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

California Mayors Ask Clinton - Spare Marijuana Clubs
('Reuters' Notes The Mayors Of San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Cruz
And West Hollywood Have Asked The President To Call Off Enforcement
Of Federal Drug Laws That Interfere With The Clubs' Daily Operations)

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 21:40:06 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: US CA: Wire: Calif. Mayors Ask Clinton: Spare Marijuana Clubs
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Frank S. World and Dave Fratello and Kendra E. Wright
Source: Reuters
Author: Andrew Quinn
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998

CALIF. MAYORS ASK CLINTON: SPARE MARIJUANA CLUBS

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A group of California mayors asked President
Clinton Wednesday to block a federal suit against the state's marijuana
clubs, sharply escalating the political and legal battle over medical
marijuana use.

"At stake is the well-being of 11,000 California residents," the mayors of
San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Cruz and West Hollywood said in letters to
Clinton. They also asked him to suspend enforcement of federal drug laws
that interfere with the clubs' daily operations.

"If the centers are shut down, many of these individuals will be compelled
to search back alleys and street corners for their medicine," the mayors
wrote. "This will not only endanger their lives, but place an unnecessary
burden on our local police departments."

The mayors' plea comes ahead of a March 24 hearing in San Francisco on a
Justice Department bid to shut down six California marijuana distribution
clubs on the grounds they violate federal drug laws.

The suit, one of two filed in federal courts in San Francisco and San Jose,
marks a major legal skirmish over California's Proposition 215, the state
law voters approved in 1996 which legalized marijuana use for people
suffering from AIDS, cancer and other serious ailments.

California politicians are squaring off over the clubs, which have been the
major source of marijuana for people who say it helps relieve a variety of
symptoms ranging from pain and nausea to "nerves".

California's Attorney General Dan Lungren has personally vowed to see the
clubs shut down, while local leaders such as San Francisco Mayor Willie
Brown and city District Attorney Terence (eds: one "r" is correct) Hallinan
have promised to keep them open.

Lungren's legal efforts were boosted last month when the state supreme
court sided with a lower court ruling which said the clubs were illegal
because they were not "primary care givers" for the patients they supply --
which is a condition set by the California measure.

Although the supreme court ruling set the legal groundwork for closure of
the clubs, most are still operating and their leaders say they can fight
the semantics in court.

Medical marijuana advocates are casting the battle as an issue of states'
rights versus the federal government, saying federal officials should not
be allowed to override a compassionate law approved by popular vote in
California.

Federal officials say, however, they are not targeting "medical use" of
marijuana -- simply the persistent violation of federal laws making it
illegal to cultivate, possess or distribute the drug.

The mayors' letter urged Clinton to side with the clubs and said the
federal government should allow local authorities to "formalize dispensary
systems that live up to the spirit of the law, and most importantly, make
marijuana available, safe and accessible to suffering patients."

They promised to abide by federal law, but asked for time to develop
"airtight" regulation and supervision of the dispensaries.

"We ask that the federal government respect local government's experience
and expertise in potentially developing legal community-based solutions
that benefit the public health of our residents," the mayors wrote.

San Francisco's Hallinan Monday indicated he was willing to defend the
city's right to set its own policies.

In court papers, Hallinan said that if the current distribution system were
disrupted by federal interference, San Francisco may ask its police to step
in "to distribute marijuana to seriously ill people."

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

California Mayors Push For Marijuana Clubs ('Associated Press' Version)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 05:35:26 EST
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: ltneidow@voyager.net
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: ltneidow@voyager.net (Lee T. Neidow)
To: Multiple recipients of list 
Subject: ART: Calif. Mayors Support Buyer's Clubs

California mayors push for marijuana clubs

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Mayors from four California cities have
urged President Clinton to make their streets safer by abandoning federal
efforts to shutter clubs that dispense medical marijuana.

In letters to the White House dated March 12 to March 17, the mayors
of San Francisco, Oakland, Santa Cruz and West Hollywood claimed
that closing the clubs would hurt those suffering from AIDS and cancer
who use the drug to ease their pain and nausea.

``If the centers are shut down, many of these individuals will be compelled
to search back alleys and street corners for their medicine,'' the mayors
wrote.

The mayors also asked the president to ``implement a moratorium on
enforcement of federal drug laws that interfere with the daily operation of
the dispensaries.''

Federal prosecutors have challenged the state's marijuana buyers clubs,
saying they are violating federal law against the possession and sale of
drugs, regardless of a 1996 state initiative.

That law allows possession and cultivation of marijuana upon a doctor's
recommendation to ease the pain and nausea of AIDS, cancer, glaucoma
and other conditions.

Outside San Francisco's Cannabis Cultivators' Club, Joel Whalen
smoked a joint Wednesday while waiting for the marijuana club to open.

``With the mayors backing us, I think it's a lot better,'' said Whalen, who
uses marijuana to boost his appetite. ``I quit all intravenous drugs, and
now that I've been smoking marijuana I feel healthier.''

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

Ban On Medical Pot In Public - Violators Could Face Jail, County Decides
('Sacramento Bee' Notes Sacramento County Board Of Supervisors
Has Voted To Nullify Proposition 215
And Recriminalize Possession Of Marijuana In One Fell Swoop)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:08:43 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US CA: Ban on Medical Pot in Public:
Violaters Could Face Jail, County Decides
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: "Frank S. World" 
Source: Sacramento Bee (CA)
Contact: opinion@sacbee.com
Website: http://www.sacbee.com/
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Author: Pamela Martineau Bee Staff Writer

BAN ON MEDICAL POT IN PUBLIC: VIOLATERS COULD FACE JAIL, COUNTY DECIDES

Anyone with a doctor's permission to smoke marijuana could face up to a
$1,000 in fines or six months in jail if they light up in public, under an
ordinance approved Tuesday by the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors.

Saying the public smoking of marijuana, even for health reasons, sends a
confusing message to youths and exposes people to secondhand marijuana
smoke, the supervisors criminalized the public consumption of the herb,
which was legalized for medicinal purposes by California voters in November
1996.

"It's not an anti-compassion issue," Sacramento Police Chief Arturo Venegas
Jr. said in support of the proposal. "I don't believe (public consumption)
was the intent of those who passed the proposition."

"Permitting smoking of marijuana in public places does send a mixed message
to our young people," said Supervisor Dave Cox.

The local ordinance passed 3-2, with Supervisors Roger Dickinson and Illa
Collin voting against the measure, saying its fines and jail term were too
strict.

"Making a person a criminal -- potentially assessing a $1,000 fine or a
six-month jail term -- is enormously out of proportion," said Dickinson.

"It opens the possibility of harassment of people who legitimately use
medicinal marijuana," Collin added.

Ryan Landers, a local AIDS patient who said he regularly smokes marijuana
in the outdoor seating sections of restaurants to quell his severe nausea,
said after Tuesday's vote that he intends to continue to smoke it even if
he might be arrested.

"I will get arrested and file a discrimination suit against the county,"
said Landers, adding that he then would go to jail and sue to be allowed to
smoke marijuana in jail.

"I'm not trying to hurt anybody by doing this," Landers earlier told
supervisors of his reason for smoking marijuana in public. "I'm just trying
to stay alive and be an active human being."

District Attorney Jan Scully, who introduced the ordinance, said the
measure is needed to address ambiguities in Proposition 215, which is
silent on whether smoking marijuana for medicinal purposes is allowed in
public.

The issue came to a head in Sacramento County when Landers smoked a joint
on the K Street Mall during the Thursday night market last summer. Landers
was arrested, but prosecutors dropped the charges, saying he would prevail
at trial since he legally was allowed to smoke marijuana under Proposition
215.

Neither Scully or Venegas could estimate how many people smoke medicinal
marijuana in public in Sacramento County, but Scully asserted that "there
aren't large numbers of people engaging in this sort of conduct."

The new ban, Scully continued, is aimed at the "flaunting and flagrant use"
of medicinal marijuana.

"This is a health issue. This isn't a criminal issue," Landers said.

The ordinance is scheduled to go into effect in about a month. Venegas said
he will ask city officials to consider a similar ordinance.

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

Jailed Rapper Has 90 Days Added To Term ('San Francisco Chronicle'
Says Sacramento, California, Rap Musician C-BO Is Being Kept In Jail
Not Because He Tested Positive For Cannabis,
But Because 'Lyrics On His New Album . . .
Violated An Unusual Parole Condition')

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:03:45 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US CA: Jailed Rapper Has 90 Days Added to Term
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: "Frank S. World" 
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998

JAILED RAPPER HAS 90 DAYS ADDED TO TERM

Sacramento rapper C-BO, who was to be released from jail today, had 90 days
added to his sentence after testing positive for marijuana while serving
two weeks for parole violations.

Shawn Thomas, 26, the ``gangsta'' rapper who records under the name C-BO,
was ordered back to jail 2 1/2 weeks ago because of lyrics on his new
album, ``. . . Til My Casket Drops,'' which violated an unusual parole
condition.

State parole authorities contended that the record promoted the gang
lifestyle and therefore violated the special condition imposed in June when
C-BO was released from Soledad State Prison after serving his second
stretch behind bars.

He originally went to prison on a 1994 conviction for willful discharge of
a firearm in a negligent manner. He was paroled in late 1995.

In April 1996 he was arrested in Cincinnati on parole violations that
involved marijuana and firearms.

After serving more than 14 months at Soledad, he was released last June
under the special parole agreement that restricted the content of his
music.

Thomas will serve the 90 days at Deuel Vocational Institute in Tracy.

1998 San Francisco Chronicle

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

Three Months Added To Rapper's Jail Term ('Orange County Register' Version
Says It Was The Drug Test, Not The Lyrics)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 21:40:54 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US CA: Three Months Added to Rappers Jail Term
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: John W.Black
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998

THREE MONTHS ADDED TO RAPPERS JAIL TERM

Rapper and convicted felon Shawn Thomas will have to serve an additional
three months in prison because he failed a drug test, the Board of Prison
Terms said Tuesday in Sacramento.

Thomas, who performs under the name C-Bo, was at the center of a
free-speech controversy this month when authorities considered jailing him
because the lyrics of his latest album violated his parole terms.

The board eventually decided not to pursue charges against Thomas on those
grounds. But he was given a one-month term - levied after Thomas tested
positive for marijuana use - will be served consecutive to the earlier
sentence, officials said. Thomas, 26, was paroled from Soledad Prison in
June after serving 15 months for illegal firearms use.

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

Guards' Union Impeding Prison Probe, Critics Say - Strong Political Presence
In Sacramento ('San Francisco Chronicle' Looks At How The Most Powerful
Prison Guard Lobby In The World Is Fighting The Federal Indictment Of Guards
At California's Corcoran Prison - Includes List Of Politicians
Who Get The Most Contributions)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 11:12:54 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US CA: Guards' Union Impeding Prison Probe, Critics Say
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: "Tom O'Connell" 
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Author: Robert B. Gunnison, Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

GUARDS' UNION IMPEDING PRISON PROBE, CRITICS SAY

Strong political presence in Sacramento

Hours after a federal grand jury indicted eight Corcoran State Prison
guards on civil rights charges, Don Novey was on the phone to help find
them defense lawyers.

