-------------------------------------------------------------------
DEA - Sufficient Grounds Exist To Remove Marijuana From Schedules I And II
(Press Release Update On Yesterday's News,
With More Commentary By Jon Gettman)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 18:21:29 EST
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: Gettman_J@mediasoft.net
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Jon Gettman
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: DEA: Sufficient Grounds Exist to Remove Marijuana from Schedules I
and II
Press Release from Riptide Communications.
Contact David Lerner / Kathy Engel Tel. 212 260-5000
Embargoed for Release Until January 14th, 1998
Report: Drug Enforcement Agency Says Grounds Exist for Removal of Marijuana
From List of hard Drugs
DEA Asked Department of Health and Human Services to Reevaluate Latest
Scientific/Medical Evidence In Response to Activist's Petition
Advocates See Process As Likely To Lead To End of Marijuana Prohibition
January 14th, 1998. - In a remarkable reversal of their prior position on
December 19th, 1997 officials with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
quietly requested the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to
conduct a legally binding "scientific and medical evaluation of the
available data" to determine whether marijuana and its active ingredients
should be removed from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
In initiating this process the DEA has for the first time made a
determination that sufficient grounds exist to reclassify marijuana.
Schedule I of the CSA is limited to hard drugs with addictive propensities
and with no legitimate medical usage
The DEA action came in response to an Administrative Petition filed on July
10, 1995, by petitioners Jon Gettman, a former president of the National
Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), and Trans High
Corporation, publisher of High Times Magazine The petitioners argued that
there is abundant evidence that marijuana and other cannabinoids lack the
"high potential for abuse" required for Schedule I and II drugs under the
CSA. According to Gettman removal of marijuana from Schedule I would
require the federal government to sanction legal distribution of marijuana
for medical uses, research and prescriptions and adopt a regulatory rather
than a prohibitory model for marijuana.
As recently as March, 1995 DEA refused to consider reevaluating the status
of marijuana claiming that they were "unaware of any new scientific studies"
that might change their mind. Gettman and High times then provided the
agency with voluminous and specific documentation which led the DEA to
reverse itself. Never before has the DEA voluntarily referred a marijuana
scheduling petition to HHS for binding review.
This new scrutiny of marijuana comes at a time when the federal government
is using its authority to override state laws and brings suits to close
cannabis buyer's club's in San Francisco. Says Gettman: "In light of the
DEA's realization that sufficient grounds may exist to reclassify marijuana
the government should halt its efforts to violate the will of the people of
California."
***
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 04:10:48 EST
From: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: DEA documentation of petition significance
WOW! Congratulations, Jon! What a tremendously encouraging development - I
hope you have celebrated this critical milestone in some appropriate
fashion. You deserve it. You also showed class by crediting the
researchers in your press statement.
I certainly hope to read this story in tomorrow's papers, hopefully on page
1 where it belongs, as well as on the TV and radio news, etc. Anything we
can do to encourage major media coverage -- perhaps MAP should get involved?
Some questions:
1. In the posted material we sometimes read "Schedule 1" and sometimes
"Schedules 1 and 2". Can DHHS decide to put it in schedule 2?
2. Did Thomas Constantine sign the letter, and is he therefore basically
acknowledging, on behalf of the agency and himself, that marijuana has
minimal addictive potential and substantial medical use? If he didn't sign
the letter, why not and who did? When are we going to get to see a copy of
this letter and any attachments?
3. How can the DEA say what they're now saying while maintaining a website
filled with the usual prohibitionist lies? (This is perhaps a rhetorical
question.)
4. How long is the DHHS process likely to take? In your estimation, is it
likely to be hopelessly politicized? Can you appeal an unfavorable opinion?
5. Is either the DEA or DHHS going to announce this development publicly, do
you know?
Thanks -- and again, congratulations!
David
***
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 14:57:29 EST
Reply-To: Gettman_J@mediasoft.net
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Jon Gettman (Gettman_J@mediasoft.net)
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: RE: DEA documentation of petition significance
David Hadorn posed some interesting questions.
Some questions:
1. In the posted material we sometimes read "Schedule 1" and sometimes
"Schedules 1 and 2". Can DHHS decide to put it in schedule 2?
[Jon Gettman]
The petition argues that these substances do not have the abuse potential
that warrants schedule I or schedule II controls. If marijuana does not have
the abuse potential for schedule I prohibition, that it does not have the
abuse potential for schedule II status either. DHHS could rule that
marijuana had sufficient abuse potential for schedule I or II, and recommend
schedule II status based on accepted medical use. The point of the petition,
though, is an evaluation of the abuse potential first, and then an
evaluation of where to schedule the drugs based on that evaluation.
2. Did Thomas Constantine sign the letter, and is he therefore basically
acknowledging, on behalf of the agency and himself, that marijuana has
minimal addictive potential and substantial medical use? If he didn't sign
the letter, why not and who did? When are we going to get to see a copy of
this letter and any attachments?
[Jon Gettman]
Here is a reposting of links to some of the letters. The 12/19/97 letter
should be on-line over the weekend. High Times is working on it now as we
speak. The links below are courtesy of NORML - which has had these documents
posted for some time. The 12/19/97 letter merely reports the referral for a
binding scientific and medical examination. The meaning of this referral is
provided by the letters cited immediately below. The 12/19/97 was not signed
by Constantine, however I do have two letters over his signature. The
12/19/97 letter is signed by Mary Kay Whalen, a DEA attorney in the office
of chief counsel.
Here is important source material that defines the significance of the
petition referral in DEA's own words. The three letters from DEA are
valuable documentation that the HHS referral of the petition means that
"sufficient grounds" exist for the removal of marijuana from schedules I and II.
March 1, 1995
Thomas Constantine (DEA) to Rep. Frank Wolf
http://www.norml.org/research/coors/fwtc395.shtml
In this March 1, 1995 letter DEA argues that "accepted medical use" is the
only issue that matters under the CSA, and that a reconsideration of
marijuana's abuse potential may be interesting but of no legal consequence.
March 14, 1995
Jon Gettman to Sen. John Warner
http://www.norml.org/research/coors/jwjg0314.shtml
In this March 14, 1995 letter I ask my U.S. Senator to remind DEA that the
argument they advanced in their letter of March 1, 1995 was explicitly
rejected by the US Court of Appeals in 1977.
April 21, 1995
Thomas Constantine (DEA) to Sen. John Warner
http://www.norml.org/research/coors/jwtc495.shtml
In this April 21, 1995 letter DEA changes their argument. They monitor
scientific research, and know of no findings that would provide grounds for
a review of marijuana's schedule I status. However I was invited to submit
such information if I could provide documentation.
July 27, 1995
Stephen Greene (DEA) to Jon Gettman
http://www.norml.org/research/coors/jgsg795.shtml
In this July 27, 1995 letter DEA acknowledges receipt of the petition and
explains that a referral to HHS means that "sufficient grounds" exist for
removal. If sufficient grounds do not exist, they will deny the petition.
The December 19, 1997 letter notifying my attorneys of the refer all to HHS
is not yet available on-line. However the significance of the referral is
established in the letters above from DEA.
