NOTE: The DRCNet Online Library is back up, but the registration has not yet propagated through all corners of the Internet. Check http://www.druglibrary.org, and if it still doesn't work by the weekend, ask your ISP's to check if they've updated their DNS records for druglibrary.org. In the meantime, most of the material in the library can be accessed at http://mir.drugtext.org/druglibrary/index.htm.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. HEA Reform Campaign Online Petition Launched
2. Conyers Reintroduces Racial Profiling Legislation
3. Conyers Introduces Legislation to End Felony Disenfranchisement
4. Unarmed Boy Shot in Drug Raid
5. California Legislators Consider "Three Strikes" Modification
6. Doctor's Undertreatment of Pain Draws Penalty
7. Nevada Legislature Mulls Marijuana Decriminalization Bill
8. Seminars at the Lindesmith Center
9. EDITORIAL: Disparity Dilemma

1. HEA Reform Campaign Online Petition Launched

The Higher Education Act of 1998, signed into law in October, includes a provision that delays or denies all federal financial aid to any student or prospective student for any drug law violation, no matter how minor. In the wake of the new law, a nationwide campaign has been launched to have it repealed. On March 10th, Rep. Barney Frank introduced H.R. 1053, which would do just that.

The campaign has grown quickly, with national organizations, including the ACLU, the NAACP, the United States Students' Association and others adding their collective voice to the efforts of students on more than 150 campuses in opposition to the new law and support of its repeal.

This week, the campaign moved to a new level with the launch of a web site, http://www.RaiseYourVoice.com, from which concerned citizens can contact their legislators to urge them to repeal the HEA provision. Within the first 24 hours of the web site's launch, more than 1,000 people had already done so.

Coalition members will be urging their members and supporters to visit the site and to forward the URL to their friends, families and colleagues so that they too can raise their voices to let Congress know that foreclosing educational opportunities is not a productive approach to the problem of substance abuse.

To learn more about the HEA Reform Campaign on college campuses, check out http://www.u-net.org. To contact your legislators to urge their support for HEA Reform, go to http://www.RaiseYourVoice.com.

(DRCNet has members from across the political spectrum, from left-leaning progressives to libertarians who believe in having the least government possible. DRCNet is strictly devoted to drug policy, and doesn't take a position on the larger question of government funding of social programs, including financial aid. So long as the government is the provider of financial aid, it is clear that no private system will spring up to serve the needs of convicted drug offenders. Hence, we oppose drug war discrimination within social programs including the Higher Education Act, but without taking a position on the public vs. private question itself.)

2. Conyers Reintroduces Racial Profiling Legislation

Representative John Conyers (D-MI) yesterday reintroduced a bill that would require the Justice Department to conduct a study of racial profiling by acquiring data from law enforcement agencies regarding the characteristics of persons stopped for alleged traffic violations. "We must stop the invidious practice of racial profiling; all citizens, regardless of their race, should be free to travel America's highways without undue harassment," said Conyers. Representative Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and Senators Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Russell Feingold (D-WI) are cosponsoring the legislation.

The limited data available indicate that the problem of racial profiling in traffic stops is growing. For example, a recent study by the Orlando Sentinel found that 70% of the persons stopped on I-95 were African American, even though African Americans make up less than 10% of the driver population. A court-ordered study in Maryland found that more than 70% of drivers stopped on I-95 were African American, though they make up only 17.5% of drivers. Yet another study, conducted in conjunction with a New Jersey civil-rights lawsuit found minorities were nearly five times as likely as non-minorities to be stopped for traffic violations along that state's turnpike. Last week, the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois produced statistical evidence of similar practices by a drug unit of that state's highway patrol (see last week's issue at http://www.drcnet.org/wol/086.html#nonwhite).

At a a press conference on Capitol Hill last Wednesday, Rep. Menendez said, "It is not a crime in this country to be an African American. It is not a crime to be a Latino. It is not a crime for a Black or Hispanic American to own a luxury car. But if you are a minority driver in my state on the New Jersey Turnpike, you might actually think that it is." Last month, New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman fired the state's highway patrol chief after he publicly commented that Latinos are more likely to be involved in drug trafficking.

Conyers said his bill will increase awareness about profiling among law enforcement, and help determine if a broader legislative response is called for. "If our citizens are to trust our justice system it is imperative that all forms of discrimination be eliminated from law enforcement," he said. "The Traffic Stops Statistics Act of 1999 will help give Congress and Americans the tools to assess and understand a dangerous form of such discrimination -- racial profiling in traffic stops."

