-------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical Marijuana On Television! (A List Subscriber
Says Monday Night's Episode Of 'LA Doctors' On CBS
Will Involve A Doctor And His Patient Using Medical Marijuana)
From: "ralph sherrow" (ralphkat@hotmail.com)
To: ralphkat@hotmail.com
Subject: DPFCA: Fwd: Medical Marijuana on TV!
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 11:05:16 PDT
Sender: owner-dpfca@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/
(forwarded message)
From: FilmMakerZ@aol.com
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 04:24:46 EDT
Subject: Medical Marijuana on TV!!
Hello everyone,
Sorry for the late notice, but I only saw the ad tonight, but Monday
night's episode of a brand new series called "LA Doctors" will feature a
plot about a doctor and his patient using medical marijuana. It will
air Monday night, Sept. 28th, at 9:00 pm, on CBS.
I am not absolutely sure of the time, so check local listings.
From the clip I saw, it appeared to be very PRO medical cannibus, even
showing the doctor getting the pot for the patient and getting busted.
(I think it was the doctor) The plot may be a little far fetched, the
important thing is for this issue to be portrayed as a serious issue.
We should get everyone to watch this show, and if they present this
serious issue in a good light, then WRITE to CBS, AND the show's
producer, praising their pro medicinal stance, or if we don't like their
message, write condeming their presentation of our RIGHT TO
MEDICINE...let's watch and see.
Please tune in and WRITE...
FilmMakerZ
***
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 09:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Lunday (robert@hemp.net)
To: hemp-talk@hemp.net
Subject: Re: HT: Medical Marijuana on CBS Tonight...
Sender: owner-hemp-talk@hemp.net
Hi Judith,
Sorry, I just forwarded it when I got it.
The show was OK. I'm not a fan of the show, so don't know much about
the characters. A brief synopsis is 2 doctors went to buy pot for an
AIDS patient and got busted by the cops. One doctor is making a big
publicity deal out of it. In that respect I think it may turn out to be
good. There will definatly be more episodes on this issue. In some
conversations between the doctors they brought up prop 215 and wrote it
off as being propogated by a bunch of potheads and so apparently not
worth much. They talked about how the issue is being fought between the
state and feds and therefore it was dangerous as doctors to get
involved.
In one discussion between the two docs, the one doctor that wanted to
challenge the bust for it's publicity value was told by the other scared
doctor that with forfieture law they could take your house, your car,
etc, etc. and Publicity Doc (who owns that jag) said "They can take my
car?", and it appeared based on that, decided to drop the whole thing
for fear of his car being taken. Seemed a bit lame to me.
At least the dialog seemed pretty lame. The fact that they are
discussing these real problems in mainstream media is excellent!
Robert Lunday --- Hemp.Net SysOp/Founder
robert@hemp.net ---- http://www.hemp.net
phone: 206.781.8307 ---- fax:206.784.2650
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lone Marijuana Plant Fires Up Debate Over Downtown Visalia ('The Fresno Bee'
Says The Discovery Of A Weed Sprouting From A Planter On Main Street
Has Led Downtown Merchants To Pitch In To Hire Security Guards)
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: (newsout@mapinc.org)
Subject: MN: US CA: Lone Marijuana Plant
Fires Up Debate Over Downtown Visalia
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 15:15:05 -0500
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: Fresno Bee, The (CA)
Contact: letters@fresnobee.com
Website: http://www.fresnobee.com/
Pubdate: September 26, 1998
Author: Lewis Griswold
LONE MARIJUANA PLANT FIRES UP DEBATE OVER DOWNTOWN VISALIA
VISALIA - Officer Donna Skaggs didn't have to look far to find drugs in
Visalia. They were growing right in front of her in a planter on Main
Street.
Skaggs, whose beat includes downtown Visalia, saw the three-or four-inch
tall plant late Thursday afternoon in front of 114 W. Main St. and took
action, said Visalia police Lt. Buddy Hale.
"She pulled it up and destroyed it," Hale said.
Only one plant was growing in the planter, which also holds marigolds and
daisies, and the incident did not appear to be a case of marijuana
cultivation, Hale said.
The plant wasn't sent to a crime lab because "there aren't any suspects,"
Skaggs said.
Skaggs asked people if they knew anything about the plant, but no one
admitted knowing anything.
The department has received complaints of marijuana smoking along Main
Street, Skaggs said, but investigations have produced no arrests. There have
been arrests for underage drinking.
The Downtown Visalians Merchants Association brought the existence of the
plant to Skaggs' attention, police said.
Merchants on the block of West Main where the plant took root said they were
not surprised by the find because it occurred in an area where teens hang
out.
"It was probably done as a practical joke," said Duane Evans, owner of
Turtle Mountain Sports, whose store is near the planter. "I'm not appalled
or anything like that. A lot of worse things have happened."
"A bird could have dropped it," said Ray Ransberger, owner of the Picnic
Sandwich Shop. "It's a non-issue with me."
Actually, "it's a sign of downtown," Evans said, explaining that a lot of
young people hang out at that particular location on Main Street, especially
on Fridays and Saturdays.
Evans said that young people don't have enough to do, so they hang out
downtown. He said the solution is to create alternatives, such as a
skateboard park, that will attract young people. A committee has been
working on establishing a skate park near downtown.
To help patrol downtown, Visalia merchants have pitched in to hire security
guards. The security guards are to be on the streets by mid-October.
Growing marijuana even as a prank means "we have to make an atmosphere where
people don't want to do something like that," Evans said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
State Law Lacks Herb Clause ('The Tulsa World' Describes The Trial
To Begin Thursday Of George Singleton Of Vermont, A Rastafarian
With Dreadlocks Who Was Busted By An Oklahoma Highway Patrol Trooper,
Who Thought Singleton's Mullein And Rosemary Were Marijuana, Which Led
To His Now Being Charged With Being Under The Influence Of An Intoxicating
Substance)
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 06:00:34 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US OK: State Law Lacks Herb Clause
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Michael Pearson (oknorml@swbell.net)
Source: Tulsa World (OK)
Contact: tulsaworld@mail.webtek.com
Website: http://www.tulsaworld.com
Pubdate: Sat, 26 Sep 1998
Author: Rik Espinosa World Staff Writer
STATE LAW LACKS HERB CLAUSE
Rastafarian set to be tried on 'drug' charges in Craig County.
Possession of the herbs mullein and rosemary may mean that a Vermont man
will serve time for being under the influence of an intoxicating substance
in a case involving an Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper in Craig County.
The herbs were initially misidentified by the trooper as marijuana, George
Singleton of Putney, Vt., said.
He is charged with driving while under the influence of intoxicants and
failure to display a current license tag. Both are misdemeanors.
Craig County District Attorney Gene Haynes said a blood test that Singleton
took for common narcotics such as marijuana, heroin, cocaine and
methamphetamine came up negative. In filing the charges, however, he said he
is relying on OHP Trooper Alvin Lavender's account of the arrest.
"It is an unusual case because of the fact that we don't have proof of any
illegal substance. But . . . we're continuing to pursue it because we feel
he was under some type of influence that rendered him a danger on the
roadway," Haynes said.
Singleton, who is a Rastafarian, said Thursday that he believes his looks
dictated his initial traffic stop. He wears his hair in waistlong
dreadlocks.
He said he has been stopped before in other states because of his looks. "I
fit all the drug (courier) profiles," he said.
Singleton, 49, spent 25 days in the Craig County jail following his Feb. 27
traffic stop on the Will Rogers Turnpike because he could not come up with
the $850 bail.
He said that when he was pulled over by Lavender, he was first told that he
had been speeding, then that he had been swerving in traffic lanes. However,
he has never received a traffic ticket or been charged with any traffic
offense other than the tag violation.
Singleton initially was charged with being under the influence of a
controlled substance, but that charge was amended to being under the
influence of an intoxicant when his blood test came back negative.
"I was humiliatingly taken into the general hospital of Craig County with my
arms handcuffed behind my back," he said.
Singleton, who has a bachelor of science degree in biology from the
University of Chicago and has studied herbology, said the only blood test
that came back positive was for tuberculosis. He told the trooper that he
uses the mullein and rosemary to make a tea to help with his illness, he
said.
Rosemary is "an evergreen herb of the mint family . . . used in perfumes, in
cooking, etc.," and mullein is "any of the genus of tall plants of the
figwort family, with spikes of yellow, lavender or white flowers," according
to Webster's New World College Dictionary.
Singleton said the late-model Volkswagen van he was driving had current
registration but that the registration papers were being processed during
his trip.
Singleton is the executive director of the Hope LA/USA Project, which is an
effort to teach biological gardening in urban settings.
He teaches inner-city children the nutritional benefits of a healthy
lifestyle, which include staying away from illegal drugs.
