Portland NORML News - Thursday, July 9, 1998
-------------------------------------------------------------------

NORML Weekly News (Marijuana Appears To Protect Against Brain Injuries,
Federal Researchers Find; Hemp Could Be Lucrative Cash Crop For State,
University Of Kentucky Report Says; Medical Marijuana Proposals Await
November Ballots In Several States; Comprehensive Look At Marijuana's
Medical History And Potential As An Analgesic In July Issue Of
'The International Association For The Study Of Pain')

From: NORMLFNDTN@aol.com
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:08:10 EDT
Subject: NORML WPR 7/9/98 (II)

The NORML Foundation Weekly Press Release

1001 Connecticut Ave., NW
Ste. 710
Washington, DC 20036
202-483-8751 (p)
202-483-0057 (f)
www.norml.org
normlfndtn@aol.com

July 9, 1998

***

Marijuana Appears To Protect Against Brain Injuries, Federal Researchers
Find

July 9, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Research published in this week's
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences demonstrates that
naturally occurring compounds in marijuana may protect brain cells during
a stroke.

Researchers at the National Institute for Mental Health found that
THC, the chief psychoactive compound in marijuana, and cannabidiol (CBD),
a nonpsychoactive component that previously showed promise as an
anti-convulsant, both appear to be potent antioxidants in laboratory
studies. Doctors rely on antioxidants to protect stroke victims from
exposure to toxic levels of a brain chemical called glutamate. Head
trauma and strokes cause the release of excessive glutamate, often
resulting in irreversible damage to brain cells.

Scientists asserted that CBD could hold advantages over other
antioxidants because the compound is fast acting and nontoxic. "We have
something that passes the brain barrier easily, has low toxicity, and
appears to be working in animal trials," lead researcher Aidan Hampson
said. "I think we have a good chance" to help patients with this
compound.

The U.S. study follows earlier research conducted in Israel
demonstrating that Dexanabinol -- a synthetic analog derived from
marijuana -- protects healthy brain cells against glutamate. Israeli
researchers declared this May that the drug will undergo Phase III human
trials shortly. They hope to begin marketing the drug by the year 2000.

Allen St. Pierre, Executive Director of The NORML Foundation, said
that the new research strengthens the need for medical marijuana reform.
"This research highlights the therapeutic value of compounds in marijuana
besides THC," he said. "Patients find maximum relief from whole smoked
marijuana because the plant contains several therapeutic properties
unavailable elsewhere. Federal law must change to allow patients access
to these naturally occurring compounds."

Federal law currently prohibits the medical use of marijuana and all
the plant's active compounds other than synthetic THC.

Harvard Medical School professor Lester Grinspoon said this research
represented the "tip of the iceberg" as far as the medical potential of
the marijuana plant. "When science gets serious about investigating
cannabis as a medicine, we will discover many more such findings," he
said. Grinspoon also stressed that the scientific community has come
full circle regarding marijuana's effects on the brain.

"The debate has moved from alleging that marijuana destroys brain
cells to finding that cannabis is clearly neuropathic," he said.

The findings indicate that marijuana may also hold medical value in
the treatment of brain diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, the
team of U.S. scientists said.

For more information, please contact either Allen St. Pierre or Paul
Armentano of The NORML Foundation @ (202) 483-8751. Dr. Lester Grinspoon
may be reached @ (617) 277-3621.

***

Hemp Could Be Lucrative Cash Crop For State, University Of Kentucky
Report Says

July 9, 1998, Louisville, KY: Hemp would rank second only to tobacco
products as a cash crop for Kentucky farmers, concluded a $23,000 study
conducted by Center for Business and Economy Research at the University
of Kentucky. The 18-month study also determined that present market
demand for the crop could support the cultivation of 82,000 acres in the
United States.

"We believe the UK study is a landmark, watershed event," said John
Gilderbloom, a University of Louisville economics professor who wrote a
forward endorsing the study. "This is the premiere study done on the
impact of hemp."

Gilderbloom said the environmental advantages of hemp, coupled with
the crop's economic potential, give the plant an edge over other possible
alternatives to tobacco. "The UK report could provide the spark for a
serious review and evaluation of the benefits of industrial hemp for the
state of Kentucky and the United States," he concluded.

At least 29 nations -- including Canada, France, England, Germany,
Japan, and Australia -- allow farmers to cultivate hemp for industrial
purposes. The report found that farmers in the European Union grew over
50,000 acres of hemp in 1997 alone. U.S. law forbids the cultivation of
hemp because the plant is of the same species as marijuana.

Authors of the study, entitled "Economic Impact of Industrial Hemp in
Kentucky," argued that climate and soil conditions make Kentucky "the
primary area in North America for growing industrial hemp." They
estimated that legalizing the crop could lead to hundreds of full-time
jobs and millions of dollars in workers earnings for the state.

This study is "the knockout punch for opponents to hemp, including the
nation's Drug Czar [Barry McCaffrey,]" Gilderbloom announced.

For more information, please contact either Paul Armentano or Allen
St. Pierre of The NORML Foundation @ (202) 483-8751. Copies of the study
are available online at: http://www.hempgrowers.com. University of
Kentucky's Center for Business and Economic Research may be contacted @
(606) 257-7675.

***

Medical Marijuana Proposals Await November Ballots In Several States

July 9, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Petitioners hoping to place medical
marijuana proposals on the November ballots in Colorado, Oregon, and
Washington state turned in signatures to their respective Secretary of
State offices this week. In all cases, the number of signatures far
exceeded the state's requirement to place an initiative on the ballot.

"These signatures represent thousands of citizens who care about
relieving the suffering of patients with terminal or debilitating
illnesses such as cancer and AIDS," said Dr. Rob Killian of Washington
Citizens for Medical Rights. The group collected over 230,000 signatures
in support of their medical marijuana measure.

Proposals in all three states seek to exempt seriously ill patients
from state criminal marijuana charges if they use the drug medicinally
under a physician's supervision.

Medical marijuana petitioners in Nevada are also awaiting validation
from the Secretary of State's office to determine whether they turned in
the required number of valid signatures last month to certify their
initiative. In addition, spokesmen from Washington D.C.'s ACT-UP
announced they acquired enough signatures to place their proposal on the
upcoming ballot..

A similar initiative filed in Alaska has already qualified for this
year's fall ballot.

"This will be an unprecedented opportunity for voters across the
nation to voice their direct support for a seriously ill patient's right
to use marijuana medicinally," NORML Executive Director R. Keith Stroup,
Esq. said.

For more information, please contact either Keith Stroup of NORML @
(202) 483-5500 or Dave Fratello of Americans for Medical Rights @ (310)
394-2952. Washington Citizens for Medical Rights may be contacted @
(206) 781-7716.

***

A COMPREHENIVE LOOK AT MARIJUANA'S MEDICAL HISTORY AND POTENTIAL AS AN
ANALGESIC APPEARS IN THIS MONTH'S ISSUE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION
FOR THE STUDY OF PAIN. THE AUTHOR, DR. ETHAN RUSSO OF THE WESTERN
MONTANA CLINIC, HAS SOUGHT FEDERAL APPROVAL FOR OVER ONE YEAR TO CONDUCT
CLINICAL TRIALS ON THE EFFECTS OF WHOLE SMOKED MARIJUANA AND MIGRAINE.

				- END -
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Feds Seek To Close Three Pot Clubs - Oakland Adopts Lenient Marijuana Policy
('The Oakland Tribune' Notes On The Same Day The Oakland City Council
Approved California's Most Lenient Policy On Medical Marijuana,
The Clinton Administration Stepped Up Efforts To Close The Oakland
Cannabis Buyers Cooperative And Two Other Dispensaries)
Link to earlier story
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 12:16:58 EDT Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org Reply-To: gsutliff@dnai.com Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org From: Gerald Sutliff (gsutliff@dnai.com) To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org) Subject: "Feds seek to close 3 pot clubs" Source: Oakland Tribune, Front Page, above the fold, 7-9-98 Contact: triblet@angnewspapers.com Newshawk: Jerry Sutliff Feds seek to close 3 pot clubs Oakland adopts lenient marijuana policy by Kathleen Kirkwood, Staff Writer OAKLAND -- The same day local officials approved the state's most lenient policy on medical marijuana, the Clinton administration stepped up efforts to close the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and two other clubs. Federal officials filed a motion Tuesday with U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer asking that the U.S. marshal be authorized to immediately shut down medicinal cannabis clubs in Oakland and in Marin and Mendocino counties. Operators of the Oakland club, which has 1,750 members, said Wednesday they will continue to operate until forced to close. The government also filed motions ordering the clubs to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of a preliminary injunction ordering them to cease operations. Hearings on the contempt motions will be held Aug. 14, said attorney Robert Raich, representing the Oakland club. "This Is being driven by a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington," Raich said. "They don't have to deal with the fallout of their actions. These are seriously ill people we're talking about . .. not hippies who want to get stoned." Late Tuesday, the Oakland City Council quietly endorsed a policy. included among a batch of committee reports, allowing medical marijuana users to have 1 1/2 pounds of cannabis, described as a three-month supply. That breaks down to about a half-pound per month, or 10 marijuana cigarettes per day, for patients who use cannabis as a way to combat nausea from such illnesses as AIDS and cancer. Developed by a committee of police. city legal staff, physicians, patients and Oakland cannabis club representatives. the policy directs officers not to confiscate marijuana, or arrest a user, if it meets the criteria. Oakland patients who present the proper documentation will be able to possess 30 outdoor flowering (or harvestable) plants, 48 indoor plants or 11/2 pounds of processed marijuana. "This takes cooperation between Oakland patients and enforcement to a new level," said Jeff Jones, the Oaklaffd club's executive director. "I hope this kind of partnership will eventually be mirrored across California and country." The policy is the most permissive in the state since Prop. 215, the medical marijuana initiative approved by voters in 1996, was implemented. By contrast, Attorney General Dan Lungren's office has issue guidelines that allow only ounce, characterized as a 30-day supply. The attorney general has criticized the Oakland policy. but a spokesman said Wednesday no action has been planned. The attorney general will wait until Oakland actually carry out its policy. said Matt Ross, a Lungreri spokesman. Although cannabis club supporters say the quantities outlined in the policy are based on ongoing U.S. Food and Drug Administration tests of medical marijuana, FDA officials say they know of no such tests.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Feds Seek To Close Three Pot Clubs ('The Oakland Tribune' Version)

Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:36:29 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Feds seek to close 3 pot clubs
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Jerry Sutliff
Source: Oakland Tribune
Contact: triblet@angnewspapers.com
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998
Author: Kathleen Kirkwood, Staff Writer

FEDS SEEK TO CLOSE 3 POT CLUBS

Oakland adopts lenient marijuana policy

OAKLAND -- The same day local officials approved the state's most lenient
policy on medical marijuana, the Clinton administration stepped up efforts
to close the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and two other clubs.

Federal officials filed a motion Tuesday with U.S. District Court Judge
Charles Breyer asking that the U.S. marshal be authorized to immediately
shut down medicinal cannabis clubs in Oakland and in Marin and Mendocino
counties.

Operators of the Oakland club, which has 1,750 members, said Wednesday they
will continue to operate until forced to close.

The government also filed motions ordering the clubs to show cause why they
should not be held in contempt of a preliminary injunction ordering them to
cease operations. Hearings on the contempt motions will be held Aug. 14,
said attorney Robert Raich, representing the Oakland club.

"This Is being driven by a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington," Raich said.

"They don't have to deal with the fallout of their actions. These are
seriously ill people we're talking about . .. not hippies who want to get
stoned."

Late Tuesday, the Oakland City Council quietly endorsed a policy. included
among a batch of committee reports, allowing medical marijuana users to
have 1 1/2 pounds of cannabis, described as a three-month supply.

That breaks down to about a half-pound per month, or 10 marijuana
cigarettes per day, for patients who use cannabis as a way to combat nausea
from such illnesses as AIDS and cancer.

Developed by a committee of police. city legal staff, physicians, patients
and Oakland cannabis club representatives. the policy directs officers not
to confiscate marijuana, or arrest a user, if it meets the criteria.

Oakland patients who present the proper documentation will be able to
possess 30 outdoor flowering (or harvestable) plants, 48 indoor plants or
1=BD pounds of processed marijuana.

"This takes cooperation between Oakland patients and enforcement to a new
level," said Jeff Jones, the Oaklaffd club's executive director. "I hope
this kind of partnership will eventually be mirrored across California and
country."

The policy is the most permissive in the state since Prop. 215, the medical
marijuana initiative approved by voters in 1996, was implemented.

By contrast, Attorney General Dan Lungren's office has issue guidelines
that allow only ounce, characterized as a 30-day supply.

The attorney general has criticized the Oakland policy. but a spokesman
said Wednesday no action has been planned.

The attorney general will wait until Oakland actually carry out its policy.
said Matt Ross, a Lungreri spokesman.

Although cannabis club supporters say the quantities outlined in the policy
are based on ongoing U.S. Food and Drug Administration tests of medical
marijuana, FDA officials say they know of no such tests.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Oakland Medical Pot Limit - One Pound ('The San Francisco Examiner' Version)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 20:12:29 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Oakland Medical Pot Limit: 1 Pounds
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998
Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA)
Contact: letters@examiner.com
Website: http://www.examiner.com/
Author: Eric Brazil Of The Examiner Staff

OAKLAND MEDICAL POT LIMIT: 1 POUNDS

Unanimous Council Vote For State's Most Permissive Rules

Unanimously and without discussion, the Oakland City Council has
established the state's most permissive medical marijuana guidelines.

Henceforth, medical marijuana users in Oakland may hold a stash of 1 pounds
-- equivalent to 30 outdoor flowering plants or 48 indoor plants -- without
fear of arrest.

For the time being.

What appears to be the definitive test case for California's medical
marijuana law -- enacted in 1996 as Proposition 215 -- is brewing in
federal court in San Francisco. Among the defendants is the Cannabis Buyers
Cooperative of Oakland, which helped develop the guidelines.

At issue is a preliminary injunction issued in May by U.S. District Judge
Charles Breyer ordering six Bay Area cannabis clubs to shut down. Breyer
said that federal law supersedes Prop. 215.

On Wednesday, just hours after the Oakland City Council promulgated its new
guidelines, the U.S. Attorney's office filed a motion asking that U.S.
marshals be authorized to close down the Oakland club as well as others in
Marin and Mendocino counties.

The government also filed motions ordering the clubs to show cause why they
should not be held in contempt of the Breyer injunction. A hearing on the
motions is scheduled on Aug. 14.

Oakland's guidelines, developed by a committee of police, patients,
physicians and Oakland's legal staff as well as the buyers cooperative, far
exceed the limit set by Attorney General Dan Lungren.

As far as Lungren is concerned, the limit is two plants or an ounce of
marijuana which, by his calculations, is equivalent to a 30-day supply.

"Those guidelines have been in effect since December 1966, and no one --
sheriffs, police departments, DAs -- has had any problem with them," said
Lungren's spokesman Matt Ross. As for the Oakland guidelines, "we hope that
law enforcement will do the right thing when stopping an individual with a
pound and a half of marijuana," he said.

Jeff Jones, executive director of the 1,700-member Cannabis Buyers
Cooperative, said the council's passage of the guidelines vetted by its
Public Health and Safety Committee kept the city "on the leading edge of
this issue."

Jones noted that Oakland modeled its guidelines after those of an ongoing
federal experiment, the Compassionate Investigative New Drug Program. That
program rations medical marijuana users to half a pound a month or about 10
cigarettes per day. Just eight patients are currently participating in the
federal program, Jones said.

The guidelines are "already being implemented by the police department,
which is working with us to make sure these medical patients aren't being
harassed," Jones said. "Police don't want to arrest patients who are
legitimately using marijuana," and are able to provide documentary proof
that they are, Jones said. But under the guidelines "somebody possessing
marijuana for sale or for personal use that's not medical will be cited and
arrested."

1998 San Francisco Examiner
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Oakland Approves Liberal Medicinal Marijuana Rules
('Orange County Register' Version)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 15:35:10 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Oakland Approves
Liberal Medicinal Marijuana Rules
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John W.Black
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/

OAKLAND APPROVES LIBERAL MEDICINAL MARIJUANA RULES

Advocates of marijuana for medical purposes praised the Oakland City
Council on Wednesday after it approved one of the most liberal medical
marijuana measures in the country by allowing patients to keep 11/2 pounds
of the drug for "personal use."

The council late Tuesday approved a policy directing police not to target
individuals or confiscate their marijuana if it falls within the guidelines.

The policy, passed unanimously, is believed to be the state's most liberal
since implementation of Proposition 215, the medical marijuana initiative
approved by voters in 1996. The Oakland policy says patients with a valid
doctor's prescription may keep 30 outdoor marijuana plants, 48 indoor
plants or 1.5 pounds of bulk marijuana.

The limit defies a threshold set by Attorney General Dan Lungren, who in
Late 1996 restricted ailing pot users to two plants for 30 days.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Lungren To Let Oakland Enforce New Pot Policy ('The San Francisco Chronicle'
Version Says California Attorney General And Republican Gubernatorial
Candidate Dan Lungren Vowed Yesterday That He Would Leave It Up To Oakland
Police To Handle The City's New Policy - For Now)

Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:31:59 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Lungren To
Let Oakland Enforce New Pot Policy
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998

LUNGREN TO LET OAKLAND ENFORCE NEW POT POLICY

Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, July 9, 1998 1998 San
Francisco Chronicle

State Attorney General Dan Lungren said yesterday that he would leave it up
to Oakland police to handle the city's new policy that allows medical
marijuana users to store 1 1/2 pounds of the drug at home.

``We would just hope that law enforcement would do the right thing when
stopping individuals with a pound and a half of marijuana,'' said Lungren
spokesman Matt Ross.

Lungren, a candidate for governor who has vigorously opposed the operation
of medical marijuana clubs, said he has no plans yet to challenge Oakland's
policy. The policy is the state's most permissive to be developed in the
wake of Proposition 215, the 1996 voter-approved medical marijuana initiative.

Ross said it is premature to discuss whether the attorney general would
consider challenging the policy in the future.

Lungren's unusual laissez-faire stance came a day after the Oakland City
Council unanimously approved a policy allowing medical marijuana users to
keep on hand 1 1/2 pounds of marijuana -- up to 24 times what is now
allowed under state law.

The policy was created by a committee of police officers, attorneys,
doctors and members of the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, based on
research by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The FDA study showed that patients use a half-pound of medical marijuana a
month. But Lungren, using his own set of guidelines drafted by police,
sheriffs and district attorneys, limited the threshold to about one ounce,
or two plants, a month.

A pound and a half of marijuana is ``quite a bit'' of the drug, which sells
for roughly $4,000 a pound wholesale, said Ross, who questioned Oakland's
figures.

The new policy instructs Oakland police to put a low priority on medical
marijuana growers. Officers are told not to cite or arrest individuals
possessing less than the amount specified under the policy if they provide
proof of medicinal use or caregiver status within two days.

Leaders at the Oakland medical marijuana club hailed the policy yesterday
as a hallmark of city government and voiced confidence that it would
survive any legal challenges.

``The federal government and state government are thwarting local
governments trying to implement their own policies and ways of dealing with
this health issue,'' said Jeff Jones, the club's executive director.

Robert Raich, an attorney who is defending the club against a federal
shutdown order, agreed.

``There's nothing they can do -- the policy applies only to Oakland,''
Raich said. ``The public health and safety of Oakland is something well
within the jurisdiction of the Oakland City Council.''

The medical marijuana controversy has long been complicated by the complex
mix of local, state and federal laws.

Despite Prop 215, federal law -- which supersedes state law -- says that
marijuana used for any purpose is illegal.

In May, a federal judge barred six Northern California pot clubs from
selling medical marijuana in violation of federal law. Also that month, a
San Francisco judge shut down the city's Cannabis Healing Center, the
nation's largest pot club. Another pot club in San Francisco and one in
Santa Cruz have also closed.

In addition to the Oakland cooperative, clubs in Marin County and Ukiah
have defied the federal order to shut down.

On Tuesday, federal lawyers filed a motion in U.S. District Court in San
Francisco, requesting permission for U.S. marshals to close the three
clubs, said U.S. Attorney Michael Yamaguchi. The lawyers also called on the
judge to force the clubs to explain why they have ignored the shutdown order.

1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page A22
-------------------------------------------------------------------

US Drug War Violates Human Rights (A Letter To The Editor
Of 'The San Francisco Chronicle' Finds President Clinton's Focus
On Human Rights While Visiting China Hypocritical In That He Carries Out
A Policy Of Expanding The Drug War, Which, Since The End Of The Cold War,
Has Been Responsible For More Human Rights Violations Than Any Other)

Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:33:36 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: PUB LTE: `U.S. Drug War Violates Human Rights'
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998

`U.S. DRUG WAR VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS'

Editor -- During Bill Clinton's visit to China, a favorite theme has been
human rights, an area in which his qualifications are both gilt-edged and
wildly conflicting. As the American president, he embodies the historic
legacy of the Enlightenment, that 18th-century philosophy which first
articulated the idea that ordinary humans have ``rights'' and directly
inspired this nation's revolutionary manifesto.