Text of all federal legislation can be found online at http://thomas.loc.gov.

3. Conyers Introduces Legislation to End Felony Disenfranchisement

(report provided by Rudy Cypser of CURE-NY, a chapter of Citizens United for the Rehabilitation of Errants)

Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) introduced a bill this week that would take the first step toward abolishing one of the last remaining restrictions enacted nearly 100 years ago to deny African Americans the right to vote: criminal disenfranchisement laws.

Although the other tools of voter discrimination enacted after the Civil War -- poll taxes, grandfather clauses and literacy tests -- have long since been abolished, criminal disenfranchisement laws continue to be used as a means of denying African Americans access to the voting booth.

Statistics show that blacks are five times as likely as whites to be disenfranchised under felony voter laws. In fact, a recent report by The Sentencing Project and Human Rights Watch estimated that "in states that disenfranchise ex-felons, 40 percent of the next generation of black men is likely to lose permanently the right to vote."

Currently 3.9 million Americans are disqualified from voting because of an inconsistent patchwork of state laws that disenfranchise citizens who have been convicted of a felony. Experts believe that in seven states one in four black men has permanently lost the right to vote. No other democratic nation indefinitely disenfranchises as many people because of felony convictions.

The Conyers bill, H.R. 906, would guarantee that all citizens who have paid their debt to society and are no longer incarcerated regain the right to vote in federal elections, even if they are barred from voting in state elections.

End arbitrary access to the voting booth! Contact your representative. Or, send a FREE FAX to your representative urging him or her to support H.R. 906 from the ACLU web site at http://www.aclu.org/action/vote106.html.

4. Unarmed Boy Shot in Drug Raid

An unarmed fifteen year-old boy was shot from behind, just below the hip on Tuesday (4/13) as police entered a Concord, North Carolina home at approximately 5:00pm to search for drugs. The boy, Thomas Edwards Jr., is a neighbor who was visiting the home to play video games.

Edwards told reporters that he obeyed the officer's order to get on his hands and knees, as did the other five children, all aged 13-17, who were in the home. It was while he was in that position, Edwards said, that he was shot just below the hip by officer Lennie Rivera. The bullet traveled straight through his buttock, and his injuries are not life-threatening.

Edwards, a ninth grader at Concord High School, where he plays varsity football, is at the house nearly every day, playing video games with friends. The police search netted small amounts of marijuana and cocaine, none of which, apparently, belonged to any of the children.

The Charlotte Observer reported that Thomas Edwards Sr. claimed that police told him the shooting was accidental.

Concord Chief of Police Robert E. Cansler told The Week Online that he believes that as well. "The State Bureau of Investigation is still investigating the case, but at this point I can say that the shooting was most likely accidental. Officer Rivera is 33 years old with a degree in education. He's been with us for five years, and before that he was a sergeant on the campus police force at Gardner-Webb University. He likes kids, he relates well to them. This has been a real tragedy for everyone involved. Thankfully, the young man appears to be all right. He was treated and released and we are told that he should recover fully."

Chief Cansler continued, "Standard procedure in any case of a shooting by an officer is that an SBI investigation is required. At the time of the shooting, the officers who had entered the house immediately secured the area, meaning that they attended to the injured young man, got everyone out of the house, including themselves, secured the perimeter of the property, and waited for the SBI unit to show up to commence with that. It wasn't until the SBI had made their investigation of the scene that a new group of Concord officers re-entered the house -- none of these officers was a part of the group that went in originally -- and conducted the search as indicated by the warrant."

What the officers found were small amounts of what appeared to be cocaine and marijuana and packaging materials for what police believe to be distribution.

As to the precautions that were taken to avoid a situation where police unintentionally encounter a large number of young people when entering a house to search for drugs, Chief Cansler said that his officers had surveilled the home "within an hour or two of their entry. At that time there were no indications of a group of children present."

Rob Stewart of the Drug Policy Foundation told The Week Online that the fact that the shooting was most likely an accident argues forcefully for a rethinking of the Drug War.

"Under current policy, the police are put in an untenable position," said Stewart. "They can take all precautions, they can do their jobs well, but the very fact that they are sent into people's homes to ferret out contraband, or evidence of its trade, places the lives of citizens, and the police themselves, at risk." Stewart added that even at their most successful, such tactics have done little to ameliorate the availability of drugs.

