DRCNetDrug Reform Coordination Network

12/23/97

Highlights
from The Week Online with DRCNet
Issue #1

Drug Reform Coordination Network, 2000 P St., NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 293-8340 (voice), (202) 293-8344 (fax)
[email protected] http://www.drcnet.org http://www.druglibrary.org http://www.stopthedrugwar.org
David Borden, Executive Director, Adam J. Smith, Associate Director

The Drug Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet) is a national organization dedicated to raising public awareness of the consequences of drug prohibition and working for any positive change in drug policy. We oppose the prison-building frenzy that sweeps the nation and support rational policies consistent with the principles of peace, justice, freedom, compassion and truth. All these have been compromised in the name of the Drug War.

Medical Marijuana

Feds Lose Again in Medical Marijuana Lawsuit (9/12)

On September 9, Federal Court Judge Fern Smith issued an order awarding interim attorney�s fees to the plaintiffs in a class-action suit stemming from the government�s response to Proposition 215 in California. Conant v. McCaffrey, a First Amendment case, was brought by doctors in response to threats made by government officials at a December 30, 1996 press conference that the DEA would revoke the prescription license and Medicare participation of any doctor who recommends marijuana to a patient.

On April 30 of this year, after attempts to bring the parties to a settlement had failed, Judge Smith granted Plaintiffs� motion for preliminary injunction against any such actions by the government. In this week�s order, Judge Smith made very clear her disdain not only for the government�s position, but for the presentation of its case. The order was such a stinging rebuke of the government�s position in this case that DRCNet feels compelled to quote liberally from its text in order to give our readers a sense of its content and tone.

"In its order of April 30, the court found that there are serious questions as to the constitutionality of the government�s medical marijuana policy, as to whether the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) can be interpreted in a manner that would allow the Drug Enforcement Administration to revoke physicians� licenses for merely recommending marijuana, and as to whether the Medicare statute can be interpreted to allow the DEA to revoke a physician�s Medicare participation for recommending marijuana."

"The government did not present any facts to support its argument based on the �public interest� provisions. It proffered no data to indicate, for example, that a physician�s recommendation of marijuana to a bona fide patient would increase drug use in the United States."

"The court disagrees with the government�s contention that it was pressing a novel but credible extension of First Amendment law. Moreover...the government failed altogether to come forward with facts to justify its position as to the First Amendment, just as it did with the CSA. By threatening to prosecute physicians for ambiguously defined conduct, the government sought either to coerce citizens into abiding by a policy that is likely unconstitutional or to force citizens to face the cost and uncertainty of suing the government to enforce physicians� and patients� First Amendment rights."

"[a]t oral argument, the government could not clarify for the court the ambiguities in its position. If the government was substantially justified, at the very least it would have been able to clarify the reaches of its own policy during the litigation.... It did not proffer any factual basis to bolster its arguments or the need for its ambiguous policy, and it has not attempted to clarify that policy with anything more than semantic distinctions at any point during this litigation."

Dan Abrahamson of The Lindesmith Center, lead attorney for the Plaintiffs, told The Week Online, "This is the third time in six months that the government has been called to task for its position with regard to physicians and medical marijuana. It is difficult to imagine a clearer indication of the merits of their position than the one communicated in this order. Yet apparently, they intend to press ahead in their attempt to establish their right to destroy the careers of qualified physicians who are using their best medical judgment in an effort to help their patients to find relief."

First Federally Sponsored Med Mj Research Approved (10/11)

Dr. Donald Abrams of San Francisco General Hospital, whose previous medical marijuana protocols have languished for years due to DEA refusal to allow him access to government marijuana, will finally begin to explore the effects of the plant on AIDS patients. His most recent proposal was approved this week by the National Institutes of Health.

63 patients will each spend 25 days in specially-ventilated hospital rooms to determine what effects the use of smoked marijuana has on HIV positive patients currently taking protease inhibitors, the most promising of the new AIDS treatments. A second group of subjects will receive the synthetic THC pill Marinol, while a third group will receive placebos.

"Approval of this study was a long time coming," Dave Fratello, spokesman for Americans for Medical Rights told The Week Online. "Clearly federal officials got a black eye during last year�s Prop. 215 campaign when their stalling of Dr. Abrams� study was exposed." Fratello added, "It�s also clear that this year�s debate on SB 535, a bill to create a center for medical marijuana research at the University of California, has influenced the decision to get this AIDS study going."

Even so, it was a change in the focus of the study which made its objective "acceptable" to the Drug War establishment.

Allan St. Pierre, Executive Director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) told The Week Online, "For all of the government�s ranting about the need for science in the medical marijuana debate, Dr. Abrams� study is only going forward because he changed its primary objective. That objective now states that the research will be looking to document adverse reactions brought on by marijuana in patients taking protease inhibitors. Only secondarily will the study be looking for increased caloric intake among the subjects." "It�s ridiculous," he added, "that with all of the doctors, scientists and patients coming forward to profess the validity of marijuana�s medicinal properties, the government is still playing Drug War politics with the lives of citizens. Sad."

For background on the Abrams study, see http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v07n3/07316abr.html.

DEA Chief Constantine Scolds Fictional Character Murphy Brown for Medical Marijuana Use (11/2)

Thomas Constantine, Director of the DEA, issued a public statement this week in response to an episode of Murphy Brown in which the title character uses marijuana to alleviate the effects of chemotherapy treatments for breast cancer. (The episode came out on the exact one-year anniversary of the passage of California�s Prop. 215, November 5th.)