Although human rights have progressed unevenly and sometimes violently in
America, we have ultimately extended them to blacks, women, and the poor --
at least in theory.

As our chief executive, Clinton also presides over a drug war which, at
American insistence, has become global policy. Since the end of the Cold
War, this policy has been responsible for more human rights violations than
any other. The critical insight necessary to reach that conclusion:
awarding a lucrative monopoly to a violent criminal market is not sane
public health, nor is diligent failure in pursuit of that policy's
irrational goals responsible government. The unnecessary deaths, ruined
lives and political corruption produced are a matter of record.

When enough people develop the necessary insight, that record will become
an indictment of leaders who proclaim with religious fervor that criminal
prohibition is the only permissible policy and doubters must be
``legalizers'' who wish to sell drugs to children.

History will not treat such leaders any more kindly than it has the earlier
advocates of an equally bogus policy: John C. Calhoun, Jefferson Davis, or
Roger B. Taney, for example.

THOMAS O'CONNELL, M.D.

San Mateo
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Ex-Pot Club Director Gathers Top Lawyers ('The San Francisco Chronicle'
Says The Trial Of Peter Baez Of The Now-Defunct Santa Clara County
Medical Cannabis Center In San Jose, California, Was Originally Scheduled
To Begin Monday, But Has Been Postponed Until September 28 - Baez Is Now
Represented By A 'Dream Team' Including Gerald F. Uelmen And Tom Nolan)

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:30:46 -0700
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Ex-Pot Club Director Gathers Top Lawyers
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998
Author: Maria Alicia Gaura, Chronicle Staff Writer

EX-POT CLUB DIRECTOR GATHERS TOP LAWYERS

Faced with criminal drug charges and a lengthy prison term, the director of
San Jose's now-defunct medical marijuana club has assembled a legal ``Dream
Team'' to present his defense.

Attorneys Gerald F. Uelmen and Tom Nolan were formalarijuana advocate Peter
Baez yesterday in a Santa Clara County courtroom.

Uelmen, a law ply named to represent mrofessor and former dean of Santa
Clara University School of Law, and an expert on constitutional law, has
defended clients as varied as O.J. Simpson and Daniel Ellsberg. Nolan, a
criminal defense attorney based in Palo Alto, is widely considered one of
the best in his field.

Neither attorney would comment on the case yesterday, but their appearance
in the fray has sparked speculation that the Baez trial may have precedent
setting potential.

Baez was founder of the Santa Clara County Medical Cannabis Center that
opened in early 1997 and closed May 8. The Santa Clara County District
Attorney filed seven felony counts against Baez in May, charging him with
selling marijuana to people lacking a doctor's recommendation, operating a
drug house, grand theft and housing fraud. Before his legal troubles began,
Baez had been lauded by city officials for his efforts to help create a
medical marijuana ordinance in San Jose.

Deputy District Attorney Denise Raabe said she expected the issues at trial
to be narrowly limited to Baez's alleged drug trafficking violations. But
many others in the medical marijuana movement hope the jury will be allowed
to consider broader issues related to Proposition 215, which legalized
medical marijuana use in California.

In addition, some local attorneys speculated that prominent local
officials, including Mayor Susan Hammer and former San Jose Police Chief
Lou Cobarruviaz, might be called to the stand to testify about San Jose's
unique marijuana dispensary law, bringing publicity to the issue. Kate
Wells, a Santa Cruz attorney who worked with Uelmen to defend a marijuana
club charged in federal court last year, said Uelmen is intrigued by the
evolving area of drugs and the law.

Uelmen is also part of the legal team currently defending six Northern
California marijuana clubs in federal court.

``This is frontier law we're making here,'' Wells said. ``It's always
exciting for an attorney to be in on the ground floor of breaking legal
ground.''

Baez's trial, originally slated to begin Monday, has been postponed until
September 28.

1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page A22
-------------------------------------------------------------------

San Jose Update (A Bay Area List Subscriber Says San Jose Officials
Met Tuesday With Medical Marijuana Activists And May Try To Start Over
With A New Distribution System For Patients Covered By Proposition 215)

From: "ralph sherrow" (ralphkat@hotmail.com)
To: ralphkat@hotmail.com
Subject: San Jose Update:
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 16:00:24 PDT

San Jose update:

On Tuesday, July 7, 1998 Dr. Dennis Augustine, and attorneys Robert
Raich and Dan Halpern represented the regulated community in a 1 1/2 hour
meeting with the assistant city manager, deputy city attorney, a
member from the planning commission and four high ranking officials from
the S.J.P.D. regarding structuring a more workable ordinance for prospective
medical cannabis clubs/cooperatives. Robert dispersed copies of the Oakland
ordinance which was modified from the Arcata cooperative model - developed
by Bobby Harris of the Humboldt Alliance for Medical Rights (HAMR) - as
an example of what could be done in San Jose.

At the request of assistant city manager, Dr. "A" gave a retrospective
review of what some of the glitches were concerning the San Jose center's
inability to comply with some of the conditions of the Special Use Permit*
(i.e. onsite cultivation, etc). He also presented valid arguments in favor of
lifting of the transportation ban. Robert recommended we scrap the existing
ordinance and start anew. He also suggested that any new ordinance should
bypass the city planning commission's zoning regulations for first level
approval as it's too cumbersome and unnecessary. There was a real spirit of
openness between all parties concerned. The main obstacles to overcome are
the transportation issue, mandatory onsite cultivation and an intake and
verification procedure that will allay any concerns of the S.J.P.D. whether a
patient - if stopped - is a bona fide patient under 215. We are exploring
alternative ways whereby the Public Health Department of Santa Clara County
could do intake and verification and issue a certificate to the patient that
would be subject to yearly renewal. Dr. Martin Fenstersheib, Health Officer
for the county was unable to attend the meeting. He has advised the city that
he doesn't think he has the budget to provide such a service but discussions
are continuing. We were invited to submit a proposal to the city that will
satisfy their concerns within the next two weeks.

Note: For those unfamiliar with the name Dan Halpern, he is a San Jose
attorney that was brought to Dr. "A"'s attention by Bobby Harris who
had Halpern represent the Arcata model for San Jose to consider back
in February. Talks had been stalled until Dr. "A" made a presentation
before the planning commission suggesting that input from the regulated
community is crucial to any re-implementation plan in San Jose. He then
contacted the Deputy City Attorney - prior to his presentation to the mayor
and city council - who agreed that a meeting was appropriate and welcomed
Dan Halpern of the law firm of Halpern and Halpern spent five years working
in the City Attorney's office while getting his law degree. He is well liked
and respected by the city and is a welcome addition to our advisory
re-implementation team.

* San Jose recently passed a modification to the existing ordinance that
called for an Administrative Permit to replace the Special Use Permit.
The former allows a prospective operator of a medical cannabis club/center
to sign off on permit requirements (rather than the owner of the property)
and does away with the need to notify residents 300 feet in each direction
as well as petition City Planning in an open public hearing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Marijuana Signatures To Be Rechecked ('The Las Vegas Review-Journal'
Says Nevada Secretary Of State Dean Heller Has Directed The Nye And Lyon
County Clerks To Re-Check Signatures In Support Of The Medical Marijuana
Initiative Sponsored By Nevadans For Medical Rights)
Link to earlier story
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:34:51 -0400 To: mapnews@mapinc.org From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US NV: Marijuana Signatures To Be Rechecked Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World) Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal (NV) Contact: letters@lvrj.com Fax: 702-383-4676 Website: http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/ Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Author: Sean Whaley Donrey Capital Bureau MARIJUANA SIGNATURES TO BE RECHECKED Medicinal-use proposal near to required support in Nye County CARSON CITY -- Secretary of State Dean Heller directed the Nye County clerk on Wednesday to re-examine signatures in support of a medical marijuana initiative and said the results were too close to call. "It will be close," he said. Nye is one of two counties where the ballot question asking voters to approve the use of marijuana for medical purposes remains in doubt. The other is Lyon County, and Heller has asked the clerk there to count all 1,391 signatures to determine if the measure qualifies. Lyon County officials have 12 days to perform the check. If the measure fails in either county, the proposal by Americans for Medical Rights will not make it on the November ballot. Under the proposal, a patient could use, upon the advice of a physician, marijuana for "treatment or alleviation" of cancer, glaucoma, AIDS, persistent nausea, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis and other medical problems. The proposal, one of many being made in states across the nation, has drawn opposition by people concerned that it would be a step toward legalization of marijuana. Heller said the issue in Lyon County is a simple one. A sample showed that the number of valid signatures was more than 90 percent of the 982 required, but less than 100 percent. The county now will check every signature. The problem in Nye County is more complex because officials there did not count many signatures that had minor errors such as incorrect dates or errors by the person circulating the petition. At noon Wednesday, Nye County officials submitted a revised count that showed 752 valid signatures out of 1,228 collected. The revised number remained 174 signatures short. But Heller, citing a 1994 interpretation of the signature-verification process by his office, said another 207 signatures should be checked. These are signatures with no dates or dates earlier than those of the circulators who turned in the petitions, he said. Signatures could be rejected if a person signed the petition and then registered to vote after the fact. Signatures must be from registered voters. But Heller said the other signatures with disputed dates should not be disqualified automatically. They should be checked to see if they are from registered voters, and if they are, they should be counted, he said. Nye County officials expect to finish checking the 207 disputed signatures in a day or two, Heller said. If 174 or more are from registered voters, then the petition will be successful in Nye County, Heller said. If the number is less, then the petition will fail and not be on the ballot. If the petition were found to have failed, the medical marijuana supporters could appeal to Heller and then to District Court to get the initiative qualified for the November ballot. The petition has qualified in 11 other counties where it was circulated but must qualify in 13 to be placed on the November ballot.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Two Counties Must Recheck Names On Marijuana Petition
('The Las Vegas Sun' Version)

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 15:58:53 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US NV: Two Counties Must
Recheck Names On Marijuana Petition
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998
Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV)
Contact: letters@lasvegassun.com
Website: http://www.lasvegassun.com/
Author: Cy Ryan, Sun Capital Bureau

TWO COUNTIES MUST RECHECK NAMES ON MARIJUANA PETITION

CARSON CITY -- Secretary of State Dean Heller said Wednesday Nye and Lyon
counties must re-check signatures of registered voters before the fate of
the medical marijuana petition is known.

It could be 12 days before it is determined if the initiative petition has
the required signatures to qualify for the November election ballot.

Petition backers gathered 74,466 signatures in 13 of the 17 counties. The
law requires 46,764 names of registered voters and 10 percent of the
registered voters in 13 of the 17 counties.

Supporters submitted the necessary signatures in only 13 counties, or the
bare minimum to qualify. Questions remain in Nye and Lyon counties on
whether enough registered voters signed the petitions.

Nye County submitted a revised report Tuesday. While 926 names are needed to
qualify, County Clerk Arte Robb reported only 752 are valid signatures.
Heller, however, said there are 207 signatures which were disqualified by
Robb which are in question.

He said the Robb tossed out the signatures because the person circulating
the petition signed the wrong date. Heller said a 1994 legal opinion by the
state attorney general's office held that an entire document cannot be
disqualified based on flaws of the circulator.

Robb is checking the 207 signatures in question to determine if they belong
to registered voters. If all 207 are valid, that would put the total in Nye
County at 959 signatures, or 33 more than needed.

Heller said he has asked Lyon County to check all of the 1,418 signatures to
see if there are the required 982 from registered voters. A random sampling
by the county of 509 signatures verified 329. To qualify for ballot, using
the sampling method, it would have required 351 signatures.

While Heller estimated Nye County officials would have their results in a
few days, Lyon County has 12 days to verify the full number.

"We're taking our time so there will be no appeal," Heller said. "We're
doing it right the first time so any judge will know it's done correctly."

The petition, which seeks to amend the Nevada Constitution, would permit
people, upon the advice of physicians, to use marijuana for curing or
relieving pain in a number of illness such as cancer and AIDS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

High Cost Of Bribes Forces Mexican Pot Growers Across Border
('The Salt Lake Tribune' Recycles A Three-Week Old Story
About Mexican Pot Growers Relocating To Idaho Rather Than Pay
$10 Per Plant)
Link to earlier story
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:53:52 -0800 To: mapnews@mapinc.org From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US ID: High Cost of Bribes Forces Mexican Pot Growers Across Border Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World) Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 Source: The Salt Lake Tribune Contact: editor@sltrib.com Website: http://www.sltrib.co Author: Steve Steubner Special To The Tribune HIGH COST OF BRIBES FORCES MEXICAN POT GROWERS ACROSS BORDER BOISE -- In Mexico, the price of growing marijuana is known as ``el mordido'' -- ``the bite.'' The term refers to bribes that growers must pay local police to stay in business. In prosecuting the largest marijuana case in Idaho's history, Assistant U.S. Attorney Kim Lindquist said escalating bribe fees in Mexico inspired growers to cross the border and set up growing areas in Idaho. The growers, nearly all undocumented immigrants from Florencia, Mexico, confessed that they moved their operations into Idaho to avoid paying the $1,000 per 100 plants Mexican authorities demand, Lindquist said. More than a dozen well-hidden pot groves in southwestern Idaho went undetected for at least three years before authorities were tipped off and seized 114,000 plants in August and September. ``They started to feel it in their pocketbook, so they moved their operations to Idaho, where the only risk was getting caught,'' Lindquist said. ``It's a good example of how we're affected by the narcotics trade below the border.'' Lindquist recently saw the sentencing of all but one of 14 defendants who were tried and convicted in federal court in connection with growing the marijuana plants, worth an estimated $26 million on the streets. Salvador Valdez, 21, who was convicted in April of cultivating marijuana, will be sentenced Monday. The defendants received sentences ranging from 10 to 21 years in federal prison and were fined $1,000. The only legal Idaho resident, Roberto Sandoval, 42, of Caldwell, fled after being indicted and is still at large, the attorney said. Another defendant was transported to Amarillo, Texas, to face drug-trafficking charges. Lindquist said he is certain other Mexican growers were involved in raising pot plants in Idaho, but they escaped before law-enforcement authorities raided the groves last summer. Fearful that ``snitching'' on those who fled might endanger their families in Mexico, 11 of the defendants pleaded innocent to federal crimes and refused to cooperate with authorities, Lindquist said. That forced the U.S. Attorney's Office to prosecute each defendant one at a time. All of the cases, except for one, resulted in convictions. Two other defendants who pleaded guilty to state crimes will likely serve one year in jail before being deported to Mexico, said Doug Perry, Gem County prosecutor. The growers confessed that they selected the remote foothills in southwestern Idaho where the terrain resembled a similar setting in Florencia, Lindquist said. The otherwise dry foothills have tiny seeps and creeks that flow under thick brush, which provide excellent camouflage. Growers testified that they made about $1,000 a week. Copyright 1998, The Salt Lake Tribune
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Rainbow Tribe Nabs Suspect ('The Arizona Republic' Says Members
Of The Rainbow Family Gathering At The Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest
In Arizona Captured A Man Wanted For The Brutal Rape And Murder
Of A Woman In Florida - Deputies, Responding To A Call From The Rainbows'
Security Team, Arrived At The Camp To Find 25 Rainbows In A Ring
Around The Man, Bound In A Blanket)

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:31:00 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US AZ: Rainbow Tribe Nabs Suspect
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family (mmfamily@ix.netcom.com)
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998
Source: Arizona Republic (AZ)
Contact: http://www.azcentral.com/opinions/letter.shtml
Website: http://www.azcentral.com/news/

RAINBOW TRIBE NABS SUSPECT

SPRINGERVILLE, ARIZ. -- Police who had shuddered to see 25,000 hippies
pitch their hugging, drumming and marijuana-smoke-filled camp last week in
the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest, saw the Rainbow Family Gathering
somewhat differently after unarmed Rainbow peacekeepers captured a man
wanted for a brutal Florida murder.

``In my long law-enforcement career, this is something I have never seen
happen,'' said Apache County sheriff's Sgt. Jim Morse.

Deputies, responding to a call from the Rainbows' security team, the
Shanti-Sena, arrived at the camp to find 25 Rainbows in a ring around the
wanted man, Joseph Giebel, who had escaped two months ago from Florida
police and was wanted for the rape and murder of a woman there. He was
bound in a blanket.

Giebel is wanted for killing Sherri Lyn Jett, who was raped and beaten to
death. Having learned he had been at other annual Rainbow Family
Gatherings, Key West police sent his description to the Rainbow Family's
Web home page.

The deputies could not say how the Shanti-Sena, an unarmed, unstructured
organization captured Giebel. The Shanti-Sena, who wear small badges made
of bark, includes many military veterans. The week-long gathering ended
Saturday except for the Rainbows' cleanup crews, who work for two or three
more weeks to clean and reseed the area.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Pot Sinks Swimmer (An 'Associated Press' Story
In Canada's 'Nelson Daily News' Says Gary Hall Jr., 23, Of Phoenix, Arizona,
Winner Of Two Gold And Two Silver Medals At The 1996 Summer Olympics,
Has Been Suspended From Competition By The International Swimming Federation
For A Positive Marijuana Test)

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 22:51:44 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US AZ: Pot Sinks Swimmer
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Herb
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998
Source: Nelson Daily News (Canada)
Contact: ndnews@netidea.com
Website: http://www.sterlingnews.com/nelson
Author: Associated Press

POT SINKS SWIMMER

PHOENIX (AP) - Gary Hall Jr., winner of two gold and two silver medals in
the 1996 Summer Olympics, has been suspended from competition by the
international swimming federation for a positive marijuana test. Hall, 23,
who lives in Phoenix, issued a statement Wednesday saying he will fight the
allegation but will be unable to compete in this month's Goodwill Games in
New York. If that test also is positive, FINA, the sport's international
governing body, would determine the length of the suspension.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Two Bullets In The Back ('The Houston Press' Describes The Case
Of A 10th-Grade Boy, Travis Allen, In Bellaire, Texas,
Killed In Police Custody While Allegedly On LSD - A $25 Million Lawsuit
Filed By His Parents Against The Bellaire Police Department And Two Officers
Alleging Excessive Use Of Force Goes To Trial On August 17 -
When A Grand Jury At First Absolved Police, One Juror Told
The 'Houston Chronicle' That Another Politically Connected Juror
Had Applied Pressure Not To Indict, Which Led To District Attorney
Johnny Holmes Jailing The Reporter And Indicting And Prosecuting
The Juror Who Spoke Out)

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:11:30 -0700
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US TX: Two Bullets in the Back
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Tammera Halphen
Source: Houston Press
Contact: feedback@houstonpress.com
Website: http://www.houstonpress.com
Author: Randall Patterson
Pubdate: July 9-16, 1998

TWO BULLETS IN THE BACK

The fear began. At 1:35 a.m., Carolyn Deal was wakened by the sound of
shattering glass. She roused her 62-year-old husband, Jack, who told her to
get dressed, lock the bedroom door. She heard coughing just outside as she
turned the lock. Jack, fighting the haze of sleep, put the telephone to his
ear. "Uh," he said, "there's someone in our house."

Over the Bellaire police frequency, the dispatcher sent the call for a
burglary in progress. The alarm was screaming when Bellaire police officer
Dan Shelor arrived at 1:36. Officers Michael Leal and Carle Upshaw were
close behind. The Deals by then had retreated through a bedroom door to
their roof. Crouching in the bushes, the police could see that most of the
windows around the front door had been smashed. Leal and Shelor took
positions in the front of the house, and Upshaw headed for the rear.

Then through a front window, a bicycle came crashing out. For an instant, a
white male stood in the window frame. The officers shouted, "Get the fuck
out of there!" And the man stared at them and disappeared inside. Through
another window, Upshaw saw him coming fast toward the rear. Upshaw, too,
shouted for the man to come out, and this time, the man turned to the glass
door and collided into it. The glass held, but his arms were already
covered with blood. Staring at Upshaw, he tried to unlock the door. He
couldn't. He walked away, leaving the glass smeared with blood.

Leal came back to help. Together, he and Upshaw yelled into the house for
the intruder to lie down. The man emerged from the shadows then and began
complying. The officers kicked more glass out of the window, and charged in
after him.

They found him between the long white couch and an antique table. Down the
barrel of a gun, Leal discerned that the intruder was only a teenager.
Upshaw saw that the boy was not very big. Holstering his pistol, Upshaw
began putting handcuffs on the boy.

Five, maybe ten minutes later, Skip and Becky Allen were wakened by the
ringing telephone. It was a friend of their son's. "Uh, Mr. Allen?" said
Mike Morgan. "I think Travis is in trouble with the police."

It was quickly decided Mrs. Allen would stay home with Gracie, their
two-year-old. Mr. Allen snatched on his clothes and jumped in his truck. He
found Mike at Trevor Ayer's house, and they sped through Bellaire. When
Mike told him to turn onto Acacia Street, most of the Bellaire Police
Department was already there, and a large clapboard house had been cordoned
off with yellow police tape.

