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

Medical marijuana a mistake (An op-ed in The Bulletin, in Bend, Oregon,
by Eric Bush, apparently a law-enforcement official, opposes Measure 67,
asking "how much of a victim you would feel like if a person crashed into you
or your family while driving down the road, coming from the marijuana store
in town," as if the Oregon Medical Marijuana allowed marijuana dispensaries.)

From: cwagoner@bendnet.com
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 08:21:08 -0800 (PST)
Subject: DPFOR: Medical marijuana a mistake
To: DPFOR@drugsense.org
Sender: owner-dpfor@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfor@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/
Newshawk: Curt Wagoner (cwagoner@bendnet.com)
Source: the Bulletin (bulletin@bendbulletin.com)
Website: http://www.bendbulletin.com
Pubdate: 10-31-98
Section: In my view
Page: A6

Medical marijuana a mistake

By Eric Bush
For the Bulletin

For years I have been involved in the "war on drugs." While many debate
the effectivness of our nation's laws and policies in regards to the fight
against drugs, one thing is clear: They are here and it is a problem that is not
getting any better. In my experiences, I have spoken with many marijuana
addicts, both recovered and not. I have been involved in the seizure of
thousands of marijuana plants in Oregon, and hundreds of pounds of finished
marijuana for sale on the street.

Does anyone remember the old phrase from the early 20th century when
someone was caught with an amount of alcohol "just for medicinal purposes "?
We laugh about that now, but many believed in the early 20th century that there
was medicinal value to alcoholic beverages. There are genuine alternatives that
are more effective and less dangerous to the medical patient for pain control
then smoking marijuana... which by itself can and often does cause the
developement of many health proplems.

According to Dr. Janet Lapey, executive director of Concerned Citizens for
Drug Prevention Inc., The American Medical Association, American Cancer Society,
National Multiple Sclerosis Society, and the Food and Drug Administration all
testified that marijuana had not been found to be safe and effective medicine.

Unfortunantly , The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
(NORML) would disagree, but their overall objectivity and motivations should
be challenged. In 1979 the director of NORML, Keith Stroup, told an Emory
University audience that his organization would use the medicinal use of
marijuana "as a red herring to give marijuana a good name." NORML is promoter
of measure 67 and is working to defeat measure 57. Their long range goal is
clear... the total legalization of this dangerous drug.

There are hundreds of other hard-core drug addicts I have spoken with,
hooked on harder drugs like methamphetamine and cocaine. I have never met one
who told me that they had not used marijuana before becoming hooked on harder
drugs. That, by itself, demonstrates the hideous nature of this drug.

Next time you hear or see some advertisement or news clip advocating the
legalization of marijuana where there is a medical patient taking a hit from a
pipe or a joint, telling you that this is the only way their pain can be
relieved, ask yourself why that patient wasn't simply prescribed an even more
effective substitute that had fewer side effects. Surely it would be easier on
the person's lungs if nothing else. Or perhaps ask who financed that commercial
on TV and why they did. Or ask yourself how much of a victim you would feel like
if a person crashed into you or your family while driving down the road, coming
from the marijuana store in town.

***

[The letter above also appeared in today's Oregonian. - ed.]

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

Re - Medical marijuana a mistake (A letter sent to the editor
of The Bulletin, in Bend, Oregon, criticizes today's op-ed
opposing Measure 67, the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act.)

From: creator@islandnet.com (Matt Elrod)
To: dpfor@drugsense.org
Subject: Sent: DPFOR: Medical marijuana a mistake
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:39:30 -0800
Lines: 35
Sender: owner-dpfor@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfor@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/

To the editor,

In his editorial of October 31, (Medical marijuana a mistake), Eric Bush
asked, "how much of a victim you would feel like if a person crashed into
you or your family while driving down the road, coming from the marijuana
store in town."

I would certainly be annoyed if the person had not followed the advice of
the store and waited to consume their cannabis until they had returned to
their home. I would be more annoyed if the person had been taking legally
prescribed tranquilizers and/or pain killers, responsible for thousands of
automobile accidents annually, because they were unable to obtain cannabis.