In a thinly veiled shot at the drug policy reform movement, and specifically at financier George Soros and his world-wide Open Society Institute, the statement said that CBS and the show�s creators were "doing a great disservice" by "trivializing drug abuse" and "pandering to the libertarian supporters of an �open society� and to the myths of legalization."

Bill Zimmerman, Director of Americans for Medical Rights, said "A few years ago, Murphy Brown shocked Dan Quayle by revealing that single women were having children. Now she�s upset the DEA by disclosing that cancer victims are using marijuana to relieve their nausea. These guys ought to spend less time in Washington and more time in America."

Those who have followed the medical marijuana campaign may be reminded of California Attorney General Dan Lungren, who held a press conference during the Prop. 215 campaign last year to denounce Zonker, the fictional character from the Doonesbury comic strip, for his advocacy of medical marijuana.

Canadian Court Declares Medical Marijuana Prohibition Unconstitutional (12/12)

Tim Devlin, from Canada

A major victory in Canada for proponents of the medical use of marijuana. Laws, which prohibit medicinal use of the drug, have gone up in smoke.

Ontario Provincial Court Judge Patrick Sheppard has thrown out charges of cultivation and possession of marijuana layed against 42 year old Terry Parker. Judge Sheppard ruled the laws are unconstitutional in cases of medical necessity. The Canadian Charter of Human Rights includes the "right to access to a medical treatment for a condition representing a danger to life without fear of criminal sanction."

Parker was busted in 1996 after police discovered 73 plants in various stages of growth in the man�s high-rise Toronto apartment. The body of evidence presented during the trial painted Parker as a tragically ill man forced to become a criminal to relieve epileptic seizures that have made his life a living hell.

The Torontonian has suffered from massive seizures since age four but conventional drugs that doctors have prescribed for the problem have serious side effects and do not relieve his condition. Parker discovered 20 years ago that smoking marijuana helps dramatically, and he has been using it to control his seizures ever since.

Judge Sheppard�s decision on Wednesday clears the way for Ontario doctors to prescribe marijuana and allows patients to grow and possess it for their own medical use. Sheppard even ordered that police return three of the seized plants to Parker.

The Toronto man is ecstatic about the ruling. "I applaud the judge," Parker says. "It�s pretty brave." He hopes the decision will force politicians to change the current laws. Parker was convicted of possession of marijuana for the purposes of trafficking and received a one year suspended sentence.

Dianne Riley, co-founder of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy Reform, a professor at the University of Toronto School of Medicine, was one of the many experts to testify for the defense. Asked for her reaction to the verdict, Dr. Riley told the Week Online, "It certainly sets a precedent for patients in Ontario. It�s only a first step, of course, but given the backlog of medical marijuana cases pending throughout Canada, and Parliament�s recent indication that they would be willing to re-examine this part of the drug law, I�d say that it is a very important decision."

Federal drug prosecutors have not indicated whether the constitutional ruling will be appealed to a higher court. So far the decision only applies to Ontario, but the precedent will undoubtedly be used in similar cases pending in other Provincial jurisdictions across Canada.

A recent poll indicates that 83 per cent of Canadians believe marijuana should be made legally available for health purposes.

American Medical Association Resolution: Let MD's, Patients Discuss Marijuana (12/12)

On December 9, the AMA, the US� largest and most influential physicians� organization, passed a resolution calling for the government to stay out of discussions between doctors and patients concerning the potential use of marijuana as medicine. The recommendations were contained in a report approved by the AMA�s House of Delegates. This was the first time that the historically conservative group has taken a favorable position on the issue.

At a press conference held on December 31, 1996, in the wake of the passage of Propositions 200 in Arizona and 215 in California, the Clinton administration threatened to revoke Medicare participation and DEA prescription licensing, and possibly to prosecute doctors who so much as discussed the issue with their patients. The administration is currently in court appealing a restraining order which prevents it from carrying out the threats.

"The AMA believes that effective patient care requires the free and unfettered exchange of information on treatment alternatives and that discussion of these alternatives between physicians and patients should not subject either party to criminal sanctions," the resolution said.

While the report avoided a wholesale endorsement of the medical use of marijuana, and made no recommendations concerning the legal status of the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of patients who currently risk arrest and imprisonment for their use of it, the report did recognize that a body of evidence exists which indicates its effectiveness. Significantly, the report notes, "Smoked marijuana was comparable or more effective than oral THC (Marinol)... in reducing nausea and emesis." Marinol is legally available by prescription in the US.

Finally, the report urges that the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) provide marijuana for FDA-approved research into marijuana�s medical uses. NIDA, the only legal source of marijuana for research purposes, has steadfastly refused to provide marijuana for any study which is not being directly funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). NIH has funded many studies on the potential dangers of marijuana, but has refused to fund research into the plant�s potential medical benefits.

According to Chuck Thomas, communications director of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, DC, "The AMA�s recommendations are a step in the right direction. It should now be easier for researchers to conduct the few remaining studies necessary to enable the FDA to approve marijuana as a prescription medicine."

NOTE: You can find the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) on the web at http://www.mpp.org/. MPP has been working to inform the AMA, and they are continuously lobbying Congress on behalf of more rational policies on cannabis. Their work is vital to the reform movement, they are good guys, and they deserve your support. And make sure to tell �em that DRCNet sent you.

French Minister Of Health Calls Medical Marijuana Legalization "Obvious" (12/12)

Bernard Kouchner, France�s Minister of Health, became the third French government official in recent months to speak out on the issue of reforming that nation�s marijuana laws. Although he didn�t speak to the decriminalization of marijuana for recreational use, he strongly supported the legalization of medical marijuana. "Obviously, it should be possible to prescribe (cannabis). For a doctor, that could be a real benefit" he said.

