-------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional Republicans Play Role Of 'Big Brother' (An Op-Ed
By Joanne Jacobs Of 'The San Jose Mercury News' In 'The Salt Lake Tribune'
Faults The Reasoning Behind An Education Bill Sponsored By Representative
Mark Souder, An Indiana Republican, That Would Suspend Federal College Loans
To Students Convicted Of Using Marijuana And Coerce Them Into Rehab,
Although It's Estimated A Third Of College Students Use Marijuana)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 15:04:26 -0400
To: MAP News (mapnews@mapinc.org)
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: OPED: Congressional Republicans Play Role Of 'Big Brother'
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Mon, 17 Aug 1998
Source: The Salt Lake Tribune
Contact: letters@sltrib.com
Website: http://www.sltrib.com/
Author: Joanne Jacobs, San Jose Mercury News
CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS PLAY ROLE OF 'BIG BROTHER'
A free people may elect a government that saps their freedom, warned Alexis
de Tocqueville in 1840. For their own good, of course. The Frenchman foresaw
"an immense and tutelary power . . . absolute, minute, regular, provident and
mild. It would be like the authority of a parent if, like that authority, its
object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep
them in perpetual childhood."
We may not yet be "timid and industrious sheep," but Congress is certainly
eager to shepherd our lives in the most minute detail. Even if it means
turning college aid officials into drug enforcement agents, and Head Start
teachers into welfare agents.
The new higher education bill includes yet another look-tough-on-drugs scheme.
This one would suspend federal college aid to students convicted of using or
selling an illegal drug.
The proponent, Rep. Mark Souder, an Indiana Republican, claims this will save
students from reefer madness. The provision primarily would affect minor drug
offenders, since those convicted of serious offenses will be enrolling in
prison, not college. Students would lose one year of aid for drug possession,
two years for a second offense.
Three strikes and they're out. Selling drugs would merit a two-year suspension
for a first offense; indefinite suspension for a second. However, students
could regain financial aid earlier by completing a rehabilitation program and
passing two surprise drug tests.
Souder's very big on drug tests. He's also proposed giving federal funds to
small businesses to pay for drug testing of employees. And he's promised to
start random drug testing of himself and his staff. Linking college aid to
drug-free urine could affect millions of students -- in theory.
A majority of college students get some kind of aid, and 75 percent of aid
involves federal funds. Furthermore, it's estimated a third of college
students use marijuana.
It won't affect the No. 1 substance abuse problem on campus: Binge drinking
is epidemic. In a Harvard survey, 44 percent of college students admitted to
binge drinking.
In response to drinking restrictions, students have rioted this spring at
Michigan State, Washington State, the University of Connecticut, Ohio
University and other colleges, demanding "the right to party." But it will be
OK for federal aid recipients to get blotto on booze every weekend as long as
they don't get caught with marijuana.
The Department of Education is supposed to enforce the smoke-a-joint,
lose-your-scholarship law, but how? Court records don't report which drug
offenders are attending which colleges, much less their scholarship status.
And how are federal education bureaucrats going to evaluate when a student
is rehabilitated if the student was never drug-dependent in the first place?
Who's going to be dean of urine, imposing surprise drug tests on students?
The Clinton administration opposes the provision, saying judges already can
deny federal benefits to drug offenders.
Not content with monitoring the behavior of college students, House
Republicans have their eye on preschoolers. An amendment to the bill
extending funding for Head Start would close the preschool door to kids if
Mom is on welfare and fails to cooperate in establishing the paternity of her
children, so that child support can be sought from their father.
Again, it's duplication. Mothers can be denied welfare if they refuse to help
establish paternity. Why deny children a Head Start on school because their
mother has not met the requirements of an entirely separate program? Of
course, college students should stay away from drugs and alcohol, whether or
not they're receiving financial aid, so they don't blur their brains.
Single mothers should identify the fathers of their children, so the kids will
have some chance at a father and at the child support they deserve. And the
rest of us should eat more fiber and less chocolate, lest Congress suspend our
Social Security benefits.
This big-daddy despotism "every day renders the exercise of the free agency
of man less useful and less frequent," de Tocqueville wrote. "It
circumscribes the will within a narrower range and gradually robs a man of
all the uses of himself."
For our own good.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Activists Seek To Limit Three-Strikes Law Sentencing ('The Los Angeles Times'
Describes A Group Of Orange County Activists Called Families
To Amend Three Strikes, Part Of A Cadre Of Southern Californians
Seeking To Limit The Use Of California's 1994 Law To Cases
Involving Violent And Especially Serious Crimes)
Newshawk: Jim Rosenfield
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Contact: letters@latimes.com
Website: http://www.latimes.com/
Pubdate: August 17, 1998
Fax: 213-237-4712
Author: Lisa Richardson, Times Staff Writer
ACTIVISTS SEEK TO LIMIT THREE-STRIKES LAW SENTENCING
Crime: Group Says Life Terms For Some Offenses Are Overly Harsh.
Assembly Is Expected To Vote This Week On Whether To Study The Issue.
By age 12, Shane Reams regularly smoked marijuana.
By high school, he was strung out on crack.
Twice he burglarized neighbors' homes to support his habit. And because his
mother believed in tough love, she drove him to the police station to turn
him in. Sue Reams didn't realize that she also was helping convict her son of
the first two strikes that placed him behind bars for 25 years to life after
the 28-year-old's drug-related arrest last year. "I never, ever, would have
done what I did if I'd known it would lead to this," said Reams, who
supported the popular three-strikes law--until it ensnared her son. Now, she
helps lead a group of Orange County activists called Families to Amend Three
Strikes, part of a cadre of Southern Californians seeking to limit the use of
the 1994 law to cases involving violent and especially serious crimes. The
organization began last year as a support group mainly for grieving mothers
and wives of men facing life in prison.
It is now a growing political force within a similar statewide movement and
boasts close ties to chapters in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Jose. Reams
and others concede that they have embraced an unsympathetic cause and face
an uphill battle.
But they say that the three-strikes law--which calls for a prison sentence of
25 years to life for defendants with three or more felony convictions--is
overly harsh. In Orange County, nonviolent drug offenses have accounted for
roughly 70% of the estimated 600 third-strike convictions since the law's
passage, according to Public Defender Carl Holmes, who said there are similar
statistics throughout Southern California. The group's immediate goal is to
convince the Legislature to vote in favor of studying the costs of the
three-strikes law--an analysis that members hope will jolt the public into
recognizing that billions in tax dollars are being spent to keep drug addicts
behind bars. "We don't put all the alcoholics in jail, so should we put all
the drug offenders in jail for life?" asked Reams, who answered her own
question by saying public funds would be better used to help drug users beat
their addictions. Many of the group's members say they support tough
punishment for violent offenders.
And Reams does not dispute that her son should be in prison for his drug
violations. But she said he never physically harmed anyone and does not
deserve such a severe punishment. Members say their biggest victory to date
has been gaining the support of Rep. Scott Baugh (R-Huntington Beach). Baugh
emphasized that he supports the three-strikes law, but believes that it may
need improvement. "It appears there have been some unjust applications of the
law, and I don't think we should be afraid to evaluate whether that indeed is
true," he said. The Orange County branch works closely with the Los Angeles
chapter, which says that having members from a conservative enclave like
Orange County helps legitimize its cause. After the South-Central group held
a candlelight vigil, Orange County's did too. South-Central members held a
town hall meeting in February; Orange County members had one in May. Orange
County residents have picketed along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard in Los
Angeles; Los Angeles members have attended events in Orange County. "There's
a tremendous appreciation in L.A. for Orange County," said Geri Silva of the
Los Angeles branch. Members went to Sacramento recently to testify before the
Assembly regarding the need for the fiscal study.