It has been shown that people tend to substitute cannabis for alcohol and
other more profoundly impairing drugs when cannabis is available. In a
statistical analysis, Frank Chaloupka, an economist at the Chicago campus
of the University of Illinois, found that states without criminal sanctions
against cannabis possession suffered fewer auto fatalities.

More recently, the largest study ever done linking automobile accidents
with drugs and alcohol has just found drivers with cannabinoid metabolites
in their blood are no more at risk than those who are drug-free. In fact,
the findings by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and
Transport South Australia found that drivers who had smoked cannabis were
marginally less likely to have an accident than those who were drug-free.

How much of a victim would Eric Bush feel if a family member with cancer
were arrested and sent to prison for using a time-tested medicinal herb to
fight their chemotherapy-induced nausea?

Matthew M. Elrod
4493 [No Thru] Rd.
Victoria, B.C.
V9C-3Y1
Phone: 250-[867-5309]
Email: creator@islandnet.com

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

Initiative 692, Do Right For The Sick (A letter to the editor of The Herald,
in Everett, Washington, says opponents of the medical marijuana
ballot measure are cruel, illogical and hypocritical.)

Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:20:26 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US WA: PUB LTE: MMJ: Initiative 692, Do Right For The Sick
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John Smith
Pubdate: Sat, 31 Oct 1998
Source: Herald, The (WA)
Copyright: 1998 The Daily Herald Co.
Contact: letters@heraldnet.com
Website: http://www.heraldnet.com/
Author: Thomas H. LaBelle, Clearview

INITIATIVE 692

DO RIGHT FOR THE SICK

All the shrieking and lamentations against Initiative 692 (medical
marijuana) are cruel, illogical and hypocritical.

First, the cruelty: Would you like to have your spouse prefer death
from cancer (as many do) because the endless, violent retching caused
by chemotherapy simply can no longer be tolerated? How about seeing
your kid go blind from glaucoma when a toke or two each day would save
his or her sight?

Now for the illogic: All pain killers and anesthetics can be - and
often are - used for recreation. If we are to follow the line of
reasoning put forth by the opponents, then we must deny all pain
killers to all people under all circumstances. To proscribe one drug
out of so many makes as much sense as saying it's OK to drive down to
the grocery in a Chevrolet or a Ford, but illegal in a Plymouth!

And finally the hypocrisy, inadvertent though it may be: I know a few
people who are foaming at the mouth over the possible use of medical
marijuana and they are the very ones who, at the first sign of a cold,
head home for a few stiff belts.

Let's end the "reefer madness." Let's do the right thing for the sick
and hurting and vote for I-692.

THOMAS H. LaBELLE
Clearview

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

Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative Office Re-Opens (California NORML
says US District Judge Charles Breyer has allowed the OCBC
to resume activities other than the distribution or production of marijuana.)

Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 11:31:39 -0800
To: dpfca@drugsense.org
From: canorml@igc.apc.org (Dale Gieringer)
Subject: DPFCA: OCBC Office Re-Opens
Sender: owner-dpfca@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/

The Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative has re-opened its office for
activities other than distribution or production of marijuana. Federal
marshals returned the key to the OCBC at the direction of a court order by
Judge Breyer. The judge appears to have been favorably impressed by the
peaceful and cooperative spirit in which the OCBC complied with his
directive ordering closure of the club earlier this month.

Attorneys for the OCBC are currently filing an appeal to the Ninth Circuit
asking for reconsideration of Breyer's ruling shutting the club. In the
meantime, the OCBC will continue to assist its members, validate medical
marijuana patients for the city of Oakland, and lobby for federal
rescheduling of marijuana.

***

Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858 // canorml@igc.apc.org
2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114

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

County Settles Suit Filed by Drug Test Takers (The San Francisco Chronicle
says Contra Costa County has agreed to pay $1.2 million to thousands
of former welfare applicants to settle a legal challenge to the county's use
of a controversial written test to identify substance abusers.)

Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:50:04 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US CA: County Settles Suit Filed by Drug Test Takers
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Sat, 31 Oct 1998
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Copyright: 1998 San Francisco Chronicle
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Author: Bernadette Tansey, Chronicle Staff Writer

COUNTY SETTLES SUIT FILED BY DRUG TEST TAKERS

Screening Was Required For Welfare

Thousands of former welfare applicants will share in a $1.2 million
settlement of a legal challenge to Contra Costa County's use of a
controversial written test to identify substance abusers.

