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

"Marijuana is Medicine" Rally April 30th in Salem (Stormy Ray, a multiple
sclerosis patient and chief petitioner for the voter-approved Oregon Medical
Marijuana Act, urges advocates for medical marijuana patients to help solve
the supply problem by lobbying legislators and showing up Friday at the
capitol to support House Joint Memorial 10, a resolution introduced by state
representative Jo Ann Bowman that would ask Congress to reschedule marijuana.
Plus the current text of HJM 10, and addresses for a short list of key
legislators.)

From: "Stormy Ray" (mbpdoors@cyberhighway.net)
To: "CRRH mailing list" (restore@crrh.org)
Subject: "Marijuana is Medicine" Rally April 30th in Salem
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 12:30:52 -0600

Dear OMMA Supporters,

What a united message was sent to the Oregon Health Division's hearing
officer. There was no doubt the patients are advocating for their needs. I'm
so glad we have this Oregon Medical Marijuana Act to protect patients that
choose to use medical marijuana. But, help is needed to get this wonderful
herb to patients in Oregon.

Voter Power has drafted a resolution whereby the Oregon Legislature
would urge the United States Congress to move marijuana from Schedule
I under the Controlled Substances Act. Rep. Jo Ann Bowman D-Portland
has agreed to introduce the resolution and other legislators have agreed to
be cosponsors. The conventional wisdom is that the right wing Republicans
who control the legislature will never pass it. However, we believe it is
important to lobby hard for this simple step. Feedback on the resolution
itself and on tactics for getting it passed would be appreciated. This
represents an opportunity for medical marijuana activists to flex a little
political muscle. There is no doubt that the public is with us on this
concept.

Voters have already accepted the concept of medical marijuana. The next step
is to create the supply system that should be available to patients. This
means rescheduling at the federal level. This resolution is step one in what
will be a protracted process. At the end of this battle patients will be able
to get marijuana from a pharmacy like other medicines and doctors will be
able to prescribe medical marijuana without fears about it adversely
affecting their careers.

Voter Power hopes to work with other organizations to coordinate a serious
effort to lobby for this Resolution "House Joint Memorial 10".

Come Join Us! April 30th, 1999

10:00 to 11:00AM "Marijuana is Medicine" rally on capitol steps
8:00AM to 5:00PM Galleria in capitol

If you can come, bring 2 friends. Let me know if you'd like to speak 2-3 min.
at the rally. Have 2 friends call their legislator 1-800-332-2313 and ask for
their support for HJM 10. Listed below is the committee members to contact.
Any Rep. can be contacted to be a supporter of HJM 10.

Here is the resolution: HJM 10 (House Joint Memorial 10)

Rescheduling Resolution

A resolution from the Oregon Legislature urging the United States Congress
to reschedule marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act.

(Long Version)

Summary:

This measure would memorialize the President and the Congress of the
United States to enact appropriate legislation to permit marijuana to be
prescribed by licensed physicians and to ensure that a safe, affordable,
regulated supply of marijuana can be available at pharmacies for medical
use.

WHEREAS, an increasing body of scientific evidence concludes that
marijuana is a safe and effective medicine with low toxicity compared to
most prescription drugs and it has been shown to be effective in the
treatment of glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, muscle spasticity,
the nausea, vomiting and appetite loss associated with chemotherapies
treating cancer, certain forms of chronic severe pain, and the AIDS wasting
syndrome; and

WHEREAS; the voters of Oregon have approved the concept of marijuana
as a medicine by passing the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act (ballot measure
67) at the November 3, 1998 general election, and

WHEREAS; the only way for a patient to obtain medical marijuana under
current Oregon law is to grow it themselves or find a caregiver who will
grow it for them, and

WHEREAS; this system is unlikely to help many patients who need medical
marijuana such as recently diagnosed cancer patients suffering from the
nausea associated with chemotherapy who do not have time to grow a
marijuana plant to maturity or find a caregiver, and

WHEREAS; this system is unlikely to help severely ill or handicapped
patients who would benefit from medical marijuana but are physically
unable to grow marijuana or find a caregiver, and

WHEREAS; this system will not help patients who are hospitalized but
whose physicians recommend that medical marijuana will mitigate their
symptoms; and

WHEREAS; patients should have the option of obtaining medical
marijuana at a pharmacy in the same way that they obtain other prescription
drugs, and

WHEREAS; doctors should be able to prescribe marijuana to patients
without fear of arrest or other penalty for conditions which the scientific
evidence shows will be ameliorated by medical marijuana, and

WHEREAS; the reason doctors cannot prescribe marijuana and pharmacies
cannot make marijuana available to patients is because it is mis-classified
as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act, which
falsely holds that medical marijuana is extremely dangerous and has no
medical utility, findings contradicted by scientific evidence, and

WHEREAS; the experience of thousands of patients around the country, as
expressed in numerous affidavits and testimony at public hearings,
indicates that medical marijuana does indeed mitigate their symptoms, and

WHEREAS; in 1988 Francis Young, an administrative law judge for the Drug
Enforcement Administration, ruled based on extensive evidence that
marijuana should be rescheduled, and

WHEREAS; the Drug Enforcement Administration ignored this ruling and

WHEREAS; Barry McCaffrey, the Director of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy, threatened doctors with losing their ability to prescribe
controlled substances if they expressed their validly held medical
judgment that marijuana might help relieve patients' symptoms based on the
best scientific research available, and

WHEREAS; the mis-scheduling of marijuana as a Schedule I controlled
substance inhibits research which will further clarify the extent of
marijuana's medical utility and methods of using it most safely, and

WHEREAS; the people of Alaska, Washington, California, Nevada, Colorado,
and the District of Columbia, in addition to Oregon, every jurisdiction
that has considered and voted on this issue, voted for medical
marijuana, and

WHEREAS; properly scheduling marijuana under the Controlled Substances
Act will ensure a regulated supply of pure unadulterated medical grade
marijuana of known potency, and

WHEREAS; not properly scheduling marijuana forces some patients to support
the illegal black market in marijuana, and

WHEREAS; rescheduling marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act is
the compassionate way to provide medical marijuana to patients who will
benefit from it:

It is the sense of the Oregon Legislature that medical marijuana ought to be
rescheduled from Schedule I, under the Controlled Substances Act, and
therefore the Oregon Legislature recommends to the United States
Congress and the President of the United States that marijuana be
rescheduled.