It has taken unrelenting effort to push the request for an analysis to the
Assembly floor. But successes are measured in increments and activists see a
long-term fight ahead.
With a vote expected this week, a push is underway. "We've moved all the
people who are going to be moved by the emotional aspect of the issue.
Now we need to move the economic conservatives," said Orange County activist
Tim Carpenter. "That's the final frontier for us and it's not going to be
easy." Recent meetings with Orange County legislators have yielded mixed
results. Rep. Richard Ackerman (R-Fullerton) said he met with the group last
week and came away unsure that a three-strikes study is needed.
Ackerman said he did his own research and concluded that a study would be
premature. "Also, I know it's expensive to lock people up for life, but it's
also expensive to have criminals victimizing society," Ackerman said. And
although foes of the three-strike's law say Reams' story is a good example of
why the law should be amended, proponents say it underscores why the law
works. Although arrested and jailed as a juvenile, Shane Reams continued
his pattern of drug use and crime into adulthood.
Imprisoning him may be expensive, but it keeps him off the street, say
proponents of the three-strikes law. "Once a person's committed two serious
or violent felonies, the emphasis should be on protecting society rather than
worrying about helping the criminal," said Orange County Assistant Dist.
Atty. Brent Romney, director of Municipal Court operations. "Also, it's not
that hard to not commit a felony." One of the most persuasive critics of the
three-strikes law is public defender Holmes, who is armed with statistics and
stories of seemingly trivial offenses punished with life sentences. "I think
everyone who voted for the three-strikes law expected we were going after
violent people who were hurting our children," Holmes said. But most of the
public defender's cases are for drug possession, he said. "We have people
here convicted on three strikes for theft of doughnuts or beer," Holmes said.
Romney agreed that programs to help drug addicts beat their addictions would
be welcome.
But until then, his job is to punish people who commit crimes. "When people
in our society can come up with some kind of a program to help these addicts
overcome their addiction, our office will be one of the very first to support
and endorse it," he said. "'Incarceration is not the best answer, but right
now it's the best answer to protect society."
Copyright 1998 Los Angeles Times. All Rights Reserved
-------------------------------------------------------------------
16-Year-Old Boy Charged In Shooting Of Officer ('The Chicago Tribune'
Says A Plainclothes Prohibition Agent Who Was Shot While Watching
The Free Market In Action At A Chicago Housing Project Amid A Gang War
Clung To Life Sunday As The Suspect's Mother Said Her Son 'Was At A Party
Until 4 In The Morning - I Have 20 Other People Who Saw Him There')
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 21:31:40 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US IL: 16-Year-Old Boy Charged In Shooting Of Officer
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Steve Young (theyoungfamily@worldnet.att.net)
Pubdate: Mon, 17 Aug 1998
Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Section: Metro Chicago, P. 1
Contact: tribletter@aol.com
Website: http://www.chicago.tribune.com/
Author: Graeme Zielinski
16-YEAR-OLD BOY CHARGED IN SHOOTING OF OFFICER
A 16-year-old boy serving as a security guard for a narcotics operation at
a South Side housing development fired the gunshot that left a young
Wentworth District police officer clinging to life late Sunday, authorities
alleged.
Officials on Sunday cited the suspect in a juvenile petition, charging him
with attempted murder, aggravated battery and aggravated discharge of a
weapon. The teenager was apprehended shortly after the predawn shooting
Saturday at the Robert Taylor Homes building at 4101 S. Federal St.
He was scheduled to appear Monday for a detention hearing in Cook County
Juvenile Court. Prosecutors could seek to have the teenager transferred to
adult court.
The officer, 26-year-old Michael Ceriale, remained in critical condition
Sunday in Cook County Medical Center. By late Sunday, he had undergone four
surgeries.
"His vitals had stabilized Saturday afternoon but now they are erratic, and
we are guarding him very carefully," the hospital administrator said.
The bullet, fired at a distance of about 60 to 70 yards, lodged into
Ceriale's lower abdomen just as he and another young partner were seeking
cover to watch drug deals at the high-rise, Wentworth Area Detective Cmdr.
Danny Gibson said Sunday at a news conference. One police officer compared
the narcotics trade at the Taylor building to that at a grocery store.
Family members have kept a revolving vigil at the officer's bedside,
hospital officials said.
Throughout Sunday, Chicago police broadcast updates of Ceriale's condition
over the radio at the request of hospital officials, who said the high
volume of police calls was overloading switchboards there.
Administrators said the hospital received nearly 25 inquiries an hour.
The defendant's relatives described him as tall, gangly and unassuming, and
they said he had had frequent run-ins with the law.
He was charged as a juvenile Sunday because the counts against him do not
automatically trigger a transfer to the adult system.
Prosecutors still could seek to have the teenager tried as an adult, but
Marcy O'Boyle, a spokeswoman for the Cook County state's attorney, would
not disclose whether those charges would be sought.
Three relatives of the youth, an incoming junior at DuSable High School,
said that in interviews he was not in the vicinity of the shooting but that
he was at a party in a housing complex several blocks away.
He lives with his mother in the high-rise at 4022 S. State St., about a
block away from the shooting.
"He was at a party until 4 in the morning," his tearful mother said Sunday.
"I have 20 other people who saw him there. All I know is that (police) took
my baby away."
Police said they were continuing their investigation but would not say
whether they were seeking more suspects.
Gibson said the shooting took place about 3:30 a.m. Saturday as Ceriale and
his partner, both with about 18 months of experience, crouched in bushes to
get a clear and clandestine view of the alleged drug outfit working out of
the building.
The bushes, on Root Street next to the building, are banked by a concrete
wall and are set amid soiled mattresses, broken bottles and other filth. On
a wall nearby is the painted message, "Give a Helping Hand to Our
Community."
The officers were not in uniform, Gibson said, a measure of their advanced
responsibilities.
Ceriale "is an excellent officer. Otherwise, he wouldn't be in civilian
dress," Gibson said.
As the two officers angled for a view, police said, four young men worked
as sentries for the drug operation. Gibson said that after it became clear
their position might have been compromised, Ceriale turned to his partner
and said, "I think they made us."
Then, Gibson said, Ceriale was shot. The other officer was not injured.
In the hours following the shooting, Gibson said, several suspects were
held for questioning. He did not say whether the 16-year-old cited made
statements that led to the juvenile citation.
One relative who insisted on anonymity said the suspect performs in a dance
troupe and was performing at an all-night party several blocks away from
the shooting scene.
He said that the suspect had had a violent run-in with police on Thursday.
"That's why he's in trouble now," the relative said.
A resident of the high-rise where the shooting took place, who insisted on
anonymity for fear of reprisal, said the sentries likely did not suspect a
police presence.
"They was shooting at the other gangs," the man said. "There's a war going
on here."
Police sources confirmed that gunfire is frequently exchanged among gangs
in the complex, where transients shift from building to building.
"This is one of the worst buildings there is," said William Roberison, a
Wentworth District patrol officer and 19-year veteran, as he surveyed the
high-rise Sunday.
He described the active drug trade there: "It's like a grocery store. . . .
They run that first floor."
Roberison pointed to bullet holes in parked vehicles in a nearby parking
lot. The complex, he said, is gang-controlled, though these individuals go
into hiding whenever police are around.
