Date: Wed, 10 May 2000
Subject: USA Today: Drug War Draws More Girls To Heroin

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #172 May 10, 2000

USA Today: Drug War Draws More Girls To Heroin

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #172 May 10, 2000

IMPORTANT NOTE: USA Today has circulation of more than 2 million
readers. The largest in the U.S. A published LTE of 250 words in this
publication has an ad value of more than $7,500.00. Please Just DO It!
Write Away.

Is the drug war supposed to save children from drugs? If it is, it’s
failing again. USA Today is reporting increasing rates of heroin use
among young girls. The support given for this assertion is mostly
anecdotal, but the story does note that government surveys indicate
increased use of heroin by young people in recent years, as well as
increased emergency room visits related to heroin for women in general.

Not surprisingly, prohibitionists interviewed for the article
recommend more tough measures to fight heroin. Some of the experts
also offer “solutions” that are kinder and gentler, though not likely
to be more effective, like an advertising campaign featuring the theme
“girl power.” Unfortunately, no one quoted in the story points out how
the basic drug war principles help to encourage drug problems among
young people. But, the information is there for those who look between
the lines. Careful readers are reminded of the allure of forbidden
fruit and the success of drug cartels in raising quality and lowering
prices.

Please write a letter to USA Today to say that the same old drug war
tactics are increasing drug problems, not decreasing them, for girls
and boys of every age.

Thanks for your effort and support.

WRITE A LETTER TODAY

It’s not what others do it’s what YOU do

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID ( Letter,
Phone, fax etc.)

Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the sent
letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or by
E-mailing a copy directly to [email protected] Your letter will then
be forwarded to the list with so others can learn from your efforts
and be motivated to follow suit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.

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

CONTACT INFO

Source: USA Today (US)
Contact: [email protected]

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

ARTICLE

Pubdate: Tue, 09 May 2000
Source: USA Today (US)
Copyright: 2000 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.
Page: 1A – Cover Story
Contact: [email protected]
Address: 1000 Wilson Blvd., Arlington VA 22229
Fax: (703) 247-3108
Website: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nfront.htm
Author: Donna Leinwand, USA TODAY

HEROIN’S RESURGENCE CLOSES DRUG’S TRADITIONAL GENDER GAP
Teenage Girls Are Increasingly Falling Prey To Narcotic In Purer, ‘More
Mainstream,’ Sniffable Form

Simona Troisi was a high school freshman on Long Island, at 14 already
a user of marijuana and LSD, when she gave $40 to a friend to score
some cocaine in New York City. The friend returned with a powder that
gave Troisi a sickening high when she snorted it.

”I don’t even know what it was,” Troisi says. ”I just kept doing
it because I had it.”

The strange powder was heroin, and within a few months, Troisi’s
recreational drug habit became a destructive lifestyle. She landed in
a drug rehabilitation program after being charged with selling heroin
to an undercover police officer. She had turned to dealing to help
finance her appetite for tiny, $10 bags of the drug.

Now 20 and nine months into rehab, Troisi symbolizes how thousands of
girls across the USA have fueled a dramatic resurgence of heroin use
among teenagers, particularly in suburban and rural areas. Not since
the late 1960s and early 1970s, when a typical dose was much less
potent and almost always injected, has heroin been so hip among
middle-class teens.

Heroin’s re-emergence comes at a time when girls — once far less
likely than boys to drink, smoke marijuana or use harder drugs such as
heroin — now appear to be keeping pace with them, says Mark Weber,
spokesman for the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration.

Weber’s agency, after finding that existing drug prevention programs
helped reduce drug use only among boys, recently helped create an
advertising campaign called ”Girl Power” to deliver anti-drug
messages specifically to girls.

A television commercial now airing features Olympic figure skating
champion Tara Lipinski and Brandi Chastain, a member of the 1999 U.S.
Women’s World Cup soccer team, urging girls not to ”blow it” by
using drugs. The agency also has begun an unprecedented effort to
collect statistics on girls’ drug use.

