Drug War Chronicle #510 - November 16, 2007

Editorial: They Know More Than They're Willing to Admit About the Drug War

David Borden, Executive Director

There was a notable moment, back in the early '90s, that helped inspire me to really get involved in the legalization cause. Early in her brief tenure as US Surgeon General, Dr. Joycelyn Elders asked a question about drug legalization at a public event, responding that while she wasn't sure what the ramifications of legalization would be, she believed that legalization would reduce crime, and that it should be studied.

The reaction was fast and furious, and (predictably) mostly negative. Elders later described it as "the day it rained on me." Still, to me it seemed that the issue had come alive. It was a little surreal to see a member of the president's cabinet say such a thing. The debate was stimulated, even if on the political level one might take an adverse lesson.

Another thing Elders said later was that more people agreed with her than were willing to admit it publicly. Senators came up to her at airports, she recounted, saying she was right and they agreed, but politically they couldn't say so. At least one politician defended her on the basis of it being important to talk about an issue where our policy is clearly not succeeding -- John Tierney from Massachusetts, if I remember correctly -- though he didn't stake out a pro-legalization position himself. But Tierney was in the rare minority. For the most part, the establishment rained on Elders -- possibly including people who knew better, and many who knew better failed to speak up at all.

Lamar Alexander, a Republican from Tennessee, made some interesting comments on the floor of the Senate this week. The subject of the debate was a bill to combat illegal logging, but drugs came up by analogy. I've posted the remarks in our blog already, but they bear repeating:

"The Senator from Oregon [Ron Wyden (D)] made a point that is maybe the central point here when he compared our efforts to stop illegal logging to our efforts to stop the bringing of illegal drugs into the United States. We all know the tremendous amount of effort we go to, for example, to keep cocaine out of the United States. We send millions of dollars to Colombia and to other countries and we try to stop that. But the real problem we have is we are a big, rich country, and there is a big demand for cocaine here. So no matter what we do in the other countries, the cocaine still keeps coming in, and the same with other illegal drugs. Here we have a chance to make a much bigger difference than we can with illegal drugs. We still are creating the demand problem. This is a country that accounts for 25 percent of all the wealth in the world. It is a country that perhaps buys a huge volume of illegal timber from around the world. Well, we can stop that. This is not a drug addiction, this is a business practice, and it is a practice we can stop according to the laws of this country. When we stop it, we will make an enormous difference for our country and for the other countries."

Established that at least one Republican US Senator understands that the war on drugs has no chance of ever succeeding. "[T]here is a big demand for cocaine here. So no matter what we do in the other countries, the cocaine still keeps coming in." But the reason he offers for the demand is suggestive at least that attempts to eliminate demand can have limited impact at best: "[W]e are a big, rich country." People buy drugs, or some people do, because they can afford them. That's not likely to change anytime soon. And ending the poverty that plagues parts of our population -- the usual solution offered from the liberal end of the spectrum -- isn't going to end the drug problem either. Because more wealth to an extent means more drug use too, though poverty can increase the harm the drugs end up causing. Alexander didn't directly say that drugs are here to stay, but he did say that "[h]ere we have a chance to make a much bigger difference than we can with illegal drugs." And to me that statement implies that there are limits to what we can do with the demand as well.

So what is the logical next link in this chain of logic? If we can't stop drug use, the question then becomes, how best do we live with it? As Dr. Elders pointed out 14 years ago this month, prohibition of drugs causes crime. To me an approach to living with drug use that causes crime makes no sense. But while I know that many US leaders understand this (based on what Elders has reported about the aftermath of the event), they seem to mostly be unwilling to say so out loud.

That needs to change -- leadership doesn't always mean saying what's popular. A discussion of drugs and crime and violence that does not address the consequences of prohibition is an incomplete conversation. We who understand this need to stand up and demand a serious debate. The loss each day to our safety, our liberties, to the lives of hapless individuals whom the drug war has hit the hardest, is just too great to allow a continued whitewash.

back to top

Feature: Presidential Contenders and Drug Policy II -- Republicans

With the 2008 presidential election now less than a year away, the campaigns for the Democratic and Republican presidential nominations are already in full swing. Last week, Drug War Chronicle examined where the Democratic candidates stand on drug reform issues, and just what it says about the state of the movement and the prospects for change. This week, we look at the Republican candidates.

Just as we did with the Democrats, the Chronicle has sent each campaign a request for an interview and a list of questions on a variety of drug policy topics ranging from marijuana (decrim and medical marijuana) to the crack-powder cocaine sentencing disparity to the allocation of federal anti-drug spending and drug-related foreign policy issues (Afghanistan, Mexico, the Andes). Only two of the Democratic campaigns provided even pro forma responses; so far, none of the Republicans have.

For drug reformers, while the Democrats are for the most part disappointing, the Republican field is downright frightening. With the exception of Ron Paul, most of the candidates embrace the drug warrior mantle, although, as was the case with the Democrats, drug policy reform is not playing much of a role in the campaign for the GOP nomination.

This week, the Chronicle will be using two 2006 congressional voters' guides, one from Mark Emery's Cannabis Culture magazine and one from the Drug Policy Alliance. Of course, only three of the Republican candidates are congressmen, so we will be looking at other ways of determining the candidates' drug policy stands as well. We will also provide the grade given each candidate by Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana, the Marijuana Policy Project-funded effort to get the candidates on the record on medical marijuana.

Here are the Republican candidates and their stands and records on drug policy issues:

Congressman from Texas Ron Paul: Although he is a long-time opponent of the drug war and favors ending drug prohibition, Paul's web site does not mention drugs or crime. His "Life and Liberty" issue page is about his anti-abortion stance, while his "Privacy and Personal Liberty" issue page warns against the Patriot Act and other intrusions into citizens' privacy. Still, he has certainly done his part in Congress for the cause, including sponsoring the States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act, the Elimination of Barriers for Katrina Victims Act, and the Industrial Hemp Act, all of which are pending in Congress. Paul earned a perfect score from DPA, and Cannabis Culture called him "the greatest congressman of the 109th Congress." He earned an "A+" from Granite Staters for his states' rights position on medical marijuana.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani: Giuliani made his career as a crime-fighting federal prosecutor, doesn't mention drugs on his web site, but does take credit for reducing crime in New York City. As mayor, he presided over a massive increase in marijuana arrests as part of his "broken windows" crime-fighting strategy. He is also a foe of needle exchanges and opioid maintenance, having attempted in 1998 to force 2,000 addicts off methadone and into abstinence-based programs, a move which was ultimately withdrawn. Giuliani famously did a 1982 ride-along with then Sen. Alphonse D'Amato to bust crack dealers, and continues to play his "tough on crime" card. He earned an "F" from Granite Staters for not only refusing to say he would stop the DEA raids, but adding that medical marijuana is a stalking horse for drug legalizers. The pro-police Giuliani also smeared the reputation of Patrick Dorismond, a black security guard gunned down by NYPD officers after he refused to sell them pot, saying he was "no choirboy." Giuliani has consummate drug warrior credentials, and every indication is he will continue to burnish them.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee: Huckabee doesn't address drugs or crime on his web page, but the guitar-playing Baptist minister seems to favor compassion over vengeance when it comes to drug policy. While in years past, he has called for more federal funding for the drug war and stricter penalties for drug-related crimes, this year he has changed his tune. He now calls for more drug courts and rehabilitation instead of incarceration and has condemned what he called the "revenge-based corrections system." On the other hand, Huckabee has said drug education doesn't work because drug taking is part of a narcissistic culture and that Medicare will go broke once old hippies figure out they can get free drugs. Huckabee earned an "F" from Granite Staters for saying he would leave the question of raids to the DEA and questioning the value of marijuana as medicine.

Congressman from California Duncan Hunter: Hunter's web page does not mention drugs or crime, except in the context of the border, where he is a champion of fence-building. He has voted against federal funding for needle exchanges and medical marijuana in the District of Columbia and voted for drug testing for federal employees. A fiscal conservative, Hunter earned a 50% from DPA because of his votes against funding Byrne grants and the drug czar's youth anti-drug media campaign and for expanding access to buprenorphine. But Hunter also voted to allow DEA raids to continue and for funding for Plan Colombia, earning him a failing grade from Cannabis Culture, which qualified him as "bad for America and bad for California." Hunter earned an "F" from Granite Staters for supporting DEA raids on his medical marijuana using constituents.

Senator from Arizona John McCain: John McCain has nothing on drugs or crime on his web page, but has been a drug war hawk for years. He called the Clinton administration "AWOL in the war on drugs," said we've been losing the drug war ever since the halcyon days of Nancy Reagan, authored a bill that would bar federal funds for drug treatment programs using opioid maintenance therapy, and called for longer prison sentences for drug offenses. He's still at it this year, calling in September for a stepped-up war on drugs and harshly rejecting the call to end DEA raids on medical marijuana providers and patients. He calls marijuana a "gateway drug," according to Granite Staters, which awarded him an "F." He has on more than one occasion said that he disagrees with the law that takes college aid away from students because of drug convictions, but has never done anything to do away with it.

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney: On his web site, Romney attacked drugs as part of his pro-family agenda: "I'm concerned about the drug culture, concerned about the pornography, the violence, the sex, the perversions that they [children] see day-in day-out," he said, highlighting his comments at the Iowa Republican Party straw poll in August. While his record on drug policy is slim, this year he congratulated the Colombian government on its fight against "vicious narco-terrorists", and here is his meandering response to a general question on drug policy: "It's been disappointing to see the trajectory of the war on drugs. Are we making progress in some areas? Yes. We spend about $750 million in Colombia alone to help them eradicate the growth of cocaine there. We're spending a substantial amount in Afghanistan to try and replace that crop. Um, we're spending a lot to try to keep drugs from growing around the world. We're not doing a terrific job in helping kids decide not to try drugs, and that's one of the frustrations I have. People talk about medicinal marijuana, and, you know, you hear that story: People who are sick need medicinal marijuana. But marijuana is the entry drug for people trying to get kids hooked on drugs. I don't want medicinal marijuana. There are synthetic forms of marijuana that are available for people who need it for prescription. Don't open the doorway to medicinal marijuana." Unsurprisingly, Romney gets an "F" from Granite Staters.

Congressman from Colorado Tom Tancredo: In the late 1990s, Tom Tancredo voted to prohibit funding for needle exchange and medical marijuana in the District of Columbia, but has come around on the latter issue. He has voted in favor of the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment, and Granite Staters gave him an "A+" for his states' rights stance on ending DEA raids of patients and providers. Tancredo got a 67% rating from DPA, voting against Byrne drug task force grants, for Hinchey, for cutting funding for Plan Colombia, and for expanded buprenorphine access. Of the DPA issues, Tancredo voted wrong only on not requiring drug task forces to ban racial profiling and on funding the drug czar's youth anti-drug media campaign. Running primarily as an anti-illegal immigration candidate, Tancredo's comments on drug policy issues have related primarily to border security -- he wants more -- and Mexican drug trafficking organizations -- he wants fewer. Cannabis Culture gave him a grade of "D," but still gave him props for supporting medical marijuana and voting against funding for the Byrne grants.

Former Senator from Tennessee Fred Thompson: Thompson does not mention drugs or crime on his web page, although in his section on building strong families he says he favors states' rights. But that position hasn't led to a clear stance against DEA raids on medical marijuana patients and providers. When it comes to that, Thompson's position is more ambiguous, leaving him with a grade of "Incomplete" from Granite Staters. As a senator, he voted in favor of spending international development funds on drug control and for increasing penalties for drug offenses. But he has also been critical of the DEA, arguing in 2001 that the agency had no meaningful performance goals. In this campaign, the main drug mentions related to the Thompson campaign have to do with the close adviser he was forced to fire after his old drug-dealing conviction came to light.

The Republican candidates are a mixed bag in the eyes of drug reformers, ranging from the excellent (Ron Paul) to the worrisome (Giuliani, McCain), but overall, the GOP candidates appear more hostile to drug policy reform than the Democrats.

"While we don't expect much from the Democrats, some of the Republicans are aggressively bad," said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project.

"The Democrats are likely to be bad, but would they be as bad as the Republicans?" asked Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance.

It could get bad even before the election, said Eric Sterling, head of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation. "Drug policy hasn't really been much of an issue this primary season, but someone like Giuliani, for whom fighting crime is a major claim, could try to make it an issue either in the primaries or in the general election campaign," he said. "I'd be surprised if he doesn't raise the issue in the general, but whether it would become more than a couple of speeches at the Fraternal Order of Police or International Association of Police Chiefs, I don't know."