"It's totally crazy," Singleton said about the case. "They should have just
dropped it."
A story about Singleton's arrest in the Brattleboro (Vt.) Reformer has
generated several editorials and letters to the editor.
An editorial by Doug Bruce said, "Oklahoma has one of those lovely,
bust-the-Bill-of- Rights, `zero-tolerance' drug laws, and anyone can lose
his or her freedom because of mere suspicion."
Jim Austin wrote that Singleton "may have thought he had entered a time
warp. He was back in the '30s where to be black was to be subjugated. Where
to be black was a crime if the law was having a slow day. Oklahoma, where
driving while black and having the temerity to question officials of the
state would garner a stint in the county lockup."
Singleton goes to trial Thursday.
Rik Espinosa can be reached at 581-8313.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ACLU Of Louisiana Sues Over 'Clean Urine Loyalty Oath' (The 'ACLU News'
Account Of Wednesday's Lawsuit Filed By The Louisiana Chapter
Of The American Civil Liberties Union Challenging The Constitutionality
Of A 1997 State Law That Requires Random Drug Testing Of Elected Officials)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 19:50:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: theHEMPEROR@webtv.net (JR Irvin)
To: NTList@Fornits.com
Subject: [ntlist] "Clean Urine Loyalty Oath"
Reply-To: ntlist@Fornits.com
***
09-26-98
ACLU Newsfeed -- ACLU News Direct to YOU!
***
ACLU of Louisiana Sues Over "Clean Urine Loyalty Oath"
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, September 23, 1998
NEW ORLEANS -- Saying that urine test "loyalty oaths" for elected
officials are blatantly unconstitutional, the American Civil Liberties
Union of Louisiana today filed a federal class-action lawsuit on behalf
of Philip O'Neill, a local Justice of the Peace, and some 4,000 other
officials.
Under the terms of Louisiana's Act 1303, O'Neill and other elected
officials would be forced to comply with the random drug testing scheme
by providing urine for inspection by the state, under penalty of censure
or a fine up to $10,000 or both.
The act, sponsored by Reps. Clo Fontenot and Woody Jenkins of Baton
Rouge, passed overwhelmingly in the State House and Senate and was
signed by Governor Foster earlier this year.
Joe Cook, Executive Director of the ACLU of Louisiana, said the
requirement violates the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment
constitutional protections of freedom from unreasonable search and
seizure, freedom from self-incrimination, and right to equal protection
and due process, as well as privacy protections under Section 5 in the
State's Declaration of Rights.
"This kind of law has no place in a free and democratic society," Cook
said. "Our elected officials should not have to prove their patriotism
or allegiance by submitting to a urine test."
Cook said the "clean urine loyalty oath," also chills individuals' right
to run for re-election or to seek any other elective office within the
state and, and establishes a de facto politically correct litmus test as
a basis for serving in an elective office. Such a requirement, he said,
constitutes a content-based restriction on free expression prohibited by
the First Amendment.
In a 1997 case directly related to the current lawsuit Chandler v.
Miller, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Georgia's requirement that
candidates for state office pass a drug test did not fit within the
closely guarded category of suspicionless searches. While recognizing
the state's commitment to the so-called "war on drugs," the Court said
that subjecting public officials or candidates to such a search is
unreasonable because Georgia asserts no evidence of a drug problem among
the state's elected officials.
Such officials, the Court said, typically do not perform high-risk,
safety-sensitive tasks, and the urine test did not immediately aid
interdiction efforts. The need revealed, in short, was symbolic, not
"special" as that term's meaning comes from case law. Because public
safety is not genuinely in jeopardy from drug-using candidates, the drug
test "diminishes personal privacy for a symbol's sake" shielded by the
Fourth Amendment.
And in a 1995 Supreme Court case involving drug testing of student
athletes, Vernonia School District v. Acton, the Court upheld the test
but cautioned against the assumption that suspicionless drug testing
could readily pass constitutional muster in other contexts.
Cook said Louisiana's Act 1303 promotes no special need of the state to
justify an intrusion into the privacy interests of public officials.
Those subject to the "clean urine loyalty oath" are not usually employed
in "safety-sensitive" positions, he noted.
"We must put a stop this Orwellian nonsense now, before one publicly
elected official has to stand in line and pee for the state beginning on
January 1, 1999," he said.
"Some people argue that if you don't use drugs, you have nothing to
hide," Cook added. "But as former Supreme Court Justice Brandeis said,
the 'right to be left alone is the most comprehensive of rights and
right most valued by civilized (people).'"
The ACLU's lawsuit was filed today in United States District Court,
Eastern District of Louisiana, Judge Ginger Berrigan presiding. Sam
Dalton, a long-time ACLU cooperating attorney, will represent Mr.
O'Neill, who is a Justice of the Peace for the Second District in
Jefferson Parish.
Named as defendants, in their official capacity and individually, are
Governor Mike Foster; Louisiana State Board of Ethics members Chairman
Robert Roland, Vice-Chairman Dr. Robert Bareikis, E.L. Guidry, Dr.
Virgil Orr, Revius Ortique, Jr., T.O. Perry, Jr., Robert L. Sawyer,
Nathan J. Thornton, Jr., Edwin O. Ware, III, Carole Cotton Winn; David
W. Hood, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals;
and, Mark C. Drennen, Commissioner of Administration.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
NAIHC Annual Meeting In DC (A Press Release From The North American
Industrial Hemp Council Publicizes Its Annual Membership Conference
And Program Schedule November 5-7 In Washington, DC)
From: "ralph sherrow" (ralphkat@hotmail.com)
To: ralphkat@hotmail.com
Subject: DPFCA: Subject: NAIHC Annual Meeting in DC
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 12:07:16 PDT
Sender: owner-dpfca@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/
Subject: NAIHC Annual Meeting in DC
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 14:14:28 -0400
From: Joe Hickey (agfuture@kih.net)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
North American Industrial Hemp Council Annual Membership Meeting and
Conference to be Held November 5-7 in Washington DC.
This third annual membership business meeting and conference of the
North American Industrial Hemp Council (NAIHC) is your opportunity to
learn more about annual industrial fiber crops and to interact with
agricultural and industrial experts.The conference is November 5 - 7,
1998 at the Crowne Plaza in Washington, DC. We will exchange ideas,
discuss opportunities, and explore the economic potential of industrial
hemp for farmers and industry. The conference will allow farmers,
researchers, industry, environmentalists, and public policy makers to
form educational networks to advance industrial hemp as a renewable
agricultural crop.
Conference location and accommodations:
Call by October 21 to reserve and receive the special conference blocked
room rate at the Crowne Plaza. Mention NAIHC when you call. You are
responsible for making your own lodging arrangements. Crowne Plaza,
800-227-6963 or 202-682-0111, 14th and K Street NW Washington, DC 20005,
$110.18 per night.
Travel
A special discounted airfare to the annual meeting and conference in
Washington DC, November 4-8, 1998, has been arranged through Burkhalter
Travel in Madison, Wisconsin. Call Kimberly at 800-556-9286 extension
233, Monday - Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Central Daylight Savings
Time. Identify yourself as a NAIHC attendee. Kimberly, a full-service
sales and travel counselor, will confirm and ticket desired travel
arrangements. Burkhalter has negotiated with United Airlines to offer
discounted fares to Washington DC, including Washington Dulles, Reagan
National, and Baltimore Washington Airports. You will be eligible for
discounts ranging from 5%-10% off of applicable flights. They are valid
from any city in the United States or Canada serviced by United
Airlines. Burkhalter guarantees the lowest applicable fares on any
carrier at the time of reservations and ticketing, if United is not
available or not preferred. Call Kimberly for full details and
reservations.
