|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(renamed "Drug War Chronicle" effective issue #300, August 2003) Issue #219, 1/11/02
"Raising Awareness of the Consequences of Drug Prohibition" Phillip S. Smith, Editor
subscribe for FREE now! ---- make a donation ---- search TABLE OF CONTENTS
(visit
the Week Online archives)
1. Editorial: A Line in the Sand David Borden, Executive Director, [email protected], 1/11/02 Every now and then something so crazy happens that you just have to laugh, angry as you may be. When police in Sao Paulo, Brazil, seized members of the band Planet Hemp as they concluded a concert, arresting them to be prosecuted for their pro-marijuana lyrics, it was one of those times. I confess to not having followed up to find out about the fate of Planet Hemp (not to be confused with the Planet Hemp clothing store, nor with the marijuana enthusiast's battle cry, "plant hemp"). But I was encouraged, as well as amused, to meet someone wearing a Planet Hemp t-shirt at a party here in Washington, DC, a few months ago. Brazil seems now to be moving away from their drug craziness (not to be confused with the book Drug Crazy, though maybe the same idea), as this week brings news that minor drug offenders in that nation will no longer face prison time. The new law is far from perfect; mandated treatment provisions, for example, raise the same issues being heatedly debated within drug reform ranks here in the US. But at least there is an interest in moving away from the hysterical, round-'em-up mentality that formerly held sway. If it isn't one thing, though, it's another. In California, companion bills in the state Senate and Assembly would mandate a 90-day or greater jail term for simply being under the influence of MDMA, popularly known as ecstasy. When you think about it, this law, too, is crazy. I'm not saying that using drugs and talking about using drugs are identical activities. But in both cases, police are seeking the power to round up and jail people who simply aren't bothering anybody else. Most ecstasy users are experimenting, exploring interesting states of consciousness or just having fun. Some may have emotional or addiction problems that impel their use, or are exacerbated by it. There are certain safety risks to the unaware or careless user, and the jury is still out on ecstasy's long-term health impact. Certainly, no drug is perfectly safe or without its downsides -- though ecstasy's extremely minimal number of fatalities compared with those from other drugs ought to place it far lower on the legislative radar than is currently the case. The main issue, however, is that no valid principle of health, safety, science or any other concern points in the direction of putting young people in jail for any drug, with its close exposure to bona-fide criminals and its well-known dangers. And to seriously attempt to enforce this law would require police to conduct invasions of homes, public establishments and personal privacy on a truly massive scale -- a frightening and abhorrent situation to anyone who respects the Constitution or values freedom, and a deranged way for a society to be organized. Either the bill's sponsors haven't thought things through, or they consider that weird vision of an Orwellian police state to be desirable. In some ways, in fact, the police state is already a reality. But that doesn't justify making things worse. It's time to draw a line in the sand against the ecstasy hysteria, and this bill strikes me as a good place to start. People who support sane drug policies need to organize to defeat this dangerous legislation. The American way of life is at stake. (Read our next article for more information on California's anti-ecstasy bills. If you're from California, please visit http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/ca-ecstasy/ to take an easy first step in opposing them.)
2. New California Bill Would Mandate 90-Day Minimum Jail Term for Being Under Ecstasy's Influence In a move that could affect hundreds of thousands of Californians, state Senator Bob Margett (R-District 29) has introduced a bill in California's Senate to make it a crime to be "under the influence" of MDMA, or ecstasy. The new misdemeanor offense would be punishable by a mandatory 90-day minimum to one-year maximum jail term. A second provision of the bill, SB 1103, would reschedule ecstasy, making it a Schedule I controlled substance under state law. An almost identical bill, AB 1416, was reintroduced this session by Assemblywoman Lynne Leach (R-District 15). The bills are only the latest manifestation of the hysteria surrounding ecstasy and the rave culture in law enforcement and the political class in California. Fueled by sensational media stories and federal fear-mongering, California authorities have swept into high schools across the state, busting students in undercover operations. The state's rave culture has also come under attack, with police arresting 80 people, primarily for ecstasy sales or possession, during the September Nocturnal Wonderland rave in the Mojave Desert and shutting down JuJu Beats 2001 before it could take place in northern Los Angeles County in August. "Ecstasy is tremendously popular," Sen. Margett's press secretary Jody Day told DRCNet, "and law enforcement asked for this bill. They see an overwhelming problem out in the communities. We're helping them do their job, giving them the tools they asked for," Day explained. "This is not the right way to reduce whatever harm may be associated with ecstasy," said Richard Boire, whose Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics has produced a stinging analysis of the proposed legislation (http://www.alchemind.org/dll/sb1103index.htm). "This bill creates an Orwellian thought crime based on a state of mind," the suburban Los Angeles attorney told DRCNet. "This is an ill-conceived, ineffective, and unjust measure," he said. "Both federal and state laws are designed to get those people who harm other people or their property, but this bill doesn't address conduct, it criminalizes a mental state," Boire pointed out. "This bill is aimed at young people, but putting them in jail for 90 days will only disrupt their college, their jobs, their family lives. It will only exacerbate harm," he said. "And how would it be enforced?" Boire asked. "The government would have to resort to totalitarian policing tactics and abusive profiling of young people at raves. It would have to throw a big net over them and force them to take urine tests," he said. "Will they detain