Deputy County Counsel Bernard Knapp announced yesterday that the
county has agreed to compensate applicants who were forced into drug
and alcohol abuse treatment based on the test results.

Civil rights attorneys filed a class-action suit against Contra Costa
in 1995, saying the test wrongly identified many applicants as
substance abusers and funneled half the client population into an
arduous six-month treatment program as a condition of receiving
general assistance grants.

Checks were withheld from those who refused to take the test, refused
treatment or failed to complete the substance abuse program.

Each applicant who lost benefits after taking the test from 1994 to
1997 will receive about $300, the equivalent of a monthly general
assistance grant, assuming the settlement is approved by U.S. District
Judge Maxine Chesney. The three lead plaintiffs, Jerry Hunsaker,
Martha Jensen and Hubert Hardge, will each receive $10,000.

Brad Seligman, an attorney for the applicants, said the lawsuit has
blocked county efforts to reduce its welfare rolls by raising
unnecessary hurdles for the destitute.

``It stopped the county from using a wildly inaccurate test as a
bludgeon to force people off general assistance,'' Seligman said.

Deputy County Counsel Bernard Knapp said welfare advocates failed to
prove their case in court, but the county settled to avoid a costly
trial. Chesney ordered the county in 1995 to stop using the test, but
an appeals court overturned that injunction in July.

Knapp acknowledged, however, that the lawsuit spurred changes in the
assessment procedure and that a study showed the test was ``less than
accurate.''

Seligman said the study indicated that half the people sent to
treatment were not chemically dependent, while the questionnaire
failed to identify half the applicants with substance abuse problems.

The county stopped giving the test, called the Substance Abuse Subtle
Screening Instrument (SASSI), in 1997 after Chesney issued the
injunction. Contra Costa did not revive the test after an appeals
court in San Francisco upheld the county's right to administer the
questionnaire, as long as a counselor made the final decision to
require drug treatment after a client interview.

Seligman said the plaintiffs may appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if
the county does not promise to refrain from using the test in the future.

He said the true-false exam includes invasive questions about
applicants' personal beliefs such as ``I believe everything is turning
out just the way the Bible said it would.''

Under the settlement, the county will be required to use newspaper
ads, postings and a toll-free telephone line to alert former
applicants, numbering as many as 5,000, who may be eligible for the
payments. Claim forms will likely go out next spring if the agreement
is finalized. Any unclaimed amounts will be donated to soup kitchens
and other agencies that serve Contra Costa's homeless population.

In separate proceedings, Chesney will determine whether the county
must pay attorneys' fees to Seligman and other civil rights lawyers on
the case.

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

Money man gets behind 5 props (A feature article in The Arizona Republic
spotlights John Sperling, the founder of the University of Phoenix
who has contributed more than $1 million for or against five of the 14
propositions on Tuesday's ballot in Arizona. The initiatives range from
medical marijuana to stopping the Legislature from thwarting voters to
enabling all voters to participate in candidate nominations.)

Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:40:16 -0600
From: "Frank S. World" (compassion23@geocities.com)
Reply-To: compassion23@geocities.com
Organization: Rx Cannabis Now!
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7417/
To: DRCNet Medical Marijuana Forum (medmj@drcnet.org)
Subject: US AZ MMJ: Money man gets behind 5 props
Sender: owner-medmj@drcnet.org
Source: The Arizona Republic
Contact: Opinions@pni.com
Website: http://www.azcentral.com/indexmain.html
Pubdate: Oct. 31, 1998

MONEY MAN GETS BEHIND 5 PROPS

By Steve Yozwiak The Arizona Republic

What 77-year-old man named John will have the most significant impact on
Arizonans in the next week?

Astronaut John Glenn? Wrong.

John Sperling, the founder of the University of Phoenix, will spend more
than $1 million -- more than any single contributor -- to persuade voters to
vote for or against five of the 14 statewide propositions on Tuesday's
ballot.

From medicinal marijuana to stopping the Legislature from thwarting voters
to enabling all voters to participate in candidate nominations, Sperling
puts his money where his mouth is. And the self-described activist and
self-made man has plenty of money and mouth.

