-------------------------------------------------------------------
Eight Prison Guards At Corcoran Indicted ('San Francisco Chronicle'
Says California Authorities Tried To Block Investigation
That Led To Federal Civil Rights Charges Being Filed Against Guards
At Corcoran State Prison Who Staged 'Blood Sport' Fights Among Inmates,
Leading To Shooting Death Of One Convict)
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 17:59:19 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US CA: 8 Prison Guards at Corcoran Indicted
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: "Tom O'Connell"
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle
Pubdate: Fri, 27 Feb 1998
Author: Robert B. Gunnison, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
8 PRISON GUARDS AT CORCORAN INDICTED
Civil rights charges in slaying of inmate
Eight guards at Corcoran State Prison were indicted yesterday on federal
civil rights charges that they staged ``blood sport'' fights among inmates
in which one convict was shot to death by a guard.
The FBI said more indictments were possible, and openly criticized state
authorities for hampering the probe of violence at the prison deep in the
San Joaquin Valley.
``Despite intentional efforts on the part of correctional and other
officials to stymie, delay and obstruct our inquiry, we will continue until
all culpable parties are brought to justice,'' said James Maddock, special
agent in charge of the Sacramento office.
The indictments come more than a year after The Chronicle reported that
high-ranking state prison officials attempted to block the FBI inquiry into
the abuses -- at the same time that corrections director James Gomez was
citing the violence to support requests for billions of dollars in new
prisons. Gomez resigned two months after The Chronicle report.
With chilling precision, the nine-count indictment describes how guards
entertained themselves by allegedly manipulating racial and gang rivalries
to incite fisticuffs in an exercise yard.
``It's going to be duck hunting season,'' one guard said to another as
inmate Preston Tate and another black inmate walked into the yard about
8:45 a.m. on April 2, 1994, the indictment said.
A few minutes later they were battling with two members of a rival gang
known as ``Southern Mexicans,'' but four guards did nothing to stop them,
the indictment said.
Guard Christopher Bethea then allegedly fired two shots, one from a rifle
that shot wooden blocks, the second from a 9mm rifle. The second shot
struck Tate in the head and killed him. Tate was the sixth of seven inmates
shot to death by guards under similar circumstances at the prison since it
opened in 1988.
The four guards then ``prepared false reports containing statements they
knew to be false and misleading to cover up the fact that these defendants
. . . knew the fight would occur and intentionally failed to keep these
inmates free from physical violence,'' the indictment said.
``The law gave these individuals the power to protect, but they used it to
torment,'' said U.S. Attorney Paul Seave. ``These defendants used their
authority to sponsor blood sport. In the process, they violated the civil
rights of individuals and abused their power and public trust.''
A Department of Corrections investigation of the shooting found no
wrongdoing, but a civil suit was filed by Tate's family. A former Corcoran
guard, Richard Caruso, helped keep the issue alive.
At one point in the investigation, Caruso was pursued by Department of
Corrections investigators who tried to keep him from giving prison records
to federal agents in Fresno.
Indicted yesterday were Timothy Dickerson, 38, of Visalia; Michael Gipson,
43, of Caruthers; Truman Jennings, 37, of Visalia; Raul Tavarez, 38, of
Tipton; Jerry Arvizu, 30, of Hanford; Douglas Martin, 54, of Corcoran; John
Vaughn, 42, of Hanford; and Bethea, 33, of Clovis. They were expected to
surrender to authorities in coming days.
All were charged with conspiracy against civil rights and deprivation of
civil rights under color of law, and aiding and abetting. Tavarez was also
charged with lying to a grand jury.
Conspiracy carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, as does each
count of deprivation of civil rights. If death results, however, a life
term is the maximum.
The Department of Corrections said two of the guards have retired; the
remainder have been placed on administrative leave with pay.
One was a lieutenant, two were sergeants, and the remainder were officers.
Critical of the indictments was the California Correctional Peace Officers
Association, the politically powerful union that represents guards.
``CCPOA is shocked by the actions of the United States attorney,'' said
Lance Corcoran, vice president of the union. ``These officers were
following policy and doing their jobs, whether we agree with that policy is
really immaterial.''
That policy, known as the integrated yard policy, requires that gang and
racial rivals use the exercise yard at the same time.
Tipton Kindel, spokesman for the Department of Corrections, said his agency
cooperated fully with the federal investigation.
``We gave them not only the conclusions of the investigators, but also all
of the notes, all of the tape recordings of the interviews,'' Kindel said.
``Anything that the department could possibly do to cooperate with the FBI
and the U.S. Department of Justice has been done.''
He also produced a letter from the FBI asking the department to stay out of
the Tate investigation because it was being handled by the federal
government.
In November 1996, Attorney General Dan Lungren's office opened a criminal
investigation of violence at Corcoran, but Lungren said he did not look
into issues already being probed by other agencies.
Last August, Lungren declared there would be no criminal prosecutions.
``After a thorough review that included interviewing more than 100 inmates
and correctional officers, the state Department of Justice has concluded
its investigation and determined that no criminal charges can be sustained
based on obtainable evidence,'' his office said at the time.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington State Medical Use Of Marijuana Act (Final Text
Of Ballot Initiative Filed By Washington Citizens For Medical Rights)
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 1998 10:30:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Randy Chase
To: Turmoil
cc: hemp-talk@hemp.net
Subject: Re: HT: mmj NOW event report
Sender: owner-hemp-talk@hemp.net
>How bout posting the text of this initiative so's we can read it.
Here you are compliments of Medical Marijuana NOW! PAC:
To all concerned parties and especially the thousands of loyal supporters:
this is an exact copy of the recently filed initiative. There are several
word changes from previous posting prior to actual filing in Olympia.
Washington State Medical Use of Marijuana Act
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
NEW SECTION: Sec. 1. Title.
This act shall be known and may be cited as the Washington State Medical
Use of Marijuana Act.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. Purpose and Intent.
The People of Washington State find that some patients with terminal or
debilitating illnesses, under their physician's care, as defined in this
act, may benefit from the medical use of marijuana. Some of the
illnesses for which marijuana appears to be beneficial include
chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting in cancer patients; AIDS wasting
syndrome; severe muscle spasms associated with multiple sclerosis and
other spasticity disorders; epilepsy; acute or chronic glaucoma; and some
forms of intractable pain.
The People find that humanitarian compassion necessitates that the
decision to authorize marijuana for use by patients with terminal or
debilitating conditions, as defined under this act, is a personal,
individual decision, based upon their physician's professional medical
judgment and discretion.
Therefore, the people of the State of Washington intend that:
Qualifying patients with terminal or debilitating conditions, as defined
by this act, who, in the judgment of their physicians, would benefit from
the use of medical marijuana, shall not be found guilty of a crime under
state law for their possession and limited use of marijuana;
Persons who act as primary caregivers to such patients, as defined under
this act, shall also not be found guilty of a crime under state law for
assisting with the medical use of marijuana; and
Physicians also be excepted from liability and prosecution for the
authorization of marijuana use to qualifying patients for whom, in the
physician's professional judgment, medical marijuana may prove
beneficial.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. Non-Medical Purposes Prohibited
Nothing in this act shall be construed to supersede Washington State
law prohibiting the acquisition, possession, manufacture, sale, or use of
marijuana for non-medical purposes.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. Protecting physicians authorizing the use of medical
marijuana.
A physician licensed under chapter 18.71 RCW or chapter 18.57 RCW shall
be excepted from the state's criminal laws and shall not be penalized in
any manner, or denied any right or privilege, for:
1. Advising a qualifying patient about the risks and benefits of medical
use of marijuana or that the qualifying patient may benefit from the
medical use of marijuana where such use is within a professional standard
of care or in the individual physician's medical judgment; or
2. Providing a qualifying patient with valid documentation, based upon
the physician's assessment of the qualifying patient's medical history
and current medical condition, that the potential benefits of the medical
use of marijuana would likely outweigh the health risks for the
particular qualifying patient.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. Protecting qualifying patients and primary
caregivers.
1. If charged with a violation of state law relating to marijuana, any
qualifying patient who is engaged in the medical use of marijuana, or any
designated primary caregiver who assists a qualifying patient in the
medical use of marijuana, will be deemed to have established an
affirmative defense to such charges by proof of his or her compliance
with the requirements provided hereunder. Any person meeting the
requirements appropriate to his or her status under this act shall be
considered to have engaged in activities permitted by the act and shall
not be penalized in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, for
such actions.
2. The qualifying patient, if eighteen years of age or older, shall:
(a) Meet all criteria for status as a qualifying patient, as that term
is defined in this act;
(b) Possess no more marijuana than is necessary for the patient's
personal, medical use, not exceeding the amount necessary for a sixty day
supply; and
(c) Present his or her valid documentation to any law enforcement
official who questions the patient regarding his or her medical use of
marijuana.
3. The qualifying patient, if under eighteen years of age, shall comply
with the requirements of section 5(2) (a) and (c) of this act; provided,
however, that any possession under section 5(2)(b) of this act, as well
as any production, acquisition, and decision as to dosage and frequency
of use, shall be the responsibility of the parent or legal guardian of
the qualifying patient.
4. The designated primary caregiver shall:
(a) Meet all criteria for status as a primary caregiver to a qualifying
patient, as that term is defined in this act;
(b) Possess, in combination with and as an agent for the qualifying
patient, no more marijuana than is necessary for the patient's personal,
medical use, not exceeding the amount necessary for a sixty day supply;
(c) Present a copy of the qualifying patient's valid documentation
required by this act, as well as evidence of designation to act as
primary caregiver by the patient, to any law enforcement official
requesting such information;
(d) Be prohibited from consuming marijuana obtained for the personal,
medical use of the patient for whom the individual is acting as primary
caregiver; and
(e) Be the primary caregiver to only one patient at any one time.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 6. Definitions.
1. "Medical use of Marijuana" means the production, possession, or
administration of marijuana, as defined in RCW 69.50.101(q), for the
exclusive benefit of a qualifying patient in the treatment of his or her
terminal r debilitating condition.
2. "Primary caregiver" means a person who:
(a) is eighteen years of age or older;
(b) is responsible for the housing, health, or care of the patient; and
(c) has been designated in writing by a patient to perform the duties of
primary caregiver under this act.
3. "Qualifying Patient" means a person who:
(a) is a bona fide patient of a physician licensed under chapter 18.71
RCW or 18.57 RCW;
(b) has been diagnosed by that physician as having a terminal or
debilitating condition;
(c) is a resident of the State of Washington at the time of such
diagnosis;
(d) has been advised by that physician about the risks and benefits of
the medical use of marijuana; and
(e) has been advised by that physician that they may benefit from the
medical use of marijuana.
4. "Terminal or Debilitating Medical Condition" means:
(a) cancer, human immune deficiency (HIV) disease, multiple sclerosis,
epilepsy or other seizure disorder, or spasticity disorders; or
(b) intractable pain, limited for the purpose of this act to mean pain
unrelieved by standard medical treatments and medications; or
(c) glaucoma, either acute or chronic, limited for the purpose of this
act to mean increased intraocular pressure unrelieved by standard
treatments and medications; or
(d) any other medical condition duly approved by the Washington State
Medical Quality Assurance Board as directed in this act.
