• Cannabis & Hemp

    US CO: Aspen Judge Says Man Can’t Use Pot for Pain


    Medicinal cannabis regulation complicates a whole slew of federal and state laws governing how people under the supervision of the criminal justice system or with criminal records must stay clean and clear of illicit drugs.

    Smack

    Pubdate: Tue, 20 Apr 2010
    Source: Aspen Times Weekly (CO)
    Copyright: 2010 Aspen Times
    Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/zKpMPhQ7
    Website: http://www.aspentimes.com/
    Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3784
    Author: Rick Carroll

    ASPEN — A judge ruled Monday that a local man convicted of a felony drug charge cannot use marijuana for medicinal purposes, although he has a state registry card allowing him to do so.

    Judge James Boyd took up the topic during a sentencing hearing in Pitkin County District Court in Aspen for Keith Timothy Pfeiffer, who pleaded guilty Feb. 8 to attempted distribution of cocaine.

    Boyd said the issue is a “troubling one for the court,” and his remark and ruling come at a time when judges across Colorado are grappling with the conflict between state and federal marijuana laws. An amendment to the state constitution permits marijuana to be used for certain medical purposes.

    But Boyd noted that “no matter what the state of Colorado has decided, the United States of America says that it is not legal.”

    Even so, Boyd said he would entertain a motion arguing that Pfeiffer be allowed to use marijuana for medicinal purposes, along with recommendations from a doctor who “can add the diagnosis it [medical marijuana] goes with.”

    Prosecutor Jonathan Pototsky encouraged Boyd to not allow Pfeiffer, who has a number of physical ailments, to use marijuana for medical purposes as part of his probation. It is standard procedure that those who are given probation are not permitted to use illegal drugs or alcohol; medications they are allowed to use must be taken at
    prescribed doses.

    Pfeiffer has been on the state’s medical marijuana registry since December, his attorney, John Van Ness, told the judge. Pfeiffer uses marijuana to cope with pain from hepatitis and cirrhosis of the liver. Both of his hips were replaced as well, Van Ness said.

    “There are some problems, including pain, that doctors say are helped by medical marijuana,” Van Ness told the judge.

    He added: “I don’t want to take that away from him.”

    Yet Pototsky argued that Pfeiffer “hides behind his illness.”

    “I don’t see why he should have his medical marijuana certificate,” Pototsky told the judge.

    [snip]

    Continues:  http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n306/a03.html

  • Hot Off The 'Net

    Marijuana & Money

    Legalizing marijuana is no longer the unthinkable. Many Americans support it and some states have sanctioned it for medical use.
    CNBC looks at the details around this multi-billion dollar industry and how it affects business, government, and the consumer.

  • Hot Off The 'Net

    The Budgetary Implications of Drug Prohibition

    By Jeffrey A. Miron Department of Economics, Harvard University

    Executive Summary

    • Government prohibition of drugs is the subject of ongoing debate.
    • One issue in this debate is the effect of prohibition on government budgets. Prohibition entails direct enforcement costs and prevents taxation of drug production and sale.
    • This report examines the budgetary implications of legalizing drugs.
    • The report estimates that legalizing drugs would save roughly $48.7 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. $33.1 billion of this savings would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6 billion would accrue to the federal government. Approximately $13.7 billion of the savings would results from legalization of marijuana, $22.3 billion from legalization of cocaine and heroin, and $12.8 from legalization of other drugs.
    • The report also estimates that drug legalization would yield tax revenue of $34.3 billion annually, assuming legal drugs are taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. Approximately $6.4 billion of this revenue would result from legalization of marijuana, $23.9 billion from legalization of cocaine and heroin,
      and $4.0 billion from legalization of other drugs.
    • State-by-state breakdowns provide a rough indication of legalization’s impacts on state budgets, but these estimates are less reliable than those for the overall economy.
    • Whether drug legalization is a desirable policy depends on many factors other than the budgetary impacts discussed here. Rational debate about drug policy should nevertheless consider these budgetary effects.
    • The estimates provided here are not definitive estimates of the budgetary implications of a legalized regime for currently illegal drugs. The analysis employs assumptions that plausibly err on the conservative side, but substantial uncertainty remains about the magnitude of the budgetary impacts.
  • Focus Alerts

    #437 Whiffs Of Change

    Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010
    Subject: #437 Whiffs Of Change

    WHIFFS OF CHANGE

    **********************************************************************

    DrugSense FOCUS Alert #437 – Monday, 12 April 2010

    Dick Polman is a columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer. His column,
    below, has appeared in five newspapers that we know of.