But he is also a portrait in contradictions:

While building a half-billion-dollar fortune on the idea that private
colleges are the best way to enhance the nation's workforce, Sperling
continues to live in the same relatively modest Phoenix home he bought when
he moved here from the Bay area 22 years ago (although he's renovating a
$1.5 million fixer-upper at the base of Camelback Mountain).

Twice divorced (he last was married more than a quarter-century ago), he
maintains a close relationship with his son, Peter, 39, an executive in the
Apollo Group, Sperling's umbrella firm for a half-dozen business and
philanthropic ventures.

He is one of the state's richest men. Only his son and Bennett Dorrance, the
heir to the Campbell Soup fortune, rated higher on this year's Forbes 400.
Yet Sperling believes in higher income taxes for the wealthy so they can
contribute more to social services.

He spurns fast cars, yachts and other material trappings of the rich in
favor of scientific and educational pursuits. Even his major occupation is
based on the ideal of making people smarter, richer, more productive and
socially conscious.

On no subject is Sperling more passionate than his quest to end the war on
drugs, which he calls "a social disaster wrought by a bankrupt policy."

His goal is to switch the nation's emphasis from warehousing addicts through
the revolving door of the criminal-justice system to providing drug users
with the medical treatment they need to become healthy, self-supporting
citizens.

His $900,000 contribution to support "no" votes on Propositions 300 and 301
has helped make The People Have Spoken the best-funded issues committee in
this election.

Defeating both propositions would reinstate the medical use of marijuana and
diversion programs for drug abusers.

Rounding out the campaign's $1.6 million war chest are fellow
philanthropists George Soros of New York, a currency trader; and Peter
Lewis, head of a Cleveland insurance firm, each of whom contributed $366,000
to the cause.

Sperling, who for 20 years was a professor of economic history at such top
colleges as the University of Maryland and Ohio State University, has done
his homework. For more than a decade, he has studied the drug war as if
pursuing another thesis, reciting statistics that show that the effort has
failed and people are fed up with it.

But his convictions are also backed by personal experience. He cites a rich
New York banker-friend whose life was saved because he smoked marijuana to
stimulate his appetite, relieve nausea and ease pain during radiation
treatments.

In 1996, nearly two-thirds of the voters in Arizona and California approved
ballot measures that allowed doctors to prescribe marijuana for victims of
cancer, glaucoma and other diseases.

The Arizona measure also established a beefed-up diversion program so that
non-violent drug offenders could be given therapy instead of prison time.

But the Arizona Legislature last year moved to scrap the citizens
initiative. Lawmakers said voters were confused and the measure was just the
first dangerous step toward drug legalization. A new citizens measure put a
freeze on the Legislature's action until the voters could again decide the
matter Tuesday.

"I think this might be the first small step in reforming our national drug
policies," said Sperling, who is also supporting drug-medicalization
measures in other states.

Sperling says that the $350 billion spent each year on illegal drugs is
going to drug lords in this and foreign nations, who in turn use their
wealth to corrupt police, border agents, judges and politicians.

Just as President Eisenhower warned of a military-industrial complex,
Sperling warns of a bureaucratic-industrial complex that has resulted in
laws and enforcement measures that have given our nation the highest rate of
imprisonment in the industrialized world.

The cabal, he said, is composed of police and prison guards, their unions,
the construction firms that build prisons, the private firms that run the
growing number of private prisons, the food and other commodity firms that
supply prisons, and the politicians whose campaign coffers are filled by all
those who benefit from the current system.

Sperling's greatest scorn is reserved for the Arizona Legislature, which is
why he and his son are the principal contributors -- $425,000 -- to the
Voter Protection Alliance, a committee supporting a "yes" vote on
Proposition 105, and a "no" vote on Proposition 104.

Both propositions would make it more difficult for the Legislature to
overturn citizen initiatives, as lawmakers did with the 1996 medicinal
marijuana measure. But Proposition 105 is more stringent.

"Here's a Legislature that is just totally indifferent, not only to the will
of the citizenry, but also to a bankrupt (drug war) program," Sperling said.