"There's all these young guys, they don't even live in the building,"
Roberison said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearing The Air About Hemp (A Letter To The Editor
Of 'The Wall Street Journal' From Erwin A. Sholts, Chairman
Of The North American Industrial Hemp Council, Dispels Some Misconceptions
And Provides The URL For The NAIH's Recent White Paper,
'Hemp And Marijuana - Myths And Realities')
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 20:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Lunday (robert@hemp.net)
To: hemp-talk@hemp.net
Subject: HT: Hemp Editorial: Wall Street Journal (fwd)
Sender: owner-hemp-talk@hemp.net
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 18:49:14 -0400
From: Joe Hickey (agfuture@kih.net)
Subject: Hemp Editorial: Wall Street Journal
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
New York, New York
August 17, 1998
EDITORIAL PAGE
Clearing the Air About Hemp
I was quite surprised to read the July 15 Marketplace piece, "This Hemp
Beer Is Legal, But Its Ads Hint Otherwise."
The article states, "Stalks of the hemp plant are used in rope; its
leaves and flowers produce marijuana." This is simply not true.
Industrial hemp's leaves and flowers, unlike those of marijuana, contain
negligible amounts of THC (less than 1%) and have no psychoactive
qualities. Smoking hemp would actually lead to a big headache.
Twenty-nine nations, including Canada, England, Germany, France and
China all legally recognize hemp's non-drug status. Canadian farmers
will be harvesting about 4,500 acres of hemp fiber and seed in the
coming weeks. The above countries all have strict laws forbidding
marijuana cultivation, while allowing farmers to grow industrial hemp.
The North American Industrial Hemp Council has published a white paper,
"Hemp and Marijuana: Myths and Realities," by David P. West, Ph.D.,
which is available at www.naihc.org.
The North American Industrial Hemp Council is a coalition drawn from
industry, agriculture, academia and the environmental movement working
to reintroduce this sustainable and versatile seed and fiber crop. The
U.S.
Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration and Gen. Barry
McCaffrey continue to state that hemp is marijuana or that hemp is only
a "novel market." The "novel marketeers" using hemp include: Mercedes
Benz, Adidas, Armani, The Body Shop and Interface Carpets. Jeffrey W.
Gain, an
NAIHC board member, was recently quoted in an AP article as saying, "I
feel the industrial hemp crop could very easily be the soybean crop of
the new millennium." Mr. Gain is a former executive director of the
American Soybean Association.
Tobacco farmers, who now see the handwriting on the wall, are
desperately looking for profitable new crops such as hemp. Farmers also
see hemp as a useful rotation crop, which chokes out weeds and requires
little if any pesticides. The University of Kentucky's Center for
Business and Economic Research just released a study which concluded
that hemp could provide farmers the second highest per-acre income after
tobacco.
Recently, several Kentucky farmers filed a suit in federal court,
challenging the U.S. government's current ban on growing hemp.
Ironically, U.S. farmers can grow an addictive drug crop, tobacco, while
growing hemp (a nondrug crop) is banned due to a flawed federal policy.
American farmers and manufacturers are thus hamstrung, while our foreign
counterparts profit by supplying hemp to a growing marketplace. In the
long run, market forces--not outdated policies--will prevail.
Erwin A. Sholts
Chairman
North American Industrial Hemp Council Inc.
Madison, Wisconsin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
American Psychological Association Passes Resolution
Opposing Mandatory Minimums (The Largest Association Of Psychologists
In The World, With More Than 155,000 Members, Passed A Resolution Sunday
Urging The Phasing Out Of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Laws
On The Federal And State Level - 'For Drug-Related Offenses
That Do Not Involve Drug Trafficking And When No Other Offense Or Harm
To Others Is Involved, And The Proper Emphasis On Prevention And Treatment
Of Substance-Related Problems As An Alternative To And In Addition
To Legal Actions')
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 16:59:20 -0400
From: detcom (detcom@earthlink.net)
Organization: Peru Support Committee/Detroit
To: "DRCTalk Reformers' Forum" (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: APA Resolution Passes Opposing Mandatory Minimums
Reply-To: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: owner-drctalk@drcnet.org
APA Resolution Passes Opposing Mandatory Minimums
Recieved: Mon, 17 Aug 1998:
At a Council of Representatives Meeting of the 50 Divisions of the
American Psychological Association held in San Francisco on Aug. 16,
1998, a Resolution was passed urging the phasing out of mandatory
minimum sentencing laws on the federal and state level.
The APA has a worldwide membership of 155,000 and is the largest
association of psychologists in the world.
Current President of the APA is Martin E. P. Seligman, Ph.D.
The Resolution was sponsored by Div. 32, Humanistic Psychology, as
presented by its representative, Dr. E. Mark Stern (New York), and
co-sponsored by the following Divisions:
Div. 50, Addictions
Div. 27, Community Research & Action
Div. 36, Psychology of Religion
Div. 28, Psychopharmacology and Substance Abuse
The Resolution reads as follows (the "issue" section has been lightly
edited for clarity's sake):
ISSUE:
In their attempt to respond to the possession and sale of illegal
drugs, the federal government and many state legislatures have imposed
mandatory minimum prison sentences. This approach has backfired. As
judicial discretion has been abandoned, the ideal of rehabilitation has
receded. "Designed to suppress the drug trade," editorializes The New
York Times (1998) "these sentences (rival) those for murder and rape
.. Instead of wiping out the drug markets, the laws (have) overloaded
prisons and court dockets with addicts and low level couriers."
In a longitudinal study based on data from Jan. 1, 1984 through
June 30, 1990, the average drug sentence increased 74%, from 68 to 118 months
during the period studied (Meierhoefer, 1992). In a separate report, the
US Justice Department estimated that one of every 29 citizens, that is
5% of the population, can anticipate serving time in a Federal or State
prison during their lifetime. The likelihood of being imprisoned is much
higher proportionately for blacks (16 %) and Hispanics (9%) than for whites
(2%). At the current level, a newborn black male has a 1 in 4 chance of
being imprisoned, while newborn Hispanic males face a 1 in 6 chance
(U.S. Dept. of Justice Sourcebook, 1996).
Legally, tests of mandatory minimum sentencing are currently
airtight. Judges are not allowed discretion in imposing 5, 10, 20, 40
and 50 years to life, without parole. The only variables are the amounts
of drugs involved, prior offenses and whether a firearm was involved.
Nothing else can be considered such as youth, addiction or social
circumstances.
A primary myth of mandatory minimum sentences is that they are
effective in fighting crime. "Criminals" are, after all, jailed for long
periods, sometimes for life. Shouldn't the public expect crime to fall?
Mandatory prison sentences, however, have not controlled drug abuse and
illegal drug use remains an overwhelming presence among our youth.
Sentences for violent offenders are far less harsh than those for
nonviolent first-time offenders. In fact, 10 year sentences with no
parole are mandatory for possessing any of the following substances: 1
gm LSD; 100 kilos of plants of marujuana; 5 gm crack; 100 gm powder
cocaine; 100 gm heroin; 10 gm methamphetamine; and 10 gm PCP. Compare
this with the average Federal sentences of 5 years for manslaughter and
3.75 years for assault, both with parole allowed (U.S. Sentencing
Commission). Mandatory minimum drug sentencing dictates that no
mitigating facts can be considered and no parole.
A resolution adopted by the 12 Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals
at its Judicial Conference voted to urge Congress to reconsider the wisdom
of mandatory minimum sentences statutes and to restructure such statutes
so that the U.S. Sentencing Commission can uniformly establish guidelines
for all criminal statutes to avoid unwarranted disparities from the
Sentencing Report Act (Title II of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act
of 1984, Public Law 98-473).
In a background paper on the Rockefeller Drug Law "reform", the
Correctional Association of New York calculated that the cost in New York of
keeping a confined drug offender in prison is $30,000 a year compared to
$2,700 to $3,600 per year for most outpatient drug programs and $17,000
to $20,000 per year for residential programs.
