believed to smuggle an estimated 330 tons of
cocaine, 14 tons of heroin and hundreds of tons of marijuana into the United
States every year.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

War On Drugs Disastrous Failure ('Calgary Sun' Editorial Columnist
Bill Kaufman Says It's Time For Canada To End Drug Prohibition -
More People Are Killed Each Year As A Result Of The War On Drugs -
Mainly From The Violence Inspired By Prohibition - Than From Overdoses)

From: creator@islandnet.com (Matt Elrod)
To: mattalk@listserv.islandnet.com
Subject: Canada: War on drugs disastrous failure
Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:21:00 -0700
Lines: 75
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Source: Calgary Sun
Contact: callet@sunpub.com
Pubdate: May 11, 1998
Author: BILL KAUFMANN -- Calgary Sun

WAR ON DRUGS DISASTROUS FAILURE

OPPRESSIVE FANTASIES OF PROHIBITION CREATE CRIMINALS AS BLINDED LEADERSHIP
REMAINS BOGGED IN INERTIA

Normally, when a course of action has proven such an overwhelming
failure that it feeds the problem, that approach is dropped in favor
of new ideas.

Not so with the war on drugs. This annual, multi-billion dollar
debacle whose prohibition fuels the engine of the black market is
curiously defended at all costs by the agents of inertia.

They'd rather ply the safe side of the political street than embark
on innovative policy requiring leadership.

Increasing numbers of law enforcement veterans and conservative
pundits are questioning the philosophy of criminalizing the personal
use of various drugs. So why do other conservatives worship personal
responsibility, yet insist on the criminalization of private choice?

In a free society, why should the state intrude on a choice of
substance we may deign to use? We know this approach doesn't work and
its police state overtones are unworthy of our notions of basic human
freedoms.

Educate by all means -- as has worked in the case of tobacco -- but
to waste scarce crime-fighting resources on such unreachable
objectives is clearly preposterous. When $500 worth of heroin or
cocaine at the source is transformed into $100,000 on the streets of
North America, "all the cops, prisons and executions in the world
cannot impede a market with that kind of tax-free profit margin,"
writes former Kansas City, Mo. police chief Joseph McNamara. "It's the
illegality that permits the obscene markup, enriching drug
traffickers."

Drugs are here to stay; there's no longer any point in pretending
otherwise. Learning to better manage their use, as has been done with
alcohol, makes more sense than fantasy attempts to prohibit them.

Some of those fantasies have led to oppressive agony for Americans,
half of whose prison population now consists of drug offenders.

Some Americans caught growing larger amounts of marijuana are now
imprisoned for the rest of their natural lives, while violent
criminals of the worst order can easily see a light at the end of
their barred tunnel.

Last month in this newspaper, one of the Calgary Police Service's
most wanted was a man sought for possession of marijuana and
production of a controlled substance. Not enough violent criminals to
go around, I guess.

More people are killed each year as a result of the war on drugs --
mainly from the violence inspired by prohibition-inflated dope prices
-- than from overdose. For Vancouver deputy police chief Ken Higgins,
the bankruptcy of laws criminalizing heroin possession in light of
that city's AIDS epidemic are obvious. The need to tackle the opiate
curse medically are just as clear.

"If we wiped the chalkboard clean and said how would we deal with the
situation now, the last thing we'd come up with is the present
system," Higgins says. Prohibitionists claim decriminalization would
create a nation of addicts, with no basis in historical fact. And
after any repeal, drug potency and purity would be regulated --
reducing the risk of overdose.

These concepts are difficult to embrace, due mainly to the
ideological climate that's been so long entrenched.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

It's D-Day In War On Bike Gangs ('London Free Press' In Ontario
Says Ontario's Top Cops Will Be In London Today To Show Off
The New Heat They're Packing In The War Against Outlaw Biker Gangs -
Code Words In Canada For 'Illegal Drug Traffickers')

From: creator@islandnet.com (Matt Elrod)
To: mattalk@listserv.islandnet.com
Subject: It's D-day in war on bike gangs
Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:01:59 -0700
Lines: 80
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Source: London Free Press
Contact: letters@lfpress.com
Pubdate: May 11, 1998
Author: Greg Van Moorsel -- Free Press Reporter

IT'S D-DAY IN WAR ON BIKE GANGS

Ontario's top cops will be in London today to show off the new heat
they're packing in the war against outlaw biker gangs.