Therefore the Secretary of the Senate shall transmit copies of this
resolution to the President and Vice President of the United States, to
the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and to each Senator and
Representative from Oregon in the Congress of the United States.

Kevin Mannix-R Chair 503) 986-1432 District #32
H-290 State Capitol, Salem, OR 97310

Floyd Prozanski-D Vice-Chair 503) 986-1440 Distr. #40
H-495 State Capitol, Salem, OR 97310

Gary Hansen-D 503) 986-1417 District #17
H-373 State Capitol, Salem, OR 97310

Mark Simmons-R 503) 986-1458 District #58
H-292 State Capitol, Salem, OR 97310

Ron Sunseri-R 503) 986-1422 District #22
D H-386 State Capitol, Salem, OR 97310

Jo Ann Bowman-D 503) 986-1419 District #19
H-383 State Capitol, Salem, OR 97310

Juley Gianella-R 503) 986-1438 District #38
H-391 State Capitol, Salem, OR 97310

EVERY CALL, EVERY WRITTEN COMMUNICATION, and EVERY PERSON AT THE RALLY helps
us all. Disabilities know no barriers. God forbid you join our ranks to soon.
But if you do, I pray you never have to fight for your medicine the way
patients have had to. Help us get our message heard!

God Bless,

Stormy

Oregon Medical Marijuana Act
Chief Petitioner - Stormy Ray
(541) 889-3876
715 Canyon 2 Rd.
Ontario, OR 97914

***

To subscribe, unsubscribe or switch to immediate or digest mode, please send
your instructions to restore-owner@crrh.org.

***

Campaign for the Restoration and Regulation of Hemp

CRRH
P.O. Box 86741
Portland, OR 97286
Phone: (503) 235-4606
Fax:(503) 235-0120
Web: http://www.crrh.org/

***

From: LawBerger@aol.com
From: "CRRH mailing list" (restore@crrh.org)
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 21:01:17 EDT
Subject: Re: "Marijuana is Medicine" Rally April 30th in Salem
To: restore@crrh.org
Reply-To: LawBerger@aol.com

We have had a public hearing on this bill and are considering re-writing the
whereas clauses to gain the support of the majority party.

We *can* win, but urging Oregon constitutents to contact their legislators
remains our best hope.

Lee Berger
Portland

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

Can you help? (A list subscriber summarizes Friday's 10-minute Oregon
legislative hearing on HJM 10, and also asks you to lobby lawmakers. The
chair of the committee, Rep. Mannix, indicated the rescheduling resolution
would stand a better chance of passing out of committee if the wording was
based from the standpoint that OMMA is the law and that marijuana in Schedule
I is federal interference with Oregon Law. With amendments, the resolution
may get a hearing before an April 30 deadline.)

From: "sburbank" (sburbank@orednet.org)
To: "1Sandee Burbank" (sburbank@orednet.org)
Subject: Can you help?
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 10:27:35 -0700

A 10 minute hearing was held on Friday, April 23rd regarding HJM-10, a joint
resolution calling for the Federal Rescheduling of Marijuana. The Chair of
the committee, Rep. Mannix, indicated it would stand a better chance of
passing out of committee if the wording was based from the standpoint that
OMMA is the law and that mj in Schedule I is federal interference with Oregon
Law.

The amendments are being written and with the help of Rep. Jo Ann Bowman and
staff, it may get a hearing. Resolution HJM 10 must have had a hearing and
be voted out of committee by April 30th.

Take a moment to contact your own legislators and Rep. Mannix and ask them to
support HJM-10. Call, fax or write, but do it NOW. Time is short!

Oregon voters have spoken. Marijuana should be available for medicine. Tell
your legislators the best way to deal with the issue is for the Federal
Government to reschedule marijuana so that patients have access to a legal
supply, not with a costly state registration process that still leaves
patients and their doctors in fear of the federal government.

The "Marijuana Is Medicine!" Rally scheduled for Friday the 30th is even more
important. We will be there the entire day from 8 AM to 5 PM.

AT 8 AM in the Galleria, main floor Capitol, Rep Bowman will make a short
speech regarding the importance of the HJM-10 and how the current federal
scheduling of marijuana effects patients.

A poster display will feature medical marijuana patients who are suffering
from the effects of the law, which puts them in prison, takes their homes and
other property, and separates them from their families. There will be
staffed information tables with the display from 8 AM to 5 PM.

At 10 AM till 11 AM there will be a press conference/rally on the front steps
of the State Capitol Bldg. Featured speakers will be Rep. Jo Ann Bowman,
sponsor of HJM-10, and Rep. Floyd Prozanski, who will be joined by several
patients and other speakers. Voter Power is sponsoring the day's events.

I will be in Salem all day on Friday, April 30th. I hope to see you and a
car full of your friends. If you can't be there, please call or fax your
legislators and Rep. Mannix and ask them to support HJM-10. We can win this
one!

Sandee Burbank

PS. Bring an umbrella in case it rains! We'll be outside from 10 till
11 AM. Pass the word!

2255 State Road, Mosier, OR 97040
phone or fax 541-298-1031
sandee@mamas.org

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

Judge shuts tap on strip club's free beer (The Oregonian says Marion County
Circuit Judge Albin Norblad issued a temporary restraining order Friday that
prohibits Scores Entertainment Inc., in Salem, from giving away beer. The
"nude dance club" doesn't have a state liquor license but argues that it
doesn't need one as long as it doesn't receive any financial consideration
for the beer. The TRO remains in effect pending a May 18 hearing.)

Newshawk: Portland NORML (http://www.pdxnorml.org/)
Pubdate: Sat, Apr 24 1999
Source: Oregonian, The (OR)
Copyright: 1999 The Oregonian
Contact: letters@news.oregonian.com
Address: 1320 SW Broadway, Portland, OR 97201
Fax: 503-294-4193
Website: http://www.oregonlive.com/
Forum: http://forums.oregonlive.com/
Author: Cheryl Martinis, correspondent, the Oregonian

Judge shuts tap on strip club's free beer

* A circuit judge issues a temporary restraining order that prohibits the
Salem club's promotion for the time being

SALEM -- A Marion County judge on Friday halted, at least temporarily, a
free-beer promotion at a Salem strip club.