The fifth ballot question influenced by Sperling is Proposition 103, which
would enable the 14 percent of Arizona voters registered as independents or
affiliated with small parties to vote in the primary election of their
choice.

Sperling initially gave $50,000 to Open Primary Elections Now to promote
Proposition 106, which would have enabled any voter of any party to vote in
any primary election. But that measure failed to make the ballot. Backers of
Proposition 106, including Democratic gubernatorial candidate Paul Johnson
and Republican Attorney General Grant Woods, then shifted their support to
Proposition 103.

Including independent voters in the primary elections, Sperling hopes, will
produce more moderate, higher-caliber candidates to run in future general
elections.

Sperling was in the news last month when a Texas paper reported that he gave
$2.3 million to a Texas university to clone his dog, Missy.

Only one problem. Sperling said he doesn't have a dog, or a cat or any other
pet. He said the cloning involves the pet of California friends. But the
professor never speaks out of school, and declined to name them.

Steve Yozwiak can be reached at (602) 444-8810 or at steve.yozwiak@pni.com
via e-mail.

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

Medicinal Marijuana Has Ally In Judge (The Philadelphia Inquirer
notes US District Judge Marvin Katz suggested last week that the federal
government settle Lawrence Elliott Hirsch's class-action lawsuit challenging
medical marijuana prohibition by re-opening the Compassionate IND program
under which eight patients still receive 300 joints every month.)

Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 13:10:16 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US PA: Medicinal Marijuana Has Ally In Judge
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Sat, 31 Oct 1998
Source: Philadelphia Inquirer (PA)
Contact: Inquirer.Opinion@phillynews.com
Website: http://www.phillynews.com/
Copyright: 1998 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc.
Author: Joseph A. Slobodzian, Inquirer Staff Writer

MEDICINAL MARIJUANA HAS ALLY IN JUDGE

He suggested settling a suit over a program by expanding it. Officials
are reviewing the idea.

In a move that surprised both sides, a judge has asked government lawyers
to consider settling a class-action lawsuit by implementing a federal
program supplying marijuana to anyone "whose medical conditions could be
improved by it."

The suggestion by U.S. District Judge Marvin Katz was made last week in a
conference with Justice Department lawyers and Lawrence Elliott Hirsch, a
Center City attorney who in July filed the lawsuit on behalf of 165
individuals who the suit says would benefit medically from smoking
marijuana.

But perhaps as surprising as the settlement proposal suggested by Katz, a
former law partner of U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.) and who was
appointed to the federal bench in 1983 by President Reagan, was the
response of government lawyers.

After first balking at the suggestion, calling it too expensive to
implement and monitor, a Justice Department lawyer on
Wednesday asked Katz for 60 more days for federal officials to consider the
settlement proposal.

Department lawyer Gail F. Levine referred questions to the department's
public information office.

"I think we simply asked for the time necessary to respond to the judge's
proposal," said Justice Department spokesman

Gregory King. "I don't think that this should be taken as any indication,
in any way, that we are reconsidering our position [on medical marijuana].

King said the government had already filed a motion to dismiss the federal
lawsuit and would continue pressing that motion.

While remaining skeptical that the government might change its mind about
legalizing the medical use of marijuana,

Hirsch said he was surprised and pleased by Katz's tack during the conference.

"I think this was the first time that I know about where any judge in the
federal system has taken such a rational and compassionate approach,"
Hirsch added.

Hirsch said that during the Oct. 21 conference, Katz suggested that to
settle the case, the government should revive and expand its "compassionate
use" program, in which seriously ill individuals were supplied marijuana
grown on a government farm in Mississippi.

Some medical researchers have said that the use of marijuana seems to help
treat the eye disease glaucoma and helps combat the nausea that often
accompanies the treatment of cancer and AIDS. Although a synthetic form of
a key compound in marijuana has been marketed as the prescription drug
Marinol, marijuana advocates contend that it is not as effective as smoking
the herb itself.

In the late 1970s, in response to a federal lawsuit, the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services began supplying up to 300 marijuana cigarettes
monthly to people found to have serious medical conditions that benefited
from marijuana use. Hirsch said the program expanded to 14 people before
the government closed it to new participants in 1992; eight people continue
to receive marijuana under the program.