Conference registration fees:
NAIHC Member $100 Non-Member $150
Exhibitors $300 (includes 1 pass & 8 foot skirted table/space is
limited). Fees includes: Thursday - reception, Friday - lunch,
reception, dinner, Saturday - lunch
Additional information (WEB: www.naihc.org), contact: Theresa, email:
conference@naihc.org, Tel: 608-224-5137, Fax: 608-224-5111
Schedule
Thursday, November 5
12:00 Noon NAIHC Trade show exhibits (set-up)
3:00 - 5:00 p.m. NAIHC Annual Membership Business Meeting
5:30 - 7 p.m. Trade show exhibits and hemp appetizers
Friday, November 6
7:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. Trade show exhibits
7:30 a.m. Registration
Moderator: Rep. Cynthia Thielen, Hawaii
8:30 a .m. Welcome
8:40 a.m. Importance of Hemp to Agriculture and Update on Canada"s
1998 Success Lorna Milne, Canadian Federal Senator
9:10 a.m. European Update Stuart Carpenter, United Kingdom
9:40 a.m. Agriculture Diversification/State Initiative, Rep. David
Monson, North Dakota
10:10 a.m. Break
Moderator: Geofrey Kime, Hempline, Inc.,Canada
10:25 a.m. Economic Impact of Industrial Hemp in Kentucky, Dr. Eric
Thompson, University of Kentucky
10:50 a.m. Reintroduction of Industrial Hemp in North America,
Edward "Ned" Daly, III, Resource Conservation Alliance, Washington, DC,
Andy Kerr, The Larch Company, Oregon, Jeffrey Gain, Blue Ridge Company,
Illinois
11:50 a.m. Lunch
Moderator: Andrew Graves, President, Fayette County Farm Bureau &
Kentucky Hemp Growers Cooperative Association, Leafland Farms
1:10 p.m. Farming Hemp Low THC Hemp Production - Stan Blade, New
Crops Development, Alberta, Canada
1:50 p.m. A Growers Cooperative/Market Development, Francios
Desanlis, La Chanvriere de l'Aube
2:30 p.m. Break
Moderator: Curtis Koster, Malcolm Associates, New Jersey
2:50 p.m. Industrial Applications Automotive Applications - Jean
Laprise, Kenex, Ltd., Ontario, Canada, Carpet Applications - Dr. Raymond
Berard, Interface Research Corporation, Georgia, Utilizing Hemp on an
Industrial Scale - Wm., "Bill" Miller, Miller Consulting Group,
Mississippi
3:40 p.m. Hemp Processing, Mill Technology - Gero Leson, Leson
Environmental Consulting, California
4:10 p.m. Hemp and Marijuana Distinguishing Between the Two Plants
Dr. Paul Mahlberg, University of Indiana, Myths and Realities - Dr.
David West
4:50 - 7:00 p.m. Trade show exhibits and reception
7:00 - 9:00 p.m. Banquet Dinner - with hemp specialty foods
Introduction: Erwin "Bud" Sholts, Wisconsin
Speaker: Al Charr, Manitoba, Canada, "Hemp Development in
Manitoba"
Saturday, November 7
8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Trade show exhibits
8:00 a.m. Registration
Moderator: Kenneth Friedman, Attorney at Law, Washington
8:30 a.m. Paper Industry Utilization Paper Industry Perspective -
Curtis Koster, Malcolm Associates, New Jersey Whole Stock Pulping for
Paper - Medwick Byrd, Jr., State University, North Carolina
9:30 a.m. Break
10:00 a.m. Rural Development and Sustainability Economic
Development - Dr. David Morris, Institute for Local Self Reliance,
Minnesota; Bio-Fuels and Energy - William Holmberg; Sustainable
New-Wealth Industries International, Virginia Processing Infrastructure
- Dr. Robert Armstrong; Alternative Agricultural Research and
Commercialization (AARC) Corporation, Washington, DC, Moderator: John
Roulac, HEMPTECH, California
11:00 a.m. Hempseed & Oil Hempseed Processing - Jean M. Laprise,
Kenex, Ltd., Ontario, Canada; Hempola, From the Farm to the Retail
Shelf - Greg Herriott, Hempola, Ontario, Canada; Market Opportunity -
Ruth Shamai, R&D Hemp, Ontario, Canada
12:15 p.m. Lunch
Moderator: Mrs. Gale M. Glenn, Kentucky Gov. Task Force on Hemp &
Related Fibers
1:30 p.m. Marketing of Textiles Hugh McKee, Hemphabrics, Inc.,
New Jersey
1:50 p.m. Marketing Hemp Products - Food & Consumer Hemp Products
- Anita Roddick, The Body Shop International DLC, West Sussex, UK; Hemp
Foods - Richard Rose, The Hemp Corporation, California; Beverages -
Marjorie McGinnis, Frederick Brewing Company, Maryland
2:50 p.m. Petition Status/Future Challenge Ralph Nader, Consumer
Advocate, Washington, DC
3:15 p.m. Conference Wrap-Up and Feedback Bud Sholts, Wisconsin
Andy Kerr, Oregon
3:30 p.m. Adjourn
NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HEMP COUNCIL (NAIHC) ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP
MEETING AND CONFERENCE, NOVEMBER 5-7, 1998
Registration Form:
Name
Company/Farm Name
Address
City State/Province ZIP Country
Telephone - - Fax - - Email
Make checks payable to: NAIHC Conference registration fee*
Mail to: PO Box 259329 $100 Member $ Madison, WI 53725 9329
$150 on-member $____________ $300 Exhibitor $ _____
Return this form and payment to NAIHC (FEIN # 39-1844357) by Friday,
October 23, 1998. No receipt will be sent.
*Add an extra $25 per person for late registrations after October 23.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A Citizen's Guide To Influencing The Administration (Excellent Tips
On Making Letters And Phone Calls Effective, From 20/20 Vision Education
Fund, A Resource For Grassroots Activists Across The Country)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 14:47:57 EDT
Errors-To: jnr@insightweb.com
Reply-To: friends@freecannabis.org
Originator: friends@freecannabis.org
Sender: friends@freecannabis.org
From: "ralph sherrow" (ralphkat@hotmail.com)
To: Multiple recipients of list (friends@freecannabis.org)
Subject: Fwd: A Citizen's Guide to Influencing the Administration
Subject: Tips on Making Letters and Phone Calls Effective
From: FilmMakerZ@aol.com Save Address Block Sender
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 17:05:51 EDT
Tips on Making Letters and Phone Calls Effective
(from http://www.2020vision.org/)
***
Writing letters and making phone calls are simple and effective ways to
change policy.
Policy makers do pay attention - and change their minds and votes - when
even a moderate number of constituents contact them on a single issue
within a short period of time. So it is vitally important to respond to
issues in a timely manner. Our experience shows that if someone puts off
her or his phone call or letter for more than two or three days, it's
put off indefinitely. So please act immediately.
Here are a few tips on how to make your actions have the greatest
impact.
When You Write:
***
* The more personal your letter is, the more influence it has. Say what's
on your mind and in your heart. Use your own words wherever possible,
but don't think you have to write like an expert to have influence.
* Hand write your letter if your handwriting is legible. Mass computer
generated mail is getting so sophisticated that it often looks like it's
done by an individual. Handwritten letters are now the only way that a
congressional office knows that the letter really comes from an
individual constituent. If you prefer to type a letter, make sure you
sign it and then add a handwritten P.S.
* It's best to be brief, clear and specific. Keep your letter to one page
if possible.
* State your opinion and your specific request within the first few
sentences.
* Ask the policy maker to state her or his position in a response letter.
* Do not say you are writing on behalf of a group or organization.
Messages from individuals are more effective.
* Be courteous and reasonable. Show respect for the policy makers you
contact, even when you disagree with them.
* Include your address on your letter; an envelope can get lost.
When You Call:
***
When calling legislators, it is best to try to speak to their specific
aide, such as the health, arms control, environmental aide, etc. If they
are not available, leave your name, address and a clear message with the
person who answers the phone. You might begin by saying, "I'm Jane Doe
calling from Anytown, and I'd like to leave a message for Congressperson
Smith." State what issue you are calling about and what you want your
legislator to do. You can ask for a written response to your message.
Don't be intimidated. You don't have to be an expert to tell policy
makers the priorities you think they should pursue.
Some Optional Enhancements:
***
* Describe briefly how the policy or legislation in question affects you
personally or affects people where you live.
* Enclose an article that has bearing on the policy or legislation in
question.
* If you have any personal association with the policy maker, let her or
him know. Nothing is more effective in getting a policy maker's
attention than letting them know you've worked on her or his campaign.
* Use your business or organization letterhead stationery if you have
any.
* Legislators have informed us that phone calls and letters carry equal
weight.
* In general, try to avoid sending letters by fax. Many congressional
offices find a fax intrusive and prefer letters that arrive by mail.
* Write or call a second time. Follow-up letters can have a much stronger
impact on policy makers and their aides than the initial communication.
Thank the legislator for taking a correct stand or ask questions about
any unsatisfactory answers they have given you.
***
From: FilmMakerZ@aol.com
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 17:06:09 EDT
Subject: A Citizen's Guide to Influencing the Administration
Beating the Bureaucracy
A Citizen's Guide to Influencing the Administration
(from http://www.2020vision.org/)
***
Congress may write the laws, but it is up to the Administration, the
President and its agencies, to execute the policies that affect every
citizen."- White House staff member
Introduction
***
20/20 Vision Education Fund has produced a resource for grassroots
activists across the country on how citizens can most effectively
influence the Administration. The Administration, or Executive branch,
is made up of federal agencies which include departments with
Secretaries who sit on the President's cabinet, agencies such as the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the White House offices. In
preparation for this report, 20/20 Vision staff interviewed over 25
Administration employees to gain insight from their experience and
observations. Staff met with representatives from the White House,
Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Defense, Department of
Energy, Department of State, and Department of the Interior. Sample
questions included:
* What happens to letters sent to the White House or other agencies?