people under some sort of reduced probable cause standard? Possession of a glow stick is not a reasonable suspicion that a crime is occurring." Press secretary Day's response to DRCNet queries on this topic suggest that the bill's sponsors have not thought through this aspect of their legislation. "I'll have to do some research on that," said Day, "but police may have probable cause based on physical actions that people are taking," she suggested. "There are physical signs that indicate ecstasy use, such as involuntary teeth-clenching." Day did not explain how police would differentiate teeth-clenching caused by ecstasy use from teeth-clenching caused by other reasons. Not to worry, though. "The police will take the same approach as if they thought someone was on heroin," she reassured. In addition to the thought crime provision, the bills would also make ecstasy a Schedule I substance, like cocaine or heroin, under California law. Although federal law classifies ecstasy as a Schedule I drug, California currently does not. Prosecutors, however, can charge ecstasy offenders under the California Controlled Substance Analog Act, so the primary negative impact of this provision will not be increased sentences, but increased obstacles to researchers attempting to study the drug's medical benefits, according to Boire. "All we want to do is have California be in compliance with federal drug schedules," said Day. "What we're trying to do is match California statute to the federal laws." "This would only contribute to a legal landscape that is inaccurately mapped," said Boire. "Ecstasy does not belong in Schedule I. The science shows that and the DEA knows that. Their own Administrative Judge, Francis Young, concluded that 'the evidence of record requires MDMA to be placed in Schedule III' and the evidence of ecstasy's medical uses has only strengthened since then." (Under federal law, a Schedule I drug must have a high potential for abuse; have no currently accepted medical use in the US; and lack a means of safe use under medical supervision.) "If they want to reschedule MDMA, then let's do it properly," said Boire. "Let's have a proper evaluation, let's look at the scientific evidence. Instead, this bill would codify misinformation about ecstasy. Just because the federal government has falsely and incorrectly scheduled MDMA is no reason for California to follow suit." The sponsors of the respective bills are both conservative Republicans. Senator Margett, representing parts of the Los Angeles suburbs, bills himself as a crime fighter and touts his success in passing one of those laws named after the victim of a particularly vicious and sensationalized crime. Assemblywoman Leach, on the other hand, has devoted much of her legislative career to education issues, but recently coauthored a measure that would create an anti-terrorism license plate "to serve as a public reminder of the terrible attack America has suffered and help to unite all Californians in our stand for freedom." Except, apparently, freedom inside their own heads. (Visit http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/ca-ecstasy/ for information and action opportunities on SB 1103, including a link to the state's online legislative tracking system and other resources.)
3. Agenda for 2002, and DRCNet Monthly Donor Program Update Thanks to the generosity of more than 80 of our readers, DRCNet's monthly donor program is now generating more than $1,000 per month! These are much-needed funds that help us offer free services like our online legislative action alert sites. Please consider signing up for our monthly program or making a one-time contribution -- any amount, large or small, will mean a lot to DRCNet and our ability to effect change. You can contribute by visiting http://www.drcnet.org/donate/ to make an encryption-secured donation by credit card or PayPal, or use the form to generate a printout to mail in with your check or money order, or just send those to: DRCNet, P.O. Box 18402, Washington, DC 20036. We are also now set up to accept contributions of stock -- our brokerage is Ameritrade, account #772973012, company name Drug Reform Coordination Network, Inc. The following is a brief summary of DRCNet's agenda for 2002: In the legislative arena (Drug Reform Coordination Network, contributions are not tax-deductible):
Thank you for doing your part to end the failed, destructive war on drugs.
4. New Jersey Governor-Elect Calls for Needle Exchange, Cites Battle Against AIDS In a remarkable shift from the policies of his Republican predecessors, incoming Democratic New Jersey governor James E. McGreevey told a Tuesday news conference that the time had come to give free needles to injection drug users as a means of combating AIDS. But McGreevey then qualified that statement, adding that he wanted to first try "a hospital-based pilot program, which represents a prudent interim step," the Associated Press Reported. Under former Republican Gov. Christine Todd Whitman, now administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the state government routinely ignored the pleas of her own AIDS advisory council to implement needle exchange programs, and instead banned them. That ban was briefly challenged by the Chai Project, whose personnel distributed syringes in New Brunswick and suffered arrests and prosecutions from 1996-1998 before ceasing that aspect of their program (http://www.drcnet.org/wol/071.html#sentenced). In addition to banning needle exchanges, state law also makes it a crime to obtain a syringe without a prescription. As a result of such policies, New Jersey is one of the few states where injection drug use is the leading cause of HIV infections. According to a 1999 report published by the Dogwood Center, a Princeton-based independent nonprofit research organization concerned with AIDS and social justice, New Jersey ranked fifth in the nation in having the highest rate of drug injection-related AIDS cases. It trailed only New York, Delaware, Maryland, and Connecticut (http://www.dogwoodcenter.org/top/topview.html). While early reaction has been muted as interested parties wait to see what to see McGreevey's words translated into policy, Dawn Day, director of the Dogwood Center, expressed guarded optimism. "I think this is a good thing," she told DRCNet. "But I do have some concerns about this being based in hospitals. If the administration of an exchange program were at a hospital, that's one thing, but we need to have those vans going out into the community where the people are."