Accepted medical use is not the only issue - established by the change in
Constantine's reply from 3/1/95 to 4/21/95.
DEA was not aware of all the relevant scientific research in early 1995 -
established by the referral to HHS 12/19/97 based on 1988 - 1994 research,
reconciled with DEA statements in the 4/21/95 letter.
"Sufficient grounds" exist for the removal of all cannabinoids from
schedules I and II - defined by the DEA's letter of 6/27/95 and established
by their referral of the petition to HHS after a 29 month review.
3. How can the DEA say what they're now saying while maintaining a Web site
filled with the usual prohibitionist lies? (This is perhaps a rhetorical
question.)
[Jon Gettman]
This is an important development, but let's not over-interpret it. Before
the petition was approved, DEA argued that "accepted medical use" was the
only argument that could affect marijuana's schedule I status. Now DEA has
acknowledged that a new argument, insufficient abuse potential, provides
"sufficient grounds" to review and perhaps alter that status, and also
preclude schedule II status. If you read the letters closesly, you'll see
that DEA once said there wasn't any other relevant science. Now they've
acknowledged there is more to the story. So as far as any anti-marijuana
arguments from DEA - well, there is more to the story, and we should follow
DEA's lead and re-evaluate common assumptions about marijuana.
4. How long is the DHHS process likely to take? In your estimation, is it
likely to be hopelessly politicized? Can you appeal an unfavorable opinion?
[Jon Gettman]
High Times and I can appeal the HHS decision. DEA can not. It will take
awhile, I expect over a year. I trust in the integrity of the scientific
process and the scientific community. It will be very difficult to
politicize this process. One of my central objectives was to give this to
scientists to evaluate according to non-political, objective scientific
standards.
5. Is either the DEA or DHHS going to announce this development publicly, do
you know?
[Jon Gettman]
They are trying to spin this as a routine bureaucratic development of little
of no consequence. They are at this point only responding to press
inquiries, which began yesterday. CNN ran this last night for quite awhile
on Headline News. It won't go away.
Thanks -- and again, congratulations!
[Jon Gettman]
Thank you. Read the DEA letters. Put them to work.
Jon Gettman
***
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 16:08:40 EST
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Jon Gettman (Gettman_J@mediasoft.net)
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Hedonism and marijuana laws
At 01:46 PM 2/21/98 EST, Robert.Goodman wrote:
>Jon Gettman wrote, in part, again:
>
>> Intent is a major aspect of a criminal offense. Marijuana laws
>> are based on the premise that all intent to use marijuana is
>> hedonistic....
>
>And I'll reply, again, that there is no such basis for the
>marijuana laws. There's never been a legislative statement that
>marijuana use is at all pleasurable.
Gosh, there are several hairs to split here but I really don't care to get
into those issues at this time. However Robert's critical faculties
warrant, at least, a modest explanation of my comment. The comment above
was offered as an opinion, but indeed it was an informed opinion.
First of all, the legal regulation of marijuana today is not based on
legislative action, but on administrative law proceedings. Existing
schedule I statius of marijuana is based on DEA rule-making. The
justification for rejecting the recommendations of Judge Francis Young was
that anecdotal evidence of therapeutic use had no scientific validity, in
part because patients were just trying to justify their dependence on
marijuana.
"Why do scientists consider stories from patients and their doctors to be
unreliable? First, sick people are not objective scientific observers,
especially when it comes to their own health. We have all heard of the
placebo effect. . . Second, most of the stories come from people who took
marijuana at the same time they took prescription drugs for their symptoms
. . Third, any mind-altering drug that produces euphoria can make a sick
person think he feels better. . . Fourth, long-time abusers of marijuana
are not immune to illness. Many eventually get cancer, glaucoma, MS and
other diseases. People who become dependent on mind-altering drugs tend to
rationalize their behavior. They invent excuses, which they can come to
believe, to justify their drug dependence." 57 Fed. Reg. 10,499 (1992)
The relevant administrative proceedings are, indeed, based on legislative
action. When turning to the legislative history of the CSA, while it is
clear that abuse potential is the basis for control, thrill-seeking is
noted to be a primary basis for the perceived drug abuse problem. For
example:
"Some persons . . .[are] extremely prone to the use of drugs, and are
likely to use a wide variety of them, in search of a psychic state
different from their normal state because of their inherent dissatisfaction
with themselves." U.S. Code Cong. & Admin. News 1970, p. 4573. (1970)
"Some use drugs to seek relief from the tedium of their jobs and their
lives. Some . . .to escape the fear of failure, or the knowledge that they
have not fulfilled their potential. Some become hooked accidentally . . .
after undergoing medical treatment . . .to relieve pain. A larger number
take to certain drugs to offset fatigue . . . A very much larger group try
psychotoxic drugs for kicks, out of curiosity or bravado. They are usually
juveniles who frequently find themselves unable to shake off the drug
habit." U.S. Code Cong. & Admin. News 1970, p. 4573. (1970)
Seeking a different psychic state, relief from tedium, and/or the pursuit
of "kicks" are all ways of describing something also referred to as
'getting high'; I include all of them as attempts to characterize using
marijuana as a pleasure seeking exercise. I remember a time when tobacco
was not recognized as containing an addictive drug. I was always amazed
when legal tobacco and illegal marijuana were justified because people use
marijuana to get high but that the use of tobacco is merely for relaxation.
One was hedonistic, the other . . . relaxing.
For a lot of people any non-medical use of drugs is improper and
constitutes drug abuse. Marijuana is illegal because, supposedly, all use
is non-medical. I maintain that most members of both the public and the
criminal justice system incorrectly believe that a) all people use
marijuana for pleasure, b) marijuana is illegal because the harmful
effects of marijuana exact too great a price for those pleasurable effects,
and c) that stories of marijuana's medical benefits are just excuses to
rationalize pleasure-seeking marijuana use.
And then we have the extensive record of Gabriel Nahas, M.D., Ph.D. who is
quite influential among opponents of marijuana law reform. In a 1985 paper
published by PRIDE "A Drug Policy for Our Times - 1985) Nahas and
co-authors Thomas Gleaton, Otto Moulton, Keith Schuchard, and Henry Clay
Frick II present the popular justification for drug prohibition under a
section entitled "The Lessons of Science."
"What does science tell us about dependence producing drugs? . . . First,
these drugs produce a pleasurable feeling, a "reward" because of their
action on the pleasure center of the brain. As a result, a person who has
consumed one of these dependence producing drugs will have a tendency to
take it again in order to obtain the initial pleasurable sensation. . .
while consumption of addictive drugs provide a pleasurable feeling,
abstinence from these drugs results in unpleasant and painful reactions --
the withdrawal symptoms. Therefore a drug dependent person is caught
between the urge to take a drug for pleasure and the desire to avoid the
unpleasantness and difficulties that occur when no longer under its
influence. . .the combined factors of pleasure and reward . . . lead to . .
compulsive, frequent, daily self-administration."
The foundation of my petition is that this last comment can not be
supported in the case of marijuana, which lacks sufficient abuse potential
for schedule I or schedule II status.