The new surge in heroin use made national news with the overdose
deaths of more than a dozen teenagers in Plano, Texas, and suburban
Orlando in 1996. Since then, hospital emergency rooms on Long Island,
N.Y., and in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Philadelphia suburbs and
several other middle-class areas have been hit by clusters of teens on
heroin.

”The picture is frightening,” says Mitchell Rosenthal, a
psychiatrist and president of a chain of drug treatment centers who
will testify before the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics
Control today about the emerging heroin problem in the suburbs.
”We’ve got a lot of suburban kids at risk. I don’t think the modern
affluent parent thinks about heroin being a danger in Scarsdale or
Beverly Hills.”

One of four teenagers scheduled to testify today is Kathryn Logan, 19,
of San Juan Capistrano in southern California. At 9, Logan stole sips
of wine from unfinished glasses. At 13, she rifled through medicine
cabinets for prescription drugs she could chop up and sniff. She
packed the powder into ballpoint pen casings so she could get high
during class. At 15, she snorted heroin and cocaine and smoked crack.

”I felt more normal when I was on drugs,” says Logan, who developed
bulimia, had an abortion and tried to commit suicide. ”I felt being
sober was too boring.” To pay for her habit, she stole money from her
parents and at one point pawned her grandmother’s diamond ring for
$25.

Even so, she kept up her grades, made the junior varsity tennis team
and tried out for cheer leading. But she felt she didn’t fit in at
school, where she thought the people were ”rich and stuck up.” Her
father, a contractor, and her mother, a flight attendant, didn’t seem
to notice her drug use. ”I was always making up excuses. I had
everything under control, the whole world under control. It was hard,
let me tell you,” says Logan, who entered rehab 79 days ago to avoid
going to jail on alcohol and marijuana possession charges. ”My
parents were clueless. I think they were in total denial that I was
doing drugs until I told them about it.”

Heroin Considered ‘Super Cool’

Heroin use remains relatively rare among teens overall. A study by
the University of Michigan last year estimated that about 2% of youths
ages 12-17 had tried it. However, that was more than double the rate
of seven years earlier. The same study indicated that 2.3% of
eighth-graders in the USA, about 83,160 youths, had used heroin.

Analysts continue to examine the reasons behind the surge. There are
the usual factors: teen angst, peer pressure, boredom, the attraction
of something dangerous for teens with money to spend. But analysts
say it’s also clear that new, highly potent forms of heroin from drug
cartels in Colombia and Mexico have been key to attracting new users
— particularly girls.

For years, most heroin had to be injected directly into a user’s
bloodstream to be effective. Girls typically prefer to sniff or smoke
their drugs rather than inject them, so heroin was out of vogue,
experts say. But now, with more potent heroin available as a powder
in small bags or gel capsules, users can get high without injecting.
That has made it more palatable to girls. ”Young girls don’t like
injecting regularly. It leaves marks. With the increase in purity of
heroin, it made it smokable,” Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., says. As
co-chairman of the Senate narcotics caucus, Biden issues regular
reports on drug abuse.

”We are seeing a wider range of users,” says H. Westley Clark, a
psychiatrist and director of the federal Center for Substance Abuse
Treatment in Washington, D.C. ”We have been seeing younger people
use. It has been fairly dramatic. These drugs are becoming equal
opportunity drugs. There is no gender bias.”

Lynn Ponton, a San Francisco-area psychiatrist, says that just last
week a 17-year-old girl she is counseling tested positive for heroin
in a routine drug screening.

”Traditional gender roles associated with risk-taking are not holding
… for drug abuse,” says Ponton, who wrote The Romance of Risk, a
book about adolescent risk-taking. ”Once (a drug is) available and
hasn’t been used for a long time, it’s deemed cool by the teenagers.
Heroin is still considered a super-cool drug, and it has high risk
associated with it. It’s probably the mystique of the drug.”