Among the residents of the house were Deborah Grissom-Scott, who has a previous charge pending for distribution of cocaine, and her two sons, 21 and 18 years-old, both of whom have prior arrests for drug distribution charges on their records.

The officers, who had a warrant to conduct the search, entered the home and called out "Search warrant. Everybody down on the floor," as is required under North Carolina law, except in situations where such an announcement is nearly certain to result in injury to an officer. "To tell you the truth," Chief Cansler said, "I would require that of my officers even if the law didn't."

Chief Cansler, a 27-year veteran of law enforcement and immediate past-president of the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police, is aware of the problems caused by an over-reliance on law enforcement in dealing with the problem of substance abuse.

"Drugs are a tremendous social problem," he said. "And addressing that problem is going to take a profound social change that will have to include a lot more than just the criminal justice system."

5. California Legislators Consider "Three Strikes" Modification

Marc Brandl, [email protected]

Hayden's bill was recently approved by the Senate's Public Safety Committee. But because the Three Strikes law was passed by a referendum, it will take a two-thirds majority in both chambers of the legislature in order to modify it -- a tough task, even in a heavily Democratic legislature. "There are a lot of Democrats who support Three Strikes who would oppose any scaling back at this point," said Rand Martin, Chief of Staff for Marin County Senator John Vasconcellos, who supports the bill. "It's still a hot potato."

Vasconcellos, also known for his support of medical marijuana, is proposing a state-sponsored study of the effects of Three Strikes. "Other studies have not been comprehensive enough to convince the California legislature or public to make substantive changes to three strikes," said Martin. "The more we can cast a light on how many pizza thieves are being sent to prison for twenty-five years to life, the more dismay there will be in the public eye. We're building a better atmosphere for change."

If Hayden's bill passes the legislature, it may be vetoed by newly elected Democratic Governor Gray Davis. During his campaign, Davis indicated he would be uneasy about changing the law. His campaign also received endorsements and contributions from the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, a group that strongly supports Three Strikes and has a powerful presence in the state capital. Geri Silva, a spokeswoman for Families for Amending California's Three Strikes (FACTS) said strong bi-partisan support will be the key. If the bill makes it as far as Davis' desk, she said, "it would be odd for him to veto it."

For more information about Three Strikes, check out the FACTS web site at http://www.facts1.com.

6. Doctor's Undertreatment of Pain Draws Penalty

One of the worst consequences of the "war on drugs" is a national epidemic of untreated and undertreated severe chronic pain. Many patients in severe pain require opioids (narcotics) to obtain adequate relief and be able to function. The same substances are also used and abused non-medically, and powerful regulatory and enforcement agencies, who tend to favor limited opioid prescription, monitor physician prescribing practices very closely. Many physicians, including the nation's leading pain control experts, consider the boards' and enforcers' prescription quantity standards to be unrealistically low. Compounding the problem is that most doctors do not receive training in pain management during medical school. (See our discussion of this issue at http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/pain.html.)

In an unusual, perhaps unprecedented move, the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners has taken disciplinary action against a physician for undertreating pain, according to the Oregonian last month (3/27). Dr. Paul A. Bilder, a 54-year old pulmonary disease specialist, has been accused by the Board of failing to give seriously ill or dying patients adequate pain medication.

Some of the same physicians who have challenged the system's obstacles to adequate treatment of pain, are encouraged by the increasing awareness and understanding of pain treatment issues, but have expressed concern that a disciplinary approach to undertreatment may backfire.

Dr. William Hurwitz, whose battle with the Virginia Board of Medicine over pain treatment was featured on Sixty Minutes in 1996 (http://www.drcnet.org/guide10-96/pain.html), told the Week Online, "Although it sounds like the doctor was indifferent to his patients' pain, anxiety, and misery, I don't think that the best way to deal with this is through disciplinary action by Boards of Medicine. There are probably rational and defensible grounds that might plausibly justify the doctor's treatment. Disciplinary actions are always undertaken with the benefit of hindsight, and here, in the context of shifting standards of care."

"It is fundamentally unfair to hold the doctor to a standard that was certainly not the community standard from 1993-1998," Hurwitz continued. "By increasing the risk to doctors of treating pain patients, whether it be for charges of overprescribing or undertreatment, it will simply make it harder to find doctors willing to treat these patients at all."