Finally, the legislative basis for the Controlled Substances Act cedes
great influence over the definition of abuse potential to contemporary
scientific standards. Some of the best articles reporting on modern
research on drug dependency are reviewed in an article by George Koob in
Neuron that explicitly invokes the hedonism focus. Koob, G. "Drug
Addiction: The Yin and Yang of Hedonic Homeostasis" Neuron. Vol 16.
893-896. May, 1996.
The legal issue is not whether or not people use marijuana for pleasure,
although many people support current laws because they want to oppose
pleasure-seeking drug use. The legal issue really is whether or not there
is sufficient harm from marijuana use to justify its complete prohibition.
One can argue that pleasurable effects are no basis for marijuana
prohibition under federal law, and I would agree. However the law does
assume that pleasure-seeking is the basis for non-medical drug use, and as
such the law assumes that hedonism is part of the intent, the guilty mind,
that is a critical component of a criminal act. My original argument was
and remains that therapeutic use of marijuana demonstrates intentions
contrary to those recognized by the public as deserving of criminal
sanctions. This discussion of hedonism is interesting in its own right,
but I don't think it affects the original argument one way of the other.
In a very formalistic sense, the drug laws do not criminalize drug-taking,
only possession, sale, and manufacture. The Supreme Court ruled in 1962
(Robinson v. California) that it was cruel and inhuman to make addiction or
any other disease subject to criminal sanctions. However, no matter what
the basis for the construction of the drug laws, the laws are a tool of
social policy that seeks to use criminal sanctions to constrain hedonistic
activity; the threat to the public health is used to justify this use of
criminal sanctions.
>There's never been a legislative statement that
>marijuana use is at all pleasurable.
There is room for a lot of opinions on this matter. Actually, I think I
may have totally misconstrued Robert's comment. Perhaps he was referring
to statements by legislators as to whether or not their individual
marijuana use was pleasurable. Didn't Newt Gingrich say he tried it at a
party in New Orleans, but didn't particularly enjoy it and never tried it
again? Come to think of it, I can't recall any statements by legislators
that marijuana use is pleasurable. Does anyone know of any?
Jon Gettman
-------------------------------------------------------------------
How To Lobby Online In Support Of SB 6271, Washington State's
Medical Marijuana Bill (Including A List Of Legislators' E-mail Addresses)
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 16:21:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Robert Lunday (robert@hemp.net)
To: wa-hemp-all@hemp.net
Subject: SB 6271 Online/Medical Marijuana Lobby Tips
Sender: owner-wa-hemp-all@hemp.net
Senate Bill 6271 is now available online in HTML format at:
http://www.hemp.net/news/SB6271.html
This version summarizes the changes to the RCW, greatly reducing it's
length, yet providing links to the complete text should you desire to see
it. The official version can be found at:
http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/senate/6250-6274/6271_011398
I've included Section 1 here which very eloquently lays out the intent of
the legislation.
Here are some excellent words of advice from Senator Jeanne Kohl:
"It's very important that people who send e-mails or contact
legislators in any form do so respectfully and not threaten people with
not voting for them, etc. That really turns off legislators. The best
thing would be to bring up medical needs, about a relative or friend who's
suffered and found help, etc. Nothing about overall drug legalization.
It would be especially helpful to have people write in who opposed the
initiative or were uncomfortable with it who would now like to see the
legislature do something very focused, narrow, regulated, etc."
Remember it is truthful information and compassion that will win the day.
Sincerely,
Robert Lunday
***
For the complete text of this bill visit:
http://www.hemp.net/news/SB6271.html
SB 6271
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. The legislature finds that some studies have
shown that some seriously ill patients, under their physicians' care, may
benefit from the use of marijuana, to relieve symptoms and suffering.
Some of the conditions for which marijuana appears to be beneficial
include chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting in cancer patients, AIDS
wasting syndrome, glaucoma, muscle spasms associated with epilepsy and
multiple sclerosis, and some forms of intractable pain.
The legislature finds that humanitarian compassion necessitates that
the decision to authorize marijuana for use by seriously ill patients is a
personal, individual decision, based upon the physician's professional
medical judgment and discretion, and founded in the privileged
physician-patient relationship. The legislature finds that the advice
given by a physician to his or her patient is constitutionally protected
free speech, and as such is entitled to the protection of the first
amendment of the bill of rights, and the Constitution of the state of
Washington. The legislature further finds that, in an era when some
seriously ill or terminal patients are driven to thoughts of suicide,
refusal to allow physicians to authorize the use of medical marijuana to
relieve intractable pain and suffering is unconscionable.
The legislature further finds that, although the policy of the
federal government is to oppose the use of medical marijuana, Washington
state public policy, in the interests of compassion, free speech, and
advancement in the treatment of the terminally ill necessitates the
legalization of limited, physician-supervised medical marijuana. Some
medical researchers believe that increased clinical experience may provide
valuable data not yet available in limited scientific studies. The
legislature finds that the medical utility of marijuana is worth studying,
and encourages public and private research organizations and physicians to
research such use, including efficacy, and availability of pharmaceutical
quality marijuana.
The legislature intends that seriously ill patients, who, in the
judgment of their physicians would benefit from the use of medical
marijuana, be exempt from liability and criminal prosecution for limited,
personal possession and use of marijuana. The legislature intends that
physicians also be immune from liability and prosecution for the
authorization of marijuana use to patients for whom, in the individual
physician's professional judgment, medical marijuana may prove beneficial.
The legislature intends to strictly limit the legalization of
marijuana to medical use, upon authorization of a physician. The
legislature does not condone the nonmedical, recreational use of marijuana
under any circumstances.
***
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 12:19:02 EST
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: "Clifford Schaffer" (schaffer@smartlink.net)
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Washington State Senate e-mail addresses
As of January 14, 1998, this is the current list of e-mail addresses for the
Washington State Senate.
bauer_al@leg.wa.gov
benton_do@leg.wa.gov
brown_li@leg.wa.gov
deccio_al@leg.wa.gov
fairley_da@leg.wa.gov
finkbein_bi@leg.wa.gov
franklin_ro@leg.wa.gov
fraser_ka@leg.wa.gov
goings_ca@leg.wa.gov
hale_pa@leg.wa.gov
haugen_ma@leg.wa.gov
heavey_mi@leg.wa.gov
hochstat_ha@leg.wa.gov
horn_ji@leg.wa.gov
johnson_st@leg.wa.gov
kline_ad@leg.wa.gov
kohl_je@leg.wa.gov
long_je@leg.wa.gov
mcauliff_ro@leg.wa.gov
mcdonald_da@leg.wa.gov
senate_26@leg.wa.gov
patterso_ju@leg.wa.gov
prentice_ma@leg.wa.gov
prince_eu@leg.wa.gov
rasmusse_ma@leg.wa.gov
senrasmussen@msn.com
roach_pa@leg.wa.gov
rossi_di@leg.wa.gov
sellar_ge@leg.wa.gov
sheldon_be@leg.wa.gov
sheldon_ti@leg.wa.gov
spanel_ha@leg.wa.gov
strannig_ga@leg.wa.gov
stevens_va@leg.wa.gov
swecker_da@leg.wa.gov
thibaude_pa@leg.wa.gov
west_ja@leg.wa.gov
winsley_sh@leg.wa.gov
wojahn_lo@leg.wa.gov
wood_je@leg.wa.gov
zarelli_jo@leg.wa.gov
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 20:05:56 EST
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: "Clifford Schaffer" (schaffer@smartlink.net)
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: Washington State Senate e-mail addresses
-----Original Message-----
>
>Cliff,
>
>Thank you for the post with Senators e-mail addresses.