For long-time drug reform activist and 2006 third-party Maryland senatorial candidate Kevin Zeese, the weak drug policy positions of the mainstream candidates in both parties is just another sign of the problems with the two-party system. "Look at the most urgent issues of the day -- millions without health care, a record number of deaths in Iraq -- the government cannot deal with these crises, let alone things like drug policy where it is all too easy to just embrace the status quo."

The answer is not to give your vote to parties that want to continue disastrous, failed drug war policies, said Zeese. "We need to make those parties take notice," he said. "Someone will run as a Green, someone will run as a Libertarian. The question is whether drug reformers have the courage to vote their convictions, or will they instead vote for people who want to put them in jail?"

To varying degrees that does seem to include most of the mainstream candidates in both parties. The Republicans have Ron Paul, and the Democrats have Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. But the eventual nominees are not likely to be people who are so enlightened on drug policy as them or are willing to say so.

back to top

Feature: Would-Be North Dakota Hemp Farmers Have Another Day in Court

A pair of North Dakota farmers who are suing the federal government over the DEA's failure to act on their applications to grow hemp will know by month's end if their case will continue, a federal district court judge in Bismarck said Wednesday. That comment from Judge Dan Hovland came at the end of a hearing on a motion by the government to dismiss the case.

Drug War Chronicle was there, sitting in the back of the courtroom as the farmers, the state of North Dakota, and hemp industry advocates took on a stubborn and recalcitrant DEA and its Justice Department mouthpieces. Besides the plaintiffs and lawyers for both sides, only a handful of hemp advocates and local media reporters were present.

Judge Hovland said he will rule on the motion within two weeks. He also stayed other motions before the court pending his ruling on the motion to dismiss.

Hemp products may be imported to the US, but a DEA ban on domestic production prevents US farmers from growing it, meaning domestic hemp product makers must turn to suppliers in countries where it is legal to grow, including Canada, China, and most of Europe.

Hemp is a member of the cannabis family, but unlike the marijuana consumed by recreational and medical marijuana users, contains only tiny amounts of the psychoactive substance that gets marijuana users "high." But the DEA argues that hemp is marijuana and that the Controlled Substances Act gives it authority to ban it.

The farmers and their attorneys disagree, pointing out that the CSA contains language explicitly exempting hemp fiber, seed oil, and seed incapable of germination from the definition of "marihuana" and are thus not controlled substances under that law. That same language was used to allow the legal import of hemp into the US as a result of a 2004 federal court decision siding with the hemp industry against the DEA.

The lawsuit filed by farmers Wayne Hauge and Dave Monson (who is also a Republican state legislator) is only the latest chapter in a decade-long struggle by North Dakota farmers to grow hemp. The state first passed hemp legislation in 1997, but things really began moving when state Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson, a strong hemp supporter, issued the first state permits to grow hemp to Hauge and Monson on February 6. One week later, Hauge and Monson sent a request to the DEA requesting licenses to grow their crops and noting that they needed a response by early April in order to get the crops in the ground this year.

The DEA failed to respond in a timely fashion. According to a March 27 DEA letter to Ag Commissioner Johnson, seven weeks was not enough time for the agency to arrive at a ruling on the request. That letter was the final straw for the North Dakotans, who then sued in federal court to get the DEA out of the way.

Just as the DEA appears determined to stall the hemp applications -- it has been sitting on one from North Dakota State University for eight years -- so the Justice Department seems much more interested in killing the case than arguing it. Wednesday's hearing in Bismarck saw Assistant US Attorney Wendy Ertmer try to make the case go away by arguing that the plaintiffs had no standing to sue the government because they had not been arrested or indicted and by arguing that district court was not the proper venue to hear it.

"The plaintiffs have suffered no injury," said Ertmer.

"Must they expose themselves to arrest to have standing?" asked an incredulous Judge Hovland.

"Generally, yes," Ertmer responded.

Hovland and Ertmer also tangled over the issue of jurisdiction, with Ertmer arguing that challenges to administrative rulings should be handled by federal appeals courts. Hovland seemed to differ, saying that district courts can indeed render declaratory judgements.

Judge Hovland also questioned Ertmer closely over the DEA's failure to act on either the NDSU application or Hauge and Monson's application. "There seems to be no realistic prospect that the DEA will grant the applications," he said.

"Why has it taken eight years and there is still no response to the NDSU application?" he asked. "Is exercising administrative remedies an exercise in futility? I see no prospect the plaintiffs will ever get a license," he said.

Throughout, Ertmer stuck to her guns and the government's official position that hemp is marijuana. She repeatedly referred to industrial hemp as "bulk marijuana" and derided North Dakota legislation that defines hemp as distinct from marijuana as meaningless. "It's still marijuana," she said.

Washington, DC, attorney Joe Sandler, who is representing the plaintiffs, provided a hint of arguments to come as he argued that neither the Supreme Court decision in the Raich case nor an 8th Circuit Court of Appeals case banning South Dakota Lakota Indian Alex White Plume from growing hemp on the Pine Ridge reservation should be controlling in the current case.

Hovland listened attentively, but then, noting that an industrial hemp bill had been introduced in Congress, wondered if a political solution were not the most appropriate. "Isn't the best remedy to amend the definition of industrial hemp under the (federal) Controlled Substances Act?" he asked. "To me, it seems like the easiest solution."

But Hauge, Monson, and their allies in the North Dakota state government and the hemp industry aren't waiting on Congress or the DEA. "If NDSU needed eight years and nothing was resolved, I think the DEA is trying to wait us out," Monson said. "It's a de facto denial of our license and that's part of our frustration."

Hauge and Monson said hemp could be a beneficial crop for North Dakota farmers. "We can start an entire industry with fiber, oil and meal," Monson said. "There are literally thousands of uses. This could be a huge economic benefit for North Dakota."

He is already getting requests for product from people who mistakenly think he's already growing a hemp crop, he said. "At least weekly, someone is calling asking to buy fiber or seed," Monson said. "There is certainly a market, especially on the West Coast and especially in the food industry. We can benefit here in North Dakota from the fiber."

Hauge, who farms a spread near the Canadian border in the western part of the state, said hemp is a potential money-maker, especially when grown in rotation with his durum, pea, and lentil crops. "You can make a profit, it's not just an alternative," Hauge said. "This is a rotation with a profit."

