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

The Generation Gap, 1999-Style (An op-ed in the Oregonian criticizes the Baby
Boom generation for its inattentiveness and fearfulness. As a so-called
Gen-X'er, the writer has become alienated about the damage Baby Boomers are
doing to society. Its fears have led to an increase in the size and intensity
of our police forces, military operations and the development and expansion
of the prison industrial complex. We have begun to see "punishment
politics" - mandatory minimum sentences, debtors prisons for deadbeat dads,
excessive use of the death penalty and so forth - guiding our political, legal
and social policies. Boomer fear will be the true Boomer legacy.)

Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 20:29:25 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US OR: OPED: The Generation Gap, 1999-Style
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Portland NORML (http://www.pdxnorml.org/)
Pubdate: Sun, May 02 1999
Source: Oregonian, The (OR)
Copyright: 1999 The Oregonian
Contact: letters@news.oregonian.com
Address: 1320 SW Broadway, Portland, OR 97201
Fax: 503-294-4193
Website: http://www.oregonlive.com/
Forum: http://forums.oregonlive.com/
Author: Bob Swan of Southeast Portland is an artist who owns a
mural-painting business.

THE GENERATION GAP, 1999-STYLE

It's Boom Time, Baby, So Hop Into That Gas-Guzzler And Go Demonstrate For War

Babies. Boomers. Baby Boomers. From where I sit, 1999 seems to be the
year of the Boomer. Advertisers are taking direct aim at them, and so
are HMOs, television, the fitness industry and a myriad of other
commercial enterprises.

It's all about the Boomer now, and why shouldn't it be? There are a
lot of them. Even our president is a Boomer.

Obviously, the Baby Boomers are in charge, having finally wrestled the
reins away from their aging and tired parents. Ta-da! It's Boom Time,
Baby! Far out! But is it? Has the sun finally risen or has the sun
finally set? Will the creators of Generation X save us or destroy us?

It's a good question, one that needs to be answered, and though I and
others of my generation suspect the latter to be true, I am not even
sure the Boomers are thinking about it at all. This scares me more
than anything else.

As a so-called Gen-X'er, I feel that our generation was, in a way,
fortunate to have been abandoned by the Boomers during their struggle
to wrestle power and money away from the previous generation. I say
"fortunate" because we have become alienated and disenfranchised
enough to see clearly and without prejudice the damage Baby Boomers
are doing to our society.

Clearly, Baby Boomers are not malicious but, rather, inattentive and
fearful. Unfortunately for all of us, the Baby Boomers have not paid
attention to the world they live in since they quit marching and got
jobs. In the struggle to acquire status, power and money (not to
mention behemoth sport-utility vehicles that never leave the road),
Baby Boomers have missed their chance to understand the world they
live in and empathize with those living in it.

As the Baby Boomers begin to retire and look out from the fog of
self-indulgence, they are finding that their grown children won't
speak to them, that their parents don't trust them and that the world
is on fire (except, of course, at the mall, where the security is
good). Baby Boomers are afraid -- afraid of the reality they have
created and do not understand at all.

Unfortunately for them, Boomer fear will be the true Boomer
legacy.

Already, Boomer fear is manifesting itself in a variety of ways. As
Boomers began to inherit and spend their parents' wealth, we also saw
an increase in the size and intensity of our police forces, military
operations and the development and expansion of the prison industrial
complex. We have begun to see "punishment politics" -- mandatory
minimum sentences, debtors prisons for deadbeat dads, excessive use of
the death penalty and so forth -- guiding our political, legal and
social policies.

Long gone are the policies that valued redemption, forgiveness or any
kind of extenuating circumstance. Boomer fear has begun to turn into
Boomer anger, and like the anger of a trapped animal, it is cruel,
illogical and confused.

As the new millennium dawns, I look out across the landscape of an
America filled with police, prisons and gas-guzzling vehicles and I am
dismayed but not surprised that my parents have stranded me here.

Perhaps my generation can deliver us from this cultural, political and
moral Armageddon, but perhaps not. It's all by, for and about the Baby
Boomers now, and maybe only they can deliver us from this madness.

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

The Economics Of Smuggling (A staff editorial in the Orange County Register
reflects on the front-page story in Friday's Register that said "Four
months after California levied the second-highest cigarette tax in the
country, the smuggling of untaxed cigarettes from Mexico has exploded." The
activists who devised the Proposition 10 tobacco tax, and the voters who
supported it, should have spent more time thinking about economics.)

Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 18:58:21 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US CA: Editorial: The Economics Of Smuggling
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: Sun, 2 May 1999
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Section: Commentary
Copyright: 1999 The Orange County Register
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/

THE ECONOMICS OF SMUGGLING

No matter how well-known certain historical events may be, some Americans
simply refuse to learn from them.