Mr. Allen pulled over and said he'd heard his son was in trouble here. When
the officer asked how he knew this, Mr. Allen pointed at Mike, and Mike was
taken away. The officer told Mr. Allen to wait. He stood by his truck and
waited.

It began to rain. Mr. Allen stood in the rain, asking the passing policemen
what was going on. At last, one of them answered: There was a deceased
person inside.

Mr. Allen said his son was supposed to be inside, and couldn't he go in
there? The officer asked him if he needed a priest or something. Mr. Allen
said no, and he was told to wait.

The hearse came. A bag was carried away. Still, Mr. Allen gazed at the
house and the landscaped lawn. He kept thinking his son would come running
out, saying, "Daddy! I'm okay. I was in trouble, but I'm okay."

Instead, after three hours, a Bellaire policeman cameout. He said there had
been a struggle, and an officer's weapon had discharged. It had discharged
into a person, and that person's name, according to the driver's license,
was Travis Allen. He had then died. Mr. Allen could go now. "We don't need
you anymore," the officer said.

The Deals went to a neighbor's house. Mr. Allen drove home alone. And
Bellaire police detectives stayed up all night July 15, 1995, trying to
explain how a 128-pound, unarmed boy on LSD had been shot twice in the back
by a police officer as the boy lay on the floor beneath another officer's
boot.

In the days and weeks that followed, the local crime-solving community bent
to the task. The medical examiner examined; Bellaire investigators
investigated.

A grand jury heard the evidence and deliberated.

The result was no indictment.

The entire criminal investigation was wrapped up within two months; the
officer who pulled the trigger was required to take only two days off work.
He was absolved so quickly that Skip and Becky Allen were left breathless.
They knew their son had deserved a great punishment; they couldn't accept
the necessity of death. They lost 60 pounds between them. They went to
church, joined grief-recovery groups. Determined to wring justice from the
justice system, they finally found themselves in the office of a lawyer.

In December 1995, they filed a $25 million lawsuit against the Bellaire
Police Department and officers Michael Leal and Carle Upshaw, alleging
excessive use of force. The lawsuit has forced the Allens to relive their
son's death, but has also uncovered many new details about it. Efforts to
dismiss the case have been themselves dismissed. Last week, U.S. District
Judge David Hittner scheduled the case for trial on August 17.

Travis grew up near the Heights, in an old neighborhood called Magnolia
Grove. Skip became a safety director over construction at a Baytown
refinery, Becky a therapist for disabled children in the school system.
They lived together in a Victorian home with latticework trim and a yard
just big enough for lush tomato vines.

He was five foot nine and growing. Travis was the one who unloaded the
dishwasher, vacuumed the house, mowed the yard, raced motocross with his
father, picked up his mother when he hugged her. And laughed. Puberty hit
him like a hurricane, but after tenth grade, his clothes and hair had begun
to settle down, and instead of skipping classes, he enrolled in summer
school to get ahead.

He came home that Friday in July at about 2 o'clock and began playing with
his sister Gracie. They rolled around in the grass, and two hours must have
passed before Travis finally got the lawn mower out. He had mowed only a
small section when rain began to fall, at which point he gave up on the
grass and put Gracie in a laundry basket. From the porch down the walkway
and back, he ran in and out of the rain. Skip remembers that you could hear
the laughter all over the block.

Then Becky came home, and she wrapped Gracie in a towel and began making
dinner. Travis went up to his room. He called his friend Trevor, who said
Tony Patt had just called: A neighbor of a friend of Tony's was throwing a
party in Bellaire.

At dinner, Travis announced that he would be sleeping at Trevor's this
evening. "No!" said Skip, because the yard was not mowed, and they were
going to get up early the next morning to ride dirt bikes.

So Travis finished his dinner and went back to his room. Becky told Skip
that Travis hadn't been out all week. Why not let him go? She went upstairs
to tell him the news. When she saw his face, she knew he wouldn't mind
staying home. But she let him go anyway, "and that's the saddest thing,"
she says.

The city of Bellaire is an enclave town, entirely surrounded by Houston.
Most law violations are committed by intruders, and most of these intruders
are simply speeding motorists. But every now and then, said Chief Randall
Mack, someone comes into Bellaire to rob a bank or something, and "you've
got to be ready to do it all."

One officer who can always be counted on to go "above and beyond the call,"
according to Mack, is Michael Leal (pronounced lay-al). Legal concerns
prevent Leal from talking to reporters (and Mack, too, wouldn't discuss
the case), but Leal is said to be 33 years old now, a resident of Katy and
the father of two young daughters and a son. Ten years ago, he joined the
department, and in 1991, he was named Bellaire Police Officer of the Year.
He long ago became a department instructor in both firearm use and
defensive tactics, and also is a founding member of Bellaire's volunteer
SWAT team equivalent, whose drills consist of wearing camouflage and
shooting one's fellow officers with paint-ball guns.

The state requires peace officers to take 40 hours of continuing training
every two years, but Leal usually takes triple that in a year. In the
summer of 1995, some of his recent courses were "ASP Baton Refresher,"
"Officer Involved shooting Investigation" and "Mental Preparation for Armed
Confrontation," which consisted of video footage of officers getting
killed.

By July 15 of that year, there had not been a police shooting in Bellaire
in 20 years, and there had never been a fatal one. But the record shows,
before his shift, Leal took the precaution of checking out two shotguns.

When Travis got to Trevor's, James Burns was there, and one of them
produced the acid. Weed and ecstasy were the usual choices; acid, said
Trevor, was kind of a special occasion.

This acid was called Blue Shield, and the dealer had said the paper was
dipped three times, instead of once. James and Trevor each took one hit,
and Travis, who was a little bigger, took two. When Meaghan Welzbacher came
over to pick them up, Travis showed her what was on his tongue. "You be
careful now," she said, and Travis smiled.

None of them knew the host of the party or cared that she was only 12 years
old. Tony said the magic words were "parents not home." The house was small
by Bellaire standards, and the party left it much reduced. Punk rock
blasted through the air. In the garage, by the keg, someone smashed a
mirror. Before long, the guests were running through the house punching the
walls. One climbed the roof and hurled a gallon of paint onto the walkway.

The whole evening became a blur to James. Trevor saw a lot of flashing
lights and moving people. And Travis, who was usually "a grinning fool"
when he was tripping, grew terribly frightened.

He was seen at the start of the evening in a chair in the back yard with a
beer, "just chilling." Later, Jessica McCracken saw him standing very stiff
and asked him what was wrong. "Bugs," said Travis. She offered him bug
repellent, but it didn't seem to help. With his hands jammed in his
pockets, Travis soon began shaking. Someone told him that there were bears
in the backyard. He seemed to believe it. He became afraid of the people
around him. Most of them were strangers, and he got the notion they were
going to jump him for the $20 in his pocket. His friend Mike Morgan finally
decided to get him away from the party. They would take a short walk to the
end of the street and come back.

Along the way, Mike asked what Travis was seeing. "Colors," said Travis.
Then he quit responding. They hadn't gone far when Tony Patt and Ben
Steinberg pulled up behind them. Travis saw the headlights, and his friends
believe he thought these were the people who had come to rob him. Travis
flung his money on the ground, and he fled as fast as he could -- over the
soft grass and under the trees and into the side of the house that was Jack
and Carolyn Deal's. At his feet, there was a 50-pound paving stone; he
heaved it through a full-length window and heaved himself after it.

Mike, who had chased until this point, heard the burglar alarm and ran the
other way. Travis was alone then, and like something wild that has flown
inside and can't get out, he knocked over plants and banged against windows
until his arms were wet with blood, and he heard voices telling him to lie
down.

Officer Upshaw put his gun away and was handcuffing Travis when he realized
that maybe he should be using gloves. He sent Shelor to get them from the
car. Then, unable to think of anything else to do, Upshaw placed his
cleated boot in the square of Travis's back and proceeded to wait.

The gloves were not in the first car; Shelor searched the second. Inside,
Leal kept his gun trained on the suspect. They had sent Shelor away without
searching the suspect or the house, or even turning on the lights. The
suspect, meanwhile, had begun to resist again. Beneath the boot, he would
not lie still. Travis flailed his arms and pushed against the boot, and the
more weight Upshaw pressed into him, the more Travis writhed and pushed
against it. All the while, he was making an awful grunting sound, which to
the neighbors next door, behind closed windows, sounded like roaring, and
which Leal described later as "this noise you make when you're exhausted."

Leal and Upshaw never reached for the batons that hung at their waists.
Leal recalled glancing again and again over his shoulder, shouting to
Travis, "Let us see your hands!" And then Upshaw, trying to help, stepped
on Travis with both boots and all of his 190 pounds. Again, Travis put his
hands beneath him, and the officers swear he pushed himself off the ground
with Upshaw on his back. Upshaw reverted then to the one-foot hold, but
Leal found himself shouting, "You're going to get shot! You're going to get
shot!" It is for moments like this that police officers drill and drill
again, so that instinct overrides emotion. Leal's first shot missed
Upshaw's foot by less than an inch, but after the recoil, Leal had the
presence of mind to aim before shooting again.

Under the vaulted ceiling, Travis lay still at last, hemorrhaging onto the
Oriental rug.

Then the house filled with new horror. Shelor arrived with the gloves. Leal
told him to handcuff the suspect, now lying in an expanding pool
of blood. Shelor did so and fled the house, and was later referred to a
counselor for emotional distress. Leal stayed inside, comprehending in the
light that he had shot an unarmed man.

The legal standard by which police shootings are judged is whether the
officer feared for his life or other lives, and whether that fear was
justified. When the house was filled with Bellaire detectives, Leal
consulted with his union lawyer and agreed to describe what had happened.

He said he had fired when Travis reached into his right pocket. Only when
asked what other move Travis had made did Leal add, "I guess he would be
rolling to his left. Basically looking at me."

The media were handled by Randall Mack, then the assistant chief. "It was
obviously a life-threatening situation," he told the Houston Chronicle. In
his first press releases, Mack never mentioned that Travis was shot while
on the floor with a policeman's boot on his back. The assistant chief only
said the suspect had refused to lie down, there had been a struggle, and
the suspect had persisted in putting his hands in his pockets. Mrs. Allen
had the impression her son was shot while attacking.

Bellaire detective Don Hazelwood supplied the Harris County medical
examiner an account that was equally vague, much more exciting and wrong:
The officers had "wrestled" the suspect to the floor. The suspect had
knocked one of them off. He had risen and was reaching into his pocket,
when "the second Bellaire officer saw his partner down and fired two
rounds of Winchester .45 caliber, Super X-silver tips, 185 grain."
Thereafter, the suspect became known as "the decedent."

Pathologist Eduardo Bellas went about his work with three Bellaire
detectives standing by. "The body was that of a well-nourished,
well-developed, thin-framed Caucasian male," he noted. The eyes were hazel;
the hair, short and brown-red. The hands were covered with bruises and
cuts. There were "brush burns" over the nose and chin, as though the face
had been pressed into carpet, though Bellas didn't suggest that. Finally,
beside a pattern of bruises, there were "gunshot wounds (2) of the back."

The bullets perforated the spinal cord, esophagus, trachea and aorta,
passing through all the corridors of life before coming to rest in the
upper chest. The heroic tale of the shooting offered no explanation for
gunshot wounds to the back. Bellas doesn't seem to have been curious. He
concluded that yes, the decedent had died of gunshot wounds.

As time passed, Leal apparently became more sure of his own story. After he
and Upshaw consulted their union lawyer, they gave their written
statements. Upshaw confirmed that under his boot, the suspect had indeed
been rolling left. Leal now testified that, "the suspect seemed intent on
fixing his gaze on me for the express purpose of whatever was going to
happen when he removed his hand from his pocket." Eventually, what was
initially described as "basically looking at me" became known as Travis's
"target stare."

Leal's description of Travis became even more threatening. At first, Leal
said they entered the house when Travis had lain down. Later, he said that
Travis had never lain down completely. Detective D.L. Oglesby, in his
official Bellaire Police Department report, recorded that Leal issued
commands to Travis "with no apparent effect."

Leal claimed he was crouching to the right of Travis when he fired, but
Oglesby later said in his deposition that he thought Leal had leaned over
the couch. The report reconciled the difference by avoiding any reference
to Leal's position.

With Upshaw on his back, and his right arm in his pocket, Travis would have
had difficulty rolling onto his left side. If Leal were leaning over the
couch above him, it would have been nearly impossible for Travis to have
given that "target stare" and still to have been shot in the back. Oglesby
initially wrote in the report that Travis had been lying on his stomach
when he was shot. But the report had been given to Leal, who sent Oglesby a
memo, a copy of which was forwarded to Randall Mack: "I noticed some
mistakes that I feel should be corrected," Leal wrote. And though what he
said didn't make sense, Oglesby nonetheless changed the report: With a boot
on his back, the suspect was rolling onto his left side when he was shot in
the back. Oglesby sent a memo informing Leal of the revisions. "You are
welcomed to review the report again if you like," he wrote.

When the investigation was complete, the case was presented to a grand
jury. The judge who presided over the grand jury, Debbie Mantooth
Stricklin, was a former prosecutor who had worked for District Attorney
Johnny Holmes, and whose husband was Holmes's chief assistant.

Prosecutors routinely work with the police and might be expected to
sympathize with them. Holmes himself said, "Not a whole lot of people have
much sympathy with a burglar in a house." In this case, he said Assistant
D.A. Belinda Hill had his absolute confidence. According to his memory,
Hill's presentation to the grand jury consisted of the autopsy report and
the testimony of Leal, Upshaw and Shelor. Hill made no recommendation for
or against indictment, according to a juror. The juror later told the
Chronicle that another, politically connected juror had applied pressure
not to indict. In the end, the 11-member grand jury missed indicting Leal
by two votes.

Holmes wouldn't present the case to another grand jury (it wouldn't be
fair, he says), but he pursued with great vigor the name of the juror who
violated the grand jury secrecy law. For refusing to disclose that juror's
name, the Chronicle reporter briefly went to jail. The juror was eventually
found and prosecuted. Holmes explained that the grand jury system can't
work if its secrets are told.

When they heard the FBI was investigating the shooting, the Allens were
relieved. "We were beginning to feel that we were the only ones who thought
something was wrong," Mrs. Allen said then. An FBI agent went by the
Bellaire Police Department to pick up Oglesby's report, but neither Oglesby
nor Upshaw nor any of Travis Allen's friends or family were ever
interviewed by the FBI. The results of the inquiry were forwarded to the
Justice Department, and after waiting months, Skip and Becky Allen made an
inquiry of their own as to the status. The reply they received was
addressed to Travis, informing Travis that "after a careful review," no
evidence could be found that his rights were violated. "Thank you," the
letter concluded, "for bringing this matter to our attention."

They had never hired a lawyer before and didn't know where to look. The
Allens wound up around the corner from their house, in the firm of Richard
"Racehorse" Haynes. Their lawyer, Graydon Wilson, claims to have no concept
of the word justice." He says there is only the system, and you pour facts
into the system, and sooner or later, you get a result. But everything
depends on the facts.

The lawsuit provided access to internal papers of the Bellaire Police
Department, and also to the officers themselves. The Allens sat across a
table in the depositions, gazing at the officers' faces. Leal and Upshaw
avoided eye contact but otherwise were courteous enough. The only exchange
between the parties occurred in the men's room during a break. Skip was
standing at the urinal when the officers walked in. Turning to Skip, Upshaw
ended an awkward moment. "This thing is taking so long," he said, "they
ought to have piss pots by the table." Skip flushed and left.

Shelor was not present at the shooting; he had little to say in his
deposition but fought tears as he said it. Michael Leal answered the
questions directly, addressing his interrogator as "sir." He claimed to be
unaware of any department policy changes prompted by the shooting, or even
any discussions on how to handle such situations better. It had been dark
in the house, he said, and in the shadows between the couch and the table,
it was hard to see Travis -- though not hard to see him rolling, reaching
into his pocket, staring. "I went forward, bang, bang," Leal testified. He
was afraid, but he denied that he had panicked. If he had shot Upshaw in
the foot, "he would have recovered," said Leal.

When it was Upshaw's turn, he said it never occurred to him to reach for
his baton. He couldn't kick Travis because "my foot was busy," he said.
Upshaw couldn't remember the size of a baton, or when he had been taught to
use it, or whether there was or wasn't a department policy on batons. But
this was not to say that he had forgotten his training; it was just that
"here today there's nothing triggering my memory for me to remember it."

It squeaked out that Upshaw had never really been afraid that night. He was
being sued for failing to stop the shooting, which he says he couldn't have
done, since he didn't expect it. "I don't know what Officer Leal considered
a threatening move," said Upshaw. "In my view, I didn't see anything
threatening."

Chief Mack later said that he thought the officers "did the best job they
could, under the circumstances." But at his deposition, Mack was unsure
what these circumstances were. He couldn't recall whether the department
hired an outside investigator for the shooting, or whether in 21 years as a
cop, he had ever restrained a suspect by standing on his back. ("I may
have," he said.) He said his press releases hadn't mentioned the boot or
the fact that Travis was on the floor, because he may not have known these
things. In fact, he still did not know them, he said, nor did he have any
"personal knowledge" regarding the location of Travis Allen's wounds. When
pressed, he admitted he had heard the rumor about the back -- but he didn't
find it especially significant. He could not judge what had happened
because, he said, "I wasn't there."

The reluctance of police to judge other policemen finally forced the use of
outside experts. Wilson said several local peace officers expressed dismay
over the shooting, but none were willing to testify publicly. Wilson
brought in from New Hampshire a police instructor in the use of lethal
force named Massad Ayoob; and from the University of Texas Medical Branch
in Galveston, a pathology instructor named Sparks Veasey.

It was Ayoob's expert opinion that "standing upright with both feet on a
person's back is more akin to riding a surfboard than to any method of
stabilizing a resisting person that I am familiar with." Upshaw's choice
not to carry gloves on his belt should not have interfered in the
performance of his job, according to Ayoob. If Upshaw had finished
handcuffing Travis, the death could have been avoided, he said.

Then, looking at pictures of the body, Ayoob noticed that where the bullets
protruded from Travis's chest, the outer skin seemed abraded. He and Sparks
Veasey came to the same conclusion. If Travis had even been partially on
his left side, Veasey reported, "one would expect the wounds would be
oblong in character," but they were circular. This trajectory, Veasey
determined, "would be more consistent with the decedent being flat on the
floor" when he was shot from a distance of about 18 inches.

The lawyer for the defense also hired an expert, of course. In the view of
David Grossi, a police instructor from Illinois, Travis was an "aggressive,
drug-laced, superhuman felon." Assuming the truth of Leal's version, Grossi
called the shooting "totally justified, completely necessary and
objectively reasonable."

The last motion to dismiss the case was denied. In April, the Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals returned the case for trial, calling it "a significant
fact-related dispute."

The glass was replaced, and the blood was covered up with paint and new
carpet, but the Deals could feel something down below. After a while, they
left their home in Bellaire. They settled in an artists' colony in Mexico.

For Travis's friends, acid became a symbol of sadness. Many of them gave it
up, and said Travis was responsible. Also, they said, you grow out of it.
"You got better things to do," said Meaghan, "than deal with an entire day
on a drug."

They've become econ majors, store managers, waitresses and slackers.

Prosecutor Belinda Hill has become Judge Hill.

Assistant Chief Mack became Chief Mack. He quietly oversaw a drastic change
in Bellaire's use-of-force policy; the policy manual now includes a section
called "Use of Force Continuum" listing all the tactics an officer might
consider before deciding to shoot.

But none of this had anything to do with the shooting, said the chief. Last
year, he promoted Michael Leal to sergeant. Leal was put in charge of
criminal investigations, supervising everyone who had investigated him.

As for the Allens, they filed the lawsuit, they say, to find out how their
son died. They know that now. Last year, they had a giant portrait of
Travis painted on the southern wall of their house. An inscription reads,
"The laws sometimes sleep but never die."

Contact Randall Patterson at his online address
(rpatterson@houstonpress.com). Or call him at 713.280.2478.

Got a comment/compliment/beef? Send us your feedback.
(feedback@houston-press.com)
-------------------------------------------------------------------

County Can't Build Its Way Out Of Jail-Crowding Problem (A Staff Editorial
In 'The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel' Wallows In Denial About The Cost
Of Locking Up 6 Percent Of The Population For Illegal-Drug Offenses,
And Gropes In The Dark For Some Way To Make It Economically Feasible)

Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 17:16:57 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US WI: County Can't
Build Its Way Out Of Jail-Crowding Problem
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (WI)
Contact: jsedit@onwis.com
Website: http://www.jsonline.com/
Pubdate: 9 Jul 1998
Fax: (414) 224-8280

COUNTY CAN'T BUILD ITS WAY OUT OF JAIL-CROWDING PROBLEM

The proposed steep increase in the Milwaukee County House of Correction
budget for next year ought to be no surprise. After all, when you expand
jail space, you expand jail costs. The addition of 1,000 beds to the house
requires an addition to the number of guards and other staffers. Hence, the
institution's request for an extra $9 million in property tax funds.