According to court documents, Katz's proposed settlement would involve the
government establishing a "carefully monitored, scientifically controlled
program" to distribute marijuana to people selected for medical reasons.
Those individuals would then become the base population providing "useful
scientific research results that would help decide whether marijuana was
medically beneficial or not." The lawsuit comes two years after California
voters approved a ballot question legalizing medical use of marijuana, and
when researchers are again examining the medical potential of the herb,
which proponents prefer to call by its Latin name, cannabis.

At the same time, officials of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in
December asked HHS scientists to study whether marijuana and its chemical
components should be removed from DEA's Schedule I list of most dangerous
drugs.

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

ACLU Sues to Guard Marijuana Measure - Congress Ordered DC Vote Voided
The Washington Post notes the American Civil Liberties Union is challenging
an amendment to the District of Columbia appropriations bill inserted Oct. 21
by Representative Robert L. Barr Jr., a Republican from Georgia,
which prohibits the District from using money on an initiative that would
"legalize or otherwise reduce penalties" for users of marijuana. "The Barr
amendment prohibits any initiative that would reduce the penalties for
marijuana, but allows any initiative that would increase those penalties,"
said Arthur Spitzer, the ACLU's legal director. "That is like saying voters
can vote for Republicans but not for Democrats, or can vote to build nuclear
power plants but not to ban them.")

Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 23:09:44 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US DC: WP MMJ: ACLU Sues to Guard Marijuana Measure Congress
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Sat, 31 Oct 1998;
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Page: A04
Contact: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Copyright: 1998 The Washington Post Company
Author: Bill Miller Washington Post Staff Writer

ACLU SUES TO GUARD MARIJUANA MEASURE CONGRESS ORDERED D.C. VOTE VOIDED

Saying that D.C. voters have a right to decide political issues, the
American Civil Liberties Union filed suit yesterday to prevent Congress
from voiding the results of a measure on Tuesday's ballot that would make
it legal for seriously ill people to use marijuana for medical reasons.

Activists had gathered enough signatures to put Initiative 59 on the
ballot, contending that marijuana can help alleviate the symptoms of
illnesses such as AIDS, cancer and glaucoma.

Five other states will decide similar issues Tuesday. Only in the District
did Congress step in to the debate.

Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.) sponsored an amendment to the D.C.
appropriations bill that prohibits the District from using money on an
initiative that would "legalize or otherwise reduce penalties" for users of
marijuana. Barr's amendment, passed with the fiscal 1999 D.C. budget on
Oct. 21, was targeted at Initiative 59.

During deliberations in Congress, Rep. J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) expressed
support for Barr's amendment, saying the legislation ensured that the
District "should not and shall not make marijuana a legal substance."

The D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics had already prepared ballots and set
up computers to count Tuesday's vote, so people still will be able to vote
"yes" or "no" for Initiative 59, officials said. The votes will be counted,
but the outcome cannot be officially certified. If the measure passed, it
would not become law.

The lawsuit, filed against the D.C. elections board, asks the court to
order city officials to certify results so that the measure can become law
if it passes. The matter was assigned to U.S. District Judge Richard
Roberts. A hearing has not been set.

"We are outraged that once again Congress has tried to exert its parochial
interests on the District of Columbia," said Mary Jane DeFrank, executive
director of the ACLU of the National Capital Area, which teamed with
proponents of the initiative to file the lawsuit.

ACLU leaders said the action marked the first time that Congress had
stepped in to block results of a D.C. election, saying it was yet another
blow to home rule. The lawsuit contends that Congress has violated the
constitutional rights of D.C. voters by imposing a restriction based on a
particular point of view. Had the District wanted to increase penalties for
marijuana, the lawsuit states, the congressional action would have no
impact. But because the initiative met with "disfavor" in Congress, the
members took action to block it, the suit states.

"The Barr amendment prohibits any initiative that would reduce the
penalties for marijuana, but allows any initiative that would increase
those penalties," said Arthur Spitzer, the ACLU's legal director. "That is
like saying voters can vote for Republicans but not for Democrats, or can
vote to build nuclear power plants but not to ban them."