Circuit Judge Albin Norblad issued a temporary restraining order, effective
immediately, that prohibits Scores Entertainment Inc. from continuing to
give away beer pending a May 18 hearing on the subject.

Scores doesn't have a state liquor license but argues that it doesn't need
one as long as it doesn't receive any financial consideration for the beer.
Since April 7, the Northeast Salem business has offered up to two free beers
per person for customers ages 21 and older.

The state argues that the giveaway is illegal without a liquor license. The
state attorney general's office went to court Friday, asking a judge to
declare Scores a "public nuisance" for serving alcohol without a license and
to make the business stop serving the beer.

Norblad said state law on the subject is confusing but granted the
restraining order based on a city of Salem ordinance that he said clearly
prohibits the activity.

Kevin Lafky, a Scores attorney, said he disagreed with Norblad's decision.
He said that state law pre-empts a city ordinance and that the city
ordinance involves loitering.

Scores previously filed a lawsuit in Marion County Circuit Court. It asked
that the courts declare the free-beer promotion legal and prevent the state
from pursuing criminal or administrative action against the club.

In 1997, Scores started to apply for a liquor license with the Oregon Liquor
Control Commission. It withdrew its application in response to heavy
opposition from the neighborhood and an unfavorable recommendation from the
Salem City Council and liquor commission staff. It has operated since
opening in July 1997 with nonalcoholic drinks. The club is open to those age
18 and older.

The free-beer promotion has boosted business significantly, manager Dylan
Salts has said.

A key issue in determining whether the club needs an OLCC license under
state law is whether the club receives any financial consideration for the
beer. Scores has argued that the beer truly is free because customers who
accept the offer don't have to pay a cover charge and don't have to buy
anything else to get the beer.

Assistant Attorney General David L. Kramer argued that there is no such
thing as free beer. He said the consideration is in the form of increased
sales of other goods and services. The club sells food and soda and charges
customers $10 to view a "table dance," the state argued.

He said in a memorandum that since withdrawing its liquor license
application, Scores twice has thumbed its nose at Salem.

"First, it opened its strip bar to 18-year-old kids, enticing them with nude
dancing and charging them $4 to $10 for a soda pop," he wrote. "Apparently,
that did not work well enough. Now, they want to entice kids and adults to
the same establishment by promoting 'free' beer along with sex."

He argued that the restraining order was justified because the "unlicensed
distribution of alcohol, in a nude dance club open to minors, poses an
immediate and continuing threat of injury to the state."

In response to Norblad's ruling, the OLCC issued a statement saying that if
Scores' practice of beer giveaways was upheld, it would allow minors to
mingle with adults in a tavern-like atmosphere. Businesses licensed by the
OLCC must have areas posted that are off-limits to minors.

Do you have news of Marion, Polk and southwestern Yamhill counties? You can
reach Cheryl Martinis at 503-399-8540 or by e-mail at cheryl@open.org.

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

Judge Rules Marijuana Test Invalid (A news release from best-selling author
Peter McWilliams says that after two days of exhaustive medical and
scientific testimony, federal Judge James McMahon ruled Friday in Los Angeles
in the case of Todd McCormick, McWilliams' co-defendant, that McCormick's
bail should not be revoked because there is no way to distinguish between
Marinol and marijuana in drug tests. McCormick originally secured bail after
agreeing to submit to urine tests the government claimed would distinguish
between Marinol and THC-V, which is unique to marijuana. McWilliams also
notes the Society of Neuroscience in October 1997 said "New research shows
that substances similar to or derived from marijuana, known as cannabinoids,
could benefit more than 97 million Americans who experience some form of pain
each year.")

From: "Peter McWilliams" (peter@mcwilliams.com)
To: "Peter McWilliams" (peter@mcwilliams.com)
Subject: Judge Rules Marijuana Test Invalid
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:35:48 -0700

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE--PLEASE CIRCULATE WIDELY

April 24, 1999

FEDERAL MAGISTRATE RULES THERE IS NO WAY TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN PRESCRIPTION
DRUG MARINOL(r) AND MARIJUANA IN DRUG TESTS

LOS ANGELES. Federal Magistrate Judge James McMahon ruled on Friday (April
23, 1999) that the test used to distinguish between the prescription drug
Marinol (r) and the pernicious drug marijuana in urine is invalid. There is,
therefore, no way in which to distinguish between Marinol (r) and marijuana in
drug tests.

The federal government had been using an experimental procedure to
distinguish between THC, found in both Marinol(r) and marijuana, and THC-V,
which is found only in marijuana. Using this test, the government was
attempting to revoke medical marijuana patient Todd McCormick's $500,000
bail and place McCormick in custody until his trial, not scheduled to begin
until September 7, 1999.

After two days of exhaustive expert medical and scientific testimony, Judge
McMahon ruled that the test was invalid.

Marinol(r) has been authorized as a treatment for cancer chemotherapy and
AIDS-related nausea, and for appetite stimulation in AIDS patients. Marinol(r)
can, however, be prescribed for any condition a physician determines might
be of value to the patient, since physicians can prescribe any legal
medication for "off label" uses. "Off label" is any medical use not listed
on the label of a prescription drug, but for which the drug has indicated
some medical potential.

Considering that the recent National Academy of Sciences Institute of
Medicine report on medical marijuana lists nausea, pain, anxiety, AIDS, and
MS as legitimate medical uses for THC, doctors should feel comfortable in
prescribing Marinol(r) widely.

How widely? A report from the Society of Neuroscience in October 1997 began,
"New research shows that substances similar to or derived from marijuana,
known as cannabinoids [of which THC is the most popular], could benefit more
than 97 million Americans who experience some form of pain each year."
(http://www.marijuanamagazine.com/toc/articles/manalgesic.htm)

"Until medical marijuana is made legal, and it will be," said federal
medical marijuana defendant Peter McWilliams (www.petertrial.com), "I
strongly suggest that my fellow patients try and use Marinol(r). After all,
General Drug Czar McCaffrey has called Marinol(r) 'the REAL medical marijuana
'--and we all know the Drug Czar is infallible."