The city will play host to the formal launch of a bulked-up police
task force aimed at routing the bikers.

The recent Ontario budget promised funding to enlarge an existing OPP
anti-biker squad and link it closely with 16 municipal forces and the
RCMP.

London, Toronto and Ottawa-Carleton police are among those included
in the alliance, expected to cost $3.4 million in its first year and
$2.7 million a year to operate after that.

The launch here is a bow to London police Chief Julian Fantino, who
pushed for the project.

With the slaying of two bikers in London last month, including the
head of the London chapter of the Outlaws, Fantino said he may take
Solicitor General Jim Flaherty, one of the officials here today, past
a gang clubhouse if he wants a first-hand look.

FEDERAL HELP

Fantino, who heads a national police strategy to deal with biker
gangs and crime, said Ottawa could help by tightening criminal laws
and sending more money seized from the proceeds of crime to the
provinces, which could direct it to front-line enforcement agencies.

"We need some significant help to deal with this problem right across
the country and beyond," he said, noting bikers have been linked to
dozens of Quebec killings in recent years and Ontario is seeing more
of the fallout.

Bikers, he noted, were implicated in a bomb blast 1 1/2 years ago at
Sudbury police headquarters.

The OPP's anti-biker squad will be boosted to 20 members from seven.

APPLAUDED

London Mayor Dianne Haskett applauded the move, saying she's
especially concerned about biker gangs trying to "exploit and
control," through drugs and prostitution, young women who work in
strip clubs.

Last month's two killings, for which two London brothers are wanted,
were "a wake-up call to the city" that gangs are a problem, Haskett
said.

OPP have been directed by the Ontario government to rid the province
of outlaw biker gangs, especially the Hells Angels.

Police say there are about a dozen biker gangs in Ontario with
hundreds of known members.

70 DEATHS

Biker wars in Quebec, where the Hells Angels dominate, have claimed
about 70 lives in recent years, many of the deaths linked to control
of the drug trade.

Observers have speculated last month's two fatal shootings in London
were a response to bikers muscling in on local drug turf.

Ontario, with a hot economy and large population, presents a
lucrative market for gang crime, said London South MPP Bob Wood, who
sits on the Tory government's anti-crime commission.

Wood said the expanded task force should give police a better
early-warning and detection system to combat gangs. "What we're really
doing is putting more money into what we've already got," he said.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Cops Need Cash - Answer To Fight Biker Gangs ('Calgary Sun'
Says Calgary Police Commissioner Patti Grier Blamed An Explosion
At An Edmonton Strip Club Last Week On Biker Gangs,
Indicating Her Suspicions Justify Giving Canadian Crime-Fighters
More Money To Fight Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs)

From: creator@islandnet.com (Matt Elrod)
To: mattalk@listserv.islandnet.com
Subject: Cops need cash
Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:22:32 -0700
Lines: 37
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Source: Calgary Sun
Contact: callet@sunpub.com
Pubdate: May 11, 1998
Author: PATRICK CARON -- Calgary Sun

COPS NEED CASH

ANSWER TO FIGHT BIKER GANGS

A Calgary police commissioner says Canadian crime-fighters need more
money to fight outlaw motorcycle gangs.

Ald. Patti Grier said she was troubled by an Edmonton strip club
explosion last week that's suspected to have links to biker gangs.

"I think the concern is the escalation of violence with different
incidents, and that is, I'm sure, a concern to all citizens," said
Grier.

She said police across Canada need more money to deal with the
problem.

But Yves Lavigne, a Canadian author who has written extensively on
the Hell's Angels, says outlaw bikers are already entrenched in
Canada.

"It's too late. They're here forever," said Lavigne.

"I blame laziness on the part of police administrators for not taking
care of this problem when they had the chance.

"If you really want to get rid of biker gangs, you have to have a
full-time, life-long commitment, but that would cost money."