The proposed budget does, however, underscore the heavy cost of
incarceration and thus the urgency of (1) putting in place less expensive
alternatives to jail and (2) steering kids at risk of winding up behind
bars away from that destiny.

Without Steps 1 and 2, the county will never build itself out of the
jail-crowding problem. The county will instead keep feeling pressure to
expand jail space even more at a cost of additional millions a year.

A promising alternative is a day reporting center. In lieu of going to
jail, petty, non-violent offenders report to the center, where they spend a
good portion of the day in intensive activities, such as drug treatment,
basic schooling, vocational training and life-skills education.

The clients have to submit to drug tests, and they are monitored while away
from the center. The idea is to change the lives of offenders so they won't
keep repeating the behavior that got them into trouble.

To its credit, the county is embarking on an experimental $100,000
day-reporting program -- albeit, as they say, a day late and a dollar
short. The county was tardy in backing the experiment, and the money
allocated may not be enough -- the County Board is quicker to pour millions
into lockups than lesser amounts into alternatives. Now, however, the
county must give the pilot program a fair chance to work.

Adults in trouble often emerge from hard, troubled childhoods. That reality
underscores the urgency of ensuring that the child welfare system actually
protects children -- a task that falls to both the county and the state.

Putting hope back in the inner city, through the development of jobs, must
also become a top county priority. Crime flourishes when jobs dry up.

All in all, the county has little choice but to boost by millions the House
of Correction budget for next year. But the county could and should act now
to prevent adding untold millions in expenditures in successive years.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Stirring The Pot ('Metroland' In Albany, New York, Notes The Schoharie County
Chapter Of NORML Is Sponsoring A High School Essay Contest
On The Drug War's Infringement Of Historic Constitutional Liberties,
But Can't Quite Distinguish Between The Purpose Of The Contest
From The Promotion Of Illegal Drug Use)

Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 18:56:10 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US NY: Stirring the Pot
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Source: Metroland (Albany, NY)
Contact: metroland@metland.com
Website: http://www.metland.com/
Fax: 518-463-3712
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998
Author: Erin M. Sullivan

STIRRING THE POT

A local NORML chapter offers high school essay contest on drug war's dangers

The Schoharie County chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of
Marijuana Laws is sponsoring a contest this summer that's probably going to
raise the eyebrows of quite a few school districts. The NORML folks are
asking high school seniors to respond to this question: How does the war on
marijuana threaten America's constitutional democracy? The student who
comes up with the best answer is going to get a $500 prize and publication
on Schoharie NORML's web site.

It's not an attempt to indoctrinate youngsters, according to Walter Wouk,
president of the Schoharie County chapter of NORML. Rather, he said, it is
an effort to make high school students recognize that the war on drugs is
actually a war on constitutional rights.

Wouk said the contest was conceived when the organization learned that the
Galway Central School District had asked the Saratoga County Sheriff's
Department to bring drug-sniffing dogs into the school to perform random
drug searches. He said Galway Central Schools' action is part of a growing
trend of teaching children that they are "guilty until proven innocent."

"You know," said Wouk, "this is America. This is a democracy. You get
children used to having police going through their lockers with
drug-sniffing dogs, and you get them used to being stripped of their rights."

He said the contest is intended not to promote drug use but to remind
people that they should not be considered criminals for discussing drug use
or expressing their opinions about drugs.

"We've been discussing this for a long time," Wouk said. "Last year we went
up to the Rockwood Hemp Fest, and I spoke to two college freshmen and a
high school graduate. I asked them if they would join NORML, and they were
afraid. They were afraid that the government would put their names on a
list and get them in trouble or something."

However, most school districts make it a point to strictly prohibit drug
use and probably don't view "students' rights" in the same light as NORML.
Many schools, including the Middleburgh Central School District in
Schoharie County, label themselves "drug-free school zones" and impose
penalties on students and others who peddle drugs or encourage their use
anywhere near the schools. According to Susan Urbach, superintendent of
Middleburgh Central School District in Schoharie County, it is a school's
duty to protect all students from harmful activities--especially
drug-oriented ones.

Urbach said that although she is unfamiliar with the contest or NORML, she
said she thinks the school district would be opposed to it if it condoned
the use of drugs.

"We are a drug-free school, and we receive drug-free money from the federal
government," she said. "Although this is a free democracy, this school
district is not supportive of anything that could harm children."

She also added that high school students are not always afforded the same
constitutional rights as adults.

"I do want to stress that I don't think people ought not to voice their
views," she insisted, "but our children are legally underage and depend on
adults for guidance."

Because she was not sure of the intent of NORML's contest, Urbach declined
to say whether or not the school district would penalize students
participating in it.

The winner of the essay contest will be announced on Schoharie NORML's Web
site. Jonathan von Linden, executive director of the Schoharie County
chapter of NORML, said students shouldn't fear repercussions from school
districts or law enforcement agencies for participating in the
contest--although he couldn't guarantee that there would be no
repercussions from their parents.

"I've been an outspoken advocate of changing the drug laws for 20 years or
so, and I live in a small town, and I've never had any trouble," said von
Linden.

Von Linden said he hopes the contest will help make students and adults
alike recognize that there is a fine line between drug law enforcement and
stomping on civil rights.

"The problem is, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are being trashed
under the guise of drug war execution," von Linden said. "People are losing
their rights whether they use drugs or not."
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Monsignor's Arrest In Queens On Drug Charges Fills Priests And Friends
With Shock ('The New York Times' Says James E. White, Arrested
For Buying Cocaine From A Narc, Was The Fastest-Rising Priest
From His Seminary Class And His Future In The Roman Catholic Archdiocese
Of New York Seemed Unlimited)
Link to earlier story
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 10:26:11 -0400 To: mapnews@mapinc.org From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US NY: Monsignor's Arrest In Queens On Drug Charges Fills Priests And Friends With Shock Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: emr@javanet.com (Dick Evans) Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 Source: New York Times (NY) Contact: letters@nytimes.com Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Author: James Risen MONSIGNOR'S ARREST IN QUEENS ON DRUG CHARGES FILLS PRIEST'S AND FRIENDS WITH SHOCK He was the fastest-rising priest from his seminary class, and his future in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York seemed unlimited. James E. White had been the first from his class to be named monsignor, had served in the highly visible post of associate pastor at St. Patrick's Cathedral, and had even worked briefly on the personal staff of John Cardinal O'Connor. And so by 1996, when he was chosen to run an important pre-seminary program to help college students interested in the priesthood, Monsignor White was emerging as an important role model, one of the few prominent black priests in an archdiocese deeply concerned about expanding its reach within the black community. Yet that stellar background has only deepened the sense of personal tragedy felt by his friends and fellow priests after Monsignor White was arrested on misdemeanor drug possession charges on Tuesday. Priests who know Monsignor White expressed shock Wednesday at the news of his arrest, saying it seemed completely out of character for the 50-year-old priest they described as quiet and gentle. Several priests who have known Monsignor White for years, including some who were in his seminary class, said they had never seen any evidence of his involvement with drugs. They added that his arrest was painful and damaging to the archdiocese, especially since New York has so few black priests in senior positions. "I really couldn't believe it," said Msgr. Howard Calkins, pastor of Sacred Heart Catholic Church in Mt. Vernon. "This is a painful moment. I feel for him. I feel for the Archbishop." William Scafidi, pastor of St. Mary's Catholic Church in Newburgh, N.Y., where Monsignor White previously served as pastor, said: "He is an excellent guy; that's why this is so damaging." Monsignor White was arrested along with another man after allegedly buying cocaine from an undercover officer in the Jackson Heights section of Queens. He pleaded not guilty to a misdemeanor narcotics possession charge in Queens criminal court Wednesday and was released on his own recognizance. He agreed to seek drug treatment and was ordered to appear in court on Aug. 18, according to the Queens County Attorney's office. Monsignor White, who is from West Harlem, came late to the priesthood, spending much of his early career as a brother in the Catholic order of the Christian Brotherhood. Ordained at the archdiocese's St. Joseph's Seminary in Dunwoodie, Yonkers, in 1983, Monsignor White was first assigned to Staten Island, where he served as an associate pastor at St. Clement and St. Michael Church for two years. After teaching at Cardinal Hayes High School for four years, he joined the staff at St. Patrick's Cathedral in 1989. While there, he filled in for one of Cardinal O'Connor's secretaries during one summer, said Joseph Zwilling, a spokesman for the archdiocese of New York. In 1991, Monsignor White was given his own parish, at St. Mary's Church in Newburgh, N.Y., which is part of the Archdiocese of New York. Five years later, he was named rector of the St. John Neumann Seminary Residence in the Riverdale section of the Bronx, where about 40 college students considering the priesthood live and study before they are ready to enter the seminary. Catholic leaders and priests said they could not recall any similar cases of a New York priest arrested on drug charges, and they were struggling to absorb the news. Last night, at Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church, the West Harlem parish where Monsignor White said his first mass and where his brother taught for years, his friend, Father Thomas Fenlon, was composing a new church bulletin that addressed the monsignor's troubles. "I was just writing in the bulletin that we support him with our prayers," Father Fenlon said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Give Hemp A Chance (A Staff Editorial In 'The Lexington Herald-Leader'
Says A New Study By A Trio Of Economists At The University Of Kentucky
Strengthens The Case For Giving Farmers A Chance To At Least Experiment
With Growing And Marketing Industrial Hemp)
Link to earlier story
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 01:17:08 -0400 To: mapnews@mapinc.org From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: US KY: Editorial: Give Hemp a Chance Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: cohip@levellers.org (Colo. Hemp Init. Project) Source: Lexington Herald-Leader (KY) Contact: hledit@lex.infi.net Website: http://www.kentuckyconnect.com/heraldleader/ Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 GIVE HEMP A CHANCE Drug politics keep us from testing economists' theories It's too bad the politics of marijuana thwart any practical investigation of the economics of hemp. A new study, by a trio of University of Kentucky economists, strengthens the case for giving farmers a chance to at least experiment with growing and marketing industrial hemp, a crop that is illegal in this country although allowed in much of the world, including Canada. Unfortunately, as long as law-enforcement officials keep their heels dug in, the UK economists' predictions will never be put to the test. From national drug czar Barry McCaffrey to state Justice Secretary Dan Cherry on down, the attitude seems to be that letting farmers grow hemp would somehow constitute a government wink at marijuana use. Such fears are misguided on several counts. Hemp farms would be licensed and subject to surprise inspections. The two crops aren't particularly compatible or even similar in appearance, though they are botanical cousins. Forget the facts, though. No politician can risk being labeled soft on drugs. So an environmentally friendly crop that might help family farms finds no champions among the powerful or the elected. No one in Washington or Frankfort has been able to authorize test plots or a pilot program similar to what Canada has. Even the conservative Farm Bureau has endorsed industrial hemp. Its strong fibers have numerous uses -- as a substitute for trees in paper-making, as fabric in clothes, automobiles and carpet, even as a substitute for plastic. The leftover pulp could be used as animal bedding. But the practical experimentation that could determine hemp's potential as an option for tobacco farmers falls victim to irrational fears and politics. Who knows. The market might make the drug czar's case better than he can. After all, only the market can provide irrefutable economic evidence. As it now stands, those interested in industrial hemp as a cash crop are dealing in hypotheticals. There are no facilities in this country for processing raw hemp straw. No one can say with certainty how demand for hemp would be affected by a new domestic supply. Without some domestic sources, it's hard to predict to what extent hemp would replace other raw materials in everything from paper to cars. Even at UK, economists are divided. An agricultural economist who produced an earlier study still says it would be cheaper to import hemp than grow it here. But the most recent study, commissioned by a pro-hemp group and released last week, concludes that hemp could be the best thing for Kentucky farms since tobacco. The study says the existing market for raw hemp would support cultivating 82,000 acres in the United States and growers could expect to clear $200 to $600 an acre. That's considerably less than the profit from an acre of tobacco but better than corn, hay, soybeans and wheat. It's time to quell the reefer madness and figure out how to let farmers experiment with a crop that could help them stay in business. All Contents Copyright 1998 Lexington Herald-Leader. All Rights Reserved
-------------------------------------------------------------------

The Drug Policy Foundation Network News (The Premiere Issue
Of A Monthly Publication For DPF's Advocacy Network Includes -
Money Laundering Bill Expands Civil Asset Forfeiture; Congress Seeks
To Expand Workplace Drug Testing; Representative Rangel Seeks
Elimination Of Sentencing Disparity; Senator Biden Calls For
Legalization Hearings)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 13:19:44 EDT
Errors-To: dpf-mod@dpf.org
Reply-To: dpnews@dpf.org
Originator: dpnews@dpf.org
Sender: dpnews@dpf.org
From: Drug Policy News Service (dpf-mod@dpf.org)
To: Multiple recipients of list (dpnews@dpf.org)
Subject: DPF's Network News (July 1998)

DRUG POLICY FOUNDATION'S NETWORK NEWS
A Monthly Publication for DPF's Advocacy Network

Welcome to the first edition of Network News, a publication of the Drug
Policy Foundation, your voice for reasoned and compassionate drug policies.
As the 105th Congress entered the last few months of its work, several drug
policy proposals captured a great deal of attention. As you may know, DPF
has prioritized civil asset forfeiture reform, sentencing disparities, and
reform of workplace drug testing as three key areas for reform.

***

Money Laundering Bill Expands Civil Asset Forfeiture

H.R. 3745, the "Money Laundering Act of 1998," was unveiled by Rep. Bill
McCollum (R-Fla.) as one of the bills to expand the war on drugs; its main
focus is broadening the government's forfeiture powers. H.R. 3745 raises
constitutional concerns including possible Fourth Amendment, due process
and privacy rights violations. Additionally, H.R. 3745 intrudes on the role
of the federal courts by significantly changing the rules of evidence and
civil procedure, and conflicts with current efforts to curb U.S. Treasury
and Justice Department forfeiture excesses. Some of the most troubling
aspects of H.R. 3745 are the civil (non-criminal) asset forfeiture
provisions. H.R. 3745 would:

* allow the federal government to go on "fishing expeditions" by
subpoenaing bank records before filing a complaint or starting a forfeiture
procedure;

* make it nearly impossible for a person to assert an "innocent owner"
defense;

* expand wiretapping authority for suspected violations of IRS form-filing
requirements;

* unduly expand the number of new acts that can be predicates for
triggering the money laundering statute, allowing federal agencies to seize
entire businesses and bank accounts for any and all manner of alleged
regulatory and state law violations; and

* expand the Department of Justice mandate by making DOJ into a de-facto
world police force-enforcing alleged violations of foreign nations' laws,
even when foreign governments don't want to prosecute.

DPF supports meaningful asset forfeiture reform that uniformly limits the
scope of the government's forfeiture powers by eliminating some of the most
egregious civil forfeiture practices. DPF supports Rep. Henry Hyde's
(R-Ill.) Manager's Amendment to H.R. 1965, the Civil Asset Forfeiture
Reform Act, and has written Rep. Hyde urging him to oppose H.R. 3745 and to
move H.R. 1965 to a vote during this session of Congress.

***

Congress Seeks to Expand Workplace Drug Testing

The House of Representatives approved H.R. 3853, the "Drug-Free Workplace
Act," on June 23, which authorizes federal grants for non-profit
organizations in an effort to encourage small businesses to institute
drug-free workplace programs. In order to receive these funds, a business
would have to follow specific federal guidelines, including establishing an
employee drug-testing program.

By and large, small businesses have opted not to institute drug-testing
because the programs are costly and have shown little evidence of long-term
effectiveness, especially in the absence of credible evidence of a
substance abuse problem. DPF has written to members of Congress opposing
this provision of H.R. 3853 and any other suspicionless workplace urine and
hair drug-testing schemes. DPF has expressed its support for the
development of alternative measures, such as performance testing, expanding
non-invasive workplace drug abuse prevention programs, and health insurance
coverage of drug treatment services for addicted employees.

As the Drug-Free Workplace Act moves to the Senate (S. 2203), DPF is
working to eliminate any mandatory drug testing requirements that are not
based on evidence of substance abuse or a reaction to circumstances in
which the presence of drugs or alcohol is suspected (e.g., after an
accident or mishap due to intoxication).

***

Rep. Rangel Seeks Elimination of Sentencing Disparity

The criminal justice approach to dealing with the problems presented by
drug use has created unacceptable social and legal side effects. Due to
discriminatory enforcement practices and unjust mandatory minimum
sentencing laws, a disproportionate number of young African-Americans are
in prison for low-level drug offenses. While it only takes five grams of
crack cocaine to trigger a five-year mandatory minimum, it takes 500 grams
of powder cocaine to receive the same sentence.

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) has introduced H.R. 2031, the "Crack-Cocaine
Equitable Sentencing Act of 1997," to eliminate the sentencing disparity
between crack cocaine and powder cocaine offenses. One of DPF's short-term
priorities is to raise public awareness of the injustices of mandatory
sentencing and its failure to have an impact on crime. DPF's first
priority in this area is the elimination of the disparity in sentencing
between crack cocaine and powder cocaine.

Rep. Rangel has requested that supporters of this legislation write to
their members of Congress to express their support and request that their
representative become a co-sponsor of this bill.

***

Senator Biden Calls for Legalization Hearings

On June 17, Sen. Joseph R. Biden (D-Del.) called on the Senate Judiciary
Committee to hold hearings on drug legalization to "expose the myths and
dangers of legalization." DPF has written to Sen. Biden, committee chairman
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the ranking minority member Sen. Patrick Leahy
(D-Vt.), and committee member Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) expressing its
support for these hearings if there is balanced representation.

On July 2, DPF Public Policy Director H. Alexander Robinson noted that "a
number of DPF members have expressed support for legalization," moreover,
"DPF supports a full discussion of the range of alternative solutions to
the growing problems caused by drug abuse." In his request that DPF be
invited to testify, Robinson noted that "despite [Sen. Biden's] conclusions
about the effects of any legalization strategies," DPF believes that
balanced hearings should "allow the expression of a wide range of views and
thereby serve as a learning opportunity for the Judiciary Committee, the
Congress, and the American people."

Reform supporters should express their support for Congress holding
balanced hearings on drug policy reform and legalization.

Introducing DPF's Network News

Network News is the newest addition to DPF's regular publications. This
monthly newsletter will keep you updated on the latest legislative and
regulatory drug policy proposals in Congress and the Administration.

Network News will be supplemented by legislative Action Alerts. These two
timely publications will help keep DPF Advocacy Network members
well-informed about current drug policy efforts.

To become a member of the DPF Advocacy Network and receive Action Alerts
and Network News, send us your name, fax number, and/or email.

Drug Policy Foundation
4455 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite B-500, Washington, DC 20008-2328
ph: (202) 537-5005 * fax: (202) 537-3007 * email: dpf@dpf.org * web:
www.dpf.org

***

Network News was brought to you by the Drug Policy News Service, a service
of the Drug Policy Foundation. To sign up for the Drug Policy News Service,
send email to listproc@dpf.org with the following in the message:
subscribe dpnews (Firstname Lastname).
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Clinton's Antidrug Plan - $2 Billion Ad Blitz ('The Christian Science Monitor'
Notes President Clinton And General Barry McCaffrey Today Will Roll Out
A Five-Year Media Campaign Bigger Than Nike's, Sprint's,
Or That Of American Express, The Largest Media Blitz Ever Undertaken
By The Federal Government, Though There's Not Any Evidence
That's 'Totally Conclusive' The Ads Will Have A Beneficial Effect)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:53:52 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Clinton's Antidrug Plan: $2 Billion Ad Blitz
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: isenberd@DynCorp.com (Isenberg, David)
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998
Source: Christian Science Monitor
Contact: oped@csps.com
Website: http://www.csmonitor.com/
Author: Francine Kiefer Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

CLINTON'S ANTIDRUG PLAN: $2 BILLION AD BLITZ

Biggest government ad campaign ever aims to lower youth drug use.

But will it work?

Think about how many times you've seen an ad with the Nike swoosh or a
pitch for Sprint's long-distance rates. Now compare that with the number of
times you've seen an ad against drug abuse.

The drug ad probably doesn't even come close.

But that should change today, when President Clinton and drug czar Barry
McCaffrey roll out an antidrug media campaign that's bigger than Nike's,
Sprint's, or that of American Express.

It's the largest media blitz ever undertaken by the federal government. And
antidrug ads like these will be hard to forget: bugs crawling all over a
teenage boy (as he might hallucinate while on methamphetamines); a young
woman demolishing her kitchen with a frying pan (symbolic of the
destruction heroin use can cause); and a sweet grade-school girl who looks
at the camera blankly when asked what her mother told her about drugs.