Who doesn't know the story of Prohibition and the futile attempts by the
federal government to outlaw the consumption of alcoholic beverages? Black
markets thrived, violence ensued and Americans faced declining rights as the
feds tried to stop the flow of booze.

Yet when it comes to, say, cigarettes, the same sort of crusaders are taking
a similar approach - albeit through higher taxes, rather than an outright
ban - to the Prohibitionists, and finding the same sort of disappointing
results. The laws of economics, like the laws of nature, appear to be immutable.

Case in point: A front-page story in Friday's Register reports that "Four
months after California levied the second-highest cigarette tax in the
country, the smuggling of untaxed cigarettes from Mexico has exploded."

It's simple economics. Taxes are forcing dramatically higher prices on
cigarettes as a way to discourage people from smoking them. But people still
want them, so black markets and smuggling rings emerge to fulfill the
demand. The higher the taxes, the more profitable the smuggling, and the
more willing people are to defy the law.

Several years ago in Canada, the national government imposed taxes that
increased the cost of cigarettes nearly 2 1/2 times.

Smuggling from the United States and elsewhere exploded, and tobacco
violence became more common. Eventually, the Canadians lowered the taxes to
reduce the problem.

Tobacco smuggling groups already are operating in the United States, where
they illegally transport cigarettes from low-tax states to high ones.

According to the Richmond Times-Dispatch, they have become increasingly
violent: "The nature of the crime and the criminal have changed. It's no
longer three guys from New York in a van driving to the Carolinas to get
smokes for the cigarette machines in their bar. The smuggling rings are
organized, sophisticated and willing to protect their assets, law enforcement
officials said."

With the price differential between Tijuana and San Diego far higher than
the differential between Raleigh and Rochester, the potential for
gun-wielding gangs is even higher in California.

We wish the activists who devised the Proposition 10 tobacco tax, and the
voters who supported it, would have spent more time thinking about economics.

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

Past Juror Granted Retrial (The Boulder Daily Camera says Laura Kriho, a
former Gilpin County juror who caused a mistrial in a 1996 drug case and
later was charged with contempt of court when her views on jury nullification
became known, won her appeal to the Colorado Court of Appeals, which ruled
Thursday that Judge Henry Nieto wrongly considered jury-room transcripts in
finding Kriho guilty of the contempt charge in 1997. A decision on whether
Gilpin County District Attorney Dave Thomas will retry the Kriho case is
unlikely until the state has exhausted its appeals.)

Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 13:42:28 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US CO: Past Juror Granted Retrial
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Jury Rights Project (jrights@levellers.org)
Pubdate: Sun, 2 May 1999
Source: Boulder Daily Camera (CO)
Copyright: 1999 The Daily Camera.
Contact: marshallj@boulderpublishing.com
Website: http://www.bouldernews.com/
Author: Christopher Anderson

PAST JUROR GRANTED RETRIAL

Concepts of 'jury nullification,' invasion of privacy assessed in appeals
court

A former Gilpin County juror, who caused a mistrial in a 1996 drug case and
later was charged with contempt of court, won a round this week in the
Colorado Court of Appeals.

The court ruled Thursday that Gilpin County Judge Henry Nieto wrongly
considered jury-room transcripts in finding Laura Kriho guilty of the
contempt charge in 1997. The decision, however, does allow for Kriho to be
prosecuted again without the transcript evidence.

The Kriho case is significant because it also centers on the concept of
"jury nullification," the concept of a juror's right to vote on conscious
regardless of law. Under the idea of nullification, a juror may vote to
acquit a defendant, not based on the evidence presented but upon the juror's
moral conviction that the law under which the case is prosecuted is wrong.
Most court rulings have failed to acknowledge the right of jury
nullification.

While investigating the mistrial, the District Attorney's Office for Gilpin
County learned Kriho had been arrested in 1985 for possession of LSD and had
supported the legalization of hemp. Kriho received a deferred sentence for
those charges but was never officially convicted.

When Kriho later served as a juror on a methamphetamine possession case, she
was the sole juror to vote for acquittal and the case ended in the mistrial.
The District Attorney's office said she should have disclosed her own drug
record before the trial, but Kriho said she was never asked about a past
drug record.

Prosecutors argued the case against Kriho was not about nullification, but
about her failure to disclose her drug-related background and her disregard
of the judge's instructions to the jury on the law and jury conduct. Kriho's
case quickly became a cause for civil rights advocates and libertarians, who
argued that the government did not have the right to interfere with the jury
deliberation process.

Kriho said Saturday she was happy with the Court of Appeals decision but
that it did not go far enough in protecting jurors' rights.

"I think the prosecution of jurors should be off limits, except in the most
egregious incidents of misconduct," she said.