Dr. Harvey Rose, a California physician who successfully defended his pain treatment approach against the California Board, spearheaded legislation in that state to protect patients' rights to pain treatment, and was also involved in passing similar legislation in Oregon. Dr. Rose commented, "To see the Oregon board go after somebody for underprescribing now is a mind-blower."

An Oregon state task force, created by the legislature in 1997, found that the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners' had a history of aggressively pursuing physicians for prescribing narcotics, constituting a significant regulatory barrier to good chronic pain care, according to the American Medical Newspaper last January.

"I think [Dr. Bilder] refused [to provide narcotics], not because he's a mean guy, I'm sure he's not," Dr. Rose said. But he's afraid to give narcotics. If he gave narcotics to these people, and if he pushed them over and they died or something, he'd get blamed for it. See, there is no law against underprescribing, but there are laws against excessive prescribing. I think what should be done with him would be an educational type discipline, where you make him take some continuing medical educational courses in pain management."

The Week Online asked Dr. Rose about the impact of the DEA on pain treatment: "The DEA claims that whenever they go after a doctor, it's been reviewed by a doctor. But who does the DEA choose to review the cases? Ultra-conservative, anti-narcotic type doctors. You choose who you want, you get the opinion that you want. They could choose a doctor who was a little more compassionate, a little more liberal in prescribing, but then they wouldn't get the result that they want. They couldn't go after the doctor. The war on drugs has created a climate now where it's become a war on patients and doctors. The war on drugs is the root of all evil. That's what's created this whole business of undertreatment of pain, and it's crazy."

A New Jersey report by the Commission for the Study of Pain Management Policy, chaired by state Assemblywoman Charlotte Vandervalk (R-Westwood), found that patients often could not get appropriate pain relief, even though it was medically possible to provide it, and made recommendations for making pain medication more available.

Vandervalk wrote in an editorial in the April 2 issue of the Bergen Record, "We heard a lot about fear. Physicians feared trouble with law enforcement for prescribing large doses of controlled substances, especially if they have a practice with a heavy caseload of patients with intractable pain. Pharmacists were also afraid of losing their licenses for filling prescriptions for high doses of painkillers. Patients feared that their supply of medicine would run out, so they cut back and did not take the optimal dosage. Some patients feared that they would be considered weak or troublesome if they complained about their pain."

Vandervalk concluded, "Government must do all that it can to eliminate obstacles, so that the best medical care becomes easier to give and receive. Science has shown us how to eliminate pain. The need for action is clear. We would be barbaric if we did not go forward with these recommendations."

7. Nevada Legislature Mulls Marijuana Decriminalization Bill

Marc Brandl, [email protected]

According to Assemblywoman Chris Guinchigliani (D-Las Vegas), the bill's sponsor, a change in the law is necessary because "the war on drugs, especially in the area of marijuana, hasn't worked." She said the resources needed to prosecute low level drug offenders should be put to better use. "My real motivation for this is to try to get some additional revenue for rehabilitation," she said. "I think that should be our focus, especially when it's an ounce or less of marijuana. We need to stop putting people in prison for an alcohol or drug problem -- we are destroying too many lives."

As of press time, the bill is being considered on the Assembly floor after receiving bi-partisan approval from the judiciary committee last week. The Nevada Assembly has a large Democratic majority, but the bill may not get a warm welcome in the state Senate. "The Senate has a vocal conservative majority," said Dan Geary, a Carson City lobbyist. "Nevada is very much a law and order state." But, he added, "I think the legislature may be surprised to find widespread support for making the possession of marijuana a misdemeanor, while remaining very much in favor of stronger penalties for sellers."

The text of the bill can be found online at http://www.leg.state.nv.us/70th/bills/AB/AB577.html.

8. Seminars at the Lindesmith Center

The Lindesmith Center, a drug policy think tank, held its 100th seminar this February, and continues the program at this spring. TLC seminar listings are updated at their web site at http://www.lindesmith.org, which also includes a substantial online library.

On the east coast: Seminars are held at the Open Society Institute, 400 West 59th Street (between 9th and 10th Avenues), 3rd Floor, New York, NY. All are welcome, but seating is limited. Call The Lindesmith Center at (212) 548-0695 or e-mail [email protected] to reserve a place.