    Others include California’s Merced Sun-Star
    http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n270/a06.html , The Rochester
    Democrat and Chronicle in New York
    http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n269/a01.html , Washington’s
    Bellingham Herald http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n267/a13.html
    and Canada’s Winnipeg Free Press
    http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n267/a12.html

    News clippings specific to the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act
    are posted at http://www.mapinc.org/topic/Tax+Cannabis+Act

    News clippings specific to cannabis in the United States are posted at
    http://www.mapinc.org/find?261

    News clippings specific to California are posted at
    http://www.mapinc.org/find?115

    An anonymous donor has challenged DrugSense and MAP to raise $25.000
    in new donations and/or increases in current periodic donations. Once
    the goal is achieved the donor will provide us with $25,000.00

    Today we are about a third of the way to this very important goal.
    Please help us meet the challenge!

    http://www.drugsense.org/donate.htm

    **********************************************************************

    Pubdate: Sun, 4 Apr 2010

    Source: Philadelphia Inquirer

    Copyright: 2010 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc.

    Author: Dick Polman

    THE AMERICAN DEBATE

    The voters of trendsetting California may well decide this November to
    legalize marijuana – there’s a ballot referendum, and 56 percent of
    Californians are in favor – and no doubt this would be great news for
    the munchie industry, the bootleggers of Grateful Dead music, and the
    millions of stoners who have long yearned for an era of reefer gladness.

    Seriously, this is a story about how desperate times require desperate
    measures. Legalization advocates, including many ex-cops and
    ex-prosecutors, have long contended that it’s nuts to keep
    criminalizing otherwise law-abiding citizens while wasting $8 billion
    a year in law enforcement costs. That argument has never worked. But
    the new argument, cleverly synced to the recession mind-set, may well
    herald a new chapter in the history of pot prohibition.

    It’s simple, really: State governments awash in red ink can solve some
    of their revenue woes by legalizing marijuana for adults and slapping
    it with a sin tax.

    So much of the marijuana debate used to be about morality; now it’s
    mostly about economics and practicality – which is why New Hampshire,
    Massachusetts, and Rhode Island are also floating measures to legalize
    and tax; why similar voter referendums are in the works in Washington
    state and Oregon; why 14 states ( including, most recently, New Jersey
    ) have legalized medical marijuana, and why even Pennsylvania, hardly
    a pacesetting state, is weighing the sanction of medical pot, complete
    with 6 percent sales tax.

    But California is the likeliest lab for a massive toke tax, given its
    dire financial straits and the fact that marijuana is the state’s top
    cash crop, racking up an estimated $14 billion in annual sales – twice
    as much as the number-two agricultural commodity, milk and cream.
    State tax collectors say that pot could put $1.4 billion a year into
    the depleted California coffers, which helps explain why 56 percent of
    Californians like the legalization option, and find it preferable to
    the ongoing layoffs of teachers and other public servants.

    Indeed, marijuana is reportedly the top cash crop in a dozen states,
    and one of the top five in 39 states – valued annually at anywhere
    from $36 billion to $100 billion. That’s a lot of money left on the
    table for the black market. In fact, five years ago, a Harvard
    economist concluded in a report that legal weed nationwide would yield
    at least $6 billion in revenue if it were sin-taxed at rates
    comparable to alcohol and tobacco.

    Actually, I doubt most stoners see themselves as sinners – what’s
    immoral about seeing Avatar three times, or strip-mining a tray of
    brownies, or punctuating the conversation with lines like, “I’m sorry,
    what was I just talking about?” – but most would probably be willing
    to pay a “sin tax” in exchange for the opportunity to imbibe,
    hassle-free, with no fear that they might join the 765,000 Americans
    who were reportedly busted last year for possession.