It's just part of Novey's job as president of the California Correctional
Peace Officers Association -- one of the most potent political forces in
the Capitol.

But these days, the association finds itself -- and its relationship with
the Wilson administration -- in an uncomfortable spotlight with the
indictment of the Corcoran officers, who were charged with staging fights
among rival gang members in 1994.

Federal sources said the U.S. Department of Justice entered the case only
after it became clear that the Wilson administration would not mount a
thorough investigation.

Peace Officers Association members even tried to interfere with the FBI
investigation, the federal sources say.

Critics contend that the inability of the Wilson administration to correct
problems among prison guards lies in the political influence the union
wields in Sacramento.

``They are so strong -- no one has the guts to stand up to them,'' said
John Irwin, a retired sociology professor at San Francisco State University
who has written four books on prisons.

Irwin said some prison guards enjoy ``an unrestrained police culture.''

``They develop a peculiar kind of sickness where they separate themselves
from the people they are guarding.''

The association has grown from a kind of social club at Folsom to a
27,000-member movement that Novey is taking to other states. His mission is
to bring respect to the job he calls ``the toughest beat in the state.''

With members contributing $49 a month, the association has given $4.8
million to candidates and propositions during the past decade.

One of its most dramatic contributions was $425,000 in October 1992 that
paid for the last week of Governor Wilson's television advertising in his
campaign against Dianne Feinstein.

The association has also contributed $143,891 to Attorney General Dan
Lungren, who investigated the alleged abuses at Corcoran at the governor's
request and found no wrongdoing.

The close relationship between Wilson and the association leads to the
perception that it is a Republican union -- an assertion that Novey denies.

``It's funny that we are pegged as a Republican union,'' he says.
``Proportionately, over the years, the Legislature has been 59 percent to
60 percent Democrat and our money has gone in that direction.''

Lawyers for the Corcoran officers will be paid for by the state, not the
union, the Department of Corrections announced late last week. ``I believe
these officers have acted appropriately,'' said C.C. Terhune, director of
corrections, in a statement.

The state's decision stunned Novey, who had been working to find lawyers
for the defendants.

``I was trying to do that. The administration said they were going to step
up the plate,'' said Novey after the announcement. ``I nearly fell on my
a--.''

The Corcoran probe involves allegations that guards staged ``blood sport''
fights in which one convict was shot to death by a guard. The defendants
are scheduled to make their first appearance in U.S. District Court in
Fresno today.

One of those indicted last month, Lieutenant John Vaughn, was appointed by
the Department of Corrections in June to the Office of Internal Affairs,
which investigates wrongdoing within the department.

The indictment charges that Vaughn permitted officers to release inmates
from rival gangs into a small exercise yard, where the inmates fought for
the entertainment of the staff. It states that he also prepared false
reports about the fights.

The problems are not limited to Corcoran. At Pelican Bay, Del Norte County,
prosecutors have proposed in court that a federal grand jury may be needed
to investigate the prison, where eight convicts have been killed in their
cells since 1996.

The FBI confirms that it also is investigating whether Department of
Corrections personnel selected inmates for ``some form of retribution
outside the criminal justice system.''

Both the Department of Corrections and Lungren investigated violence at
Corcoran.

The Department of Corrections said it was instructed by the FBI not to look
at the shooting death because the federal agency would open its own probe.

The Department of Justice said it, too, did not want to duplicate the
federal investigations.

But for critics like Catherine Campbell, a Fresno lawyer who represents the
family of Preston Tate, the slain inmate at Corcoran, the Department of
Correction's behavior showed that it had no intention of finding anything.

``They were fighting a media battle,'' she said. ``The entire thrust of
their investigation was at the media.''

And for her, the motivation is clear -- the political clout of Novey's
association. ``They don't want to jeopardize their campaign financing,''
said Campbell. ``I can't see it any other way.''

As union president, Novey must defend his members, even when they are
accused of the worst kinds of crimes. Nevertheless, he has called for the
state to provide psychological testing and better training for the
high-stress job.

In the nearly two decades since state employees won collective bargaining
rights, Novey has negotiated contracts that now provide officers -- who
control more than 160,000 inmates in the state's 33 prisons -- with an
average salary of $39,501.

``Our members' salaries are up there and commensurate with their peers in
law enforcement. That's all we wanted to achieve,'' Novey said in an
interview.

Asked to describe how the Department of Corrections gets along with the
union, corrections spokeswoman Christine May said it is a ``typical
management-labor relationship.''

``At times, we may have differences of opinion as to how to achieve a
goal,'' May said, ``but for the most part we have a good management-labor
relationship.''

Although the union has sought longer prison terms and more prison
construction -- generally backed by Republicans -- it has also backed more
job protections for organized labor, usually supported by Democrats.

The association has often given generously to crime victims groups, such as
the Doris Tate Crime Bureau, an important ally in seeking longer prison
sentences.

One Democrat to tangle with Novey -- and to come out in a good position --
is Senator John Vasconcellos, D-San Jose. Vasconcellos was a union target
in 1992, when he was running for re-election to the Assembly.

``They were going to put $200,000 against me,'' recalls Vasconcellos. He
said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco, then a member
of the Assembly, talked Novey into reducing the amount to $75,000.

``We won handily,'' Vasconcellos said. ``Afterwards, I spent time with Don
Novey and made peace. Since then, we've gotten along. In my Senate race (in
1996), they stayed neutral. I've been working with them on prison and
parole reform.

``Their endorsement, for people who think being tough on law and order is
the way to get elected, is valuable. (But) it is possible to win without
it.''

***

BC: CONTRIBUTIONS

Since 1987, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association has
given $4.8 million to candidates and propositions. Here is a look at some
of those contributions: .

Former Assembly Speaker Willie Brown            $189,000
Lieutenant Govenor Gray Davis                     37,500
Former Governor George Deukmejian                494,437
Former Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer      37,750
Attorney General Dan Lungren                     143,891
Insurance Commissioner Chuck Quackenbush          45,631
Governor Pete Wilson                             614,550

Figures are cumulative and in some cases cover contributions to candidates
for offices other than the ones indicated.

Source: Legitech

1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page A1

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

San Francisco DEA Chief - From Tough Streets To Top Agent ('Associated Press'
Profiles Michele Leonhart, The Highest-Ranking Woman
In The US Drug Enforcement Administration,
Chief Of 130 Agents In Northern California)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 17:39:48 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US CA: WIRE: SF DEA Chief -- From Tough Streets to Top Agent
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn)
Source: Associated Press
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Author: Richard Cole, Associated Press

SF DEA CHIEF -- FROM TOUGH STREETS TO TOP AGENT

SAN FRANCISCO -- When Jorge Roca Suarez, the king of Bolivian cocaine
paste, closed his deals with the Colombian drug cartels, little did he know
that one day he would sit in a U.S. prison because someone stole a young
girl's blue bicycle in White Bear Lake, Minn.

Fourth-grader Michele Leonhart owned that bike, with its white basket and
pink streamers.

She refused to shrug it off. She asked questions. Checked around. And a few
weeks later, tracked it down in an alley a few blocks from her house.

``I started thinking I was a bit of an investigator trying to locate my
blue Huffy,'' she says three decades later.

That fourth grader set her eyes on a career in law enforcement -- and a
``bit of an investigator'' is what she turned out to be.

Leonhart is the highest-ranking woman in the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration and, as chief of 130 agents in Northern California, the only
woman to head a regional DEA office.

She's no token. First in her class at the Baltimore police academy in 1978.
First again in the DEA academy in 1980. Intelligence and enforcement group
supervisor in San Diego, No. 2 agent in Los Angeles. A string of
high-profile cases stretching from Canada to Bolivia.

But she almost had no law enforcement career. When Leonhart graduated from
college in 1978, police department after police department turned her down.
Los Angeles said she was too short. Chicago and Miami had residency
requirements. Every department seemed to have an excuse.

``One by one, I was being slapped with, `No, you don't qualify,''' she says.

But Baltimore -- a city she had to look up on a map because she had never
before left the Twin Cities area -- invited her to take their test. She
worked out to meet the strength requirements. And then aced the academy.

Woman officers were rare in Baltimore. The male officers turned Michele
into ``Mikey'' her first day on the job.

As a rookie, she found herself patrolling alone at night on the streets of
Baltimore's worst neighborhoods. She earned the grudging admiration of
street kids, who called the fearless 5-foot-4-inch officer ``Mighty Mike,''
and tipped her to who committed neighborhood burglaries.

She began to see the damage done by drugs. She battled with a PCP-loaded
suspect who had just thrown a traffic barrier through a store window. She
helped DEA agents serve warrants on drug suspects. She caught the bug.

``It would take me years to become a detective and get to the point where I
could investigate cases, and these DEA agents were doing it every day,''
she recalls thinking.

So she signed up with the DEA. As the top student in the academy, she had
her pick of cities, and decided to return to her native Minnesota. Other
agents criticized her for not picking a higher profile city like Miami or
New York. But Leonhart had an idea that she could be a bigger fish in a
smaller school.

She was right.

The day she walked in the door as the first female agent to work in
Minneapolis, she was handed what turned out to be one of her biggest cases.

A mysterious Puerto Rican millionaire was wowing the people of Princeton
near the Canadian border. He bought football uniforms for the high school.
He took seniors to lunch. And he put a lot of money into the local airport.
The newspapers called him ``Princeton's mysterious benefactor.''

The DEA had its suspicions. In went their newest agent, and within a day
the rookie ingratiated herself with the mystery man. He conveniently
pointed out the planes and property he owned, allowing the DEA to track his
cross-border flights. Their suspicions were right. Off he went to prison.

Leonhart had landed running and never stopped. She bought LSD from an
American Indian Movement leader in his home, trading supposedly stolen
VCRs.

She worked a Marielito Cuban bar in Minneapolis so tough the owner had
installed a metal detector that seemed to beep every time a customer walked
through.

``I was buying dope in the men's room and they were putting shotguns on the
pool table,'' she recalls.

Sitting in a conference room of the office she now heads, her eyes sparkle
when she talks about her undercover work.

``One day I would go in as the head of my own organization -- I'm in
charge, I want to buy drugs,'' she says. ``The next day I could be some
flunky, dumb girlfriend who would just sit there and make phone calls. It
was fun.''

The DEA had plans for the bright young agent that didn't include undercover
work. She found herself being kicked upstairs to higher posts.

The DEA, she acknowledges, has always had more of a cowboy reputation than
the more sedate FBI. It was made up, especially initially, of upwardly
mobile street cops who were facing heavily armed and equally macho drug
dealers. A woman moving up through the ranks was suspect, she found.

``There is always that doubt. `A woman on the job? I'm not quite sure,'''
she says. ``Each time I moved to a new post I would have to re-prove
myself.''

But her fellow agents, she discovered, cared more about making cases than
gender politics. Some of her early critics are now her biggest fans, she
says.

She also found the DEA more egalitarian when it came to assignments. During
one San Diego raid with another agency known for having women agents, she
and a fellow female DEA investigator stood shoulder-to-shoulder with their
colleagues as they entered the property.