Lionel Jospin, France�s Prime Minister, stated during his recent, successful election campaign that marijuana should be decriminalized, although he has not addressed the issue since. Dr. Dominique Voynet, France�s Environmental Minister, and a physician, was even more direct. "Merde!" (Shit!) she said, when pressed on the issue. She went on to defend cannabis as less dangerous than commonly used sleeping pills, and called for it�s outright legalization "both as a doctor and as a politician."

This seeming coalescence around the issue within France�s new Socialist-led government does not bode well for US drug warriors, who have come to count on France, with its repressive dug laws, to lead the European chorus for Prohibition. A two-day conference of the French Health Ministry is scheduled for December 13-14 during which politicians, civil servants, doctors and drug experts will make recommendations to Mr. Kouchner. It is expected that they recommend a cautious strategy of encouraging public debate on drug policy issues, with an eye toward developing legislation to take the place of existing policies before the French elections of 2002.

According to Liberation, a French newspaper, the new French Government has moved slowly on the issue so as not to get "too far ahead of the music" of public opinion and European Union policy.

Health Canada Prepared to Okay Medicinal Marijuana: Will they call it Mackenzie Brothers medicine? (12/20)

A few bureaucratic hurdles are all that remain between Jean Charles Pariseau and the medicine his doctors believe is saving his life. Pariseau, who suffers from AIDS and its associated "wasting syndrome," had tried more than a dozen prescription drugs to fight nausea and increase his appetite, but none of them had worked. He weighed just eighty-two pounds and was told he had three months to live when, on a friend�s advice, he began to smoke marijuana.

Today Pariseau weighs in at over one hundred pounds, and his life expectancy has been extended to three years. His doctor, Don Kirby, is convinced that marijuana made all the difference. So when Pariseau was arrested in October and charged with marijuana possession, Dr. Kirby set out to find a way to get Pariseau�s medicine restored to him. Now, with the help of a former head of Health Canada�s Special Access Program and legal assistance from the Canadian Foundation on Drug Policy, he appears to have succeeded.

Health Canada�s Emergency Drug Release Program allows doctors to apply for permission to prescribe unauthorized medicines as life-saving measures on a case-by-case basis. Such applications are common, and are usually approved within 24-72 hours when there is evidence to indicate a drug�s usefulness. In Pariseau�s case, Dr. Kirby�s initial application was rejected on the basis of two technicalities, both of which are expected to be remedied quickly, and neither of which is related to a lack of evidence of medical necessity.

"It would be approved, if the changes are made," said Dann Nichols, who oversees the regulation of all drugs and medical devices in Canada. "There is no problem, basically, with marijuana as medicine." NOTE: Also in Canada this week, prosecutors indicated that they would appeal last week�s decision by an Ottawa court declaring the prohibition of medicinal marijuana unconstitutional in the case of Terry Parker, an epileptic.

Prison

War in the Capital (9/12)

Two weeks ago, the Week Online reported that a study by the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives (NCIA) had found that one out of every two black men between ages of 18 and 35 were under criminal justice supervision on any given day (http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1997/8-29-1.html#injustice).

According to Eric Lotke, the primary author of the report, of the over 39,000 arrests in the Capitol District by the Metropolitan Police in 1996, less than 3% were for serious violent crimes.

Cheryl Epps, a member of the NAACP Criminal Justice and Policy Review Task Force, and a former New York City narcotics prosecutor, told the Week Online, "These numbers represent the tragic effects of the War on Drugs in Communities of Color. 50% of young, black males in the capitol of the United States of America are caught up in the criminal justice system. It is time to take a very hard look at the paradigm in which we are dealing with our drug problem. No responsible criminal justice professional can look at these figures and deny that something is very, very wrong."

Massachusetts Study - Mandatory Minimum Sentences Wasteful, Unjust (11/27)

A study of drug offenders serving long, mandatory sentences in Massachusetts found that nearly 83% were African American or Latino and that 2/3 had never been convicted of a violent crime. William Brownsberger, a state assistant attorney general, led the study which was conducted at Harvard Medical School. According to Mr. Brownsberger, "Mandatory sentencing laws are wasting prison resources on non-violent, low-level offenders and reducing resources available to lock up violent offenders."

The study, "Profile of Anti-Drug Law Enforcement in Urban Poverty Areas in Massachusetts," comes on the heels of another study, conducted by the Rand Corporation, which found that mandatory minimum sentences were less cost-effective than traditional sentences. The Harvard study shows that the rate of admission to state correctional facilities for Latinos was 81 times that of whites. The African American rate is 39 times the white rate.

"Incarceration rates among blacks and Hispanics are damagingly high," said Brownsberger. "This study underscores how mandatory minimum sentencing for drug-related offenses is cheapening the deterrent effect of punishment. Overuse of incarceration can worsen the crime situation." The study notes that state drug sentences were often harsher than those for crimes such as manslaughter and armed robbery.

California�s Prison Population Expected to Grow by 37% in Five Years (12/20)

California, which already has one of the highest per-capita incarceration rates of any governmental entity on earth, has announced that it expects the population of its state prison system to increase dramatically over the next five years. According to the Orange County Register, state officials said this week that that they expect that the number of Californians incarcerated in the state system will increase by about 57,733 inmates, or 37%, to a total of 213,420 by the year 2003.

It should be noted here that of young (18-29 years) African American males in California, over 40% are currently under the "supervision" of the criminal justice system. It should also be noted that in the 1996 state-wide election campaigns in California, the largest single campaign contributor was the California Prison Guards Association.