    Pot smokers have long been bugged by the stigma. When I covered a
    marijuana reform convention in Washington way back in 1977 ( OK, yes,
    I’m old ), a delegate from Illinois named Paul Kuhn spoke for many
    when he complained to me: “You can get rip-roaring, toilet-hugging,
    puking drunk in public, and that’s OK. But if you pass a joint in
    public to a friend, you’re a pusher.”

    But even the reformers of ’77 said it was “naive” to believe that
    Americans would ever buy legalization. Today’s generation is more
    shrewd; the word legalization doesn’t even appear in the California
    ballot proposal. The proponents, including a retired Superior Court
    judge who got fed up with handling pot cases, are calling it the
    “Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act.”

    Frankly, California and other cash-strapped states don’t have a whole
    lot of sin-tax options. Cigarettes and booze are already taxed to the
    max, and ( as Philadelphia is discovering ) any attempts to slap
    special levies on sugared water are fiercely resisted by soda
    companies that fear any curbs on their freedom to rot kids’ teeth. By
    contrast, stoners crave the respectability of being taxed; the
    fiercest tax opponents are probably the Mexican drug cartels, which
    would lose market share just as the mob lost out on liquor when
    Prohibition ended in ’33.

    Granted, nobody quite knows whether or how the California pot plan
    would fly in practice. Pot use would still be illegal under federal
    law – the director of the National Drug Control Policy has said that
    “legalization is not in the president’s vocabulary” – and the U.S.
    Constitution decrees that federal law trumps state law. On the other
    hand, the Obama team has stated that it has no interest in hassling
    the medical-marijuana states.

    The big question is how such a sin tax would be structured. Would all
    sellers be licensed? Would it be a point-of-sale excise tax on top of
    the sales tax? It’s worth pondering, because some state is bound to
    take the plunge, even if California’s voters balk in November – which
    could happen because, favorable pot polls notwithstanding,
    conservatives riled up by health reform seem most energized to turn
    out in disproportionate numbers this year.

    The bottom line is that public support for legalizing the crop has
    been building for a very long time. Gallup found only 12 percent of
    Americans in favor back in 1969, but 31 percent said yes in 2000, 36
    percent said yes in 2005, and 44 percent said yes in 2009. The
    economic crisis has put wind behind the sentiment, and it seems
    inevitable that there will come a day — perhaps in the next major
    recession — when a presidential candidate will find it perfectly
    politic to speechify about the audacity of dope.

    **********************************************************************

    Suggestions for writing letters are at our Media Activism Center
    http://www.mapinc.org/resource/#guides

    The cannabis section of Drug War Facts has been updated
    http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/node/53

    **********************************************************************

    Prepared by: Richard Lake, Senior Editor www.mapinc.org

    =.

  • Focus Alerts

    #436 California Will Vote On Legalizing Marijuana

    Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
    Subject: #436 California Will Vote On Legalizing Marijuana

    CALIFORNIA WILL VOTE ON LEGALIZING MARIJUANA

    **********************************************************************

    DrugSense FOCUS Alert #436 – Wednesday, 24 March 2010

    Today the Los Angeles Times announced that L.A. County petition
    signatures are expected to tilt the balance for putting The Regulate,
    Control, and Tax Cannabis Act on the California ballot for November.

    The initiative statute http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/pend_sig/init-sample-1377-032310.pdf

    The initiative website http://www.taxcannabis.org/

    Opportunities for writing letters will abound in the months ahead.
    News clippings specific to California are posted at
    http://www.mapinc.org/find?115

    An anonymous donor has challenged DrugSense and MAP to raise $25.000
    in new donations and/or increases in current monthly donations. Once
    the goal is achieved the donor will provide us with $25.000. Today we
    are about a third of the way to our goal. Please help us meet the
    challenge! http://www.drugsense.org/donate.htm

    **********************************************************************

    Pubdate: Wed, 24 Mar 2010

    Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)

    Page: Front Page, continued on page A14

    Copyright: 2010 Los Angeles Times

    Contact: http://mapinc.org/url/bc7El3Yo

    Author: John Hoeffel

    BID TO LEGALIZE POT USE NEAR BALLOT

    Voters Could Weigh in on Initiative This Fall. Fiscal Crisis May Help
    It Pass, Some Say.