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

Drug Smugglers To Get No Dignity (The Globe and Mail, in Toronto, says the
Supreme Court of Canada ruled yesterday that subjecting travellers to a
"bedpan vigil" is a fair price to pay in balancing the right to individual
privacy with the state interest in detecting "drugs." The ruling overturned
the acquittal of Isaac Monney, a citizen of Ghana who arrived in Canada on a
flight from Switzerland and was detained in a "drug loo facility" before
providing officers with the self-incriminating evidence they were hoping
for.)

Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 17:22:23 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Canada: Drug Smugglers To Get No Dignity
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Pubdate: Saturday, April 24, 1999
Source: Globe and Mail (Canada)
Copyright: 1999, The Globe and Mail Company
Contact: letters@globeandmail.ca
Website: http://www.globeandmail.ca/
Forum: http://forums.theglobeandmail.com/
Author: Kirk Makin

DRUG SMUGGLERS TO GET NO DIGNITY

Bedpan vigils necessary in border searches despite embarrassment, top
court rules

Suspected drug smugglers must be prepared to suffer embarrassing
searches at the border as a necessary price of keeping contraband out
of the country, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled yesterday.

The court overturned the acquittal of a man who was kept in custody at
Toronto's Pearson International Airport on March 13, 1993, until he
had eliminated 84 condom-encased pellets of heroin.

The court said subjecting travellers to "a bedpan vigil" is a fair
price to pay in balancing the right to individual privacy with the
state interest in detecting drugs.

The defendant -- Isaac Monney -- was detained after arriving on a
flight from Switzerland. A customs officer found it odd Mr. Monney had
purchased his ticket with cash that day. His suspicions increased when
he saw Mr. Monney's passport showed he was born in Ghana, a source
country for narcotics.

Mr. Monney became nervous during questioning. He modified several
answers about his criminal record, his reasons for travel and the
route he had chosen. After being detained for several hours in a "drug
loo facility," he provided officers with the self-incriminating
evidence they were hoping for.

Yesterday's ruling overturned an earlier decision by the Ontario Court
of Appeal, which had itself overturned Mr. Monney's conviction at his
trial.

In concluding Mr. Monney had been the victim of an unreasonable search
and seizure, the Ontario Court of Appeal said that while the customs
officers had grounds to suspect Mr. Monney of being a drug courier,
these fell short of being reasonable grounds to believe an offence had
been committed. It also ruled that the search amounted to a forced
conscription of the suspect.

Writing for a unanimous court, Mr. Justice Frank Iacobucci said
yesterday that travellers crossing borders have a lowered expectation
of privacy than they would have in the streets.

It said that while they are embarrassing, bedpan vigils are analogous
to strip-searches and less invasive than body-cavity searches, X-rays
or the use of emetics.

"A passive bedpan vigil is the least intrusive means of monitoring the
alimentary canal in circumstances where there is a real danger of
losing evidence, and where the protection and safety of the public are
of primary concern," Mr. Iacobucci said.

Turning to the legitimacy of the customs officers' suspicions, the
court said the inability of a person to keep a story straight leads to
a reasonable conclusion he or she may be lying.

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

Swiss Panel Calls For Marijuana Legalization (A similarly brief Orange County
Register version)

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 12:37:18 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: CA: Swiss Panel Calls For Marijuana Legalization
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John W. Black
Pubdate: Saturday April 24,1999
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Copyright: 1999 The Orange County Register
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/
Section: News,page 34

SWISS PANEL CALLS FOR MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION

Switzerland should legalize the sale and use of marijuana,but with
controls to keep the nation from becoming a drug haven, a
government-appointed panel urged Friday.

The committee's recommendation to the Cabinet will be considered as
part of a continuing study to revise Switzerland's drug laws, but would
probably need approval in a national referendum.

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

News From Portugal - The Government Announces Decriminalisation (A list
subscriber forwards a correspondent's e-mail saying the Portuguese government
announced two days ago a decision by the council of ministers to
decriminalise the use and the possession of drugs for personal use, replacing
jail terms with fines, community service and driving restrictions. The
decision appears framed in the new national drug strategy.)

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:43:22 +0000
To: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Peter Webster (vignes@monaco.mc)
Subject: [] News From Portugal - The Government Announces Decriminalisation

Subject: News from Portugal - The government announces his commitment to
the decriminalisation of drug use and to the harm reduction policies
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 14:08:07 +0100
From: "Sergio Inacio" (drgmap@writeme.com)

News from Portugal - The government announces his commitment to the
decriminalisation of drug use and to the harm reduction policies

The Portuguese government announced in 22/04/99 the decision taken by the
council of ministers, to decriminalise the use and the possession of drugs
for personal use, and this way to abolish the imprisonment up to 3 months
that is stipulated as punishment. This decision appears framed in the new
national strategy of combating drug addictions that apart from the
decriminalisation expressed a devotion to the establishment or strengthens
the strategies of harm reduction, for example, allowing the opening of
shooting rooms. Returning to the decriminalisation of the use of drugs. This
decriminalisation doesn't mean that the use is not sanctioned, but the same
will become subject to a fine, work for the community, prohibition of
driving, or similar. Even though this change in the Portuguese drug policy
is not perfect, it is a small step that places Portugal in the vanguard of
the respect for the citizen's rights. This change, which will come into
effect after approval from the Portuguese parliament and transported to the
Portuguese law, may also contribute to the necessary development of a
European drug and addiction policy that is freed from the American
impositions via the organisms of UN

One last and particular appreciation, is that this decision came out in an
electoral period that usually are used to promote more repressive and
aggressive policies in a clear demagogue attitude.

For a new drugs and addiction policy

http://come.to/drgmap

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

The Week Online with DRCNet, Issue No. 88 (The Drug Reform Coordination
Network's original online drug policy newsmagazine features - HEA reform
campaign gets boost; Report: District of Columbia drug policy a disaster;
Heroin in Australia: a conversation with Brian McConnell of Families and
Friends for Drug Law Reform; North Dakota becomes first state to legalize
hemp cultivation; Oregon Supreme Court to review forfeiture as double
jeopardy; Book: "No Equal Justice, Race and Class in the American Criminal
Justice System"; Report: In search of a new ethic for treating patients with
chronic pain; Seminar in NYC, Friday, 5/28)

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 05:47:38 +0000
To: drc-natl@drcnet.org
From: DRCNet (drcnet@drcnet.org)
Subject: The Week Online with DRCNet, Issue #88
Sender: owner-drc-natl@drcnet.org

The Week Online with DRCNet, Issue #88 - April 24, 1999
A Publication of the Drug Reform Coordination Network

-------- PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE --------

(To sign off this list, mailto:listproc@drcnet.org with the
line "signoff drc-natl" in the body of the message, or
mailto:kfish@drcnet.org for assistance. To subscribe to
this list, visit http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html.)