5. Colombia Peace Process Collapses While Second Presidential Candidate Decries Failed Drug Policies As Colombian President Andres Pastrana finishes out his term, he this week abandoned the slow-moving negotiations with the 17,000 leftist guerrillas of the FARC which have consumed his years in office, and the country is bracing for even higher levels of political violence as the Colombian armed forces maneuver menacingly around the rebels' Switzerland-sized safe haven. With peace talks at an end, the government has vowed to retake the zone. Meanwhile, another of the candidates moving to take Pastrana's place has decried the drug war as a failure. US observers of Colombia expressed grave preoccupation with Pastrana's move. "We are very concerned," said Jason Hagen, Colombia associate for the Washington Office on Latin America (http://www.wola.org). "The talks have been troubled for some time -- there's a lot of mistrust between the FARC and the government -- but we still believe peace negotiations are the only way out of this conflict," he told DRCNet. "If this process fails and the war gets much worse, it will be worse than anything Colombia has ever seen," said Adam Isaacson, senior associate at the Center for International Policy (http://www.ciponline.org). "The FARC and the military have been kind of holding back during the peace process. The last time the FARC and the government really went at it, back in 1998, there were bloody battles and gruesome human rights violations," he told DRCNet. "But back then, the FARC and the military were only two-thirds of their present size, and the paramilitaries were only about one-third as powerful as now. The FARC is capable of doing much more than kidnapping people and blowing up oil pipelines." The situation in Colombia, however, remains confused and fluid. On Wednesday, President Pastrana told the nation the rebels had abandoned the peace talks and gave them 48 hours to vacate the safe haven. According to Colombian press reports and the Associated Press, units of the Colombian military are making preparations to retake the zone. But the rebels deny having abandoned the peace talks, and Pastrana's own words to his countrymen sound like he is the one walking away. "Today I have to tell Colombians, with regret, but above all with realism and responsibility, that the FARC keeps placing obstacles in front of the peace process, making it impossible for us to keep advancing with the process," Pastrana said in a nationally broadcast speech. "The FARC has 48 hours, as agreed, to retire from the zone," he said, referring to the original timeframe for them to abandon the safe haven if talks failed. "He lied to the country and the international community when he said the FARC had asked for 48 hours... for the armed forces to enter the zone after not coming to an agreement," FARC peace negotiator and spokesman Raul Reyes told the AP. In a communique released Thursday, the FARC repeated that claim and denied that it had walked out of the negotiations. Just hours before Pastrana's Wednesday announcement, Reyes had told reporters the FARC hoped the talks would continue until at least January 20, the latest repeatedly postponed expiration date for the safe haven. On Thursday afternoon, it was unclear if the 48-period had begun, and by Thursday evening the situation became even more muddied. In another address to the nation that evening, President Pastrana announced that at the behest of the United Nations he was giving that group 48-hours to resurrect the peace talks he had buried the day before. This time, Pastrana gave a firm deadline. "A few moments ago, the special advisor to the UN Secretary General for the Colombian peace process, Mr. James LeMoyne, with the support of the international community, has asked of me a reasonable time to meet with the FARC," Pastrana told a confused nation. "I have accepted this request and have given them a maximum and unchangeable period of 48 hours to do so, that is, from this moment until 9:30 Saturday night." Pastrana has been under increasing pressure from the Colombian military, elements of popular opinion, and parts of the US government to abandon the three-year old peace talks. The US government's Plan Colombia, while officially aimed at drug trafficking, has involved the US in an expensive military and political campaign against the FARC, who, along with most other actors in the Colombian conflict, profit from the drug trade. "Some elements in the US government thought Pastrana was ceding too much to the FARC," said WOLA's Hagen, "that Pastrana was not being tough enough. They were disappointed because the US made special concessions to meet with the FARC and treated them as political actors, even though they are officially designated as terrorists." Neither Hagen nor Isaacson thought these latest moves would have a direct impact on Plan Colombia, except to make matters worse. "US drug control goals will remain the same," said Isaacson. "The question is would we get involved in backing a much larger war effort? My suspicion is yes, especially with this administration. Once they get their Latin America team in place, it's hard not to imagine dire consequences." Drowned out in the uproar over the apparent end of the peace process was independent presidential candidate Noemi Sanin's call for an international conference to address failed drug war strategies. Sanin, an outspoken politician who has rebuked the US for criticizing Colombian anti-drug efforts, is running in second place in recent polls. Current drug control strategies "are inadequate; drug trafficking keeps advancing, it keeps financing our conflict and creating an economy which is very damaging to democracy and its institutions," she told the Associated Press in a Tuesday interview. "We're not winning the war against drug trafficking -- not even close," the former foreign minister said. "And we're losing many battles." The need for change is urgent, said Sanin, because drug profits fuel the civil war. "If we could cut the veins of their drug-trafficking financing, the conflict would not be able to endure," she said. Sanin called for an international conference to look at new strategies for dealing with the drug trade, echoing a call made by Pastrana himself. She joins presidential candidate Colombian presidential candidate Luis Eduardo Garzon of the Social and Political Front in denouncing current Colombian drug policies (http://www.drcnet.org/wol/201.html#groundswell); Garzon went so far as to explicitly call for legalization. Leading presidential contender, Liberal Horacio Serpa has not addressed the issue. Presidential elections are set for May 26.