``The other agency's women agents handed out sodas to the men -- that was
their job!'' she marvels. ``We have female agents who have died on the job
doing the same thing that men do. We jump out of helicopters. We were down
in Bolivia and Peru doing everything that the men do.''

It was the Bolivian connection that led to one of the DEA's biggest cases
and put a feather in Leonhart's cap. The San Diego group she supervised
patiently made a case against Jorge Roca Suarez, head of powerful drug
family in Bolivia. He supplied the cocaine paste, the base for all powdered
cocaine, to the Medellin and Cali cartels in Colombia.

Her agents nabbed Roca Suarez in Los Angeles, and he is now serving 40
years in prison. The DEA confiscated $14 million in property.

When she took over the San Francisco office in June of last year, she found
trends she had first spotted in Southern California had accelerated. The
enemy has become methamphetamine, responsible for 60-70 percent of DEA
cases in the region. Organized Mexican traffickers are taking over from the
bikers who once dominated the meth trade. And the San Francisco office also
has to watch Asian heroin -- and fret over pot clubs.

It keeps her too busy to spend much time thinking about breaking barriers.

``I don't see anything strange about it,'' she says. ``But when we look at
it, especially for law enforcement, it is a landmark. I do have to realize
that this is a good way to be a role model for women going into law
enforcement.''

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

'Black Tar' Heroin Addicts Prone To Botulism ('San Francisco Chronicle'
Reports A Study In Today's 'Journal Of The American Medical Association'
Says California Health Specialists Have Found That People Who Inject The Black,
Resinous Form Of Heroin Beneath Their Skin Or Into Their Muscles
Run A Major Risk Of Contracting Severe Botulism - Of 35 Victims Studied
By Doctors With The California Department Of Health Services, All But Two
Required Long Hospital Stays)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 11:19:09 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US CA: `Black Tar' Heroin Addicts Prone to Botulism
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: "Frank S. World"  and "Kendra E.
Wright" 
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Author: David Perlman, Chronicle Science Editor

'BLACK TAR' HEROIN ADDICTS PRONE TO BOTULISM

Worst risk from injecting directly under the skin

Botulism, the deadly disease widely feared as an agent in biological
warfare, is striking drug addicts who inject a crude drug known on the
street as ``black tar'' heroin.

The drug has become widely used throughout the West Coast in recent years,
and California health specialists have found that addicts who inject the
black, resinous form of heroin beneath their skin or into their muscles run
a major risk of contracting severe cases of wound botulism.

Of 35 addicts studied by doctors with the California Department of Health
Services, all but two required long hospital stays before recovering and
all but five had to be placed on respirators when paralysis of their lungs
threatened to halt their breathing.

The study of the problem is being reported today in the Journal of the
American Medical Association by a team that included Dr. Douglas Passaro,
now an infectious disease specialist at the Stanford University Medical
Center and Dr. Duc Vugia of the state health department in Berkeley.

The doctors followed 26 of the botulism patients and compared them with a
control group of 110 addicts who were recently enrolled in methadone
clinics in four California counties but did not develop the disease.

According to Vugia, the most serious danger of contracting the paralyzing
disease comes from a practice known as ``skin popping,'' where instead of
injecting a drug into a vein an addict thrusts it directly beneath the skin
or into a muscle.

In their study, the physicians found that nearly all the addicts who
developed wound botulism had been ``skin popping'' the drug, while only 44
percent of the men and women in the control group used the crude heroin
that way.

The botulism germ, called Clostridium botulinum, is closely related to the
bacterium known as Clostridium tetani, which causes tetanus, a disease also
known to be common among users of black tar heroin -- especially those who
``skin pop'' the drug.

Both the bacteria are earth-dwelling microbes that thrive best without
oxygen, and because blood is rich in oxygen, wound botulism rarely strikes
addicts who inject the drug into their veins, Vugia said. All the addicts
in the study were careful to use clean syringes in order to prevent AIDS,
he said, so the most likely source of the dangerous bacteria must be the
crude black tar heroin, which is sold cheaply and is often contaminated
with plant material and dirt.

According to Greg Hayner, the pharmacist at the Haight Ashbury Free Clinic
in San Francisco, the use of black tar heroin is increasing sharply as its
price drops. A quantity that used to sell for $100 now goes on the street
for $20, Hayner said, and addicts who ``run out of veins to shoot'' are
turning more and more to the dangerous types of injections.

1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page A2

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

Wound Botulism Associated With Black Tar Heroin
Among Injecting Drug Users (Text Of Report
In 'The Journal Of The American Medical Association')

Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 19:07:18 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: US: JAMA: Wound Botulism Associated With Black Tar Heroin
Among Injecting Drug Users
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn)
Source: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA. 1998;279:859-863)
Section: Abstracts
Pubdate: 18 March 1998
Contact: JAMA-letters@ama-assn.org
Editors note: Before writing to JAMA please review the requirements at:
http://www.ama-assn.org/public/journals/jama/letters.htm

Wound Botulism Associated With Black Tar Heroin Among Injecting Drug Users

Douglas J. Passaro, MD, MPH; S. Benson Werner, MD, MPH; Jim McGee, MSPH;
William R. Mac Kenzie, MD; Duc J. Vugia, MD, MPH

Context.-Wound botulism (WB) is a potentially lethal, descending, flaccid,
paralysis that results when spores of Clostridium botulinum germinate in a
wound and elaborate neurotoxin. Since 1988, California has experienced a
dramatic increase in WB associated with injecting "black tar" heroin (BTH),
a dark, tarry form of the drug.

Objective.-To identify risk factors for WB among injecting drug users (IDUs).

Design.-Case-control study based on data from in-person and telephone
interviews.

Participants.-Case patients (n=26) were IDUs who developed WB from January
1994 through February 1996. Controls (n=110) were IDUs newly enrolled in
methadone detoxification programs in 4 counties.

Main Outcome Measures.-Factors associated with the development of WB.

Results.-Among the 26 patients, the median age was 41.5 years, 15 (58%)
were women, 14 (54%) were non-Hispanic white, 11 (42%) were Hispanic, and
none were positive for the human immunodeficiency virus. Nearly all
participants (96% of patients and 97% of controls) injected BTH, and the
mean cumulative dose of BTH used per month was similar for patients and
controls (27 g and 31 g, respectively; P=.6). Patients were more likely
than controls to inject drugs subcutaneously or intramuscularly (92% vs
44%, P<.001) and used this route of drug administration more times per
month (mean, 67 vs 24, P<.001), with a greater cumulative monthly dose of
BTH (22.3 g vs 6.3 g, P<.001). A dose-response relationship was observed
between the monthly cumulative dose of BTH injected subcutaneously or
intramuscularly and the development of WB (2 for linear trend, 26.5;
P<.001). In the final regression model, subcutaneous or intramuscular
injection of BTH was the only behavior associated with WB among IDUs (odds
ratio, 13.7; 95% confidence interval, 3.0-63.0). The risk for development
of WB was not affected by cleaning the skin, cleaning injection
paraphernalia, or sharing needles.

Conclusions.-Injection of BTH intramuscularly or subcutaneously is the
primary risk factor for the development of WB. Physicians in the western
United States, where BTH is widely used, should be aware of the potential
for WB to occur among IDUs.

JAMA. 1998;279:859-863

>From the Division of Communicable Disease Control, California Department of
Health Services, Berkeley (Drs Passaro, Werner, and Vugia and Mr McGee),
and the Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine, Stanford
University Medical School, Stanford, Calif (Dr Passaro), and the Division
of Field Epidemiology, Epidemiology Program Office, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga (Drs Passaro and Mac Kenzie). Dr
Passaro is now with the Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic
Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center. Dr Mac Kenzie is now with the
Division of Parasitic Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

***

[JAMA] EDITOR'S NOTE.-Despite the well-known hazards of injection drug use,
such as human immunodeficiency virus infection, endocarditis, and fatal
overdose, some substance abusers continue to inject heroin and other
illicit drugs. This case-control study evaluated injection drug users who
developed another dangerous complication, wound botulism, and examined risk
factors for this potentially fatal paralytic disorder. Injection of black
tar heroin (a dark, tarry form of the drug) subcutaneously or
intramuscularly (a practice known as skin-popping) was associated with an
increased risk for wound botulism, with a "dose-response" relationship
between the cumulative amount of black tar heroin injected via this route
and development of disease. Clinicians should add wound botulism to the
list of dangerous complications they may encounter in patients who inject
black tar heroin and other illicit drugs.

Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD, Senior Editor

(c) 1995-1998 American Medical Association.

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

Son Of Zoo Official Faces Drug Charges ('Milwaukee Journal Sentinel'
Says The 18-Year-Old Man From Racine, Wisconsin,
Has Been Charged With Selling A Half-Ounce Of Cocaine For $725
To An Undercover Cop)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 11:01:45 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US WI: Son of Zoo Official Faces Drug Charges
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: "Frank S. World" 
Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (WI)
Contact: jsedit@onwis.com
Fax: (414) 224-8280
Website: http://www.jsonline.com/
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Author: Meg Jones of the Journal Sentinel staff

SON OF ZOO OFFICIAL FACES DRUG CHARGES

A Racine zoo official's son, who was accused of taking $3,000 from the zoo
last year, has been charged in Jefferson County with selling cocaine to an
undercover officer, officials said Tuesday.

Patrick Torhorst, 18, of Racine, was in the Jefferson County Jail on
Tuesday in lieu of $5,000 bail.

Torhorst was charged Monday in Jefferson County with one count of delivery
of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a park and two counts of possession of
narcotics with the intent to deliver. A preliminary hearing is scheduled
for Tuesday.

Torhorst was arrested Sunday in Palmyra after he allegedly sold a
half-ounce of cocaine for $725 in a restaurant parking lot, Palmyra Police
Chief Scott Neubauer said Tuesday.

When officers searched Torhorst's vehicle, they discovered 500 Vicodin and
100 Percodan painkiller pills, which Torhorst admitted stealing from a
Waterford pharmacy where he works, according to the criminal complaint.
Neubauer said the pharmacy is owned by Torhorst's uncle.

When police asked Torhorst about the painkillers, he said he intended "to
eat 'em and also to give them to friends," according to the complaint.

Torhorst was cited last year for municipal ordinances of trespass and
theft, and ordered to pay a $250 fine in connection with a burglary at the
Racine zoo, where his father, Thomas Torhorst, is the executive director.

He could have faced a felony charge of burglary, but Racine County District
Attorney Robert Flancher decided to charge Torhorst with the lesser
ordinance.

As part of the agreement, a felony burglary charge could be filed if
Torhorst commits a crime. Neubauer said Tuesday the district attorney was
considering filing burglary charges against Torhorst in light of his arrest
Sunday.

Flancher did not return a phone message Tuesday.

Police were called to the Racine zoo in September after $3,000 was stolen
during a burglary. Two days after the break-in, Patrick Torhorst's attorney
told police that the teen had admitted his involvement and that his father
would repay the money.