(Picture)
IN-YOUR-FACE AD: These frames are the first part of an antidrug TV spot
that will run in prime time describing the consequences of using heroin.
(PARTNERSHIP FOR A DRUG-FREE AMERICA)

Drug use by youths has risen throughout most of the Clinton presidency. But
now with a five-year, $2 billion ad campaign, the White House hopes to
lower it within two years, especially among children 13 and under.

But the question remains: Will this high-cost, high-profile strategy work?
Research shows a link between advertising and less use, though there's "not
any that's totally conclusive," says Lloyd Johnston, principal investigator
for the Monitoring the Future study, a comprehensive survey that tracks
drug use in America.

Several studies, including those done by Dr. Johnston, support the premise
that ads affect kids' attitudes toward drugs - and that attitudes in turn
affect behavior.

When advertising increased in the 1980s, drug use by youths decreased. When
it declined in the 1990s, drug use increased (though it leveled off last
year and declined in some areas, such as marijuana use).

Yet other factors have contributed to increased use of drugs in the '90s.
The music industry, for instance, began to send pro-drug messages through
lyrics and individual stars' behavior. Marijuana became more acceptable,
because many kids' parents once used it and because of its increasing
medicinal role.

Leigh Leventhal, spokeswoman for the Partnership for a Drug-Free America
(PDFA), expects the administration's campaign will have an impact on use.

For the first time, she points out, the US government is going to pay for
prime-time advertising. That's a welcome development after "dwindling"
public-service advertising. "What we've been lacking is consistency, and in
order to be consistent and reach kids, you've got to be on prime time,"
says Ms. Leventhal, whose New York-based nonprofit group is providing the
ads for the campaign.

TV, Radio, Internet, Schools

The media campaign, aimed at nonusers and infrequent users, will go far
beyond prime time, though. It will include national and local TV, radio,
and print ads.

It will also reach kids through the Internet, Channel One in schools, and
billboards. The White House calls it "not just an ad campaign," saying the
administration will also work with the entertainment industry to portray
more accurately the consequences of using drugs.

Those inside and outside the White House say that for the media campaign to
work, it must target the needs of America's different communities, include
parents, provide follow-up support at the grass-roots level, and be
consistent.

The program is a bipartisan, public-private partnership. Half its cost will
be covered by the government, half by the media industry, which will
contribute time and space for the campaign.

Congress has approved this year's federal installment of $195 million and
is likely to support the next installment. The media industry, Leventhal
says, "has been enormously generous."

On the surface at least, the campaign seems to meet many of the criteria
for success. One measure is that in five months of pilot testing in 12
cities, calls to a national clearinghouse hot line increased 40 percent
compared with cities that weren't part of the pilot program. Some local hot
lines in the pilot cities saw the number of calls increase by 400 to 500
percent.

Early Ads Showed Success

In the test, the ads were targeted at different communities.
Anti-methamphetamine ads appeared in San Diego, because this drug is on the
increase in the West and Midwest. But anti-heroin ads were aired in
Baltimore, because that's the emerging drug there.

All the test cities had ads aimed at parents, because research shows that
drug use is significantly lower among children who learn at home about the
risks of drugs.

Meanwhile, groups like the National Guard and the Community Anti-Drug
Coalitions of America - which include about 4,000 local antidrug groups -
are working with the administration to support the campaign at the
grass-roots level.

The pilot test hasn't been without bumps. "These ads don't talk to my
population," says Jeff Spiegel of San Diego's Communities Against Substance
Abuse. He wants to see ads that focus on Latinos.

The White House acknowledges this gap and others, including a lack of staff
to deal with the interest the media campaign is expected to generate.

But it says it is trying to solve these problems and points out that its
campaign will be monitored and adjusted if it is not meeting goals.

(c) Copyright 1997, 1998 The Christian Science Publishing Society. All
rights reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

US Starts Paid Ad Campaign Against Drugs ('New York Times' Version)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 14:53:52 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: U.S. Starts Paid Ad Campaign Against Drugs
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: emr@javanet.com (Dick Evans)
Source: New York Times (NY)
Contact: letters@nytimes.com
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998
Author: Courtney Kane

U.S. STARTS PAID AD CAMPAIGN AGAINST DRUGS

The White House's drug policy agency will introduce its first paid national
advertising Thursday as part of its fight against drug use among
adolescents.

President Clinton will join Gen. Barry McCaffrey, the director of the
Office of National Drug Control Policy, in Atlanta to introduce the
campaign, the largest government-financed social marketing effort to date.
It will have an initial budget of $195 million, appropriated by Congress,
and will involve television, radio, print, billboards and interactive
media. The decision to spend taxpayer money to finance the aggressive
anti-drug campaign is a marked change from the government's longtime policy
of watching from the sidelines as advertising and media professionals
coordinated unpaid anti-drug messages as public service advertising. "For
the first time we will be able to buy the time slots in the best media
vehicles," said Thomas Hedrick, vice chairman of the Partnership for a
Drug-Free America in New York, "just like Nike or McDonald's or Pepsi does
on a regular basis."

The partnership, a nonprofit coalition of advertising and media
professionals, has supervised the anti-drug pro bono campaign since 1987.
Though the media have donated the equivalent of more than $2.5 billion
worth of commercial time and ad space for anti-drug advertising, Hedrick
said, the organization has found it increasingly difficult to reach
specific audiences with specific ads because the pro bono campaigns depend
on the availability of time and space.

For instance, in a strong economy, exposure in desirable places like
popular prime-time TV series is difficult to obtain, and many public
service spots are relegated to late-night time slots when few if any of the
intended viewers are watching.

"We're going to pay for the precise placement we need to get the right
message to the right audience," Hedrick said, "with enough frequency to
change attitudes and, over time, drug behavior."

The national paid campaign comes after a six-month test in 12 cities,
including Atlanta, Baltimore, Denver, Hartford, San Diego and Tucson, Ariz.
Each year for the next four years, Congress will be asked to appropriate an
additional $195 million to continue the campaign.

The ads, which will begin appearing Thursday, will be a mix of work already
produced for the partnership and new spots.

In an interesting twist, the media that will be selling the paid time and
space will be asked for such bonus or in-kind contributions as public
service advertising or programs or articles addressing drug issues. For
example, a TV network that receives ad dollars for anti-drug commercials
may agree to run an episode of a sitcom in which a character confronts the
problem of drug abuse or may produce a segment on drug policy for a news
magazine show.

In the test markets, Hedrick said, the media matched the paid ads with
bonus contributions.

The television part of the paid campaign is scheduled to appear Thursday
night on the four main broadcast networks -- ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC -- and
on CNN. The goal is for anti-drug spots to run about 9:15 Eastern time, on
the five networks in a TV tactic known as a roadblock. The Daily Fax
edition of Advertising Age said that other cable networks like ESPN2, ESPN
News, MTV and VH1 had also committed to run spots at about the same time.
The plans call for ABC to run an anti-heroin commercial recently created
for the partnership by Margeotes/Fertitta & Partners in New York. The spot
updates the famous "This is your brain on drugs" commercial by showing a
woman wrecking a kitchen with a frying pan to simulate the effect that
heroin can have on a life.

CBS is scheduled to run a spot aimed at parents that features actor Carroll
O'Connor, whose son died after years of drug abuse. On Fox, teen-age
viewers are the intended audience for a commercial with the rap star Chuck
D. The spot planned for NBC is aimed at young parents, and the spot on CNN,
to run during "Larry King Live," is also aimed at parents, addressing the
need to discuss drugs with their children.

The print part of the campaign is set to begin Thursday in big-city
newspapers. One hard-hitting ad, titled "Disconnect," is meant to
illustrate a generation gap about drugs. A photograph of a woman is
accompanied by these words: "My kid doesn't smoke pot. He's either at
school, soccer practice, piano lessons or at a friend's house." Underneath
is a photograph of a boy, who says, "I usually get stoned at school, after
soccer practice, before piano lessons or at my friend's house."

The ads for the paid campaign are being donated by agencies through the
partnership, which is serving as an unpaid consultant and will receive no
Federal money. Media planning and buying are being handled by Bates USA in
New York, part of Cordiant Communications Group PLC, and Zenith Media
Services in New York, which is owned by Cordiant and Saatchi & Saatchi PLC.
Though many Americans consider anti-drug advertising a necessary component
of the federal war on drugs, some perceive the ambitious crusade as money
ill spent. Ethan Nadelmann, director of the Lindesmith Center in New York,
a drug policy research organization that is part of the Open Society
Institute sponsored by financier George Soros, said: "For the past 10
years, our nation's kids have been bombarded with anti-drug messages, and
it is these same kids who are experimenting with more drugs. While these
ads are well intended, this money could be better spent on programs that
are proven effective in reducing drug use, such as after-school programs
and treatment on demand."

Hedrick, needless to say, disagreed. "I don't understand how it is a big
waste of money," he said. "We have seen in independent research a strong
and consistent correlation between exposure of anti-drug messages and
improving anti-drug attitudes and behavior." "There is simply no more
cost-effective way" to deter drug use, he added, "than by investing 1
percent of the federal anti-drug budget in this public-private partnership."

Still, Hedrick said, "the proof will be in the pudding." The partnership is
awaiting the results of research from the 12 test markets, which are
expected sometime in the fall, he said. There will also be research to
evaluate the effectiveness of the national paid campaign. Other
organizations are also offering their assistance. The American Advertising
Federation in Washington -- which represents agencies, media and marketers
-- will serve as a clearinghouse for matching public service advertising in
100 local markets where the paid campaign will appear. And the Advertising
Council in New York -- the nonprofit organization that coordinates public
service campaigns for the agency and media industries -- will serve as a
clearinghouse for matching public service advertising nationally.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Clinton, Gingrich Announce New Anti-Drug Campaign
('Associated Press' Version)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 15:35:10 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Wire: Clinton, Gingrich
Announce New Anti-Drug Campaign
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn)
Source: Associated Press
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998

CLINTON, GINGRICH ANNOUNCE NEW ANTI-DRUG CAMPAIGN

ATLANTA (AP) -- Updating ``just say no'' with images to ``knock America
upside the head,'' President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich
announced an anti-drug campaign aimed at bombarding the nation with $1
billion in hard-hitting ads over the next five years.

Starting Thursday night on network TV, the government campaign -- bigger
than last year's huge Nike and Sprint campaigns for comparison-- intends to
hit both parents and kids at least four times a week with graphic images of
drugs' destructiveness and children's vulnerability.

``These ads were designed to knock America upside the head and get
America's attention and empower all of you,'' Clinton told an audience of
mostly children, clusters of them sporting Boy Scout and Girl Scout
uniforms.

Gingrich pledged to try to win congressional approval for expanding the
$195 million one-year campaign into a five-year, $1 billion taxpayer
investment in stopping youth drug use. And the government will ask media
outlets to match the federal money dollar for dollar.

In a 1997 national survey, half of high school seniors and nearly one-third
of eighth-graders reported using drugs.

``I wanted to come here today to stand with the president to say that on a
bipartisan basis -- Democrats and Republicans, the legislative branch and
the presidency -- we're all trying to reach out to every young American and
say, 'Don't do it,''' said Gingrich, R-Ga.

The president recalled his younger brother, Roger, battling cocaine
addiction. ``What kind of fool am I that I didn't know what was going on?
... There's somebody like my brother back at your school who's a good kid,
just a little lost,'' Clinton said.

Politics were only on temporary hold. From the ceremonies in the Georgia
World Congress Center, Gingrich headed to a Republican fund-raiser in New
York, Clinton to Democratic events in Atlanta and Miami that would raise
$1.3 million for the effort to oust the GOP from control of Congress.

The president also was stopping in Daytona Beach, Fla., to meet with those
who have been fighting the state's raging wildfires.

Even before Clinton wrapped his drug speech, Republican Sens. Paul
Coverdell of Georgia and John Ashcroft of Missouri issued statements
knocking Clinton's record as soft on drug criminals.

The ads were in 75 Thursday morning newspapers. Though the bulk of the
campaign will focus on TV, ads produced free by some of Madison Avenue's
premiere agencies will also run on radio, billboards and the Internet.

One spot walks viewers past school lockers into a classroom of pint-sized
desks. ``It's true,'' the announcer exhorts parents, ``The use of marijuana
has actually gone down ... to the fifth grade. Talk to your kids now,
before someone else does.''

Another is a spin-off of the fried egg ``This is your brain on drugs'' ad
so widely used during the Partnership for a Drug-Free America's 11-year
campaign, with its Reagan-era slogan ``Just Say No.'' The updated version,
about heroin's ruinous power, shows a frying-pan-wielding young woman
smashing an egg and then tearing up her whole kitchen.

That ad has been running since January in 12 test cities where it generated
a 300 percent increase in calls to a national clearinghouse of information
on drug use, said retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, Clinton's drug policy
director.

At least $150 million of this year's appropriation will be spent directly
on air time targeting middle-schoolers. That, according to 1997 Advertising
Age figures, is more than Nike or Sprint spent to air single-brand ads.

Based on a study of the test campaign, McCaffrey acknowledged it could be
three years before anyone knows whether the ads are actually driving down
drug use. And some activists doubted the ads' effectiveness.

The Lindesmith Center, a research project of philanthropist George Soros,
who supports legalized marijuana for medical use, said the money would be
better spent on after-school programs and drug treatment.

For more than a decade, media outlets gave the Partnership for a Drug-Free
America some $3 billion in free air time for its public service
announcements.

But since 1991, with the explosion of new competition that cable channels
brought, prime time has been squeezed by network promotions, shoving many
public service announcements to the wee hours. Teen drug use more than
doubled during that period.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Clinton, Gingrich Kick Off Huge Government Anti-Drug Ad Campaign
(A Different 'Associated Press' Version)

Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 10:22:40 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Wire: Clinton, Gingrich
Kick Off Huge Government Anti-Drug Ad Campaign
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Patrick Henry (resist_tyranny@hotmail.com)
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998
Source: Associated Press

CLINTON, GINGRICH KICK OFF HUGE GOVERNMENT ANTI-DRUG AD CAMPAIGN

WASHINGTON (AP) - Remember that old fried egg ad with its warning, "This is
your brain on drugs"? It's going big time this year, with the federal
government spending $195 million more than the annual advertising campaigns
of American Express, Nike or Sprint to plaster the airwaves with anti-drug
messages.

The ad campaign, a five-year project being given a bipartisan send-off today
in Atlanta by President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, could turn
into a $1 billion government investment in stopping teen drug use.

"This is an effort to talk to a generation that started to get the wrong
message," said retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who heads Clinton's drug
control policy office. In a 1997 national survey, half of high school
seniors and nearly one-third of eighth-graders reported using illegal drugs
at least once.

Today's unveiling promised a brief cease-fire in the sharp election-year
squabbling between Clinton and Republican leaders on everything from drugs
to foreign policy. Gingrich, R-Ga., who rearranged his schedule to be at the
president's side on his own Atlanta turf, said congressional Republicans
were committed to funding the campaign for its full five-year run.

"It's important first of all to send a signal to young people that whether
you're a Republican or a Democrat, you're committed to getting across the
message that drugs are dangerous. This is a national message, not a
political message," the speaker said in an interview Wednesday.

"The level of support among Republicans in the Congress is strong and
growing. ... We want to break the back of the drug culture over the next
five years," he said.

Politics would be on only a temporary hold. From today's ceremonies in the
Georgia World Congress Center, Gingrich was headed to a Republican
fund-raiser in New York, Clinton to Democratic money events in Atlanta and
Miami. The president also was stopping in Daytona Beach, Fla., to meet with
those who have been fighting the state's raging wildfires.

Beginning today in 75 major newspapers and on the four major TV networks
tonight, parents and a target youth audience between the ages of 9 and 18
will be bombarded by provocative anti-drug ads produced gratis by some of
Madison Avenue's premiere ad agencies. The goal is to hit the average family
least four times a week either through TV, radio, newspapers, billboards or
the Internet.

One of the spots is a spin-off of the fried egg ad popularized during the
Partnership for a Drug-Free America's 11-year campaign, with its Reagan-era
slogan "Just Say No." The updated version, meant to dramatize the effects of
heroin use, shows a Winona Ryder look-alike bust up an egg and her whole
kitchen with a frying pan.

That ad already has been running in 12 test cities where it generated a 300
percent increase in calls to a national clearinghouse of information on drug
use, McCaffrey said.

The nationwide government campaign is the 15th largest single-brand ad
project, larger than the media buys of American Express, Nike and Sprint,
said Steve Dnistrian, senior vice president of the Partnership for a
Drug-Free America.

But its funding will be vulnerable to Capitol Hill's annual appropriations
process, which is why all sides strived to keep today's unveiling bipartisan.

A one-year campaign is worthless, Dnistrian said. "Coke and Pepsi don't run
an ad campaign for a year and then walk away. To maintain market share you
have to be out there constantly reminding them."

The Lindesmith Center, a research project of philanthropist George Soros,
who supports free clean needles for intravenous drug users and legalized
marijuana for medical use, issued a statement saying the money would be
better spent on after-school programs and drug treatment.

For more than a decade, Dnistrian's PDFA has rounded up help from the
advertising industry and media outlets who pitched in as much as $3 billion
in free air time to put out anti-drug ads primarily aimed at young people.

But since 1991, with the explosion of new competition that cable channels
brought, prime time has been squeezed by network promotions, consigning
public service announcements to the wee hours even as drug use by teens
skyrocketed.

As part of the new ad initiative, the government will ask media outlets to
match the taxpayers' investment dollar for dollar. And McCaffrey hoped the
campaign would live well beyond five years to keep up with successive crops
of young people.

"We'll always have to start over with a new generation of eighth-graders,"
he said. "Some people like to call this a war on drugs. .. It's a war on
ignorance."
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Anti-Drug Ads To Bombard Airwaves ('Seattle Times' Version)

Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 20:43:41 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Anti-drug ads to bombard airwaves
Cc: tresor@boulder.net
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John Smith
Source: Seattle Times (WA)
Contact: opinion@seatimes.com
Website: http://www.seattletimes.com/
Pubdate: 9 Jul 1998
Author: Seattle Times news services. Material from The Associated Press,
The Washington Post and Newsday is included in this report.

ANTI-DRUG ADS TO BOMBARD AIRWAVES

WASHINGTON - Remember that old fried-egg ad with its warning, "This is your
brain on drugs"? It's going big time this year, with the federal government
spending $195 million - rivaling the annual advertising campaigns of
American Express, Nike or Sprint - to plaster the airwaves with anti-drug
messages.

The ad campaign, a five-year project being given a send-off today in
Atlanta by President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, could turn
into a $1 billion government investment in stopping teen drug use.

The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy is launching ads on
TV, radio and movie screens, in newspapers and magazines, and on the Internet.

"If Corporate America uses mass media to sell everything from sneakers to
soda, we've got to use the full power of mass media to unsell drugs to
children," said Barry McCaffrey, director of the office.

Among the ads are a television spot showing a young woman smashing objects
in a kitchen to demonstrate the emotional and physical effects of heroin
use and a radio spot that chides parents for not talking to their children
about the dangers of drug use.

McCaffrey said test-marketing has suggested that the ads do in fact
stimulate interest in anti-drug efforts, citing such measurements as
increased calls to drug hotlines.

But the media campaign, which was first promoted by McCaffrey and won
bipartisan support in Congress, has drawn criticism from groups that
question whether the use of ads has proved sufficiently effective in the
past to warrant the increased investment.

"For the past 10 years, our nation's kids have been bombarded with
anti-drug messages, and it is these same kids who are experimenting with
more drugs," said Ethan Nadelmann, director of the Lindesmith Center, a
drug-policy research organization funded by financier George Soros, who has
supported decriminalizing the medical use of marijuana.

"While these ads are well-intended, this money could be better spent on
programs that are proven effective in reducing drug use, such as
after-school programs and treatment on demand," Nadelmann said.

The federal campaign is primarily aimed at middle-school-age adolescents,
approximately 11 to 13 years old, because that is the age at which young
people form their attitudes toward drug use and are at increased risk of
beginning to use illegal drugs.

The other major target audience is parents.

In the past, groups such as the Partnership for a Drug-Free America
depended on donated time and space to run ads. But since 1991, TV networks
have slashed the number of public-service ads they run, shifted others to
the middle of the night and created their own ads. Congress responded by
authorizing the White House to pay for the anti-drug ads.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Clinton Kicks Off $2 Billion Anti-Drug Media Blitz ('Reuters' Version)

Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 23:17:43 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Wire: Clinton Kicks
Off $2 Billion Anti-Drug Media Blitz
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn)
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998
Source: Reuters
Author: Arshad Mohammed

CLINTON KICKS OFF $2 BILLION ANTI-DRUG MEDIA BLITZ

ATLANTA (Reuters) - Seeking to shock children into avoiding illegal drugs,
President Clinton Thursday launched a $2 billion media blitz of provocative
radio, television, newspaper and Internet ads.

The money, half from the government and half to be raised from the private
sector, will be spent over the next five years, beginning with simultaneous
anti-drug advertisements on the major U.S. television networks Thursday night.

The ads are designed to be jarring, with one showing a girl screaming and
smashing things with a frying pan while telling the audience this is what
drugs will do to their lives.