In the appeals court's ruling, Judge Sandra Rothenberg, who wrote the
majority opinion, stated that the invasion of the jury process is dangerous
because it tends to "chill the willingness of our citizens to serve on
juries."

Rothenberg specifically cited a 1997 Circuit Court of Appeals Case, United
States vs. Thomas.

The Thomas case states: "The need to preserve the secrecy of jury
deliberations requires an investigation of juror misconduct to cease once
'any possibility' arises that the juror is acting during deliberations based
on his or her view of the sufficiency of the evidence."

Rothenberg further wrote that "extensive evidence" shows Kriho "was one of
the most diligent jurors."

A decision on whether District Attorney Dave Thomas will retry the Kriho
case is unlikely until the state has exhausted its appeals.

Ken Lane, a spokesman for the state Attorney General's Office, declined to
comment on the case.

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

Drug Testing: Why Your Boss Wants A Piece Of Your Hair (A second article in
the St. Louis Post-Dispatch about hair testing says hundreds of studies have
been undertaken on the new technology. Some scientists are convinced of its
accuracy. Others aren't sure. Most of the research has been done by
scientists who operate companies that seek hair-testing contracts or by
scientists whose work is financed by hair-testing labs. Some scientists fear
that blacks are more likely to be caught by such tests than whites because
dark, coarse hair might absorb more drugs than does light, fine hair. Tom
Mieczkowski of the University of Southern Florida cautions that "urinalysis
is not 100 percent accurate, either." It's hard for aggrieved workers to file
lawsuits, however. According to Lewis Maltby of the ACLU, "There's absolutely
no law that says an employer has to use reliable testing, except in the
federal testing program. You can use a Ouija board, and it's perfectly
legal.")

Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 08:54:31 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US MO: OPED: Why Your Boss Wants A Piece Of Your Hair
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: unoino2
Pubdate: Sun, 02 May 1999
Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch (MO)
Copyright: 1999 Post Dispatch
Contact: letters@pd.stlnet.com
Website: http://www.stlnet.com/
Forum: http://www.stlnet.com/postnet/index.nsf/forums
Author: Al Stamborski
Section: Business

WHY YOUR BOSS WANTS A PIECE OF YOUR HAIR

Some employers think hair analysis is a more accurate way to test
for drug use. But critics raise many questions, from racial bias to
possible contamination.

A conflict is brewing over a relatively new weapon in the war on drugs
in the workplace. Armed with scissors, employers are snipping locks of
hair from job applicants and employees. Lab analysis of the hair aims
to show whether the person used marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamines
or other illegal drugs in the previous 90 days. That's a much longer
look back than the three or four days usually provided through
urinalysis, which is still the drug test of choice for most companies
when deciding whether to hire or fire someone.

Hundreds of employers around the country -- banks, factories, police
departments -- have turned to hair testing in recent years, either to
supplement urine testing or to replace it. They say drug users have
learned to "beat" urinalysis by adulterating their urine or by
abstaining from drugs for a few days.

In this area, Harrah's Casino tests the hair of job applicants. So
does the General Motors plant. Anheuser-Busch uses the test for
applicants and some others, and is expanding its use to include all
employees. A-B will conduct the tests on a somewhat regular basis, not
just when someone is suspected of being a drug user or after an
accident in a plant.

The brewery's plan angers its biggest union, and a lawsuit has been
filed in New Jersey.

"The Teamsters do not condone the use of drugs," stressed Gary Scott,
one of the union leaders here. But the union, like other critics,
questions both the accuracy and the fairness of the tests. Even some
scientists fear that blacks are more likely to be caught by such tests
than whites because dark, coarse hair might absorb more drugs than
does light, fine hair.

While such matters are being reviewed and fought over, employees won't
have the option of refusing to take the test -- unless they want to be
fired on the spot.

"All you have to do is say 'no' and go get a job elsewhere," Chairman
August A. Busch III told protesting Teamsters on Wednesday at the
company's annual meeting.

Scientist has doubts

Hundreds of studies have been undertaken on hair testing. Some
scientists are convinced of its accuracy and value as a drug-testing
tool. Others aren't sure.

Most of the research has been done by scientists who operate companies
that seek hair-testing contracts or by scientists whose work is
financed by hair-testing labs, said Dr. Bryan Rogers, associate
medical director of Barnes Care Corporate Health Services here.

Rogers said he is "not at all" convinced of the accuracy of hair
testing, and he informs customers of his reservations. Nonetheless,
Barnes will collect hair samples and forward them to a lab if asked,
as it has been by one or two area employers.

"We're a business just like anybody else," he explained.

Bruce Goldberger, a toxicologist at the University of Florida,
Gainesville, has done independent research on hair tests for years.
Last summer, he testified before a congressional panel looking into
new ways of testing workers for drug abuse.