* Does the Administration pay attention to letters to the editor
published in newspapers?
* What number of letters or calls gets the Administration's attention?
* Is it better as a citizen to affiliate yourself with a national
organization?
* Which actions are the most effective: phone calls, letters, editorials?
* What is the role of members of Congress in influencing Administration
officials?
Citizen lobbyists have become skilled in lobbying Congress. Influencing
the Administration, however, proves more difficult than influencing
Congress.
There are several inherent difficulties in targeting the administration
on current issues. Some of the differences include:
* Administration agencies are highly bureaucratic and complex. The
Administration is comprised of a constantly changing set of actors, and
Administration staff directories are subject to changes right after
publication. Not only do positions change from Administration to
Administration, but during a President's term, political appointees
resign or are reassigned. Thus, it is much harder to identify the
appropriate Administration officials to whom you should direct your
actions. Often it is unclear who is actually making the decisions and
who is involved in the decision making process.
* In addition, each agency is a separate entity operating independently
of each other. Much like an individual business enterprise, each agency
has its own hierarchy and methods for getting work accomplished. We
found the agencies to be so compartmentalized that employees often do
not interact with colleagues down the hall or know what tasks each
division is responsible for. Because of this, responses to citizen
requests take much longer to process in an agency
than within a congressional office.
* Administration agencies have no true constituency. Unlike members of
Congress, who are accountable to the citizens who elected them, agencies
do not have a public constituency. As a staff member pointed out, the
Secretary of Defense has a constituency of one, the President.
Therefore, Administration staff are not under the same political
pressure to respond to inquiries or appeals.
* Administration agencies' tracking systems for letters and phone calls
differ widely. Unlike Congress, where correspondence is tracked,
tallied, and responded to, most agencies are not equipped to handle
large volumes of mail or phone calls. Because of this, phone calls are
often not returned and letters may not be answered.
These factors make contacting and communicating with the Administration
extremely challenging, but not impossible. Throughout our research we
were repeatedly told that the Administration needs to hear from
concerned citizens. "Tell citizens to keep writing. The Administration
needs to hear what the public is saying," said an EPA staff member. This
guide is designed to help citizens overcome the challenges and determine
the most effective ways to communicate with and influence the
Administration.
Several common themes emerged from 20/20 Vision Education Fund
interviews with different Administration employees. Although the
agencies varied widely, all agreed that the most effective means for
attracting the attention of the Administration are to:
* Work with your members of Congress;
* Take advantage of regional offices;
* Use the media; and
* Utilize channels unique to the Administration.
***
The President must veto a bill within ten days after it is submitted and
return it to Congress with a message stating his reasons. Congress may
try to override his veto and enact the bill into law. The override of a
veto requires a recorded vote with a two-thirds majority voting in both
the House and Senate. Citizens can write to the President encouraging
him to veto a piece of legislation that is coming to him for a
signature. In addition, citizens can contact their member of Congress to
vote for or against the override of a veto.
* Executive Orders. This critical instrument of active presidential power
is nowhere defined in the Constitution, but generally is construed as a
directive that becomes law without prior congressional approval.
Executive orders usually pertain specifically to government agencies and
officials, but their effects often reach to the average citizen. For
example, Lyndon Johnson in 1965 required firms that win federal
government contracts to create programs for hiring more minorities, thus
significantly affecting private sector employment practices. There are
no specific constitutional procedures for issuing executive orders, but the
text of all executive orders must be published in the Federal Register.
An executive order addresses the Executive branch across the board, is
long term (may carry over from one Administration to the next), and is
public. For example, such executive orders have included:
* requiring the federal government to use recycled paper, to convert
11,000 federal vehicles from gasoline to alternative fuels, and to
utilize energy efficient computers.
* promoting "environmental justice," aimed at controlling hazardous
substances in communities regardless of race or economic circumstances.
Proposed executive orders can originate from almost anywhere in the
Executive branch. A few are composed directly in the White House, but
most emanate from various agencies. Some orders, such as those affecting
another nation, may be written at the explicit instruction of the
President, but most are composed by career staff personnel in the
agencies to implement federal regulations or propose new rules or
procedures. Executive orders by nature exclude Congress from the process
of decision making, often leaving the legislature to catch up
after the fact. Citizens can contact the President and request an
executive order to be produced.
Another instrument, which usually deals with national security issues,
is called a Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) and gives specific
instructions to a limited number of agencies. Although classified, often
the language of presidential directives gets leaked to the press prior
to being officially approved and signed by the President. Citizens can
write the Administration during the period when a PDD is being debated.
For example, when the Administration reviewed its arms transfer policy,
citizens wrote to the President to express an alternative position.
"People on the ground writing letters provide a highly valuable tool for
getting the word out to policy makers." - Department of the Interior
staff member Keep in mind letters can be used as reinforcement to back
up or determine an agency policy. For example, if an agency has not yet
determined its internal position, stacks of citizen letters may be used
to show public opinion or support and persuade department personnel to
select the public stance exhibited in the letters. A Department of
Energy staff member recalled, "When the department was undecided on its
position, a stack of citizen letters
helped the secretary reach a decision." When you write keep in mind:
* Format. Unlike sending handwritten notes to Congress, letters should be
typed (if possible), include full name, phone number and address, and a
specific request or questions regarding the Administration's policy or
position. Your message should be clear, focused, thoughtful, and
concise.
* Influential Author. A letter from an organization or well known
individual carries more clout than a letter from an average citizen.
Also, a letter from an unlikely supporter of a position will get
noticed. For example, a letter from a retired army general in favor of
reducing the military budget will get noticed, because this viewpoint is
unexpected.
* Give Praise. When the Administration has listened to citizen input or
has taken a position that you agree with, let the Administration know.
"When people write they are usually complaining about something. The
President needs to get positive mail too to show support of his
policies. People should write to support him as well as complain or
comment," explained a White House staff member.
* Raise New Issues. Write letters to the Administration in support of an
issue and bring attention to something not currently being addressed.
For example, citizens wrote to the Administration to highlight an
upcoming international population conference asking for the
Administration to become involved and make public its position.
***
On Calls to the Administration
***
Unlike calling your member of Congress, Administration offices are not
all equipped to deal with large volumes of phone calls. Staff members
pointed out that they tend to get "overwhelmed" by calls. Within the
bureaucracy of each agency there is not an assigned receptionist to
field citizen phone calls. "We just don't have the secretarial support
to cover calls," reported a Department of Defense staff member.
Furthermore, it is often difficult to find the right person to speak
with in Administration agencies. Calls to senior officials are not
likely to be returned, unless a well known individual calls.
The vast majority of Administration staff recommended writing rather
than calling to increase the chances that your inquiry receives
attention and generates a response. "Calls from citizens won't be
returned; messages are taken," explained a Department of Energy staff
member. The general practice in all agencies is to take messages.
The EPA was the only agency that recommended phone calls from citizens.
If you only have time to call, ask a specific question (such as the
deadline for comments to a public docket) rather than trying to
influence Administration decisions and policy.
Identifying who your letter or call should be directed to is an
important step in the process. When interviewing Administration staff,
we consistently heard four themes:
* Consider Politics. Many times political strategists are the decision
makers versus technical policy people. Political people especially
influence the President's position. Such people include the President's
senior advisors, strategists, and the Chief of Staff. Citizens should
look to newspaper articles and weekend talk shows to determine who is
making policy decisions and providing input to the Administration's
policy initiatives. Technical people for the most part do not rely on
citizen input. For example, many of the issues covered by the Department
of Defense are technical and complex in
nature. It is difficult for citizens to provide valued input or opinion,
unless a citizen has specific issue expertise.
* Cast the Net Broadly. When targeting the Administration, citizens
should "cast the net broadly" within each agency, pointed out a
Department of Energy staff member. In other words, hit the worker bee
level as well as the top level of management. Send a letter with copies
to employees at various levels of the hierarchy. This ensures that your
inquiry will get noticed by someone.
* Potential Allies. Citizens should attempt to select target(s) who might
be swayed or who are undecided on an issue and need to be persuaded.
Just like targeting potential "swing voters" in Congress on a particular
piece of legislation, citizens should try to identify undecided decision
makers. Read the paper to gather useful information such as position
changes and who is influencing the President on a particular issue.
* Double Impact. Citizens may want to write to the Secretary of an agency
as well as to the President. As one EPA staff member said, "both is
better." When doing so, a citizen should send separately addressed
letters.
What happens to letters you send to the President?
***
"What's different about the Clinton Administration, is that they answer
mail, unlike previous Administrations." - Volunteer, White House mailroom
The White House told us that letters to the White House are sorted by
topic, and are entered into a main computer. Answers have been
previously formulated and approved by the President.