Another shows a child recounting her mother's warnings about talking to
strangers and playing with matches. Asked what her mother had said about
drugs, the girl is silent.

Officials said the Clinton administration is trying to use the most
sophisticated techniques of television and Hollywood to shake children and
their parents out of complacency about the effects of illegal drugs.

Critics, however, say there is scant evidence that such ad campaigns work
and that the $1 billion that is to come from the government, along with an
equal amount in free air time and advertising space from media groups, could
be better spent.

Speaking in Atlanta, Clinton recalled his half-brother Roger's drug habit
and said the ads were aimed at everyone: children, their parents and siblings.

"My brother nearly died from a cocaine habit and I've asked myself a
thousand times: what kind of fool was I that I did not know that this was
going on?" he said. "How did this happen that I didn't see this coming and
didn't stop it?"

"Nobody in America is free of this: not the president, not any community,
any school, any church, any neighborhood," he added. "These ads are designed
to knock America up side the head and get America's attention."

Clinton launched the campaign in a rare appearance with Republican House of
Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich, who said Congress, which provided
$195 million for the program's first year, would come up with the rest of
the money.

"We are all trying to reach out to every young American and say: don't do
it," Gingrich said.

The campaign, crafted by Clinton's Office of National Drug Control Policy
and the Partnership for a Drug-free America as well as other nonprofit
groups, is not without critics.

"For the past 10 years, our nation's kids have been bombarded with anti-drug
messages, and it is these same kids who are experimenting with more drugs,"
said Ethan Nadelmann, of the Lindesmith Center. The center is a drug policy
group funded by investor George Soros, who advocates decriminalizing some
drugs and emphasizing treatment instead of punishment.

"While these ads are well intended, this money could be better spent on
programs that are proven effective in reducing drug use, such as
after-school programs and treatment on demand," Nadelmann added.

After presenting the ads, Clinton was to attend an Atlanta lunch to raise
$500,000 for Michael Coles, a Democrat seeking to unseat Georgia Republican
Sen. Paul Coverdell. In 1996, Coles had sought to oust Gingrich from his
House seat.

Clinton then flies to Daytona Beach to meet with victims of the wildfires
that have swept Florida in recent weeks and then on to Miami for a
fund-raising dinner to drum up $800,000 for fellow Democrats at the home of
actor Sylvester Stallone.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Clinton To Unveil Anti-Drug Advertising Blitz (A Different 'Reuters' Version)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 12:47:31 EDT
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: paulwolf@icdc.com
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Paul Wolf (paulwolf@icdc.com)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: $ 2 Billion Psychological Campaign Underway

Clinton to unveil anti-drug advertising blitz
By Arshad Mohammed

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Clinton kicks off a $2 billion
media blitz Thursday to bombard children with radio, television
and newspaper ads discouraging them from taking drugs.

Clinton will unveil the advertisements at a high-tech ceremony
in Atlanta, one of the 12 cities where they have been test-marketed
before their national release Thursday.

The ads are designed to shock, with one showing a girl smashing
things with a frying pan while telling the audience this is what
drugs will do to their lives.

Another shows a child recounting what she and her mother talk about.
Asked what her mother tells her about drugs, the girl is silent.

Officials said the Clinton administration is trying to use the most
sophisticated techniques of television and Hollywood to shake
children and their parents out of complacency about the effects of
illegal drugs.

"The ads are designed to be jarring and provocative," said White
House spokesman Joe Lockhart. "They get your attention."

The campaign was crafted by Clinton's Office of National Drug Control
Policy (ONDCP) and nonprofit groups with the assistance of public
relations experts Porter Novelli.

"This is an enormously powerful opportunity to make a difference, for
very little money in the medium that Americans understand," said
ONDCP spokesman Bob Weiner.

Weiner said $2 billion is expected to be spent on the ads over the
next five years, with $195 million funded each year by the government
and an equal amount raised from the private sector, partly in free
air time and newspaper space from media groups.

The campaign, however, is not without critics.

"For the past 10 years, our nation's kids have been bombarded with
anti-drug messages, and it is these same kids who are experimenting
with more drugs," said Ethan Nadelmann, of the Lindesmith Center. The
center is a drug policy group funded by financier George Soros, who
advocates decriminalizing some drugs and emphasizing treatment instead
of punishment.

"While these ads are well intended, this money could be better spent
on programs that are proven effective in reducing drug use, such as
after-school programs and treatment on demand," Nadelmann added.

Anti-drug groups also said there was no evidence the campaign would work.
"While a national media campaign will get a lot of attention and make it
look like something is being done about adolescent drug use, there is no
research that supports this massive expenditure," said Kendra Wright,
director of the Family Watch anti-drug group.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Taking Stock On The War On Drugs (Transcript Of The Lengthy
Cable News Network Version, Including A Brief Debate Between
General Barry McCaffrey And Mike Gray, Author Of 'Drug Crazy')

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 00:02:46 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Transcript:
Taking Stock On The War On Drugs
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Paul Wolf (paulwolf@icdc.com)
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998
Source: CNN
Contact 1: cnn.feedback@cnn.com
Contact 2: cnn.onair@cnn.com
Website: http://www.cnn.com/
Note: Aired July 9, 1998 - 3:00 p.m. ET

TAKING STOCK ON THE WAR ON DRUGS

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is what happens to your brain after starting
marijuana.

BARRY McCAFFREY, DRUG POLICY DIRECTOR: At the end of the day -- and really
this comes lock, stock, and barrel out of Partnership for Drug Free America.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is what your family goes through.

McCAFFREY: What we're trying to do is change youth attitudes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And your friends.

REP. NEWT GINGRICH (R) HOUSE SPEAKER: When you have the courage to say, "No,
I'm not going to do drugs and you shouldn't do drugs either," when you have
the courage to turn in somebody who's a drug dealer, when you have the
courage to insist that you want to go to a drug-free school, live in a
drug-free neighborhood, when you turn to your younger brother and sister and
say, "Don't you do it," you may literally be saving their life.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: These ads are designed
to knock America up side the head and get America's attention and to empower
all of you who are trying to do the right thing. Please do it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Any questions?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOBBIE BATTISTA, HOST: Will new government ads keep your kids off drugs? Ask
drug policy director Barry McCaffrey why he thinks they work. Also, a man
some call Dr. Vomit offers a more graphic deterrent. And this man suggests
the government is in denial. Are you? Get ready to talk back.

Hello, everybody, and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE, CNN's interactive talk show.
I'm Bobbie Battista, and we are taking stock of the war on drugs as the
government releases a new series of public service announcements today.

With us in our studios, General Barry McCaffrey, director of the Office of
National Drug Control Policy and a member of the National

Security Council. With us as well from Dallas, we are joined by Dr. Larry
Alexander, an emergency room physician who has earned the nickname, Dr.
Vomit. And we will get into that a little bit later in the show.

General McCaffrey, good to see you. Nice to have you on the show.

McCAFFREY: Good to be here, Bobbie.

BATTISTA: The ad that we saw just a few moments ago is pretty much the sum
and substance of what you hope will be a $2 billion, five-year advertising
campaign aimed at keeping kids off drugs. Why do you think these ads will work?

McCAFFREY: Well, we're going to begin what we launched today with President
Clinton. And we had Attorney General Janet Reno here and Secretary Donna
Shalala and the Speaker to try and indicate this is a bipartisan effort.

We're going to talk to children, particularly middle school youngsters,
about the dangers of drugs, but not just on television, that beautiful
Partnership for Drug-Free America work, we're also going to be on the
Internet, radio, print media, a very sophisticated five-year effort.

BATTISTA: So it's a saturation campaign for the most part?

McCAFFREY: We're going to try and talk to every young person four times a
week in prime time access.

BATTISTA: OK, now how will you know that this kind of an ad is getting to
the people it needs to reach?

McCAFFREY: We're going to have to evaluate it. We went out to 12 test cities
in the last four months and ran these ads, a $20 million effort, saw
dramatic feedback of 500 percent increase in telephone calls to these
community coalitions, which is really the heart and soul of what we're
doing. We think it will work, and we're going to have to evaluate it,
though, step by step.

BATTISTA: What do you think now of critics who say, "How about taking the $2
billion and spending it elsewhere?"

McCAFFREY: Well, one of the nice things is we don't have to make an
either/or determination. We've increased the amount of money in drug
prevention activities by more than 15 percent just in the coming year. We're
going to do a lot of things. We're going to support boys and girls clubs,
Pride, DARE Program, a lot of efforts to try and engage young people after
school, between 3:00 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. and on weekends and in the summer.

BATTISTA: Let me ask you something. You've got a gold bracelet on your wrist.

McCAFFREY: Yeah.

BATTISTA: And there is special significance to that. Could you tell us about
that?

McCAFFREY: Well, this is a very special thing. It's Tish Elizabeth Smith's
(ph) memory bracelet. She died in her first year at college, this beautiful
young woman, a straight "A" student. Her mother is here today, Deborah
Padgett Barr, and we're going to talk to her of an overdose of heroin which
she took smoking, probably one of her first drug uses in her life. It's a
tremendous reminder to people like me of why we're doing this.

BATTISTA: Let me talk to Mrs. Barr. You're right, she's right behind you
here in our audience. And I see you have pictures of your daughter. Can you
share her story with us?

DEBORAH PADGETT BARR, MOTHERS WITHOUT CHILDREN: Tish was 18. She had been a
very good student in high school. She graduated an honor roll student, went
off to college. I encouraged her to take college classes outside of the
city, and she would say jokingly, "Mommy, I'm not big enough to leave you."
But just a few months later, she left me forever.

With the end of her high school days and the beginning of college, there
were new people in her life, new situations and challenges. And I think
Tish's need to fit in outweighed the logic she used to have. She was very
anti-drug as a child.

The new friends in her life gave her some drugs, and she started out smoking
marijuana in the fall. And I don't think she got the message that I got as a
child. That's why this campaign is very, very important. Just like we would
immunize our children against measles or diphtheria, this is an opportunity
to take information vaccine all across our country and save our children's
lives.

BATTISTA: Let me bring in Dr. Larry Alexander now, because unfortunately,
Dr. Alexander, you see quite a number of cases just like this, don't you?

DR. LARRY ALEXANDER, BAYLOR MEDICAL CENTER: Unfortunately, we do.

BATTISTA: Can you tell us about a few of those?

ALEXANDER: Well, even just this past weekend, we had two overdoses in the
hospital that I work in now. And I have changed hospitals since really
becoming involved in this. And it's just an example of how this is beginning
to spread throughout the entire metroplex areas. I don't think any suburban
area is safe anymore.

And I agree with Mrs. Barr. I think many of these kids who are trying this
are doing it to fit in because their friends are doing it, because they want
to belong. And unfortunately, many of them, when they're trying heroin this
time, aren't aware that the chieva (ph) that they're using is truly heroin.

BATTISTA: All right, let me take a couple of questions here from the
audience. Jennifer, go ahead.

JENNIFER: I just wondered why the money wouldn't have been split more
between community-based programs and programs that work from the ground up,
as well as the sort of top down media campaign. It seems like often,
children are affected by their peers and what's around them and their
environment as much as they're affected by what they see sort of far off in
the media. And I was wondering if there would be a way for the money to be
allocated both from the top down and bottom up.

BATTISTA: General?

McCAFFREY: I think your point is right on target. This is an either/or
proposition. Tremendous increases in funding, three years in a row, have
been the biggest drug budgets in history. The amount of money that's
actually going to this piece of it, the youth media strategy campaign, is
under one percent of the total.

So we don't have to choose. We're going to support broad-based drug
prevention programs, including things like safe and drug-free schools money.
So I think you're quite right. We have to build community coalitions if we
expect to make any progress in this.

BATTISTA: Let me scoot over here real quick. We do have to take a quick
break, and when we come back, a man who says the drug war is a dirty,
rotten, miserable failure. We'll be back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLINTON: My brother nearly died from a cocaine habit. And I've asked myself
a thousand times: What kind of fool was I that I did not know this was going on?

You know, I got myself elected president. I'm supposed to know what people
are thinking, what's going on in their minds. How did this happen that I
didn't see this coming and didn't stop it?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: In today's "New York Times," the first of many anti-drug ads
encouraging parents to talk to their kids about drugs appears. A mother
says, "My kid doesn't smoke pot. He's either at school, soccer practice,
piano lessons, or at a friend's house." The son says, "I usually get stoned
at school, after soccer practice, before piano lessons, or at my friend's
house."

BATTISTA: Welcome back, everybody. We are talking about the war on drugs
today. Let's take a phone call now from Joe in West Virginia. Joe, go ahead.

JOE: Yes. Over two million people admit to using cannabis in the United
States. Roughly 200,000, that's two percent, were caught last year.
Conversely, 98 percent were not caught. This to me shows a complete failure
of the government's drug policy. The fact is that people who want to use
drugs will continue to do so regardless of the laws in place.

BATTISTA: Well, General, we had an Internet message there a few minutes ago,
too, someone criticizing the effort because it's going after the users
rather than the suppliers.

McCAFFREY: Of course, what we're talking about today is we're talking about
drug prevention, focusing on young people in middle school years, and
reducing the likelihood of using cigarettes, alcohol, the most dangerous
drug affecting our children, and marijuana. That's 90 percent of the drug
abuse problem. And it produces the four million chronic addicts in our
country today. So prevention is the heart and soul of this strategy.

At the same time, we've got to recognize that we want to support local law
enforcement. We want high rates of social rejection of drugs, and law
enforcement is part of that equation.

BATTISTA: I thought it was interesting a few moments ago when Deborah, whose
daughter overdosed on heroin trying it the first time, you said that she was
brought up who was very anti-drug as a child and obviously was getting that
message from those around her but then tried drugs anyway. So, I mean --
Crystal, go ahead.

BARR: I'm not sure that I adequately prepared my daughter for the drugs she
would be facing. The drugs of today are not the same drugs that I grew up
with, and I did not understand -- For example, I didn't know that kids were
smoking heroin. My image of a heroin user did not fit my daughter, so I
didn't prepare her for that. I think in her mind, smoking heroin must have
seemed much less serious

BATTISTA: The PSA we're looking at now as you talk is one, as a matter of
fact, that addresses parents and the fact that they should talk to their
children about drugs.

All right, joining us now is Mike Gray, a writer and filmmaker. He authored
the film, "China Syndrome," among others. His latest book is entitled, "Drug
Crazy, How We Got Into this Mess and How We Can Get Out."

Mike, welcome to the show. Let me ask you, first of all, how you even got
into this topic. I mean, how did this book even come about?

MIKE GRAY, DRUG WAR CRITIC: Well, I've been aware of the fact, as I think 75
percent of the American people are aware of the fact, that the drug war is a
failure. And so six years ago, I decided to start digging into this. And the
deeper I got, the more horrified I became. And this book was the result of that.

I tried to cover the entire drug war and then shrink it down to 200 pages.
So it's basically a two subway ride read, and you can get through the whole
thing and understand what went wrong and why.

BATTISTA: Well, tell us if you can in a capsule.

GRAY: Well, in capsule, we didn't have a drug problem in this country prior
to 1914. These wounds are totally self-inflicted. And the terrible tragedy
that happened to Mrs. Barr and her daughter and the stories that Larry is
talking about, the emergency room heroin overdoses, this all occurred during
the most stringent prohibition this planet has ever seen. We enacted it in
1914. At that time, we did not have a drug problem. There were a couple of
hundred thousand addicts in the country, and there was no teenage addiction.
The teenage addicts were absolutely unheard of.

Prior to 1914, for all practical purposes, children didn't have access to
drugs. Now, of course, they can get anything they want from the neighbor's kid.

BATTISTA: What do you think of this new ad campaign, Mike?

GRAY: Well, I'm strongly in favor of prevention messages going out to
teenagers. The problem with this ad campaign, like the previous ad
campaigns, is it's based upon very flawed premises.

Let me tell you, about three years ago when I was in the middle of the
research for my book, "Drug Crazy," I got a call from one of my son's former
high school buddies. And he said, "I understand you're working on a book
about drugs. I need help. I'm a heroin addict." Well, I was blown away. And
I couldn't understand what had happened to this kid who was, you know, had a
scholarship to college and was on the way to a brilliant career as an
artist. And I asked him, "How did you stumble into this hole?" And he said,
"Well, they lied to us about marijuana, and I figured they were lying to us
about this stuff as well."

Well, it turns out we weren't lying about heroin. We were telling the truth.
But how is this kid supposed to know? And that's the underlying flaw that
permeates this campaign and others is in the attempt to rope marijuana in
with these hard drugs: heroin and cocaine.

BATTISTA: So you're worried the kids won't take these ads seriously?

GRAY: Well, the problem is in attempting to equate marijuana with the evil
of heroin, the message that we send them is that heroin is no more dangerous
than marijuana. And that's a terrible message to send to these kids, and we
are now reaping the message -- the harvest that that message sowed.

McCAFFREY: Bobbie, I wonder if I could add something.

BATTISTA: Yeah, go ahead, General.

McCAFFREY: I think Mike actually has a lot of good points, one of which I
would certainly underscore is that we've got to read history. And Professor
Dave Musto up at Yale University is a good place to start, probably our
prominent historian about drug abuse in America.

GRAY: That's where I started.

McCAFFREY: We've had a terrible drug problem in America during the early
part of this century. Cocaine and opiate use was widespread. We had a
terrible drug use problem in the 1870s. We've been here before. And what
happens when we get energized and reject this substance abuse, it goes down.
So, you know, to some extent, Mike and I may agree on it.

Now second thing you've got to clearly argue is that when I'm asked what the
most dangerous drug in America is, I don't talk about methamphetamines and
heroin. I talk about a 12-year-old smoking pot regularly and using beer.

And Bobbie, the reason we say that is that when we look at this Columbia
University data, Joe Califano and his associates, a 12-year- old smoking pot
is 79 times more likely to end up as a chronic drug abuser than one who
isn't. So gateway behavior is a threat.

BATTISTA: Let's ask our medical person to get in on that. Dr. Alexander.

ALEXANDER: Thank you. I was just about to jump in on that. I agree with a
lot of these points that are being made. I do like the fact that we're going
to be doing this campaign where people are actually able to see some of
these things on television.

The problem I have with it, I think, is sometimes it's off target for the
kids. They have been hit with so many different things on the media that
many times they'll tune these things out. And the message that they get from
their friends is that this isn't bad. The message that they sometimes get
from their parents who smoke, who drink, who may or may not use marijuana
is: "This isn't bad." And then when they do eventually get around to talking
to them about the heroin or something other that's harder, then they may not
often put this all together.

And I think that we need to be working harder to educate these younger kids.
The general mentioned that many of these kids now are ten, 12 years old are
smoking pot. I have seen that, and it's very, very frustrating when they
come in. It's really frightening when you have an 11-year-old who is so
drunk that they can't stand up. And you know that they're getting it either
at school or after school. And their parents come in and deny it, and then
parents have to leave to go out and smoke a cigarette. I think this is
really bad behavior.

BATTISTA: We have to interrupt for just a second. We will continue our
discussion here with our guests. We have to go back to the newsroom now and
Natalie Allen.

(BREAKING NEWS COVERAGE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLINTON: We work more with countries where drugs are grown and processed to
try to stop the drugs from coming into the United States in the first place.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BATTISTA: And welcome back, everybody, to TALKBACK LIVE. The topic is drugs
today. Let's take a look at a couple of faxes from Mark: "The government is
spending money on an ad campaign that causes most of our youth to go into
convulsive fits of laughter. The kids know that these ads are largely
comprised of half truths and fabrications. The fact has sabotaged our
credibility as adults and authority figures."

And from Thomas in Arkansas: "Drug prohibition can never work for the simple
reason that it creates a criminal black market that is impossible to
control. It is time to end a brain dead, self-defeating policy that causes a
hundred times as much trouble as the drugs themselves could ever do." I
guess we would have to ask Thomas what the alternative is. But anyway, let's
go to Peter in our audience.

PETER: Great. I'm a New York City school teacher in Staten Island, New York,
and I have found that one of the most difficult problems in discussing drugs
-- I had the opportunity to teach a sociology course this year, and many of
the students said to me, "The president of the United States has been on
MTV, and he told us that he smoked pot. And therefore, we can do it, too."

And they even asked me as their teacher, "Did you ever smoke pot?" And I
said, "No, I've never used drugs. I didn't use them in school. I still don't
use them today," and they don't believe me. They say, "If the president has
done it, why can't we?" And I just feel, General, that we've taken a great
step backwards as opposed to the Nancy Reagan campaigns which stated, "Just
say no to drugs," that told kids that they could say no and they did have an
option. What are your feelings on that?