>
>It would appear that the Senate is not going to be a problem. Sen. Kohl
>and Sen. Deccio are the ranking members of the Health Care Committee and
>they have jointly sponsored the bill for medical mj.
>
>The House is a different story, we do not have a current sponsor in the
>house.
>
>Do not let this discourage you from contacting senators, but know the
>focus that we need today.
OK, then, here is the House. Enjoy.
Gary Alexander 20 alexande_ga@leg.wa.gov
David H. Anderson 10 anderson_da@leg.wa.gov
Marlin Appelwick 46 appelwic_ma@leg.wa.gov
Bill Backlund 45 backlund_bi@leg.wa.gov
Ida Ballasiotes 41 ballasio_id@leg.wa.gov
Brad Benson 6 benson_br@leg.wa.gov
Rod Blalock 33 blalock_ro@leg.wa.gov
Marc Boldt 17 boldt_ma@leg.wa.gov
Roger Bush 2 bush_ro@leg.wa.gov
Patty Butler 32 butler_pa@leg.wa.gov
Jack Cairnes 47 cairnes_ja@leg.wa.gov
Don Carlson 49 carlson_do@leg.wa.gov
Mike Carrell 28 carrell_mi@leg.wa.gov
Gary Chandler 13 chandler_ga@leg.wa.gov
Frank Chopp 43 chopp_fr@leg.wa.gov
Grace Cole 32 cole_gr@leg.wa.gov
Dow Constantine 34 constant_do@leg.wa.gov
Steve Conway 29 conway_st@leg.wa.gov
Suzette Cooke 47 cooke_su@leg.wa.gov
Mike Cooper 21 cooper_mi@leg.wa.gov
Jeralita "Jeri" Costa 38 costa_je@leg.wa.gov
Larry Crouse 4 crouse_la@leg.wa.gov
Richard DeBolt 20 debolt_ri@leg.wa.gov
Jerome Delvin 8 delvin_je@leg.wa.gov
Mary Lou Dickerson 36 dickerso_ma@leg.wa.gov
Jim Dunn 17 dunn_ji@leg.wa.gov
Hans Dunshee 39 dunshee_ha@leg.wa.gov
Philip E. Dyer 5 dyer_ph@leg.wa.gov
Ruth Fisher 27 fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov
Georgia Gardner 42 gardner_ge@leg.wa.gov
Jeff Gombosky 3 gombosky_je@leg.wa.gov
William A. Grant 16 grant_wi@leg.wa.gov
Brian Hatfield 19 hatfield_br@leg.wa.gov
Timothy T. Hickel 30 hickel_ti@leg.wa.gov
Jim Honeyford 15 honeyfor_ji@leg.wa.gov
Tom Huff 26 huff_to@leg.wa.gov
Peggy Johnson 35 johnson_pe@leg.wa.gov
Jim Kastama 25 kastama_ja@leg.wa.gov
Karen Keiser 33 keiser_ka@leg.wa.gov
Phyllis Kenney 46 kenney_ph@leg.wa.gov
Lynn Kessler 24 kessler_ly@leg.wa.gov
John Koster 39 koster_jo@leg.wa.gov
Eileen L. Cody 11 cody_ei@leg.wa.gov
Kathy Lambert 45 lambert_ka@leg.wa.gov
Patricia Lantz 26 lantz_pa@leg.wa.gov
Kelli Linville 42 linville_ke@leg.wa.gov
Dave Mastin 16 mastin_da@leg.wa.gov
Joyce McDonald 25 mcdonald_jo@leg.wa.gov
Cathy McMorris 7 mcmorris_ca@leg.wa.gov
Thomas Mielke 18 mielke_th@leg.wa.gov
Maryann Mitchell 30 mitchell_ma@leg.wa.gov
Jeff Morris 40 morris_je@leg.wa.gov
Joyce Mulliken 13 mulliken_jo@leg.wa.gov
Edward B. Murray 43 murray_ed@leg.wa.gov
Al O'Brien 1 obrien_al@leg.wa.gov
Val Ogden 49 ogden_va@leg.wa.gov
Linda Evans Parlette 12 parlette_li@leg.wa.gov
John Pennington 18 penningt_jo@leg.wa.gov
Erik Poulsen 34 poulsen_er@leg.wa.gov
Dave Quall 40 quall_da@leg.wa.gov
Renee Radcliff 48 radcliff_re@leg.wa.gov
Debbie Regala 27 regala_de@leg.wa.gov
Eric Robertson 31 robertso_er@leg.wa.gov
Sandra Singery Romero 22 romero_sa@leg.wa.gov
Dave Schmidt 44 schmidt_da@leg.wa.gov
Karen Schmidt 23 schmidt_ka@leg.wa.gov
Mark G. Schoesler 9 schoesle_ma@leg.wa.gov
Pat Scott 38 scott_pa@leg.wa.gov
Barry Sehlin 10 sehlin_ba@leg.wa.gov
Larry Sheahan 9 sheahan_la@leg.wa.gov
Tim Sheldon 35 sheldon_ti@leg.wa.gov
Mike Sherstad 1 sherstad_mi@leg.wa.gov
Mary Skinner 14 skinner_ma@leg.wa.gov
Scott Smith 2 smith_sc@leg.wa.gov
Duane Sommers 6 sommers_du@leg.wa.gov
Helen Sommers 36 sommers_he@leg.wa.gov
Mark Sterk 4 sterk_ma@leg.wa.gov
Brian Sullivan 29 sullivan_br@leg.wa.gov
Bob Sump 7 sump_bo@leg.wa.gov
Gigi Talcott 28 talcott_gi@leg.wa.gov
Les Thomas 31 thomas_le@leg.wa.gov
Brian Thomas 5 thomas_br@leg.wa.gov
Bill Thompson 44 thompson_bi@leg.wa.gov
Kip Tokuda 37 tokuda_ki@leg.wa.gov
Steve Van Luven 48 vanluven_st@leg.wa.gov
Mike Wensman 41 wensman_mi@leg.wa.gov
Cathy Wolfe 22 wolfe_ca@leg.wa.gov
Alex Wood 3 wood_al@leg.wa.gov
Paul Zellinsky 23 zellinsk_pa@leg.wa.gov
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DrugSense Weekly, Number 29 (Summary Of Drug Policy News For Activists)
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:13:30 -0800
To: mgreer@mapinc.org
From: Mark Greer
Subject: DrugSense Weekly January 14, 1998 #029
DRUGSENSE WEEKLY
DrugSense Weekly January 14, 1998 #029
A DrugSense publication
http://www.drugsense.org
***
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
* Feature Articles
War on Patients to Escalate: Federal Government Announces Plan to Raid
Cannabis Buyers' Clubs, by the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP@MPP.ORG)
and
These People Made a Difference: A Eulogy, by Chuck Thomas
* Weekly News In Review
Domestic News -
Adolescents
Washington a Test Market for Anti-Drug Ads
Cannabis Clubs
Marijuana Clubs Vow to Continue Operations
Government Moves To Close Marijuana Clubs
U.S. Launches Drive To Close Marijuana Clubs
Federal Drug Laws, State Initiative Are At Odds
U.S. Acts To Close Pot Clubs
U.S. Attorney Files Suits To Close Cannabis Clubs
Heroin
Another Look At Methadone Maintenance
Hemp News
Farmers To Debate Hemp
California Petition Drive Begins to Make Hemp Use Legal
Medical Marijuana
Help Sought For Medical Pot Users
Galbraith Asks Judges OK Pot as "Natural Remedy"
The Drug War
Drug Testing Of Workers Keeps Rising
FBI Completes Probe Of Fatal Shooting Of Border Teen By Marine
Clinton Will Require States To Cut Drug Use In Prisons
There's No Justice In The War On Drugs
Study Links Drugs To 80% Of Incarcerations
International News -
Needle-exchange Programmes in the USA: Time To Act Now
Hot Off The 'Net
Peter Gorman on the Art Bell Show
Former NORML Head Launches On-Line Magazine
Second Conference on Pain Management and Chemical Dependency
***
FEATURE ARTICLE
War on Patients to Escalate: Federal Government Announces Plan to Raid
Cannabis Buyers' Clubs
by the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP@MPP.ORG)
On January 9, The U.S. Department of Justice filed civil suits to shut
down six of the not-for-profit medicinal marijuana dispensaries, known
as Cannabis Buyers' Clubs (CBCs), throughout Northern California. CBC
workers who refuse to comply will be arrested. One of these workers
specifically named in the federal suit is an AIDS patient, Barbara
Sweeney.