5. "Valid Documentation" means:
(a) A statement signed by a qualifying patient's physician, or a copy of
the qualifying patient's pertinent medical records, which states that, in
the physician's professional opinion, the potential benefits of the
medical use of marijuana would likely outweigh the health risks for a
particular qualifying patient; and
(b) Proof of Identity such as a Washington State driver's license or
identity card, as defined in RCW 46.20.035.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 7. Additional protections.
1. The lawful possession or manufacture of medical marijuana as
authorized by this act shall not result in the forfeiture or seizure of
any property.
2. No person shall be prosecuted for constructive possession,
conspiracy, or any other criminal offense solely for being in the
presence or vicinity of medical marijuana or it's use as authorized by
this act.
3 The state shall not be held liable for any deleterious outcomes from
the medical use of marijuana by any qualifying patient.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 8. Restrictions, and Limitations Regarding the Medical
Use of Marijuana.
1. It shall be a misdemeanor to use or display medical marijuana in a
manner or place which is open to the view of the general public.
2. Nothing in this act shall require any health insurance provider to be
liable for any claim for reimbursement for the medical use of marijuana.
3. Nothing in this act shall require any physician to authorize the use
of medical marijuana for a patient.
4. Nothing in this act shall require any accommodation of any medical
use of marijuana in any place of employment, in any school bus or on any
school grounds, or in youth center.
5. It shall be a Class C felony to fraudulently produce any record
purporting to be, or tamper with the content of any record for the
purpose of having it accepted as, valid documentation under section
6(5)(a).
6. No person shall be entitled to claim the affirmative defense provided
in Section 5 for engaging in the medical use of marijuana in a way that
endangers the health or well-being of any person through the use of a
motorized vehicle on a street, road, or highway.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 9. Addition of Medical Conditions.
The Washington State Medical Quality Assurance Board, or other
appropriate agency as designated by the Governor, shall accept for
consideration petitions submitted by physicians or patients to add
terminal or debilitating conditions to those included in this act. In
considering such petitions, the Washington State Medical Quality
Assurance Board shall include public notice of, and an opportunity to
comment in a public hearing upon, such petitions. The Washington State
Medical Quality Assurance Board shall, after hearing, approve or deny
such petitions within one hundred eighty days of submission. The approval
or denial of such a petition shall be considered a final agency action,
subject to judicial review.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 10. Severability.
If any provision of this act or its application to any person or
circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application
of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected.
Footnotes and misc. information.
This initiative was filed in Washington State on February 26, l998. There
are three sponsors of the filing to show public unity and diverse
supporters. Sponsors include Karen Pehoushek who is a multiple sclerosis
patient and member of the Green Cross patient co-operative; Judith Seeley,
wife of the late Ralph Seeley; and Dr. Robert Killian, Tacoma physician
and a national activist in the fight for the medicalization of marijuana.
After 4 to 5 weeks of processing in the Secretary of State's office the
initiative will emerge with an official ballot title and summary and
permission to print and circulate. The printed petitions must conform to
exact format prescribed by statute..
Under Washington statute the drive for signatures will end on July 2nd
and on that date approximately l88,000 valid registered voter signatures
must be turned in to proceed to the November ballot. Because there are
always many duplicate signatures, non-registered signers, etc., all
petition drives. to the ballot must include a healthy cushion. Thus the
signature goal will be in the neighborhood of 240,000.
This posting and information furnished as a joint effort by Medical
Marijuana Now PAC and Washington Citizens for Medical Rights.
On to Victory in November, George Bakan.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Eight Marines Are Reportedly Cleared In Shooting Death
('San Diego Union Tribune' Version)
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 1998 13:23:44 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US: 8 Marines Are Reportedly Cleared in Shooting Death
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: nora
Source: San Diego Union Tribune (CA)
Contact: letters@uniontrib.com
Website: http://www.uniontrib.com/
Pubdate: Fri, 27 Feb 1998
Author: Lola Sherman, Staff Writer
8 MARINES ARE REPORTEDLY CLEARED IN SHOOTING DEATH
A Texas congressman has said the Justice Department will not file criminal
civil rights charges against four Camp Pendleton Marines involved in the
slaying of a young goatherd nine months ago.
The shooting took place the evening of May 20 near Redford, Texas, the home
of the 18-year-old victim, Esequiel Hernandez Jr.
Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, chairman of the House Immigration Subcommittee,
issued a press release yesterday saying he learned just a few days ago that
a grand jury inquiry into a possible civil rights case concluded Jan. 8,
apparently with a recommendation not to prosecute.
Jerald Crow, an attorney for one of the Marines involved, said yesterday
that he had heard that Attorney General Janet Reno is to announce that
decision today.
Press officers at the Justice Department said yesterday that they could not
discuss Reno's intentions.
Smith said he has initiated his own inquiry but he gave no details.
"The shooting death of Esequiel Hernandez remains troubling," he said in
his news release. "The public has a right to know who is responsible for
this death. But no one is being held accountable."
"This is a death that did not have to happen," Smith said, "and raises
serious questions about training and supervision by the Border Patrol,"
which was directing the Marines.
In Texas, members of the Redford Citizens' Committee for Justice weren't
satisfied, either.
The Rev. Melvin La Follette, a retired Episcopal priest who heads the
organization, said the group is just waiting to see what the federal
government will do about the allegation of a civil rights violation before
filing a civil suit on behalf of the entire community of 100 residents.
La Follette faulted a state grand jury, comprised of several government
employees or spouses, that exonerated the Marines last summer.
"When the fox investigates the chicken coop, he's not going to find any
hens missing," La Follette said. "At least there are civil recourses and
whatever kind of political process."
La Follette said the townspeople blame the Border Patrol agents who gave
the command to fire on Hernandez more than the young Marines who, he said,
are trained to obey orders.
The Marines were helping with a Border Patrol campaign aimed at identifying
illegal immigrants and drugs crossing into Texas from Mexico.
Simon Garza, the Border Patrol's new chief patrol agent for the area that
includes Redford, said he has offered his condolences to the Hernandez
family and added, "My agenda is to assure that it does not happen again."
Garza, who was not in charge at the time of the shooting, said joint
operations involving the Marines and his agency are in abeyance but could
be reactivated.
"We do have a mission to accomplish, a dangerous mission," he said, noting
that in the past fiscal year 20 tons of marijuana and 10,000 pounds of
cocaine were intercepted in the area.
Bill Weinacht, attorney for the Hernandez family, said, "We have a claim
pending with the Justice Department that has not been denied at this time."
A Camp Pendleton spokesman, Lt. Philip Schrode, said base officials are
referring all calls about the case to Jack Zimmermann, the attorney for
Cpl. Clemente Banuelos, who fired the fatal shot.
Schrode would not say whether the four Marines are still at Camp Pendleton.
Zimmermann was not in his Houston office yesterday and could not be
contacted for comment, but attorneys for the other Marines said three of
them remain in the service.
Crow said his client, Lance Cpl. James Blood, has mustered out and now
lives in the Pacific Northwest. Blood said publicly during the state grand
jury hearings that Hernandez had fired twice at the Marines, camouflaged to
blend in with the local terrain, and was pointing the gun a third time,
right at him, when Banuelos shot the youth and saved Blood's life.
Hernandez, a third-generation resident of Redford, was tending to the
family's goats at the time. The family said the teen-ager always carried
his World War I-era .22-caliber rifle to protect the herd.
Both Crow and Michael Gross, attorney for one of the other Marines in the
contingent involved in the shooting, Cpl. Roy Torrez, said they had
received no official notice of any decision by the Justice Department, but
would welcome news that the Marines would not be prosecuted on civil rights
charges.
"Yes, I believe it's a second vindication," Crow said. "I personally would
consider it a great victory."
Gross agreed.
"The Marines were just doing what they had been told to do," he said.
The four private attorneys, all former Marines now living in Texas, were
hired by the government to represent the Marines.
Dan Hagood, who represented the fourth Marine, Lance Cpl. Robert Weiler
Jr., said he would not comment until he receives official notification of
the Justice Department ruling.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase In Prescription Drug Deaths Is Reported ('San Diego Union Tribune'
Account Of Research At University Of California At San Diego, To Be Published
Tomorrow In Britain's 'Lancet,' Is Based On Review Of Federal Database
Of Death Certificates Filed Between 1983 And 1993 In Every State -
Prescription Drug Errors Kill Thousands More Americans Every Year
Than They Did A Decade Ago, A Greater Rate Of Increase Than Any Other Cause
Of Death Except AIDS - Number Of Deaths Attributed To Medication Errors
Rose Twofold For Hospital Patients, But Eightfold For Outpatients)
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 1998 13:26:10 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US: Increase in Prescription Drug Deaths is Reported
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: nora
Source: San Diego Union Tribune (CA)
Contact: letters@uniontrib.com
Website: http://www.uniontrib.com/
Pubdate: Fri, 27 Feb 1998
Author: Cheryl Clark, Staff Writer
INCREASE IN PRESCRIPTION DRUG DEATHS IS REPORTED
UCSD researchers tie results to managed care
Prescription drug errors kill thousands more Americans a year than they did
a decade ago, raising concerns that fast-growing managed care systems may
not be paying enough heed to how their patients respond to medication,
three UCSD researchers report.
"We need to ask whether changes in the way we deliver medical care may have
increased the risk of death" from prescription drug mistakes, said
sociologist David Phillips, lead author of a letter printed in tomorrow's
issue of the British medical journal The Lancet.
Phillips, psychologist Nicholas Christenfeld and graduate student Laura
Glynn, all of UCSD, drew their study from a federal database of death
certificates filed between 1983 and 1993 in every state.
They found that deaths attributed to medication errors -- mistakes in the
type of medication or the dosage level prescribed -- rose more than twofold
in that period, a greater rate of increase than any other cause of death
except AIDS.
What was surprising, however, was that the number of deaths attributed to
medication errors rose only twofold for hospital patients, but for
outpatients the increase was more than eightfold.
The rates of increase were much higher than the increases in prescription
drug sales or in the population of the United States in that period, they
said. The deaths occurred in all ages and races, although they found the
highest increases in black and white males.
Health officials in Sacramento were cautious, saying they doubted the
increases could be attributed to managed care's cost cutting.
Dr. David Werdegar, head of the statewide Office of Health Planning and
Development, which studies hospital costs and quality, wondered whether the
people who died were in any managed care system at all.
Perhaps, they weren't, "but would have gotten better follow-up care that
would have avoided that death if they had been. I have some skepticism,
particularly when they lay this at the feet of managed care," he said.
The authors said they pointed at managed care because patients in 1993 were
more likely to receive treatment in an outpatient setting, such as a
doctor's office or an emergency room, rather than in a hospital bed than
they were in 1983, a trend largely dictated by managed care's desire to cut
health costs.
In this 10-year period, they wrote, the number of outpatient visits
nationwide increased by 75 percent while the number of hospitalization days
fell by 21 percent, according to national hospital statistics.
"What we see is that an enormously increasing number of patients are being
put out earlier on their own to deal with the effects of potentially lethal
medications," said Christenfeld, one of the researchers. "What health
maintenance organizations are good at is saving money; what they're not
good at is having doctors spend a good amount of time with patients."