New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, has pointed out
that the operation of the State's sentencing laws "has resulted in the
incarceration of many offenders whose crimes arose out of their own
addiction and for whom the costs of imprisonment would have been better
spent on treating and rehabilitation." In the case of low-level street
dealers, taxpayers funds would, according to the Court, have been "more
productively and humanely directed toward prevention, through education
and treatment of drug addictions."
The American Bar Association has passed a resolution condemning
mandatory minimum sentences, and Human Rights Watch, a group that
monitors international human rights violations, declared in its March
1997 newsletter that "Mandatory minimum sentences contravene the
Universal Declaration of Rights, the International Covenant of Civil and
Political Rights and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment."
The field of psychology has been sorely challenged to respond to
these "rigidly Draconian drug laws" (The New York Times, 1998). They
have had the effect of distancing scholars and practitioners from their
potential effectiveness as change agents, foiling the potential of both
rehabilitative programs and humane criminal justice policies (Haney &
Zimbardo, 1998). The American Psychological Association has an
opportunity to confront mandatory minimum drug sentencing laws with
its wide knowledge and practice base at a time when these laws are
coming under increased scrutiny.
MAIN MOTION:
WHEREAS mandatory minimum drug sentencing laws reduce judicial
discretion and require incarceration of offenders whose criminal
behavior is limited to drug possession and use, and who may be first
time offenders;
WHEREAS minor drug offenders receive harsh mandatory minimum sentences,
regardless of their limited role in the offense, leaving the Chief
Justice of the United States, William Rehnquist (commenting on a
first-time offender sentenced to life imprisonment) to call such
mandatory drug sentencing good examples "of the law of unintended
circumstances,"
WHEREAS convicted offenders with substance abuse problems typically are
remanded to prisons that lack adequate substance abuse treatment and HIV
prevention programs that are essential for drug abusers;
WHEREAS mandatory minimum drug sentencing laws have contributed
significantly to the more than threefold increase in the U.S. prison
population during the past decade and have disproportionately involved
minorities and the poor, especially African American and Hispanic males;
WHEREAS research on the cost-effectiveness of different drug control
strategies has shown that substance abuse treatment, even with its known
limitations, is a cost-effective strategy to reduce drug use;
WHEREAS the U.S. federal drug control budget heavily favors interdiction
approaches to the US. drug problem to the detriment of providing
adequate funding for drug treatment and prevention;
WHEREAS research on cocaine dosage forms has shown that the differences
in the severity of sentences for powder and crack cocaine are not based
on supportable differences in the psychological or biological impact of
those dosage forms;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the American Psychological Association
supports in principle restoration of reasonable boundaries in mandatory
drug sentencing laws, the phasing out of such laws at both the state and
federal levels for drug-related offenses that do not involve drug
trafficking and when no other offense or harm to others is involved, and
the proper emphasis on prevention and treatment of substance-related
problems as an alternative to and in addition to leal actions.
Passed, August 16, 1998
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DEA Drives Off The Old Guard ('Insight On The News'
Says Changing Times Brought On By Janet Reno Have Forced
Many Of The Drug Enforcement Administration's 'Jurassic Narcs,'
The Most Experienced, Toughest Agents, Into Early Retirement,
And Alleges With A Straight Typeface Their Departure
May Be Great News For 'Drug' Cartels)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 03:38:32 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: DEA Drives Off The Old Guard
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: August 17, 1998
Source: Insight On The News Online
Section: Vol. 14, No. 30
Contact: insight@wt.infi.net
Website: www.insightmag.com
Author: Jamie Dettmer
Note: Published in Washington, D.C.
DEA DRIVES OFF THE OLD GUARD
Changing times brought on by Janet Reno have forced many of the agency's
most experienced, toughest agents into early retirement. Their departure may
be great news for drug cartels.
They call themselves the "Jurassic narcs" -- a fitting description for such
an endangered species. Most of them came to law enforcement after service in
Vietnam, where they'd witnessed not only the stunning defeat inflicted on
the United States but had watched helplessly as heroin, LSD and marijuana
attacked the moral fiber of the military. The images fixed in their memories
of comrades transformed into drug zombies and friends dead from overdoses
prompted hundreds of veterans to enlist in the war on drugs, to join Lyndon
Johnson's Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs and later Richard Nixon's
replacement superagency, the Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA.
. . . . "We had a mission and we were out to fulfill it," remarks a 20-year
DEA veteran. "Sure it beat the tedium of an ordinary 9-to-5 job. There was,
I suppose, a selfishness about what we were doing -- wives, families,
suffered. But we were serious about it, really committed."
. . . . For those who had seen service in Indochina, such as Celerino
Castillo, fighting drug dealers and traffickers amounted to a cause. Writing
in his memoir Powderburns, after he left the DEA in 1990, the Texas native
and son of a World War II veteran recalled having learned to "hate the OJs
(marijuana joints soaked in opium) and needles as much as I hated the
enemy." The Viet Cong didn't kill the first GI he watched die, he says;
heroin did. "His death scene gave me a purpose. If ever I left Vietnam, I
would put all my energy into fighting America's drug habit," Castillo wrote.
. . . Two, three decades later, the Jurassic narcs -- Vietnam vets and their
contemporaries in the DEA who adopted a no-nonsense, crusading style to
drug-busting -- are a dwindling band. For some, ill health and death have
intervened. Others were exhausted by the fight and grabbed pensions early.
But in the last five years the march of time has been given a sharp shove by
DEA chief Tom Constantine -- who with little fanfare or notice from Congress
or the media has been presiding over a shake-out and a changing of the guard
at America's leading agency in the war on drugs. Or so say internal agency
critics -- people who use the word purge.
. . . . Constantine, who was plucked in 1993 from his post as superintendent
of the New York State Police by Attorney General Janet Reno and FBI Director
Louis Freeh to head the DEA, has engineered a revolution by stealth. Veteran
agents charge that through harassment, administrative leaves, constant
transfers and a hair-trigger readiness to believe the worst of any of his
older agents, unleashing prolonged internal-affairs probes against them,
Constantine has forced out many of the remaining Jurassic narcs. Those
encouraged to leave include some of the DEA's most successful and
experienced agents -- people whose names might appear on a roll call of
honor or an index to a chronicle of the agency's most significant busts.
. . . Among the casualties whose careers read like movie scripts: Ed Heath,
the former DEA attach=E9 in Mexico who moved heaven and earth to identify
those behind the 1985 Guadalajara murder of agent Enrique "Kiki" Camarena;
Phil Jordan, a former director of the El Paso Intelligence Center; Don
Ferrarone, the Houston special agent in charge, or SAC, who at the time of
his forced departure last year from the DEA was hot on the trail of
drug-linked Mexican politicians; Hector Berrellez, a bulldog of a man who
kidnapped a Mexican doctor suspected of involvement in the Camarena murder;
Billy Mockler, who in the 1980s in Colombia slipped a transmitter into a
batch of precursor chemicals, tracked it, and busted a vast
Medell=EDn-cartel jungle cocaine lab; and the legendary Frank White, who
when asked during a trial why he'd shot a notorious Florida drug-dealer nine
times, responded: "Nine? Because I ran out of bullets."
. . . . And that's just scratching the surface. A top list also would
include Ken Cloud, Tommy Burn, John O'Neil, Glen Cooper and Frank Rodriguez,
the DEA attach=E9 in Mexico City last year who was made the scapegoat,
sources say, for a Washington intelligence snafu that embarrassed U.S. drug
czar Barry McCaffrey. "We've lost the best," laments a veteran U.S. lawman.
"The DEA ain't ever going to be the same."
. . . That would seem to be Constantine's aim. All the current SACs except
for one are Constantine appointees. To hasten a generational change, there's
been fast-track promotion of younger agents. Most first-line supervisors now
have less than eight years of DEA experience, compared with an average 15 to
20 years' experience for supervisors a decade ago.