6. Supreme Court to Hear Public Transit Search Case, Bush Administration Invokes Terror War to Support Drug War Measure At the urging of the Bush administration, the Supreme Court will review a federal appeals court ruling holding that police officers who seek to search or question passengers on public transportation, such as interstate buses and trains, must first inform citizens of their constitutional rights, particularly the right not to consent to an unwarranted search. The case, US v. Drayton, grew out of the increasingly common drug war police practice of boarding buses and trains and attempting to intimidate passengers into waiving their right to travel free of suspicionless searches. In the present case, three Tallahassee, Florida, police officers boarded a bus bound from Ft. Lauderdale to Detroit. One officer sat in the driver's seat, kneeling and facing passengers, while the other two officers questioned passengers, saying they were looking for drugs and weapons, according to documents filed with the court. Christopher Drayton and traveling companion Clifton Brown consented to a search of their luggage. Police found no contraband in the luggage. Police then asked to pat down the two men. The two consented, and police subsequently discovered packages of cocaine beneath their clothing. Both men were charged, convicted, and sentenced on drug charges, but appealed their convictions to the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals. That court threw out the convictions, ruling that the cocaine should not have been admitted as evidence because police failed to inform Drayton and Brown of their rights or tell them they were not required to cooperate. The incident violated the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures, the court held, because the men did not feel free to leave. In asking the Supreme Court to intervene, Solicitor General Theodore Olson invoked the specter of terrorism. "Programs that rely on consensual interactions between police officers and citizens on means of public transportation are an important part of the national effort to combat the flow of illegal narcotics and weapons," he wrote. "In the current environment, they may also become an important part of preventing other forms of criminal activity that involve travel on the nation's system of public transportation." (Olson, the attorney who led the Bush campaign team's post-election recount battle in Florida and was rewarded with the Solicitor General post, was married to conservative columnist Barbara Olson, who was killed on September 11 when the plane on which she was passenger crashed into the Pentagon.) In his appeal to the court, Olson also wrote that the 11th Circuit's decision endangered a common law enforcement tactic. Additionally, Olson claimed that the 11th Circuit's ruling left law enforcement officers "without clear guidance on the boundaries of lawful bus, train and airplane interdiction practices." In their brief to the court, lawyers for Drayton and Brown urged the Supreme Court to stay out of the case. The 11th Circuit's ruling, "which merely required compliance with the Constitution and precedent of this court, was a sound application of well-established law," they wrote. "Nothing in our recent national tragedies changed that." The Supreme Court's previous rulings on the issue have been a mixed bag. In one case, the court ruled that police may not squeeze sealed luggage to search for contraband, but in another case, it ruled that police questioning aboard buses is not necessarily more coercive merely because passengers have little room to move about. That the Supreme Court agreed to take the case is a signal that it may be inclined to reverse the 11th Circuit, said veteran criminal defense attorney Michael Cutler. "The number of cases competing to get on the court's docket is so enormous that they rarely take cases they simply mean to rubberstamp," he told DRCNet. "This court has shown some sensitivity to fundamental questions of guilt and innocence or in giving juries a chance to rule on factors that could lengthen sentences," said Cutler, a senior staff attorney with the Boston area Center for Public Representation, Inc., a nonprofit law office, "but the court is not interested in punishing police conduct if it means guilty parties go free." The government appeal to fear of terrorism could influence the court, said Cutler. "The court went a long distance in the 1980s toward creating a drug exception to Fourth Amendment protections," he said. "It remains to be seen whether there will now be a terrorist exception to the laws that protect public privacy." An adverse ruling could be ominous, he added. "If the court says giving up these rights in as mundane a setting as ordinary intercity bus travel is constitutional, then there is no reason this terrorist exception to the Fourth Amendment could not be extended to an urban bus, a cab, or even a private car."
7. Brazil Joins Ranks of Drug Reform Nations, Users to Avoid Jail Under New Law After a ten-year struggle, the Brazilian Congress has adopted drug reform legislation that will keep small-time drug offenders out of prison while increasing penalties for major drug traffickers. Instead of prison sentences, recreational drug users will face less serious alternative punishments and will be treated not as criminals, but as persons needing medical or psychological help. The move got the go-ahead in December from President Henrique Fernando Cardoso, and the Brazilian House responded in the last days of 2001 by passing the legislation, which had been languishing in the Brazilian congress since 1991. The bill is the government's response to a rapid increase in cocaine consumption in the nation of 170 million, and to widespread social acceptance of marijuana use. "Smoking marijuana is not a crime," said Gen. Paulo Roberto Uchoa, who head's Brazil's National Antidrug Secretariat. "A drug user is someone who needs counseling and information. The ones who traffic drugs are the criminals," he told the Christian Science Monitor last week. The move puts Brazil in line with a global trend toward more lenient treatment of drug users, a trend particularly pronounced in Europe, where Belgium, Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal and Switzerland have all moved in that direction in recent years. But it also makes Brazil the only country in the Americas to adopt drug reform legislation. Fearing the wrath of a United States strongly committed to prohibitionist law enforcement responses to drug use and the drug trade, other Latin American countries have been loath to enact similar reforms. "A drug user is not a case for the police, he is a drug addict," said Congressman Elias Murad, who led the decade-long legislative struggle. "He's more of a medical and social problem than a police problem, and that's the way the thinking is going, not just here in Brazil, but around the world," he told the Monitor. "We believe that you can't send someone to jail who is ill." Skeptical observers might suggest that Murad has more than altruistic motives in pushing the legislation, which would send some drug offenders to treatment or rehabiliation. Murad, a physician, runs a chain of 50 drug prevention and rehabilitation centers in his home state of Minas Gerais. Under Murad's bill, first-time drug possessors will not face prison time, but will instead be sentenced to treatment, community service, fines or license suspension. Under the old law, possession of one joint or one pound of cocaine could result in a prison sentence of from six months to two years. Like the old statute, the new law makes no distinction between hard and soft drugs. Unlike the old statute, however, it removes prison sentences for non-drug traffickers. A decade ago, cocaine was seen primarily as a transit drug, shipped through Brazil on its way to Europe or the United States, but domestic cocaine consumption increased throughout the 1990s. Last year, the United Nations Office