Thursday, April 29th, 4-6pm
Pain and Addiction: Which Part of the Elephant Are You Touching?

Co-sponsored with the Project on Death in America of the Open Society Institute. Sidney H. Schnoll, MD, PhD, professor of internal medicine and psychiatry, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University, examines the undertreatment of pain by physicians. Schnoll, chairman, Division of Addiction Medicine, presents recommendations for prescribing opioid pain medication intended to overcome fears of addiction, invasive regulatory oversight and risks of medication abuse.

Monday, May 10th, 4-6pm
The Evolution of Drug Markets in New York City

Richard Curtis, PhD, professor of anthropology, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and J. Travis Wendel, JD, PhD candidate, adjunct professor, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, analyze drug distribution in the Lower East Side of Manhattan and the Bushwick and Williamsburg sections of Brooklyn. Curtis and Wendel, ethnographers for "Heroin in the 21st Century," funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and "Lower East Side Trafficking," funded by the National Institute of Justice, examine the evolution of multi-drug markets and their interaction with local communities.

Thursday, May 27th, 4-6pm
Preventing and Managing Binge Drinking in College Students: A Harm-Reduction Approach

G. Alan Marlatt, PhD, professor of psychology and director, Addictive Behaviors Research Center, University of Washington in Seattle, analyzes trends in alcohol consumption among college students, based on research funded by the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Marlatt, editor of Harm Reduction: Pragmatic Strategies for Managing High Risk Behaviors (Guilford Press, 1998), offers techniques for managing and preventing alcohol-related harms.

Tuesday, June 8th, 4-6pm
Coca Leaf: Sacrament and Scapegoat

Carolina Salguero, photographer, and Anthony Henman, author of Mama Coca (1978), examine the use of coca in the Andes. Salguero, grantee of the Fund for Investigative Journalism, presents a slide show focusing on the role of coca in the daily lives of campesinos in Apurimac Valley, Peru. Henman, former professor of anthropology, University of São Paolo / Campinas, Brazil, analyzes the role of coca in Andean culture.

Wednesday, June 23rd, 4-6pm
Exchange, Distribution or Sale? Strategies for Syringe Availability

Donald Grove, director of development, Harm Reduction Coalition and Moving Equipment, Robert Heimer, PhD, associate professor of epidemiology and public health, Yale University School of Medicine, and Beth Weinstein, MPH, director, Bureau of Community Health AIDS Program, Connecticut Department of Public Health, examine strategies for sterile syringe availability.

On the west coast: TLC-West forum and conference locations vary. Call (415) 921-4987 or e-mail [email protected] for information, to reserve a space, or to sign up for the TLC-West mailing list.

Thursday, April 29, 5-7pm

Heroin Overdose Prevention
Held at the San Francisco Medical Society, 1409 Sutter (at Franklin) Heroin Overdose Prevention. With: Karl Sporer, MD, Assistant Clinical Professor, UCSF School of Medicine, Attending Physician, San Francisco General Hospital Emergency Services; Dan Bigg, Director, Chicago Recovery Alliance; and Reda Sobky, MD, Medical Director of HAART, Fort Help and Castro Valley Methadone Clinics, San Francisco.

Monday, May 3, 8:30am-5pm, and Tuesday, May 4, 9am-5pm
Bridging the Gap: Integrating Traditional Substance Abuse and Harm Reduction Services

Held at the Radisson Miyako Hotel, 1625 Post Street (at Geary), San Francisco. An educational workshop for members of the San Francisco provider community. Presented by the San Francisco Department of Public Health, The Lindesmith Center, and the Harm Reduction Training Institute, with additional funding from SAMSA and DPF. Speakers include: Wesley Clark, Director of San Francisco Community Substance Abuse Services (CSAS); Alan Marlatt, University of \ Washington; Patt Denning, Addiction Treatment Alternatives, SF; and Rubin Medina, Executive Director, Promesa, NY. Attendees must be pre-registered. For information, call Bill Lapp at 4(15) 255-3522.

Conferences

Thursday, October 29, all day
New Directions in Drug Education

Held at the Golden Gate Club, Presidio of San Francisco, featuring educators, researchers, students and parents. For information, contact TLC-West at (415) 921-4987.