Hauge was hopeful following the hearing, saying he expected a ruling in the plaintiff's favor. "I'm positive about this," Hauge said. "The judge asked good questions and it shows his insight."

If Hovland denies the government motion to dismiss, it's back to court, where the plaintiffs will seek a summary declaration in their favor. But the federal courts move slowly, and planting season is only a few months away.

back to top

Weekly: Blogging @ the Speakeasy

Along with our weekly in-depth Chronicle reporting, DRCNet has since late summer also been providing daily content in the way of blogging in the Stop the Drug War Speakeasy -- huge numbers of people have been reading it recently -- as well as Latest News links (upper right-hand corner of most web pages), event listings (lower right-hand corner) and other info. Check out DRCNet every day to stay on top of the drug reform game!

Since last issue:

Scott Morgan bring us: "Top Drug War Advocate Publicly Humiliates Himself," "Marijuana Evolves Faster Than Human Beings" (#1 Digg story!), "Feds Predict Major Drop in Marijuana Prices."

David Borden pens: "Lamar Alexander Acknowledges the Futility of the Drug War" and "Eighty-Year-Old US-Mexico Drug Program is Far Over Budget."

Phil Smith reports from on the scene: "Hemp on the Menu in Bismarck, North Dakota."

David Guard posts numerous press releases, action alerts and other organizational announcements in the In the Trenches blog. And please join us in the Reader Blogs too.

Thanks for reading, and writing...

back to top

Students: Intern at DRCNet and Help Stop the Drug War!

Want to help end the "war on drugs," while earning college credit too? Apply for a DRCNet internship for this fall semester (or spring) and you could come join the team and help us fight the fight!

DRCNet (also known as "Stop the Drug War") has a strong record of providing substantive work experience to our interns -- you won't spend the summer doing filing or running errands, you will play an integral role in one or more of our exciting programs. Options for work you can do with us include coalition outreach as part of the campaign to repeal the drug provision of the Higher Education Act, and to expand that effort to encompass other bad drug laws like the similar provisions in welfare and public housing law; blogosphere/web outreach; media research and outreach; web site work (research, writing, technical); possibly other areas. If you are chosen for an internship, we will strive to match your interests and abilities to whichever area is the best fit for you.

While our internships are unpaid, we will reimburse you for metro fare, and DRCNet is a fun and rewarding place to work. To apply, please send your resume to David Guard at [email protected], and feel free to contact us at (202) 293-8340. We hope to hear from you! Check out our web site at http://stopthedrugwar.org to learn more about our organization.

back to top

Full of It: Rep. Mark Souder Souder Gets Called on His Characterization of HEA Reform Supporters

In an effort to build support for retaining his pet project, the Higher Education Act's drug provision, Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN) sent a Dear Colleague letter around Capitol Hill. In that letter he accused the more than 500 academic, professional, religious, civil rights, addiction and recovery, and other organizations supporting the call to repeal the provision of all being drug legalizers.

While there's nothing wrong with being a "legalizer," the vast majority of those organizations do not fall into that category. Now, Souder is being called on it.

The drug provision, also known as the "Aid Elimination Penalty," denies financial aid for specified periods to students with drug convictions. It originally applied to any drug conviction in the student's past, but with Souder's support -- perhaps in order to save it from a growing chorus of critics -- it was amended last year to apply only to offenses committed while a student enrolled in school.

With consideration of repealing the law pending in the House Education & Labor Committee, Souder sent a "Dear Colleague" letter reading:

"I wanted to make you aware of an important provision in the current law that is facing assault by a small but determined coalition of drug-legalization groups," Souder wrote in the November 1 letter. "Before you are bombarded by the talking points of such groups, I wanted to make sure everyone has the facts straight," he wrote.

But some of the groups Souder called drug legalizers wanted to get the facts straight themselves. In their own letter to Souder, 16 of those organizations asked him to retract his statement and requested a meeting to explain to him directly why they oppose his law.

"We, the undersigned organizations, would like to assure you that the coalition supporting repeal of the Aid Elimination Penalty ranges far beyond 'drug-legalization groups,' said the letter. "Last week, over 160 organizations signed a letter to Education & Labor Committee Chairman George Miller and Ranking Member Buck McKeon calling for full repeal, bringing the total number of groups in opposition to the penalty to more than 500. These organizations represent a broad range of interests, including the areas of addiction treatment and recovery, civil rights, college administration and admissions, criminal justice, legal reform and faith leaders. The overwhelming majority of signatories of the letter to Chairman Miller and Ranking Member McKeon do not endorse drug legalization. As just a small sampling of such organizations, we, the undersigned, want to make clear that opposition to the [anti-drug provision] is not in any way dependent on support for broad drug legalization."

The signatories to the letter were the American Federation of Teachers, the American Friends Service Committee, the Coalition of Essential Schools, College Parents of America, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, the Friends Committee on National Legislation, the International Nurses Society on Addictions, the National Association of Social Workers, National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, National Education Association, the National Women's Health Network, the National Youth Rights Association, Therapeutic Communities of America, the Union for Reform Judaism, the United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries, the United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society, and the United States Student Association."

While some signatories and key organizers of the Coalition for Higher Education Act Reform might be called "legalizers," as the above list makes clear, you don't have to be a legalizer to understand the counterproductive impact of Souder's law.

News will be posted on DRCNet shortly about the outcome of amendments offered in the Ed/Labor Committee late Wednesday night.

back to top

Law Enforcement: This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories

Tennessee's narc of the year gets busted, and cops in Boston and Buffalo cop pleas. Let's get to it:

In Knoxville, Tennessee, a the state's narcotics officer of the year was indicted last Friday on federal charges for taking kickbacks from drug dealers. Knoxville Police Sgt. Brady Valentine, 36, a 13-year veteran, is accused of taking money from marijuana traffickers to allow one load a month to pass unmolested over a three-year period, as well as trafficking in steroids and giving dealers tips to help them avoid getting busted. Valentine was a member of the West Tennessee Violent Crimes and Drug Task Force, a multi-agency team that regularly lands some of the biggest drug busts in the state, and was honored last month as the state's top narc at the Tennessee Narcotics Officers Association annual convention in Gatlinburg.