City police Supt. Bill Sherlock said more money is needed for
in-depth investigations to cut into outlaw biker gang activities.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Drug Paraphernalia Law Faces Challenge (Version In The Kitchener-Waterloo,
Ontario, 'Record')

From: "Starr" 
To: "legalize" , "mattalk" ,
"maptalk" 
Subject: Drug Paraphernalia Law Faces Challenge
Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:15:10 -0400
Source: The Record (Kitchener-Waterloo)
recordletters@southam.ca
Date: May 11, 1998
By: Stephen Bindman- Southam Newspapers

DRUG PARAPHERNALIA LAW FACES CHALLENGE

SASKATOON -- Mike Spindloe wanted to make a political statement about
Canada's drug laws when he began selling hash pipes and scales at his
Saskatoon record store three years ago.

Today, about 8,000 pipes later, he hopes to make a legal statement, too.

Spindloe will be in court challenging the constitutionality of a
10-year-old law that makes it a crime to sell "instruments for illicit drug
use."

The so-called drug paraphernalia law carries a maximum fine of $100,000 and
six months in jail for a first conviction and $300,000 and a year for
subsequent offences.

Spindloe's is the latest battle in the legal war waged in courts across
Canada to decriminalize marijuana.

"The cannabis laws are wrong and if individual people don't stand up and
try to change them, nothing will ever happen because we have no political
leadership," said the 36-year-old owner of Vinyl Exchange in downtown
Saskatoon, who admits he's been an avid pot smoker for 20 years.

"It's just hyporcritical for them to make cannabis illegal at the same time
they sell us tobacco and alcohol. As a recreational srug, it's far less
harmful, both in terms of social consequences and potential physical health
consequences, than either tobacco or alcohol."

Spindloe is represented by Osgoode Hall law professor Alan Young, one of
the leaders of the recent cannabis court crusade.

"This is one more step towards the goal of derciminalization or
legalization, to get the government to reconsider their very misguided and
myopic drug policy as it relates to marijuana," said Young.

"We will chip away at the whole edifice of narcotics law enforcement. This
is a secondary, more minor offence that we feel it's necessary also to
challenge on constutional grounds in order to get to the larger picture of
trying to move the government towards a more enlightened drug policy."

Spindloe's store was raided by Saskatoon police last May and about $4,000
worth of pipes, scales, roach clips, rolling paper, hemp cookbooks and
cannabis cookbooks were seized.

Spindloe says the paraphernalia law is not only a "knee-jerk reaction to
the conservative, right-wing war on drugs in the 1980s," it is ineffective
to boot.

"The law is supposed to somehow prevent people from having access to
cannabis, but it is completely ineffective for that because I'm preaching
to the converted. If I sell a pipe, it's not because they're thinking about
going out and smoking marjuana, it's because they've already got some and
they want something to put it in."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Cannabis Decriminalisation Calls (Alcohol And Other Drugs Council
Of Australia's 'ADCA Daily News' Notes The Victorian Premier's
Advisory Council On Illicit Drugs Endorsed Decriminalisation Of Marijuana
Yesterday Despite One Panelist's Insistence Heavy Marijuana Use
Causes 'Long-Tem Effects On The Brain')

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 00:41:55 EDT
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: UPDATE - NEWS - Cannabis Decriminalisation Calls
Return-Path: (owner-update@wilma.netinfo.com.au)
From: McCormack (petermcc@adca.org.au)
To: "'ADCA News of the Day'" (update@adca.org.au)
Subject: UPDATE - NEWS - Cannabis Decriminalisation Calls
Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:38:12 +1000
Sender: owner-update@wilma.netinfo.com.au
Reply-To: McCormack (petermcc@adca.org.au)

CANBERRA TIMES 11 May 1998 p3
AUSTRALIAN 11 May 1998 p3
HOBART MERCURY 11 May 1998 p4
DAILY TELEGRAPH 11 May 1998 p16
HERALD SUN 11 May 1998 p8

An expert panel endorsed decriminalisation of marijuana yesterday despite
Australian research establishing long-tem effects on the brain. A National
Drug and Alcohol Research Centre researcher, Dr Nadia Solowij said her
studies showed smoking marijuana more than twice a week or once a month for
five years could make it harder for users to remember, pay attention or
organise complex information. Dr Solowij stressed the impaired information
filtering was only subtle and due to changes in how brains worked rather
than brain damage. But Dr Solowij and fellow panelist and chairman of the
Victorian Premier's Advisory Council on Illicit Drugs Professor David
Penington, insisted it was wrong for marijuana use to be treated as an
offence rather than a health issue. "Even though I have identified some
harms associated with cannabis use, they are subtle and I think the greater
harm....is the fact it's illegal and exposes people to criminal activity
and other harder drugs."