However, if a letter details an unusual firsthand experience, that
citizen will likely receive a personal answer. "The President receives
between 40,000 to 60,000 letters per week," explained a staff member of
the White House Office of Correspondence. Letter readers give the
President 10-15 letters a week to read. Fifty percent of the letter
readers in the White House are volunteers.
If the White House receives form letters or campaign generated
postcards, responses are not sent. If an individual writes several times
on the same topic, he/she will receive only one response. Unlike
Administration agencies, typed and handwritten letters addressed to the
White House receive the same amount of attention.
Citizens, if they are the leaders of a local organization or chapter of
a national organization, should note their affiliated organization when
addressing the President. Otherwise noting your organization is not
recommended, as it will draw attention to the fact that your letter is
part of an orchestrated letter writing campaign. Like Congress, the
Administration may discount letters it believes are part of a
manufactured campaign. However, it is effective for groups to band
together when writing the President. Several may wish to write and sign
a joint letter, thus showing broad support for the issue.
The tracking of letters is very sophisticated at the White House.
According to a Department of State staff member, when he attends
meetings at the White House, "the staff members are aware of the number
of letters they are receiving or not receiving on a particular issue."
What happens when you e-mail the President?
***
Communicating by Computer
* Electronic Mail (e-mail)
You can e-mail the President at:
president@whitehouse.gov
You can e-mail the Vice President at:
vicepresident@whitehouse.gov
* Visit the White House on-line
You can also access the White House using the World Wide Web. This site
provides a graphical interface and allows your to send e-mail to the
White House.
"Welcome to the White House: An Interactive Citizens' Handbook" can be
visited at:
http://www2.whitehouse.gov/
This Web site or "home page" offers citizens the opportunity to direct
comments to the President or Vice President. By selecting the "comments"
item on the World Wide Web home page, a screen entitled "speak out"
appears. The citizen is asked questions, such as his/her e-mail address
and if he/she is writing on behalf of an organization. In addition, a
citizen can choose to indicate the purpose, general topic (such as
environment or defense), and major subject of the message.
According to the Director of Correspondence for the President, the
President has received thousands of messages from people all over the
world since coming on-line in 1993. A detailed report is provided to
both the President and Vice President based on the number and type of
e-mail messages received. To facilitate contact with either the
President or Vice President, try to write short and concise messages,
address only one issue per message, and send only one copy of your
message.
Shortly after you send your message, you will receive an electronic
acknowledgment that the message was successfully accepted and is being
forwarded to the White House. You will not receive an electronic
response to your inquiry. However, if you supply your standard mailing
address, a reply to your comment will be sent via the U.S. Postal
Service.
What happens to your phone calls to the President?
***
"If you really want your opinion to get to the President, the White
House comment line is an effective way to express your opinion."
- White House staff member, Greetings Office
The White House has a comment line available Monday - Friday, 9 am to 5
pm EST (202/456-1111). The comment line begins with a survey of recent
topical issues, such as healthcare or gun control. Callers are given a
choice of responding to the survey or bypassing it and simply leaving a
message or speaking to an operator. The comment line receives over 2,000
calls every day. The calls are tallied and a summary is given to the
President daily.
***
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:45:34 -0400
To: dpfca@drugsense.org
From: Richard Lake (rlake@mapinc.org)
Subject: Re: DPFCA: Fwd: Tips on How to Use the Media Effectively
Sender: owner-dpfca@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/
At 11:59 AM 9/28/98 PDT, ralph sherrow wrote:
>
>From: FilmMakerZ@aol.com
>Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 17:05:41 EDT
>Subject: Tips on How to Use the Media Effectively
[snip]
Super tips! Thanks!
A great many more can be found at:
http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm
And the links from the above page. After all, using the media is the reason
the Media Awareness Project of DrugSense was started.
Richard Lake
Senior Editor; MAPnews, MAPnews-Digest and DrugNews-Digest
email: rlake@DrugSense.org
http://www.DrugSense.org/drugnews/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Police Pose As Drug Dealers In Cocaine Sting ('The Vancouver Sun'
Says Royal Canadian Mounted Police Officers Took Advantage Of Controversial
New Regulations Allowing Them To Break Drug Laws If They Are Investigating
A Crime In Order To Carry Out A 'Reverse Sting' In Richmond, British
Columbia, Where They Charged Three Men With Conspiracy To Traffic In Cocaine
And Seized $1.2 Million In Cash)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 18:45:10 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Canada: Police Pose As Drug Dealers In Cocaine Sting
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Pubdate: Sat, 26 Sep 1998
Source: Vancouver Sun (Canada)
Contact: sunletters@pacpress.southam.ca
Website: http://www.vancouversun.com/
Author: Chad Skelton
POLICE POSE AS DRUG DEALERS IN COCAINE STING
In the largest case of its kind in Canada, RCMP officers working under
controversial new regulations that allow police to pose as drug dealers
charged three men with conspiracy to traffic in cocaine and seized $1.2
million in cash.
Police described the men arrested Thursday night in Richmond as associates
of a local motorcycle gang. On Friday police showed the media large stacks
of seized $20, $50 and $100 bills.
The "reverse sting" investigation -- in which undercover officers arranged
a meeting in Richmond with suspects they had learned were in the market for
50 kilograms of cocaine -- was made possible by a change in police
enforcement regulations by the federal justice department last year. That
change effectively lets officers break drug laws if they are investigating
a crime.
RCMP spokesman Sergeant Russ Grabb was blunt in describing the impact of
the new rules: "We have done reverse stings before, but they have been
ruled illegal by the courts. . . . Police are now allowed to engage in what
would otherwise be, technically, an unlawful act -- drug trafficking -- in
order to collect evidence."
As recently as this June, several charges were stayed against admitted
marijuana dealer Frederick Creswell after B.C. Supreme Court Justice Mary
Humphries ruled a money-laundering sting, in which RCMP officers operated a
currency exchange, was an illegal act. The Crown is appealing the verdict.
The police enforcement regulations, which came into force on May 15, 1997,
specifically mention, in an attached analysis, that problems in previous
court cases "accentuated the need for legislation to provide explicit
authority for police to engage in conduct that might otherwise be illegal."
John Conroy, the Abbotsford lawyer who represents Creswell, said the
regulations give police wide latitude to engage in criminal activity.
"They're exempted from all the [drug] offences. They can grow it, traffic
it, cultivate it and produce it -- everything you can think of. . . . It
frightens me."
Grabb said "no cocaine was actually delivered to the suspects in this case"
and that it is RCMP policy not to add drugs into the system.
Sergeant Chuck Doucette of the force's drug awareness program, would only
say that selling drugs is "something we would not do if we could avoid it."
Because the new police powers fall under justice department regulations,
not legislation, they were not debated in Parliament. A justice department
librarian in Vancouver had trouble even finding a copy of them, noting
press releases aren't usually sent out on these types of changes.
"The bureaucrats in Ottawa brought forward the amendments," Conroy said. "I
doubt very much that there was much public debate."
For their part, police argue the new rules are an essential tool in the
fight against drugs. "Historically, we've posed as drug purchasers," Grabb
said, and dealers are the lowest rung in criminal organizations.
The best way to destabilize criminal groups is to take out the leaders, he
said. And while drug bosses leave the selling of small amounts of drugs to
others, they take a more active interest in a million dollars' worth of
cocaine.
But while police say the new rules let them catch the big fish, Conroy
argues it allows them to catch small fry, too. The new powers provide no
restriction on how big the case needs to be, he said, so police could
theoretically use the rules to entrap individuals buying drugs for
recreational use.
Grabb said the RCMP has no interest in targeting individuals. "Our mandate
is to target high-level drug dealers and organized crime only."
Another recent change to the Controlled Drug and Substances Act was
legislation allowing police to seize the "proceeds of crime," such as the
money and property of drug dealers, to put those proceeds into law
enforcement funds.
The money seized this week will not go into police coffers -- because every
last bill is evidence of the crime itself -- until a judge rules what to do
with it.
The arrest was the result of a 10-month undercover operation that involved
more than 40 officers.
Those facing charges are: John Terzakis, 30, of Vancouver, Greg James
Hinchcliffe, 33, of Ridge Meadows and Sidney Gordon Dallas, 40, of Surrey.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Last Days Of The War On Drugs (Occasional Toronto 'Globe And Mail'
Columnist Gwynne Dyer Comments On The Recent London Symposium,
'Regulating Cannabis - Options For Control In The 21st Century,' And Other
Reform Developments Around The World, Saying That As Far As The Technical
And Philosophical Debate Is Concerned, The War Is Over; We Just Haven't
Declared A Ceasefire On The Actual Battlefronts Yet - But That Is Coming Too)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 09:30:38 EDT
From: Carey Ker (carey.ker@utoronto.ca)
Subject: Canada: The last days of the war on drugs
To: mattalk@listserv.islandnet.com
Source: The Globe and Mail, September 26, 1998, F4
Newshawk:carey.ker@utoronto.ca
contact: letters@GlobeAndMail.ca
Author: Gwynne Dyer
The last days of the war on drugs
At an international symposium on regulating cannabis held in
London, there was the obligatory pony-tailed man
conspicuously smoking a roach. But the besuited delegates
completely ignored him. Which is what most of them propose
doing at a policy level about the whole marijuana 'problem.'