In Boston, a Boston Police officer pleaded guilty November 8 to federal cocaine trafficking charges, becoming the third to cop a plea in a scandal involving cops providing protection to drug traffickers. Officer Robert Pulido, 42, pleaded guilty after two days of testimony in his trial where his own words on FBI tapes portrayed him as an unscrupulous character more akin to a crime boss than a law officer. He and his partners, Officers Nelson Carrasquillo and Carlos Pizarro, plotted unknowingly with undercover FBI officers to protect trucks carrying 140 pounds of cocaine to Boston. Carrasquillo and Pizarro have already pleaded guilty, and now Pulildo has joined them, copping to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine and one kilogram of heroin and two counts of attempting to aid and abet the distribution of cocaine. He also pleaded no contest to carrying a gun in a drug trafficking crime. He faces 15 years to life when he is sentenced February 6. In the meantime, the Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis is vowing to investigate other allegations of corruption that occurred during Pulido's trial, including steroid sales, gambling parties, and illegal after hours parties conducted by other Boston police officers.

In Buffalo, New York, a Buffalo police officer pleaded guilty last Friday in federal court to setting up a phony traffic stop as part of a drug rip-off. Officer Ronnie Funderburk, 42, a nine-year veteran, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to possess cocaine. Funderburk admitted conspiring with a drug dealer to convince one of the dealer's customers that he had seized $14,000 worth of cocaine that the customer had already paid for. The drug dealer copped a plea last month and faces 20 to life. Funderburk faces up to six months when he is sentenced in March.

back to top

Medical Marijuana: Invited By "Pro-Family Group," Drug Czar's Chief Scientist Testifies at Tennessee House Hearing

A Tennessee House committee considering a medical marijuana bill heard from a number of witnesses, many of them hostile, including Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) chief scientist Dr. David Murray, at a hearing this week. Much of the opposition was organized by a "pro-family" Christian organization normally worried about issues such as gay adoption and subtle anti-Christian messages in movies. Reformers were present too, among them Marijuana Policy Project legislative analyst Nathan Miller and Maury County epidemiologist and substance abuse researcher Bernie Ellis, himself a medical marijuana patient.

The hearing came Tuesday before the House Health and Human Services Committee on House Bill 486, sponsored by Rep. Sherry Jones (D-Nashville). The bill would create a state identity card and registry system for terminally ill patients only. But even that was too much for drug war bureaucrats and moral crusaders.

According to a report in The Chattanoogan, Murray, New York anti-drug crusader Steven Steiner, and Nashville oncologist Dr. Kent Shih, who all testified against the bill, all appeared thanks to the efforts of the Family Action Council of Tennessee. Headed by former state Sen. David Fowler, the council says it promotes "the culture that values the traditional family, for the sake of the common good" and is generally concerned with opposing reproductive rights, restricting adult-oriented businesses, and fighting homosexuality.

"We appreciate the willingness of these individuals to come, at their own expense, to educate the committee members about what is really at stake in the debate over 'medical marijuana,'" said Fowler. "Having seen my own mother suffer and die from cancer, I know how much we all desire to see relief for those we love. But we cannot allow the compassion of the average American to overcome good science and good medicine. Nor can we allow that compassion to be manipulated by those who have, as their ultimate agenda, the legalization of marijuana and even other drugs."

Worse yet, Fowler said, the bill "would inevitably lead to increased public consumption of marijuana and make a mockery of our criminal drug laws. What has been observed in other states is that marijuana distribution becomes uncontrollable in society at large even when it is restricted to 'medicinal uses.' With an individual able to produce up to 13,000 joints per year under this bill, it is naïve to think that those joints won't wind up in the wrong hands."

Fowler also cited California's wide-open medical marijuana scene to suggest the Tennessee bill would make enforcement of the criminal law regarding marijuana impracticable. "In North Hollywood, there are now more medical pot clubs than there are Starbucks. In fact, the co-founder of the California medical pot referendum has now said that most of the medical pot dispensaries in California are 'little more than dope dealers with storefronts,'" he added, citing the infamous words of Scott Imler.

Miller told committee members 12 states have medical marijuana laws and there was no evidence they "send the wrong message" to young people. In 11 of those states, Miller pointed out, teen marijuana use had declined.

Ellis, who suffers from degenerative joint disease and fibromyalgia, and who was convicted on federal drug charges for growing medical marijuana for himself and providing it for free to four terminal patients, said that marijuana was once a significant medicine before it was banned 70 years ago. He read testimonials from cancer and AIDS patients who said marijuana helped eased their suffering. "We would not be here urging you to make medical marijuana legal again in the state if it were not safe and effective," Ellis said.

ONDCP's Murray told lawmakers they should not do an end run around the Food & Drug Administration. "My concern is we're doing more harm than good with these measures," he said.

Dr. Shih, who practices in Nashville, told the committee that marijuana is "impractical" and that other legal medications are as effective. "I believe there are safer drugs," he said.

William Benson, assistant director of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, also testified. He said the bill could present complications for law enforcement because Tennessee is a leading producer of marijuana.

Rep. Jones, for her part, went after Fowler's characterization of her bill as a stalking horse for legalization. "This is not about making marijuana legal across the state. This is strictly for medical reasons, only to help people feel better," Jones said. "Any suggestion that there might be something hidden in the legislation is absurd."

Former Sen. Steve Cohen (D-Memphis), now a member of the US House of Representatives, tried with no luck to get a medical marijuana bill through in years past. Jones' bill is unlikely to go anywhere this year, although she said she was open to changes that could make it more politically palatable next year. Given the mobilization of the "pro-family" groups and the participation of the drug czar's office, it will be an uphill battle in the Volunteer State. The drug czar has lost before, though, so stay tuned.

back to top

Marijuana: California Cops Destroy Pot Worth Twice As Much as State's Largest Legal Cash Crop, But Still Miss Vast Majority of It

Another harvest season has come and gone, and the state of California has once again forgone the opportunity to reap hundreds of millions of dollars in marijuana tax revenues. Instead, the state attorney general's office proudly announced this week that the annual Campaign Against Marijuana Planting had uprooted some 3 million plants, wiping out an estimated $11.6 billion worth of weed.

That is more than twice the value of the state's largest legal agricultural commodity, milk and cream, which was worth $5.2 billion in 2005, according to the state Department of Food and Agriculture. It is nearly four times the value of the state's largest legal cash crop, grapes, which was worth $3.2 billion.