Despite years of lobbying by the hair testing labs and others, the
federal government has not approved hair analysis for federal
employees or anyone in a federally regulated industry, such as
airlines, railroads and nuclear power companies. Urinalysis, for the
most part, is the only approved drug test for this group of workers,
who make up about one-tenth of the nation's work force.

"The state of knowledge with hair analysis is still at an immature
level," Goldberger told the Post-Dispatch, echoing his testimony.

While the basic techniques used by the handful of hair testing labs in
the country are common and reliable, Goldberger said some problems
must be resolved before he can endorse hair testing in the workplace,
especially if it is to be used by itself and not in tandem with urine
testing.

Hair color bias is issue

The possibility of color bias, for example, must be further examined,
he said. While this appears to be a race issue to many, he noted that
anyone with dark hair might be more likely to be caught by the tests
than a person with light hair. A black person with light gray hair
might be less susceptible to being caught than a white person with
dark, coarse hair.

External contamination is another issue. In drug users, drug residue
is believed to be carried through the bloodstream to the hair, where
it is trapped inside the shafts. But even people who don't use drugs
sometimes have the residue on their hair because they are around drug
users. Marijuana smoke, cocaine "dust" and other residue can get into
the hair at parties, bars and other public places. While most hair
labs say they can wash away such outside contamination before testing
the inside of the hair, not everyone in the scientific community is
convinced that such thorough washing can be done or that it can be
done by all labs.

Such lack of standardization of labs is another stumbling block for
Goldberger and others. Some labs have better equipment and technology
than do others. While the federal government regularly inspects the
urinalysis labs used by the federally controlled industries, there is
nothing comparable for the hair labs.

"I think it will take a few more years for these issues to be totally
resolved," Goldberger said.

Issue raises emotions

Another Florida researcher appears to have more faith in the process.

"Hair testing is a reasonably accurate and reliable technique,
comparable to urinalysis," said Tom Mieczkowski at the University of
Southern Florida in St. Petersburg. He cautions that "urinalysis is
not 100 percent accurate, either."

In his 10 years of research, he hasn't found any evidence that color
of hair has much effect, if any, on the hair test. As for external
contamination, hair would have to be soaked in a cocaine solution for
48 hours before it would cause a problem in the test, he said.

Mieczkowski said the same sorts of arguments being used against hair
testing today were brought up 20 years ago with urine testing. And
they'll be hauled out again to challenge the coming generation of drug
tests, which will analyze saliva, fingernails and sweat.

Any form of drug testing is "so emotionally charged," he added. Yet,
he noted, little opposition arises when hair is tested for things
other than illegal drugs -- such as heavy metals, toxins and medication.

Supporters of hair testing say there are enough safeguards to prevent
false positives. A hair sample is subjected to two different lab tests
before being declared positive. Positive results are then reported to
a company's medical review officer, often a physician, who can
consider other reasons for testing positive, such as use of
prescription medicine or excessive eating of poppy seeds, which could
lead to a positive result for opiates.

There are so many safeguards in such testing programs that by the time
people are sent to drug treatment programs, fewer than 1 percent
continue to deny having used illegal drugs, Mierczkowski said.

Even the CEO was tested

At GM, "I don't know of anybody, when we've told them they test
positive, that they disagree with us," said Dr. Douglas Van Brocklin,
supervisor of the automaker's testing program throughout North America.

Mierczkowski had this advice for those innocent people who flunk drug
tests, either because of a fraudulent process, unreliable analysis or
incompetent lab: "You sue their butts off."

But that's easier said than done, said Lewis Maltby of the American
Civil Liberties Union.

"There's absolutely no law that says an employer has to use reliable
testing except in the federal testing program," he said. "You can use
a Ouija board, and it's perfectly legal."

The ACLU opposes the hair tests because it feels they are not
accurate. The group also believes that drug testing in general is
overdone by many employers.

"If someone gives an employer reason to think he's abusing drugs on
the job or coming to work on drugs, then by all means test him" --
with a urine test that's analyzed at a federally certified lab, Maltby
said.

"Our objection is to people having to prove their innocence when they
have given their employer no reason to think they've done anything
wrong," Maltby said.

Such is the case with random or blanket testing, which Anheuser-Busch
plans to do.

Scott, the union leader at A-B, asked, "How much of my life do I have
to expose to August Busch? The real issue here is having a safe
workplace, not what I do on my four weeks' vacation."

The beer company wouldn't provide someone to talk about its testing
program. But in written responses to some questions, the company said,
"The goal of these programs is to balance our respect for the
individual with the need to maintain a safe, productive and drug-free
workplace. . . . These programs are working: Pre-employment testing
has screened out users who would have otherwise been hired, and
post-employment testing has resulted in employees receiving needed
rehabilitation and, in a few cases, leaving the company when they have
been unwilling to remain drug free."