Prohibition at Work

War in California (9/20)

The Los Angeles Times reports that Mexican traffickers are increasingly growing marijuana in California, using illegal immigrants to tend sizable plots. The crop is either planted on public park land or else on private land, without the knowledge of the rightful owner. Such schemes eliminate costly and risky smuggling as the product is already in the U.S. when harvested.

With the price of choice sinsemilla now estimated by authorities at a minimum of $4,000 per pound wholesale, guns and violence have intruded on what was once a peaceful, if covert agribusiness. Special Agent Tommy LaNier is quoted in the story, saying, "In the past, we had hippy types growing a couple of hundred plants. They were laid back and non-confrontational. This started to change about ten years ago. Now more than 90% of the groves we uncover are tended by Mexican nationals."

Chris Conrad, cofounder of Human Rights �95, an exhibit of drug war travesties, a long-time activist for the reform of marijuana and hemp laws, told The Week Online, "Our policies, and the politicians who are behind them have made sure that marijuana, a plant which can be grown nearly anywhere, is more valuable than gold. The American people are simply going to have to decide whether they want to devalue the crop and put it in the hands of legitimate business, operating under the law, or whether they want to leave it in the hands of organized criminals, who answer to no one and whose means of doing business is a threat to everyone around them."

"The false alternative, which is being increasingly pushed by our government, is an all-out military war within our own borders. This would have disastrous effects on public safety, civil rights, and domestic corruption. It will be incredibly expensive, it will have no achievable endpoint, and, I would add, will not put a stop to the cultivation of marijuana in California or anywhere else."

Prohibition-Induced Gang Warfare on Native American Reservation (12/5)

On November 27, 25 young people were arrested on the Menominee Reservation in Keshena, Wisconsin in the aftermath of an inter-gang battle in which at least 50 shots were fired. The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that more than 30 members of the Gangster Disciples and the Latin Kings, armed with pistols and sawed-off shotguns were involved in the melee. No injuries were reported.

Tribal Police Chief Karen Neconish-Gardner told the Star Tribune, "Where you have a gang problem, you have a drug problem. This is not about using. This is about trafficking. It is all about criminal activity � about drugs and crime and power." The "gangsters" arrested were all between 12 and 17 years-old.

DRCNet suggests: Send an email "letter to the editor" of the Star Tribune at [email protected], highlighting the obvious damage being done to these children by Prohibition, over and above the damage that the drugs themselves may be doing on this reservation.

Gun Battle at the Mexican Border (12/5)

On November 24, an group of armed men opened fire on the Mexican border guards at Nogales, Arizona ,in an effort to free a compatriot who had been stopped carrying $123,000 in cash. One agent was killed and another was wounded in the clash. Two Americans who were waiting to cross the border were also reportedly wounded.

The incident began at approximately 6:00pm when a customs agent pulled over a pickup truck coming over from the US side. The agent inquired about the contents of a large box in the back. Unsatisfied with the response of the truck�s occupants, the agent asked them to open it. At that point, the driver handed the box to the truck�s passenger who jumped out and attempted to run. The box proved too heavy, however and the man dropped it, causing it to break open, spilling its contents of American currency.

The two were escorted to the office, and, while the agents were counting the cash, a group of between 5 and 9 armed men appeared and opened fire at the officers. Two of the assailants were wounded and taken into custody. The truck�s driver and the rest of the attackers escaped.

and... Crusading Mexican Editor Shot and Wounded

On November 27, in yet another example of the destructive effects of American Prohibition on Mexican society, five armed men opened fire on the car of Jesus Blancornelas, severely wounding him, and killing his bodyguard. Blancornelas was the editor of "Zeta" a Tijuana weekly which had railed against the Tijuana-based operations of the Arellano Felix brothers, a major drug-trafficking organization.

Youth

New Study, Same Results: DARE Doesn�t Work (8/21)

A study released this week at a conference of the American Psychological Association shows that the nation�s most widely taught drug prevention curriculum, the Drug Abuse resistance Education (DARE) program, has no effect on teenage drug use. The study, the first to look at students 6 years removed from DARE, backed up what similar studies had found in students immediately after and three years removed from the program. The program purports to teach students the dangers of drug use and gangs, as well as the importance of respecting authority and resisting peer pressure. DARE consists of seventeen classes taught to fifth and sixth grade classes by police officers.

Students who had been through the program were no less likely than non-participants to use alcohol, cigarettes or marijuana. DARE also had no impact on time spent on homework, number of classes skipped, educational aspirations or respect for teachers. There were also no differences between participants and non-participants in incidents of fighting, assault, theft, trespass, curfew violation or gang membership.

It is estimated that as many as 70% of American public school students participate in the DARE program, which is run by a private, non-profit corporation under contract to local school systems.

For more information, check out DRCNet�s "A Different Look at DARE" at http://www.drcnet.org/DARE/. DARE�s own web site can be found at http://www.dare-america.com/.

Nine-Year-Old Busted on Candy Rap (9/28)

In yet another example of zero-tolerance to the point of absurdity, a nine year-old Virginia boy was suspended from school for giving two pill-shaped Certs candies to a classmate. According to the parents of the classmate, little Joey Hoeffer told their son that the candies would "make him jump higher." When the friend, who apparently did not consume the mints, told his parents what Joey had told him, they immediately suspected that their son had been given some kind of drug.