While the value of the plants eradicated exceeds that of the state's licit cash crops, they are only a fraction of the state's outdoor crop. Using state and federal government figures, researcher Jon Gettman estimated that the state's outdoor plant count in 2006 was more than 17 million plants in his report Marijuana Production in the United States (2006). Assuming marijuana production levels were unchanged between this year and last, that means CAMP did not eradicate some 14 million pot plants.

According to CAMP's $4,000 a plant estimate, that's some $50-60 billion in marijuana profits that went un-eradicated and untaxed. Gettman uses much smaller crop value estimates, but even using Gettman's more conservative figures, the untouched California pot crop was worth about $10 billion. And we're not even counting the estimated four million plants grown indoors in California in 2006 and presumably again this year. Ending prohibition might reduce the prices by eliminating the "risk premium" effectively added by the current illicit status, but we're still talking about a lot of money.

back to top

Marijuana: A Week After Initiative Vote, Denver Bites the Bullet -- Sort Of

A week after voters in Denver for the third time in as many years sent a strong signal that they don't want adult marijuana smokers arrested, the city of Denver is moving to comply with the will of the voters. In response to the 57% passage of an initiative making adult marijuana possession offenses the city's lowest law enforcement priority, Mayor John Hickenlooper announced this week that he will create an 11-member panel to oversee and implement the initiative.

The panel, whose composition was mandated in the text of Initiative 100, the lowest priority measure, will include one representative each of the Denver City Council, the Denver Police Department, Denver County District Attorney's office, the Denver City Attorney's office, as well as three criminal defense attorneys (one of who shall be a public defender), two Denver residents selected by SAFER Denver, the group that organized the drive, one drug abuse prevention counselor, and one member of the Denver Metro Domestic Violence Fatality Review Committee who is not also a member of law enforcement.

While Denver officials are taking steps to comply with the will of the voters, they still sound a bit grumpy about it all. "Given that adult possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is already one of the police department's lowest priorities, it is unclear what substantive impact, if any, the initiative's passage will take," Hickenlooper said in a statement.

Denver voted to legalize the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by adults in 2005, but city officials have refused to recognize that act, instead ticketing people on the basis of the state marijuana law. They could still do that, Denver Police Chief Gerry Whitman said in a statement.

"When an individual is cited for possession of less than an ounce of marijuana -- as Colorado state law requires -- it is generally because the marijuana was uncovered by police during the course of investigating another crime," said Whitman.

"We are glad to see our mayor and city officials will be respecting the will of the voters, and we look forward to working with them toward a more sensible marijuana policy in the city of Denver," responded SAFER leader Mason Tvert.

Denver had nearly 1,400 marijuana possession cases last year. Seattle, a similarly-sized city which passed a lowest priority initiative in 2003, and whose municipal officials have cooperated with it, had just 125.

back to top

Popular Culture: One-Third of Hit Songs Contain Drug Use References

Twentieth Century jazz musicians like Cab Calloway or Mezz Mezzrow, who were singing about drug use three-quarters of a century ago, won't exactly be rolling over in their graves, but research results released last week show that contemporary music is replete with drug references, and most of them are positive.

Researchers at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine examined 297 songs that made it to the top of the Billboard charts in 2005 and found that 93 (33%) of them portrayed drug or alcohol use. Some 86% of hit rap tunes had drug references, followed by 37% of country tunes (presumably mostly alcohol references), 29% of R&B/Hip-Hop songs, 14% of rock songs, and 12% of pop songs.

Nearly one-quarter (24%) of drug use references were to alcohol, 14% were to marijuana, and only 3% were to tobacco. Some 12% of references were to drugs the researchers could not identify.

In the songs, people took drugs for various reasons, including peer pressure (48%), sex (30%), money (25%), or mood management (17%). Apparently, as in real life, people in songs took drugs for multiple reasons.

Drug use was commonly associated with partying (54%), sex (49%), violence (29%), and humor (24%). Only 4% of songs examined contained anti-drug use messages, one referred to setting limits, and none portrayed people refusing to take drugs. Of those songs that mentioned drug use, more than two-thirds (68%) were positive.

"We're learning that media affects a lot of different health behaviors," said assistant professor Dr. Brian Primack who headed the study. "Tobacco in movies, for example, is now known to lead to smoking. We started realizing adolescents are exposed to two and a half hours a day of music. What's in the music?"

back to top

Australia: Queensland to Increase Drug Penalties

The government of Queensland is preparing to try more of the same old-same old in its ongoing, futile effort to wipe out drug use and dealing. The state cabinet Monday approved amendments to the Drugs Misuse Act that will reschedule a number of drugs into more dangerous classifications, which will result in an increase in penalties for offenses committed concerning those substances.

Under the bill, ecstasy and PMA, a dangerous drug sometimes substituted for ecstasy and known in Australia's superheated drug lexicon as "death," will be moved from Schedule II to Schedule I, meaning maximum penalties for supplying, trafficking, or possessing the drugs will increase from 20 to 25 years.

"Under the bill, the schedule two drugs, ecstasy and death, will be reclassified as schedule one drugs, which carry greater penalties," Premier Anna Bligh said.

A handful of other drugs are also being rescheduled, Bligh said. "Valium and Serepax, as well as drugs previously in Schedule IIA of the laws, such as steroids, Rohypnol and ephedrine, would be added to Schedule II, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years' jail for unlawful possession, supply or trafficking."

But wait, there's more, said Attorney-General Kerry Shine, announcing that the government will introduce the concept of "analogs" into the laws. "It will mean that drugs which are not named in the schedules, but have similar structure and pharmacological effect, will attract the same penalties," Mr. Shine said.

And that's not all. The law will also create new offenses for the supply and production of precursor drugs like pseudoephedrine, and the equipment used in the production of illegal drugs, such as pill presses.

Now, that ought to end the drug problem in Queensland. Stay tuned.

back to top

Death Penalty: Two More Executed for Drug Trafficking in Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia continued its bid to remain in the top ranks among countries who execute people for drug offenses, beheading two Pakistanis in different parts of the country last week. Along with Iran, Indonesia, and Malaysia, Saudi Arabia is among the most prolific killers of drug law violators.

According to the anti-death penalty group Hands Off Cain, citing Saudi state media sources, Pakistani citizen Bhrour Sadbar Khan was executed November 8 in Riyadh for smuggling heroin into the kingdom. Pakistani citizen Qismata Qul Rasul Khan was executed November 10 in the eastern city of Damman after being convicted of smuggling heroin and hashish into the kingdom.