Saturday, September 26, 1998
GWYNNE DYER
I noticed the ashtray winking up at me as soon as I sat down
at the table. I was having dinner at an auberge at the far
end of L'Ile d'Orleans, and it seemed to be saying: "This is
Quebec, where we aren't afraid to live and we aren't afraid
to die. You can have an after-dinner cigarette here if you
want."
I did want, as it happens. I started smoking at nine and
quit in my late 30s, but after-dinner cigarettes were always
the best, and very occasionally I do make an exception. So I
got a pack of Players Light from the bar and lit one up --
and it hit me, as it always does, far harder than if I had
just lit up a joint.
Regular tobacco smokers don't know what they're missing,
because regular use dulls the effect; most of the time,
they're just feeding the addiction. But if your system is
really clear of nicotine, the first two or three puffs don't
just taste good; your vision sharpens, your whole body
buzzes, and you're floating three or four inches off the
ground. Then the whole effect clears within minutes of
putting the cigarette out. If it wasn't so addictive, if
addiction didn't ruin the effect - and if it didn't kill so
many of its users - tobacco would be the ideal recreational
drug.
Marijuana (or cannabis, to be technical) is not addictive
and it's not a health problem, but it has drawbacks too.
Much the same ones as alcohol, in fact: The high lasts an
inconveniently long time, and temporarily affects judgment
in ways that make it incompatible with driving, for example.
Marijuana doesn't have the same association with violent
behaviour as alcohol, and it would be equally foolish and
futile to try to ban it, but, like alcohol, it clearly needs
to be regulated; no sales to under-18s, for example.
Except that marijuana is illegal. Over the past three
decades there have been more than a million drug arrests in
Canada, resulting in hundreds of thousands of Canadians
getting criminal records after conviction for possessing
small amounts of cannabis. We assume that Canada, unlike,
say, Arkansas, does not send people to jail just for
cannabis possession, but last year an estimated 2,000
Canadians did go to jail for just that offence (though many
of them were people unable to pay the fines that were
originally imposed).
Relax. This is not yet another article about how we ought to
legalize banned drugs in order to cut the crime rate and
save addicts' lives. I used to write pieces about that, but
now I don't bother. As far as the technical and
philosophical debate is concerned, the war is over; we just
haven't declared a ceasefire on the actual battlefronts yet.
But that is coming too.
One sign that the "war on drugs" is nearing an end is the
willingness of mainstream newspapers in Canada, Europe and
even the United States to open their columns to informed
advocates of legalization in ways that would have been
unimaginable 10 years ago. (The most recent examples in The
Globe and Mail were articles by then business columnist
Terence Corcoran and by Eugene Oscapella and Diane Riley of
the Canadian Centre for Drug Policy.)
But the most convincing evidence for impending change is
that experts in the field are now moving on from mere
advocacy to discussing how drug use should be regulated
after the war ends.
Which brings us, in roundabout fashion, to the international
symposium on Regulating Cannabis: Options for Control in the
21st Century, held at Regent's College in London on Sept. 5.
In the coffee room there was the obligatory pony-tailed,
middle-aged man conspicuously smoking a roach behind a table
with leaflets on it -- but there was only one, and the
besuited participants from 14 countries completely ignored
him. Which is also what most of them propose doing at a
policy level about the whole marijuana "problem."
As Benedikt Fischer of the Drug Policy Research Group at the
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto put it:
"It is a waste of energy at this point to go for formal
political and legal reform." This was the central paradox at
the symposium: Almost everybody present agreed that
"depenalization," decriminalization, even de facto
legalization of marijuana use was coming to many countries
in practice, but almost none believed that it would be
achieved through the usual means of changing bad laws.
A lot of the people present were lawyers, and they clearly
didn't like this. Most of them would prefer to deal with
regulating hitherto banned drugs in the same rational,
straightforward way that the U.S. ended alcohol prohibition
in 1933: American lawmakers just passed the 21st Amendment
to cancel the 18th Amendment, made new laws about where and
when and to whom alcohol may be sold, and then taxed the
hell out of it. It was an approach that accepted that lots
of people would still suffer from alcohol abuse -- but at
least they would no longer go blind or die from poisonously
bad alcohol, and the criminal black market that thrived on
prohibition would be closed down.
As soon as the various panelists in London got into the nuts
and bolts of post-prohibition policies for marijuana,
however, they all had to acknowledge the same problem: In
the course of this century, American anti-drug crusaders
have exploited their country's growing clout to turn
international law into an almost insuperable legal barrier
to rational drug policy. It might make sense to legalize
marijuana use, but you can't.
As late as 1900, all the drugs that we are now called to
fight a "drug war" against were perfectly legal. Everybody
knows the story behind Coca-Cola's early success, but the
use of barbiturates in modest quantities was equally
acceptable on the other side of the Atlantic.
Opium, sold freely in pharmacies in Britain, was the valium
of the Victorian middle class. And the 1912 Hague Convention
for the Suppression of Opium and Other Drugs, arising from a
U.S. initiative three years before, was an unmitigated
disaster for A.R. Clark's pharmacy in Braemar, Scotland,
which had previously done a thriving business in supplying
heroin, cocaine and other drugs to the Royal Family round
the corner at Balmoral Castle.
But the real war on drugs only got under way after the
Second World War, when America's undisputed superpower
status enabled it to impose its prohibitionist domestic
policies on the rest of the world as well. The 1961 United
Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, the 1971 UN
Convention on Psychotropic Substances (to ban new drugs that
hadn't existed in 1961), and the 1988 UN Convention against
Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances (to close loopholes and criminalize even cannabis
possession) constitute a towering wall of prohibition.
The Single Conventions not only block the outright
legalization of drugs, but also render most "harm-reduction"
policies (maintenance doses of heroin and methadone, needle
exchanges and safe injection rooms, decriminalization of
possession and retail sale of small amounts of cannabis) of
doubtful legality. Yet there is no hope of dismantling or
substantially amending the Single Conventions until the
United States is ready to end its "war on drugs," and it
will almost certainly be the last to kick the habit.
There are stirrings of revolt against prohibitionist
policies even in the United States, things like the 1996
referendum in California that legalized the medical uses of
marijuana (principally for pain relief in AIDS and cancer
patients and sufferers from multiple sclerosis). Similar
referenda will be held in November in Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Nevada, Oregon and Washington D.C. But the federal
government has fought back by raiding the "cannabis buyers'
clubs" that have been set up to provide marijuana to
patients too ill to grow it themselves. (The city of
Oakland, California, in response, has tried to afford legal
protection by designating some club members as "municipal
officials.")
Change will doubtless come to the U.S., but so many
Americans -- bureaucrats, police, prison guards -- now make
their living from the war on drugs that they constitute an
institutional pressure group similar to (though less wealthy
than) the celebrated military-industrial complex. This often
results in active U.S. disinformation efforts like the
suppression early this year of a key chapter in the World
Health Organization's first report on cannabis in 15 years,
which originally concluded that cannabis, compared to
alcohol and tobacco, posed less of a threat to health. (The
respected journal New Scientist published a leaked
version of the report in February.)
It is dangerous for even the most prominent and respected
Americans to question the wisdom of the war on drugs: Former
Secretary of State George Shultz was vilified and ridiculed,
and Attorney-General M. Jocelyn Elders lost her job. So one
must not expect early movement within the U.S. federal
government on these issues, and until that happens there is
not a snowball's chance in hell of changing the Single
Conventions. So what is the rest of the world to do in the
meantime? The answer, put bluntly, is to cheat.
And the cheating is happening. All over Europe, and now in
Canada, initiatives are being taken that get around rigid
and immovable anti-drug laws under the guise of medical and
public-health experiments, or simply turn a blind eye to
actual practice while leaving the draconian anti-drug laws
on the books.
The oldest and best-known example is the Dutch "coffee shop"
system. It began in 1976, when the Dutch government adopted
a policy of separating the soft and hard drug markets by
turning a blind eye to the emergence of "coffee shops" that
openly sell retail quantities of cannabis and hash to their
(over-18) customers.