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

Truth In Sentencing Examined ('Tulsa World'
Says An Oklahoma Legislative Committee Has Been Meeting Twice A Week
To Examine Revisions To Last Year's Truth-In-Sentencing Law
And Whether They Are Keeping Violent And Habitual Offenders
Behind Bars Longer - Critics Say Opposite Has Happened -
House Of Representatives Passed A Bill Last Week That Would Greatly Increase
Many Sentences)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 16:36:02 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: Olafur Brentmar 
Subject: MN: US OK: Truth in Sentencing Examined
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: OK NORML 
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Source: Tulsa World (OK)
Author: Brian Ford World Capitol Bureau 3/18/98
Contact: tulsaworld@mail.webtek.com
Website: http://www.tulsaworld.com

TRUTH IN SENTENCING EXAMINED

OKLAHOMA CITY -- A joint legislative committee is examining whether the
truth-in-sentencing law really would give the ``bad guys more time'' in
prison.

The committee has been meeting twice a week to examine revisions to the
truth-in-sentencing law, which was passed last year.

The Thursday meetings have been open to the public, but the Tuesday
meetings have been closed at least twice to reporters in past weeks.
Tuesday was the first time the Tuesday meeting was opened to reporters.

The truth-in-sentencing law was aimed at making violent and habitual
offenders serve 75 percent to 85 percent of their sentences under a brand
new sentencing guideline system. Less serious offenders would be placed in
local community sentencing programs that could range from incarceration to
drug and alcohol treatment to education.

Prosecutors, sheriffs and some crime victim groups have roundly criticized
the law, saying they believe many offenders would actually do less time
than what the old sentencing system allowed. Proponents of the law disagree.

The House of Representatives passed a bill last week that would greatly
increase many sentences and move back the implementation date of the new
law from July 1 to Jan. 1.

House Bill 2927, authored by House Speaker Loyd Benson, D-Frederick, and
Senate President Pro Tem Stratton Taylor, D-Claremore, would still require
violent offenders to serve 85 percent of their sentences, but it gives
judges and prosecutors more leeway in the length of sentences that can be
sought. The bill also would lengthen the potential sentences of many
offenses but would still do away with jury sentencing in all but
first-degree murder cases. Judges could impose longer sentences for
criminals who had been incarcerated by the Department of Corrections twice
before.

On Tuesday, Sen. Cal Hobson, D-Lexington, the Senate chairman of the joint
committee, said, ``We've got to settle the question: Did we or did we not
give the bad guys more time (with the law passed last year)?''

Bill Chown, an official with the Department of Corrections, gave the
committee several statistics. Chown examined the actual time served by 66
Department of Corrections inmates who were convicted of rape and released
from prison over an 18-month period ending Dec. 31. He then examined what
they probably would have served if they had been convicted under the
truth-in-sentencing law.

He found that the average time served in the Department of Corrections was
nearly 47 months under the old law.

He said those inmates probably would have served an average of 134 months
under truth in sentencing. He said 56 of the 66 inmates probably would have
served longer terms under truth in sentencing.

Chown compared inmates convicted of other serious and violent crimes and
had the same results -- most would have served more time in prison under
truth in sentencing.

The committee plans to examine the cost next week of the House
truth-in-sentencing revision bill.

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

Branstad Signs Bill On Drug Testing ('Associated Press' Notes Iowa Governor
Terry Branstad On Tuesday Signed A Bill Allowing Private Businesses
To Test Workers' Urine Randomly Or With 'Reasonable Suspicion')

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 22:00:51 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: US IA: Branstad Signs Bill On Drug Testing
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: "Carl E. Olsen" 
Source: Des Moines Register
Author: Associated Press
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Contact: letters@news.dmreg.com
Webform: http://www.dmregister.com/letter.html
Website: http://www.dmregister.com/

LEGISLATURE - BRANSTAD SIGNS BILL ON DRUG TESTING

Workers could be subject to random tests for use of alcohol or other drugs
under legislation signed into law by Gov. Terry Branstad on Tuesday.

The governor labeled the bill "the right prescription at the right time"
and said it would reduce industrial accidents and cut the use of drugs in
the workplace.

"If you want to work and prosper in Iowa, you better stay away from illegal
drugs," Branstad said at a formal signing ceremony attended by dozens of
supporters of the bill.

Businesses currently can test workers for drug use, but there are
restrictions that employers argue are so tight they make the law meaningless.

The new law, which takes effect in 30 days, allows random and unannounced
tests of workers. It also allows pre-employment screening tests without
including a physical examination and allows testing if companies have a
"reasonable suspicion" of drug use.

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

Alert - Medical Marijuana Vote In Congress Next Week
(Drug Reform Coordination Network Asks You To Write A Letter
And Make A Phone Call To Your US Representative Asking Him Or Her
To Oppose The House's Anti-Medical Marijuana Resolution, 372)

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 16:30:39 EST
Originator: drc-natl@drcnet.org
Sender: drc-natl@drcnet.org
From: DRCNet (manager@drcnet.org)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drc-natl@drcnet.org)
Subject: ALERT: Medical Marijuana Vote in Congress Next Week

ALERT: Medical Marijuana Vote in Congress Next Week

--- PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE ---

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

3/18/98
Dear DRCNet reader:

Your help is needed this week to defeat a "sense of the
house" resolution opposing the medical use of marijuana.
H.Res. 372 states "Marijuana is a dangerous and addictive
drug and should not be legalized for medicinal use," and
"The United States House of Representatives is unequivocally
opposed to legalizing marijuana for medicinal use, and urges
the defeat of state initiatives which would seek to legalize
marijuana for medicinal use." While the resolution is not
binding, its passage would create another political
roadblock in the way of freedom from prison for medical
marijuana patients. Ironically, the resolution's sponsor,
Bill McCollum, was a co-sponsor of pro-medical marijuana
legislation in the early 1980's.

Please call or fax your U.S. representatives and tell
them that the people supporting this resolution should stop
playing doctor, and that you want the government to get out
of the way and let patients and doctors make medical
decisions without threat of criminal punishment. Urge them
to instead sponsor H.R. 1782, making medical marijuana legal
under federal law, or at least to wait until the Institute
of Medicine completes its scientific review of the issue
this December.

You can reach your Representative (or find out who your
rep is) via the Congressional Switchboard at (202) 224-3121.
You can leave your opinion by phone, or ask your rep's
office for their fax number.

If you are from a state that has or has had an
initiative legalizing medical use of marijuana, and if you
have seen recent press coverage of the issue, consider
writing a letter to the editor. Such states include
California and Arizona (last year), and Maine, Alaska,
Florida, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and the
District of Columbia. Points for your letters:

* The federal government should respect states' rights and
the will of the voters (our will, if you are from one of
these states).

* Politicians should stop politicizing this medical issue
and let science and common sense prevail. At a minimum they
should wait until the Institute of Medicine completes its
scientific review of medical marijuana later this year.

* Other addictive drugs like morphine, cocaine and
methamphetamine are legally prescribable medicines.

* It irrational and cruel to incarcerate sick people who
happen to choose marijuana as their treatment, or to
threaten their physicians.

As usual, please send us copies of your correspondence
or let us know what actions you have taken. And please act
now, before H. Res. 372 reaches the floor! Further
information on marijuana legislation is available online at
http://www.norml.org and http://www.mpp.org.

| PROTEST IN SAN FRANCISCO, MARCH 24 11:00AM -- info at |
| http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/3-13.html#medmjrally |

***

Drug Reform Coordination Network, 2000 P St. NW Suite 615
Washington, DC 20036, (202) 293-8340 (voice), (202)
293-8344 (fax), drcnet@drcnet.org, http://www.drcnet.org

***

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

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

Rogan Now Backs Resolution Against Medical Marijuana
(According To 'The Glendale News-Press Leader,'
US Representative James Rogan, A First-Term Republican,
Says He Will Vote In Favor Of The House's Anti-Medical Marijuana Resolution,
372, Despite Having Supported Medical Cannabis In The California Assembly -
He Says His Position Is Unchanged)

Newshawk: From Richard Lake, Sr. Editor, DrugSense News Service
Source: Glendale News-Press Leader
Contact: FAX: 818-241-1975
Mail: Dan Bolton, Executive Editor, 425 W Broadway #30, Glendale, CA 91204
Pubdate: March 18, 1998
Author: Kevin Smith
Subject: MN: US CA: Rogan Now Backs Resolution Against Medical Marijuana
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Contact: letters@latimes.com
Fax: 213-237-4712
Pubdate: March 18, 1998

ROGAN NOW BACKS RESOLUTION AGAINST MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Congressman says his position is no different than when he was an
assemblyman and favored limited use.

GLENDALE ~ Congressman James Rogan says he will back a resolution that
opposes the use of marijuana for medical purposes, despite having supported
the idea as a state assemblyman. The first-term Republican, whose 27th
Congressional District includes Glendale, nonetheless said he is taking the
same position he took in the Assembly.

House Resolution 372 expresses the sense of the House of Representatives
that marijuana "is a dangerous and addictive drug and should not be
legalized for medicinal use."

Resolutions carry no legal weight, but are often crafted to gauge support
for legislation on issues.

The resolution has already been approved by the House Subcommittee on Crime
and is expected to be brought to the floor for a full House vote, possibly
next week. Rogan, elected to the 43rd Assembly District eat in 1994, served
through 1996.

"I supported (medical use of marijuana) in the Assembly, but only in
limited circumstances of a physician being able to prescribe marijuana for
terminal patients," he said.

He does not support Proposition 215, approved by California voters in 1996,
because it is too broad in scope, Rogan said.

"It allows any medical practitioner to use it," he said. "And that could
mean an acupuncturist or ... a witch doctor. And not all of the patients
are terminal cases."

In September 1995, Rogan supported Assembly Bill 1529. The measure, which
ultimately failed, was intended to provide a criminal defense for personal
possession of marijuana for medical purposes, but only when approved in
writing by a licensed physician for patients with cancer, AIDS, glaucoma
and multiple sclerosis. Rogan's support for limited use of marijuana was
fueled by personal experience.

In 1980, Rogan's cousin was diagnosed with cancer and given just six months
to live.

Under his doctor's advice, he began using marijuana to gain weight and
combat the nausea brought on by chemotherapy treatments. Rogan believes his
cousin's use of marijuana helped him live for another 10 years.

"It had everything to do with him being able to get out of bed, eat, go to
work and be productive for another decade," Rogan said, according to a
transcript of his remarks in front of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Pasadena Democrat Barry Gordon, who is running for Rogan's seat, agreed
with Rogan that Proposition 215 was too broad. But, he said, the House
resolution Rogan plans to support is every bit as vague as Proposition 215.

"That seems to close the door pretty solidly to me" on using marijuana for
medicinal use, he said. "And it's contrary to what the voters expressed in
1996."

Since its passage, the controversial initiative has faced numerous legal
challenges. Many establishments that have tried to sell marijuana for
medical purposes have been shut down.

The California Nurses Association supports Proposition 215. "As nurses, we
have seen that marijuana helps patients with nausea, vomiting and muscle
spasms where other medications are not effective," said Jill Furillo, a
legislative advocate for the group.

"Fifty-six percent of the voters approved it as an effective healing
methodology. The CNA believes the voters' desire to implement Proposition
215 must be respected."