The one-day suspension was for violation of the school�s drug policy which forbids "possession or distribution (or attempted distribution) of drugs, illegal substances, controlled substances, or �look-alikes� which by dosage, unit, appearance or by representation would lead a person to believe that the substance is a controlled or illegal substance." During his ordeal, little Joey was interviewed by the school�s principle, Gloria Jackson, and by a Manassas police officer, who confiscated the mint for analysis.

(The summer �96 issue of the Drug Policy Letter featured similar incidents in its cover story, "The War on our Children", online at http://www.dpf.org/dpletter/30/, or call DPF at (202) 537-5005 for a copy.

Irish Teens Top Eu Drug Stats: Far Fewer Dutch Youth Experiment with Drugs (11/2)

The annual report of the European Union Drug Monitoring Service shows that Ireland�s 16 year-olds are using drugs at the highest rates in the EU. Nearly 2 of 5 Irish teens have used drugs, mainly cannabis. The revelation surprised some as Ireland is among the most repressive states in the EU on issues of drug prohibition.

In contrast, The Netherlands, which has, for years, tolerated the sale of "soft drugs" in coffeeshops and which deals with even personal use sale and possession of "hard drugs" as a health, rather than criminal problem, had far lower use rates among its teens. According to the report, only 14% of Dutch 16 year-olds had experimented with drugs. In the US, which was not included in the EU report, estimates of the number of high school-aged teens who have used drugs range from 25 to 35%.

Junior High Student Suspended for Supplying Cough Drop (11/15)

Colin Dunlap, a junior high school student in West Virginia, was suspended from school for three days last week when he was busted for giving a lozenge to a classmate. School policy requires a parental note for the possession of any over the counter medications.

"That�s why they have warning labels" said school nurse Brenda Isaac. "Cough drops appear harmless, but none of them are." Jennifer Dunlap, the student�s mother, had a different take on her son�s punishment. "A cough drop? I think that�s the most asinine thing I�ve ever heard."

Marsha Rosenbaum, Director of the Lindesmith Center West, commented, "It seems a bad idea to suspend kids for violating school policy. If they are inclined toward deviant behavior, a leave of absence from school only encourages further deviance. As a parent I would prefer more rather than less time at school, and the option of punishing my child as I see fit."

Undercover Federal Narc Shoots Teen Holding Candy Bar (11/15)

A federal undercover agent working in a "High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Task Force" in Queens, NY, shot a local high school student when he mistook a candy bar in the youth�s hand for a gun. 17 year-old Andre Burgess, captain of the Hillcrest High School soccer team, was walking down 138th street in Laurelton, Queens, when the carload of Federal agents rolled by and one officer, identified by the New York Daily News as William Cannon, jumped out.

Cannon apparently identified himself, but, according to Burgess, gave the teen no time to react. "I turned to see what was up, and boom, I�m hit, and I fell to the ground." Burgess also described the callousness with which the incident was handled even after it was discovered that he had been unarmed and apparently wholly uninvolved in any criminal activity.

"I�m laying there, bleeding, waiting to go the hospital, and he�s shaking hands with the other cops, or agents, or whatever they were," he said. "He asked one of them, �Don�t I know you from some other case?� And I�m still lying there."

DRCNet Executive Director David Borden commented, "The incident is reminiscent of the Esequiel Hernandez killing in Redford, Texas, by U.S. Marines. In neither case did the aggressors provide appropriate medical assistance to their victims. Fortunately, Burgess was not fatally wounded. But then, this is only the one incident out of many that happened to get some press."

Six Year-Old Suspended for Sharing Lemon Drops (11/23)

In the latest in a national trend, a six-year-old boy was suspended from school for half a day for giving a lemon drop candy to a classmate. Officials at Taylor Elementary School in Colorado Springs, CO summoned an ambulance and the fire department to respond when they found the boys in possession of the candies, which were bought by the student�s mother in a local health food store, and which school officials could not identify. The suspension came despite the mother�s assurances as to the identity of the candies, and despite those assurances, school officials urged the parents of both students to take the children to a local hospital for "tests".

The school district�s policy treats any unfamiliar product as "drugs", according to an administrator. The suspended student�s mother told the Denver Post that the school�s response was one of "complete hysteria" adding "I can�t believe these people are educating our kids." (http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1446.htm)

Needle Exchange:
Interview with Alexander Robinson

Alexander Robinson is the President of the National Task Force on AIDS Prevention, and the Administrator of Federal Affairs for Cities Advocating Emergency AIDS Relief (The CAEAR Coalition). He is also a member of the President�s Advisory Council on AIDS. He spoke with Adam Smith, DRCNet�s Associate Director, in early October, about the possibility of resignations from the President�s Council over the needle exchange issue. This interview was published in the October 11 issue of The Week Online.

AS: This week the Associated Press reports that several members of the President�s Advisory Council on AIDS were considering resigning from their posts. What was the genesis of this potential protest?

AR: In our last meeting, in Atlanta this past July, there was a motion presented which highlighted three issues which we felt that the administration had negligently failed to act upon. The first and most prominent of these was the ban on the use of federal AIDS prevention funds for needle exchange, the second were content restrictions on AIDS prevention materials created with federal money, and the third was the continuation of outdated discriminatory policies against people who ware HIV-positive in certain government programs such as the Peace Corps.

The motion presented stated that if these issues were not addressed by a certain time, that we would tender our resignations. The motion was ultimately withdrawn, but with a verbal agreement that we would reopen discussion of such a possibility at our December meeting.

AS: What factors were considered while you were discussing the possibility of resignations?

AR: There was some concern that perhaps there were steps short of resignation which hadn�t been taken. There were people within the administration whom we hadn�t spoken to, including Secretary Shalala, and that we ought to make every effort to be heard so that our action, if we decided to take it, would be grounded in the belief that we had done all that we could.