Dutch law still officially makes marijuana possession an
offence (though not one subject to criminal penalties), but
in fact there are now an estimated 1,500 of these "coffee
shops" all over the country, some operated by
municipalities. Nobody gets arrested, the government
collects value-added tax (a GST, that is) on the sales, and
the black market for marijuana has shrivelled up. In
1992-96, only 7.2 per cent of Dutch youths aged 12-15 had
tried marijuana, compared to 13.5 per cent of
Americans of the same age.
For a long time the Dutch were virtually alone apart from
Spain, which decriminalized private use of marijuana in
1983, but now they are being emulated all over the place.
French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin has declared himself in
favour of decriminalization, as have the Belgian government
and the Luxembourg parliament. In April, the Italian
government finally stated that it would act on the 1992
referendum in which Italians voted to decriminalize personal
drug use.
The German state of Schleswig-Holstein is planning a
three-year pilot program to sell up to five grams of
marijuana per day through pharmacies to over-16 participants
in one big city, one small town and one rural area, with the
idea of spreading the system state-wide if results are
satisfactory; the council of health ministers from all of
the country's states has approved the plan in principle. The
Swiss have allowed 200 "hemp shops" to open in the past two
years. They sell 12-gram bags of marijuana for 50 francs --
with printed instructions that it is to be mixed into
bathwater or hung in clothes closets as an aromatic.
In Australia, the Northern Territory, the state of South
Australia, and the Australian Capital Territory moved to
on-the-spot fines for cannabis possession that involve no
criminal record years ago, and this year the states of
Victoria and Western Australia are adopting simple "caution"
systems. And in Canada, where a recent poll found that a
narrow majority of 51 per cent favour
decriminalizing marijuana, the Vancouver police, until
recently the Canadian leaders for marijuana busts (260 per
100,000 people, compared to 41 and 43 per 100,000 in Toronto
and Montreal, respectively), have announced that they will
only press charges for simple possession if there are no
aggravating factors.
Not surprisingly, there is a parallel movement in a number
of countries toward the so-called British system of
prescribing heroin for addicts who are not ready or able to
quit. The Swiss have been running a pilot program with about
1,000 volunteers since 1994, with excellent results:
Criminal offences by participants dropped by 60 per cent,
their health improved enormously, the number in regular
employment more than doubled, there were no deaths from
overdoses, and no prescribed drugs were diverted to the
black market. The Netherlands, Spain and Luxembourg are
planning similar heroin-prescription programs, and
the League of Cities in Germany has petitioned the federal
government for leave to do the same, with support from the
police chiefs in 10 of Germany's 12 biggest cities.
A majority of Australia's state health ministers approved a
heroin prescription trial last year, but were blocked by
Prime Minister John Howard (who faces an election next
month). Vancouver is considering a similar program, which
would be a first in North America. "Filling prisons or
hospital beds with substance abusers does not make any
public policy sense," said police chief Bruce Chambers in a
July press conference, while chief coroner Larry Campbell
stated bluntly: "It's time someone stepped forward and said
the war on drugs is lost. We cannot even pretend to be
winning the war."
No less an authority than Raymond Kendall, secretary-general
of Interpol, said in 1994: "The prosecution of thousands of
otherwise law-abiding citizens every year is both
hypocritical and an affront to individual, civil and human
rights . . . Drug use should no longer be a criminal
offence." But given the power of the U.S. government and the
international legal barriers it has erected, nobody is able
to sign a separate peace in this war. What they are doing,
instead, is deserting one by one.
Gwynne Dyer, a Canadian-born writer based in London, is a
regular contributor to Focus.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hemp Production Goes Into Rehabilitation ('The Ottawa Sun'
Notes Recalcitrant Agriculture Officials Have Made It Difficult
For Canadian Hemp Farmers To Expand Their Production This Year
As Much As Hoped)
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 06:51:48 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Canada: Hemp Production Goes Into Rehabilitation
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Pubdate: September 26, 1998
Source: Ottawa Sun (Canada)
Contact: oped@sunpub.com
Website: http://www.canoe.ca/OttawaSun/
Author: Tom Van Dusen
HEMP PRODUCTION GOES INTO REHABILITATION
KEMPTVILLE -- John Madill is a mild-mannered agronomist based at Kemptville
College of Agricultural Technology who specializes in soybeans, forages,
small fruits such as strawberries, and "oddball crops."
Soft-spoken Madill might have been the last guy to anticipate that he'd ever
be asked to undergo a criminal record check during the normal course of his
agricultural duties.
But that's exactly happened to Madill after he applied to Health Canada to
become an official sampler for an oddball crop of long, tall plants with
familiar-looking serrated leaves beginning to dot the countryside.
That crop is hemp which, although fully authorized for industrial production
earlier this year, is still treated with deep suspicion by skittish federal
officials -- many of whom never wanted it legalized in the first place --
wary of its age-old association to kissing-cousin cannabis.
Banned 60 years ago, hemp was only cleared for a return to the Canadian
agricultural scene after months of badgering by the Senate and an
intervention by Health Minister Allan Rock. Under duress, reluctant
bureaucrats finally consented to prepare the necessary regulations.
These servants of the people had stalled shamelessly for close to two years
despite the fact parliamentarians had passed Bill C-8 permitting renewed
cultivation of the once acclaimed Canadian crop. When the officials said
they needed another year, the Senate and Rock heaved the book at them.
But they still made it almost impossible to grow hemp this year. Not only
were prospective hemp farmers required to demonstrate no criminal record,
they were swamped by a mound of complex licensing paperwork at the eleventh
hour when they should have been out planting.
As of June 30 this year, Health Canada's Therapeutic Products Directorate
had issued 262 licenses across the country to grow hemp for commercial and
research purposes. That was about 100 licenses less than the number of
applications received.
In all, 2507 hectares were licensed for cultivation although the directorate
has no way of knowing how many hectares actually went into production. Going
by reports from various farm agencies, the complicated approval system
resulted in many licensees failing to get a crop in the ground.
Hemp was banned after authorities decided it was too difficult to
differentiate between the branch of the family with psychoactive THC and the
branch without it. Unfortunately, three generations of Canadians lost the
benefits of THC-free hemp and the oil derived from its seed, a valuable
renewable resource useful in manufacturing building materials, textiles,
rope, carpet, soap, cosmetics, paint ... even automobile components.
In placing so many restrictions on hemp's return to credibility, the current
crop of bureaucrats is obviously having as much trouble as their forefathers
in separating two branches of the same family tree. And just in case anyone
missed the point it ain't going to be easy to grow hemp in this country,
before legally selling a crop a farmer is required at his expense to have
the THC content verified. A level higher than .3% and ... she's starting to
smell like wacky tabaccy, boys! That's where John Madill comes in. At a $25
cost to himself, Madill underwent a cop check which ascertained -- just as
he suspected -- that he has no criminal record.
Madill's successful application made him the only person in Eastern Ontario
authorized to sample and transport hemp. He is one of only a few such
samplers in the province as hemp production takes a few hobbled steps back
into the sunlight.
Why did Madill swallow principle and go through the aggravation? "Because a
grower called looking for the service and there was nobody else," he
explained, adding Kemptville College felt it should get involved at this
stage in case markets fall into place for hemp and it returns to some
semblance of its glory days as premier crop.
Following directions in a technical manual issued by the federal
directorate, Madill will retrieve hemp samples when requested by a farmer
and ship them off to federal laboratories in Toronto or Winnipeg where
they're tested for THC. Each sample costs the producer $135 which includes a
final report from Madill. So far, the agronomist said, he has only been
charging mileage for his personal services.
And so far, he's only been called into action twice, once for Marvelville's
Jeff MacDougall whose organically grown hemp suffered from extensive
moisture damage, and once for Pontiac County growers who planted 12 acres as
a pilot project. In both cases, the sampler said, the hemp came in under the
magic 0.3% THC.
So, despite the worst efforts of the ever-vigilant federal bureaucracy --
which, to its credit, claims to be looking at ways of streamlining the
application process -- hemp is still taking a bit of a foothold in its first
year back from disgrace.
And get this! While the new-age officials seem to be concerned that
marijuana will somehow get mixed in with the hemp, Madill says pot can't be
successfully planted in a hemp field because the amount of pollen produced
by hemp negatively effects THC levels.
The feds should put that in their pipe and smoke it!
Copyright (c) 1998, Canoe Limited Partnership.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug Gangs Devastate Indian Villages In Baja ('The New York Times'
Says Illegal Drug Traffickers Are Taking Advantage Of The Traditional
Conflicts That Have Plagued Native Indian Communities In Baja Mexico,
Leading To The Killings Last Week Of Two Entire Families From The Pai-Pai
Ethnic Group, Along With A Household Of Neighbors, Who Were Dragged
From Their Homes And Shot To Death In A Driveway In Ensenada)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 08:42:01 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Mexico: NYT: Drug Gangs Devastate Indian Villages In Baja
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Jim Galasyn
Source: New York Times (NY)
Contact: letters@nytimes.com
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Pubdate: 26 Sep 1998
Author: Sam Dillon
DRUG GANGS DEVASTATE INDIAN VILLAGES IN BAJA CALIFORNIA
SANTA CATARINA, Mexico -- After five centuries of killing and pestilence
that began with the Spanish conquest, only a few hundred of Baja
California's indigenous people are left alive. And now they are being
hunted down and killed by drug traffickers. The violence began two years
ago when the leader of an indigenous village that resisted traffickers'
efforts to take over communal lands for drug cultivation was gunned down,
along with another Indian, in an ambush along a rural road.