The hair tests are not just for the rank-and-file workers, but for all
employees, the company said. Even Busch has had his hair snipped and
tested, it said.

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

Hemp Backed By Ex-CIA Chief (The Washington Post says James Woolsey, the
former CIA director who is now a Washington corporate lawyer, recently got
his first lobbying client, the North American Industrial Hemp Council.
Woolsey must convince Congress and key administration officials that
reasonable precautions could build a booming domestic hemp industry.)

Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 19:50:03 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: WP: Hemp Backed By Ex-CIA Chief
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: agfuture@kih.net
Pubdate: Sun, 2 May 1999
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 1999 The Washington Post Company
Address: 1150 15th Street Northwest, Washington, DC 20071
Feedback: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/

EX-CIA CHIEF'S BACKING OF HEMP RAISES EYEBROWS AMONG OFFICIALS

WASHINGTON - James Woolsey, the former CIA director, wants to make one
thing clear: He isn't fighting for the right to get stoned.

Lately, some friends have wondered. Woolsey, now a Washington
corporate lawyer, recently got his first lobbying client, the North
American Industrial Hemp Council, a group angling to legalize hemp.

The multipurpose fiber comes from the same plant family as marijuana.
But hemp lacks enough of the psychoactive substance that gets pot
smokers high. What it has, say farmers, environmentalists and
agribusiness interests, is the potential to become a
billion-dollar-a-year crop, producing paper, clothing, lotions and
even car dashboards. Several countries have produced profitable hemp
harvests for years.

"Before I explain, I get smiles from friends," Woolsey said in a
recent interview. "This isn't about trying to legalize marijuana, though."

But Woolsey and the council, a group of about 100 agribusinesses,
farmers and scientists, are in for a battle. The White House and the
Drug Enforcement Administration are against domestic hemp farming,
arguing that hemp plants look so similar to marijuana that allowing
farmers to grow them would complicate drug-fighting efforts. And they
dismiss talk about hemp's potential as a substitute for oil, cotton
and paper as part of a campaign to bring the country closer to
decriminalizing pot.

"Only chemical analysis allows you to tell the difference between a
pot plant and hemp plant," said Bob Weiner, a spokesman for the
administration's Office of National Drug Control Policy. "You can't
tell the difference from a helicopter, and that makes it a nightmare
for eradication."

For states, the administration's opinion effectively blocks hemp
planting. Last month, North Dakota became the first state to
decriminalize hemp farming. But the measure is purely symbolic until
the DEA changes its position.

Hemp's drug rap could be hard for even Woolsey to beat. Not even Vice
President Al Gore, who fancies himself a forward-thinking
environmentalist, will endorse it. And the weed is avidly embraced by
the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, the
country's foremost pot lobby.

NORML acknowledges that anyone smoking hemp will get a headache, not a
high; in fact, the pollen from hemp reduces the potency of marijuana,
rendering it worthless to drug dealers. Nonetheless, NORML leaders are
delighted to have an establishment figure such as Woolsey in hemp's
corner.

"As Americans grow more accustomed to seeing hemp growing as an
independent crop, it's going to be a little harder for the government
to pull this 'reefer madness' approach," said Keith Stroup, NORML's
executive director.

To Woolsey, a partner at Shea & Gardner, the hemp battle is about
developing hemp oil as a substitute for petroleum, which could enhance
the country's energy security by making it less dependent on foreign
suppliers.

NORML is welcome to join his side, he said, though its presence on his
team borders on absurd: "Hemp is nature's own marijuana eradication
system."

Agriculture experts hail hemp's short growing cycle - about 120 days -
and the versatility of its fibers. Environmental groups say hemp is
good news for forests because it's a new source of paper and building
materials.

Woolsey must convince Congress and key administration officials that
reasonable precautions could build a booming domestic hemp industry.

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

To Win The War On Drugs (Washington Post syndicated columnist David S. Broder
praises coerced treatment programs for drug offenders in Arizona and
Maryland.)

Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 12:27:16 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: OPED: To Win 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: Support MAP!
Pubdate: Sun, 02 May 1999
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 1999 The Washington Post Company
Page: B07
Address: 1150 15th Street Northwest, Washington, DC 20071
Feedback: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Author: David S. Broder
Note: Broder, a Pulitzer Prize-winning political reporter, writes a
nationally syndicated column from Washington, D.C.

TO WIN THE WAR ON DRUGS

Decades after America declared "war on drugs," there are encouraging
signs that we may be getting smart about how it can be won.

For years, the focus was on blocking shipments of heroin and cocaine
into the country. The effort continues, but so does the drug traffic.