Sgt. Rick Young, a spokesman for the Glendale Police Department, said some
who have been arrested in Glendale for possession of marijuana have claimed
they needed the drug for medical reasons. But none has been able to prove
it and no legal challenges have arisen in Glendale, he said.

"This proposition (215) fooled a lot of people," he said. "It played on the
sympathy of the terminally ill."

Young said people who really need the drug can take Marinol, a marijuana
derivative that comes in the form of a pill and is available through a
prescription.

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

DRCNet Needs Your Help (Drug Reform Coordination Network
Has More Than 4,500 E-Mail Subscribers,
But More Of Them Need To Contribute Money)

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 18:20:40 EST
Originator: drc-natl@drcnet.org
Sender: drc-natl@drcnet.org
From: DRCNet 
To: Multiple recipients of list 
Subject: DRCNet Needs Your Help

NEWSFLASH: Physician Leadership on National Drug Policy on
Nightline TONIGHT (3/18/98)

Dear DRCNet reader:

Once a week we write you with the week's news and
announcements on drug policy and the reform effort (latest
at http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/3-13.html). Sometimes,
like in our medical marijuana action alert earlier today
(http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/3-18-1.html), we alert you
to important votes taking place in Congress, state
legislatures, or other urgent matters. We need your help,
writing letters, making phone calls, being part of the
movement.

Today I am writing to ask for your help in another way.
DRCNet needs not only your participation but your financial
support as well, to secure the organization's health and
stability and enable us to continue fighting for change in
our disastrous global drug policy. We need your help to be
able to meet three very important goals:

1) Our budget projection calls for raising $6,850 in member
contributions this quarter. We need to raise another $1,500
over the next two weeks to meet this goal.

2) We need 77 more non-paying subscribers to become paying
members, in order to reach our 1st quarter goal of 750
paying members. (Our total number of e-mail subscribers is
well over 4,500.)

Our major donors will be paying attention to both of these
goals, and success in meeting them will be sure to give them
confidence in DRCNet's ability to make the grade.

3) While our fundraising this quarter has gone very well,
and we are likely to exceed our projected income, we are
still recovering from the latter part of 1997, when our
fundraising didn't go as well, and when we had to spend
several thousand dollars renting and equipping our new
office and on other organizational needs. We have had to
put off important plans and purchases several times, because
our cash flow is so tight. We need an influx of donations,
to bring our payroll current, purchase some much needed
equipment, to get the bills paid on time, and to keep from
running out of money before our next major donations arrive.

DRCNet needs your help this month. If you value our
service, but haven't yet taken the time to become a dues-
paying member, please take a few moments this week to send a
check or wire in a credit card donation. If you can't
afford the $25 full membership dues, become a "virtual"
member for $10. (We'll even take less if we have to!) If
you can afford to, please consider becoming a special friend
of the organization with a gift of $100 or more, or by
making a monthly pledge. If you are already a DRCNet
supporter, please consider making an additional donation.
And don't forget, we'll send a free copy of Marijuana Myths,
Marijuana Facts to anyone donating $30 or more.

Please visit our secure registration form at
; there you can wire us
your donation by credit card, or you can just let us know
that a check is on the way, and print the form out for your
convenience. Or, just send a check or money order to:
DRCNet, 2000 P St., NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036.
(Credit card donations can also be submitted by phone to
(202) 293-8340 or fax to (202) 293-8344.)

We value your participation, whether or not you can make
a gift at this time. If you are unable to contribute,
please send us a note to let us know that you are there and
that you intend to do your part by participating in letter
writing and other reform efforts. The cracks have started
to appear in the iron wall of prohibition; together we will
make the world a better place.

Sincerely,

David Borden
Executive Director

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

Orlando Protest March 19 (Florida Medical Marijuana Reformers
Are Asked To Show Up At Noon Thursday Outside The Office
Of Florida Representative Bill McCollum To Protest
His Anti-Medical Marijuana Resolution, 372)

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 15:57:59 EST
Originator: medmj@drcnet.org
Sender: medmj@drcnet.org
From: "Charles P. Conrad" (cpconrad@att.net)
To: Multiple recipients of list (medmj@drcnet.org)
Subject: ORLANDO PROTEST 3/19

Noon, Thursday 3/19, Rep. McCollum's (R-FL) Office -- 605 E. Robinson
in downtown Orlando.

Demonstration to protest his HR372.

BE THERE.

Chuck Conrad
(310) 542-6013
cpconrad@att.net
cpconrad@freecannabis.org
http://www.freecannabis.org
http://www.hempmuseum.org/
http://www.druglibrary.org

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

Americans Say Drug War Should Continue, Polls Show ('Reuters'
Account Of Summary In 'The Journal Of The American Medical Association'
Of 47 National Surveys Conducted Over The Past 20 Years, Reports
60 Percent Of Public Supports Physicians' Right To Prescribe Medical Cannabis -
Americans Also Hold Some Nonsensical Views Ripe For Political Exploitation -
For Example, 78 Percent Believe Anti-Drug Efforts Have Failed,
But 66 Percent Would Pay More Taxes To Expand Failed Policies)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 18:08:48 -0500
From: "R. Lake" 
Subject: MN: US: Wire: Americans Say Drug War Should Continue, Polls Show
To: DrugSense News Service 
Organization: The Media Awareness Project of DrugSense
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Nora Callahan http://www.november.org/
Source: Reuters
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998

AMERICANS SAY DRUG WAR SHOULD CONTINUE, POLLS SHOW

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Surveys over the last two decades show most Americans
believe the government's ``war on drugs'' has failed but that more money
should be spent on it, researchers said Tuesday.

In a study summarizing 47 national surveys conducted over the past 20 years,
researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health found that 78 percent of
the public believes anti-drug efforts have failed and that 66 percent were
willing to pay more taxes to fight drug use.

More than half those surveyed thought the drug problem had grown worse.

``Despite this assessment, they continue to support greater resources being
expended in generally the same policy direction as has been followed in the
past,'' researchers Robert Blendon and John Young wrote in the Journal of
the American Medical Association.

Roughly 60 percent of those polled supported allowing physicians to
prescribe medical marijuana for seriously ill patients.

About two-thirds thought illegal drug use was morally wrong, while 82
percent rated illegal drug use as a big problem for society.

Just 27 percent thought it was a major problem in their communities and 81
percent said drug abuse never caused problems in their own families.

Among 19 options designed to reduce the use and effect of illegal drugs, the
largest share of public support was for more severe penalties for dealing
and possession, followed by more anti-drug education and increased funding
for police.

Only 14 percent of the public supported drug legalization, and slightly more
than half said they believe drug-related crime would rise if drugs were
legalized.

The report estimated that illicit drugs led to about 11,000 deaths annually
in the United States. The U.S. government annually spends about $27 billion
directly on fighting the war on drugs, it said.

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

Despite Little Success, Public Still Supports War On Drugs -
Surveys Find Opposition To Drug Legalization, Support For Medical Use
Of Marijuana (AMA Web Site Synopsis Of Report In Today's
'Journal Of The American Medical Association,' Summarizing 47 National Polls
Conducted Over The Past 20 Years, Notes 'Illicit Drugs Lead To
Approximately 11,000 Deaths Each Year' In The United States)

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 14:04:07 EST
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: adbryan@onramp.net
To: Multiple recipients of list 
Subject: ART: JAMA - DESPITE LITTLE SUCCESS, PUBLIC STILL SUPPORTS WAR ON DRUGS

When reading this, keep in mind that only 1/3 of the colonists
wanted to seperate from Great Britain.

>From the 3-18-98 Journal of the American Medical Association

http://www.ama-assn.org/sci-pubs/sci-news/1998/snr0318.htm

***

THE PUBLIC AND THE WAR ON ILLICIT DRUGS

Robert J. Blendon, ScD; John T. Young, MPhil

This article presents what Americans think about the policies subsumed under
the label of the "War on Drugs." It is based on an analysis of 47 national
surveys conducted between 1978 and 1997. The major results are that most
Americans rely on the mass media for information about the scope of the drug
abuse problem; Americans do not think that the Wars on Drugs have
succeeded, but they do not want to quit on these efforts; weak support exists
for increasing funding for drug treatment; support for preventive education has
increased during the 1990s; criminal justice responses remain very popular; for
many, illicit drug use is a moral rather than a public health issue; the public
supports allowing physicians to prescribe marijuana for severe illness, but
opposes the general legalization of marijuana and other illicit drugs; and needle
exchange programs are supported by a bare majority, but only when they are
told that the American Medical Association supports these programs.

JAMA. 1998;279:827-832

***

DESPITE LITTLE SUCCESS, PUBLIC STILL SUPPORTS WAR ON DRUGS

Surveys find opposition to drug legalization, support for medical use of
marijuana

CHICAGO-Even though the majority of Americans do not feel the "War on
Drugs" has succeeded, they are not willing to give up on drug-fighting
efforts, according to an article in the March 18 issue of The Journal of
the American Medical Association (JAMA).

Robert J. Blendon, Sc.D., and John T. Young, M.Phil., of the Harvard
School of Public Health, in Boston, Mass., reviewed 47 national surveys
conducted between 1978 and 1997. They looked at four areas important to
health professionals interested in America's drug policy:

• Where do Americans get their information about the extent of the
nation's illegal drug problem, and what are their experiences with it?

• What worries Americans most about the country's illicit drug problems?

• Why do Americans think individuals use illegal drugs?

• What are the public's views on various policy proposals to respond to
the nation's drug problems, and what are their implications for the
future?

On the final question, the researchers found a paradox: " Most Americans
(58 percent) do not see the nation's illegal drug problem getting better
after years of increases in national spending, and they see the War on
Drugs as having failed thus far (78 percent). Yet, despite this
assessment, they continue to support greater resources being expended in
generally the same policy direction as has been followed in the past."

They go on to write: "Not only do Americans say that more money should
be spent dealing with addiction, they report that they are willing to
pay more in taxes (66 percent) to support increased antidrug-related
spending."

When choosing among 19 options for reducing the use and effects of
illegal drugs, the largest share of strong support is found for more
severe penalties for drug sale and possession. The second choice is
antidrug education in schools. The third choice is increased funding for
police.

A majority of Americans believe drugs are one of the most important
causes of crime. Only 14 percent of the public supports legalization of
illicit drugs. The researchers write: "The majority of the public (52
percent) believes that drug-related crime would actually increase if
drugs were legalized."

But a majority of Americans support legalized use of marijuana for
medical purposes: "In early 1997, separate surveys reported that 62
percent and 60 percent of the American public supported a policy where
physicians should be able to prescribe marijuana to their seriously and
terminally ill patients."

Among other findings of the study:

• Most people rely on mass media for information about the scope of drug
abuse in America.

• Although 82 percent of the public thinks illegal drug use is a big
problem for society, only 27 percent see it as a major problem in their
local communities. Eighty-one percent say drug abuse has never caused
problems in their own families.

• Seventy-two percent see drug use as changing the national character; 64
percent of adults describe it as morally wrong.

• Seventy-three percent of adults are very concerned about the
possibility of themselves or a family member being the victim of a crime
committed by a drug user.

• The majority of Americans believe individuals might begin using illegal
drugs because of peer pressure, poor parenting, or because drug dealers
are trying to expand their markets.