According to the anti-death penalty group, Saudi Arabia has executed dozens of people each year this decade, with yearly figures ranging from a low of 38 in 2004 and a high of 90 in 2005. So far, 49 people have been executed this year. It is unclear how many were drug offenders.

back to top

Web Scan

latest CDC syringe exchange data

Marijuana as First Amendment Right, C-VILLE newsweekly on the Rutherford Institute and Carl Olsen's religious use of marijuana case

Congress Must Fix Racist Crack/Powder Disparity Laws, Anthony Papa in the Huffington Post

November issue of Cannabinoid Chronicles

Cannabis and Cannabinoids in the 21st Century: Medical Marijuana, video of Dr. David Bearman, University of Wisconsin Medical School, 11/13

National Drug Threat Assessment 2008, from the National Drug Intelligence Center

Community Oversight Committee report, marijuana lowest priority police, Missoula, Montana

Medical Marijuana and Federal Lawlessness, Jim Cardoza on LibertyPen.com

Drug Truth Network Update:
Cultural Baggage for 11/14/07: Karen Garrison, mother of two sons in federal prison on mandatory minimums of 15 and 19 years + Marc Mauer of Sentencing Project (MP3)
Century of Lies for 11/13/07: Jerry Epstein, founding member of Drug Policy Forum of Texas, Drug War Facts (MP3)

back to top

Weekly: This Week in History

November 22, 1963: Aldous Huxley uses LSD to enhance his awareness as he dies.

November 22, 1975: Colombian police seize 600 kilos from a small plane at the Cali airport -- the largest cocaine seizure to date. In response, drug traffickers begin a vendetta known as the "Medellin Massacre." Forty people die in Medellin in one weekend. This event signals the new power of Colombia's cocaine industry, headquartered in Medellin.

November 18, 1986: A US federal grand jury in Miami releases the indictment of the Ochoas, Pablo Escobar, Carlos Lehder, and Jose Gonzalo Rodriguez Gacha under the RICO statute. The indictment names the Medellin cartel as the largest cocaine smuggling organization in the world.

November 21, 1987: Jorge Ochoa is arrested in Colombia. Ochoa is held in prison on the bull-smuggling charge for which he was extradited from Spain. Twenty-four hours later a gang of thugs arrive at the house of Juan Gomez Martinez, the editor of Medellin's daily newspaper El Colombiano. They present Martinez with a communique signed by "The Extraditables," which threatens execution of Colombian political leaders if Ochoa is extradited. On December 30, Ochoa is released under dubious legal circumstances. In January 1988, the murder of Colombian Attorney General Carlos Mauro Hoyos is claimed by the Extraditables.

November 17, 1993: President Clinton signs the North American Free Trade Agreement which results in an enormous increase in legitimate trade across the US-Mexican border. The volume of trade increases the difficulty for US Customs officials seeking to find narcotics hidden within legitimate goods. [Ed: Of course, reducing the supply of drugs was already an essentially hopeless task.]

November 17, 1993: At an International Network of Cities on Drug Policy conference in Baltimore, Maryland former Colombian high court judge Gomez Hurtado tells the Americans present, "Forget about drug deaths, and acquisitive crime, and addiction, and AIDS. All this pales into insignificance before the prospect facing the liberal societies of the West. The income of the drug barons is greater than the American defense budget. With this financial power they can suborn the institutions of the State and, if the State resists... they can purchase the firepower to outgun it. We are threatened with a return to the Dark Ages."

November 19, 1993: In Missouri, a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) helicopter crashes while conducting surveillance of suspected drug activity, killing a St. Louis police officer and critically injuring the pilot. The crash occurs in a rural, heavily wooded area 15 miles south of St. Louis. The man killed is Stephen Strehl, 35, a 14-year department veteran assigned to a DEA drug task force. The pilot, Hawthorn Lee, is hospitalized in critical condition.

November 19, 2001: Former West Vancouver (Canada) school superintendent Ed Carlin becomes furious with the North Vancouver Royal Canadian Mounted Police after a blunder during which the emergency response team raids a basement rental suite occupied by his son and three others in search of drugs and guns -- the police find Nintendo controllers in the home, but no guns or drugs.

November 20, 2002: Irvin Rosenfeld marks his twentieth anniversary of receiving a monthly tin of about 300 pre-rolled medical marijuana cigarettes from the United States government, as one of seven living patients grandfathered into the now defunct Compassionate Investigative New Drug Program.

back to top

Job Opportunity: Drug Policy Alliance, Deputy Director, San Francisco Office

This position reports to the Director, Drug Policy Alliance California (based in Los Angeles) and directs DPA's San Francisco office. The Deputy Director serves as the primary strategist for DPA's Model City initiative at the local level in San Francisco. The Deputy Director also collaborates with DPA's other California offices (in Sacramento and Los Angeles) in support of DPA's California legislative agenda, and with DPA's other "Model City" initiative directors in Washington, DC, and New York, NY.

The Deputy Director, DPA California-San Francisco serves as DPA's primary spokesperson in San Francisco and is responsible for cultivating and maintaining relationships with local politicians, individual and foundation funders, partner organizations, media, DPA members, and other stakeholders.

Responsibilities include developing and articulating a vision for DPA's work in San Francisco that is consistent with the organization's overall mission, philosophy, and strategic approach; supervising DPA's advocacy and program efforts in San Francisco and surrounding communities; identifying opportunities to promote DPA's core priorities in the political, cultural, and academic arenas in San Francisco; contributing to DPA's statewide legislative advocacy, particularly in terms of cultivating the support of local state representatives, partner organizations, and constituents; collaborating with DPA's Office of Legal Affairs (located in Berkeley, CA) on issues pertaining to San Francisco; contributing to DPA's local and statewide fundraising activities; serving as DPA spokesperson in the media and at community events, conferences, and other forums; and supervising and mentoring administrative and junior program staff, student interns, and volunteers.

Specific qualifications include demonstrated leadership skills, including 3-5 years progressively senior public policy, legislative and/or governmental affairs experience (criminal justice and/or public health experience preferred); familiarity with drug policy desirable (commitment to harm reduction philosophy essential); being comfortable with fundraising, including cultivation and solicitation of donors, foundations, and government funders; strong analytic ability and superior communication skills, including writing and public speaking; advanced degree in public policy/administration, public health, law or related field preferred but not required; and availability to work occasional evenings and weekends and to travel periodically throughout the state and nationally.