The Clinton administration is subverting the will of California voters
by these suits against the courageous caregivers who help seriously ill
patients obtain medicinal marijuana. Ironically, CBCs would not even be
needed if the federal government would allow licensed pharmacies to
distribute medicinal marijuana.
Proposition 215, passed by California voters in November 1996, calls on
the "federal and state governments to implement a plan to provide for
the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in
medical need." While state and federal prosecutors have been working to
subvert Proposition 215, numerous city and county governments throughout
California have established regulations to allow tightly controlled CBCs
to operate.
Local governments have passed laws or entered into agreements which
allow CBCs to give patients a safe, affordable supply of marijuana. CBCs
undercut organized crime - patients no longer need to buy their medicine
from drug dealers on street corners. How dare the cruel, power-hungry
federal government interfere with local laws that work? This
'Washington-knows-best' attitude results in drug policies that do
nothing but harm.
When the government starts raiding CBCs, the Marijuana Policy Project
hopes that the media will resist the urge to focus on the one or two
flamboyant CBCs. The public should know that the vast majority are
professional, well-regulated, and tightly controlled.
***
These People Made a Difference: A Eulogy by Chuck Thomas
Two of the medicinal marijuana patients and activists who passed away in
1997 that I had the pleasure of working with were Lucie Bergmann Shuster
and Andrew Hasenfeld, Ph.D. Despite their suffering, both testified
before a National Institutes of Health (NIH) medicinal marijuana panel
last February. This influential government panel made strong statements
supporting marijuana's medical value, including, "We know that for some
people, it makes a difference."
Many of the NIH panelists would not have fully understood this fact - or
had the courage to publicly state it - if not for the heartfelt
testimony of Lucie, Andrew and several other patients who testified. The
NIH panel's supportive statements will be cited by medicinal marijuana
advocates for years to come, arguing that if marijuana "makes a
difference," then patients should not be arrested for using it. It's
only a matter of time before the laws are changed and marijuana is made
legally available to seriously ill people. Lucie and Andrew truly made a
difference.
Lucie Bergmann Shuster, a middle-aged, married woman from San Jose,
California, was diagnosed with breast cancer a few years ago. She
suffered debilitating nausea from her chemotherapy, despite having tried
all of the legal anti-emetics. Like TV character Murphy Brown, Lucie
reluctantly tried marijuana - and it worked. A couple of puffs was all
that she needed. After several bouts of chemotherapy, she barely
finished an eighth-ounce baggie, and she had no interest in using
marijuana recreationally. She was politically active in health care and
breast cancer issues.
Lucie passed away on September 18, 1997.
Andrew Hasenfeld, a 40-year-old man from Amherst, Massachusetts,
suffered from multiple sclerosis for nearly 20 years. Andrew earned a
Ph.D. in physics and had developed useful medical technology during his
career. Ironically, the only substance that controlled his spasticity
was a naturally growing plant that had been used as a medicine thousands
of years before Isaac Newton's time.
Andrew participated in numerous medicinal marijuana advocacy efforts in
Massachusetts. His testimony at the February 1997 NIH conference was
compelling, cutting right to the core of the issue when he asked the
panel, "I'm in a wheelchair already. Do you want to see me in jail?"
Andrew passed away on December 21, 1997, from MS-related complications.
Andrew and Lucie were a pleasure and inspiration to work with. Their
serious, respectable attitudes were complimented by their good-natured
sense of humor. Throughout the two-day NIH conference, Lucie kept busy
helping the other patients, many of whom were in wheelchairs or nearly
blind. Andrew, even when barely able to hold his head up, would ask, "Is
there anything else I should do?"
The lesson that Andrew and Lucie taught by example was that no matter
how stacked the odds are against you, you can always do something to
help others. Over the years, countless healthy, financially secure
people have declined to help change the marijuana laws, fearing legal
hassles, a damaged reputation, or claiming that they "can't afford" the
time or money. Some say, "It's too much work, so why bother?"
People like Andrew and Lucie are the reason to bother - people who risk
losing their medicine and their freedom by outing themselves as
criminals for using medicinal marijuana, so that someday, long after
they're gone, other people in the same situation won't have to suffer or
be arrested.
In 1997, Andrew and Lucie made a difference at NIH. In 1998, will their
legacy make a difference for the entire reform movement?
Chuck Thomas is the Communications Director of the Washington, D.C.
based - Marijuana Policy Project.
For more information please visit the Marijuana Policy Project web site
at http://www.mpp.org
***
WEEKLY NEWS IN REVIEW
Domestic News
***
Adolescents
Subj: US DC: Washington a Test Market for Anti-Drug Ads
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n026.a06.html
Source: Washington Post
Contact: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm
Pubdate: Friday, January 9, 1998
The woman in the commercial smashes an egg to show what a brain on drugs
looks like, then claims the yolk dripping from the frying pan is what a
body on drugs feels like. Then she goes on a rampage breaking plates and
glasses, declaring: "This is what your family goes through."
The television ad - part of a $195 million anti-drug advertising
campaign launched by the White House and aimed at America's youth - was
one of four spots previewed yesterday by 200 fourth-, fifth- and
sixth-graders at Lafayette Elementary School in Northwest Washington.