When frustration with that approach bubbled over, the next move was to
crack down on the users. "Lock 'em up and throw away the key" became
the new mantra. States went on a prison-building spree and discovered
how expensive that would be. And too many of the prisoners, when
released, went right back to stealing to sustain their habit.

During all this time, a small chorus kept saying, "When you catch
them, get them treatment and keep testing them to be sure they stay
clean." Now more states are trying it -- and finding that it works.

The most dramatic shift in policy occurred in Arizona -- and it came
as the result of a voter initiative, not something the elected
officials decided. In fact, many of the provisions of that 1996
initiative -- financed by a handful of millionaires -- remain bitterly
controversial. It decriminalized marijuana and a wide variety of hard
drugs, a step retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, the federal "drug czar,"
vehemently opposed -- and still does.

But another part of Prop. 200 required that people convicted of drug
possession for the first or second time be placed on probation and in
treatment, rather than going to jail. A report on the first year of
the program, issued late last month by the Arizona Supreme Court,
offered real encouragement.

Of the 2,622 offenders diverted from prison, more than three-quarters
(77 percent) tested drug-free at the end of their treatment programs.
The same percentage made at least one payment toward the cost of their
treatment, as the new procedure specifies.

The program appears to be substantially cheaper than putting people in
prison. The court estimates that treating and testing these people was
$2.5 million less costly than jailing them would have been.

John McDonald, the spokesman for the Supreme Court, noted that it will
be at least another year before the recidivism rate can be established
to gauge how many of these people stay clean. But he said political
support for the program -- financed chiefly by a luxury tax on liquor
-- has grown.

It long has been known that drug abuse is the major factor in swelling
our prison and jail population almost to 2 million. But few of the
prisoners get treatment. The astonishing figure cited by Maryland Lt.
Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, the coordinator of her state's
anti-crime program, is that half of the country's entire consumption
of heroin and cocaine is by people who are on probation or parole. If
that is even remotely accurate, targeting this population for
treatment could significantly reduce the demand that keeps the
international drug traffickers in business.

Maryland has begun a program aimed at getting all 25,000 of the
state's parolees and probationers into a rigorous testing regimen. The
first results on the people who began the twice-a-week tests last
autumn "are so good we're leery about them," said Adam Gelb,
Townsend's policy director. After three months, the percentage testing
positive dropped from 40 percent to just 7.4 percent -- a drop of more
than four-fifths.

Before this "Break the Cycle" program began, Gelb said, a probation
officer could order only about seven drug tests a month for a typical
caseload of 100 probationers. If someone failed, it was up to a judge
to set the punishment -- and often overworked judges just voiced a
warning to "clean up your act."

In the new system, the courts have pre-authorized an escalating set of
penalties for each failed test, climaxing in a return to jail. With
the certainty of punishment for failure and the potential of shortened
probation for staying clean, the incentives to seek treatment are
vastly greater.

Like her Arizona counterparts, Townsend does not want to claim more
than a promising start for the program. "It could provide a way out of
the paralyzing and stupid debate between treatment and incarceration,"
she said. "A combination of sanctions and treatment works best."

McCaffrey agrees. In congressional testimony last week, he said it was
time to abandon the phrase "war on drugs," because "addicted Americans
are not the enemy. They require treatment. Wars are waged with weapons
and soldiers. Prevention and treatment are the primary tools in our
fight against drugs."

And they offer hope of success.

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

Pastrana, Rebel Chief Announce Talks (According to the Associated Press,
Colombian President Andres Pastrana and FARC leader Manuel Marulanda
announced Sunday that the Pastrana administration would begin substantive
peace talks Thursday with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Without
explicitly saying so, Pastrana was, in effect, announcing that he would
continue excluding overnment forces from a region the size of Switzerland as
a concession to the FARC. Pastrana's peace efforts have put him at odds with
the U.S. Congress, who say it has hampered drug crop eradication efforts and
given the FARC the opportunity to increase its profits from the local cocaine
trade.)

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 19:20:06 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Columbia: Wire: Pastrana, Rebel Chief Announce Talks
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: EWCHIEF@aol.com
Pubdate: Sun, 02 May 1999
Source: Associated Press
Copyright: 1999 Associated Press
Author: Jared Kotler, Associated Press Writer

PASTRANA, REBEL CHIEF ANNOUNCE TALKS

BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) Colombia will begin substantive peace talks later
this week with Latin America's most powerful guerrilla group, President
Andres Pastrana and the rebel leader announced Sunday after a surprise meeting.

The peace talks with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC,
will begin Thursday, according to a joint statement read to reporters by
Foreign Minister Guillermo Fernandez de Soto.

Without explicitly saying so, Pastrana was, in effect, announcing that he
would extend a controversial withdrawal of all government forces from a
massive southern region where Pastrana met with the FARC's legendary leader,
Manuel Marulanda.