of Drug Control and Crime Prevention estimated that 900,000 Brazilians had tried cocaine, while reports of crack cocaine trafficking in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo have increased dramatically. Marijuana is so popular in Brazil that it is smoked openly on the country's beaches and in bars and discos, the Monitor reported. According to a recent study by the World Health Organization, 80% of young people in Sao Paulo reported knowing someone who smoked pot. Still, the weed remains controversial. In November, popular Brazilian TV personality Sonia "Soninha" Francine, lost her job on TV Cultura after she appeared on the cover of the magazine Epoca underneath the headline "I Smoke Marijuana." The Epoca story was one of a series of recent articles on the clash between popular mores and conservative cultural values surrounding marijuana use in Brazil. The popular weekly Veja ran a story entitled "My Dad Smokes Pot With Me," and another story in which a Sao Paulo city official called for debate on the medical use of marijuana. Francine, the country's top female soccer commentator and a former MTV host, remained unrepentant in the wake of being sacked. "I am not a pothead; I am the same person I was before," she told the Brazilian talk show Join Us. "But the fact that a person consumes a substance should not turn that person into a criminal, even if that substance is bad for their health," she said. The Francine affair prompted former Brazilian drug czar Judge Walter Maierovitch to criticize Brazil's drug policy stance. "Brazil is moving in the opposite direction of modern approaches," he told Reuters in November. "What predominates is prohibition and bad information," he said. Although Francine lost her job, her relatively lax treatment is an indicator of the rapid changes in Brazilian attitudes toward marijuana. Only four years ago, Brazilian authorities arrested the members of the band Planet Hemp, not for marijuana use, but for their pro-marijuana lyrics. Police literally grabbed the band members as they exited stage following a concert in Sao Paulo in November 1997 (http://www.drcnet.org/wol/020.html#brazil). Despite the passage of the new law, Maierovitch has not changed his tune. In a December interview with Reuters, he said the policy is inspired by US anti-drug policy, but will be doomed to failure without heavy spending on US-style drug prevention campaigns. "This is a parody of a policy, a badly made draft of what should be an anti-drug policy," said Maierovitch. Even so, the new law will have an immediate impact on Brazil's overcrowded and notoriously violent prisons. (In the latest round of prison violence, at least 30 prisoners died in fighting and rioting at the Urso Branco Penitentiary in the western state of Rondonia on January 2.) According to Brazilian prosecutor Ricardo de Oliveira Silva, the new law could reduce new prison admittances by one-third. In enacting the new law, the Brazilian government is in some ways only adapting the legal system to social reality. According to the Christian Science Monitor, police in many Brazilian states had already been using their discretion to warn small-time drug users instead of charging them.
8. Hemp Industry Takes DEA to Court Over Hemp Food Ban, Urges 9th Circuit to Throw Out DEA Interpretative Rule The long-running conflict between the federal government's drug enforcement bureaucracy and a youthful hemp industry took a new turn this week when the Hemp Industries Association (HIA) and seven major hemp food companies filed suit in federal court to block the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) from banning the sale and consumption of hemp foods containing trace amounts of THC, the primary psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. The civil suit is only the latest tactic in the feisty industry's effort to survive and prosper in the face of drug war restrictions on hemp. Hemp activists had attempted in advance to gain a favorable rule interpretation from the DEA, to no avail. After the DEA's October 9 rulemaking, which bans such foods as of February 6, the industry responded on both the political and the legal fronts. The HIA filed for a temporary injunction to block implementation of the new rules (that request has yet to be ruled on), and Vote Hemp, an advocacy group working closely with the industry, with the help of Students for Sensible Drug Policy and the Mintwood Media Collective, organized publicity-generating hemp food taste test demonstrations in front of DEA offices or other federal buildings in at least 74 cities in December. Now, the industry has opened a new front. In its their filings this week in San Francisco, industry attorneys attacked the DEA's rulemaking process, the statutory basis for the DEA's authority to regulate hemp seeds and hemp oils derived from non-smokeable portions of marijuana plants, and the agency's wrongheaded assertions: "The 'Interpretive Rule' is, as a matter of law, actually a substantive, legislative rule," went the hemp industry brief. "Prior to the issuance of the 'Interpretive Rule," sterilized hemp seed and hemp seed oil, and oil and seed products, were not controlled substances under the terms of the CSA [Controlled Substances Act] notwithstanding the presence of miniscule amounts of THC. Hemp seed and oil are specifically excluded from the statutory definition of 'marijuana.' And both the statutory definition of 'THC' and the DEA's own regulations, by their plain terms and as interpreted by the courts, cover only synthetic THC, not naturally occurring THC present in the excluded parts of the marijuana plant." The lawsuit asks the 9th Circuit to invalidate the DEA's new rules and set them aside. "We're optimistic that the court will see that the DEA's actions are obviously unfounded and arbitrary," said David Bronner of Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps. Although Bronner's business would be only marginally affected by the hemp food rules -- the company using hemp oil as an ingredient in its popular "magic soaps" -- he has nonetheless emerged as a key spokesman for the industry on this issue. "These rules have no basis in law or in common sense," Bronner told DRCNet. Bronner also expressed optimism regarding the still-pending request for a temporary injunction to block the DEA from implementing the new rules. "No, there hasn't been a ruling yet," he explained, "but the injunction request is being heard by the full three-member panel, and our lawyers interpret this as a sign they are carefully crafting a ruling against the DEA." Hemp activists expect a ruling before February 6, said Bronner. According to Bronner, the agency is also sending out mixed signals about how it will respond to hemp foods after February 6. One manufacturer reported being told that the agency would accept hemp foods tested in DEA-certified laboratories, said Bronner, "but other channels are reporting that the DEA is not at all interested in working with us. That's what I believe. If the DEA were to actually certify a lab or a protocol for testing, they would have de facto created a new, non-zero standard, and they have shown they are not interested in doing that," Bronner said. The hemp industry is not sitting back and waiting for the courts to act, said Bronner. The industry and major retailers have been working together in self-defense, he said. "Major retailers are now requiring that each and every lot be tested," Bronner said, "and this is a real expense for vendors. The Canadian government routinely does such tests -- they have it down to a science -- and does them for about $140. The DEA labs are much more expensive because they are not geared for these tests. The DEA test costs about $325." The hemp industry is paying a price to continue to exist, but hopes are that this is only a short-term measure until the courts overturn the DEA. (Visit http://www.votehemp.com/PDF/hemp_group_9th_cir_opening.pdf to read the HIA's exhaustive filing online.)