The fast-paced, thought-provoking ads, which began airing on local
television stations in Washington last night, will be viewed locally in
11 other cities before they are shown nationally in June.
The goal of the five-year campaign is to encourage adults to talk openly
with children about illegal substances and to stir children to talk with
their peers about drugs, said Barry R. McCaffrey, White House national
drug policy director.
"I thought [the advertisement] was kind of strange, and it caught my eye
because it was interesting," said Aaron Laporte, 11, one of the
awestruck sixth-graders who watched the ad in the school auditorium.
"It's saying, Don't take drugs, because they hurt your body."
[continues: 43 lines]
***
Cannabis Clubs
Subj: US CA: SFX: Marijuana Clubs Vow to Continue Operations
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n027.a01.html
Source: San Francisco Examiner
Pubdate: Sunday, January 11, 1998
Contact: letters@examiner.com
California's cannabis clubs vow to continue distributing marijuana -one
way or another-despite a formidable attack by the U.S. Justice
Department.
Almost all 17 clubs in the state said they are seeking new ways to
continue serving their estimated 6,300 clients, either by restructuring
their organizations, opening under new management or creating
clandestine distribution routes.
"We'll devise a plan to help people (get marijuana)," said Dennis Peron,
whose Cannabis Cultivators' Club was targeted in the federal probe. "We
cannot abandon the sick and dying.... This will not stop medical
marijuana."
In a broad and sweeping effort to close the clubs, the U.S. Justice
Department filed suit Friday to enjoin pot distribution by six clubs in
Marin, San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Cruz and Ukiah.
Officials would not say why those six clubs were singled out, but they
did not rule out investigating activities at the others.
[continues: 102 lines]
***
Subj: US CA: Government Moves To Close Marijuana Clubs
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n025.a04.html
Source: Orange County Register
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Pubdate: 10 Jan 1998
San Francisco - The federal government renewed its battle against the
state's medical marijuana law Friday,moving to shut down six marijuana
buyers' clubs in Northern California.
U.S. Attorney Michael Yamaguchi filed civil suits seeking to halt
operation of the clubs - two in San Francisco and one each in Oakland,
southern Marin County, Santa Cruz and Ukiah - for violations of federal
laws against the possession, cultivation and distribution of marijuana.
"The issue is not the medical use of marijuana. It is the persistent
violation of federal law," Yamaguchi said at a news conference. He said
the civil suits, which target only the clubs and their operators and not
individual patients, were a "measured approach" short of criminal
charges.
Undercover drug agents had bought marijuana at each club and had seen
purchases by other customers, according to court papers.
[continues: 47 lines]
***
Subj: US CA: LAT: U.S. Launches Drive to Close Marijuana Clubs
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n025.a05.html
Source: Los Angeles Times
Pubdate: 10 Jan 1998
Contact: letters@latimes.com
SAN FRANCISCO - For the first time since California voters approved the
use of medical marijuana, the federal government Friday mounted a legal
battle to shut down six Northern California clubs that sell the weed.
The government wants to "send a clear message regarding the illegality
of marijuana cultivation and distribution," said Michael Yamaguchi, the
U.S. attorney for Northern California.
His office filed civil lawsuits Friday accusing the clubs and 10 of
their operators of distribution of marijuana, and seeking permanent
injunctions to close centers in San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Cruz,
Ukiah and Marin.
The move comes as medical marijuana advocates in other states are
pushing to follow California's lead, seeking similar ballot initiatives
to allow patients to grow and use marijuana with a doctor's
recommendation.
[continues: 121 lines]
***
Subj: US CA: Federal Drug Laws, State Initiative Are At Odds
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n025.a06.html
Source: San Jose Mercury News
Contact: letters@sjmercury.com
Pubdate: Sat, 10 Jan 1998
SAN FRANCISCO - Putting its weight for the first time behind efforts to
undercut California's voter-approved Proposition 215, the Clinton
administration Friday filed a flurry of lawsuits seeking to shut down
six Northern California marijuana clubs.
The U.S. Justice Department filed the lawsuits in federal courts in San
Francisco, Oakland and San Jose, attempting to finally resolve a
conflict between federal drug laws and the state ballot initiative
voters approved in November 1996 allowing sales of marijuana for
medicinal purposes.
Federal officials did not move to close San Jose's Cannabis Center,
although word of the Justice Department's offensive created some panic
among the club's operators and patrons. "I'm relieved (we were not
sued), but I know we're not out of the woods," said Peter Baez, the
center's executive director. "The federal government will do everything
it takes. I'm sure our time will come."
[continues: 116 lines]
***
Subj: US CA: SFX: U.S. Acts To Close Pot Clubs
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n025.a07.html
Source: San Francisco Examiner
Pubdate: January 10, 1998
Contact: letters@examiner.com
In a major strike in the federal government's war on California's new
medicinal marijuana law, U.S. Attorney Michael Yamaguchi filed suits to
close six cannabis clubs that distribute the drug to hundreds of
Northern Californians each week.
Despite the state's Proposition 215, passed by voters in 1996, Yamaguchi
said the federal Controlled Substances Act made it unlawful to
cultivate, distribute or possess marijuana.
"California's medical marijuana status has no effect on the
applicability of federal drug laws," Yamaguchi said in a Friday press
conference.
"Although California appears to have decriminalized marijuana ... the
federal law governing the distribution, cultivation, and possession of
marijuana has not changed," he said.
Marijuana activist Dennis Peron, whose San Francisco-based club is
targeted by the probe, said he would fight the action in court and, if
necessary, with civil disobedience.
[continues: 56 lines]
***
Subj: US CA: BEE: U.S. Attorney Files Suits To Close Cannabis Clubs
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n025.a10.html
Source: Sacramento Bee
Pubdate: January 10, 1998
Contact: sacbedit@netcom.com
SAN FRANCISCO - The federal government struck a broad blow against
advocates of medical marijuana Friday, moving to shut down six major
marijuana dispensaries operating in Northern California.
Michael J. Yamaguchi, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District, filed
separate civil lawsuits charging the six "cannabis clubs" and 10 of
their operators with violating federal drug laws. The suits seek
permanent closures of two outlets in San Francisco and others in
Oakland, Ukiah, Santa Cruz and Marin County.
"The issue is not the medical use of marijuana," Yamaguchi said. "It is
the continued violation of federal law."
Calling the move a "measured approach," Yamaguchi said the suits stem
from an ongoing federal investigation into club activities, and do not
rule out the filing of future criminal charges.
[continues: 60 lines]
***
Heroin
Subj: US: PUB OPED: Another Look at Methadone Maintenance
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n025.a01.html
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Pubdate: Thursday, 8 Jan 1998
Last week, Supervisor Gavin Newsom called for changing federal
regulations to endorse private physicans' prescribing of methadone to
heroin addicts.
Newsom is right for many reasons. Endorsing private physician
prescription and pharmacy dispensation would allow patients stabilized
on methadone to leave the clinic setting, thus freeing up slots for
addicts closer to the street who may need more supervision initially.
Treatment by private physicians would be cheaper, and would allow
patients to lead more normal lives.