    Fourteen years after California decided marijuana could be used as a
    medicine and ignited a national movement, the state is likely to vote
    on whether to take another step into the vanguard of drug
    liberalization: legalizing the controversial weed for fun and profit.

    On Wednesday, Los Angeles County elections officials must turn in
    their count of valid signatures collected in the county on a statewide
    legalization initiative. The number is virtually certain to be enough
    to qualify the initiative for the November ballot, according to a
    tally kept by state election officials.

    That will once again make California the focal point of the
    long-stewing argument over marijuana legalization, a debate likely to
    be a high-dollar brawl between adversaries who believe it could launch
    or stifle another national trend.

    The campaign will air issues that have changed little over the years.
    Proponents will cite the financial and social cost of enforcing pot
    prohibition and argue that marijuana is not as dangerous and addictive
    as tobacco or alcohol. Opponents will highlight marijuana-linked
    crimes, rising teenage use and the harm the weed causes some smokers.

    But the debate also will play out against a cultural landscape that
    has changed substantially, with marijuana moving from dark street
    corners to neon-lit suburban boutiques. In the months since the Obama
    administration ordered drug agents to lay off dispensaries, hundreds
    have opened, putting pot within easy reach of most Californians.
    Whether voters view this de facto legalization with trepidation or
    equanimity could shape the outcome.

    The measure’s supporters hope that this dynamic will shift the debate,
    allowing them to persuade voters to replace prohibition with
    controlled sales that could be taxed to help California’s cities and
    counties.

    “They already accept that it’s out there. They want to see a smart
    strategy,” said Chris Lehane, a top strategist for the initiative.

    But John Lovell, a Sacramento lobbyist for law enforcement groups,
    said he believes that voters will reject that argument.

    “Why on Earth would you want to add yet another mind-altering
    substance to the legal array?” he asked.

    California is not alone in weighing legalization. Several state
    legislatures have considered bills and two other Western states may
    vote on initiatives. In Nevada, a measure aimed for 2012 would allow
    state-licensed pot stores. And a campaign in Washington hopes to put a
    legalization measure on the fall ballot.

    The 10-page California initiative would allow anyone 21 or older to
    possess, share and transport up to an ounce for personal use and to
    grow up to 25 square feet per residence or parcel. It would allow
    local governments, but not the state, to authorize the cultivation,
    transportation and sale of marijuana and to impose taxes to raise revenues.

    To make the ballot, the measure needs 433,971 valid signatures. By
    Tuesday, it was just 15,000 short. Los Angeles County, where
    supporters collected 142,246 signatures, is expected to put it over
    the top.

    The initiative’s main proponent, Richard Lee, has spent at least $1.3
    million, mostly on a professional signature-gathering effort, and has
    assembled a team of experienced campaign consultants that includes
    Lehane, a veteran of the Clinton White House.

    Lee, who owns half a dozen mostly pot-related businesses in Oakland,
    has said that he hopes to raise as much as $20 million. The last time
    pot was on the ballot, in 1996, proponents raised $2 million, with
    most of it from a few wealthy supporters.

    Lehane said the campaign would have a major Internet component.
    Marijuana has a devoted following on the Web. When President Obama
    held an online town hall meeting after his inauguration, he was
    barraged with questions about legalization.

    “There’s the potential to raise significant online resources,” he
    said.

    Lovell has been assembling a coalition to defeat the measure. He
    thinks that he will be able to recruit business leaders because the
    initiative prohibits discrimination against anyone who uses marijuana,
    unless it affects job performance.

    Lovell said he is not worried about “the deep pockets on that side.”
    He noted that opponents of Proposition 5, which would have let
    nonviolent drug offenders avoid prison, defeated it in 2008 despite
    being outspent.

    “We don’t have to match the other side dollar for dollar,” he
    said.