There was also an argument made that although we were being frustrated on these issues, there was value in our continued participation because we still might have an impact on other policy decisions. The question was asked whether the symbolic value of resignation, even as an activist strategy, was worth giving up a seat at the table, even if at times it seemed as if we were eating alone.

AS: And how did you come down on these issues?

AR: Well, I�m the chair of the Prevention Committee, and although the idea of needle exchange was counter-intuitive to me early on, I�ve looked at the facts and they�re indisputable. Therefore, I am truly invested, both on a personal level and by virtue of my position, in the best and most effective means of preventing the spread of this disease. It seemed incongruous to me therefore that I should remain in a position of supposed influence when no one, in fact, was listening.

AS: So, since July, the committee has set about to speak to people in the administration. Have you spoken with Secretary Shalala?

AR: As a matter of fact, we finally got our first opportunity to meet with her the day after the needle exchange protest in Washington, D.C.

AS: Really? Do you think that the protest was an impetus for that meeting?

AR: We had been attempting to get a meeting for some time, but that protest presaged a lot of activity on this issue within the administration. So, yes, in part, the protest played a role.

AS: And what was the result of that meeting?

AR: It was much the same as the responses we�ve been getting from the administration overall. On one hand, there�s this overriding message to us that we are being ungrateful in some way. That this administration has done more on this issue than its predecessors (which wouldn�t have been difficult, in any case), and has spent all of this money, and that we ought to be thankful.

On the other hand, there has been a very clear pattern of delay. Every time we�ve pressed on this issue we�ve been told to wait for this or that political concern. Whether it was to wait until after the �96 elections, or until the appropriations process is complete, or until the nominations of the new Surgeon General and assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services go through. And within the AIDS issue, there has been such a history of disappointment, we�re so used to being told to wait, or that we have to play the "insiders game" that there was a tendency, I think, to go along and just say "maybe you�re right. Let�s not do harm in our zeal to do good. Perhaps this isn�t the most opportune time."

AS: And what was the motivation to press forward now?

AR: Actually, for me, it was Robert Fogel. He was new to the Council and this was his first experience with the AIDS issue. He was less conditioned, perhaps, to being put off. He had far less patience and he was adamant about the need for the administration to muster the political courage to do the right thing.

AS: And you found yourself in agreement?

AR: It seems to me that this administration has been masterful at managing the consequences of their political actions. They�ve avoided so many pitfalls that I just feel that if they were to get behind this issue, to do the right thing, they would survive politically. It has become relatively apparent, however, that the lives at stake here aren�t important enough to them to make this type of effort. I find myself in agreement therefore, yes, that the time for more delay has come and gone, and that nothing short of action will be acceptable anymore.

AS: You come to the issue of needle exchange from the perspective of fighting the AIDS epidemic. But tell me how you see this debate in the context of our larger drug policy. Do you feel that it is drug policy, rather than AIDS policy that is driving these decisions?

AR: Clearly this is an administration that is greatly conflicted over drug policy. But so is the nation as a whole. On needle exchange, as in other areas of drug policy, the truth is counter-intuitive. If we look at the African American community, and the destruction and the misery associated with substance abuse, as well as the violence that is part of the trade, the system of enforcement that we�ve put into place seems on the surface to be the right thing to do.

But the facts on needle exchange, and on drug policy as a whole, don�t necessarily point to the solutions which seem obvious on the surface. A short time ago, it would have been absurd to think that the Congressional Black Caucus would have come out in favor of needle exchange. Most of those legislators were adamantly opposed to the idea from the beginning. It seemed to them that needle exchange somehow enabled or sanctioned drug use. Yet ultimately, they have come out in support. Which shows that when you present honest information to intelligent people, they can be persuaded despite their initial inclinations.

AS: Have you considered the possibility that some of the highest-level opposition to needle exchange comes from a desire to avoid questions of drug policy on any level? I mean, an entire industry has emerged out of the imprisonment of enormous numbers of young, poor, primarily African American males. The prison industry, the defense industry, the armed forces, police, all of them are benefiting from the status quo. I look at the medical marijuana debate during last year�s elections. Was it really necessary to bring out three former presidents to campaign against the right of an AIDS patient to smoke pot to relieve his nausea?

AR: I can tell you as someone who has worked within Washington that there�s a lot to that argument. This administration has been very good at spin. They�ve played well on people�s fears. Because of that, people, and this includes the African American community which has been most negatively impacted, can unwittingly become part of a system of community destruction. They are sold on, and cling to, strategies which may not, in reality, have much to do with the issues of substance abuse that they are concerned about. They accept policies which may really be about the maintenance of an industry. Even an industry which feeds off of the very destruction those people are trying to end. As I said, needle exchange is illustrative here because on its surface it�s counter-intuitive, but in reality, it is effective.

AS: So you are saying that the acceptance of needle exchange is dependent upon a change in the ways that people view substance abuse as a whole?

AR: Yes. Even a change in the way that people view people who use drugs. We need to accept that not every addict considers him or herself to be self-destructive. They may want their fix, but they will take precautions for their safety and well-being. Needle exchange functions to foster those changes in perception in that once we begin to treat this illness, substance abuse, and once we begin to bring those afflicted into the system, instead of chasing them away, it becomes apparent that these are in fact human beings, and that they�re worthy of compassion. I think that that whole concept is threatening to the status quo in that it tends to delegitimize the dehumanization which has taken place and upon which some of our current policies depend.

AS: So what will happen in December? Are you, are others on the President�s council still considering resignation?