Like the stimulant and hallucinogen Ecstasy, another favorite drug of
the moment, heroin plays to girls’ insecurities. Users lose their
appetite, and so lose weight. The ”heroin girl” look has been
glamorized recently, from ashen, wafer-thin runway models to anthems
by grunge bands. All this has recast heroin in a more favorable light
for this generation of youths. Troisi, who is 5 feet 5 and weighed 80
pounds when she entered drug treatment, says she never associated
heroin with images of needle-toting junkies from the 1960s and ’70s.

”Think of all the heroin-chic pictures that have been in the culture
for a number of years,” Rosenthal says. ”Advertising campaigns show
gaunt men and women. The stigma of heroin appears to have faded.”

Heroin, a narcotic derived from the opium poppy, was developed in the
1880s as a pain reliever and substitute for highly addictive morphine.
Scientists soon found that heroin is even more addictive. It was made
illegal in the United States in 1914. Heroin is produced mainly in
Southeast Asia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Mexico and Colombia.

For street sales, heroin is mixed, or ”cut,” with other ingredients,
such as quinine or sugar. A hit of heroin produces a rush of euphoria
followed by several hours of relaxation and wooziness. Twenty years
ago, a milligram dose with 3.6% pure heroin (and cut with 96.4% other
ingredients) cost about $3.90, says Richard Fiano, director of
operations for the Drug Enforcement Administration. Now, the average
milligram is 41.6% pure and costs about $1. Some Colombian heroin the
DEA seized recently was 98% pure, Fiano says.

Colombian drug lords used existing cocaine distribution networks to
introduce the purer heroin to the USA, Fiano says. ”They have a
very, very good marketing strategy,” he says. ”They’ve come out
with a new product line. They even have packaged it with brand names,
just like buying a pack of cigarettes. They even gave out free samples.”

Emergency-Room Visits Rise

The strategy appears to be working; heroin users are younger than
ever. Surveys by the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration indicate the average age of first-time users plummeted
from about 27.4 years in 1988 to 17.6 in 1997, the youngest average
since 1969.

Emergency-room doctors reported in 1997 and 1998 that heroin is
involved in four to six visits out of 100,000 by youths ages 12 to 17,
up from one in 100,000 in 1990. For young adults 18 to 25, 41
emergency room visits in 100,000 involved heroin, up from 19 in 1991.
Among women in general, the numbers have doubled in a decade.

Biden would like to direct more federal money to drug treatment for
adolescents and law enforcement efforts in Colombia. Sen. Charles
Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate narcotics caucus, says that
even if the USA directs more money toward Colombia, the focus should
be on sending teens a clear anti-drug message, similar to the Reagan
administration’s ”Just Say No” campaign.

Troisi says a steady stream of information about the risks of
different drugs might have steered her away from heroin. She and her
friends had no idea how seductive and addictive the drug could be, she
says. She adds that she had no trouble finding heroin in her affluent
hometown, Selden, N.Y.

”I’m not saying that heroin is the normal thing, but it is going more
mainstream,” she says. ”When I first started, I was one of the
first females, but I’ve seen more and more. I’ve seen them come into
detox.” In Selden, about 45 miles from New York City, there isn’t a
whole lot for teens to do, and becoming a drug user wasn’t too
different from finding a spot in an after-school club, she says. ”It
seemed like this underground society,” says Troisi, who says she grew
up in a stable home with three brothers, including one who was high
school valedictorian. Her father is a high school teacher. ”Boredom
played a big part of it. A lot of my friends got involved in drugs
real young. I kept away from it for a while, but I was real lonely.
When I started using heroin, I just kept going back to it. I felt
like I’d never feel comfortable with myself without it.”

Like many girls who slide into addiction, Troisi wound up taking
heroin the way she initially avoided: by injection. That way, Troisi,
who sometimes spent more than $100 a day on drugs, needed less heroin
to get high.