. . . . No one has written an elegy for the Jurassic narcs. Their passing,
though, deserves one -- they were the DEA equivalent of the FBI's famous
Eliot Ness generation, the Untouchables. And any obituary for them should
raise questions about the effectiveness of the culture that's replacing
them. It also should prompt the query: Why has Constantine been so eager to
rip out the agency's past? According to the old guard, the Jurassic narcs
just don't fit the Constantine DEA where, they say, individual initiative is
now frowned upon. The agency's traditional rebellious streak has been
scrubbed. "Bureaucracy rules the roost," remarks one of the vets. Others
lament the loss of a can-do energy, of a sense of a crusade that was
exhibited to the nth degree by the Jurassic narcs. "There used to be an old
law-enforcement saying about the DEA and FBI," remarks a drug warrior who
left the agency two years ago because he says he had fought his war and
needed rest. "The FBI is an outstanding institution with mediocre people;
the DEA is a mediocre institution with outstanding people. It is the
outstanding who're leaving and only time will tell whether the new bunch
will compare."
. . . . Bitter complaints of the Constantine-engineered change in DEA
personnel and culture now have spilled into public. A World Wide Web site
called "DEA Watch" has become the online vehicle for old-guard attacks on
"Constantinople," as the vets scornfully refer to the agency now. Among the
recent contributions: "HQ doesn't want fighters, they want bookworms and
yes-men ... the kind of people who'd rather fight the drug war behind a
desk. It takes fighters to take down drug dealers." Other Watch contributors
say the DEA has become "a vicious circle of promotion-seekers" and a
"dog-eat-dog agency." Of the new generation of rapidly promoted first-line
supervisors in Constantinople, one vet says: "Some are 90-day wonders --
they think they know it all, they make incredible mistakes; they can be
easily misled or sidetracked by corrupt cops." Above all, the recently hired
are viewed as lacking the right stuff -- panache, zest and a gallant spirit.
. . . . Is this just a case of generational rivalry, as some Constantine
loyalists maintain? They argue previous directors Jack Lawn and Robert
Bonner indulged the good ol' boys and allowed them to get away with murder.
Discipline was lacking, and in the new Reno-ordered law-enforcement regime
of greater cooperation and less turf-fighting between federal agencies in
the war on drugs everyone has to toe the line. From their viewpoint the
Jurassic narcs were cowboys wandering the range. "Those who buckled under
have been left alone," says a senior DEA official.
. . . . And those who wouldn't? One was White, a New Yorker who gloried in
the nicknames his colleagues gave him: Dirty Harry, the Rifleman and the
Wizard. In Vietnam, White received a Purple Heart and Bronze and Silver
stars, but he was forced out in 1995 amid allegations made by female police
officers from Wisconsin attending a DEA training session in Chicago. The
female officers objected to the politically incorrect language White and
four other agents used. He had been in trouble for that before -- having
been hauled onto the carpet once for referring to Reno as a "dyke" during a
heated meeting with assistant U.S. attorneys.
. . "But who do you want to send into the drug war -- politically correct
Ivy Leaguers or people who grew up on the streets and studied at the school
of hard knocks?" growls a Dirty Harry defender when reminded of the Reno
remark. His point: Some slack should be cut for the Jurassics because
they're the most effective agents against the most dangerous traffickers,
street dealers and enforcers for the smugglers.
. . . . White, by all accounts, was as fearless as a lion, the type you want
in that proverbial last ditch. The Florida bullet-pumping incident came in
1980 when Miami drug dealers captured half a dozen DEA agents during a
warehouse bust gone wrong. One of the kidnappers tried to flee in a truck
and White found himself perilously balanced on the running board staring
down the barrel of the dealer's gun. In 1981 he was involved in another
bloody Miami shoot-out and fired two bullets into the back of a narcotics
fugitive during an intense firefight. Both incidents brought him to the
angry attention of a local prosecutor who wanted to indict him -- one Janet
Reno. White, who went on in the late eighties to lead the clandestine
Operation Snowcap, a U.S. initiative in Colombia involving assaults on
remote jungle drug labs, had his card marked when Reno and Constantine came
in, say insiders.
. . . . Diplomacy was never the Jurassic narcs' strong point. Heath's
departure from the DEA was sealed the moment he joined in the national
debate over the virtues and drawbacks of Mexico joining the United States
and Canada in a free-trade pact. Like many DEA agents in the early nineties
his point was that the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, would
be a godsend to the traffickers. As director of EPIC, the federal
intelligence-sharing facility, Heath publicly blasted the Mexican government
for drug corruption. "The politicos here didn't want anyone saying anything
about Mexico," says a DEA old-timer. "Ed Heath got transferred to Washington
by Constantine in 1993, a day after saying there was corruption in the
[governing] PRI party. Heath quit rather than move."
. . . . Heath wasn't alone in alienating Constantine with dire warnings
about the smuggling consequences of NAFTA -- which among the Jurassic narcs
is mocked as the North American Free Trafficking Agreement. Insiders say
Hector Berrellez, who in the early nineties was leading the continuing probe
into the 1985 Camarena murder, did himself no favors when in 1993 he flooded
DEA headquarters with intelligence reports detailing traffickers' links with
top Mexican politicians. And he wouldn't desist. Berrellez had few friends
in Constantinople, where he was seen by the new DEA regime as epitomizing
the worst traits of the Jurassics -- he was stubborn, bullheaded,
irreverent. Responsible for the abduction in 1990 from Mexico of Dr.
Humberto Alvarez Machain -- the operation was authorized by then-DEA head
Bonner -- Berrellez was a diplomatic embarrassment, a thorn in the side of
U.S.-Mexican relations. Alvarez was acquitted later in a high-profile Los
Angeles trial, but not before the abduction triggered a furious argument
between Washington and Mexico City, one that still is reverberating.
. . . . While Washington cringed, the ol' boys applauded -- as far as they
were concerned Berrellez had shown all the derring-do expected of a Jurassic
narc. A Mexican warrant out for his arrest and a contract on his head from
traffickers merely attested to Berrellez having the right stuff. .
. . . "It isn't hard to understand why Constantine would want to see the
back of Berrellez or Heath or any of that lot," says a retired DEA agent.
Sympathetic to Constantine, he argues the Jurassics were trouble and made no
effort to fit in with the new regime. They resisted change and from the
start mocked their new administrator. The Buffalo-born Constantine -- he
worked his way up from highway patrolman to the superintendent's job -- was
seen as just a local cop, lacking real know-how and appreciation of federal
law enforcement.
. . . . Under Constantine there has been a new set of objectives, including
an increased focus on drugs and violence in America's inner cities. As far
as the old-timers are concerned, that isn't a federal responsibility and on
the whole should be left to state and local forces to investigate and
combat. To pursue what Jurassics sniff at as "microstuff" merely betrays
Constantine's state-police roots, they say. They argue it also highlights
why Constantine was brought in by Reno and Freeh in the first place -- he'd
follow their direction, and they wanted a DEA controlled by the FBI, one
less gung-ho and awkwardly independent. "Remember," says one Jurassic, "Reno
wanted to fold the DEA into the FBI and Bonner defeated that plan. But in a
sense that's happened anyway -- Freeh calls the shots and the DEA is a shell
of its former self. It is no longer the lead agency in the drug war. When
was the last time anyone in the administration asked Tom Constantine for his
advice? When Clinton signed a new methamphetamine bill Constantine wasn't
even invited to the White House."
. . . . The loss of the DEA's status within the federal law-enforcement
community has hit the Jurassics hard. In some ways it predates Constantine.