    In that case, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and four former governors
    denounced the measure. All the major candidates for governor have
    shunned the pot initiative, including Democrat Jerry Brown, who as
    governor signed a law in 1975 that dramatically reduced marijuana penalties.

    Lehane said the legalization campaign would soon roll out radio ads
    with former law enforcement officials.

    Polls have shown that a slim majority of California voters want to
    legalize marijuana. Both sides will shape their arguments to take aim
    at the wavering voters in the middle.

    The measure’s supporters say the undecided are primarily women in
    their 30s and 40s with children.

    Proponents hope to persuade those voters that it is time for a fresh
    approach to a drug that is a fact of life in California, where it
    supports a multibillion-dollar economy. The wisest plan, they argue,
    is to allow cities and counties to regulate sales and impose taxes to
    help them escape their budget disasters.

    Two independent pollsters, Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy
    Institute of California and Mark DiCamillo of the Field Poll, said the
    state’s grim financial situation may heighten the measure’s appeal.

    “Whether voters are really there, whether they want to legalize
    marijuana, I would probably tend to say no, but given the drastic
    state of the budget, I don’t know,” said DiCamillo, calling the issue
    a wild card. “The climate may actually help it a bit.”

    Opponents plan to remind voters of the chaos caused by cities and
    counties struggling with California’s medical marijuana law, noting
    that it had led to the explosive growth in dispensaries in Los Angeles
    County, where a quarter of the state’s voters live.

    “It’s going to be a crazy quilt of 500 different marijuana nations,”
    Lovell said.

    Lehane said the legalization campaign will unveil model ordinances to
    show voters how it could work and highlight separate state legislation
    to capture tax revenue from legal sales.

    The adversaries will also debate the social costs, disputing the
    effect prohibition has on marijuana use, drug violence and the role of
    Mexican cartels.

    Stephen Gutwillig, California director of the Drug Policy Alliance,
    said he hoped to highlight the increase in misdemeanor marijuana
    arrests, which tripled between 1990 and 2008.

    “It really is on a scale that we have never seen,” he
    said.

    Opponents will cite a national survey that found an increase in
    teenagers trying marijuana last year. And they are emphasizing the
    danger of drugged drivers. In a recent column, Ventura County Sheriff
    Bob Brooks cited a 2007 accident in which a driver high on marijuana
    crashed into a stopped vehicle, killing its driver and critically
    injuring a California Highway Patrol officer.

    **********************************************************************

    Suggestions for writing letters are at our Media Activism Center
    http://www.mapinc.org/resource/#guides

    The marijuana section of Drug War Facts has been updated
    http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/node/53

    **********************************************************************

    Prepared by: Richard Lake, Senior Editor www.mapinc.org

    =.

  • Focus Alerts

    #435 This Whole Medical-Marijuana Thing Is A Charade

    Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010
    Subject: #435 This Whole Medical-Marijuana Thing Is A Charade

    THIS WHOLE MEDICAL-MARIJUANA THING IS A CHARADE

    **********************************************************************

    DrugSense FOCUS Alert #435 – Sunday, 21 March 2010

    Our headline comes from a column by the managing editor of The Pueblo
    Chieftain which is at http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10.n192.a07.html
    It introduces three news items and a column with a hint that more may
    follow in the future. The items are:

    Medical Marijuana: Remedy or Smoke Screen?
    http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10.n192.a04.html

    Doctors Defend or Disparage Medical Marijuana http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10.n192.a05.html

    Legislature’s Decisions to Guide Local Pot Regulation
    http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10.n192.a06.html

    Column: Marijuana Expedition a Real Trip
    http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10.n193.a04.html

    Is medicinal marijuana a charade? That is for you to
    decide.

    Now and in the future news clippings specific to Colorado appear at
    http://www.mapinc.org/states/CO/ , dispensary items at
    http://www.mapinc.org/topic/dispensaries and United Stated medicinal
    cannabis items at http://www.mapinc.org/find?253 . Many of the news
    clippings may be worthy targets for your letters to the editor.