McCAFFREY: Well, you know, what we've got to recognize in our country is
that one out of three adult Americans has used an illegal drug: marijuana,
cocaine, LSD. We had a revolution in the 1970s which almost wrecked America,
our economic efficiency, our homes, the armed forces. It was a disaster.
Those 72 million Americans, the Speaker of the House, and others, it depends
on how old you are and where you were during that period of time whether you
encountered this. But they've rejected drug use. And so you've got people
like our president, who is a great father and a parent who doesn't want his
daughter using drugs and doesn't want a society that's stoned and dazed. So
I think all of us shouldn't say, "Let's look back at the 1970s." Let's say,
"Who commits to creating a drug-free country."

BATTISTA: Well, maybe it doesn't go far enough with these ads. Let's ask Dr.
Alexander why he has been nicknamed Dr. Vomit, for one thing, because,
Doctor, you do take a bit more graphic approach to this, don't you?

ALEXANDER: I do. I feel a lot of times that these ad campaigns really don't
do enough for kids. And after having been through quite a few situations
that really just made me angry and actually really hurt me where I had to be
the one to call parents to tell them their child had died of a heroin
overdose, I decided I wanted to do something about it. And I was asked by
the schools to come talk to the kids about drugs.

And the first time I went, they didn't seemingly get anything out of it
because I went in my suit and tie and I talked to them as a physician. I
changed my tactics after that and started dressing down. I dressed in blue
jeans, a shirt, tennis shoes, and I started telling them the stories about
what I did in the emergency department, what I was seeing. And I found that
they began to listen. And I started relating some of the stories about some
of the kids that they knew who had died.

And in the end, I wound up finding that the thing that really got them was
the dramatic approach using the example of what it felt like to die from
heroin. And most people who die from heroin die because they stop breathing.
And most of the time the reason they stop breathing is because they vomited
due to the narcotic effect of the drug. They swallow all the vomit back into
their lungs and basically drown on their own vomit. And that seemingly
struck a large nerve with most of the kids I talked with.

And as the word got around, the kids starting talking more about the vomit
doctor. And that's how that name came about. But it seems to work.

BATTISTA: And Mike Gray, I read in the research also that you were
expounding a bit on how they do things overseas, certainly places in Europe.

GRAY: Well, Bobbie, the Dutch don't have this problem. I mean, the Dutch
realized a long time ago that a certain small segment of the youths are
going to experiment with drugs regardless of what we do. And they felt that
it was better for them to experiment with marijuana than with heroin and
cocaine. So they erected a barrier between these drugs. They made marijuana
available in coffee shops to anyone over 18. And as a consequence, they have
an aging heroin population. In other words, the number of the heroin users
in Holland are getting older and older, which means that they are not
getting new recruits.

General McCaffrey informs us that here in the United States, the greatest
jump in use is among eighth graders. And this is during this incredibly
stringent prohibition.

The Dutch have a much more tolerant policy, and their results are better
than ours across the board.

McCAFFREY: Mike, if I may, let me say again, I think we ought to agree to
disagree on the facts. The Dutch experience is not something I would suggest
we want to model. It's been an unmitigated disaster...

GRAY: General, General, General, let me...

McCAFFREY: Let me finish, if I may, Mike.

GRAY: OK, all right.

McCAFFREY: I would argue instead... Let me just take the title of your book,
"Drug Crazy." It seems to me you've got to be crazy to use drugs or to make
it easier for young people to do that. And that's essentially what some of
us argue the Dutch have tried to do.

GRAY: General, let me caution you that your deputy, Jim McDunna (ph), told
me that the situation in the Netherlands was a disaster during one of our
recent debates. So yesterday, I checked with the Dutch embassy in
Washington. And hopefully, they are monitoring this broadcast, and you may
get a diplomatic protest from the Dutch embassy because they are quite
concerned...

McCAFFREY: They've done them from the French, also, I might add, diplomatic
protests, and the Germans and others who are concerned about their example
in Europe.

GRAY: General, let me finish. The French have a higher addiction rate than
the Dutch. We have a higher addiction rate than the Dutch. And the worse
thing that we have is a decreasing age among the heroin users.
Link to FAQ on comparative use rates
McCAFFREY: Actually, you know, I probably would again dispute you on the facts. The rates of drug abuse among young people in Holland have tended to go up dramatically during this period of time, while ours were going down. So I really don't agree with what you're saying. GRAY: Bobbie, I hope for the sake of settling this argument once and for all you will check with the Dutch embassy, because the Dutch embassy is going to issue a formal protest against this... BATTISTA: Mike, unfortunately, hold on to that thought and others. We do have to hit a break very quickly here. We'll be back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) TERRI: Yes, I'd like to respond to the gentleman who asked the question, is the fight on drugs -- is it going to be harder now that the president has used drugs. Well, I'd like to answer that question. I feel that the answer to that question is no, simple because we're not only here to preach the drug-free message to our young adults, we're also here to teach them that they need to learn from their mistakes. Now, I believe if the president of the United States can actually admit on national TV that he has used pot, but now, he's here to fight against it -- now I do believe if students, like the gentleman said early, if the students may look up to the president, and say he has used it, why can't we. If they can look up to him to say that, why can't they look up to him now being that he has made a mistake and say well, he admitted that he made a mistake, why can't we stand up now and say, hey, we don't want to do this. BATTISTA: And welcome back everyone, I'm Bobbie Battista, we're talking about your children and drugs today. And right before we went to the break, Mike Gray, you made a couple references to legalization. And I know Dr. Alexander wanted to comment on that. DR. ALEXANDER: Yes, Mike, I just waned to say I am against legalization for a number of reasons. I think legalizing it takes some of the money aspect out of it, but you've got to realize there's a lot of other things involved -- the emotional, the psychological, the physical addictions that can occur. And legalizing is not going to take care of anything. In regards, the General's comments, I do think that this is on the rise in all levels. I'm a member of the American College of Emergency Physicians -- that's 20,000 physicians across the country, and I've been talking with my colleagues and we're seeing this in the rise everywhere. It's not just in suburban areas anymore, it's spreading out to rural areas. It's not just in the inner cities. And legalizing this is not going to take care of it. I really think we've got to educate these kids more. GRAY: Absolutely, I agree with you that we need to educate. McCAFFREY: You're right on target, I think doctor. GRAY: Let me say the problem with this approach is there are basically only three ways to get a handle on this problem, to get drugs under control and out of the hands of children, which I think we all agree is the primary objective. First, you can either have the federal government control the distribution through careful regulation and taxation to cover rehabilitation of people who fall off the wagon, or you can turn it over to private industry with a regulatory controls and taxation or you can leave it in the hands of the mob. Now mob doesn't check for ID and what I want to know, is why -- what reason do we possibly have for leaving drug distribution in the hands of the mob? We did not have this problem prior to 1914, when we passed this prohibition law. McCAFFREY: You know Bobbie, I wonder if I could interject. BATTISTA: I don't think it matters when we had this problem or when it started. McCAFFREY: Let me add to Mike's point. GRAY: Well, there is cause and effect, you have to understand. BATTISTA: We're dealing with the problem now. We want to deal with the problem now. McCAFFREY: When I hear people say, let's make it look like alcohol and tobacco, I'm astonished. These two mildly addictive substances -- alcohol kills 150,000 people a year. Tobacco kills 440,000 people. They're available, they're legal, they're widely used. Thank God we're cutting down on both those dangerous drugs but we certainly don't want to add the power of commercial interest to hawking methamphetamine and crack cocaine. That's silly. GRAY: That's an absurd idea, general. Nobody is talking about advertising amphetamines to children. The situation that we have now is children have access to this stuff. Not only have we created a situation where children have access to drugs, we've created a situation where they have to be the front line runners in a marketplace so dangerous they have to be armed with automatic weapons. And I have to tell you, I interviewed a prosecutor in one of the lead prosecutors in night drug court in Chicago, and he said if you want to use Vietnam as a metaphor for the drug war, we're at the point where the helicopters are leaving the embassy roof. BATTISTA: All right let's go to our audience now. James, go ahead. JAMES: The gentleman from Los Angeles, I'm hearing in his solution that if we take it off the streets and put it in the private industry of the government that might help solve the problem. I have friends who have been in -- involved in violent crimes and have gotten shot because someone was high, not because they got it legally or illegally. People want to be high. They're committing crimes while they're high. We need to address the problems that come from people using drugs, not where they're getting the drugs from, how they're getting the drugs. The fact that they are getting high and they're committing crimes and it's hurting our society. GRAY: That's a fundamental mistake by the way in the assumption -- Al Capone did not kill people because he was drunk. Al Capone killed people because they were infringing on his market franchise or because they were late on payments. He had to settle all business arrangements violently because he couldn't very well call the cops. BATTISTA: Let me get a comment from Dr. Alexander then on what people are capable of doing under the influence of drugs. DR. ALEXANDER: I think people are capable of doing anything at anytime and I think drugs will lower inhibitions and allow feelings and actions to occur that might not always occur when people are thinking clearly. The problem is, I think, that we're wanting to find a point to put the blame on. This is a multifactorial problem. It's not that you're going to find one problem and that's going to take care of it. We're going to solve it in this fashion. Education has got to be the important thing, but taking it from the government, taking it from the mob, putting it in private industry. We've already seen a lot of these haven't worked in any fashion. I don't know that I have the right answer, but I think we've got to change the way we're doing it now, otherwise we're going to lose the battle all together. BATTISTA: Let me take a comment from Tom and then we've got to go to break. TOM: My comment is, wake up America. You've got 68 million young people that are strong, caring, and capable. Let's use them as teachers to their peers. BATTISTA: We'll take a break here. When we come back, is it possible to have a drug-free America? (COMMERCIAL BREAK) BATTISTA: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. Let's take a phone call. Darryl from Georgia's on the line with us. And Darryl, you don't necessarily feel this is a national problem? DARRYL: No, I don't. I believe that the problem is that we try to make it into a national problem and we try to take everyone's tax money and things like this, when not most of us -- most of us don't have a drug problem, and we shouldn't have to pay for other people's stupidity. It should be controlled by the family and friends of individual drug users, and they should be held responsible for their own stupid actions and not the whole nation held responsible for one person's mistakes. BATTISTA: All right, Darryl, thanks very much. General, I'm just curious as to whether we're spitting in the wind to some degree. Is it possible for us to have a drug-free America? McCAFFREY: No. But on the other hand, in 1979, 14 percent of the country were using drugs. Today, it's 6 percent. We're sure we can cut it by half. We do have something at stake. You know, your caller is quite correct. Most of us don't use drugs. Fourteen million Americans do and they're causing 16,000 dead a year and what we say is $110 billion in damages, so he and I and you, we've all got something at stake and someone else's child who's dead from a drug overdose. BATTISTA: Mike Gray, do you agree with that, that it's not possible to have a drug-free America? GRAY: We've been at it now for 80 years, and we've made the problem steadily worse year by year. And while General McCaffrey says that since 1980 we've cut casual marijuana and cocaine use by half. That's true, but look what we gave up in return. Prior to 1980 we had never even heard of crack cocaine. We had not heard of -- the chief of police of Omaha tells us that in 1985 the crips came out from Los Angeles and discovered this fertile market their in Omaha. A few months latter the Bloods discovered it and all of the sudden they have gang warfare and crack in Omaha. I don't consider that a success. BATTISTA: All right, Rod. ROD: Yes, I have to say that I agree with the general that I don't think there could ever be a drug-free America, because just like in the prohibition back in the early 1900s when they were making alcohol legal and people were still smuggling it in and using it, and we have the same problem today. So until everybody comes together and has some unity and try to stop this and realize that drugs are destroying our communities and destroying our homes and families, then we'll never be able to stop it. BATTISTA: And Jocilyn. JOCILYN: Yes, my question is for the general. Everyone talks about the prevention and prevention. What about those people who have already done drugs and are trying rehabilitate themselves. What are we doing to help those people? McCAFFREY: Boy, I tell, that is right on the money, because we've got four million Americans who are chronically addicted to drugs. We've got probably half the drug treatment capacity we need. Secretary Donna Shalala, Dr. Alan Leshner, the National Institute of Drug Abuse, and others, are pumping more money into creating the drug treatment capacity we need. In particular, we have to hook it to the criminal justice system. But one of the other things that Attorney General Janet Reno is doing, we're starting up drug courts all over the country. There were 12 of them three years ago, today there are over 200 -- before we leave office we hope there will be over a thousand -- where we put people addicted to illegal drugs into mandated treatment, get them back to their families and keep them from prison. That's where we're going with this problem. ALEXANDER: Bobbie, this is Larry. BATTISTA: Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Larry. ALEXANDER: I have a problem with that. Hooking this into the criminal system is not going to solve anything. Addiction is a physical problem. It's just like diabetes, hypertension, things that you're going to have to live with every day. I do agree with general that I think we're not doing enough for rehab. I have kids that we try to get in when they come in in an overdose situation, and we can't find placement. There's not an open bed. Or, the get accepted -- there insurance will cover it three days, or 10 days; that's not enough to get them off of their problem -- get them through this. They've got to learn to deal with this, to cope with it. You can't do that in 10 days. And until this country realizes that when we have someone who's addicted and has a problem and we're willing to fight with them to help them get rid of this problem, we're not ever going to hook this. There will never be a drug-free America. McCAFFREY: Larry, I think we're probably agreeing with each other. I think you're right on target. When I say hook it into the criminal justice system, Joe Califano, of Columbia University and his colleagues, think that probably 50 percent of the people behind bars, the 1.7 million who are there, have some sort of an alcohol or drug problem, maybe as high at 80 percent. So we've simply got to get that group, who are in there for burglary, robbery, other crimes of violence. We've got to get them into drug treatment, or we can never return them to their community. That's what Secretary Shalala and I and Janet Reno are working on. GRAY: Bobbie. BATTISTA: Yes, Mike -- You know what, we have to take a quick break, but I promise you the first word when we come back. And, as we go to the break, we have a question also from the Internet. From Robert, who asks: What makes this approach more effective than previous drug war approaches? We'll try to look at that too, when we come back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) BATTISTA: All right. We're back, and in the short amount of time that we have -- General, we went into the break with an Internet person asking us how this particular approach to fighting the drug war is any different than previous ones? McCAFFREY: Well, I think one of things that's different is we've got a more coherent approach. We understand that it can't be just law enforcement. It has to be drug treatment programs. It has to be fundamentally dependent upon prevention efforts. We have to work in cooperation with the international community. So let me just close by coming back to this issue of the youth media campaign. We're going to provide scientifically, ethically, sound advice to young people, and let them make their own decisions. We're going to be on the Internet, radio, TV, print media. We're going to stay at it for five years. We care about children, and we're convinced that our sales force, which is parents, doctors, ministers and coaches, can get out there with our message. BATTISTA: OK, and a last quick word from Dr. Alexander and Mike. ALEXANDER: I agree with the general. I think it's going to take a combined effort, and I think more people who are experienced in this need to get out and speak, so that kids understand our viewpoint on this, and they can make an informed decision. Our kids aren't stupid, but if they don't have all the facts, they may make the wrong choice, and if they do, they may not survive. BATTISTA: All right, Mike -- about 15 seconds. GRAY: I'm in lock step with the general on the issue of treatment for addicts in prison. We have 50,000 addicts here in prison in California, and only 400 in treatment. But I question whether or not enforced treatment will help. I was addicted to tobacco for many years and like all chronic addictions I had to quit five times before it finally took. But I wouldn't have been helped at all by being in jail in between those times. BATTISTA: All right, we are out of time. We thank all of our guests today, and for you, too, joining us. I'm Bobbie Battista. We'll see you again tomorrow on TALKBACK LIVE.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Prime-Time TV Enters Battle Against Drugs
('The San Jose Mercury News' Version)

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 01:13:42 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Prime-Time TV Enters Battle Against Drugs
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family 
Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA)
Contact: letters@sjmercury.com
Website: http://www.sjmercury.com/
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998

PRIME-TIME TV ENTERS BATTLE AGAINST DRUGS

Starting tonight, the federal government is doing something different to
fight illegal drug use by young people: paying to air anti-drug spots on
prime-time television. The Office of National Drug Control Policy is
launching a $195 million-a-year campaign to create and run ads on TV, radio
and movie screens, in newspapers and magazines, and on the Internet.

In the past, groups like the Partnership for a Drug-Free America depended
on donated time and space to run ads. But since 1991, TV networks have
slashed the number of public-service ads they run, shifted others to the
middle of the night and created their own public-service spots featuring
stars of series.

Congress responded by authorizing the White House to pay for ads, which
allows the anti-drug czar's office to pick which ads should run, when and
where. Some experts question whether the ads have much effect on cutting
drug use. ``These kinds of campaigns are pretty good for raising awareness,
but not very good on having an impact on the problem,'' said Lawrence
Wallach, professor of public health at the University of California-Berkeley.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Horror Story From Canadian Border (A List Subscriber Forwards A Letter
From A Non-Pot-Smoking Canadian Woman Who, Along With Her Husband,
Had Her Rights Violated And Was Barred From Entering The United States
To Visit Relatives Due To US Border Agents' 'Zero Tolerance' Policy)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 22:08:03 EDT
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: ammo@levellers.org
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: ammo (ammo@levellers.org)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: Horror Story from Canadian Border
------ Forwarded message ------
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 13:59:51 -0700
From: Carla Fry (mckayfry@sprint.ca)
To: bhip@cygnus.com
Subject: Just sharing a little horror story that demonstrates ignorance
about hemp. Share the story with who ever you like.

WHAT ABOUT THE INNOCENT VICTIMS OF THE 'DRUG WAR'?

Recent articles and news stories report the efforts that Canadian and
American customs inspectors have instituted to stop the drug trade between
our two countries, but I'm here to ask "what about the innocent by-standers
that get 'gunned down' in the cross-fire?"

I am writing from experience. Unfortunately. My husband and I unwillingly
took part in the efforts to combat the export of marijuana from B.C. to the
U.S. last week. On July 1st, after a drive from Vancouver through southern
British Columbia, we attempted to cross into the U.S. at the Laurier
crossing for a surprise reunion with my husband's family, who were having a
fun-filled vacation in Sand Point, Idaho. When we came up to the customs
agent, all seemed to be going as usual, with questions such as, what were
our citizenships, where were we going, for how long, and were we bringing
liquor or fruit across the line. Then, something changed. For some reason,
which I can only speculate upon now, we became public enemy number one, and
during the next two hours of our lives, events occurred that will forever
be burned into our memory, and will forever change our lives.

We were asked to open the back of our half-ton truck that has a topper on
it that we use as a camper & my husband often uses to haul hardware for his
various home-improvement projects. After that, we were asked to step inside
the U.S. Customs & Immigration building, while another customs agent went
through our vehicle in more detail. We could only guess what they were
looking for and what would happen next. While the agent was going through
all of our bags and searching the cab and box of the truck, the first agent
asked us where we worked and had us fill our a customs form. We told him
that my husband works for the parks department, and that I have my
doctorate in clinical psychology and work with children. We filled our the
forms and assumed that we'd be on our way. That was most definitely not the
case.

In a few moments, the second agent came in and said that she had tested
some residue in our truck and that the test indicated positively for
marijuana. As you can imagine, my heart jumped to my throat and my husband
& I exchanged panicked glances. I was wondering if she was joking, or if we
were on candid camera, or if maybe we had been transported somehow into a
parallel dimension, because neither my husband nor myself smoke pot. Ever.
Not only that, but we've owned the truck for 3 years and never had anyone
in the truck who ever smoked or carried pot. Ever. I was certain, thinking
about what she had said, from my scientific background, that the test must
have been a false-positive. That it was a mistake. It just couldn't be. And
certainly not now, with two customs officers staring at us with disgusted
frowns, and two immigrations officers coming over from the other side of
the building to do the same. I was frightened about what was going to
happen next. It turns out I had good reason to be scared.

We were instructed not to leave the building, and both the customs
officers went back out to the truck, while the other two stood guard over
us. Two regular, hard-working, ordinary Canadians had suddenly become
America's Most Wanted. Although I was concerned, I had full confidence that
they would come back empty-handed and that everything would be cleared-up,
as we had nothing to hide. Much to our horror, they came back in claiming
that they had two more positive marijuana tests. The second officer showed
us the pin-head sized residue that she purported to be marijuana while the
first customs officer waved a piece of paper in the air, demanding to know
'What is this!?'. Bad luck for us is what it was.

A few weeks earlier I had been at a flea market that sold second-hand
goods and some new products as well. Being an environmentally aware and
concerned person, I stopped at a booth that had a write up on hemp as an
alternative paper, clothing, and petroleum product. The booth was selling
hand cream, hemp T-shirts, and various jewelry items that were made from
THC-free (the psychoactive & illegal chemical in marijuana), and perfectly
legal hemp. I took a business card from the people at the booth, as they
had their website address on the card, and I wanted to read up on the
advantages and disadvantages of hemp as a renewable resource. This was the
card that the customs agent found. This was the card that turned the
ice-cold stares of the agents from disgust to hatred.

'Zero tolerance! Zero tolerance!' was thrust at us time and again. The
first customs agent, ignorantly informed us that 'marijuana is marijuana'
in any form and that obviously, if I supported and condoned hemp products,
I believed in the pot-smoking way of life. He was not interested in hearing
about whether products contained or did not contain THC. Our ship was, as
they say, sunk.