When the first drug czar was appointed, then-DEA chief Jack Lawn reportedly
lamented, "I thought that was me." Under Constantine the process of reducing
the DEA's clout has proceeded pell-mell. The DEA administrator answers to
Freeh, who chairs a law-enforcement oversight committee.
. . . . And what angers them even more are what they see as regular
witch-hunts against stalwart agents, such as John Marcello, a 27-year DEA
veteran. Marcello was a key agent in the successful 1994 takedown of Claude
Duboc, the world's largest hashish trafficker until his arrest. As the Duboc
case was wrapped up, Marcello was put on administrative leave and
investigated. The probe was based on an extraordinary conspiracy theory
involving not only Marcello -- a Vietnam vet -- but two highly respected
Customs agents and three other senior DEA agents, say sources highly
knowledgeable about the inquiry.
. . . . Some basic police work at the start would have shot down the graft
theory, the sources say. But that wasn't done until much later. Marcello
remained under investigation for three years when, after strenuous failed
efforts to get something on him, he was told unceremoniously that "no
adverse action" would be taken against him. "No adverse action for what?
There never was anything on him -- but once they'd gone for him, Constantine
wouldn't let up," according to a DEA source.
. . . . As a consequence, morale is slipping, adding to the exodus of the
old-timers. The paucity of big, high-profile busts compared to the past is
taking its toll as well. Dozens of current and former agents interviewed for
this article applauded U.S. Customs for Operation Casablanca -- the recent
undercover sting that exposed Mexican and Colombian money-laundering and
netted several bankers -- but they all bemoaned the fact that it wasn't
DEA-led. "That's the kind of thing we used to do," says a veteran drug warrior.
. . . . One recruiter tells Insight: "Enrique Camarena was killed because he
defied corrupt Mexican politicians, the U.S. Embassy staff and the DEA suits
when he hired a private pilot to fly him over 150 acres of marijuana in the
fields of Zacatecas. Photos in hand, Kiki returned to Mexico City and the
Mexicans had no choice but to burn the fields. As I look into the eyes of
Constantine's new hires, I don't see a Camarena among them. That bodes well
for the Mexican cartels."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The War On Drugs - Race Falls Out Of The Closet (A List Subscriber
Posts An Excerpt From Jerome G. Miller's Book, 'Search And Destroy -
African-American Males In The Criminal Justice System,' Including Footnotes,
Providing Shocking Documentation Of The Depth Of Racial Bias Inherent
In The War On Some Drug Users And Sellers)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 13:18:34 +0000
To: "DRCTalk Reformers' Forum" (drctalk@drcnet.org)
From: Peter Webster (vignes@monaco.mc)
Subject: The War on Drugs: Race Falls Out of the Closet
Reply-To: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: owner-drctalk@drcnet.org
The following passage from Jerome G. Miller's book *Search and Destroy:
African-American Males in the Criminal Justice System* Cambridge University
Press 1996, is one of the best concise condemnations of the racism inherent
in the practice of the War on Drugs, with good quotable passages and
statistics, a good piece to keep on hand for purposes of debates, letters
to editors, and a general wake-up as to a principal underlying reason why
drug prohibition is so popular with many who believe they discarded their
racism long ago, but in reality...
[pp 80-88]
The War on Drugs: Race Falls Out of the Closet
The "drug war" was a disaster-in-waiting for African-Americans from the day
of its conception. Despite the fact that drug usage among various racial
and ethnic groups in the 1970s and 1980s remained roughly equivalent to
their representation in the society, from the first shot fired in the drug
war African-Americans were targeted, arrested, and imprisoned in wildly
disproportionate numbers. There was historical precedent for what happened.
As the African-American writer Clarence Lusane has noted, although there
was no evidence of disproportionate opiate use among blacks in the 19th and
early 20th centuries (with studies in Florida and Tennessee at the time of
World War I showing less opiate use proportionately among blacks than
whites), law-enforcement agencies and the press at the time claimed that
blacks were using cocaine at alarming levels. A New York Times article,
entitled "Negro Cocaine Fiends Are a New Southern Menace," noted that
southern sheriffs had switched from .32-caliber guns to .38 caliber pistols
to protect themselves from drug-empowered blacks.[77]
Although the first "war on drugs" was declared by President Nixon in 1970,
federal and state budgets for this conflict grew slowly until the late
1980s. Then, in the wake of University of Maryland African-American
basketball star Len Bias's death from cocaine overdose, President and Mrs.
Reagan defined drug abuse as the major problem facing the nation and the
"war" began in earnest. By 1992, the country was spending over $30 billion
annually on the drug war. Though this war had been a failure in its own
terms, it had inadvertently exposed the depth of racial bias in the justice
system, making hitherto subtle discrimination boldly obvious. While
African-Americans and Hispanics made up the bulk of those being arrested,
convicted, and sentenced to prison for drug offenses, in 1992, the U.S.
Public Health Service's Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration estimated that 76% of the illicit drug users in the United
States were white, 14% were black, and 8% were Hispanic.[78] Patterns of
cocaine use were only slightly different: two-thirds of cocaine users were
white, 17.6% were black, and 15.9% Hispanic.[79] Studies of those who
consumed all illicit drugs showed slightly lower percentages of blacks and
Latinos than whites in every age category.[80] There was no evidence that
the arresting patterns relative to African-Americans and Hispanics had
stemmed cocaine use among these groups. The fact that drug dealing in the
city, unlike that in the suburbs, often goes on in public areas guaranteed
that law-enforcement efforts would be directed at young black and Hispanic
men.
In Baltimore, Maryland, 11,107 of the 12,965 persons arrested for "drug
abuse violations" in 1991 were African-Americans.[81] In Columbus, Ohio,
where African-American males made up less than 11 % of the population, they
comprised over 90% of the drug arrests and were being arrested at I8 times
the rate of whites.[82] In Jacksonville, Florida, 87% of those arrested on
drug charges were African-American males, even though they comprised only
12% of that county's population.[83] In Minneapolis (where a state court
held that the punishments mandated by the legislature for possession or
sale of crack cocaine were racist in their effect), though black men made
up only about 7% of the population, they were being arrested at a ratio of
approximately 20:1 white males. These patterns were repeated in cities
across the nation.
Penalties followed the same trends. In 1991, 90% percent of the "crack"
arrests nationally were of minorities, whereas three-fourths of the arrests
for powder cocaine were of whites. However, sentences for possession of
crack were usually three to four times harsher than those for possession of
the same amount of powder cocaine. Blacks were sent to prison in
unprecedented numbers and were kept there longer than whites. Ninety-two
percent (92%) of all drug possession offenders sentenced to prison in New
York were either black or Hispanic, and 71% in California.[84]
In December 1990, a Minnesota judge, an African-American woman, declared
unconstitutional that state's drug law, which in effect punished the
possession of crack cocaine more severely (maximum sentence of 20 years)
than possession of an equal amount of powder cocaine (maximum sentence of
five years). Over 95% of those arrested for possession of crack cocaine
were black (in this virtually all-white state), whereas 80% of those
arrested for powder cocaine were white.
Although expert witnesses brought in from the Addictions Research Center of
the National Institute of Drug Abuse testified that they "suspected" that
crack cocaine led to addiction more quickly than powder cocaine, they were
unable to produce a single study to support that claim. Nor was there any
evidence that an addiction to crack was harder to break than an addiction
to powder cocaine. The only testimony elicited was anecdotal - primarily
from police, drug agents, and prosecutors. In upholding the lower court's
decision, one state supreme court justice saw "a plausible case for the
proposition that the statute evidenced intentional discrimination against
blacks."