The troop withdrawal was set to expire later this week, and Pastrana had
warned he would only extend the measure if he felt that progress was being
made in preliminary discussions to define an agenda for the talks.

In the statement Sunday, both sides said they had reviewed efforts thus far
and found "concrete and significant advances."

Negotiations between the government and the 15,000-member rebel group were
formally initiated in southern Colombia in January. The rebels control a
region the size of Switzerland that has been cleared of all government
troops as a concession to the FARC.

Last week, government and rebel negotiators meeting near San Vicente del
Caguan, the largest of five towns in the demilitarized zone, announced they
were near agreement on a far-reaching agenda for talks to end Colombia's 35-
year conflict.

The two sides also announced they would form an international commission to
help verify agreements and appealed to Colombian society and the
international community to have patience during a potentially lengthy peace
process.

Pastrana's peace efforts have put him at odds with the U.S. Congress, who
say it has hampered drug crop eradication efforts and given the FARC the
opportunity to increase its profits from the local cocaine trade.

FARC commanders deny "trafficking" in cocaine, but acknowledge taxing
production and cultivation.

Senior U.S. diplomats have said Pastrana was in danger of losing credibility
if he were to continue to pull government troops out of rebel-held areas
without getting the rebels to agree to formal peace talks.

The rendezvous Sunday was the second time Pastrana has surprised the nation
since his election by meeting with the reclusive rebel chief.

Television footage released by the presidency showed the two men chatting as
they strolled side-by-side along a dirt road.

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

ACM-Bulletin of 2 May 1999 (An English-language bulletin from the Association
for Cannabis as Medicine, in Cologne, Germany, features news about the debate
in the Canadian House of Commons on medical marijuana; and the drug
commission in Switzerland that recommended legalizing cannabis.)

From: "Association for Cannabis as Medicine" (info@acmed.org)
To: acm-bulletin@acmed.org
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 00:03:18 +0200
Subject: ACM-Bulletin of 2 May 1999
Sender: info@acmed.org

***

ACM-Bulletin of 2 May 1999

***

Canada: Debate in the House of Commons on medical use of
marijuana

Switzerland: Drug commission recommends legalization of
Cannabis

***

1.

Canada: Debate in the House of Commons on medical use of marijuana

On 14 April the House of Commons debated a motion that
recommends the government to "undertake all necessary steps
concerning the possible legal use of marijuana for health and
medical purposes." MPs will vote on Motion 381, introduced by
MP Bernard Bigras (Bloc Québécois), in June.

Health Minister Allan Rock (Liberal) said on 3 March he has
ordered officials to develop clinical trials for the medical use of
marijuana. Bigras said he doubts the sincerity of Rock's
announcement. An aide to Bigras estimated that 100 MPs from
different parties support Motion 381 in the 301-member House,
consisting of the Bloc Québécois Party (42 members), two
Independents, the Liberal Party (156), the New Democratic Party
(21), the Progressive Conservative Party (19), and the Reform
Party (59).

MP Pauline Picard (Bloc Québécois): "In our view, at the present
time the government is holding hostage thousands of people who
are suffering and waiting for a sign of hope."

MP Sue Barnes (Liberal): "I have pushed this matter very hard
inside my government. (...) I, with others, understand that even
now there will not be overnight change; but let us not
underestimate the progress made."

MP Libby Davies (New Democratic): "In some ways this
institution of the House of Commons is sort of far behind public
opinion, even where the medical community is. (...) We must
make it very clear that we do not want to wait another two or
three years for trials to be conducted."

MP Diane St-Jacques (Progressive Conservative): "I think it is
totally unacceptable that someone who is chronically ill or in the
final stages of AIDS is being penalized for medical treatment that
many doctors would recommend if they could."

(Source: Speeches before the Canadian House of Commons on
14 April 1999, Calgary Herald of 4 March 1999, NORML of 22
April 1999)


2.

Switzerland: Drug commission recommends legalisation of
Cannabis

The 'Eidgenössische Kommission fuer Drogenfragen' (EKDF,
Confederate Commission for Drug Issues) proposed an extensive
liberalisation of the Cannabis laws. The first of two models
provides impunity of procurement for personal use, the second
legalisation with licensed trade.

"Cannabis is a drug and the commission isn't intending to trivialise
it or say that its consumption is without risk (...) but consumption
is rising, especially among young people," panel member Anne-
Catherine Menetrey said. In the summary of the Cannabis Report,
presented on 23 April, it is said: "Different circumstances caused
the commission to reach the conclusion that a reappraisal of the
state of Cannabis is necessary - as much with regard to its
recreational role as to a possible medical use."