The next thing we knew, the agents were sifting through our wallets,
pouring over everything from my cheque book, to receipts, to lint, looking
for some evidence of wrong-doing. Two agents asked my husband to step into
a back room & I panicked, thinking of all the B-movies I had seen where
small town cops roughed-up who ever they wanted for no reason at all. I was
relieved when I was finally informed that they were only going to search
him. Only. I don't know about the average person, but I'm assuming that
most people have never been told to put their hands up against the wall,
spread their legs, and have some stranger pat down their whole body. Well,
we've certainly never experienced it before. But we both did that day.

Throughout this whole ordeal, a giant sized picture of the agents' esteemed
leader Bill Clinton hung on the wall above us. I couldn't help marveling at
the irony of it all. Now, I don't have anything against Bill, myself, but
in the midst of the demands for Zero Tolerance from the great Canadian
criminals of the year (which is how we were being treated) were being
supervised by the "I tried it, but I didn't inhale" president of the
country. I almost laughed out loud at one point. But I couldn't laugh. Not
at all.

We were then given a choice. Our choice was to pick the lesser of two
evils. Not much of a choice, if you ask me. But of course they didn't ask
me. We were allowed to chose between being arrested for the dreaded
marijuana residue, or signing a form that admitted that they had taken
marijuana residue from our vehicle. We were very nervous about signing, but
did not want to get arrested either. When we asked about the implications
of signing, what seemed to be basically an admittance of guilt, the agents
all came over and stood around us and said that they could just as easily
arrest us. We signed. I still don't know if we made the right decision.
Fear and pressure had their way with us. Then we were asked to sign a form
saying that we were treated fairly and were not harassed. No. We weren't
harassed. Not at all. Four burly border agents breathing down our necks,
threatening to arrest us for something we didn't do, asking us to say they
'played-nice'. Again we signed. At that point we just wanted to get out of
there. It wasn't to be though.

The customs agents were done with us, but the immigration agents were not.
Again they asked my husband to step behind the counter. Because he was
driving and the truck is under his name, he was targeted for the next round
of interrogation. He was read his rights ('You have the right to remain
silent...), asked to raise his right hand and swear that he would 'tell
nothing but the truth...', while another agent stood over him ensuring that
he behaved and answered appropriately. He was asked about 45 minutes worth
of questions, fingerprinted, his mug-shots were taken, and he was asked if
he would like to leave the country willingly, or be arrested and removed
forcefully. I think you know what he chose. Then he was informed that he
was banned from the United States for life. At this point we were thinking
that all future travel to this country should be forever avoided anyway,
but they just thought they would make it official, I suppose.

Somewhere in between the photocopying of our driver's licenses, birth
certificates, and the business card of the hemp company, we began to wonder
if the agents planted the residue that they claimed they had found. As you
sit here and read this, you may wonder, if we weren't being a wee bit
paranoid. At that point we had every reason to be feeling paranoid. It
seemed like the only reasonable explanation. That for some reason, we were
being set up to 'take the fall', as we all so often hear about on good
detective movies-of-the-week. We wondered if they had a quota of 'bad guys'
to fill and that we were the closest they could find. Unlucky us.

Then, my husband remembered one foreign object that had been in the back of
the truck earlier that week. He had been to one of those auto wreckers
where you can go in and take a part off of a car & pay a minimal amount of
money for the used product. He is restoring a car right now and had found a
rug from a car that fit the one he's working on, purchased it, threw it in
the back of the truck and brought it home. Of course, when we went through
the border crossing, we did not have the rug with us, or the receipt for
the rug, and even though we mentioned the possibility that the rug may have
had something on it that fell off and was tested by the agents as positive,
they didn't really care. It didn't matter to them whether we had never had
pot into the truck ourselves, or if we had a 1000 pound bale of it there to
sell to small children. They had their residue as evidence and nothing else
mattered. Zero tolerance.

Just at the point that I thought that nothing could shock me any more, they
said that we could not enter the country to visit our family. I couldn't
believe it. Then we found out that my husband's finger prints were being
sent to the FBI. I couldn't believe it. The crowning moment was certainly
when he was told that he was banned from the country for life. Residue.
Could this possibly be candid camera, I still found my self wondering. No,
this was far from a joke.

We were then informed of what I suppose they considered the good news.
Besides the fact that he was 'lucky that he wasn't getting arrested', he
was told that he would be allowed to apply to enter the U.S. for yearly
passes that the immigration administration may or may not grant. All he
would have to do is send $100+ plus his finger prints and a criminal record
check from an a local police station, plus another round of finger prints
from a U.S. border crossing. They also kindly let us know that if he tried
to cross the border without this pass, that he would be immediately
arrested and the vehicle he was traveling would be permanently impounded.

Happy Canada Day (July 1st is our version of your 4th of July). Was
someone, somewhere trying to send us a message about leaving our great land
on her birthday? I don't think so. The facts are simple, we were treated
like criminals and put through a ludicrous amount of stress and pressure,
and I cannot believe, even now, a week later, that my husband's finger
prints are at the FBI and he is banned from the country. We were told that
they were giving us an example of the American Justice system at work.
Truth, Freedom & the American way? Innocent until proven guilty?

Until now, I had thought of our two great countries, practically as one. I
spent three years of my life in the U.S. going to graduate school. Some of
my best friends are Americans. We vacation there regularly. My attitudes
have changed completely. This won't change my relationships with my
American friends, but it will change our behavior. There's limitless
amounts of things to see and do here in Canada. Looks like we'll be seeing
and doing all of our vacations up here from now on. Or we can explore
Mexico, Australia, or many other more welcoming countries. I do not need to
be treated like a common criminal. I will not.

So what's the moral of the story? Should every Canadian dip themselves in
bleach and sanitize their vehicles, making sure to never drive a used car
or have any particles of dust & debris that they cannot identify in their
car before going across the line? Should we sit back and allow ourselves to
be treated this way? You can be sure that we're not the only ones this has
happened to. One thing I do know, is that if the American customs &
immigrations agents continue to behave in this way, Canadians will not
stand for it, and our peaceful relations, trade and openness will suffer.

My way of not feeling like a victim is to let others know, so that maybe
they will join in our outrage & send a message that we will not be
victimized.

Residue. Ya right.

Carla Fry
e-mail: mckayfry@sprint.ca
Vancouver, B.C.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

The War On Drugs Is About To Escalate In Your Living Room
(ABC News Online Version)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 17:29:44 EDT
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: gsutliff@dnai.com
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Gerald Sutliff (gsutliff@dnai.com)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: Drug War Redux

Dear Talkers,
Get this from ABC News, online
vty,
Jerry Sutliff

ABCNEWS.com July 9 - The war on drugs is about to escalate in your living
room. A string of provocative, slick Madison Avenue anti-drug ads are
headed for newspapers and TV. The goal, say officials, is to hit the
average family at least four times a week either through television, radio,
newspapers, billboards or the Internet. "These ads were designed to knock
America upside the head and get America's attention and empower all of
you," said President Clinton, who was joined by House Speaker Newt Gingrich
today to unveil the $2 billion, five-year campaign. Half of the funding for
the campaign comes from the government, and half will be raised from the
private sector. Clinton recalled his half-brother Roger's drug habit and
said the ads were aimed at everyone: children, parents and siblings. "My
brother nearly died from a cocaine habit and I've asked myself a thousand
times: what kind of fool was I that I did not know that this was going on?"
he said. "How did this happen that I didn't see this coming and didn't stop
it?"

A Wake Up Call For Kids The ads are designed to be jarring, with one
showing a girl screaming and smashing things with a frying pan while
telling the audience this is what drugs will do to their lives. Another
shows a child recounting her mother's warnings about talking to strangers
and playing with matches. Asked what her mother had said about drugs, the
girl is silent. Retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who heads Clinton's
drug-control policy office, called the unprecedented federal campaign "an
effort to talk to a generation that started to get the wrong message." In a
1997 national survey, half of high school seniors and nearly one-third of
eighth-graders reported using illegal drugs at least once. "I wanted to
come here today to stand with the president. ...We're all trying to reach out
to every young American and say, 'Don't do it,'" said Gingrich, who
rearranged his schedule to make today's announcement. Congressional
Republicans are committed to financing the campaign for its full five-year
run, Gingrich said. The nationwide government campaign is the 15th largest
single-brand ad project, larger than the media buys of American Express,
Nike and Sprint, said Steve Dnistrian, senior vice president of the
Partnership for a Drug-Free America.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Drug Policy Experts Criticize Anti-Drug Advertising Campaign
(A Press Release From The Lindesmith Center, A Drug Policy Research Institute
In New York, Protests The US Government's New $2 Billion
Anti-Drug Ad Campaign - Research Suggests The Ad Campaign
Will Be Ineffective In Curbing Drug Use)

From: Ty Trippet (ttrippet@sorosny.org)
To: TLC_ACTIVIST (TLCACT@snake-eyes.soros.org)
Subject: News: DRUG POLICY EXPERTS CRITICIZE
ANTI-DRUG ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 10:49:05 -0400
Sender: owner-tlc-activist@server.soros.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE					
July 9, 1998

Contact: Ty Trippet
212-548-0604

DRUG POLICY EXPERTS CRITICIZE ANTI-DRUG ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN

* Research Does Not Support Campaign's Effectiveness In Curbing Drug Use:
Money Should Be Spent On Drug Abuse Prevention That Works,
Such As After School Programs

Facing a rise in teen drug use and growing criticism of U.S. drug
policy, President Clinton and Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey rolled out a
national advertising campaign today to discourage drug use. Funded by
taxpayers, the $1 billion campaign aims to reduce illicit drug use among
our nation's youth. The campaign is being criticized by drug policy
experts who say anti-drug media campaigns don't reduce drug use, and
that they may encourage drug use. They say the money should be spent on
proven drug prevention programs, rather than unproven publicity
campaigns.

"It's a shame that the Drug Czar continues to ignore science and sound
research in favor of ineffective 'feel good' campaigns," said Ethan
Nadelmann, director of The Lindesmith Center.

"The purpose of the ads is to deter drug use, but there's a chance they
make drugs more interesting and attractive to adolescents," said
professor Lynn Zimmer, a sociologist at Queens College in New York and
author of the book Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Facts: A Review of the
Scientific Evidence. "After all, it was the same young people who
began seeing the Partnership's anti-drug ads in the late 1980s who, in
the 1990s, began using marijuana in greater numbers."

Research evaluating the effect of anti-drug ads shows that while they
harden anti-drug attitudes among some adults, they have no effect on
adolescents. In fact, according to an article in Brandweek, Dr. Evelyn
Cohen Reis, the lead author of the only published study evaluating the
Partnership's ad campaign, has since said, "You can't tell, based on the
paper, that it actually works." She thinks respondents "were telling us
what they wanted us to hear."

Based in New York, the Lindesmith Center is a drug policy research
institute that concentrates on broadening the drug policy debate. The
Lindesmith Center is a project of the Open Society Institute, the
nonprofit foundation established by philanthropist George Soros to
promote the development of open societies around the world. The
founder and director of The Lindesmith Center, Ethan Nadelmann, J.D.,
Ph.D. is author of Cops Across Borders: The Internationalization of
U.S. Criminal Law Enforcement (Penn State Press, 1993) as well as
numerous articles on drug control policy in leading scholarly and
popular journals. The Lindesmith Center's web site is
http://www.lindesmith.org.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Censorship Of Cannabis Stroke Protection Story? (A List Subscriber
Notes The US Media Are Quashing Recent Positive News
About Medical Marijuana Research - Plus Other Subscribers'
Commentary)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 21:56:10 +1200 (NZST)
To: drctalk@drcnet.org, drugtalk@adca.org.au, maptalk@mapinc.org
From: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn)
Subject: Censorship of cannabis stroke protection story?

To date I have seen reports of the cannabis/stroke story in the following
sources:

The Guardian (UK)
BBC News
Associated Press
Reuters
NZ Herald (Auckland)
The Independent (UK)
Irish Independent
South China Evening Post (Hong Kong)

CNN picked up the AP report, but to date I haven't seen a single US,
Canadian, or Australian newspaper pick up this story. Have I missed
something, or is there perhaps a little censorship going on?

David

***

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 10:30:10 EDT
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: basd@fastbk.com
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: "Barrington Daltrey" (basd@fastbk.com)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: Re: Censorship of cannabis stroke protection story?

I immediately thought the same thing, since I saw the report here on the
internet and then not in the newspapers I receive. I even said something about
censorship to my wife after I became aware of the story having run in NZ press,
but shortly after my comment, a news feature on it ran on the local ABC news
affiliate we were watching. So it is not totally missing.

Maybe everyone is afraid to contradict McCzar (who claim there are no medical
uses for cannabis) for fear of losing their "share" of the $1 billion ad budget.

***

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 10:57:29 EDT
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: schaffer@smartlink.net
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: "Cliff Schaffer" (schaffer@smartlink.net)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: RE: Censorship of cannabis stroke protection story?

It was reported on Fox News, and even came up as one of the items on my
internet start page.

***

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 11:08:06 EDT
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: Gettman_J@mediasoft.net
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Jon Gettman (Gettman_J@mediasoft.net)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: Re: W. Post on cannabis/stroke

David Hadorn wrote:

>To date I have seen reports of the cannabis/stroke story in the following
>sources (snip)

>CNN picked up the AP report, but to date I haven't seen a single US,
>Canadian, or Australian newspaper pick up this story. Have I missed
>something, or is there perhaps a little censorship going on?

It made the Washington Post, I missed it but my mother told me about it.
In this case it is not so much censorship perhaps as much the general way
science is covered in the press. It was the lead item in a column that
also included items on asteroids and 9,400 year old footwear. The oldest
shoes were made from plants, not identified in the column.

Jon Gettman

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-07/06/063l-070698-idx.html

[Link to July 6 article at this site.]

***

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 06:10:06 EDT
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: Rgbakan@aol.com
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: (Rgbakan@aol.com)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: Re: W. Post on cannabis/stroke

The story made Seattle TV - health local news feature. The nice thing is
they had footage from somewhere showing several quite elder women
rolling big fat joints of green bud and lighting up........ it looked like
a well done ad for the medica; mj campaign.

Regards, George
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Survey Finds Doctors Fail To Order Key Drugs ('The Orange County Register'
Says A Survey Conducted By United HealthCare Of Doctors In The Nation's
Largest Managed Care Company Showed Many Routinely Fail To Give Patients
Drugs And Tests Proven To Work Against Conditions Ranging From Heart Disease
To Diabetes)

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 15:35:10 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Survey Finds Doctors
Fail To Order Key Drugs
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk:John W.Black
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Jul 1998
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/

SURVEY FINDS DOCTORS FAIL TO ORDER KEY DRUGS

A survey of doctors in the nation's largest managed care company showed
many routinely fail to give patients drugs and tests proven to work against
conditions ranging from heart disease to diabetes.

The survey conducted by United HealthCare looked at computerized patient
records of 1,600 cardiologists and internists in Colorado, North Carolina,
Ohio and Texas.

The Minnetonka, Minn.-based health-care giant found that many cardiologists
failed to prescribe widely recommended drugs such as beta blockers for
heart attack survivors and ACE inhibitors for chronic heart-failure
patients. Current medical literature says the drugs are essential in most
cases.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Re - Horror Story From Canadian Border (Richard Rose Of HempRella
Suggests A Way To Avoid Unpleasantness At The US-Canada Border,
And Notes The Horror Story Illustrates The Need To Differentiate
Between Hemp And Marijuana)

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 18:24:01 -0700
To: Rgbakan@aol.com, hemp-talk@hemp.net
From: Richard Rose (richard@rella.com)
Subject: Re: HT: Fwd: Horror Story from Canadian Border
Sender: owner-hemp-talk@hemp.net

When we first started importing HempRella from the plant in Vancouver BC a
customs agent tested it for marijuana (what with the big neon green leaf on
it and the word 'hemp' all over it). He got all excited when it came back
as 'positive as a baggy of pot.' But what they test is cannabis, not THC.
My lawyer pointed that out, and that cannabis in many forms is legal
(hemp), and then they did a second more elaborate test for THC and it was
negative. They released the shipment.

These guys get bonuses for busts, even petty ones like this. Someone should
have demanded the second test, which would have come back negative. Or
refused to sign, requiring them to try the innocent people, and then the
test would have been done.

But this is also a very real and practical illustration why those in the
movement do everyone a disservice by lumping pot and hemp together, just
like these customs guys do (and their employers, the US government). Hemp
is NOT Marijuana, but both are cannabis. I have yet to hear a cogent reason
why the movement should not make this differentiation. So what if they
called it hemp 100 years ago and marijuana is a made-up name. If it
reflects today's reality then let's use it. Jeez, only a few generations
ago they called cars 'horseless carriages.' Language is dynamic. If you
wanna call pot something else, at least be correct and call it 'Cannabis,'
a word used even far longer than Hemp.

Following a policy that has worked so damn well for the government all
these years is absolute lunacy. They cling to it desperately, knowing full
well that to allow the separation of 'rope from dope' will be a major step
in the rapid fall of prohibition. It would be sweet if activists would
cling to the need for said separation just as desperately. To do otherwise
is nothing less than to aid and abet the evil forces of prohibition, making
it just a little longer before these good people from the North can go to
another family reunion in the states.

Richard Rose, President of The Hemp Corporation,
richard@thehempcorp.com. Makers of HempRella,
Hempeh Burgers, and HempNut hulled hempseed.
Founder of Hemp Food Association (moreinfo@hempfood.com)
-------------------------------------------------------------------

On Losing The Drug War (Two Letters To The Editor Of 'The Calgary Sun,'
The Second Of Which Is A Response By Vancouver Police Constable Gil Puder
To A Personal Attack On Him By Staff Sergeant Mike Cullen Of The Calgary
Police Service In Bill Kaufman's July 6 Column)

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:28:35 -0700
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: Canada: PUB LTEs: On Losing the Drug War
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Source: Calgary Sun (Canada)
Contact: callet@sunpub.com
Website: http://www.canoe.ca/CalgarySun/
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Jul 1998
Authors: Aaron Lagadyn; Gil Puder

BILL KAUFMANN'S column re: ("Losing the drug war -- criminalized users are
dehumanized while wealthy dealers take smarmy refuge.)" Kudos to Kaufmann
for writing a brilliant article on the facts of life.

- Aaron Lagadyn

(Pass it on.)

***

A THOUSAND miles of distance appear to have given Staff Sgt. Mike Cullen of
the Calgary Police Service the courage necessary for a groundless personal
attack, evidenced by his comments about me in Bill Kaufman's July 6 column.

This certainly contrasts with his silence at April's Fraser Institute
conference, when like all attendees he was invited to take the microphone
and publicly hold me accountable in person.

Whether it's a lack of guts, or simply that he has no evidence to support
any disagreement, I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that I'd be happy to
publicly debate him on the illicit drug issue anytime -- an offer I've made
to many drug squad types and which I've yet to have accepted. As far as
being "out to lunch" goes, I'll be doing that shortly and will enjoy my
favorite wine, a nice B.C. pinot noir. Taxpayers should be wary of the drug
warrior's favorite whine, however, as stated by Cullen himself -- give us
more money!

- Gil Puder

(Well, Staff Sgt. Cullen?)
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Criticism Over Drug Adviser's Second Job (Britain's 'Times' Notes That,
Only A Few Months Into His Job As Britain's Drug Tsar, Keith Hellawell
Has Already Found Other Work)
Link to earlier story
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 14:26:33 -0400 To: mapnews@mapinc.org From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews) Subject: MN: UK: Criticism Over Drug Adviser's Second Job Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Martin Cooke (mjc1947@cyberclub.iol.ie) Source: Times The (UK) Contact: letters@the-times.co.uk Website: http://www.the-times.co.uk/ Pubdate: 9 Jul 1998 Author: Stewart Tendler, Crime Correspondent CRITICISM OVER DRUG ADVISER'S SECOND JOB THE Government's drugs adviser was criticised last night for taking a second job as a part-time director with a 300 million property company. Keith Hellawell, who earns 102,000 a year as drugs co-ordinator, is joining Evans of Leeds as a non-executive director. The former Chief Constable of West Yorkshire will get 15,750 plus travel expenses for 12 days' work a year. John Bell, managing director of the company, said that Mr Hellawell was a widely respected figure in Yorkshire and the North East. "Non-executive directors bring their general experience to the boardroom. They are there to assist the executive directors." Mr Hellawell would be expected to attend six board meetings and work another six days during the year. The Cabinet Office said that the directorship was not considered incompatible with Mr Hellawell's drugs work. However, James Clappison, a Shadow Home Affairs spokesman, said the job of drugs adviser needed full-time commitment, adding: "I question whether this is a distraction." -------------------------------------------------------------------

[End]

Top
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. E-mail

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

Back to 1998 Daily News index for July 9-15

Back to Portland NORML news archive directory

Back to 1998 Daily News index (long)

This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/980709.html

Home