What's troubling is that a medication error is much more likely to go
unnoticed or uncorrected if the drug is administered in an outpatient
setting, they said.
The researchers emphasized that the death certificates did not specify who
caused the error -- the pharmacy, the prescribing physician, a nurse, the
patient's family or the patient.
But the researchers said they found one important clue that points a finger
to managed care rather than patient error. The largest increase in deaths
due to medication error involved anesthesia and narcotic painkillers.
"These are medicines that would not normally be taken by the patient
himself, but would more likely be administered by a physician or nurse in
an outpatient setting," such as an emergency room or doctor's office,
Phillips said. A decade ago, the patient would have been more likely to
receive those drugs as a hospital patient.
The researchers hypothesized that the increase in death may be due to
patients given prescriptions and then sent home, where they are the only
ones in control of their medication.
"It is thought to be increasingly difficult for physicians to maintain the
continuity and quality of their relationships with patients" today compared
with 1983, they wrote.
Other health officials were also skeptical of the study.
"Unless these researchers can demonstrate something about the managed care
system that is causing this, I don't think they have any grounds for
claiming this has something to do with managed care," said Maureen O'Haren,
executive vice president for the California Association for Health Plans,
which represents nearly all health maintenance organizations in the state.
Dr. Brian Blackbourne, medical examiner for San Diego County since 1990,
said he hadn't noticed any increase in death from medication errors and
also questioned the UCSD report.
Phillips acknowledged that the statistics could not tell whether the deaths
occurred in people who were enrolled in managed care plans.
"The nearest we can say is that this increase in deaths from medication
errors appears to be associated with a change in the way medical care is
delivered," he said. "And that may very well be associated to trends in
managed care."
The researchers said they plan more studies to focus on where these kinds
of errors occur. Phillips said they want to know which regions of the
country, what ages of patients and which illnesses and conditions are
likely to lead to these kinds of fatal mistakes.
Phillips emphasized that the initial findings "do not necessarily signal
that the health care system should immediately return to inpatient care.
Rather, it may be a signal that we should increase our careful monitoring
of medications for our patients."
He pointed to the eightfold increase in medication error deaths among
outpatients as the strongest finding.
"There's no chance of them happening by chance alone. This kind of an
increase is an enormous one."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug Makers See A Risky New Role For Nicotine
('Wall Street Journal' Suggests That, 'With New Research Revealing
That Nicotine Is More Benign Than Previously Thought,'
Pharmaceutical Companies Are Weighing The Pitfalls - And Potential Profits -
Posed By The Possibility That Some Former Tobacco Smokers
May Want To Sustain Their Nicotine Habits For Years With Patches, Sprays)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 1998 15:19:13 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake
Subject: MN: US: WSJ: Drug Makers See A Risky New Role For Nicotine
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: "Tom O'Connell" (tjeffoc@sirius.com)
Source: Wall Street Journal
Author: Suein L. Hwang, Staff Reporter Of The Wall Street Journal
Contact: editors@interactive.wsj.com
Pubdate: Fri, 27 Feb 1998
Page: B 1
DRUG MAKERS SEE A RISKY NEW ROLE FOR NICOTINE
Cigarette makers may be facing an unusual rival as long-term suppliers of
nicotine fixes: the pharmaceutical industry.
For the past 14 years, drug companies have sold nicotine patches and gums
with the single-minded goal of helping people quit smoking. Now the drug
makers are talking with federal regulators about promoting their nicotine
products to those among the nation's 50 million smokers who merely want
to cut down on cigarettes.
With new research revealing that nicotine is more benign than previously
thought, some executives envision sustaining cigarette addicts with
pharmaceutical nicotine for years, even decades.
"Nicotine, caffeine and alcohol are cultural drugs, and I don't think we
can get rid of them," says Karl Fagerstrom, former director of scientific
information for Pharmacia & Uplohn Inc., which makes smoking-cessation
products, including Nicorette nicotine gum. "If it's the nicotine people
want, why not give it to them?"
In the past year, Pharmacia, Smith~ Kline Beecham PLC, which markets
Nicorette in the U.S., and others have quietly commissioned research to
explore the potential health benefits of simply cutting back on cigarettes
smoked, as opposed to quitting altogether.
Meanwhile, for people still struggling to quit, they also hope to persuade
the Food and Drug Administration to extend the recommended dosage period
for gums and patches to as much as six months from the current six to 12
weeks.
According to people close to SmithKline, the company began talking to the
FDA about its new strategy in late 1996, and it has been exploring the
issue with division-level officials on a regular basis ever since.
The drug makers' new strategy has some obvious advantages. "There will be
less environmental smoke," says Neal Benowitz, a nicotine expert at the
University of California at San Francisco who was one of the scientific
editors of the landmark surgeon general's report of 1988 that concluded
that nicotine is addictive. "I'd much rather see people dependent on
nicotine than on tobacco," he adds.
But the approach also raises troubling ethical questions: Will smokers
merely cut down rather than quit? Will former smokers be lured back into
the habit? Should people be perpetually maintained with nicotine?
George Crane, a 77-year-old retired math researcher in Palo Alto, Calif.,
chomps on about a dozen pieces of Nicorette gum a day - and has chewed them
faithfully ever since he snuffed out his last cigarette six years ago. "I'm
going to be on nicotine all my life," Mr. Crane says. "I think we need to
take care of people who've become so addicted to nicotine that there's
nothing you can do but give them a maintenance drug."
It's certainly a sensitive topic for the drug makers. SmithKline, according
to scientists familiar with the company, is petrified that people will
accuse it of profiting from addiction, as they do the tobacco companies. "I
don't want people to misconstrue our intentions here." says George
Quesnelle, vice president of medical marketing and sales at SmithKline.
"We're not a cigarette company; we're a health-care company."
That may be, but drug makers also know there is much room for growth.
Over-the-counter smoking-cessation aids, which generated sales of about
$700 million last year, have barely been tapped by smokers, who spent $25
billion on cigarettes. According to a soon-to-be-published study
co-authored by John Pinney, a consultant for SmithKline, only an estimated
13% of all smokers try to quit using a nicotine patch or gum. Of those,
only 8% stay off cigarettes for at least a year.
The company that stands to gain the most is SmithKline, which dominates the
U.S. over-the-counter market with its Nicorette gum and NicoDerm CQ
patches. The company has already benefited from smokers who defy the
product label in search of a nicotine substitute. Last year, SmithKline
says, sales of its NicoDerm CQ patch and Nicorette gum swelled 30%, to $448
million, partly because more smokers were using the products to avoid
nicotine cravings in non-smoking places.
"To be crass about it, virtually every pharmaceutical company sees a
tremendous market here," says David Sachs, director of the Palo Alto Center
for Pulmonary Disease Prevention in California, which conducts clinical
studies on smoking-cessation products.
Just a few years ago, the mere suggestion that a drug company would
encourage people to use nicotine would have been treated as heresy. Most
experts believed the addictive substance was dangerous to the heart, and
news reports in 1992 announced an apparent link between smoking while using
the nicotine patch and heart attacks.
But new nicotine research has caused scientists to rethink their
objections. A major study by the National Institutes of Health, which
tracked smokers using nicotine gum between late 1986 and May 1994, found no
increase in heart problems. Another, conducted between November 1994 and
June 1995 and funded by Hoechst
Marion Roussel, found that those who smoked while using a patch were no
more likely to suffer ill effects than smokers who didn't wear a patch.
While some researchers still believe nicotine may not be good for the heart
most scientists now think the critical addictive agent in cigarettes is
relatively benign in low doses compared with cigarette tar, which has
dozens of carcinogens, or cancer-causing agents.
To distance themselves from cigarette makers, whose sales are perpetuated
by nicotine dependence, SmithKline's Mr. Quesnelle says drug companies must
remain committed to helping people overcome nicotine addiction. He says his
company is interested only in pursuing "exposure reduction" - that is,
selling aids to smokers who want to cut back in order to eventually quit.
"We're not in the business of saying 'use this for the rest of your life,'
" Mr. Quesnelle says. "It's too much like cigarettes."
SmithKline's biggest rival in the market, Glaxo Wellcome PLC, says it is
studying whether prolonged use of its smoking cessation drug, Zyban, will
keep ex-smokers from relapsing. Zyban, which was initially developed as an
antidepressant contains no nicotine but appears to alleviate
nicotine-withdrawal symptoms. After repackaging the drug for smokers last
year, Glaxo has been advertising it heavily. It has side effects, including
dry, mouth and insomnia; the company says they are mild and often subside
within a few weeks.
For weaning people from cigarettes, non-nicotine products like Zyban are
better than nicotine-based ones, contends J. Andrew Johnston, head of the
psychiatry clinical research group of Glaxo Wellcome. But, he adds, "I
would support long-term nicotine use through some administration other than
cigarettes."
It's likely to be many months be fore the drug makers formally petition the
FDA to extend the approved period for nicotine alternatives. But last
summer the FDA signaled an interest in nicotine after natives. One
official, Curtis Wright, said a~ a meeting, "We can shift our attitude . .
to accept the reality that there are some patients that are going to need
prolonged treatment with nicotine-replacement therapy, and approach that
as something we can gather information about rather than try to prevent."
(Mr. Wright, formerly director of the FDA's division of anesthetic,
critical care and addiction drug products, left the agency last year.)
People close to the agency say it is having a tough time grappling with any
regulatory change on nicotine, worried about the consequences to millions
of people who are addicted to cigarettes. "The experts don't know all the
right questions to ask, and it's a painstakingly slow process," says a
person familiar with the agency's thinking. "But the agency can't afford to
make any mistakes."
Representatives of Philip Morris Cos. RJR Nabisco Holdings Corp. and B.A.T
Industries PLC's Brown & Williamson tobacco unit declined to comment on
drug makers' plane.
Brown & Williamson once toyed with the idea of getting into the
nicotine-patch business itself. According to internal documents, in 1992
the company was concerned about the impact nicotine patches would have on
smoking. A couple of memos even suggested that the patches might simply be
regarded as "an alternative to smoking as a vehicle for delivering
nicotine." But a spokesman for Brown & Williamson maintains that the memos
discussing patches were anticipating how tobacco opponents, rather than the
company itself, would regard them.
As it moves forward, the FDA has reason to be cautious. In 1994, Kabi
Pharmacia Inc. sought approval for a nicotine nasal spray, which sends
nicotine to the brain more quickly than patches or gum. Though the vast
majority of smokers reported no problems, a handful grew so addicted to the
spray that they started to give themselves dozens of "hits" a day. One
woman insisted on using her spray even when she had nosebleeds; another
used hers after developing a nasal ulcer. Such incidents were very rare,
though, and the FDA ultimately approved the spray.