Initiative 59 would change D.C. law to legalize the possession, use,
cultivation and distribution of marijuana if recommended by a physician for
serious illnesses. It also would require the city to provide for the "safe
and affordable" distribution of marijuana to Medicaid patients and others
whose doctors recommend it. Mayoral candidate Anthony A. Williams (D)
favors the measure, along with a majority of D.C. Council members,
including his opponent, Carol Schwartz (R-At Large). People suffering from
AIDS-related symptoms contend that marijuana combats nausea and enables
them to eat better and take medication.

Joining in the lawsuit: Wayne Turner, who led the initiative campaign; the
"Yes on 59" association; and activists including Jim Graham, a D.C. Council
candidate and executive director of the Whitman-Walker Clinic, the city's
largest provider of AIDS-related medical services. Turner urged supporters
and opponents to vote on Tuesday, vowing to make the results count.

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

US, China Team Up In Drug War - Report (According to Reuters,
The Washington Post said Saturday that the United States and China
established a secret electronic surveillance post in 1995 along China's
border with Burma to eavesdrop on narcotics trafficking from the Golden
Triangle. In addition, Chinese sources said, the United States has
established a secret fund that Chinese officials can access to run the
surveillance center and fight drug trafficking.)

Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 13:48:58 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: WIRE: U.S., China Team Up In Drug War - Report
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John W. Black
Pubdate: Sat, 31 Oct 1998
Source: Reuters
Copyright: 1998 Reuters Limited.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States and China have established a
secret electronic surveillance post along China's border with Burma to
eavesdrop on narcotics trafficking from the Golden Triangle, one of the
world's biggest sources of heroin, the Washington Post reported Saturday.

Quoting U.S. and Chinese sources, the newspaper said the Clinton
administration has also given China several dozen Jeep-like Humvee vehicles
for narcotics interdiction in mountainous terrain along the Burmese border.

In addition, Chinese sources said, the United States has established a
secret fund that Chinese officials can access to run the surveillance
center and fight drug trafficking.

The listening post, staffed by Chinese and U.S. agents near the Chinese
border town of Ruili in southern Yunnan Province, marks a significant step
forward in a U.S. intelligence-sharing relationship with China dating back
to 1971, the Post said.

The newspaper said the post opened in 1995 and the arrangement was
unaffected by subsequent bickering between Washington and Beijing over
Taiwan and other issues.

Intelligence cooperation is insulated from what one Chinese source called
``short-term'' troubles in the relationship.

The Ruili listening post is the most advanced of a host of new initiatives
that U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies are launching with
China to battle international crime, the newspaper said.

According to the report, a liaison group for law enforcement agreed last
month to draw up a list of U.S. and Chinese criminal suspects who are
believed to be operating in each other's country.

The group also is to arrange the exchange of law enforcement personnel and
an agreement to share evidence and harmonize judicial procedures.

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

Why China Would "Team up" With US in Drug War (Michael Levine, a former DEA
agent, now an author and radio talk-show host, says the United States
is giving China an excuse to make foreign military incursions into
neighboring countries such as Burma under the banner of the "war on drugs,"
just as the United States has done. The Chinese government also recognizes
that, with the rapid growth of capitalism in China, it needs an "acceptable"
excuse to continue police-state tactics.)

Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1998 10:59:32 -0500
From: Scott Dykstra (rumba2@earthlink.net)
Reply-To: rumba2@earthlink.net
To: "cannabis-patriots-l@teleport.com" (cannabis-patriots-l@teleport.com)
Subject: CanPat - [Fwd: Why China Would "Team up" With Us in Drug War]
Sender: owner-cannabis-patriots-l@smtp.teleport.com

Ex-DEA agent, Mike Levine.....
From: Expert53@aol.com
Received: from Expert53@aol.com
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 02:45:52 EST
Subject: Why China Would "Team up" With Us in Drug War

Dear Editor,

The below piece is herewith submitted as either a Letter-to-the Editor or an
op-ed piece.