***

The Alcohol and other Drugs Council of Australia (ADCA) Daily News selects
one story only from the many that comprise the national news for posting to
this listserv. Copies of articles can be faxed or mailed on request and at
no cost. Requests can be made by phone 02 62811002, fax 02 6282 7364 or
email library@adca.org.au To subscribe to this listserv, send the message
"subscribe update" (without the inverted commas) in the text field to
majordomo@majordomo.netinfo.com.au with the subject field left empty.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Keep Marijuana Users Out Of Jail, Say Experts
(Version In Australia's 'Daily Telegraph')

Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 10:39:54 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: Australia: Keep Marijuana Users Out of Jail, Say Experts
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Ken Russell
Pubdate: Mon, 11 May 1998
Source: Daily Telegraph (Australia)
Contact: dtmletr@matp.newsltd.com

KEEP MARIJUANA USERS OUT OF JAIL, SAY EXPERTS

An expert panel yesterday endorsed decriminalisation of marijuana despite
Australian research establishing long-term effects on the brain.

National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre researcher Dr Nadia Solowij said
her studies showed smoking marijuana more than twice a week could make it
harder for users to remember, pay attention or organise complex information.

Dr Solowij stressed the impaired information filtering was only subtle and
was due to changes in how brains worked rather than brain damage.

"But it's probable an inability to focus attention and filter out
distractors would affect learning in the classroom and work performance in
jobs where mental operations predominate," she told a a Science Now! public
forum.

But Dr Solowij and fellow panellist and chairman of the Victorian Premier's
Advisory Council on Illicit Drugs, Professor David Penington, said it was
wrong for marijuana use to be treated as an offence rather than a health issue.

"Even though I have identified some harms, associated with cannabis use,
they are subtle and I think the greater harm ... is the fact it's illegal
and exposes people to criminal activity and other harder drugs," she said.

Prof Penington said young people rejected arguments that marijuana use
should be a criminal offence when alcohol was responsible for far more deaths.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Olympic Ban (A Parisian's Letter To The Editor Of 'The European'
Says The Recent Decision Of The International Olympics Committee
To Add Cannabis To Its List Of Banned Substances Isn't Rational -
'Clearly This Decision Reflects A Personal Obsession
On The Part Of Key IOC Members')

From: "ralph sherrow" 
To: ralphkat@hotmail.com
Subject: Olympic ban
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 01:13:30 PDT

FRANCE: PUB LTE: Olympic Ban

Newshawk: shug@shug.co.uk
Pubdate: Mon, 11 May 1998
Source: European, The
Contact: editor@the-european.com
Website: http://www.the-european.com/
Author: Gerard Mulholland

OLYMPIC BAN

I have been trying to understand the reasons for the International
Olympics Committee's decision to add cannabis to the list of
proscribed drugs for which Olympic athletes will be tested.

It cannot be because cannabis is "performance enhancing". It isn't. On
the contrary, cannabis is a relaxing recreational drug that inhibits
performance of any kind. If the IOC wants an all-inclusive list of
performance-enhancing drugs it should have added tea and coffee to
its list, not to mention chocolate.

It cannot be simply because cannabis is illegal in some countries,
because that logic would oblige the IOC to ban both alcohol and
female athletes. It cannot be to avoid offending the domestic legislation
of host countries, because it would not offend in all such countries.
Besides, athletes are bound to obey the domestic legislation of their
host country, regardless of any IOC rule.

Clearly, this decision reflects a personal obsession on the part of key
IOC members. This obsession is with the separate question of the war
on illegal recreational drugs. It has nothing to do with the global
campaign against performance-enhancing drugs in sport.

The war against illegal drugs is contentious, not universal and certainly
does not enjoy unqualified public support. It is a battle which shows
every sign of being very expensively lost. The campaign against
performance-enhancing drugs in sport is global, universally approved
and opposed only by cheats.

By irrationally mixing the two campaigns, the IOC has delivered a
severe blow to what is left of the ideals of Pierre de Coubertin. As we
lose the war against illegal drugs, the public perception of sporting
drugs will be changed and eventually that will be lost as well, to the
great regret of far more people than the short-sighted IOC.

Gerard Mulholland Paris, France.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

[End]