Certainly, the FDA's choices aren't easy. Scientists are convinced that
smoking fewer cigarettes is better than not cutting back, but not as
beneficial a quitting altogether. So if drug companies, manage to encourage
smokers only to cut back, will they indirectly discourage then from
quitting? "It's a difficult and painful question," says Dr. Wright, the
former FDA official.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug-Test Positives Rising As Labor Pool Tightens Up (Wide-Ranging
'San Jose Mercury News' Article Cites Anecdotal Evidence
That Supposed Decade-Long Decline In Positive Urine Tests
Is Reversing Itself - Three Possible Reasons Might Include
Unemployment Rate's 25-Year Low, New Products Available To Beat Drug Tests,
And A Resurgence In Popularity Of Marijuana - Which, By The Way,
Would Mean Government's National Household Survey On Drug Abuse Statistics
Are Grossly Underestimated, Which Should Raise Doubts About How Effective
Drug Testing Is Anyway)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 06:22:11 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US CA: Drug-Test Positives Rising As Labor Pool Tightens Up
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family
Source: San Jose Mercury New (CA)
Contact: letters@sjmercury.com
Pubdate: Fri, 27 Feb 1998
DRUG-TEST POSITIVES RISING AS LABOR POOL TIGHTENS UP
Illegal drugs are a big problem for Garry M. Ritzky: too many of his job
applicants use them. Ritzky, risk and human resources director for Turner
Brothers Trucking Inc., a transportation and oil services company in
Oklahoma City, is having a hard time finding candidates who are clean of
cocaine, marijuana and heroin.
`We have an oil pipe operation that uses unskilled laborers, and we're
seeing more positive drug tests,'' he said. ``We had three last week.'' The
number of positive drug tests among applicants for low-skilled jobs at
Turner Brothers has doubled in the last year, Ritzky added.
Such evidence, while mostly anecdotal, runs counter to the decline in
positive tests most businesses have seen the last decade. Yet with the
unemployment rate at a 25-year low and the economy continuing to grow, more
human resource managers say they are starting to see a small but disturbing
increase in the number of job applicants who fail screening for drug and
alcohol abuse.
One reason for that increase, they say, is that as the supply of potential
employees continues to shrink, those with drug and alcohol problems
probably represent a larger portion of the labor pool.
Some also say a number of products now available to beat drug tests are
encouraging some job applicants to take chances. And marijuana, they say,
is again in vogue.
Passing Grades Rare
According to a study released late last year by the National Household
Survey on Drug Abuse, 16 percent of unemployed people used illicit drugs in
1994.
When the data was collected, unemployment was at 6.1 percent. Today, with
unemployment at 4.7 percent, qualified job seekers are harder to find.
``Employers are finding it harder to find people who are not using drugs,''
said James G. Lipari, public health adviser for the federal government's
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. ``Since there are more employers
using testing and other prevention means, there are more people who are
unemployed for that reason, which makes the pool of unemployed who are
using drugs great.''
But these apparent trends are not yet reflected in the data. When drug
testing first became widespread, in the late 1980s, about 18 percent of the
tests showed signs of drug use, according to SmithKline Beecham Clinical
Laboratories, one of the nation's largest drug-testing labs. That number,
which represents mostly screening of applicants and a small amount of tests
for workers already on the job, fell steadily, to 8.8 percent in 1991, and
then began to decline more slowly. In 1996, about 5.8 percent of the tests
showed signs of drugs.
``Over the past 10 years, we've seen a dramatic decrease in positive
tests,'' said Thomas Johnson, a spokesman for SmithKline Beecham. The lab
is expected to release the results for 1997 in the next few weeks. ``Early
indications are that they will continue to decline,'' Johnson said.
One drug that is coming back, however, is marijuana. Of the people who
failed the SmithKline drug test in 1996, almost 60 percent had traces of
marijuana in their urine. That is up from 52 percent from 1995.
Marijuana use was in the spotlight two weeks ago when Canadian snowboarder
Ross Rebagliati had his Olympic gold medal withdrawn after he failed a drug
test.
Rebagliati said he had not smoked marijuana since April 1997 and that any
residue in his urine was from second-hand smoke With somewhat
less-than-clear Olympic rules on the penalty for marijuana use, he was
later allowed to keep the medal.
Accuracy Challenged
The accuracy of drug tests has been questioned by groups including the
Society for Human Resource Management, based in Alexandria, Va. It says
data provided by companies like SmithKline Beecham, while accurately
reflecting a downward rend, must be taken with a grain of salt. ``Some
people have since learned to beat the system,'' said Barry Lawrence, a
spokesman for the society.
Several companies advertise on the Internet, for example, selling products
to cover up traces of drugs in urine or hair. One company, Test Clean Drug
Testing Solutions in Oklahoma City, boasts that its product, Klear, which
can be bought for as little as $30, ``is the smallest, most potent,
undetectable urine purifier sold today.''
Johnson of SmithKline acknowledged, ``It's like a cat-and-mouse game.''
Catching On To Tricks
But, he said, laboratories are catching on and are starting to test for
those adulterants as well.
Most experts agree that drug testing has cut drug and alcohol abuse in the
workplace, but its greatest impact is on casual users.
``It eliminated use among individuals who could stop, who had more at stake
and didn't want to lose that,'' said Ellen Weber, director of national
policy for the Legal Action Center, a non-profit group based in New York
that is involved in drug, alcohol and HIV employment issues. ``Drug
testing, in my mind, was never an effective tool for people who are
dependent on drugs.''
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Drop Reported In Prison Drug Use ('Standard-Times'
Notes Massachusetts Prison Officials Say 22,303 Prisoners Were Tested
In 1995, And 507 Tested Positive For Illicit Drugs,
Compared To 62,417 Inmates Tested In 1997, With 192 Testing Positive)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 06:22:11 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US MA: Drop Reported In Prison Drug Use
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: John Smith
Pubdate: Fri., 27 Feb. 1998
Source: The Standard-Times, Serving the South Coast of Massachusetts
Contact: YourView@S-T.com
WebPage: http://www.s-t.com
Note: Please mail any comments to Newsroom@S-T.com
DROP REPORTED IN PRISON DRUG USE
Officials say testing, fear of punishment works
BOSTON -- Corrections officials say fear, not treatment, is the best way to
keep prisoners off drugs.
But advocates for prison inmates say drug users in the state's jails need
more treatment.
The state Department of Corrections announced this week that the number of
inmates using drugs has dropped sharply in the last three years.
"If you test them frequently enough, you will force them to break the
habit," Timothy App, assistant deputy commissioner for community
corrections, told a Boston newspaper.
Inmates in the two minimum-security programs at the Bristol County House of
Correction are tested for drug use at least once a week, jail spokesman
Bernard Sullivan told The Standard-Times.
"Between the pre-release, where inmates are being prepared to go out
into the community, and the drug rehab program at the David R. Nelson
Correctional Alcohol Center, for obvious reasons, those people are tested
regularly," Mr. Sullivan said.
In the general population at both Ash Street and Dartmouth facilities, drug
testing is random.
"Any suggestion or hint of a problem with an inmate, there is a test done,"
Mr. Sullivan said. "Our people know when someone is not acting normally."
Mr. Sullivan said one longtime jail employee said he had noticed a decrease
in drug-related incidents in the jail buildings, most likely a result of
more restricted access by inmates.
Officials give some credit to treatment programs for the decline in use,
but say prisoners stop mostly because they fear punishment if they test
positive for drugs. App said inmates are tested at random and when they are
suspected of using drugs.
Jill Brotman, executive director of the prisoner advocacy group
Massachusetts Prison Society, said the department spends too much on
testing and not enough on programs.
"Counseling, mental health and educational programs provide people with the
wherewithal to lead drug-free lives, not drug testing and punitive
policies," Brotman said.
Last year, urine tests given to 0.3 percent of prisoners were positive,
compared with 2.3 percent in 1995.
App said inmates with positive tests are dealt with on a case-by-case
basis. Punishment may be loss of library access, canteen use, visits or
being transferred to an area with higher security.
In extreme cases, prisoners may be referred for treatment and prosecution.
Officials said 22,303 prisoners were tested in 1995, and 507 showed drugs.
Last year, 62,417 inmates, close to three times as many, were tested, and
192, or 62 percent fewer than in 1995, showed drugs.
The number of inmates caught using drugs tends to drop as the number of
tests increase, say officials.
Attorney General Janet Reno called the Massachusetts policy exemplary, and
federal officials invited App to talk about the policies last fall to help
other states come up with their own.
App said corrections officials spent $150,000 on testing last year and
expect to spend $200,000 this year.
Anthony Carnevale, spokesman for the department, said it spends slightly
less than $3 million a year on drug treatment.
States are required to have prison drug policies that conform to federal
guidelines to remain eligible for federal money for capital improvements in
prisons.
The Department of Correction got $8,693,941 in federal money last year and
a total of $9,942,394 since the grant program was implemented in 1996, said
Steven Amos, deputy director of the Justice Department's correction program
office.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
White House Says Mexico 'Cooperating' In Drug Fight Despite DEA Report
('New York Times' Says Clinton Administration Announced Thursday That Mexico
Was 'Fully Cooperating' In Fight Against Drug Trafficking,
Despite Confidential DEA Assessment That Measures By Mexico
Have Not Produced 'Significant Results')
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 1998 01:44:15 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake
Subject: MN: US: NYT: White House Says Mexico 'Cooperating' in Drug Fight
Despite D.E.A. Report
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Richard Lake
Pubdate: Friday, 27 Feb 1998
Author: Tim Golden
Source: New York Times
Contact: letters@nytimes.com
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
WHITE HOUSE SAYS MEXICO 'COOPERATING' IN DRUG FIGHT DESPITE D.E.A. REPORT
WASHINGTON -- Despite a confidential government assessment that recent
drug-enforcement measures by Mexico have not produced "significant
results," the White House announced Thursday that the Mexican government
was "fully cooperating" in the fight against drug trafficking.
While some senior administration officials lavishly praised Mexico's
record, the confidential assessment, by the Drug Enforcement
Administration, painted a much darker picture.
It played down the impact of a major effort to overhaul the Mexican federal
police, and emphasized that corrupt officials continued to insure the
impunity of the country's biggest drug traffickers.
"During the past year," the analysis reads, "the government of Mexico has
not accomplished its counternarcotics goals or succeeded in cooperation
with the United States government."
"The scope of Mexican drug trafficking has increased significantly, along
with the attendant violence," said the assessment, a copy of which was
obtained by The New York Times. "The level of drug corruption in Mexico
continues unabated."
Mexico had been expected to win the endorsement of the White House as part
of the annual evaluation of drug-control efforts abroad, which is known as
certification. But officials acknowledged that the announcement Thursday
followed two days of often-chaotic maneuvering, and that the blunt
criticism it immediately received from both parties in Congress suggested
that the administration might have underestimated the volatility of the
issue.
"We must make an honest assessment," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said
at a Senate subcommittee hearing Thursday. "And by no realistic standard
can Mexico be deemed to have cooperated fully, which is the standard of the
law."
Feinstein and other legislators said they expected considerable debate over
the administration's endorsement of Mexico, which can be overturned by
Congress. But it was unclear whether the critics have as much support as
they did last year, when the White House narrowly prevailed.
In its review of drug-enforcement programs in 30 countries considered
important to the production or transportation of illegal drugs, the
administration denied certification to Afghanistan, Burma, Nigeria and
Iran. Under the law, the United States must now withhold part of any
foreign aid those countries may receive and vote against loans they seek
from development banks.