This issue can be also be read on our web site at
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html. Check out the DRCNN
weekly radio segment at http://www.drcnet.org/drcnn/.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. HEA Reform Campaign Gets Boost
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html#campaign

2. REPORT: District of Columbia Drug Policy a Disaster
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html#drugstrategies

3. Heroin in Australia: A Conversation with Brian McConnell
of Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html#ffdlr

4. North Dakota Becomes First State to Legalize Hemp
Cultivation
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html#northdakota

5. Oregon Supreme Court to Review Forfeiture as Double
Jeopardy
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html#doublejeopardy

6. BOOK: NO Equal Justice, Race and Class in the American
Criminal Justice System
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html#noequaljustice

7. REPORT: In Search of a New Ethic for Treating Patients
with Chronic Pain
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html#newethic

8. Seminar in NYC, Friday, 5/28
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/088.html#seminar

***

1. HEA Reform Campaign Gets Boost

The student campaign to repeal the drug provision of the
Higher Education Act of 1998 got a boost this past week,
with four new endorsements of the campaign's resolution.
Student governments at the University of Wisconsin at
Richland, Illinois State University at Normal, and the
University of Texas at Dallas, voted to adopt the
resolution; and thanks to the efforts of the student
activists at Richland, the United Council of University of
Wisconsin Students, representing 140,000 students at the 24
University of Wisconsin campuses, endorsed the resolution
unanimously last Tuesday. Other student government
endorsements include the Rochester Institute of Technology
(NY), Hampshire College (MA), Western Connecticut State
University, Pitzer College (CA), Western State College (CO),
and the Student Association of the State University of New
York. The HEA drug provision delays or denies all federal
financial aid for any drug offender, and the student
resolution calls for the provision's repeal.

Over 30 organizations so far have signed on to a letter to
the Congress calling for passage of H.R. 1053, a bill
sponsored by Rep. Barney Frank that if passed will repeal
the HEA drug provision. Signatories include the NAACP, the
United States Student Association, the American Civil
Liberties Union, the National Council of Negro Women, the
General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist
Church, the Center for Campus Organizing and many more.
(Visit http://www.u-net.org/supporters.html for the complete
listing.)

Also this past week, students at Ohio State University, with
supporters from the organization For a Better Ohio,
demonstrated against the HEA drug provision. Visit
http://www.angelfire.com/oh2/ohiohemp/demo.html to view
photographs from the event.

Over 9,200 e-mails and faxes supporting H.R. 1053 have been
sent to Congress by visitors to DRCNet's online electronic
petition at http://www.RaiseYourVoice.com since it was
inaugurated last week. If you haven't yet filled out the
petition, please take two minutes right now to type in your
name and address and let your Representative and your two
Senators know how you feel! And please take a few moments
to tell your friends -- visit our referral page at
http://www.RaiseYourVoice.com/tellfriend.html to send a note
to them or to cut and paste our referral letter into your
own e-mail or mailing list or online forum posting. The e-
mail your friends receive will have your name in the
subject. And don't worry -- we keep no record of your
friends' e-mail addresses, and won't contact them ever
again, unless they decide to subscribe to our list. Many
petition visitors do decide to subscribe, so sending people
to http://www.RaiseYourVoice.com is a great way to build the
movement too!

For further information on the HEA reform campaign and how
to get involved, visit http://www.u-net.org/ or e-mail
lotlikar@drcnet.org.

***

2. REPORT: District of Columbia Drug Policy a Disaster

The District of Columbia spends more than any other US city
on drug law enforcement, yet it ranks among the worst in
rates of substance abuse, drug-related disease and crime,
according to a new report from Drug Strategies, a DC-based
research institute. "Facing Facts: Drugs and the Future of
Washington, DC" found that the District spends $1,257 per
capita on drug enforcement each year, but a scant $42.45 per
capita on drug treatment and prevention combined.

Drug Strategies President Mathea Falco told the Week Online
that such spending priorities were not justified by their
results. "Last year they only spent $22 million on
treatment and $2 million on prevention compared to well over
1/2 billion for drug enforcement," she said. "Despite these
massive investments in enforcement, the crime situation has
not improved, because most of the offenders in the city have
serious alcohol and other drug problems which have gone
unaddressed." The report also blamed bureaucratic
mismanagement, poor recordkeeping and a lack of cooperation
between the District and surrounding counties in Maryland
and Virginia for high rates of recidivism among drug-
addicted individuals.

Along with recommendations for increasing funding for
treatment and prevention programs, raising alcohol and
cigarette taxes, and increasing support for drug courts and
court ordered diversion programs, the report called for the
repeal of the Congressional ban on funds for needle exchange
programs (NEP's). "We believe NEP's that are well
administered and carefully controlled can make a huge
difference," said Falco. "In this we are joined by the
American Pediatric Association, American Medical Association
and the American Bar Association. This is definitely a
mainstream position."

AIDS is the third leading cause of death in the District,
and one in three of an estimated 15,000-20,000 residents
living with HIV or AIDS caught the virus by sharing needles.
Nevertheless, an amendment introduced last October by
Georgia Republican Bob Barr extended the ban on federal
funding of needle exchanges to include even privately funded
programs run by organizations that receive federal dollars
for other work they do. One of the District's only needle
exchange programs, run by the Whitman-Walker AIDS Clinic,
was forced to close as a result. The exchange program was
re-launched in December as a separate entity, Prevention
Works, with the help of a grant from the Drug Policy
Foundation.

Despite the report's grim vision of the District's drug war
wasteland, there may be some cause for optimism. At a press
conference held in the wake of the report's release, newly-
elected DC Mayor Anthony Williams and his cabinet pledged
another $26 million for treatment and prevention. "We hear
you," Williams said. "We will overlook this problem no
longer. Left on auto pilot with these statistics, this is
not a pretty picture. We cannot allow this to happen."
Falco praised Williams' comments, which she called "terrific
expressions of commitment." She added, "What's most needed
is for them to keep their commitments." No initiatives have
been announced, however, to scale back the prosecution of
the Washington DC's massive drug enforcement/prison program.