Illicit drugs lead to approximately 11,000 deaths each year, according
to information in the article. Over half a million drug-related episodes
are reported in hospital emergency departments. Direct government
expenditures linked to illicit drugs total $27 billion annually.
(JAMA. 1998;279:827-832)

Note: This work was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

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

Book Review - 'Crack In America - Demon Drugs And Social Justice'
('The Journal Of The American Medical Association' Says
The Well-Coordinated Collection Of 17 Essays By An Expert Panel
Of Social Scientists Notes The Media In 1986 First Exaggerated
The Health Risks Of Crack Cocaine And Then Created A Public Perception
That Illicit Drugs Were The Nation's Preeminent Problem
At A Time When The Government Was Defunding Social Programs)

Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 19:39:50 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: US; JAMA Book Review: Crack in America: Demon Drugs and Social
Justice
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: David.Hadorn@vuw.ac.nz (David Hadorn)
Source: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA. 1998;279:885-886)
Section: Books, Journals, New Media
Pubdate: 18 March 1998
Contact: JAMA-letters@ama-assn.org
Website: http://www.ama-assn.org/public/journals/jama/

CRACK

Crack in America: Demon Drugs and Social Justice, edited by Craig Reinarman
and Harry G. Levine, 388 pp, with illus, $48, ISBN 0-520-20241-4, paper,
$17.95, ISBN 0-520-20242-2, Berkeley, Calif, University of California
Press, 1997.

The introduction and spread of smokable cocaine, or crack, has inflicted
tremendous harm to individuals and to society. Not the least, the authors
of this provocative book argue, is the inappropriate punitive reaction to a
largely mythical crack "epidemic." The much publicized war on drugs of the
1980s, which failed to stem the supply of crack or other illegal drugs, had
its origins in a misleading, medicalized view of drug abuse and in a
conservative ideology. As the editors assert, "Unemployment, poverty, urban
decay, school crises, crime, and all their attendant forms of human
troubles were spoken of and acted upon as if they were the result of
individual deviance, immorality, or weakness." In such a context, an
offensive was launched with the advent of crack in 1986 that did little to
help drug users and had numerous ill effects.

The authors of Crack in America may not convert any drug prohibitionists to
their view that "individual choices are influenced by social
circumstances." Nevertheless, they provide ample ammunition for those of us
who argue against drug wars and for new responses that focus foremost on
reduction of harm to society at large and to the marginalized populations
most at risk from drugs and the crossfire of drug wars.

We cannot radically reduce drug abuse until we begin to eliminate the
social conditions that foster it. An understanding of the complex social
factors involved is needed, not only to accurately describe the problem,
but also to formulate effective intervention strategies. To that end, this
book is very useful for policymakers, health care providers, and students
of medicine, social work, and public health. While it does not contain a
chapter on prevention or treatment for the minority of users who develop
serious addictions, its statements on the social and political contexts of
drugs in American society provide necessary background for all of us
working in the field.

Crack in America is a well-coordinated collection of 17 essays by an expert
panel of social scientists who believe that the dominant
psychopharmacological analysis of drug use has rationalized an approach
that deliberately ignores social factors. Two introductory essays by the
editors convincingly show how the media (including the televised appearance
of President Bush with a vial of the drug) exaggerated crack's dangers. The
media also created a public perception of illicit drugs as the nation's
preeminent problem at a time when the government was defunding social
programs addressing more prevalent issues. The editors argue that while
media attention, which included as many as 37 network news segments on
crack in July 1986 alone, may have had a perverse "advertising effect" on
use of the drug, still "lifetime prevalence of crack use began low and
declined thereafter." Citing figures from the National Institute of Drug
Abuse's National Household Survey, they show that by 1992 only about 3% of
18- to 34-year-olds had ever used crack, about 1% had used it in the year
preceding the survey, and less than 0.5% had used it in the prior month.

The book's central section assesses crack's "myths and realities" from a
variety of perspectives. One chapter reviews the scientific literature to
argue that powder cocaine and smoked crack do not have very different
effects on their users and that neither produces instant addiction as
claimed by numerous politicians, journalists, and even scientific
researchers. The more substantial differences are in the social profiles of
the users of cheap, mass-marketed crack vs the much more expensive powder
cocaine. Nevertheless, the demonizing of crack led to offensives against
its most vulnerable users, causing, through differential sentencing laws,
disproportionate incarceration of African Americans, who make up 15% of
American drug users but are half to two thirds of those imprisoned on drug
charges.

Three chapters are based on fieldwork. One stems from participant
observation in the underground economy of the crack business in New York
City. Another profiles the attempts of two cocaine users to free themselves
from dependence. Most useful, a chapter on "bingeing and addiction among
heavy cocaine smokers" provides insight drawn from interviews with the
users on the patterns of their use and implies that harm reduction
treatment approaches could extend the periods between binges among many
crack users. None of these empirically based studies, however, involves
large samples, nor do they include many women. More research needs to be
done using longitudinal and qualitative approaches that can penetrate more
deeply into the nature of crack use and other drugs. Qualitative research,
especially, will allow us to derive the meanings of the stories and
experiences of drug users. Such research, ultimately, will make it possible
to design better drug and other health and mental health treatment programs
that address sex and cultural issues and incorporate more fully
contextualized treatment approaches. Additionally, the differences in
psychology and social setting for female drug users make it critical that
treatment strategies for women be based on research that focuses on women
specifically, rather than extrapolating from existing data on male drug users.

A separate section examines why crack did not reach epidemic levels in
three comparable societies: Canada, Australia, and the Netherlands. The
Canadian experience may be most relevant, as Canada's proximity made supply
easiest and the heavy influence of the US media led the Canadian public to
expect a similar "plague." The authors suggest that the relative lack of
ghettoes in Canadian cities may be the determining factor in crack's
inability to find a market there. The negligible use of crack in the other
two societies makes them less enlightening models for understanding the
situation in the United States. However, the Netherlands has long had a
less punitive response to drug use, based on earlier alcohol use policies.
Decriminalization and an emphasis on harm reduction have had positive
results in the Netherlands in addressing problems related to other drugs.
For example, use of marijuana in the Netherlands is less prevalent than in
the United States, and needle exchange programs have largely prevented the
spread of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) among Dutch heroin users.
Furthermore, Canada, Australia, and the Netherlands have national health
programs and more extensive social services than the United States, which
makes it possible to treat people with drug problems in a context of health
care rather than law enforcement.

A third section of the book discusses the harmful impact of the American
drug war on civil liberties, and in the final section, the editors discuss
alternatives to the prohibition model for drug policy. They do not endorse
calls for a blanket legalization of drugs or expect changes of policy or
public opinion overnight. Instead, they seek to influence debate on drug
policy over the long run so that society can move toward gradual,
controlled decriminalization. In their view, there are now "signs of
significant undercurrents of opposition to U.S. drug policy at major
institutions of influence and power," including the media and the medical,
law enforcement, and public health professions. They note several African
American mayors, including Kurt Schmoke of Baltimore, Md, who espouse the
value of harm-reduction strategies, such as needle exchange programs, in
addressing problems caused by illegal drugs.

In 1995, $8.2 billion was spent on the federal drug war, yet resources for
treatment and prevention remain extremely limited. The authors describe a
mother who was prosecuted after giving birth for distributing cocaine to
her baby in the moments just after birth, but who was denied entry into
several day treatment programs while she was pregnant. In my own research
on drug use among poor, primarily African American and Latina women in New
York City, I interviewed a woman who was upset over testing negative for
HIV because, while drug treatment is often accessible for HIV-positive
individuals, none would be available for her.

Some recent figures indicate a waning in use of crack cocaine. While drug
prohibitionists may claim credit, the decline is far more likely the result
of a normal, cyclical pattern and the attendant buildups of publicity and
law enforcement. One author in this book argues that "preliminary evidence
suggests that initiation into crack use began to decline at precisely the
time-late 1989-when crack was cheapest and most abundant."

No one can deny the extensive damage to society caused by the effects of
drug abuse. My recent research, for instance, has found that 60% to 70% of
drug-using women are victims of spousal abuse, vs 21% to 34% in the general
population. What is clear is that the long-standing approach in the United
States of responding to illicit drugs by increasing law enforcement has
been wasteful of resources, ineffective, and even cruel. Creative,
innovative approaches are needed in applying harm reduction to the
recurrent problem of drugs in our society. What we need are drug treatment
programs in which the cornerstone is realistic education about drugs and
their outcomes. These programs must focus on the full context of drug use,
including economic, social, and sex-specific factors, and not just on use
of drugs per se. The public has supported the use of methadone in treatment
of heroin addiction and can be persuaded of the value of other
harm-reduction approaches. Schools, churches, and the media all need to
enlist in spreading knowledge-based information and awareness of the value
of socially constructed knowledge in understanding drugs in our society.

A shortcoming of Crack in America is its lack of reference to how the
movement toward managed care and cutbacks in social programs through
welfare reform will affect those in need of drug treatment. Current
research has shown that large proportions of drug users are found in the
criminal justice, primary health, and welfare systems. With more people
being dropped from welfare rolls and losing associated health insurance
benefits, we need to devise means of intervention before they are
encountered in the criminal justice system. Additionally, research is
needed into the particular difficulties current and former drug users may
face finding the jobs required by new welfare policies.

Access to treatment and the maintenance of an array of services is
critical. Family, medical, economic, and social problems all need to be
addressed together if inroads are to be made into the damage caused to
individuals and to society by illegal drugs. To have more such effective
programs, we need extensive changes in our public policy and our politics.
For those changes to begin to seem possible, we need research and social
and political analysis like that presented in this book.

Nabila El-Bassel, DSW Columbia University School of Social Work New York, NY

(c) 1995-1998 American Medical Association.

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

DARE Doesn't Work, Study Finds - Students In Program Used Same Amount
Of Drugs As Others (Actually, This NBC News Broadcast Says
Suburban DARE Students Used More 'Drugs' Than Their Non-DARE Peers,
According To New Study By Dennis Rosenbaum,
Head Of The Criminal Justice Department At The University Of Illinois)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 12:14:51 EST
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Jim Rosenfield 
To: Multiple recipients of list 
Subject: D.A.R.E. doesn't work, study finds

Source: MSNBC
Pubdate: March 18, 1998
Url: http://www.msnbc.com/news/151739.asp

D.A.R.E. doesn't work, study finds
Students in program used same amount of drugs as others

By Jim Avila
NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT

CHAPEL HILL, N.C., March 18 - The D.A.R.E.
anti-drug program may be a good idea
gone bad. A new study concludes that the
program is not working and, in fact, may
actually be hurting drug-abuse prevention
efforts in some communities. The six-year
study followed 1,800 Illinois kids from
fifth grade through high school.

FOR MORE THAN 23 million children -
80 percent of America's schools - the nation's
antidrug mantra is "I pledge to lead a drug-free
life." That pledge comes from a program called
D.A.R.E., which stands for Drug Abuse
Resistance Education.

At McDougle Elementary School, in the
Carrboro School district of Chapel Hill, N.C.,
D.A.R.E. is one of the favorite subjects among
fifth-graders.