The administration also decertified four other nations -- Colombia,
Pakistan, Paraguay and Cambodia -- but waived the penalties in the interest
of national security. Most critics of the Mexico decision argued that it
should have been placed in that category.
The decision on Colombia in effect upgraded the country's status after it
had been penalized two years in a row, and it came barely two months after
the Colombian government swept aside American appeals and allowed the
passage of a new extradition treaty that will protect drug kingpins from
the threat of prosecution in the United States.
In announcing the decision, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright suggested
that Colombia's waiver did not reflect government efforts so much as
support for the police and efforts "to lay the groundwork for increased
future cooperation."
Albright's acting deputy for international narcotics issues, Randy Beers,
also argued that Colombia was at "a critical turning point" because of the
threats posed by increasingly aggressive leftist insurgents, still-powerful
drug traffickers and a major increase in the country's cultivation of coca,
the raw material for cocaine.
A report released Thursday by the General Accounting Office, the
investigative office of Congress, contended that Colombia's decertification
had hobbled the much-praised Colombian National Police by depriving the
force of needed materiel, like explosives and ammunition.
Beers, however, contradicted the thrust of the report, and said that since
being decertified without a national-interest waiver, Colombia had actually
received more and more aid from the United States each year.
Administration officials appeared to be far less comfortable with the
contradictory evidence of drug-enforcement progress in Mexico.
Concerned that dissonant voices might compete with the certification
announcement, the White House at one point tried to stop administration
officials from testifying on the subject at a Senate hearing scheduled for
Thursday. But while the White House drug-policy director, Gen. Barry
McCaffrey, bowed out of the hearing, Thomas Constantine, the head of the
the Drug Enforcement Administration, did not.
Worried about Constantine, who is widely viewed as the most outspoken
senior official on the issue, the White House then tried unsuccessfully to
get McCaffrey back on the schedule in order to "balance" the portrayal of
Mexico, an official said.
"These are not the actions of a government that feels confident," said the
chairman of the subcommittee, Sen. Paul Coverdell, R-Ga. "They are
defensive actions."
McCaffrey has consistently taken the lead among administration officials in
praising the Mexican government publicly. Thursday, he called its
cooperation with the United States "absolutely superlative."
The State Department's explanation of the certification decision noted a
series of changes by and to Mexican law-enforcement institutions over the
last year: the creation of specialized police intelligence units; the
reconstitution of special task forces in which agents of the two countries
are to work together against traffickers along the border; an increase in
drug seizures, and some progress in efforts to insure the extradition from
Mexico of drug fugitives wanted in the United States.
But many law-enforcement officials said Mexico's history on such matters
demanded a greater skepticism. They noted that Mexico has recreated its
drug-enforcement agency three times since 1989, that no Mexican national
was in fact extradited to face drug charges in the United States, and that
the new units have made only modest progress.
The analysis by the Drug Enforcement Administration noted many of the
changes made. But it added bluntly that "none of these changes have
produced significant results."
"None have resulted in the arrest of the leadership or the dismantlement of
any of the well-known organized criminal groups operating out of Mexico,"
the analysis said. "Unfortunately, virtually every investigation DEA
conducts against major traffickers in Mexico uncovers significant
corruption of law-enforcement officials."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Citing Progress, US Ends Drug Sanctions On Bogota - Pakistan And Cambodia
Also Receive Waivers ('International Herald Tribune' Version)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 1998 15:14:16 +0000
To: press@drugtext.nl, editor@mapinc.org
From: Peter Webster
Subject: ART: Citing Progress, U.S. Ends Drug Sanctions on Bogota
International Herald Tribune Feb 27 1998
contact: iht@iht.com
CitingProgress, U.S. Ends Drug Sanctions on Bogota
Pakistan and Cambodia Also Receive Waivers
Compiled by Our Staff from Dispatches
WASHINGTON---Citing national security concerns and gains in Colombia's war
on drugs, the Clinton administration has decided to waive sanctions against
that country.
Although Colombia will remain in a special "decertified" category, the
waiver means that there will be fewer impediments to U.S. assistance to
Colombia's anti-drug efforts. Colombia also will be spared economic
penalties for the coming year.
Pakistan and Cambodia also received a sanctions waiver despite their poor
record, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright announced.
American officials described the agreement hours before the public release
of formal administration evaluations of the anti-narcotics performances of
30 foreign countries.
Most of the 30 were expected to be "certified" as fully cooperating with
U.S. anti-narcotics efforts. The officials, asking not to be identified,
said the administration had decided, as expected, to recertify Mexico,
ignoring the objections of many in Congress.
The administration is not certifying Colombia as fully cooperating because
of ficials believe that country's anti-narcotics effort suffers from
serious shortcomings, the officials said.
In Colombia, Foreign Minister Maria Emma MeFia called the conditional
certification a triumph "for this country, which has suffered greatly,
which has lost a lot of tives and for the president, of course, who has
helped us emerge from this predicament we've had for two years that did not
serve us well."
Colombia remains the world's leading producer and distributor of cocaine
and a major supplier of heroin and marijuana.
The officials said Colombia-would remain in the "decertified" category.
They added that the decision to waive the sanctions was based partly on the
emergence of the Colombian national police as an effective
counter-narcotics force.
For the last two years, Colombia has been ineligible for all U.S.
assistance except for humanitarian and counternarcotics aid. The
designation also required the United States to vote against Colombian loan
requests in international lending institutions.
Colombia's president, Ernesto Samper, is a major reason the Clinton
administration has been unable to give Colombia a clean bill of health. He
is seen in Washington as beholden to drug traffickers based on an alleged
$6 million contribution he received during the 1994 presidential campaign.
The U.S. decision to waive sanctions was made easier by the fact that Mr.
Samper's term in of fice ends in August. Presidential elections are set for
May.
American officials said Colombia's eradication campaign had been
impressive, but they said increased plantings by traffickers had more than
compensated for the crops destroyed through spraying. They also describe as
a step forward the reinstatement of an extradition law by the Colombian
legislature in December.
Colombia had joined Afghanistan Burma, Nigeria and Iran on the list of
decertified countries ineligible for most U.S. assistance.
Other countries subject to the certification process were Aruba, the
Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, Cambodia China, the Dominican Republic Ecuador,
Guatemala, Haiti, Hong Kong, India, Jamaica, Laos, Malaysia, Panama,
Paraguay, Peru, Taiwan, Thailand, Venezuela and Vietnarn.
Syria and Lebanon were decertified last year but are no longer considered
problem countries because of successful opium poppy eradication programs.
The certification process, first required by Congress in 1986, enrages
many countries, where it is seen as counterproductive. These nations say
the root cause of the drug problem is insatiable U.S. demand, not lax
enforcement by source countries.
But Clinton administration officials say the threat of public humiliation
the certification process entails has energized anti-narcotics activities
in a number of countries.
(AP, AFP, Reuters) -- 'Emerald King' Is Arrested
A millionaire entrepreneur known as the "Emerald King" was arrested late
Tuesday on a farm in a suburb of Bogota on charges of sponsoring and
financing right-wing paramilitary death squads, The Washington Post reported.
Prosecutors said Victor Manuel Carranza Nino, 56, had long been suspected
of complicity in a number of killings and of being involved in drug
trafficking.
***
The drugtext press list.
News on substance use related issues, drugs and drug policy
webmaster@drugtext.nl
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hemp To Become Legal Crop (According To 'Ottawa Citizen,'
Federal Health Minister Allan Rock Yesterday Told Annual Meeting
Of Canadian Federation Of Agriculture That, For First Time Since WWII,
Cultivation Of Industrial Hemp Will Be Legal Nationwide Early Next Month)
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 21:09:09 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: Canada: Hemp To Become Legal Crop
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Source: Ottawa Citizen (Canada)
Contact: letters@thecitizen.southam.ca
Website: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/
Pubdate: Fri, 27 February 1998
Author: Dawn Walton, The Ottawa Citizen
HEMP TO BECOME LEGAL CROP
'I'm not on marijuana -- I'm just excited,' MP says
Canadian farmers can plan to grow hemp this spring, thanks to a decision
that comes a year earlier than expected -- but, as some see it, 60 years
late.
Federal Health Minister Allan Rock told the annual meeting of the Canadian
Federation of Agriculture that, for the first time since the Second World
War, cultivation of industrial hemp will be legal nationwide early next
month.
"When I took office last June, I was told by Health Canada officials that
we could not possibly get regulations in place to permit hemp production
until the growing season of 1999," Mr. Rock said yesterday.
As the result of a North American anti-marijuana campaign, both hemp and
marijuana were outlawed in Canada in 1938. Both substances come from the
same cannabis plant, but they're different varieties; only marijuana
contains enough of the psychoactive substance tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to
give users a "high."
According to the Health Canada regulations still to be formally approved by
Mr. Rock, industrial hemp must have less than 0.3 per cent THC, which means
smoking a field of the stuff would give the users more of a headache than a
high.
"There will be minor adjustments (to the regulations) and those minor
adjustments will be reflected in the final regulations," said Derek Kent,
spokesman for the minister. "I can't comment on what those adjustments are
because it's not public yet, but those will become public, of course, when
they become law."
But assuming the licensing portion of the regulations doesn't change,
individuals who wish to grow hemp cannot have been found guilty of any drug
offence in the previous 10 years and must be at least 18. Farmers also will
not be allowed to grow less than four hectares of hemp.
Hemp crusaders are thrilled with the long-awaited public announcement that
would give the green light to growing hemp.
"I am delighted that the matter is going ahead," said Senator Lorna Milne,
the Liberal member who pushed the federal government to move more quickly
with the regulations.
"This is an opportunity for Canadian farmers, unmatched in this century. It
is also proof of the effectiveness and worth of the Senate of Canada."
The value of a Canadian hemp industry is difficult to quantify, but every
year the United States imports $100 million (U.S.) of the crop annually.
It's not legal to grow hemp in the U.S. but there also is pressure there
for legalization.
"There's been a lot of interest from Americans who right now are purchasing
their hemp products from abroad -- mostly China -- and they'd love to be
able to drive it down from Canada," said Ron Schnider, of West Hemp
Enterprises Inc., a Vancouver-based firm that is helping B.C. and Alberta
farmers get licences and obtain seeds.
Almost 100 interested growers have contacted West Hemp for advice in
anticipation of the regulations
In 1996, the federal government passed legislation that made the
cultivation and sale of hemp legal, but farmers had been waiting ever since
for the regulations that would actually allow them to grow the stuff.
Sally Rutherford, executive director of Canadian Federation of Agriculture,
which represents 200,000 farm families nationwide, has been asking for
legalization for the past few years.
"That provides another commodity that people can produce and there appears
to be a growing market for it. It is growable in lots of different areas.
For people looking for diversified crops to grow, it is good news."
In the 100-kilometre region around Grand Forks, B.C., interest in growing
the crop is strong. About 75 potential growers have expressed interest.
There has also been a flurry of interest in northern parts of the prairie
provinces because the crop can be turned around quickly in a very short
growing season.
In southwestern Ontario, where the first federal licence to grow hemp was
issued in 1994, farmers have been tapping into the potentially lucrative
industry.