9. Gettman-High Times Marijuana Rescheduling Action Heads for Federal Court, Latest Turn in Glacially-Paced Legal Battle In the latest phase of a decades-long effort to win the marijuana wars by using the federal administrative process to reschedule marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act, lawyers for former National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) director Jon Gettman and High Times magazine are preparing oral arguments before the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Attorneys from the law office of New York City-based Michael Kennedy will argue before the court on March 19. DRCNet has obtained a copy of their brief. Although NORML first filed suit against the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs in 1972, and Gettman, as head of NORML for part of that time, participated in that lawsuit, its twenty-year odyssey through bureaucratic purgatory ended in failure. In 1995, Gettman filed a new petition asking the DEA to to reschedule marijuana because it did not fit the three criteria required to make it a Schedule I drug -- high potential for abuse, no accepted medical use, and no safe means of medical use. After sitting on the petition for two years, the DEA shuffled the petition off to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for required evaluation. Three years after that, in March, 2000, the DEA denied the petition. Gettman and High Times filed an appeal three weeks later. In their brief, Gettman's and High Times' attorneys will ask the court to overturn the DEA denial on five grounds:
Still, Rionda doesn't foresee final victory anytime soon. "If we win on the issues, the court will remand the petition back to the DEA and order it to do a proper evaluation. Then they will attempt to find other reasons not to reschedule," Rionda said. "They will be bogus, but then they could try to stretch it out for another six years."
10. What Drug-Terror Link? Drug Money Not Mentioned as Feds End Investigation of September 11 Finances Investigators from the Treasury and Justice Departments, the FBI and other federal agencies have finished the initial phase of their exhaustive effort to trace the financial underpinnings of the attacks that killed about 3,000 persons in New York City and Washington, DC, on September 11. Despite repeated charges from pundits and politicians, including President Bush, that Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda organization was aided and abetted by funds derived from drug trafficking, federal investigators did not mention illicit drug profits as a source of funding for the attacks. Working from credit card receipts, ATM transactions and other financial records, federal investigators determined that the plot had cost about $500,000, with funds being transferred by Al Qaeda paymasters in Germany, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates to hijacking teams in place in the United States. "Investigators are still uncertain about the origins of the $500,000 used in the September 11 plot," wrote the Washington Post in its exclusive report on the investigation on Monday. "But US intelligence officials say Al Qaeda has raised money through means as varied as credit card fraud, diamond trafficking and the sale of honey." The Post story made no mention of possible profits from the narcotics trade. "If you quit honey, you join the fight against terror in America," President Bush did not say in response to the investigation. "It's important for Americans to know that the trafficking of honey finances the world of terror, sustaining terrorists," he did not add. Bush's non-utterances on terrorist financing stand in stark contrast to comments he did make on December 14 in which he attempted to tie domestic drug use to international terrorism (http://www.drcnet.org/wol/216.html#bushspeech). At that time, President Bush told an audience of anti-drug activists that drug users aid terrorists, who benefit from black market profits from the drug trade, he claimed. "If you quit drugs, you join the fight against terror in America," Bush said. "It's important for Americans to know that the trafficking of drugs finances the world of terror, sustaining terrorists," Bush said. For the president and the other politicians and pundits eager to tie their tired last war to their shiny new one, better a rhetorical crusade against a favored bogeyman -- the drug trade -- than a complex and complicated struggle to understand the roots of Al Qaeda and its financing within the legitimate structures of the global economic system. After all, if honey is financing terrorism, someone might start asking questions about oil next.