Though popular, Chapel Hill is thinking
about dropping the class. "The body of research
about D.A.R.E. says that it has no long-term
effect for drug-abuse prevention," said Susan
Spalt, the health director for the Carrboro School
District.

***

'It hurts me to
sit here and tell
you that
D.A.R.E. does
not work.'
- DENNIS
ROSENBAUM
author of new study

***

In the most comprehensive study yet on
D.A.R.E., researchers followed 1,800 students
using techniques endorsed by D.A.R.E. itself. Its
author concluded that D.A.R.E. is a a waste of
money - $220 million in tax money and
donations last year alone with no beneficial effect
on drug use.

"It hurts me to sit here and tell you that
D.A.R.E. does not work," said Dennis
Rosenbaum, the author and head of the Criminal
Justice Department at the University of Illinois.
"But it's time for us to go back to the drawing
board and figure out how it can be improved or
what better ways we can spend our money on
drug education in this country."

Rosenbaum's six-year study finds that kids
in the D.A.R.E. program used the same amount
of drugs as others. Perhaps the researchers most
surprising conclusion: D.A.R.E. actually appears
to have an "adverse" effect on drug activity in
suburban communities.

"Kids in the suburbs who were exposed to
the D.A.R.E. program, who participated in
D.A.R.E., actually had significantly higher levels
of drug use than suburban kids who did not get
the D.A.R.E. program," said Rosenbaum. "This
was very disturbing to us."

It's a mystery the researchers say requires
further study.

Bill Alden, a former U.S. Drug Enforcement
agent and spokesman for D.A.R.E., calls the
study "outrageous." NBC News provided him
with a copy and asked him about its findings.

"I don't have an answer," he said.

For its part, D.A.R.E. embraces one study
from Ohio State University that says the program
does work, if students are given additional
anti-drug classes through high school. But an
overwhelming majority of students do not take
such classes and a dozen other studies have flatly
concluded that D.A.R.E. does not deliver on its
promise to "teach kids to resist drugs."

***

'Millions of
parents say
DARE made a
difference in my
child's life.'
- BILL ALDEN
deputy director of
D.A.R.E. America

***

D.A.R.E. officials are pushing to add more
programs in junior high and high schools.

"It's not that D.A.R.E. doesn't work," said
Bill Alden, deputy director of D.A.R.E. America.
"D.A.R.E. does work. But it dissipates. It erodes.
What has to happen ... there has to be more, not
less."

Alden said D.A.R.E. is a popular program.
"We've got thousands and thousands of
principals," he said. "Millions of parents say,
'D.A.R.E. made a difference in my child's life.'"

But the two key federal agencies evaluating
drug abuse programs do not recommend
D.A.R.E. on their lists of acceptable programs,
leaving school districts like Chapel Hill with a
difficult choice.

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

Health Experts - Treat, Don't Jail, Drug Abusers ('Dallas Morning News'
Says New Research From The Physician Leadership On National Drug Policy,
A Bipartisan Group Of Prominent Physicians And Public Health Leaders
From The Clinton, Bush And Reagan Administrations,
Shows That Abuse Of Alcohol And Other Drugs Is A Medical Problem
That Respond Much Better To Medical Treatment Than To Jail -
Long-Term Drug Treatment Is As Effective As Long-Term Treatment
For Some Chronic Diseases Such As Diabetes, Asthma And Hypertension)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 17:10:12 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US: Health Experts: Treat, Don't Jail, Drug Abusers
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: adbryan@onramp.net
Source: Dallas Morning News
Contact: letterstoeditor@dallasnews.com
Website: http://www.dallasnews.com
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998

HEALTH EXPERTS: TREAT, DON'T JAIL, DRUG ABUSERS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Drug and alcohol abuse are medical problems that respond
to medical treatment just as well as diabetes and other chronic diseases do
-- and treatment is cheaper and more effective than jail, says new
research.

Yet the nation spends only 20 percent of its $17 billion drug-control
budget to treat addicts, and the public believes that jailing addicts is
best, a bipartisan group of public health experts said Tuesday.

"We've been telling people to 'just say no' when addiction is a biological
event," said Dr. June Osborn, who chairs the new Physician Leadership on
National Drug Policy. "There must be a bridge between what the public
believes and the science," added Dr. Lonnie Bristow of the American Medical
Association.

The group of prominent physicians and public health leaders from the
Clinton, Bush and Reagan administrations commissioned the research. They
are using it to urge doctors to play a greater role in diagnosing and
treating addiction - - and are providing it to politicians who control
drug-treatment money.

Many of the 14 million American alcoholics and 6.7 million drug addicts
relapse after drug treatment, but the scientists concluded that:

Jailing a drug addict costs $25,900 per year. A year of traditional
outpatient drug treatment costs $1,800, intensive outpatient care costs
$2,500, methadone treatment for heroin users costs $3,900 and residential
drug-treatment programs range from $4,400 to $6,800 a year.

Drug treatment can cut crime by 80 percent, said Brown University addiction
director Norman Hoffman. Brown researcher Craig Love studied female
substance abusers who were in jail, and found that 25 percent who underwent
treatment were later re-arrested, versus 62 percent released without
substance abuse treatment. A California study of 1,600 drug abusers found
their involvement in drug sales, drug-related prostitution and theft
decreased threefold after treatment.

Every dollar invested in drug treatment can save $7 in societal and medical
costs, said former Assistant Health Secretary Philip Lee.

Long-term drug treatment is as effective as long-term treatment for chronic
diseases, said Dr. Thomas McLellan of the University of Pennsylvania.
One-year relapse rates for the diseases and for addicts all are about 50
percent, he said. Compliance with therapy is similar, too: Fewer than half
of diabetics comply with their therapy, as do fewer than 30 percent of
asthma and hypertension patients and fewer than 40 percent of alcohol or
drug abusers.

Drug treatment also helps society's health, McLellan said. Heroin users,
for example, are at huge risk of catching and spreading the AIDS virus or
hepatitis. A seven-year study of heroin addicts found 51 percent who never
entered drug treatment caught HIV during that period, versus. 21 percent of
treated addicts.

Severe shortage of treatment programs

Yet, there is a severe shortage of drug-treatment programs, the doctors
said About 15 percent of people who need treatment get it. Seven states
don't offer any methadone clinics for heroin addicts, and every U.S.
methadone clinic has a waiting list. Only 5 percent to 20 percent of
pregnant drug abusers can get drug treatment because of too few programs,
inability to pay or too few inpatient programs that will accept the woman's
other children, said Pennsylvania's Dr. Jeffrey Merrill.

The findings conflict with public opinion. An analysis of surveys being
published Wednesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association
finds support for increased spending on drug treatment has dropped from 65
percent in 1990 to 53 percent in 1996.

In contrast, 84 percent of Americans say the solution is tougher criminal
penalties. Next on the list are anti-drug education, more police and
mandatory drug testing.

The survey also found Americans believe drug abusers are predominantly
poor, uneducated and minorities. In fact, the majority are like Dr. Richard
Corlin's son, once a cocaine addict: white, from well-educated families and
initially employed.

Dispelling those myths is vital to public commitment for drug treatment,
said Corlin, a Los Angeles medical professor. "People think it is someone
else's problem. It is not."

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

Drug Treatment Pays, Study Finds ('San Jose Mercury News' Version)

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:11:24 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US: Drug Treatment Pays, Study Finds
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family 
Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA)
Contact: letters@sjmercury.com
Website: http://www.sjmercury.com/
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Author: Lauran Neergaard, Associated Press

DRUG TREATMENT PAYS, STUDY FINDS

But public favors costly prison time for addicts instead

WASHINGTON -- Medical treatment for drug addiction works as well as
treating diabetes or other chronic diseases, dramatically reduces crime and
is a lot cheaper than jail, says a study released Tuesday by bipartisan
public-health experts.

But a separate survey indicates that the public believes just the opposite
-- that jail is best, while support for drug treatment is dropping.

That perception prompts the federal government to spend only 20 percent of
the nation's $17 billion drug-control budget to treat addicts, a proportion
the doctors' group concluded should increase.

``We've been telling people to `just say no' when addiction is a biological
event,'' said Dr. June Osborn of the new Physician Leadership on National
Drug Policy, prominent physicians and public-health leaders from the
Clinton, Bush and Reagan administrations that commissioned the research
from half a dozen universities.

Big names

Included in the coalition were former Food and Drug Administration head
David Kessler; Dr. Antonia Novello, the surgeon general for the Bush
administration; Dr. Frederick Robbins, a Nobel laureate in medicine; the
deans of several prestigious medical schools; and the heads of several
professional medical associations.

Among their findings:

Sending addicts to jail costs society much more than treating them, the
coalition said. The annual cost of jailing each addict is $25,900, whereas
the annual cost of treating each addict ranges from $1,800 for outpatient
treatment to $6,800 for long-term hospitalization.

Drug treatment can cut crime by 80 percent, said Brown University addiction
director Norman Hoffman. Brown researcher Craig Love studied female
substance abusers who were in jail, and found that 25 percent who underwent
treatment were later re-arrested, vs. 62 percent released without
substance-abuse treatment.

Every dollar invested in drug treatment can save $7 in societal and medical
costs, said former Assistant Health Secretary Philip Lee.

Long-term drug treatment is as effective as long-term treatment for chronic
diseases, said Dr. Thomas McLellan of the University of Pennsylvania.
One-year relapse rates for the diseases and for addicts all are about 50
percent, he said. Compliance with therapy is similar, too: Fewer than half
of diabetics comply with their therapy, fewer than 30 percent of asthma and
hypertension patients, and fewer than 40 percent of alcohol or drug
abusers.

Drug treatment also helps society's health, McLellan said. Heroin users,
for example, are at huge risk of catching and spreading the AIDS virus or
hepatitis. A seven-year study of heroin addicts found 51 percent who never
entered drug treatment contracted HIV during that period, vs. 21 percent of
treated addicts.

Yet there is a severe shortage of drug-treatment programs, the doctors said.

About 15 percent of people who need treatment get it. About seven states
don't offer any methadone clinics for heroin addicts, and every U.S.
methadone clinic has a waiting list. Only between one in 20 and one in five
pregnant drug abusers can get drug treatment because of too few programs,
inability to pay or too few inpatient programs that will accept the woman's
other children, said Pennsylvania's Dr. Jeffrey Merrill.

The findings conflict with public opinion.

Public support lacking

An analysis of national surveys published today in the Journal of the
American Medical Association finds public support for increased spending on
drug treatment has dropped from 65 percent in 1990 to 53 percent in 1996.

In contrast, 84 percent of Americans say the solution is tougher criminal
penalties. Next on the list are anti-drug education, more police and
mandatory drug testing.

National drug-policy chief Barry McCaffrey welcomed the data, and will
discuss it next week at a conference on how to improve drug treatment
inside prisons.