Rose-Marie Ur, a Liberal MP from Lambton-Kent-Middlesex who has been among
those lobbying the Health Minister to move faster to legalize, said
yesterday's announcement marks a real opportunity for local farmers to be
ahead of their American counterparts.
"I'm not on marijuana," she beamed. "I'm just excited."
But even some of the biggest proponents of the alternative crop remain
critical of the proposed regulations.
"One of the problems was they were limiting growing to minimum of four
hectares, which eliminates a lot of small farmers," said Brian Taylor,
mayor of Grand Forks, B.C.
Mr. Taylor, an early advocate, planted hemp illegally three years ago in a
field to spell the word "hemp" and was charged with cultivation and
possession. The charges were stayed after he demonstrated it was hemp, not
marijuana.
Experts caution that growing hemp is not a get-rich-quick scheme.
"It will be used in rotation with other crops," Ms. Rutherford says.
"It's certainly no Cinderella crop. It's not going to make anybody a fortune."
Ms. Rutherford says. "It's not going to be used as a permanent crop. It is
just a really good rotation crop for people to use to provide some
diversified activity."
The 0.3 per cent level of THC permitted to be present in the hemp seeds is
also being criticized as being too rigid.
"I think it's actually the THC that protects it from pests, ironically
enough," Mr. Schnider said.
Hemp History:
Banned in Canada since 1938 because it is related to marijuana, it enjoyed
a brief resurgence when it was needed for the Second World War effort, but
the law was once again enforced in the late 1940s.
Political parties have avoided the issue of decriminalization. While the
Liberals promised decriminalization in their 1980 throne speech, they never
followed through.
In 1996, a multi-party Senate committee studied the issue but failed to
come up with a solution.
On June 20, 1996, the federal government passed a bill to make hemp exempt
from a list of cannabis products illegal in Canada.
In March 1998, Federal Health Minister Allan Rock is expected to formally
introduce regulations for the cultivation of hemp.
Remained legal in China, France, Spain and many former East Bloc countries.
Industrial uses of hemp: automotive parts; fibre for the pulp and paper
industry; building materials, textiles; soap; rope; cooking oils; food
additives; carpets; cosmetics; paint.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Swiss Heroin Trials - Testing Alternative Approaches
(Editorial In 'British Medical Journal' Says Swiss Results Show
'Prescribed Heroin Is Likely To Have A Limited Role' -
Swiss Maintained Good Drug Control, Good Order, Client Safety, Staff Morale,
No Evidence Of Increasing Tolerance, Death Rate 1 Percent Per Year,
Not A Single 'Overdose')
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 21:09:09 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: UK: BMJ: Editorial: The Swiss Heroin Trials: Testing Alternative
Approaches
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Kevin Zeese
Source: British Medical Journal [BMJ No 7132 Volume 316] (UK)
Contact: bmj@bmj.com
Pubdate: Fri, 27 Feb 1998
THE SWISS HEROIN TRIALS: TESTING ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES
Prescribed heroin is likely to have a limited role
Over half a million heroin misusers receive oral methadone maintenance
treatment world-wide (1) but the maintenance prescription of injectable
opioid drugs, like heroin, remains controversial.
In 1992 Switzerland began a large scale evaluation of heroin and other
injectable opiate prescribing that eventually involved 1,035 misusers.(2,3)
The results of the evaluation have recently been reported.(4) These show
that it was feasible to provide heroin by intravenous injection at a
clinic, up to three times a day, for seven days a week. This was done while
maintaining good drug control, good order, client safety, and staff morale.
Patients were stabilised on 500 to 600 mg heroin daily without evidence of
increasing tolerance. Retention in treatment was 89% at six months and 69%
at 18 months.(4)
The self reported use of non-prescribed heroin fell significantly, but
other drug use was minimally affected. The death rate was 1% per year, and
there were no deaths from overdose among participants while they were
receiving treatment. There were limited reports of problems in the local
neighbourhood, despite the high frequency of daily attendance. Heroin
diversion was not a major problem, although some trial participants were
expelled for attempting to remove heroin from the clinic or to smuggle
cocaine into the clinic.(4)
The Swiss trials have encouraged proposals for similar trials in other
countries, including Australia, (5) and, more recently, Denmark, Luxemburg,
and the Netherlands. Any country that contemplates a trial of heroin
prescription will need to address several problems that arose in the Swiss
trials. Firstly, the participants' preference for heroin over any
alternative opioid undermined the randomised controlled design that was
originally planned and resulted finally in a descriptive outcome study.
Secondly, in the Swiss trials heroin was prescribed as part of a
comprehensive social and psychological intervention. In the absence of any
comparison treatment it was impossible to disentangle the pharmacological
effects of heroin from the effects of providing treatment in well resourced
clinics with highly motivated staff. An assessment of this issue requires
an appropriate comparison treatment. Thirdly, the unique social and
political context of the Swiss trials makes it uncertain how to generalise
their findings to other countries. Switzerland is a wealthy society that
has a comprehensive healthcare system that includes a well developed drug
treatment system whose staff have substantial experience with opioid
substitution treatment. Even so, heroin prescription in Switzerland has
been an addition to existing treatment approaches: it has not replaced the
methadone maintenance still prescribed for 15,000 Swiss heroin misusers but
has been an expensive option for a minority of severely dependent misusers
who have not responded to existing treatments.
Given this limited role, the controversy surrounding heroin prescription in
Switzerland and elsewhere has been out of all proportion to its likely role
as a treatment option. A recent debate about heroin prescription in
Australia, for example, dominated public discussion of drug policy for
nearly a month before the government decided against proceeding with the
trial. The debate also had other untoward effects: supporters of the trial
argued that something radical was needed, thereby encouraging the view that
Australia was in the midst of a national heroin crisis. Their opponents
agreed but countered that this was evidence that the national policy of
harm minimisation, which sanctions methadone maintenance and needle and
syringe exchange, had failed.
These issues have not been resolved by the Swiss trial. There are clearly
still questions that remain unanswered. The most important is what is the
comparative usefulness and cost effectiveness of injectable heroin and oral
methadone maintenance? A convincing answer to this question would
substantially improve our understanding of the role of this controversial
treatment.
Michael Farrell Senior lecturer National Addiction Centre, Institute of
Psychiatry, London SE5 8AF
Wayne Hall Executive director National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre,
Sydney, Australia
References
1 Farrell M, Neeleman J, Gossop M, Griffiths P, Buning E, Finch E, et al.
The legislation, organisation and delivery of methadone in 12 EU member
states. Brussels: European Commission, 1996.
2 Rihs-Middel M. The Swiss Federal Office of Public Health's research
strategy and the prescription of narcotics. In: Rihs-Middel M, ed. The
medical prescription of narcotics. Scientific foundations of practical
experiences. Berne: Hogrefe and Huber, 1994.
3 Uchlenhagen A, Dobler-Mikola A, Gutzwiller F. Medically controlled
prescription of narcotics: fundamentals, research plan, first experiences.
In: Rihs-Middel M, ed. The medical prescription of narcotics. Scientific
foundations of practical experiences. Berne: Hogrefe and Huber, 1994.
4 Uchlenhagen A, Gutzwiller F, Dobler-Mikola A, eds. Programme for a
medical prescription of narcotics: final report of the research
representatives. Summary of the synthesis report. Zurich: University of
Zurich, 1997.
5 Bammer G. The feasibility of the controlled supply of heroin to opiate
addicts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Week Online With DRCNet, Issue Number 31 (News Summary For Activists,
From The Drug Reform Coordination Network - Original Articles Note
American Public Health Association Holds Congressional Briefing
On Syringe Exchange; And, Editorial By Adam J. Smith, 'Hollywood
And The Drug War')
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 17:02:40 EST
Originator: drc-natl@drcnet.org
Sender: drc-natl@drcnet.org
From: DRCNet (manager@drcnet.org)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drc-natl@drcnet.org)
Subject: The Week Online with DRCNet, Issue #31
***
Drug Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet)
Rapid Response Team
***
Please copy and distribute.
***
THE WEEK ONLINE WITH DRCNet
ISSUE #31 -- FEBRUARY 27, 1998
(To sign off this list, mailto:listproc@drcnet.org with the
line "signoff drc-natl" in the body of the message, or
mailto:drcnet@drcnet.org for assistance. To subscribe to
this list, visit http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html.)
STILL AVAILABLE: Copies of Marijuana Myths, Marijuana
Facts, free with donations of $30 or more to DRCNet! Sign-
on online at http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html, or mail to
DRCNet, 2000 P St., NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
1. DRCNet SPECIAL REPORT: AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION
HOLDS CONGRESSIONAL BRIEFING ON SYRINGE EXCHANGE
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#apha
2. IT'S "CERTIFICATION" TIME AGAIN: MEXICO MAKES THE GRADE,
COLOMBIA DOESN'T -- BUT SANCTIONS WILL BE LIFTED
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#certification
3. COLORADO STATE SENATE OKAYS NEEDLE EXCHANGE: REPUBLICAN
STATE CHAIR EXPLICTLY THREATENS REPS WHO VOTE IN FAVOR!
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#colorado
4. HOUSE REPUBLICANS DECLARE: DAMN THE SCIENCE, FULL SPEED
AHEAD! APPROVE RESOLUTION OPPOSING ANY USE OF MARIJUANA
AS MEDICINE (reprinted from the NORML Weekly News)
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#nomedmj
5. HOLLYWOOD GROUP PROMISES MORE ANTI-DRUG THEMES (also --
see this week's editorial)
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#hollywood
6. STATE LEGISLATORS LAUNCH COUNTERATTACK ON PROP 215 IN
CALIFORNIA
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#antiprop215
7. CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT DEALS A BLOW TO BUYERS' CLUBS
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#calcourt
8. NO FEDERAL CHARGES TO BE FILED AGAINST MARINE WHO SHOT
HERNANDEZ
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#hernandez
9. EDITORIAL: Hollywood and the Drug War
http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/2-27.html#editorial
***
1. SPECIAL REPORT: AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION HOLDS
CONGRESSIONAL BRIEFING ON SYRINGE EXCHANGE
-Adam J. Smith
On Tuesday, 2/24, the APHA held a very well-attended
briefing for congressional staffers on the topic of syringe
exchange. At a moment in history when the mere mention of
drugs or drug policy reform sends shivers through the very
halls of Congress, the prestige of the 125 year-old APHA was
an important factor in cutting through the politics of the
debate and drawing a crowd of over 100 staffers to the
luncheon.
Three speakers, Harry Simpson, Executive Director of the
Community Health Awareness Project in Detroit, Dr. Peter
Beilenson, Health Commissioner for the City of Baltimore,
and Dr. Don Des Jarlais, prominent AIDS researcher,
currently on staff at the Beth Israel Medical Center in New
York, made a compelling case in favor of syringe exchange
from the practical, political and public health
perspectives. Although all three speakers spoke of the
imperative, both medical and moral, for lifting the current
ban on the use of federal AIDS funding for these programs,
the event also provided a broad-based education on the issue
of harm reduction to staffers, who seemed eager both to
learn more about syringe exchange and to gather rhetorical
ammunition to take back to hesitant legislators.