    An anonymous donor has challenged DrugSense and MAP to raise $25.000
    in new donations and/or increases in current monthly donations. Once
    the goal is achieved the donor will provide us with $25.000 which is
    needed within months for us to continue our work. Please help us meet
    the challenge by going http://www.drugsense.org/donate.htm

    **********************************************************************

    Suggestions for writing letters are at our Media Activism
    Center

    http://www.mapinc.org/resource/#guides

    Recently updated facts you may find of value for writing your letters
    are at

    Medical Marijuana http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/node/54

    and

    Marijuana http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/node/53

    **********************************************************************

    Prepared by: Richard Lake, Senior Editor www.mapinc.org

    =.

  • Focus Alerts

    #434 The International Narcotics Control Board On Cannabis

    Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010
    Subject: #434 The International Narcotics Control Board On Cannabis

    THE INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL BOARD ON CANNABIS

    **********************************************************************

    DrugSense FOCUS Alert #434 – Thursday, 25 February 2010

    Today major newspapers across Canada printed articles with headlines
    like ‘Strengthen Medical Marijuana Laws, UN Drug Watchdog Warns’ which
    appeared in the National Post http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10.n140.a11.html
    The key paragraph from the article states “The Vienna-based
    International Narcotics Control Board said Canada is operating outside
    international treaty rules aimed at minimizing the risk criminals will
    get hold of cannabis grown under the program.”

    The Board has only the power to encourage governments to act in
    accordance with the United Nations Conventions on Narcotic Drugs.
    Governments are free to express their sovereignty as their laws allow.
    The media is more often than not clueless about this.

    Understanding this may help you to counter the issues raised in your
    letters to the editor and your other efforts in support of marijuana
    law reform.

    MAP’s news clippings are updated a few times each day at
    http://www.drugnews.org/ Some may touch on this issue, but many will
    not. Most clippings are worthy of consideration for your letter to the
    editor writing efforts.

    **********************************************************************

    The Board’s report is at http://www.incb.org/incb/en/annual-report-2009.html
    and Chapter III, Americas is at http://mapinc.org/url/8FhqCC7M The
    paragraph about the United States and cannabis is below.

    400. While the consumption and cultivation of cannabis, except for
    scientific purposes, are illegal activities according to federal law
    in the United States, several states have enacted laws that provide
    for the “medical use” of cannabis.41 The control measures applied in
    those states for the cultivation of cannabis plants and the
    production, distribution and use of cannabis fall short of the control
    requirements laid down in the 1961 Convention. The Board is deeply
    concerned that those insufficient control provisions have contributed
    substantially to the increase in illicit cultivation and abuse of
    cannabis in the United States. In addition, that development sends a
    wrong message to other countries. The Board welcomes the reaffirmation
    by the Government of the United States that cannabis continues to be
    considered a dangerous drug. The Government has also underscored that
    it is the responsibility of the Food and Drug Administration to
    approve all medicines in the United States. The Board notes with
    appreciation that the Government, following new guidelines on
    prosecution, which stipulate that activities should not focus on
    individuals who comply with “medical” cannabis regulations in states,
    has confirmed that it has no intention to legalize cannabis. The Board
    is concerned over the ongoing discussion in several states on
    legalizing and taxing the “recreational” use of cannabis, which would
    be a serious contravention of the 1961 Convention. The Board
    emphasizes that it is the responsibility of the Government of the
    United States to fully implement the provisions of the 1961 Convention
    with respect to all narcotic drugs, including cannabis (see paragraphs
    61-64 above).

    **********************************************************************

    Suggestions for Writing LTEs Are at Our Media Activism
    Center

    http://www.mapinc.org/resource/#guides

    **********************************************************************

    Prepared by: Richard Lake, Senior Editor www.mapinc.org

    =.