9. EDITORIAL: Disparity Dilemma

David Borden, Executive Director, [email protected]

[Adam's editorials will be back next week. Because of the surging debate on mandatory minimum sentences, including the disparity between crack and powder cocaine sentences (Charles Rangel's bill, for example, discussed in issue #83 at http://www.drcnet.org/wol/083.html#rangel, and more sweeping legislation soon to come), we've decided to reprint this editorial by David Borden, from the August 1997 issue of The Activist Guide.]

Over the past few years, the question of crack vs. powder cocaine sentencing has become a symbol of racial inequity in the U.S. criminal justice system. The controversy is that under federal sentencing law, a defendant convicted of possession of 5 grams of crack receives a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years, while 500 grams of powder cocaine are required to trigger the same mandatory minimum. Last year (1996), the U.S. Sentencing Commission decided that the 5-year threshold for crack should be raised to 500 grams, matching that of powder. For the first time ever, the Commission's recommendations were overturned by Congress. Earlier this year (1997), the Commission came back with an alternative recommendation, raising the crack threshold to 25 grams and lowering powder's to 250.

Though use of crack cocaine in the white community is not uncommon, most arrests, and virtually all federal prosecutions of crack defendants, are of blacks, and powder cocaine enforcement is racially discriminatory as well. Mainstream leaders, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus, have openly denounced the situation, both current and proposed, as racist. Of all current drug policy reform proposals, this one small change may have more public, activist, and official support than any other. It seems like it should be easy. So why are we losing?

It may be that the focus on this one discriminatory sentencing policy is misdirected. Heinous as it is, the 5 gram-5 year mandatory minimum is only the tip of the iceberg of a much larger problem. A 1995 study by The Sentencing Project found that nearly 1 in 3 African American men between the ages of 20 and 29 were under some form of correctional supervision -- prison, jail, probation or parole -- on any given day, meaning the percentage who undergo correctional control at some time is larger. Astonishing percentages of young black men in our major cities enter prison at some time during their lives. Though data on the number of them incarcerated for drug offenses are unavailable, the Sentencing Project blamed the dramatic increase in incarceration of the last 15 years on drug policies. While the debate focuses on grams and ratios, opponents of sentencing reform can minimize the problem by pointing to the relatively small numbers of people sentenced under this one federal law, distracting attention from the larger numbers of persons incarcerated, 90 percent at the state level.

And sadly, many Americans today are willing to sacrifice fairness for the sake of "stamping out drugs" or whatever they think is being accomplished. So long as they believe that tough drug enforcement and mandatory minimum sentences are effective approaches to the drug problem, they will set aside concerns of justice, whether they agree with them or not. Indeed, they may think it unfair to not punish inner-city offenders more harshly, given the more severe impact that substance abuse and related problems have in that environment.

Yet their belief is misguided. An officer during the Vietnam War once explained that he had destroyed a village in order to "liberate" it. Today's drug warriors are much like this officer, trying to "save" the inner cities by removing huge numbers of young blacks to prisons for long periods of time. As contracting of prison labor by private industry becomes widespread, many of these men, and a growing number of women, are put to work for compensation that might colloquially be termed "slave wages." Meanwhile, the drug industry out on the streets replaces their lost workers with new young men and women, who can then be sent to prison, etc., etc. Result: bigger prisons, no reduction in the availability of drugs.

We as reformers need to keep the focus on the big picture, dealing with important partial issues like the sentencing disparity but framing them in terms of the larger context.

If you like what you see here and want to get these bulletins by e-mail, please fill out our quick signup form at https://stopthedrugwar.org/WOLSignup.shtml.

PERMISSION to reprint or redistribute any or all of the contents of Drug War Chronicle 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: StoptheDrugWar.org: the Drug Reform Coordination Network, P.O. Box 18402, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 293-8340 (voice), (202) 293-8344 (fax), e-mail [email protected]. Thank you.

Articles of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of the DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.

Out from the Shadows HEA Drug Provision Drug War Chronicle Perry Fund DRCNet en Español Speakeasy Blogs About Us Home Why Legalization? NJ Racial Profiling Archive Subscribe Donate DRCNet em Português Latest News Drug Library Search special friends links: SSDP - Flex Your Rights - IAL - Drug War Facts StoptheDrugWar.org: the Drug Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet) 1623 Connecticut Ave., NW, 3rd Floor, Washington DC 20009 Phone (202) 293-8340 Fax (202) 293-8344 [email protected]