11. Montana Sets Drug Policy Task Force -- No Dopers Need Apply Montana Republican Gov. Judy Martz and Attorney General Mike McGrath announced the make-up of a new, 20-member Montana drug control policy task force last week. The task force is charged with developing a statewide drug control policy. It has ten months to report back with recommendations on coping with alcohol and tobacco use among minors, the state's methamphetamine problem, and ideas for improving drug prevention, education and treatment programs. But in a state where illicit drug users number in the tens of thousands and on a panel that will help set policy directly affecting drug users, no drug users, former drug users, or drug reformers are represented. The failing is not unique to Montana. Unlike many European countries -- the Dutch actually subsidize a junkie's union to provide input to policy-makers -- drug policy task forces and legislative hearings in the US have been keen to ignore the people most directly affected by their ruminations and subsequent lawmaking. But Montanans need not look across the ocean to see a more inclusive approach, they need look only across the border. No, not Wyoming -- Canada. In Vancouver, home of the hemisphere's most advanced and inclusive strategizing on drug problems, drug reformers and organized drug users are recognized as key stakeholders on drug issues, and their input has been sought accordingly as that city hones its harm reduction strategies. "That sounds great," one Montana harm reduction activist told DRCNet, "but this is Montana. This is cowboy country. They couldn't handle the idea," she said. The activist helped make the case for her take on Montana's conservative social reality by telling DRCNet she did not want to be named because she was engaged in harm reduction activities not provided for by Montana law. "Better to work quietly to reduce harm than risk a public scandal," she said. Not surprisingly, then, the Montana task force, even if empaneled in good faith, is filled with the usual suspects and stacked toward the criminal justice approach. The panel's law enforcement contingent includes Mike Batista, head of the state Justice Department's Criminal Investigations Division; Billings Deputy Police Chief Jerry Archer; Cascade County Sheriff John Standell; prosecutor and state representative Joey Jane; District Judge Susan Waters of Billings; and Marko Lukich, juvenile probation head for Butte. In addition to the six representatives of the criminal justice apparatus, the panel includes four drug treatment representatives, two of whom are state criminal justice bureaucrats: Montana Chemical Dependency Bureau chief Rolland Menna and Montana probation and parole head Mary Fay. Four seats are taken up by prevention specialists and three by lawmakers. The Montana Tavern Association is represented, as is the state Chamber of Commerce. Even victims' rights advocates are represented, with Bill Muhs of Mothers Against Drunk Driving and Miles City activist Mary Haydal, whose daughter died of a meth overdose, sitting on the panel. In a telling indication of task force leanings, the governor and attorney general could find room for only one representative of the medical field, Dr. Dave Jackson of Billings. "We had limited funding for the task force and that forced us to limit its membership," said Jean Branscum, health policy advisor to the governor. "But the task force is charged with developing a comprehensive drug strategy for the state. It will first assess problems in Montana, what's working, what's not, what are the best practices. If task force members feel that a viewpoint is not being heard, they can act to change that," she told DRCNet. "There will be public hearings." But those public hearings will only take place after task force working groups have made their recommendations, said Branscum. When asked why no representatives of the drug-using population were appointed, Branscum paused, then replied, "We didn't think of that." If drug users and drug reformers are not represented on the task force, there are voices determined to speak for a progressive agenda on drug policy. Adam Jones, a student at Montana State University and member of MSU NORML and the MSU chapter of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (http://www.ssdp.org), told DRCNet he would attempt to address the panel. "I plan to find out the options of addressing the panel in person or otherwise," Jones told DRCNet. "If given the opportunity, I would like to address the effect of tightened drug laws on Montana's effort to utilize industrial hemp. This is one issue I would like some clarity on, as our state's laws are somewhat hypocritical in this regard," he said. Jones expressed some hope for the task force, but also concern about its makeup. "It seems that this may be just the thing to see how badly our drug laws are failing, but the members are the same people that have always been in control," he said. "Why should we expect their blindness to suddenly become clarity? If the objective is to offer a wide range of insight, why then is most of the panel made up of people involved in the criminal justice system? Why are there not rehabilitated drug users who can say what worked for them, and how the criminal justice system affected them? I would like to think that this may be the awakening required for change, but I fear this will end up as just another pledge of allegiance to an ever failing drug war." According to Jones, neither Montana NORML nor SSDP were aware of the task force's creation, which occurred within the last month. But the anonymous harm reduction worker, who keeps close but quiet contact with public health officials, told DRCNet she had heard about it through her contacts in various state and local offices. She has a different strategy for intervening in the task force's deliberations. "I do my work one-on-one, educating these public employees about the need for harm reduction," she told DRCNet. "I will let my ideas be heard through these more respectable voices. Who is going to listen to an ex-junkie, ex-prostitute?" Maybe that's part of the problem. In one interesting indication of the quiet influence a drug-reforming elected official can have, Branscum gave some credit to New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson for inspiring the task force idea. "The idea for this came out of the Western Governors' Association drug summit, where Johnson was prominent," said Branscum. "After that, we approached the attorney general and asked whether they would form a partnership with us."
Students in the Washington, DC area, as well as especially interested parties elsewhere, are encouraged to contact DRCNet regarding the possibility of internships at DRCNet this semester. We are planning a major push in the Higher Education Act Reform Campaign (http://www.raiseyourvoice.com), seeking to repeal the law that strips drug offenders of their eligibility for college financial aid. This is a high-profile, aggressive campaign, representing a major opportunity for the drug policy reform movement to influence federal policy and for young people to gain valuable experience on an exciting project. We will also consider options for working on other DRCNet projects if you have special skills to bring to bear on them, such as writing or research for this newsletter, cataloguing racial profiling documents or assisting with legislative action alerts. Our focus, however, is the Higher Education Act Campaign. Internships are unpaid, but are a great way to bring yourself to the attention of possible future employers in drug policy reform. At least four past DRCNet interns or volunteers have moved on to exciting jobs in the movement. Please contact us at [email protected] and include a resume and/or any other information about your skills or experience or other relevant information, and a short statement of why you are interested in interning at DRCNet, as well as contact information and dates of availability.