The full text of "Facing Facts: Drugs and the Future of
Washington, DC" is available on the Drug Strategies web site
at http://www.drugstrategies.org.

***

3. Heroin in Australia: A Conversation with Brian McConnell
of Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform

An escalating heroin problem and an attendant rise in
overdose deaths have put the drug policy debate center stage
in Australia. Alongside tragic stories of young, and
increasingly rural people dead from overdoses, the
Australian newspapers are filled with angry and frustrated
letters to the editors, editorials and political opinions
about the right course of action. Last year, a move by
public health officials to implement a heroin prescription
experiment similar to Switzerland's made it as far as the
first trial phase before it was quashed by Prime Minister
John Howard, after US State Department officials reportedly
threatened to close down Tasmania's pharmaceutical opiate
industry in retaliation. Earlier this year, Mr. Howard
invited FBI head Louis Freeh to Australia to make the case
for American-style zero tolerance drug policies.

But harm reduction advocates say the battle is far from
lost, and point to a range of innovative programs springing
up in states and territories across the country. In
Queensland, for example, clinical trials are underway for
Naltrexone, an opiate-receptor blocking drug that has
enjoyed some success in Europe. In New South Wales, a small
drug court is in the first stages of a scientific study. In
several states, first time drug offenders are now given the
option of treatment instead of jail. And Michael Moore,
Health Minister for the Australian Capital Territory (ACT)
has waged a very public battle with Prime Minister Howard to
re-launch the heroin prescription program, and to set up
"safe injection rooms" where addicts can find clean needles,
access to health care and counseling, and learn about
treatment options.

To get a better grasp of these developments, the Week Online
spoke with Moore and with Brian McConnell, president and a
founding member of Family and Friends for Drug Law Reform
(FFDLR). This week we present our conversation with Mr.
McConnell, who became involved with drug law reform after
his son died of a heroin overdose.

WOL: How has the tenor of the drug policy debate in
Australia changed over the past few years?

MCCONNELL: When Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform
was formed in 1995, there was virtually no discussion of
heroin as a problem. But since that time, people are more
concerned about the overdose deaths. In Victoria, they have
a very good system from the coroner's records of the
overdose deaths, and they can tally the number of deaths
very quickly, so you don't have to wait a year or two before
you get the results. One of the newspapers in Victoria is
running a tally of overdose deaths to road deaths, and right
now they are running neck in neck. And the debate is now
more robust. People are putting forward more thoughtful
suggestions for how it might be dealt with. Around the time
the Premieres' conference was going on [a national
conference of state and territorial leaders, at which heroin
policy was a hot topic this year], for that weekend and
Monday papers, we had a hundred and twenty-four pages of
clippings about heroin trials from newspapers from around
Australia.

WOL: What influence has the US had on drug policy?

MCCONNELL: By and large we seem to be tied to US policies,
and I think that is largely due to our Prime Minister.
Rather than call on experts that have some evidence with
success, he called on the FBI for advice on what to do.
Now, to say the least, that's curious. There is no evidence
that the FBI has done anything that's been successful in
this area. He is also keen on the zero tolerance in New
York and was keen on it with no facts, no figures. And zero
tolerance is a city jurisdiction and not the FBI's, so
that's curious as well.

WOL: What can be done by the federal Commonwealth
government in terms of legislation?

MCCONNELL: Drug issues are basically a state responsibility
-- outside of customs and border patrol type activities. It
is the customs end of it that is preventing a heroin trial
from taking place. But a lot of work can be done without
touching the legislation, much of it in the policy area.
Here in the ACT, my son's death is directly attributable to
the police being involved when he first overdosed. The
paramedics and police took him to hospital. When he awoke
the police were at the end of his bed. He was frightened
and discharged himself and went on a hurried holiday. Two
weeks later he was dead. The police in the ACT and in many
other states don't chase ambulances for overdoses anymore,
unless there is another reason. That puts it clearly in the
health arena.

WOL: Where does public opinion stand on heroin trials?

MCCONNELL: In the ACT, support for heroin trials is
marginally over fifty percent, with four to six percent
undecided, and its been that way for awhile now. What has
changed is the opinion in the rest of Australia. Back in
1996, those in favor nationally were at about thirty-five
percent, but it has now gone up to forty six percent. In
Victoria, a state where the Premiere and his government are
supportive of a trial and where there has been positive
press, the percentage in favor has exceeded fifty percent.

WOL: What has changed people's minds?

MCCONNELL: What has turned some public opinion around is
when people like myself and others have come out and said my
son or daughter died of a heroin overdose, and they didn't
have two heads, they weren't living in the gutter. They
were intelligent and well educated and had a job and all
those sorts of things. Here we are as a family and we are
trying to do something about it and we would like to prevent
this from happening in the future. It's a turnaround in the
debate and in some people's minds.

But it's still not far enough to do something. We are only
in the debate stage. We've got some action happening
because we are researching other treatment options. We're
certainly not as progressive as European countries because
there is still a stigma and a marginalization for drug users
here. A lot of the calls for changes to the drug laws and
the ways policies are administered are coming from the
police. The politicians are the last ones to come along.

(Visit Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform on the web
at http://www.adca.org.au/ffdlr. Next week, our
conversation with ACT Health Minister Michael Moore.

***

4. North Dakota Becomes First State to Legalize Hemp
Cultivation

(from the NORML Weekly News, http://www.norml.org)

April 22, 1999, Bismarck, ND: Governor Ed Schafer (R)
signed legislation Saturday allowing local farmers to
"plant, grow, harvest, possess, sell, and buy industrial
hemp." North Dakota is the first state to remove criminal
penalties for hemp cultivation.

House Bill 1428 reclassifies hemp containing no more than
three-tenths of one percent THC as a legal commercial crop,
and allows licensed farmers to grow it. The House and
Senate overwhelmingly approved the measure before the
governor signed it. The Legislature commissioned a study
two years ago that determined locally grown hemp could yield
profits as high as $141 per acre.

North Dakota's new regulations are modeled closely after
Canada's, which legalized commercial hemp cultivation last
year. Bill sponsor Rep. David Monson (D-Osnabrock) said
that local farmers are eager to grow hemp after seeing the
crop's economic success north of the border.