Despite this state court decision, the discriminatory distinction continued
in the federal courts. Under the Congress's reform "sentencing guidelines,"
possession for personal use of five grams of crack cocaine carried a
five-year mandatory minimum sentence, while possession of the same amount
of powder cocaine or any other drug was a misdemeanor punishable by a
maximum of one year. These guidelines were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court
even though the racial effect was evident in the burgeoning percentages of
minorities entering the federal prison populations. As one long-time
federal judge, taking note of the Minnesota court's decision, commented to
me in I992, "The Constitution is no longer as important to the Supreme
Court as it is to state courts."[85]
By 1992, the Office of National Drug Control Policy was predicting that by
1996 sentenced drug offenders would comprise more than two-thirds of all
inmates in the Federal Bureau of Prisons, but did not mention that the
overwhelming majority of them would be black and Latino. A I99I survey of
racial rates of incarceration in Texas provided a graphic illustration of
where things were headed (Table 6). Most of these gross racial disparities
occurred between I985 and I99I and were directly related to the drug war.[86]
The racial discrimination endemic to the drug war wound its way through
every stage of the processing- arrest, jailing, conviction, and sentencing.
Among those sent to prison for drug offenses, African-Americans were less
likely to be assigned to treatment programs than whites. In California, for
example, whereas 70% of inmates sentenced for drug offenses were black,
two-thirds of the drug-treatment slots went to whites. The situation was no
different on the East Coast. A study done by a committee of the Monroe
County (Rochester, New York) Bar Association revealed that, although drug
use among ethnic and racial groups was roughly proportionate to their
percentages in the general population, African-Americans were being
arrested at I8 times the rate of whites. However, 75% of those who were
afforded the few drug-treatment slots available were white.[87]
With these kinds of figures emerging, even Blumstein, who previously had
found no evidence of racial bias in imprisonment rates, acknowledged
possible racial disparities in the "dramatic, exponential growth in arrest
rates for blacks compared to whites" related to the drug war.[88] In
testimony in early 1994 before the Pittsburgh Commission on Human
Relations, he argued that the war on drugs was victimizing black people. As
he put it, "The approaches we are taking are clearly, in my mind, making
matters appreciably worse."[89]
Nowhere were the racial disparities of the drug war more obvious than in
its treatment of African-American juveniles. In 1980, the national rate of
drug arrests for white and black juveniles was approximately the
same - about 400 per 100,000. During the early I980S, the drug-arrest rate
for white youths declined by 33%, while the arrest rates among black youths
remained relatively stable. However, as the drug war expanded, arrests of
black youths surged from 683 per 100,000 in 1985 to 1,200 per
100,000 - nearly five times the white rate - by 1989. By 1991, the rates of
arrest for black juveniles was at 1,415 per 100,000.[90] The above graph
(Figure 5) illustrates this pattern.
The effects of the drug war on juveniles in some cities was even more
devastating. One of the most disturbing findings in the Baltimore study
conducted by the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives can be
seen in the following graph (Figure 6).
It reveals that a total of 18 white juveniles were arrested in the city of
Baltimore in 1980 and charged with drug sales; by 1990, that number had
actually dropped to 13 such arrests. However, whereas 86 black juveniles
were arrested in Baltimore in 1980 for drug sales, by 1990, with the drug
war in full swing, 1,304 black juveniles were being arrested annually on
that charge. Black juveniles in Baltimore were being arrested for drugs at
roughly 100 times the arrest rate for whites of the same age.[91] A 1990
Johns Hopkins University study of the same population yielded similar
results, with 97% of the juvenile arrests for drug possession/selling in
Baltimore being black youths. Incredibly, statewide in Maryland, 90.5% of
the drug arrests were of black youngsters.[92] The national increase in
arrests of black youths for drug offenses, coupled with more severe
sentences in drug cases, was a primary factor contributing to the
disproportionate referral of African-American teenagers to state reform
schools and detention centers.[93] While the number of white juveniles
brought into the juvenile court system increased by only I% between I987
and I988, the number of nonwhite juveniles being processed in juvenile
courts increased at 42 times that rate.[94] Moreover, as youngsters were
caught up in the earliest stages of the juvenile justice system, one could
anticipate that the cumulative effect of bias would increase the
probability of their eventually being sentenced to jail or prison.
Off the Record
Having served in justice roles on the cabinets or personal staffs of
governors of three major states - Massachusetts, Illinois, and
Pennsylvania - I find it incredible that so many in the government and the
judiciary deny the racism which is so much a part of the conversation and
informal life of so many in the system. This was brought home to me while I
was monitoring jail overcrowding for a federal court. I was taken aback,
early in my tenure while sitting with the chief judge of the criminal
court, to be told by him that the major reason for crime in the city was
"Lyndon Johnson's Civil Rights Act." The judge then went on to explicate
his embarrassing personal biases on black men and crime. When I mentioned
the conversation later to other officials, the only response I got was,
"Did he really say that?" - and the conversation turned quickly to other
subjects. Meanwhile, hundreds of black males continued to have their cases
heard in this judge's court. The same judge later "acquitted" himself with
a local reporter (though the interview was not published for a number of
months), by saying that the problems with blacks were not entirely their
fault: "It's the fault of their mothers and their daddies and their
ancestors and our fault. We have been too good to them." As a result, he
concluded that "black youths have a tendency to fight and form gangs and
have difficulty competing in public school where they molest teachers and
commit rapes.... I would not date a black girl. I would not take one home.
My mother would kill me. I wouldn't mistreat one. I would not want my
children to marry a black or Asian or Chinese or a Puerto Rican."
The chief judge in Florida had committed the faux pas of speaking his mind.
Unfortunately, what he said, in my opinion, was probably uncomfortably
close to the quietly held attitudes that define the "social context" of
justice for most young African-American males entering that judicial
system. How else can we explain our increased reliance on imprisonment and
harsher sentences as the skin color of arrestees and defendants grows ever
darker?
This process, in turn, has had other unsavory effects. As the
African-American sociologist Troy Duster put it: "If we are ignorant of
recent history, and do not know that the incarceration rate and the
coloring of our prisons is a function of dramatic changes in the last half
century, we are far more vulnerable to the seduction of the genetic
explanation . . . [the] astonishing pattern of incarceration rates by race
. . . should give pause to anyone who would try to explain these
incarcerated.... The gene pool among humans takes many centuries to change,
but since I933, the incarceration of African-Americans in relation to
whites has gone up in a striking manner. In 1933, blacks were incarcerated
as a race approximately three times the rate of incarceration for whites.
In 1950, the ratio had increased to approximately 4 to 1; in 1960, it was 5
to 1, in 1970, it was 6 to 1, and in 1989, it was 7 to 1 ."[95] Initially,
the trends led to calls for new, higher levels of harsh punishment, which
were to have their own set of unanticipated consequences. Ultimately, they
set the political stage for resurrecting the genetic theories regarding the
black criminal that had obsessed white criminologists 75 years earlier.
References
77. Clarence Lusane, Pipe Dream Blues (Boston: South End Press, 1990).
78. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service,
Preliminary Estimates from the 1992 National Household Survey on Drug
Abuse, Advance Report No. 3, June 1993, Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies (OAS internal draft
version 7, 6/14/93, p. 8).
79. Ibid., p. 1 2.
80. Los Angeles Times, "Blacks Feel Brunt of Drug War," April 22, 1990.
81. Report of National Center on Institutions and Alternatives, "Hobbling a
Generation 11," 1992 (Alexandria, Virginia).
82. Sam Vincent Meddis, "Is the Drug War Racist?" USA Today, July 23-25,
1993, p. 2A
83. J. G. Miller, Duval Jail Report, filed with Middle District Court of
Florida, Jacksonville, Fla., June 1993.
84. "Does the Punishment Fit the Crime? Drug Users and Drunk Drivers,
Questions of Race and Class," The Sentencing Project, Washington D.C., 1993.