13. Alerts: Ecstasy Bills, HEA Drug Provision, Bolivia, DEA Hemp Ban, Mandatory Minimums, Medical Marijuana Click on the links below for information on these issues and web forms to help you contact Congress: Stop New California Anti-Ecstasy Bill (Please submit listings of events concerning drug policy and related topics to [email protected].) January 19, 11:00am-7:00pm, Brooklyn, NY, "Rave and Outlaw Summit: A Gathering of Youth Outreach Workers." Topics to include front-line outreach, the law and student aid, GHB and heroin overdose prevention and first-aid, Drugs 102, handling the media, and the state of the attacks on rave and club culture. At the Lunatarium, 10 Jay Street, contact DanceSafe NYC at [email protected] for further information. January 20, Berkeley, CA, 1:00pm, California NORML new year's activist meeting. Topics to include DEA's action against the medical marijuana clubs, federal and state legislation, and other topics. At 2747 San Pablo Ave., RSVP to Dale Gieringer, [email protected]. January 21, Albany, NY, Drop the Rock press conference opposing the Rockefeller Drug Laws, marking Martin Luther King Day. Near the Empire State Convention Center, followed by speakers, awards presentations, entertainment and a march on the capitol. Visit http://www.droptherock.org for information. January 24, 7:30pm, Melbourne, FL, "Express Yourself: A Guide to the First Amendment," role-playing workshop dealing with direct action, petition gathering and tabling for nonprofits. At the Melbourne Community Center, 703 East New Haven Avenue, call Kevin at (321) 726-6656 for further information. January 25-27, New York, NY, "Maternal-State Conflicts: Claims of Fetal Rights & the Well-Being of Women & Families." Conference sponsored by National Advocates for Pregnant Women and the Mt. Sinai Hospital-Based Clinical Education Initiative. For further information, call (212) 475-4218, visit http://www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org or e-mail [email protected]. January 26, 8:30am-4:30pm, Pasadena, CA, "Unlocking Los Angeles: LA and the Prison Industrial Complex," conference of the Criminal Justice Consortium. At All Saints Church, 132 North Euclid Ave., e-mail [email protected], visit http://www.idiom.com/~cjc/ or call (626) 296-3338 for further information. January 26, 9:30pm-3:00am, Miami, FL, Benefit Concert for the medical marijuana petition drive. At the Tobacco Road Night Club, 626 South Miami Avenue, call Flash at (305) 579-0069 for info. January 29, Tallahassee, FL, Florida State University NORML weekly chapter meeting, featuring guest speaker Kris Krane, national chapter coordinator for NORML. Contact Ricky at (850) 386-5628 for further information. February 5, Tallahassee, FL, Florida State University NORML weekly chapter meeting, featuring guest speaker Jodi James, director of the Florida Cannabis Action Network. Contact Ricky at (850) 386-5628 for further information. February 12, 8:00am, Indianapolis, IN, Jeanne Horton Support Rally, medical marijuana patient with multiple sclerosis being prosecuted by Marion County. At the Indianapolis City County Building, Market St. Entrance. For further information, contact Indiana NORML at (317) 923-9391 or (317) 335-6023, [email protected] or http://www.inorml.org. February 16, Albany, NY, Drop The Rock Upstate-Downstate Coalition Organizers Conference, at the Schuyler Inn, 575 Broadway. Call (518) 463-1121 or visit http://www.droptherock.org for information. February 21-23, Washington, DC, National Families Against Mandatory Minimums Workshop. At the Washington Plaza Hotel, call (202) 822-6700 or visit http://www.famm.org for information. February 23, noon, Tampa, FL, "Washington’s Birthday Hemp Festival." Sponsored by FORML, featuring music, vendors, speakers and more. At Lowry Park, contact Mike at (813) 779-2551 for further information. February 28, 7:30pm, Melbourne, FL, "Marijuana: Medical Effects and Legal Consequences." At the Melbourne Community Center, 703 East New Haven Avenue, contact Jodi at (321) 253-3673 for info. February 28-March 1, New York, NY, "Problem Solving Courts: From Adversarial Litigation to Innovative Jurisprudence." Panelists include former Attorney General Janet Reno, Rev. Al Sharpton and Mary Barr, Executive Director of Conextions. At Fordham University Law School, take the A, B, C, D, 1, and 9 subway trains to 59th Street/Columbus Circle and walk one block west. For further information, call (656) 345-5352 or e-mail [email protected]. March 3-7, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 13th International Conference on the Reduction of Drug Related Harm and 2nd International Harm Reduction Congress on Women and Drugs. Sponsored by the International Harm Reduction Association, visit http://www.ihrc2002.net or e-mail [email protected] for further information. March 14, 7:30pm, Court Watch Project Training Meeting. At the Melbourne Community Center, 703 East New Haven Avenue, with the Florida Cannabis Action Network, call Kevin at (321) 726-6656 for further information. March 24-27, Rimini, Italy, "Club Health 2002: The Second International Conference on Night-Life, Substance Use and Related Health Issues." Visit http://www.clubhealth.org.uk for info. March 26, Albany, NY, "Drop The Rock Day," march and demonstration against the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Visit http://www.droptherock.org for information. April 8-13, Gainesville, FL, "Drug Education Week," series of presentations on different topics in the drug war, including daily keynote, followed by Saturday free concert. Hosted by University of Florida Students for Sensible Drug Policy, visit http://grove.ufl.edu/~ssdp/ or e-mail [email protected] for further information. April 18-20, San Francisco, CA, 2002 NORML Conference. At the Crowne Plaza Hotel at Union Square, registration $150, call (202) 483-5500 for further information. Online registration will be available at http://www.norml.org in the near future. April 20, noon, Jacksonville, FL, Jacksonville Hemp Festival. Contact Scott at (904) 732-4785 for further information. May 3-4, Portland, OR, Second National Clinical Conference on Cannabis Therapeutics, focus on Analgesia and Other Indications. Sponsored by Patients Out of Time and Legacy Emmanuel Hospital, for further information visit http://www.medicalcannabis.com or call (804) 263-4484. December 1-4, Seattle, WA, Fourth National Harm Reduction Conference. Featuring keynote speaker Dr. Joycelyn Elders, former US Surgeon General, at the Sheraton Seattle. For further information, visit http://www.harmreduction.org or call (212) 213-6376. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