By the time she was 15, Troisi says, she loathed getting out of bed
without a heroin jolt. ”I used to sleep with a bag of it in my bra
so I would have it first thing, so I could get out of bed and brush my
teeth,” she says. Troisi, who after nine months of treatment now
weighs a healthier 110 pounds, thinks she will get better. What she
calls the ”zombie” feeling has faded. ”One day, I woke up and I
felt good,” she says. ”I eat now. And I go running, five miles a
day sometimes. I feel like it’s a new world. I still go through
moods, but I know how to deal with those moods. I think I have a chance.”

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor:

After decades of zero tolerance law enforcement America is
experiencing a resurgence in heroin use which crosses gender lines.
How will politicians respond? Implement needle exchange programs to
stop the spread of HIV perhaps? Legalize marijuana to separate the
hard and soft drug markets and thereby close the black market gateway
to heroin? Not likely! No doubt tough-on-drugs politicians will
seize the opportunity to call for increased drug war funding, despite
the obvious failure of past interdiction efforts.

Temporarily limiting the amount of heroin on the streets might do more
harm than good. By decreasing supply while demand remains constant,
America’s fledgling addicts will soon find the price of heroin
soaring. Those already hooked will inevitably step up criminal
activity in order to feed their habits. While males are more prone to
violent crime, female addicts may fall victim to prostitution. The
resulting nationwide crime wave will have more to do with application
of drug laws then the medical condition the addicts suffer from. Just
as alcohol prohibition failed, the drug war has failed to prevent drug
use, but it has fostered a great deal of unnecessary crime and violence.

Am I suggesting that heroin be legalized and sold in convenience
stores? Contrary to what zero tolerance proponents would have
Americans believe, there is a middle ground between all out
legalization and drug prohibition. By registering heroin addicts and
providing them with standardized doses in a treatment setting, the
public health problems associated with heroin use could very well be
eliminated. More important, organized crime would lose an important
client base. This would render illegal heroin trafficking
unprofitable and spare future generations the horror of heroin addiction.

Robert Sharpe

IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone
number

Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it
at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the
same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work.
—————————————————————————-

ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing
efforts

3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm

Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm

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

TO SUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP, OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL SEE

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

TO UNSUBSCRIBE SEE http://www.drugsense.org/unsub.htm

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

Prepared by Stephen Young – http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus
Alert Specialist

Date: Wed, 03 May 2000
Subject: New York Times: Drug War Poisons Communities

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 171 May 3, 2000

New York Times: Drug War Poisons Communities

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 171 May 3, 2000

Drug warriors sometimes try to justify prohibition by comparing drugs
to poison and suggesting that they are attempting to keep “poison” out
of communities. Not only does it fail as a metaphor (since the
ultimate effect of the drug war is to make this “poison” one of the
world’s most profitable commodities), it is ironic that the drug war
itself is spreading real poison into the places where people live.

The New York Times this week reported on the environmental devastation
caused by pesticide that is supposed to be eradicating illegal drug
crops in Colombia. While crop spraying is often touted as a method
stop drugs, the destruction caused to humans and their habitats is
rarely acknowledged. This excellent article (below) exposes the
situation, but it also clearly illustrates how little drug warriors
really care about human suffering.

An American embassy official claimed, “Being sprayed on certainly does
not make people sick,” though the reporter found ample evidence to the
contrary. Please write a letter to the Times or any of the other
newspapers where this story was carried to express horror at another
toxic strategy from the drug war.

Thanks for your effort and support.

WRITE A LETTER TODAY

If not YOU who? If not NOW when?

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID ( Letter,
Phone, fax etc.)

Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the sent
letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or by
E-mailing a copy directly to [email protected] Your letter will then
be forwarded to the list with so others can learn from your efforts
and be motivated to follow suit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.

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

CONTACT INFO

Source: New York Times (NY)
Contact: [email protected]

EXTRA CREDIT

Please send the letter to other newspapers where the same story has
appeared, including the San Francisco Chronicle and the
Register-Guard.