Farmers who wish to grow hemp must have no prior criminal
history, use certified seeds, and allow random inspections
of their crop for THC content. Farmers must pay a minimum
$150 fee to apply for a hemp license.

John Howell, CEO of New York City's Hemp Company of America
and a plaintiff in a 1998 federal lawsuit to legalize hemp
cultivation, said that "the future of hemp in America now
looks much, much brighter." He noted that federal permits
to grow hemp require applicants to answer whether
cultivation is legal in their state. "Until now, every
applicant had to check 'no' and applications were denied.
Now that Catch-22 cycle has been broken by North Dakota's
action."

The Legislature also approved measures allowing university
researchers who have federal permission to grow small
quantities of hemp, and urging Congress to acknowledge legal
distinctions between hemp and marijuana. Twenty-nine
nations, including France, England, Germany, Japan, and
Australia allow farmers to grow non-psychoactive hemp for
its fiber content.

The text of the North Dakota legislation can is online at
http://ranch.state.nd.us/LR/text/BILL_INDEX/BI1428.html.
More information on state-level legislation can be found
online at http://www.norml.org/laws/stateleg1999.html.

***

5. Oregon Supreme Court to Review Forfeiture as Double
Jeopardy

The Oregon Supreme Court recently agreed to review State vs.
Selness, which concerns a 1994 marijuana arrest. In that
case, the defendant's home was forfeited along with his
receiving jail time. The defendant claims that his
punishment was unconstitutional, on the grounds that it was
a case of double jeopardy.

The United States Constitution protects citizens from double
jeopardy: being punished for the same offense twice. The
Supreme Court has previously ruled that civil forfeiture is
not a punishment, and therefore does not constitute double
jeopardy. The Oregon State Constitution has a wider view on
double jeopardy, however, and the Oregon Supreme Court has
never previously ruled on civil forfeiture as a form of
punishment, leaving the possibility that the court may rule
in favor of the defendant.

One day prior to the Court's agreement to review State vs.
Selness, the Oregon Court of Appeals overturned a previous
ruling in a lower court that stated that the practice of
excluding drug offenders from certain neighborhoods prior to
sentencing is double jeopardy.

(Visit Forfeiture Endangers American Rights, online at
http://www.fear.org, for much more information about asset
forfeiture. The Cato Institute is sponsoring a half-day
conference, "Forfeiture Reform: Now, or Never?", on May 3,
9:00am - 1:30pm, Washington, DC, featuring US Rep. Henry J.
Hyde, ACLU's Ira Glasser, and others. For further
information, visit http://www.cato.org/events/ccs99/ on the
web, call (202)218-4633 or e-mail forfeit@cato.org.

***

6. BOOK: NO Equal Justice, Race and Class in the American
Criminal Justice System

In recent months, various criminal justice policies and
practices, and the racially disparate impacts they produce,
have begun to come to the fore of public attention. Last
week DRCNet reported that Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) had
reintroduced the Traffic Stops Statistics Act, and had
introduced legislation to end felony disenfranchisement
(http://www.drcnet.org/wol/087.html#profiling and
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/087.html#disenfranchisement).
Five weeks ago, we reported that Rep. Charges Rangel had
introduced legislation to reduce sentences for crack cocaine
offenses to the level of powder cocaine sentences
(http://www.drcnet.org/wol/083.html#rangel).

"NO Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Criminal
Justice System," by Georgetown University law professor
David Cole, analyzes the nature and extent of racial
disparities in the criminal justice system and the dynamics
that contribute to them. Cole puts forward overwhelming
evidence that not only do disparities exist, but the problem
extends from the bottom of the system (cops on the beat
habitually using racial profiles) to the top (a Supreme
Court that has set unattainable standards for invoking
protections against racial discrimination).

Cole doesn't attribute the disparities to deliberate racism,
but rather to the unavoidable tension between law
enforcement efficiency and constitutional rights. Rather
than staking out a consistent position for balancing these
two concerns, Cole argues, police forces and the courts have
picked two different points on the spectrum -- one for the
majority and another for minorities. The majority, then,
doesn't pay the cost of the policies that it enacts -- a
cost measured in disparate police searches, no-knock
warrants, convictions and incarceration rates.

One of the reasons disparity in searches exists is that
courts have given police an astonishingly free hand in
conducting them. On pages 48-49, Cole lists drug courier
"profiles" that drug enforcement agents have presented as
"probable cause" for conducting searches:

arrived late at night
arrived early in the morning
arrive in afternoon
one of first to deplane
one of last to deplane
deplaned in the middle
purchased ticket at airport
made reservation on short notice
bought coach ticket
bought first-class ticket
used one-way ticket
used round-trip ticket
paid for ticket with cash
paid for ticket with small denomination currency
paid for ticket with large denomination current
made local telephone call after deplaning
made long-distance telephone call after deplaning
pretended to make telephone call
traveled from New York to Los Angeles
traveled to Houston
carried no luggage
carried brand-new luggage
carried a small bag
carried a medium-sized bag
carried two bulky garment bags
carried two heavy suitcases
carried four pieces of luggage
overly protective of luggage
disassociated self from luggage
traveled alone
traveled with a companion
acted too nervous
acted too calm
made eye contact with officer
avoided making eye contact with officer
wore expensive clothing and gold jewelry
dressed casually
went to restroom after deplaning
walked quickly through airport
walked slowly through airport
walked aimlessly through airport
left airport by taxi
left airport by limousine
left airport by private car
left airport by hotel courtesy van
suspect was Hispanic
suspect was black female

Cole explains that "[s]uch profiles do not so much focus an
investigation as provide law enforcement officials a ready-
made excuse for stopping whomever they please. The Supreme
Court has warned that the mere fact that someone fits a
drug-courier profile does not automatically constitute
reasonable suspicion justifying a stop. In practice,
however, courts frequently defer to the profile and equate
it with reasonable suspicion. As one judge said after
conducting a comprehensive review of drug-courier profile
decisions, '[m]any courts have accepted the profile, as well
as the Drug Enforcement Agency's scattershot enforcement
efforts, unquestioningly, mechanistically, and
dispositively.'"