Citing increased overdose deaths and long waiting lists for treatment,
Newsom wants to "start looking at the problem as a medical one." It's
about time. Today, less than 20 percent of the nation's heroin addicts
are enrolled in methadone maintenance, largely because programs are
mired in red tape and regulations, or are inaccessible because of cost
or location.
In the late 1960s, after working with heroin addicts, Drs. Vincent Dole
and Marie Nyswander argued that addiction was a physiological disease.
Methadone, it was found, could lessen the physical craving for heroin,
and its daily use would enable a patient to stop using heroin and become
a productive member of society. According to Dr. Robert Newman of Beth
Israel Hospital in New York, the media heralded methadone as a
"Cinderella drug" that could be economically applied to hundreds of
thousands of addicts, and, in short order, solve the narcotics problem.
[continues: 35 lines]
***
Hemp News
Subj: US NC: Farmers To Debate Hemp
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n030.a08.html
Source: The News and Observer Raleigh, North Carolina
Contact: forum@nando.com
Pubdate: January 12, 1998
Website: http://www.news-observer.com/daily/
CHARLOTTE - The nation's largest farmers' group is buzzing about hemp
production as it meets to hash out stands on pocketbook issues such as
property rights, taxes and foreign imports.
Delegates to the American Farm Bureau Federation's annual convention,
which began Sunday in Charlotte, will revisit a policy statement
supporting research into the economic potential of industrial hemp
production in the United States. The group has 4.6 million members.
Farmers supporting the current policy say they just want to explore a
hardy crop that shows promise for use in fibers, fuel and foods.
Opponents of hemp production and research are citing the concern of
law-enforcement agencies, which say it would be difficult for agents to
distinguish between hemp and its cousin, marijuana.
[continues: 53 lines]
***
Subj: US CA: California Petition Drive Begins to Make Hemp Use Legal
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n030.a02.html
Pubdate: Monday, 12 January 1998
Source: (1) San Luis Obispo Telegram-Tribune (2) The Sacramento Bee (3)
San Jose Mercury News
Contact: (1) slott@sint01.sanluisobispo.com (2) sacbedit@netcom.com (3)
letters@sjmercury.com
A proposal to legalize the growing of hemp for industrial purposes is
the 38th initiative certified to collect voter signatures for a place on
California's 1998 general election ballot.
The petition drive, which started Friday, must collect verified
signatures of 433,269 registered voters by May 18.
The proposal by Sam H. Clauder II of Garden Grove would legalize the
growing, harvesting, storage and use of hemp for use as a building
material or in the production of cloth, paper, fuels and various
building materials and industrial chemicals.
It contends that California's current ban on hemp, a member of the same
plant family as marijuana, prohibits the state from participating in a
thriving global market for industrial hemp.
It raises the number of initiatives in circulation for the November
ballot to 38. Five initiatives are expected to be certified for the June
ballot.
***
Medical Marijuana
Subj: US CA: Wire: Help Sought For Medical Pot Users
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n029.a01.html
Source: United Press International
Pubdate: Mon, 12 Jan 1998
SACRAMENTO, Jan. 12 (UPI) - State Sen. John Vasconcellos has stepped up
his effort to get help for users of medical marijuana.
The Santa Clara Democrat held a Capitol news conference today to
announce a half-dozen measures to implement Proposition 215, the medical
marijuana law approved by 6 million California voters in November 1996.
Vasconcellos says he's outraged by state and federal efforts to thwart
distribution of marijuana to patients of AIDS, cancer and other diseases
who want the drug to ease their pain.
He cited the recent U.S. Justice Department closure of northern
California cannibis clubs under a federal law that conflicts with
Proposition 215 - an action he promises to appeal.
The lawmaker also announced plans for a Public Safety Committee "summit"
on the distribution issue in hopes of reconciling diverse viewpoints,
and new implementing legislation based on the meeting.
Vasconcellos promised renewed efforts to move a bill off the Assembly
floor that would authorize a three-year University of California study
on medical use of the drug.
The Senate passed it last year, but it fell short in the Assembly
despite support from state Attorney General Dan Lungren.
Vasconellos is also asking colleagues to sign a protest letter to
President Clinton, and appealing to citizens to do the same.
***
Subj: US KY: Galbraith Asks Judges OK Pot As "Natural Remedy"
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n030.a09.html
Source: Lexington Herald-Leader
Contact: hledit@lex.infi.net
Pubdate: Monday, January 12, 1998
Website: http://www.kentuckyconnect.com/heraldleader/
Prosecutors in five counties want to put Gatewood Galbraith's
marijuana-smoking clients on trial.
So, in his inimitably colorful and passionate way, Galbraith plans to
seize the initiative and put Kentucky's marijuana laws on trial instead.
Galbraith - a Lexington lawyer, occasional gubernatorial candidate and
self-proclaimed lover of the weed - has filed a flurry of motions in the
criminal cases in Allen, Butler, Clark, Rowan and Trimble counties. He's
asking the judges to recognize marijuana as a medicine and "the safest
therapeutic substance known to man."
Each of Galbraith's clients claims to have cultivated and used marijuana
for personal medical use, not for sale to the public. It's illogical to
deny people access to a plant that grows naturally in the ground if it
can improve their conditions, Galbraith said this week.
"If Jack Kevorkian can walk around and dispense his particular brand of
medical cure, I don't see why my clients can't use this God-given,
all-natural remedy," said Galbraith.
[continues: 64 lines]
***
The Drug War
Subj: US IL: Drug Testing Of Workers Keeps Rising
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n029.a03.html
Source: Chicago Sun-Times Pubdate: Jan. 11, 1998
Contact: letters@suntimes.com
Though it was virtually unheard of 15 years ago, mandatory drug testing
in the workplace has spread faster than marijuana smoke at a Grateful
Dead concert.
Testing requirements now blanket millions of people nationwide -
especially job seekers. And technology is improving to the point that
it's difficult, if not impossible, for drug users to escape the net of
some advanced tests.
"It's becoming more accepted and more widespread. And it's still
growing," said Daryl G. Grecich, a spokesman for the Institute for a
Drug-Free Workplace, a pro-testing group in Washington, D.C.
The Chicago Police Department is the most recent employer here to crack
down on drug users. But the latest sweep isn't in the streets - it's now
screened through hair samples, a cutting-edge technology that can extend
the reach of a drug test almost 90 times for most substances.
[continues: 117 lines]
***
Subj: US: FBI Completes Probe Of Fatal Shooting Of Border Teen By Marine
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n028.a04.html
Source: Houston Chronicle
Contact: viewpoints@chron.com
Pubdate: Sat, 10 Jan 1998
Website: http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/
PECOS (AP) - The FBI has completed its investigation into the fatal
shooting of a border teen-ager by a U.S. Marine and forwarded the case
to federal civil rights investigators, an FBI spokesman said Friday.
The Department of Justice is trying to determine whether there were any
civil rights violations during the May 20 shooting of Esequiel Hernandez
Jr. in Redford, a rural community about 200 miles southeast of El Paso.
"Unless the Department of Justice requires additional information, our
investigation is complete," said Terry Kincaid, agent in charge of the
FBI office in Midland.