THE EXPERT WITNESS RADIO SHOW

WBAI New York City (99.5 FM-Tuesdays 7-8pm))
KPFK Los Angeles (90.7 FM)
(Los Angeles: Roy Tuckman's "Something's Happening Show, re broadcasts all
Expert Witness Shows on Thursdays at 1:am)
Expert53@aol.co
212-209-2800 (voice mail #2970)

Host: Michael Levine, 25 Year veteran federal agent and author of NY Times
best seller "DEEP COVER" - (just optioned for movie) "THE BIG WHITE LIE" -The
fact-based thriller (now in paperback) THE TRIANGLE OF DEATH (a/k/a The CIA's
Worst Nightmare- Problem with phantom ISBN number still exists, so make sure
that, if you order the book, the ISBN number is 0-440-22367-9, or it will
never arrive. )

http://www.radio4all.org/expert - which includes many of the shows, taped and
archived, books, photos and opinion articles. Shows may be downloaded free of
charge.

http://www.universalprosthesis.com/news/expert.html - which includes the
ability to order tapes of the old shows, at cost, $8 per show.

FIGHT BACK ANTI-DRUG PROGRAM:
http://idt.net/~dorisaw

CHINA TEAMS WITH US IN DRUG WAR? DUH! I WONDER WHY?

Today's Washington Post announced that China is now "teaming up" with the US
in the drug war. We are actually giving China military equipment and our
"expertise" to help them to patrol their Burma border.

I mean Holy Monica Lewinsky. How dumb can we get?

Think about this a second.

Between 1948 and 1951 China rehabilitated 70 million heroin and opium
addicts. There were a total of 27 executions in all that time (See FIGHT
BACK above for research). And now they have such an "internal problem" (as
the article intimates) that they are "teaming up" with the same country that
has not been able to reduce its less than 3 million hard core addicts by a
single percentage point in the last decade? Puhleeeze, even if I wasn't a
front line witness to the whacky trillion dollar, drug war boondoggle for 25
years, this story would smell of long dead tuna.

"Gee Mike Levine, Duh! If they can handle their own drug problems so
effectively, why would they be teaming up with us?" you ask.

Or at least I hope you do.

The answer seems relatively simple for all but the crew now running this drug
war.

Our "brilliant" leaders are once again missing the forest for the trees.
They are now giving China an excuse to make foreign military incursions into
neighboring countries under the banner of "war on drugs" the way we do.

I mean let's suppose a few months from now China decides to declare "Drug
War" on Burma or some other country and invade, positioning itself as our
ally - can we protest? Hell, they'll be invading using some of our donated drug
war armament.

The Chinese government also recognizes that, with the rapid growth of
capitalism in China (even I now have two books translated there) and the need
for increased freedoms among its citizenry to accommodate this growth, they
need an "acceptable" excuse to continue police state tactics. What better
excuse than the same one our government now uses to violate our Constitutional
rights?

This latest US "drug war" move is so incredibly dumb and shortsighted that I
can only conclude that the CIA is behind it.

Best

Mike Levine

Interview of Mike Levine and wife and co-writer, Laura Kavanau in November's
on-line magazine WRITING NOW at http://www.writingnow.com/

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

Swiss Referendum Repeals Prohibition (A list subscriber draws your attention
to the "droleg" referendum November 29. Switzerland may repeal
the prohibitions on currently illegal drugs. Hard drugs, soft drugs - all
drugs.)

From: Phillizy@aol.com
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 23:33:22 EST
To: "DRCTalk Reformers' Forum" (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: Swiss Referendum Repeals Prohibition
Reply-To: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: owner-drctalk@drcnet.org

On November 29th, the Swiss will vote on the Droleg Referendum which, if
passed, will repeal Prohibition of all drugs. Hard drugs, soft drugs -- ALL
drugs.

Under the Droleg Referendum, only government authorized dealers may dispense
the drugs -- and only Swiss citizens may legally buy the drugs. Drug
traffickers, Mafia connections, and black marketeers will continue to be
penalized.

Leading up to the vote, the Swiss media are presenting a cool, calm and
collected view of the drug scene. They are not demonizing drugs or dealers
or users nor recommending a particular action. They are just presenting a
balanced overview of the problem. The media are giving the Swiss a
refreshing look at the real thing, up close and personal, without the
propaganda, and the Swiss are feeling a lot differently about drugs and users.
More tolerant, actually.

The general view, according to most Swiss, is that "freedom is better than
Prohibition."

Lizy

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

[End]