  • Focus Alerts

    #433 Black Tar Heroin

    Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010
    Subject: #433 Black Tar Heroin

    BLACK TAR HEROIN

    **********************************************************************

    DrugSense FOCUS Alert #433 – Tuesday, 16 February 2010

    For newspapers to print a series of articles about heroin is rare. The
    Los Angeles Times printed, starting on the newspaper’s front page each
    day, an in depth series Sunday through today. The sidebar, below,
    appeared at the end of each article. Here are the links to each article:

    Sunday: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n111/a09.html

    Monday: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n114/a01.html

    Tuesday: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n117/a03.html

    Your letters to the editor may be sent by using the webform at
    http://mapinc.org/url/bc7El3Yo – which recommends letters of about 150
    words or less – or by email to [email protected]

    Sustaining all the activities of DrugSense in support of the reform
    community is difficult in these hard economic times. Please consider
    giving what you can. Details are at http://www.drugsense.org/donate.htm

    **********************************************************************

    ABOUT THIS SERIES

    Times staff writer Sam Quinones is the author of two books about
    Mexico, where he lived for 10 years. For this series, he traveled to
    Colorado, Idaho, Ohio, West Virginia and Xalisco, Mexico, to track the
    spread of black-tar heroin. He interviewed police narcotics officers,
    federal drug agents, prosecutors, public health officials, addiction
    experts and imprisoned former dealers and addicts across the U.S.

    Sunday: Pushing heroin into the heartland.

    Monday: Black tar packs a deadly punch.

    Tuesday: Drug money transforms a backwater.

    latimes.com/blacktar

    An audio slide show and other resources are available
    online.

    **********************************************************************

    Suggestions for Writing LTEs Are at Our Media Activism
    Center

    http://www.mapinc.org/resource/#guides

    **********************************************************************

    Prepared by: Richard Lake, Senior Editor www.mapinc.org

    =.

  • Focus Alerts

    #432 Colorado In The News

    Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010
    Subject: #432 Colorado In The News

    COLORADO IN THE NEWS

    **********************************************************************

    DrugSense FOCUS Alert #432 – Friday, 12 February 2010

    While not yet rivaling the medical cannabis dispensary news from
    California there has been a substantial increase in medical marijuana
    news from Colorado.

    On December 28, 2000 the Constitution of Colorado was amended to
    include medical marijuana. That makes Colorado different than other
    states where laws were passed by initiative or the state legislature.
    Read Section 14 of the Colorado Constitution at http://mapinc.org/url/NU0HpB5k

    Please note that for magazines, with very rare exceptions, the cover
    date or Pubdate is the date that the magazine is removed from sale.

    Now and in the future news clippings specific to Colorado appear at
    http://www.mapinc.org/states/co/ , dispensary items at
    http://www.mapinc.org/topic/dispensaries and United Stated medicinal
    cannabis items at http://www.mapinc.org/find?253 . Many of the news
    clippings may be worthy targets for your letters to the editor.

    Sustaining all the activities of DrugSense in support of the reform
    community is difficult in these hard economic times. Please consider
    giving what you can. Details are at http://www.drugsense.org/donate.htm

    **********************************************************************

    Pubdate: Mon, 22 Feb 2010

    Source: Newsweek (US)

    Copyright: 2010 Newsweek, Inc.

    Contact: [email protected]

    Author: Tony Dokoupil, NEWSWEEK

    COLORADO’S DOPE DILEMMA

    With more medical-marijuana dispensaries than Starbucks outlets,
    Denver has emerged as the per capita frontrunner for curative ganja.
    As more residents partake of doctor-prescribed pot, however, questions
    are emerging about where the line is between an employee’s right to
    use medical marijuana and an employer’s right to a drug-free office.

    Employers, of course, don’t need to accommodate a worker who shows up
    stoned. But can someone who legally tokes on his own time, and whose
    performance isn’t hurt, be fired for failing a drug test? “We’re in
    uncharted territory,” says Vance Knapp, a Denver employment lawyer who
    expects the issue to be tested in the courts soon.

    So far, judges in California, Washington, Montana, and Oregon have
    sided with employers. But because Colorado’s medical-marijuana laws
    are in its constitution, not just statutes, legal experts give the
    edge in any test case to employees. That could mean a breakthrough
    victory for users, swinging momentum their way and giving pro-patient
    lawyers in other states much-needed–if nonbinding–precedent.

    **********************************************************************

    Suggestions for Writing LTEs Are at Our Media Activism
    Center

    http://www.mapinc.org/resource/#guides

    **********************************************************************

    Prepared by: Richard Lake, Senior Editor www.mapinc.org

    =.