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

Study - Treatment, Not Jail, Best Response To Drug Addiction
('Associated Press' Version In Massachusetts' 'Standard-Times')

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 17:54:52 -0500
From: "R. Lake" 
Subject: MN: US: Study: Treatment, Not Jail, Best Response to Drug Addiction
To: DrugSense News Service 
Organization: The Media Awareness Project of DrugSense
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: John Smith
Pubdate: Wed., 18 Mar. 1998
Source: The Standard-Times, Serving the South Coast of Massachusetts
Contact: YourView@S-T.com
WebPage: http://www.s-t.com
Author: Lauran Neergaard, Associated Press writer

STUDY: TREATMENT, NOT JAIL, BEST RESPONSE TO DRUG ADDICTION

WASHINGTON -- Medical treatment for drug addiction works as well as treating
diabetes or other chronic diseases, dramatically reduces crime and is a lot
cheaper than jail, says a study released yesterday by bipartisan public
health experts.

But a separate survey indicates that the public believes just the opposite
-- that jail is best, while support for drug treatment is dropping.

That perception prompts the federal government to spend only 20 percent of
the nation's $17 billion drug-control budget to treat addicts, a proportion
the doctors' group concluded should increase.

"We've been telling people to 'just say no' when addiction is a biological
event," said Dr. June Osborn of the new Physician Leadership on National
Drug Policy, prominent physicians and public health leaders from the
Clinton, Bush and Reagan administrations that commissioned the research from
half a dozen universities.

"There must be a bridge between what the public believes and the science,"
added Dr. Lonnie Bristow of the American Medical Association, who is helping
provide the data to Republican congressional leaders who control drug
spending.

That's not to say medically treating the 14 million American alcoholics and
6.7 million drug addicts is a cure -- many do relapse. But the scientists
concluded that:

Jailing a drug addict costs $25,900 per year. A year of traditional
outpatient drug treatment costs $1,800, intensive outpatient care costs
$2,500, methadone treatment for heroin users costs $3,900 and residential
drug-treatment programs range from $4,400 to $6,800 a year.

Drug treatment can cut crime by 80 percent, said Brown University addiction
director Norman Hoffman. Brown researcher Craig Love studied female
substance abusers who were in jail, and found that 25 percent who underwent
treatment were later re-arrested, vs. 62 percent released without substance
abuse treatment.

A California study of 1,600 drug abusers found their involvement in drug
sales, drug-related prostitution and theft decreased threefold after
treatment.

Every dollar invested in drug treatment can save $7 in societal and medical
costs, said former Assistant Health Secretary Philip Lee.

Long-term drug treatment is as effective as long-term treatment for chronic
diseases, said Dr. Thomas McLellan of the University of Pennsylvania.
One-year relapse rates for the diseases and for addicts all are about 50
percent, he said. Compliance with therapy is similar, too: Less than half of
diabetics comply with their therapy, less than 30 percent of asthma and
hypertension patients and less than 40 percent of alcohol or drug abusers.

Drug treatment also helps society's health, McLellan said.

Heroin users, for example, are at huge risk of catching and spreading the
AIDS virus or hepatitis. A seven-year study of heroin addicts found 51
percent who never entered drug treatment caught HIV during that period, vs.
21 percent of treated addicts.

Yet, there is a severe shortage of drug-treatment programs, the doctors
said. About 15 percent of people who need treatment get it. About seven
states don't offer any methadone clinics for heroin addicts, and every U.S.
methadone clinic has a waiting list.

Only between one in 20 and one in five pregnant drug abusers can get drug
treatment because of too few programs, inability to pay or too few inpatient
programs that will accept the woman's other children, said Pennsylvania's
Dr. Jeffrey Merrill.

The findings conflict with public opinion. An analysis of national surveys
being published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association
finds public support for increased spending on drug treatment has dropped
from 65 percent in 1990 to 53 percent in 1996.

In contrast, 84 percent of Americans say the solution is tougher criminal
penalties.

Next on the list are anti-drug education, more police and mandatory drug
testing.

The physicians group has elicited early interest in the data from Republican
health and drug-policy leaders such as Sens. Jim Jeffords of Vermont and
Orrin Hatch of Utah.

National drug policy chief Barry McCaffrey also welcomed the data, and will
discuss it next week at a conference on how to improve drug treatment inside
prisons.

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

Drug Treatment Programs Save Money, Study Finds ('Associated Press' Version
As Edited By 'The Oregonian')

Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 20:06:51 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)
Subject: MN: US: Drug Treatment Programs Save Money, Study Finds
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Rachel Rose
Source: Oregonian, The
Contact: letters@news.oregonian.com
Website: http://www.oregonlive.com/
Pubdate: Wed, 18 Mar 1998
Author: :Lauran Neergaard, The Associated Press

DRUG TREATMENT PROGRAMS SAVE MONEY, STUDY FINDS

Doctors say treating addicts is cheaper than jailing them, but another
survey finds the public opposed to paying for treatment

WASHINGTON -- Medical treatment for drug addiction works as well as
treatment for diabetes and other chronic diseases, dramatically reduces
crime and is much cheaper than jail, says a study released Tuesday by
bipartisan public health experts.

But a separate survey indicates that the public thinks the opposite-- that
jail is best -- while support for drug treatment is dropping.

That perception prompts the federal government to spend only 20 percent of
the nation's 117 billion drug-control budget to treat addicts, a proportion
the doctors' group concluded should increase.

"We've been telling people to 'just say no' when addiction is a biological
event," said Dr. June Osborn of the new Physician Leadership on National
Drug Policy. The group of prominent physicians and public health leaders
from the Clinton, Bush and Reagan administrations commissioned the research
from half a dozen universities.

"There must be a bridge between what the public believes and the science,"
added Dr. Lonnie Bristow of the American Medical Association, who is
helping provide the data to Republican congressional leaders who control
drug spending.

That's not to say medically treating the 14 million American alcoholics and
6.7 million drug addicts is a cure -- many relapse.

But the scientists concluded that:

Jailing a drug addict costs $25,900 per year. A year of traditional
outpatient treatment costs $1,800, intensive outpatient care costs $2,500,
methadone treatment for heroin users costs $3,900, and residential
drug-treatment programs range from $4,400 to $6,800 a year. Drug treatment
can cut crime by 80 percent, said Norman Hoffman, Brown University
addiction director. A Brown researcher, Craig Love, studied women substance
abusers who were in jail and found that 25 percent of those who underwent
treatment were re-arrested, compared to 62 percent of those who did not
receive treatment.

Every dollar invested in drug treatment can save $7 in societal and medical
costs, said former Assistant Health Secretary Philip Lee. Long-term drug
treatment is as effective as long-term treatment for chronic diseases, said
Dr. Thomas McLellan of the University of Pennsylvania. One-year relapse
rates for the diseases and for addicts are about 50 percent, he said.
Compliance with therapy is similar, too: Less than half of diabetics comply
with their therapy, compared to less than 30 percent of asthma and
hypertension patients and less than 40 percent of alcohol or drug abusers.
Drug treatment also helps society's health, McLellan said. Heroin users,
for example, are at high risk of contracting and spreading the AIDS virus
or hepatitis.

But there is a severe shortage of drug-treatment programs, the doctors said.

About 15 percent of people who need treatment get it. About seven states
don't offer methadone clinics for heroin addicts, and every U.S. methadone
clinic has a waiting list. Only between one in 20 and one in five pregnant
drug abusers can get drug treatment because of too few programs, inability
to pay or too few inpatient programs that will accept the woman's other
children, said Pennsylvania's Dr. Jeffrey Merrill.

The findings conflict with public opinion.

An analysis of national surveys to be published today in the Journal of the
American Medical Association finds public support for increased spending on
drug treatment has dropped from 65 percent in 1990 to 53 percent in 1996.

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

Doctors Want Addicts Cured, Not Jailed ('USA Today' Version)

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:16:04 -0800
From: Allison Bigelow 
Reply-To: whc@CNW.COM
To: hemp-talk@hemp.net
Subject: HT: USA today: Doctors want addicts cured, not jailed
Sender: owner-hemp-talk@hemp.net

Doctors want addicts cured, not jailed

WASHINGTON - Research sponsored by a group of the nation's leading doctors
concludes that drug addiction is a chronic illness that can be treated as
readily as hypertension, diabetes and asthma.

The research also shows that treatment is a better and cheaper anti-crime
measure than prison. Yet a separate study in Wednesday's Journal of the
American Medical Association (JAMA) reports that the public prefers jailing
drug offenders to treating them.

The doctors' research, based on an analysis of more than 600 studies, was
commissioned by Physician Leadership on National Drug Policy, a new group
that wants to tip public opinion toward treatment and away from prisons.

"Incarceration reduces drug use only temporarily and at great expense," the
University of Pennsylvania's Thomas McLellan, lead author of one of the
studies, said Tuesday.

For instance, he said, spending $2,800 to $9,000 on drug treatment can save
$19,000 in crime-related costs. Imprisoning one drug abuser costs about
$25,900 a year.

The White House office of drug policy on Tuesday endorsed the doctors'
approach.

Heading the 37-member doctors group is June Osborn, former chair of the
National Commission on AIDS. It includes David Kessler, former commissioner
of the Food and Drug Administration; Louis Sullivan, President Bush's
secretary of Health and Human Services; and the editors of leading medical
journals.

Osborn said the evidence is unequivocal that drug abuse is an illness.
Although addicts bear responsibility for their plight, she said, so do
people with heart disease who smoke and diabetics who eat poorly. "We were
telling people to 'just say no,' when addiction is a biological event."

McLellan cited evidence from studies of twins, the best source of
information on inheritance, that shows the risk of inheriting a
vulnerability to addiction is roughly the same as the risk of inheriting
asthma or diabetes.

Other studies show that addictive drugs alter the wiring of the brain,
making it harder for some people to stop taking them once they've started.
Ninety-five percent of youths try drugs or alcohol at some point,
McLellan noted.

The studies show that drug abusers comply with abstinence-oriented treatment
about as well as people with recognized chronic illnesses stick with their
therapy.

Sue Rusche of the anti-drug parents group National Families in Action in
Atlanta endorses the notion that drug abusers should be treated. She says,
however, that lawbreakers should be punished.

The study in JAMA shows that her opinion is widely held. The analysis of
opinion surveys by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health found
that 78% of Americans view the nation's "war on drugs" as a failure, yet
they favor "more severe penalties for the possession and sale of drugs."

By Steve Sternberg, USA TOD Gannett Co. Inc.

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

It's Not A War Against Drugs (Transcript Of ABC 'Nightline' Program
On Treatment Versus Prisons)

Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 22:26:32 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: US: Transcript: ABC Nightline: It's Not a War Against Drugs
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family 
Source: ABC Nightline
Transcript: Produced by Federal Document Clearing House
Pubdate: Wednesday, 18 Mar 1998
Contact: http://www.abcnews.com/onair/email.html
Website: http://www.abcnews.com/

IT'S NOT A WAR AGAINST DRUGS - IT'S A WAR AGAINST A DISEASE

TED KOPPEL We are, in many respects, a nation of addicts. We eat too much,
we smoke too much, we drink too much coffee, we consume too much alcohol,
we take too much prescription medicine. Even in relatively benign areas
like diet and exercise, many of us are inclined toward wretched excess. But
in all of those areas, assuming, of course, that we're talking about
adults, we are acting within the law. Drug addiction, on the other hand,
falls into a unique categor