Harry Simpson spoke first and told the standing room only
crowd of his 16 years as an injection drug user. Clean and
sober today and the Executive Director of a full-service
harm-reduction and public health center with an annual
budget of over $1 million, Simpson eloquently made the case
for helping, rather than discarding, our fellow citizens who
find themselves mired in addiction and abuse. "As a
recovering addict, when I first heard about syringe-
exchange, my initial reaction was, 'you gonna give these
folks free needles? That's the most ridiculous thing I've
ever heard.'" Simpson went on to say, however, that today,
as a practitioner of harm reduction and syringe exchange, he
believed that the service was not only an effective AIDS-
prevention strategy, but also provided a bridge for
substance abusers which led to healthier lives and quite
often to successful recovery.
Dr. Beilenson spoke of the experience of the city of
Baltimore, where AIDS is the #1 killer of persons 25-44
years-old. Baltimore, he said, had the largest city-run
syringe exchange/harm reduction program in the country, with
two mobile units, six separate sites and two pharmacies
where syringes could be exchanged. Dr. Beilenson emphasized
the superiority of exchanges, where dirty needles are taken
back off the street and properly disposed of, over simple
over-the-counter availability, which relied upon consumers
to dispose of the potentially hazardous waste themselves.
One staffer asked about reports that some sites around the
country had given syringes to people who had not brought
used syringes to exchange, to which Dr. Beilenson replied
that while an exchange is formally required, and that the
vast majority of clients did in fact come to the sites with
used syringes, if staff believed that a person asking for
syringes was, in fact, an IV drug user, it would not be in
anyone's interest to turn them away. In Baltimore, where
each syringe is computer coded, the city-run exchange gets
back over 90% of the syringes that it gives out. Dr.
Beilenson also noted that while the typical taxpayer cost
for a single indigent AIDS patient easily surpassed
$100,000, the cost of running Baltimore's entire exchange
program was just $300,000, making the program an enormous
cost-saving measure for the city.
Dr. Beilenson also listed for the staffers four things that
syringe exchange does NOT do: 1) increase the number of
dirty needles on the streets (Baltimore has seen a
decrease); 2) increase crime in their areas of operation
(here again Baltimore has seen a decrease); 3) increase the
use of drugs by clients (Baltimore's large-scale study found
a 22% overall reduction in use by clients); 4) condone
injection drug use, especially with regard to adolescents
(Baltimore's program, which serves over 7,000 clients and
which has exchanged 1.7 million syringes, has exactly two
clients under 18 years of age).
Dr. Don Des Jarlais spoke of the public health imperative
for implementing programs which have now been common-
practice for years in nearly every western society. He told
the gathered staffers that more than one half of all new
AIDS cases in the US came directly from infected needles,
and that overall, more than 70% of new cases were injection-
related. He said that IV drug users have multiple
incentives to use the programs where they are available, as
in addition to the health benefits, new needles worked and
felt better than old, dull needles. In fact, 70-90% of
users who had access to programs used them regularly. In
addition, he stressed, syringe exchange programs were the
single largest source of treatment referrals in areas in
which they operated.
In a nod to the partisan nature of the debate over the
programs in the US, Des Jarlais addded that in the late
1980's "that noted British liberal Margaret Thatcher
instituted nation-wide syringe exchange" as part of her
country's AIDS prevention strategy, and that in contrast to
the startling situation in the States, there is today in the
UK almost no correlation between IV drug use and the AIDS
virus.
Throughout the program, attendees could be seen nodding in
agreement and furiously taking notes. One staffer asked the
panel how to broach the subject with a legislator for whom
the moral imperative of helping drug addicted persons, or
even the public health benefits of the programs, fell on
deaf ears. Beilenson urged the staffer to argue dollars and
cents. He reiterated his earlier assertion that Baltimore's
$300,000 program was saving the city untold millions of
dollars in health care costs each year. A warm round of
applause closed the program, and a buzzing crowd of
congressional aides spilled out into the hall and back to
work.
[AJS: Having witnessed this event with the knowledge that
the House Republican leadership is in the process of
crafting a comprehensive Drug War legislative package, one
could not escape the feeling that a fight over drug policy,
a real fight with real philosophical distinctions, is set to
emerge in the House and to be played out over the next 3-4
years. That fight will pit war vs. peace, marginalization
vs. integration, and punitive measures vs. public and
individual health imperatives. At stake will be nothing
less than the future direction of the democracy, and the
type and the character of the nation that we will hand to
our children in the new millennium.]
***
2. IT'S "CERTIFICATION" TIME AGAIN" MEXICO MAKES THE GRADE,
COLOMBIA DOESN'T -- BUT SANCTIONS WILL BE LIFTED
In the annual, controversial ritual in which the President,
with the consent of Congress, certifies those nations which
have been appropriately cooperative in the global Drug War,
Mexico has maintained its status as an ally, while Colombia,
which has been decertified for the past two years, will
remain off the list but will see US sanctions lifted.
None of this is final, of course, as Congress may well
attempt to overturn President Clinton's decisions, as they
attempted unsuccessfully to do last year with regard to
Mexico. The Associated Press (2/26) reports that there is
already a move on in Congress to decertify Mexico
legislatively. Nations which have been denied certification
face economic sanctions including an automatic "no" vote by
the U.S. on any loan requests to the World Bank.
That is exactly the position in which Colombia has found
itself over the past two years; the Clinton Administration
has cited its belief that President Ernesto Samper received
over $6 million in campaign contributions from drug
traffickers during his 1994 campaign. Clinton's
recommendation this year, that Colombia remain decertified
but have economic sanctions waived, apparently reflects the
belief of the administration that Colombia's police force
and new attorney general are relatively free of corruption
and are making a good-faith effort to combat the multi-
billion dollar trade. The AP notes that US officials
acknowledge the massive eradication efforts in Colombia but
also know that increased planting of coca has more than made
up the difference.
{DB: The one thing that neither the Administration nor
Congress wants to admit is that it doesn't make a difference
how hard a source country "fights" the drug trade -- demand
for drugs in the US and other countries assures that someone
will provide the supply. Study after study, many of them by
the government's own General Accounting Office, have found
that source country efforts have had negligible long-term
impact on the price and availability of drugs in the US.]
***
3. COLORADO STATE SENATE OKAYS NEEDLE EXCHANGE: REPUBLICAN
STATE CHAIR EXPLICTLY THREATENS REPS WHO VOTE IN FAVOR
In an emotional and hotly contested 20-15 vote, Colorado's
senate approved SB-99, which would legalize syringe exchange
in the state. The measure goes next to the house. The city
of Denver would like to institute a needle exchange program,
while Boulder already has one in operation, albeit
illegally. Authorities in Boulder have thus far declined to
shut the program down in the belief that it is providing a
valuable service to the community.
Denver's Mayor Wellington Webb, a supporter of syringe
exchange, told the Denver Post, "I'm pleased that we're
halfway there, and I certainly want to congratulate those
legislators who were able to give another tool to be used in
the fight against the spread of AIDS.
But sources told The Week Online that Colorado State
Republican Chair Steve Curtis has issued an explicit threat
to any house member who votes in favor of the bill. Curtis
promised that any house Republican who strays from the party
line on this vote can be assured of facing party-financed
opposition in their next primary. Insiders say that Curtis'
threat may in fact work against his party, with the
potential existing for a backlash against such an overt act
of coercion. The bill is now in the 11-member Health,
Environment, Welfare and Institutions committee, where it is
thought that one or two swing votes are still needed to send
the bill to the floor.
Paul Simons, Executive Director of People Engaged in
Education and Reduction Strategies (PEERS), a proponent of
the bill, told The Week Online, "There is obviously a lot of
support within the city governments of both Denver and
Boulder for these programs. We're facing a situation here
where legislators from districts which are not facing these
types of problems are trying to hold syringe exchange
hostage, and are essentially condemning people to death, for
purely political reasons. It's vital that people of
Colorado contact their legislators and express their
concern."
ALERT: Colorado residents are STRONGLY URGED to contact
their state reps by phone THIS WEEK as the bill will be
acted upon quickly.
Some of the key legislators in this process include Kay
Alexander (58-R) 866-2955, Chuck Berry (21-R) 866-2346,
Jeanne Faatz (1-R) 866-2966, Dorothy Gotlieb (10-R) 866-
2910, William Kaufman (51-R) 866-2947, Martha Kreutz (37-R)
866-5510, Joyce Lawrence (45-R) 866-2922, Paul Schauer (39-
R) 866-2935, Bryan Sullivant (62-R) 866-2916, Bill Swenson
(12-R) 866-2920, Jack Taylor (56-R) 866-2949, and Tambor
Williams (50-R) 866-2929.
Please call one or more of the legislators on this list plus
your own; and whether or not you live in Colorado, please
get your friends and family in Colorado to call theirs. You
can contact PEERS at (303) 455-2472.
For more information about syringe exchange and injection-
related AIDS, go to DRCNet's Topics in Depth site at
http://www.drcnet.org/AIDS/, the North American Syringe
Exchange Network home page at http://www.nasen.org/, or
the Safe Works AIDS Project web site at
http://www.safeworks.org.
***
4. HOUSE REPUBLICANS DECLARE: DAMN THE SCIENCE, FULL SPEED
AHEAD! APPROVE RESOLUTION OPPOSING ANY USE OF MARIJUANA
AS MEDICINE
(Reprinted with permission of the NORML Foundation,
http://www.norml.org.)
February 26, 1998, Washington, DC: A coalition of
Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee
on Crime, approved a "sense of the House of Representatives"
resolution stating that "marijuana is a dangerous and
addictive drug and should not be legalized for medical
use." The resolution -- introduced by subcommittee chair
Bill McCollum (R-FL) -- won the approval of all seven
Republicans present, while being opposed by the two
Democrats at the mark-up, Reps. John Conyers (D-MI) and
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX). Ironically, the subcommittee's
action came just one day after the National Academy of
Sciences Institute of Medicine (IOM) held its third and
final symposium on the merits of marijuana therapy. The IOM
organized the conferences as part of a federally funded 18-
month review of the scientific evidence demonstrating
marijuana's therapeutic value.
Before passing the resolution, the Republicans rejected an
amendment offered by Rep. Conyers, ranking Democrat on the
House Judiciary Committee, stating that the "States have the
primary responsibility for protecting the health and safety
of their citizens, and the Federal Government should not
interfere with any state's policy (as expressed in a
legislative enactment or referendum) which authorizes
persons with AIDS or cancer to pursue, upon the
recommendation of a licensed physician, a course of
treatment for such illness that includes the use of
marijuana."
Republicans argued that any lifting of the legal ban
prohibiting marijuana, even for medical purposes, would send
mixed and potentially dangerous messages to the American
public about drug use. Conyers said that the federal
government has no right to interfere in the relationship
between a doctor and a patient.
"We are talking about patients with the most serious
illnesses a person can have -- people who may very well
die," Conyers said. "And for these patients, there is
substantial medical literature suggesting that marijuana can
reduce their suffering."