The ideal candidate will be a collegial, self-motivated advocate who thinks conceptually, creatively, and strategically. This is an entrepreneurial organization that encourages initiative, and the successful candidate must be a self-starter and a risk taker, with a high degree of confidence and energy. Excellent interpersonal skills and a passion for social justice that includes a fair and equitable drug policy are essential for success.

This position offers a competitive salary, commensurate with experience, as well as an excellent benefits package, including health, long-term disability and life insurance; a generous 403(b) plan; and four weeks paid vacation.

To apply, please send a resume and cover letter to: Holly Hawkins, Director of Research, McCormack & Associates, 10061 Riverside Drive, Suite 890, Toluca Lake, CA 91602, (323) 549-9200, fax: (323) 549-9222, [email protected], online http://www.mccormackassociates.com.

All inquiries or referrals will be held in strict confidence.

Please note that your education, dates of employment, compensation and other information provided will be verified prior to an offer of employment.

back to top

Feedback: Do You Read Drug War Chronicle?

Do you read Drug War Chronicle? If so, we'd like to hear from you. DRCNet needs two things:

1. We are in between newsletter grants, and that makes our need for donations more pressing. Drug War Chronicle is free to read but not to produce! Click here to make a donation by credit card or PayPal, or to print out a form to send in by mail.
   
   
2. Please send quotes and reports on how you put our flow of information to work, for use in upcoming grant proposals and letters to funders or potential funders. Do you use DRCNet as a source for public speaking? For letters to the editor? Helping you talk to friends or associates about the issue? Research? For your own edification? Have you changed your mind about any aspects of drug policy since subscribing, or inspired you to get involved in the cause? Do you reprint or repost portions of our bulletins on other lists or in other newsletters? Do you have any criticisms or complaints, or suggestions? We want to hear those too. Please send your response -- one or two sentences would be fine; more is great, too -- email [email protected] or reply to a Chronicle email or use our online comment form. Please let us know if we may reprint your comments, and if so, if we may include your name or if you wish to remain anonymous. IMPORTANT: Even if you have given us this kind of feedback before, we could use your updated feedback now too -- we need to hear from you!

Again, please help us keep Drug War Chronicle alive at this important time! Click here to make a donation online, or send your check or money order to: DRCNet, P.O. Box 18402, Washington, DC 20036. Make your check payable to DRCNet Foundation to make a tax-deductible donation for Drug War Chronicle -- remember if you select one of our member premium gifts that will reduce the portion of your donation that is tax-deductible -- or make a non-deductible donation for our lobbying work -- online or check payable to Drug Reform Coordination Network, same address. We can also accept contributions of stock -- email [email protected] for the necessary info.

back to top

Webmasters: Help the Movement by Running DRCNet Syndication Feeds on Your Web Site!

Are you a fan of DRCNet, and do you have a web site you'd like to use to spread the word more forcefully than a single link to our site can achieve? We are pleased to announce that DRCNet content syndication feeds are now available. Whether your readers' interest is in-depth reporting as in Drug War Chronicle, the ongoing commentary in our blogs, or info on specific drug war subtopics, we are now able to provide customizable code for you to paste into appropriate spots on your blog or web site to run automatically updating links to DRCNet educational content.

For example, if you're a big fan of Drug War Chronicle and you think your readers would benefit from it, you can have the latest issue's headlines, or a portion of them, automatically show up and refresh when each new issue comes out.

If your site is devoted to marijuana policy, you can run our topical archive, featuring links to every item we post to our site about marijuana -- Chronicle articles, blog posts, event listings, outside news links, more. The same for harm reduction, asset forfeiture, drug trade violence, needle exchange programs, Canada, ballot initiatives, roughly a hundred different topics we are now tracking on an ongoing basis. (Visit the Chronicle main page, right-hand column, to see the complete current list.)

If you're especially into our new Speakeasy blog section, new content coming out every day dealing with all the issues, you can run links to those posts or to subsections of the Speakeasy.

Click here to view a sample of what is available -- please note that the length, the look and other details of how it will appear on your site can be customized to match your needs and preferences.

Please also note that we will be happy to make additional permutations of our content available to you upon request (though we cannot promise immediate fulfillment of such requests as the timing will in many cases depend on the availability of our web site designer). Visit our Site Map page to see what is currently available -- any RSS feed made available there is also available as a javascript feed for your web site (along with the Chronicle feed which is not showing up yet but which you can find on the feeds page linked above). Feel free to try out our automatic feed generator, online here.

Contact us for assistance or to let us know what you are running and where. And thank you in advance for your support.

back to top

Resource: DRCNet Web Site Offers Wide Array of RSS Feeds for Your Reader

RSS feeds are the wave of the future -- and DRCNet now offers them! The latest Drug War Chronicle issue is now available using RSS at http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/feed online.

We have many other RSS feeds available as well, following about a hundred different drug policy subtopics that we began tracking since the relaunch of our web site this summer -- indexing not only Drug War Chronicle articles but also Speakeasy blog posts, event listings, outside news links and more -- and for our daily blog postings and the different subtracks of them. Visit our Site Map page to peruse the full set.

Thank you for tuning in to DRCNet and drug policy reform!

back to top

Resource: Reformer's Calendar Accessible Through DRCNet Web Site

DRCNet's Reformer's Calendar is a tool you can use to let the world know about your events, and find out what is going on in your area in the issue. This resource used to run in our newsletter each week, but now is available from the right hand column of most of the pages on our web site.

• Visit http://stopthedrugwar.org each day and you'll see a listing of upcoming events in the page's right-hand column with the number of days remaining until the next several events coming up and a link to more.

• Check our new online calendar section at to view all of them by month, week or a range of different views.
• We request and invite you to submit your event listings directly on our web site. Note that our new system allows you to post not only a short description as we currently do, but also the entire text of your announcement.

The Reformer's Calendar publishes events large and small of interest to drug policy reformers around the world. Whether it's a major international conference, a demonstration bringing together people from around the region or a forum at the local college, we want to know so we can let others know, too.

But we need your help to keep the calendar current, so please make sure to contact us and don't assume that we already know about the event or that we'll hear about it from someone else, because that doesn't always happen.

back to top