85. In August 1993, Federal Judge Lyle E. Strom in Omaha, Nebraska, became
the first in the nation to rule that sentences could not be more severe for
those who deal in crack cocaine than those who deal in powder cocaine.
Judge Strom departed from federal sentencing guidelines. He commented that
even were the disparate penalties inherently constitutional, when applied
to blacks their impact was "disproportionately severe." He also noted that
more than 90% of the persons prosecuted for dealing crack were
African-American ("Federal Judge Attacks Disparity in Sentencing for
Cocaine Cases," Wall Street Journal, August 3, 1993). In March 1995, the
federal sentencing commission announced their intention to adjust the
guidelines for those caught with crack cocaine versus powder cocaine to
bring the recommended sentences into conformity. The Clinton administration
refused to support the Commission's reforms and they died in Congress.
86. Criminal Justice Policy Council, Sentencing Dynamics Study, Texas
Punishment Standards Commission, 1992.
87. Report to Monroe County Bar Association Board of Trustees, "Justice in
Jeopardy," Monroe County Bar Association, May 1992.
88. In a 1992 conversation with the author.
89. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, January 22, 1994, Sec. B, p. Al.
90. Howard Snyder, Ph.D., "Arrests of Youth 1990," National Center for
Juvenile Justice (Research Branch of National Council of Juvenile and
Family Court Judges), Pittsburgh, Pa.
91. National Center on Institutions and Alternatives, "Hobbling a
Generation II", p. 3.
92. D. Altschuler, The State of the Region: Youth Crime and Juvenile
Justice in Maryland and Baltimore (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Institute
for Policy Studies, Fall 1992), p. vi.
93. H. Snyder, T. A. Finnegan, E. H. Nimick, M. H. Sickmund, D. P.
Sullivan, and N. J. Tierney (1990). Juvenile Court Statistics, 1988.
National Center for Juvenile Justice, Pittsburgh, Pa.
94. Ibid., p. 4.
95. Duster notes that the War on Drugs of the 19805 amplified these
differences even more. In Florida, admissions to state prisons tripled from
1983 to 1989. In 1983 in Virginia, 63 % of prison commitments for drugs
were white, 37% minority. By 1989, the pattern had reversed, with 34% of
the new commitments being white and 65% minority. "Yet, in this very period
we find a significant increase in scientific journal articles and scholarly
books (Mednick et al. 1984; Wilson and Herrnstein 1985) suggesting a
greater role for biological explanations of crime" (Troy Duster, "Genetics,
Race, and Crime, etc.," pp. 133-135).
Peter Webster
vignes@monaco.mc
International Journal of Drug Policy
http://www.elsevier.nl:80/
subscriptions: usinfo-f@elsevier.com
DRCNet Online Library of Drug Policy
http://www.druglibrary.org/
The Psychedelic Library
psd_lib@druglibrary.org
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/lsd/
http://www.drugtext.org/psychedelics/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cocaine Plane Scandal Rocks Nicaraguan Elite ('The San Francisco Chronicle'
Says Arnoldo Aleman, The President Of Nicaragua, Allowed Himself To Be Flown
Around Earlier This Year In A Plane Allegedly Owned By A Cuban American
Named Jose Francisco Guasch, Who Also Used The Plane, Stolen From An Airport
In Fort Lauderdale, Florida, To Transport Large Quantities Of Cocaine,
According To Nicaraguan Police)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 21:29:18 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: Nicaragua: Cocaine Plane Scandal Rocks Nicaraguan Elite
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: tjeffoc@sirius.com
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
Contact: chronletter@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/
Pubdate: Mon, 17 Aug 1998
Section: Page A10
Author: Edward Hegstrom Chronicle Foreign Service
COCAINE PLANE SCANDAL ROCKS NICARAGUAN ELITE
President says he was innocent victim
Managua -- Maybe Arnoldo Aleman's mother never warned him against accepting
rides from strangers.
Aleman, the president of Nicaragua, allowed himself to be flown around
earlier this year in a plane allegedly owned by a silver-haired Cuban
American named Jose Francisco Guasch.
But now Aleman probably wishes he hadn't done that. The jet was stolen from
a Florida airport days before Guasch brought it to Managua last December to
offer free rides.
In addition to carting around the president, his wife .and several other
unsuspecting dignitaries, the plane was also used to transport large
quantities of cocaine, according to Nicaraguan Police. Authorities say they
don't know whether the jet ever transported cocaine at the same time that
it transported Aleman and his associates.
The case has resulted in the firing of government officials, including the
head of the Civil Aeronautics Division, who now awaits trial on
drug-trafficking charges.
Like just about every other important Nicaraguan taken for a ride on the
jet, Aleman says he was an innocent victim.
"I think the whole nation has been jarred by these events," Aleman told an
investigating judge. He blamed his civil aviation authorities and security
guards for allowing him to fly on the plane.
U.S. authorities say they believe Aleman. "We have no information linking
the president either to the theft of the airplane or to narco-trafficking,"
said an embassy spokesmanin Managua.
Court records in Managua contain a copy of an American passport indicating
that Guasch, 52, was born in Cuba and naturalized as a U.S. citizen. The
records also contain a letter from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency
indicating that Guasch has previously been investigated in connection with
international drug trafficking. But there is no indication that he has ever
been arrested.
Months before bringing the plane to Managua, Guasch began visiting
Nicaragua to look into the possibility of setting up a commercial airline,
which he
planned to call Ceylon Air. He met with the head of Nicaragua's Civil
Aeronautics Division, Mario Rivas Montealegre, whom he knew from Florida
pilot schools in the 1980s.
Guasch told Montealegre that he worked for the CIA, according to court
records.
When it came time to form the company, Guasch needed a Nicaraguan to be
named as the majority owner. Montealegre volunteered his chauffeur, who
became listed as the owner in the paperwork.
But the new airlines still needed an airplane.
No problem. On the morning of December 16, workers at a small Fort
Lauderdale airline arrived at the airport to discover their jet was missing
from the hangar.
Police dutifully took a report about a stolen 1975 Lear jet, white with
gold and maroon trim, and eight leather passenger seats. Estimated value:
$3 million.
A few days later, the jet showed up in Managua, accordmg to authorities.
Guasch told people that he had bought it in Germany. Instead of parking the
plane at the principal international airport, Guasch decided to Store it at
a mostly abandoned airport known as Brasiles.
The airport has no active control tower and no immigration inspectors.
As part of Ceylon Air's rollout, Guasch offered 10 hours of free flights to
his new friends in the government. The transportation minister used the
plane to fly to Montelimar, an exclusive beach resort on the Pacific. The
trip was billed as an official opportunity to inspect the quality of the
runway there.
The tourism, minister and the vice president also made trips. Aleman's
wife, Dolores, flew with friends to visit the Atlantic coast. Aleman and
his aides took the plane to a February Conference of Central American
presidents in El Salvador.
Exactly what other flights the plane took Out of the uncontrolled airport
are not known. Authorities are aware of one April flight where the plane
went from Managua to San Jose, Costa Rica, where it was also allowed to
land without being searched. It went On to Medellin, Colombia, before
heading home the next day.
While top officials were enjoying the seemingly limitless access to the
luxury jet, police were groing
suspicious. In May, Officials entered the hangar and searched the plane. A
sophisticated drug-detecting device found high levels of cocaine residue in
12 of the 13 locations searched.
The presence of residual cocaine, even in compartments led authorities to
conclude that the plane had recently been used to transport large
quantities of the drug. No actual cocaine was found, however.
Four people have been arrested, including Montealegre and his chauffeur.
Guasch slipped out of the country and remains at large.
to 1998 Daily News index for August 13-19