The medical aspect is only superficially covered in the report:
"Based upon international medical scientific literature the
establishment of a legal basis for controlled research studies in the
area of the therapeutic use of Cannabis in Switzerland is
recommended." Cannabis had become a stimulant, used by "a
significant part of the population without a sense of injustice." The
present drug policy suffered from a "growing loss of credibility."

In the first model the commission recommends "impunity of
Cannabis use and of the actions of procurement for personal use",
as well as an opportunity regulation, that allows the police "to
disregard the persecution of retail trade, including on a
commercial level, under clearly defined prevailing conditions."

In the second proposal "the elaboration of a model with licensed
trade (...) is proposed. Such a model would enable legal access to
Cannabis, not in the sense of free trade, but with clear
regulations." "From a professional point of view" the commission
favours the second model, "because it creates clear and
enforceable prevailing conditions for the handling of Cannabis."
This model would, however, "not be conformable to the
international conventions."

The 'Eidgenössische Kommission fuer Drogenfragen' is a
commission elected by the Upper House of Parliament. Its
members are experts from different areas, who are professionally
confronted with partial aspects of the drug problem. The
committee's recommendations to the Cabinet are part of an
ongoing study to revise Switzerland's drug laws. Government
ministers already said that the legalisation plan was a health risk.

(Sources: Summary of the Cannabis Report of the EKDF for the
media seminar of 23 April 1999, AP of 23. April 1999,
Tagesanzeiger of 24 April 1999, Basler Zeitung of 24 April 1999)

3.

News in brief

***

USA:

Guidelines take effect next week allowing the state health
department of Oregon to register and license medical marijuana
patients. Oregon will become the first state to issue ID cards to
patients who will be allowed to possess marijuana. On 3
November 1998 voters in Oregon and four other states had
approved ballot initiatives exempting patients from criminal
penalties when they use marijuana under the supervision of a
physician.

(Source: NORML of 29 April 1999)

***

USA/Canada:

The fight to keep a 29-year-old Californian woman from being
deported to the U.S. to face marijuana-related charges began on
19 April in British Columbia Supreme Court in Vancouver. Renee
Boje, an advocate of medicinal marijuana, was caught up in Los
Angeles in 1997. The U.S. government requests extradition to
California, where Boje would face a minimum 10 years in jail if
convicted.

(Source: Vancouver Province of 20 April 1999)

***

Science:

People who smoke marijuana every day become more aggressive
when they quit. Writing in the journal Psychopharmacology Dr.
Elena Kouri and colleagues at Harvard University said they had
shown objectively that when people stop smoking marijuana there
is a clear withdrawal syndrome. "This syndrome, although less
dramatic than the withdrawal syndrome associated with alcohol,
opiate or cocaine withdrawal, may contribute to relapse among
those dependent on marijuana," Dr. Alan Leshner, head of the
National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), which funded the
study, said.

(Source: Reuters of 20 April 1999)

***

Australia:

One of Australia's top prosecutors would rather see marijuana
sold in corner shops than by criminals on the streets. Speaking at
the Australasian Conference on Drugs Strategy, South Australian
Director of Public Prosecutions Paul Rofe said on 28 April people
should consider government-controlled supply and distribution of
drugs such as marijuana and heroin, as current attempts to combat
the drugs crisis did not work. Prime Minister John Howard
criticized Mr Rofe the day after, saying the comments were
unhelpful.

(Source: AAP of 28 and 29 April 1999)

***

Great Britain:

The Government is wasting "vast amounts of money" prosecuting
people for smoking Cannabis, a Labour MP said on 28 April. Dr
Brian Iddon said as well, it was "scandalous" that sick people
were not allowed to use it to relieve pain. Dr Iddon is chairman of
the House of Commons Drugs Misuse Group. He is supporting a
march this weekend organized by campaigners to legalize
Cannabis as part of an international "May Day is Jay (joint) Day"
event.

(Source: PA News of 28 April 1999)


4.

THE COMMENT

... to the plans of the Canadian Minister of Health to conduct
clinical trials with Cannabis:

"It is a useful and good thing to have these clinical trials go ahead
as there are things that we need to learn. However, we have
enough information now to ask the minister to go ahead with the
exemption so that people can get relief, help and support now without
having to become criminals. (...) The Minister of Health should be
approving applications today for exemptions so that Canadians do not
suffer any longer. (...) That is a shame. It is something that does
not need to exist if we had the political will and the leadership."

MP Libby Davies (Vancouver East, New Democratic Party), Speech before the
House of Commons on 14 April 1999

Association for Cannabis as Medicine (ACM)
Maybachstrasse 14
D-50670 Cologne
Germany
Phone: +49-221-912 30 33
Fax: +49-221-130 05 91
Email: info@acmed.org
Internet: http://www.acmed.org

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

[End]