AR: Still considering? Yes. I think a lot will depend upon where we are on needle exchange in December. If the administration has allowed the authority to lift the ban to be taken from them, or if they still have the authority but have declined to use it, I think that their is a very real possibility that you will see people resigning.

There is a lot of frustration on the council with the administration. So much time has been spent on the politics of this that we�ve failed to use the public health system to educate people. People have to be able to separate out the illness of substance addiction, and the people who use drugs, from the drug trade. The two are connected, but they aren�t synonymous.

In the end, holding a "position of influence" is pretty empty if no one is listening to you. For me, my attitude is that coming to Washington three or four times per year just to make well-informed, considered recommendations which are then ignored... I don�t want to be a party to that process. I have more important things to do with my time.

The Debate Continues�

British Newspaper Launches Campaign to Legalize Cannabis (10/3)

The Independent on Sunday, a national British newspaper, launched a campaign last week to persuade both Britons and their government to legalize the possession of cannabis for personal use. The campaign has the backing of over 100 prominent citizens, including celebrities, business leaders, prominent physicians, former senior police officials and Sir Paul McCartney. The paper and its editors vow to continue the campaign "until the law is changed."

This very public challenge to British drug policy comes as the Labour government is preparing to announce the appointment of an American-style "drug-czar" to coordinate its war effort. The paper�s editor, Rosie Boycott, told the Associated Press, "I think we can win this campaign, it may take a long time, but I believe we have right on our side. We need a more open debate about the whole drug policy issue in this country."

The British government appears to disagree, however. Home Secretary Jack Straw told independent television, "There is a profoundly pessimistic assumption behind what the Independent on Sunday says and that is that we are losing the war on drugs. It�s not true."

American Medical Association Calls for More Rational Drug Policies (10/11)

This month�s issue of the Journal of the American medical Association (JAMA) reports that the delegates of the AMA have voted to adopt, as official policy, the recommendations of its Council on Scientific Affairs regarding the need for more rational drug policies and research of alternatives to the Drug War. The seven recommendations embrace Harm Reduction, and explicitly call for research into the effects of alternatives to Prohibition. The measures adopted are as follows:

  1. That the AMA encourage national policymakers to pursue an approach to the problem of drug abuse aimed at preventing the initiation of drug use, aiding those who wish to cease drug use, and diminishing the adverse consequences of drug use.
  2. That the AMA encourage policymakers to recognize the importance of screening for alcohol and other drug use in a variety of settings, and to broaden their concept of addiction treatment to embrace a continuum of modalities and goals, including appropriate measures of harm reduction, which can be made available and accessible to enhance positive treatment outcomes for patients and society.
  3. That the AMA encourage the expansion of opioid maintenance programs so that opioid maintenance therapy can be available for any individual who applies and for whom the treatment is suitable. Training must be available so that an adequate number of phy-sicians are prepared to provide treatment. Program regulations should be strengthened so that treatment is driven by patient needs, medical judgment, and drug rehabilitation concerns. Treatment goals should acknowledge the benefits of abstinence from drug use or degrees of relative drug use reduction.
  4. That the AMA encourage the extensive application of needle and syringe exchange and distribution programs and the modification of restrictive laws and regulations concerning the sale and possession of needles and syringes to maximize the availability of sterile syringes and needles, while ensuring continued reimbursement for medically necessary needles and syringes. The need for such programs and modification of laws and regulations is urgent, considering the contribution of injecting drug use to the epidemic of human immunodeficiency virus infection.
  5. That the AMA encourage the undertaking of comprehensive research into the potential effects, both positive and adverse, of relaxing existing drug prohibitions and controls and that, until the findings of such research can be adequately assessed, the AMA reaffirm its opposition to drug legalization, with a report back on the status of such research at the interim meeting of 1998.
  6. That the AMA initiate and support legislation revoking the 1988 federal ban on funding for needle exchange programs for injecting drug users.
  7. That the AMA strongly encourage state medical associations to initiate state legislation modifying drug paraphernalia laws so that injection drug users can purchase and possess needles and syringes without a prescription.

B.C. Canada�s Attorney General Calls for an Examination of Decriminalization (10/24)

Attorney-General Ujjal Dosanjh of British Columbia said this week that current prohibitionist drug policies were incompatible with a humane and effective approach to drug addiction. As such, and assuming that he has the backing of B.C.�s mayors and police chiefs, he will soon be presenting the idea of decriminalization of personal use amounts of illegal substances to his counterparts in other provinces.

Vancouver Mayor Philip Owen and Police Chief Bruce Chambers said they are ready to look at decrim, as well as any other measure that might ease social and health problems associated with substance abuse in their city. "Obviously, we have a problem, and we have to consider all possible solutions," Owen said. "The realistic thing at this point is to deal that card on to the table and have a discussion."

This pronouncement by the Attorney General follows close on the heels of another high-level official�s comments in the same vein. Earlier last week, deputy chief Ken Higgins of the Vancouver police department said decriminalizing possession of drugs like heroin or cocaine is a necessary part of the battle against HIV/AIDS among drug addicts.

51% of Canadians Favor Decriminalization of Marijuana (11/15)

A poll released this week finds that a slight majority of Canadians favor the decriminalization of the personal possession and use of marijuana. Of 1,515 adults polled, 51% were in favor of decriminalization for personal use, and 83% favored legalization for medicinal use.

The only age category opposed to decrim were those over 55, with only 41% in favor. Level of education was also a factor, with 55% of college-educated adults favoring decrim as opposed to 49% of those with less than a high school education.