While some have resisted, other Indians have been seduced by the quick
fortunes that can reward those who manage desert airstrips or offer other
services to the drug cartels. And that has resulted in a string of killings
in the Indian communities that cling to the arid hills 60 miles south of
the California border.
The violence took on horrifying new dimensions last week when two entire
families of Indians from the Pai-Pai ethnic group, along with a household
of neighbors, were dragged from their homes and shot to death in a driveway
in Ensenada, a coastal city to which some Indians have migrated. It was
Mexico's worst incident of drug-related bloodshed in memory.
"We're not many Pai-Pai, and this has devastated our community," said
Armando Gonzalez, the commissioner of communal lands in Santa Catarina,
waving across the horizon of wooden huts and cactus that make up this
desert hamlet where seven of the massacre victims were buried Sunday. "For
us there's never been anything so calamitous."
Few institutions or communities in Mexico are being spared the effects of
the multibillion-dollar drug industry, and even the most remote indigenous
communities are no exception.
"The traffickers are taking advantage of the traditional conflicts that
have plagued these communities, and that is undermining the fragile sense
of cohesion that exists," said Everardo Garduno Ruiz, a graduate student at
Arizona State University who wrote a book about Baja California's
indigenous communities.
The Jesuit missionaries who explored Baja California in the 16th century
estimated the native population at 50,000. The Catholic Church persecuted
the Pai-Pai and speakers of four other indigenous languages, labeling their
traditional healers as pagans. The Indians resisted all efforts to
transform them into sedentary farmers until the 1930s, when the government
finally forced them onto communal lands. Today only about 1,000 Baja
California natives are left, Garduno said.
Until recently, tuberculosis, alcoholism and emigration were among the main
causes of decline, but the disintegration quickened a decade ago when drug
traffickers began to muscle in on the communities.
San Isidoro, a Pai-Pai village 30 miles southeast of Santa Catarina, has
nearly disappeared since 1987, when the government loosened restrictions on
the sale of communal properties and traffickers and their representatives
began to buy the Pai-Pai's lands. Many of San Isidoro's Pai-Pai have moved
into the nearby town of Valle de Trinidad.
Nonetheless, in 1996 San Isidoro still had Marcelino Murillo Alvarez, a Pai
speaker, as its community land commissioner. After the army found marijuana
plantations around the village that year, Murillo told the authorities that
he was willing to sign a document swearing that he and other Pai-Pai were
uninvolved in the drug cultivation, Murillo's brother Federico said in an
interview.
Weeks later, on May 29, 1996, gunmen blocked Marcelino's car and shot him
to death along with a passenger, Federico said. On May 18 of this year,
there was a killing near Valle de Trinidad. Ramon Valenzuela, the president
of the vigilance council of another, smaller group of indigenous people
known as the Kiliwa, was gunned down along a farm road. A Valle de Trinidad
police official, Roberto Gonzalez, said none of the murders had been solved.
"The Valle de Trinidad has turned into a valley of death," Federico Murillo
said.
The killings of the Indians near Trinidad have attracted renewed attention
since the drug-related massacre of 18 men, women and children on Sept. 17
near Ensenada. Police said after that crime that the target had been Fermin
Castro, 38, a Pai-Pai from Santa Catarina who was shot during the attack
and is in a coma. He grew wealthy in the last decade, ostensibly as the
owner of a rodeo production company. Police said Castro had headed a small
trafficking organization.
The Ensenada killings have also caused people in Santa Catarina to rethink
their views on another spectacular killing last year. To the horror of
spectators at a rodeo in May 1997 that Castro produced near Santa Catarina,
a gunman on horseback galloped up to Eufemio Sandoval, the Pai-Pai Indian
who worked for Castro as the rodeo announcer, shot Sandoval to death at
point-blank range, rode off to a waiting jeep and escaped into the desert.
People here originally viewed Sandoval's killing as part of a longtime
family vendetta. But two people said they now believed that it had been
related to Castro's narcotics activities.
Scores of Pai-Pai attended two memorial services, one last Saturday in El
Sauzal, the Ensenada suburb where the Sept. 17 massacre took place, and the
other on Sunday in Santa Catarina's cemetery. There, five of the seven dead
were children aged 6 to 13. But no one spoke.
"I guess nobody could find the words to express their feelings about this,"
said Cruz Lopez Ochurte, a villager.
***
[ed. note - Another version of this story indicates it was published by 'The
Orange County Register']
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 10:28:01 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Mexico: Drug Gangs Devastate Indian Villages In Baja
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John W.Black
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/
Pubdate: Sat, 26 Sep 1998
DRUG GANGS DEVASTATE INDIAN VILLAGES IN BAJA
The Ensenada slayings last week of two families from the Pai-Pai ethnic
group is the latest example.
SANTA CATARINA, Mexico - After five centuries of killing and pestilence
that began with the Spanish conquest, only a few hundred of Baja
California's indigenous people are left alive. And now they are being
hunted down and killed by drug traffickers.
[snip]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug Courts Pilot Scheme Needs Proper Funding (The Irish 'Examiner'
Says The Labour Party, Democratic Left, And Drug Treatment Professionals
Have Welcomed The Irish Government's Decision To Set Up US-Style Drug Courts,
But Stress The Need To Commit Sufficient Funds - To Deal With Non-Violent
Convicts And Those Guilty Of Non-Serious Offences By Way Of Drug Treatment
Rather Than Jail Terms, Supporters Asked For Funding For Participants'
Counselling, Career Guidance And Medical Care, Promising The Funding
Would Would 'Pay For Itself Because Of The High Costs Of Drug Addiction
To Society')
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 17:10:34 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Ireland: Drug Courts Pilot Scheme Needs Proper Funding
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: Examiner, The (Ireland)
Contact: exam_letters@examiner.ie
Pubdate: Sat, 26 Sep 1998
Author: Denis Lehane
DRUG COURTS PILOT SCHEME NEEDS PROPER FUNDING
THE Labour Party, Democratic Left and drug treatment bodies have
welcomed the Government's decision to set up a drug courts' pilot
project, but have stressed the need to commit sufficient funds for the
scheme.
Justice and Law Reform Minister John O'Donoghue, yesterday, announced
a pilot scheme of drug courts, based on the US system, following the
recommendations of a working group on a courts commission chaired by
Supreme Court Justice Mrs Susan Denham.
The key element in the scheme would be to deal with non-violent
convicts and those guilty of non-serious offences by way of drug
treatment rather than sentencing them to jail terms. As part of the
scheme, if those on the drug treatment schemes were to lapse, the
option of a jail sentence would still remain. Announcing the scheme,
Mr O'Donoghue said: "Today's announcement marks a major policy
initiative in the criminal justice system. It is the beginning of a
fundamental realignment of the response of the criminal justice system
to those involved in less serious drug related offences.
The Labour Party's spokesman on Justice, Pat Upton, in welcoming the
initiative, said there was an absolute need to establish such a system
of dealing with drug addicts in Ireland.
"I would urge the Minister for Justice to fund this pilot court to the
maximum to ensure that all aspects of rehabilitation for drug addicts
are provided, including counselling, career guidance as well as
medical care."
Democratic Left spokesperson Liz McManus also welcomed the decision,
but called for sufficient funds to make it work.
"The commitment of the additional resources required to make the drug
courts a success will be costly, but in the long-run it will pay
dividends as we are already facing a huge social and economic cost for
drug abuse and its associated crime problem," he said.
Chief executive of the Coolmine Therapeutic Community in Dublin Jim
Comberton said that many judges were already doing their best to deal
with drug addicts by way of sending them to treatment centres like
his.
"This proposal will give the option of sending a chap to prison or
into recovery. It gives the chap the chance to make a choice at the
point of high motivation," he said.
"It is a lot more humane, based on problem solving and trying to
address the problems rather than just sending them to prison."
Assistant director of the Rutland Centre in Dublin Roland Anderson
said that the Minister's announcement was good news and that the
investment of money into the scheme would pay for itself because of
the high costs of drug addiction to society.
"We would welcome any initiative where people would have the
possibility of treatment rather than punishment," he said.
"The Government appears to have got the balance right, where everyone
who needs treatment would get treatment."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[End]
to the 1998 Daily News index for September 24-30