Cole goes on to argue that while the majority doesn't pay
the cost of the criminal justice policies that it passes,
over time those costs come home in the form of decreased
respect for law and unwillingness to cooperate with the
system, leading to a diminished ability to control crime and
heightened social danger for all.

(Buy "NO Equal Justice" online -- just point your browser to
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1565844734/drcnet/
and follow the instructions, and DRCNet will earn 15% of
what you spend on the book! Or ask for "NO Equal Justice"
at your local bookstore.)

***

7. REPORT: In Search of a New Ethic for Treating Patients
with Chronic Pain

An article in last week's issue, "Doctor's Undertreatment of
Pain Draws Penalty," discussed the issue of pain treatment
and the war on drugs, surrounding the Oregon Board of
Medical Examiner's decision to take disciplinary action
against a physician for the undertreatment of pain, possibly
the first medical board in U.S. history to take such a step.
(See http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/pain.html for a general
discussion of the impact of the drug war on pain treatment,
and visit http://www.drcnet.org/wol/087.html#undertreatment
for last week's article.)

A report published in the Winter 1998 issue of the Journal
of Law, Medicine & Ethics examines the "ethic of
underprescribing" and steps that states and boards have
taken to begin to reverse it. Author Ann Martino concludes
that underprescribing for pain is the norm or prevailing
standard, and describes three principles that contribute to
the underprescribing ethic:

1. Just Say No -- a generalized fear of narcotics and
addiction, known as opiophobia, on the part of both
physicians and patients. Martino writes, "Opiophobia has
been heightened in recent years by the rhetoric accompanying
the government's War on Drugs. One of the central tactics
in the War on Drugs has been to focus broadly on the horrors
of addiction in media campaigns and anti-drug and prevention
programs, without drawing distinctions between drug
dependency and abuse or types of addictive drugs. It is
thus not surprising that many patients fear that taking any
drug in large doses for relatively long periods of time will
cause addiction." Additionally, doctors who do treat pain
aggressively often face the threat of investigation by
medical boards or the DEA, a circumstance that can ruin the
careers of doctors, even when cleared. Hence, internal
values and external consequences contribute to the Just Say
No ethic in pain treatment.

2. Grin and Bear It -- the conception of pain as a moral
good that builds character or an inevitability that should
simply be endured. Martino writes, "[A]lthough it is hard
to imagine that anyone who regularly engages in the practice
of chronic pain management would purposefully deny relief to
a patient experiencing unrelenting pain, the available
empirical evidence clearly shows that it happens all the
time."

3. Avoid Risks -- the decision or tendency to not prescribe
pain medication in adequate quantities, knowing that doing
so can result in trouble with medical boards, insurers or
enforcers. "The be investigated or sanctioned by a board
could result in a loss of stature, reputation, institutional
privileges, or access to insurance panels, even if no
restrictions or limitations are imposed on the license to
practice."

Martino discusses why efforts states have made at regulatory
relief, including Intractable Pain Treatment Acts by
legislatures and pain treatment guidelines by boards, have
not yet succeeded changing the opiophobic climate in pain
treatment. The report, titled "In Search of a New Ethic for
Treating Patients with Chronic Pain: What Can Medical Boards
Do?," includes illustrative quotes from doctors,
pharmacists, patients and family members, as well as a chart
listing the many causes of underprescribing. It can be
ordered purchased for $10, including postage, from the
American Society for Law, Medicine & Ethics, 765
Commonwealth Ave., 16th Floor, Boston, MA 02215, (617) 262-
4990, aslme@bu.edu, http://www.aslme.org.

To learn more about the pain issue and find out how to get
help or get involved, visit the American Society for Action
on Pain at http://www.actiononpain.org. (Use
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/asap/index.htm
temporarily if you get an error message.)

***

8. Seminar in NYC, Friday, 5/28

Bridging the Gap: Creating a Continuum of Care for Drug
Users, Friday, May 28, 1-5pm, hosted by Mount Sinai
Hospital, co-sponsored by The Statewide Black & Puerto
Rican/Latino Substance Abuse Task Force, The Harm Reduction
Coalition, The Harm Reduction Care Network of New York, and
the Mount Sinai Based HIV Clinical Education Institute.
Topics include "Situating the Drug User at the Center to
Provide a Continuum of Care" and "Practical Applications of
Utilizing Harm Reduction Principles Within a Drug
Treatment Setting."

At the Stern Auditorium, Mt. Sinai Medical Center, E. 100th
Street & Madison Avenue, NYC. By subway take the 6 train to
96th Street. Stern is in the Annenberg Building on the
mezzanine level. Enter Mt. Sinai at the 100th and Madison
entrance, go up the stairs, then to your left through the
glass doors, and follow the signs to Stern. For further
information, contact Ralph Gonzales, (516) 979-7300 ext. 202
or e-mail nathan_perry@usa.net.

(Due to staff travel schedules there is no editorial this
week. All previous issues of the Week Online, including the
editorials, are archived online, and can be accessed at
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/archives.html.

***

DRCNet needs your support! Donations can be sent to 2000 P
St., NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036, or made by credit
card at http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html. Donations to
the Drug Reform Coordination Network are not tax-deductible.
Deductible contributions supporting our educational work can
be made by check to the DRCNet Foundation, a 501(c)(3) tax-
exempt organization, same address.

PERMISSION to reprint or redistribute any or all of the
contents of The Week Online is hereby granted. We ask that
any use of these materials include proper credit and, where
appropriate, a link to one or more of our web sites. If
your publication customarily pays for publication, DRCNet
requests checks payable to the organization. If your
publication does not pay for materials, you are free to use
the materials gratis. In all cases, we request notification
for our records, including physical copies where material
has appeared in print. Contact: Drug Reform Coordination
Network, 2000 P St., NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036,
(202) 293-8340 (voice), (202) 293-8344 (fax), e-mail
drcnet@drcnet.org. Thank you.

Articles of a purely educational nature in The Week Online
appear courtesy of the DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise
noted.

***

DRCNet

***

GATEWAY TO REFORM PAGE	http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/
DRCNet HOME PAGE	http://www.drcnet.org/
DRUG POLICY LIBRARY	http://www.druglibrary.org/
JOIN/MAKE A DONATION	http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html
REFORMER'S CALENDAR	http://www.drcnet.org/calendar.html
SUBSCRIBE TO THIS LIST	http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html