Military officials say Cpl. Clemente Banuelos killed Hernandez after the
teen-ager began shooting at a four-man Marine team conducting anti-drug
surveillance along the Rio Grande.
A Presidio County grand jury last year cleared Banuelos and the other
three Marines of any wrongdoing in the case.
The Justice Department then stepped up its investigation and a federal
grand jury in Pecos began hearing from witnesses.
Daryl Fields, a U.S. Attorney's spokesman in San Antonio, declined to
comment on the case beyond saying the investigation was continuing.
***
Subj: US: Clinton Will Require States to Cut Drug Use in Prisons
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n030.a06.html
Source: New York Times
Contact: letters@nytimes.com
Pubdate: Monday, January 12, 1998
Seeking to cleanse prisons of illegal drugs, the Clinton administration
plans to tell the states that they have to determine and report the
extent of illicit drug use among their inmates before they can receive
more federal money to spend on prisons.
The information that the states provide will be used to create a
baseline to measure their progress in reducing drugs inside prison,
which in turn will qualify them for more federal money.
President Clinton is scheduled to sign the directive in the Oval Office
on Monday. A draft copy, which is addressed to Attorney General Reno,
was provided by a senior administration official who said that it had
been circulating in the White House, the Justice Department and other
interested agencies for the last month or two.
The document reflects a belief within the administration that crimping
the supply of drugs in prison will cut the demand for them after the
convicts are released. "With more than half the individuals in our
criminal justice system estimated to have a substance abuse problem,"
the draft says, "promoting coerced abstinence within the criminal
justice system offers us a unique opportunity to break this cycle of
crime and drugs."
[continues: 81 lines]
***
Subj: US: NYT OPED: There's No Justice In The War On Drugs
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n026.a04.html
Source: New York Times
Contact: letters@nytimes.com
Pubdate: Sun, 11 Jan 1998
STANFORD - Twenty-five years ago, President Richard M. Nixon announced a
"War on Drugs." I criticized the action on both moral and expediential
grounds in my Newsweek column of May 1, 1972, "Prohibition and Drugs":
"On ethical grounds, do we have the right to use the machinery of
government to prevent an individual from becoming an alcoholic or a drug
addict? For children, almost everyone would answer at least a qualified
yes. But for responsible adults, I, for one, would answer no. Reason
with the potential addict, yes. Tell him the consequences, yes. Pray for
and with him, yes. But I believe that we have no right to use force,
directly or indirectly, to prevent a fellow man from committing suicide,
let alone from drinking alcohol or taking drugs."
That basic ethical flaw has inevitably generated specific evils during
the past quarter century, just as it did during our earlier attempt at
alcohol prohibition.
[continues: 83 lines]
***
Subj: US: USA Today: Study Links Drugs To 80% Of Incarcerations
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n027.a04.html
Source: USA Today
Pubdate: 9 Jan 1998
Contact: editor@usatoday.com
WASHINGTON - Eighty percent of people behind bars were involved with
alcohol or other drugs at the times of the crime, a report says.
And, alcohol plays a role in a greater number of violent crimes than
crack or powder cocaine, according to the report by the National Center
on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University in New York.
The three year study released Thursday found that 1.4 million of the 1.7
million people serving time in the nation's jails and prisons committed
crimes while they were high, stole property to buy drugs, have a history
of drug or alcohol abuse or are in jail for violating drug or alcohol
laws.
The 281-page report concludes that criminal activity because of drugs
and alcohol is the overwhelming reason the nation's prison population
has risen nearly 239% since 1980, when 501,886 people were behind bars.
"People think prisons are full of James Cagney types and psychopaths,
but they are actually full of alcoholics and drug addicts, and we can
deal with that through treatment," says Joseph Califano Jr., president
of the center and former secretary of Health, Education and Welfare.
[continues: 36 lines]
***
International News
UK: The Lancet Editorial: Needle-exchange Programmes in the USA:
Time To Act Now
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n027.a07.html
Source: The Lancet - Volume 351, Number 9096
Pubdate: Sat, 10 Jan 1998
Contact: lancet.editorial@elsevier.co.uk
One in three of the more than 570,000 AIDS cases reported in the USA
since the beginning of the epidemic has been caused, directly or
indirectly, by injection drug misuse. Although HIV-infection rates among
homosexual men have fallen, rates due to intravenous drug misuse have
soared and about half of new HIV infections now can be traced to that
source. Those affected are not only the drug misusers infected by
contaminated needles but their sexual partners (most of whom have been
poor, black, and Hispanic women) and the children of women infected by
drug misuse or sexual contact with infected drug misusers. Injection
drug misuse is now the leading primary cause of paediatric AIDS.
Yet, despite this epidemic, the USA remains one of the few
industrialised countries that refuses to provide easy access to sterile
syringes. Of the 100 or so US needle-exchange programmes most are small
and underfunded, and some are illegal. Most US states still have laws on
drug paraphernalia or syringe prescription that make it a crime to give
a drug misuser a clean needle.
The Clinton Administration now has an opportunity to address this
problem. In 1997 the US Congress banned the use of Federal funds for
needle-exchange programmes until March 31, 1998, but after that date the
legislation allows funding if the Secretary of Health and Human Services
determines that exchange programmes are effective in preventing the
spread of HIV and do not encourage the use of illegal drugs. But with
the deadline fast approaching, the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, Donna Shalala, has yet to make an official determination,
causing AIDS activists to wonder whether the Administration will refuse
to endorse needle-exchange programmes out of fear that the step will
open the President to the charge that he is "soft on drugs".
[continues: 33 lines]
***
HOT OFF THE 'NET
Peter Gorman on the Art Bell Show
High Times' Peter Gorman was interviewed Monday night (1-12) on the Art
Bell Show. Art and Peter discuss our failing drug laws. This is a must
hear!
For anyone who uses RealAudio the following link will take you to the
AudioNet archives page where you'll find the link for the 1-12 show.
http://ww2.audionet.com/artbell/archive.html#jan98
Those of you who do not yet have the RealAudio software can obtain a
free copy of RealPlayer 5.0 at http://www.real.com
***
Former NORML Head Launches On-Line Magazine
A new on-line journal examining marijuana prohibition is now available
on the Internet at http://www.marijuananews.com
Former NORML National Director Richard Cowan is heading the project.
Cowan calls his new site "a personal newsletter on the cannabis
controversies." The site will feature daily updates on marijuana news.
***
Second Conference on Pain Management and Chemical Dependency: Evolving
Connections
January 15-17, 1998, New York City
For more information visit the conference site at Imedex
http://www.imedex.nl/congresses/inc20.htm
Or contact Imedex by e-mail imedex@aol.com
***
DS Weekly is one of the many free educational services DrugSense offers
our members. Watch this feature to learn more about what DrugSense can
do for you.
Editor: Tom Hawkins, thawkins@mapinc.org Senior Editor: Mark Greer,
mgreer@mapinc.org
We wish to thank each and every one of our contributors.
NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes.
Mark Greer
Media Awareness Project (MAP) inc.
d/b/a DrugSense
MGreer@mapinc.org
http://www.DrugSense.org/
http://www.mapinc.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[End]
to 1998 Daily News index for January 8-14