"The Republicans on the Judiciary Committee refuse to
recognize that this is a public health question, not part of
the war on drugs," said NORML Executive Director R. Keith
Stroup, Esq. "They are willing to ignore the science and
deny an effective medication to the sick and dying in order
to advance their political agenda. It is especially
disappointing that Chairman McCollum, who twice sponsored
legislation to permit the legal use of medical marijuana in
the 1980's, would lead this misguided effort."
The resolution now goes for consideration before the full
Judiciary Committee. A separate federal bill to allow for
the legal use and distribution of medical marijuana in
states that approve such efforts is pending in the
House Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Health and
Environment. House Bill 1782 -- introduced by Rep. Barney
Frank (D-MA) -- currently has ten co-sponsors.
For more information or a copy of the February 23 House
Resolution, please contact either Keith Stroup or Paul
Armentano of NORML @ (202) 483-5500. Information on
upcoming state medical marijuana initiatives and legislation
is also available upon request.
***
5. HOLLYWOOD GROUP PROMISES MORE ANTI-DRUG THEMES
A Hollywood organization known as the Caucus of Producers,
Writers and Directors met with Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey
last week (2/18) and announced their intention to
incorporate more anti-drug themes into their work. Jerry
Isenberg, chair of the caucus, told the Los Angeles Times
that they would have to get creative becauses "simplistic
'drugs are bad' messages (are) old and ineffective." Asked
about the groups apparent adherence to the administration's
party line, Isenberg told the Times, "There is no party
line, everybody hates drugs."
PLEASE SEE THIS WEEK'S EDITORIAL (at bottom) FOR REACTION TO
THIS TREND.
***
6. STATE LEGISLATORS LAUNCH COUNTERATTACK ON PROP 215 IN
CALIFORNIA
- Lloyd Johnson for DRCNet
California State Sen. Richard Rainey (R-Walnut Creek) has
introduced SB 2113, which would severely limit the reach and
effectiveness of Prop 215. SB 2113 would make it illegal
for a doctor to recommend marijuana to any patient under 18,
limit the authority to California Licensed doctors only,
disallow hospice personnel, nurses or other medical
professionals from being designated as a patient's primary
caregiver, and limit the law's application to cancer, HIV,
glaucoma, and muscle spasms associated with a chronic
illness (excluding depression, nausea, anorexia, arthritis,
migraines and many other conditions for which relief has
long been noted).
The bill also deletes the provision encouraging state and
federal agencies to develop a means of distribution of the
medicine, makes Buyers Clubs illegal, requires the doctor to
administer a complete examination and written diagnosis
prior to any recommendation, requires a new examination and
written recommendation every six months, requires
recommending physicians to have an ongoing relationship with
a patient prior to recommendation, and would make an oral
recommendation illegal. The complete content of SB 2113 at
http://www.senate.ca.gov/.
Even if passed by the legislature and signed by the
Governor, SB 2113 will still require approval by the voters
next November, as the California Constitution mandates that
any law passed by the people can only be amended by the
people.
ALERT: California residents, now is the time to let your
State Reps know how you feel about SB 2113. If it gets on
the ballot, it will consume precious resources to defeat.
***
7. CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT DEALS A BLOW TO BUYERS' CLUBS
- Barrington Daltrey for DRCNet
The California Supreme Court dealt the medical marijuana
clubs a setback this week (2/25), letting stand a lower
court ruling prohibiting clubs from selling marijuana to
patients, despite the 1996 Proposition 215 voter initiative.
The appellants had argued that they qualified as "primary
caregivers" even though they might be commercial
enterprises. The appellate court's ruling held that
Proposition 215 did not allow anyone the right to sell
marijuana; nor did it allow commercial enterprises to act as
"primary caregivers."
The spokesman for Cannabis Cultivator's Club of San
Francisco, one of the appellants, is reported as having
stated that he believes the club is now in compliance with
the ruling, as it is not selling marijuana, but is only
receiving reimbursement for cultivation costs.
The state's attorney has indicated he will seek to shut down
CCC and various other clubs providing medical marijuana.
Federal prosecutors are also seeking an order closing
several clubs, based on federal law. Their action
is pending in federal court.
***
8. NO FEDERAL CHARGES TO BE FILED AGAINST MARINE WHO SHOT
HERNANDEZ
The US Justice Department has decided not to pursue civil
rights charges against Cpl. Clemente Banuelos, the marine
who shot and killed Esequiel Hernandez, an 18 year-old Texas
resident, near the Texas-Mexico border. Hernandez was out
herding the family sheep when he was tracked and killed by a
camouflaged, four-marine patrol on the lookout for smugglers
and illegal aliens. Hernandez was carrying an old .22 rifle
that he used to scare off snakes and other predators. The
killing was the first of an American citizen by an active
duty soldier.
***
9. EDITORIAL: Hollywood and the Drug War
Last week, a group calling itself the Caucus of Producers,
Writers and Directors met with Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey and
promised to work more anti-drug themes into their
productions. "If anybody knows how to reach the adolescents
of America, it is the people in this room" McCaffrey told
the group. This is ironic, of course, because if there is
anybody who doesn't know how to reach the adolescents of
America, it is the people who are prosecuting the Drug War.
Over the past several years, the Hollywood community has
been high on the list of allies that the Clinton
administration has attempted to enlist in the War effort.
Propaganda works of course, and if the information presented
to kids through the entertainment industry is accurate (the
Madison Avenue-issued Partnership For Drug Free America ads
have been repeatedly attacked for employing more hyperbole
than honesty), then surely no one could quibble with trying
to warn kids about the dangers inherent in using drugs. But
with the industry itself rife with illegal drug use, the
apparent hypocrisy may well intrude on the effectiveness of
the message.
And that hypocrisy goes well beyond the "do what I say, not
what I do" variety. The General, while he talks a lot about
treatment and prevention, is the front man for a policy that
is directly responsible for making the US the world's #1 per
capita incarcerator, with one out of every 144 Americans
behind bars, and one in three young black males under
criminal justice 'supervision". And while it is well known
that drug use is common in the entertainment industry, trips
to expensive rehab programs are still the rule, with arrests
the notable exception. For unless a celebrity is caught
doing something incredibly stupid or outrageous (such as
smuggling drugs across a border, or being arrested for gross
public displays of delirium), state and federal law
enforcement agencies have shown little interest in
intervening. When was the last time you read about a big
Hollywood party being raided, resulting in arrests and asset
forfeiture?
So the Hollywood community is safe to go about its business,
secure in the knowledge that the Drug War is a war against
others, and that their friends in and around "the business"
need only keep their use relatively private in order to
avoid the consequences that the General and his War have in
store for "regular people." One would imagine that few
members of the entertainment industry believe that any of
their drug-using colleagues would be better off doing a five
or ten year mandatory sentence for possession or conspiracy.
And of course, they would be right.
But while countless stars and starlets appear on the Oscars
telecast sporting ribbons for AIDS research, or against
cruelty to animals, or whatever undeniably worthy cause for
which they wish to speak out, on the issue of the drug war,
there is deafening silence -- even complicity. In the
absence of dissent, a Czar calls forth their talents and
their influence in service to a policy that is destroying
the lives and communities of "regular people" while failing
spectacularly to put a dent in either the availability or
the abuse of drugs.
Public service announcements and anti-drug messages in
entertainment are fine, but the fact is that an American
child has a better chance of growing up in a community torn
apart by the black market, or to lose a parent to the
criminal justice system, or even to end up being sucked into
the trade itself, than he or she has of ever becoming
addicted to drugs. And this is true even though the current
system virtually assures that kids have unfettered access to
even the most dangerous substances.
Pardon the cynicism inherent in this question, but is there
a quid pro quo here? Clearly, a few well-timed busts could
put a very large and very public hole in the Hollywood
community. The damages would extend far beyond the lives of
the celebrities involved, what with contracts and ongoing
projects and current work all dependent upon the viability
of the "stars". Is Hollywood's latest bow to America's
longest war some sort of insurance policy against such
ugliness? Even if only implicitly?
One can almost hear, of course, the worried voices of agents
and PR people warning the talent to stay far clear of this
third-rail. Even those who support reform know that the
majority of Americans is woefully misinformed about the
issue. But in this case the image-makers are behind the
curve. Europe is experiencing a virtual revolution of
thought on the issue of drugs and policy, as is Australia
and Canada. The Independent on Sunday, a British paper, is
in fact in the midst of a very well-publicized campaign to
legalize cannabis. They have garnered support from all
segments of society, including the very public backing of
Sir Paul McCartney. Of course, you won't read about the
debate raging in the UK in the US media.
Here at home, polls indicate that over 50% of Americans know
the Drug War has been a failure. That they often support
even tougher measures, flawed though that strategy is, only
underscores the fact that there are no other options being
discussed by those with serious media access. A couple of
Hollywood names could begin to remedy that in about a week.
The fact is that the cutting edge of opinion on the issue is
anti-war, which makes choosing propaganda over principle
akin to taking the lead in "Big-Budget Part IV" instead of
an artistically brilliant little piece, better for the soul
than the bank account. But artists, in the end, must
nourish their souls.
General McCaffrey is right about one thing--the power of
celebrity is indeed awesome. That is why it would take just
a few brave souls within the industry to stand up against
this insane War to give the movement an enormous shot in the
arm both in public awareness and in financial contributions
to the badly outspent reform organizations. The Drug
Warriors, McCaffrey included, like to answer questions about
the War by reiterating that, well, drug abuse is bad,
thereby implying that reformers think that drug abuse is
somehow OK. That is not the reformer's point, of course,
but the effect of such public implication is to chill the
willingness of the non-believers to speak out. Thus far,
the most notable recent example of bravery coming from
Hollywood has been that radical Woody Harrelson, talking
about industrial hemp. For a business that prides itself on
independent thinking and progressive (on both the left and
the right) politics, that is a pretty lame output.
If the professionals of the entertainment industry have not
been threatened into cooperating, and remain silent simply
for want of information, then it is certainly time for the
voices of reform to access the industry and to educate it.
But perhaps it is true. Perhaps the people of the
entertainment industry, living in glass houses, er,
mansions, are really afraid to throw stones lest the Feds
show up at their next party with glass-cutters and warrants.
If the entertainment industry has indeed been so cowed, it
is a shame. It is also an indication of the absolute
corruption of the war, both in its principles and in its
execution.
Nearly fifty years ago the same industry was intimidated
into silence during the red scare, and that silence
destroyed careers and nearly destroyed a nation. It was not
the industry's proudest moment. Today, only Hollywood knows
why Hollywood has agreed to play a supporting role in the
General's multi-billion dollar farce. But one thing is
certain. Those who appear in the Drug War credits will have
to live with that billing for the rest of their lives.
Especially if they took the part for all the wrong reasons.
Adam J. Smith
Associate Director
***
DRCNet
***
JOIN/MAKE A DONATION
http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html
DRUG POLICY LIBRARY
http://www.druglibrary.org
REFORMER'S CALENDAR
http://www.drcnet.org/calendar.html
SUBSCRIBE TO THIS LIST
http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html
DRCNet HOME PAGE
http://www.drcnet.org
STOP THE DRUG WAR SITE
http://www.stopthedrugwar.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[End]
to 1998 Daily News index for February 26-March 4