This story was reported on the front page of the Globe and Mail, Canada�s only national newspaper, on November 4. The Globe and Mail accepts email letters to the editors at [email protected], and their web site can be found at http://www.globeandmail.ca/.

Australian Mayors: Enforcement "Will Not Work" (12/12)

On December 4, Australia�s Council of Capital City Lord Mayors announced that they had united in commitment to a new national drug strategy, and the formation of a new national advisory committee on the issue which would report directly to them.

Sydney�s Lord Mayor, Cr Frank Sartor, took serious issue with the national Government�s law enforcement approach. "It�s quite obvious that the political leadership in this country has let us down significantly. It�s quite obvious that the current strategies are not working, will not work, and the capital cities need to work much harder."

The Adelaide Lord Mayor, Dr. Jane Lomax-Smith said that the lord mayors were disappointed with the recent federal decision to cancel planned heroin maintenance trials. Pat Assheton of DrugAid, a reform organization in Australia, told The Week Online that it is likely that Jim Sorely, the Lord Mayor of Brisbane, was the driving force behind this action. Mayor Sorely�s office said that they had no comment for release at this time.

Brian McConnell, President of Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform, joined with the Lord Mayors in decrying the continued reliance on enforcement by the Australian Federal Government: "Families and Friends for Drug Law Reform welcomes the moves by Australia�s Lord Mayors. Community political leaders, like our Lord Mayors, are taking seriously the problems caused by prohibition and illicit drugs and are taking action, while other more senior political leaders continue to stick their heads in the sand."

For more about reform efforts in Australia, visit the web site of Family and Friends for Drug Law Reform at http://www.wps.com.au/druglawreform/. Families and Friends is made up of those who have lost loved ones to substance abuse, and who are calling for a public health, rather than a punitive approach to drug policy.

Conference on Cannabis Policy in Britain (12/20)

Last week, the Independent on Sunday newspaper hosted a spirited and possibly historic conference on cannabis law reform in England. The conference grew out of The Independent�s 12 week-old campaign to legalize marijuana, which has sparked a national debate on the issue. Attendees of the conference included 15 Members of Parliament, doctors, substance abuse professionals, police officers, cannabis users, patients and even the authors of the book "Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Facts, Drs. Lynn Zimmer and John P. Morgan, who flew over from the states to participate. All told, over 700 people gathered at the Queen Elizabeth II Convention Centre, in the heart of Westminster, to debate the question, "Cannabis: Should it be Decriminalized?"

Notable in their absence were any high-ranking members of the ruling Labour party. According to The Independent, George Howarth, junior Home Office minister in charge of drugs, "had been invited a month earlier. At that time his diary for Thursday�s conference was clear. But last week his staff announced that he had a �prior engagement.� Jack Straw, the Home Secretary, left it until Monday to explain that he, too, would be unable to attend."

Straw sent a message to the conference which indicated that, like their counterparts in America, British Prohibitionists have mastered the art of "Drug War Think." The message stated, "As you know, I am only too happy to debate [the decriminalization of cannabis]" (despite the fact that he failed to show up for such a debate) but added, of the British government, "we are against the legalization of cannabis."

The speakers who did appear included representatives from both sides of the debate, including MP Nigel Evans, who stated "if you visit any mental health hospital you will find young patients who have gone crazy from smoking strong cannabis." Professor Lynn Zimmer, who followed Mr. Evans, held up a copy of Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Facts, and told the audience "I brought this copy of the book especially for Nigel Evans, in the hope that he�ll become beter informed on the science of this issue." One observer told The Week Online, "They must not train their drug warriors as well over there (in the UK). Mr. Evans looked positively pleased to be presented with the book. He was nodding and smiling as if he had just won a door prize. After Ms. Zimmer finished speaking, he ran right up to her to collect."

Anita Roddick of The Body Shop, one of the principle sponsors of the conference (along with Richard Branson of the Virgin Group) spoke passionately about the immorality of a Prohibition on the medicinal use of marijuana. Mike Goodman, Director of Release, a British reform organization, told the crowd that in 1967, there were 2,393 cannabis-related convictions in England. "Now there are over 1,500 a week. By 2000, a million mostly young people will have been dealt with by the police and courts for cannabis offenses."

The closing statement was delivered by the Editor of The Independent on Sunday, Rosie Boycott, who said:

"By staging this debate, we are giving the nation the first opportunity to join in a frank and balanced forum on the whole issue of cannabis. When we launched this campaign at the end of September we let loose an avalanche which even in my wildest dreams I didn�t think would happen. Letters continue to pour in to the offices..." "It has come from across the world, from MP�s and from America. A few British MP�s have supported us publicly. In private a great many more, some in the Government, have expressed their support. But in the main, Westminster has been silent. Quite astonishing considering that both the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Bingham, and the Master of the Rolls, Lord Wolfson, have been moved to say how urgently a debate is needed."

Editorial: Giving Thanks

As this is the last issue of The Week Online before the American holiday of Thanksgiving, we thought we�d leave our readers with a list of things for which to be thankful.

If you and everyone that you love can go through this list and be thankful for each and every entry, know that you are among a shrinking group of Americans who have managed to avoid some of the most common consequences of the War on Drugs. But know too, that your tax dollars, in ever- increasing amounts, are helping to make the number of citizens like you smaller each year. So give thanks. But remember too that there is work to be done. Happy Thanksgiving.

Adam J. Smith, Associate Director (published 11/23/97)

If you like what you see here and want to get these bulletins by e-mail, please fill out our quick signup form at http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html.

Click to sign up now

Drug Reform Coordination Network