Title: Colombia: Colombians Say Drug Spraying Creating Health Crisis
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: [email protected]

Title: Colombia: Drug War Blamed For Hurting Villagers
Source: Register-Guard, The (OR)
Contact: [email protected]

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

ARTICLE

Colombia: To Colombians, Drug War Is A Toxic Foe
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n578/a06.html
Newshawk: M & M Family
Pubdate: Mon, 01 May 2000
Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 2000 The New York Times Company
Contact: [email protected]
Address: 229 West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036
Fax: (212) 556-3622
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Forum: http://www10.nytimes.com/comment/
Author: Larry Rohter

TO COLOMBIANS, DRUG WAR IS A TOXIC FOE

IOBLANCO DE SOTARA, Colombia — The children and their teachers were
in the schoolyard, they say, playing soccer and basketball and waiting
for classes to begin when the crop-duster appeared. At first they
waved, but as the plane drew closer and a gray mist began to stream
from its wings, alarmed teachers rushed the pupils to their classrooms.

Over the next two weeks, a fleet of counter narcotics planes taking
part in an American-sponsored program to eradicate heroin poppy
cultivation returned here repeatedly. Time and time again, residents
charge, the government planes also sprayed buildings and fields that
were not supposed to be targets, damaging residents’ health and crops.

“The pilot was flying low, so there is no way he could not have seen
those children,” said Nidia Majin, principal of the La Floresta rural
elementary school, whose 70 pupils were sprayed that Monday morning
last June. “We had no way to give them first aid, so I sent them
home. But they had to cross fields and streams that had also been
contaminated, so some of them got sick.”

In fact, say leaders of this remote Yanacona Indian village high in
the Andes, dozens of other residents also became ill during the
spraying campaign, complaining of nausea, dizziness, vomiting, rashes,
blurred vision and ear and stomach aches. They say the spraying also
damaged legitimate crops, undermining government efforts to support
residents who have abandoned poppy growing.

Such incidents are not limited to this village of 5,000, say critics
in Colombia and the United States, but have occurred in numerous parts
of Colombia and are bound to increase if the fumigation program is
intensified, as the Clinton administration is proposing as part of a
$1.6 billion emergency aid package to Colombia.

Critics say they frequently receive reports of mistakes and abuses by
the planes’ Colombian pilots that both the American and Colombian
governments choose to ignore.

State Department officials deny that indiscriminate spraying takes
place, with an American Embassy official in Bogota describing the
residents’ claims of illnesses as “scientifically impossible.”

But to local leaders here the situation brought on by the spraying
remains one of crisis. “The fumigation was done in an indiscriminate
and irresponsible manner, and it did not achieve its objective,” said
Ivan Alberto Chicangana, who was the mayor when the spraying occurred.

“The damage done to the physical and economic well-being of this
community has been serious,” he said, “and is going to be very
difficult for us to overcome.”

He and other local leaders say that people were sick for several weeks
after the spraying, and in interviews a few residents complained of
lasting symptoms. Three fish farms with more than 25,000 rainbow
trout were destroyed, residents said, and numerous farm animals,
mostly chickens and guinea pigs, died, while others, including some
cows and horses, fell ill.

In addition, fields of beans, onions, garlic, potatoes, corn and other
traditional crops were sprayed, leaving plants to wither and die. As
a result, community leaders here say, crop-substitution projects
sponsored by the Colombian government have been irremediably damaged
and their participants left impoverished.

The spraying around this particular village has since stopped,
residents say, though they fear that it could resume at any time, and
it continues in neighboring areas, like nearby Guachicono, and
year-round elsewhere in Colombia.

Peasants in the coca-growing region of Caqueta, southeast of here,
last year complained to a reporter that spray planes had devastated
the crops they had planted after abandoning coca, and similar reports
have emerged from Guaviare, another province to the east.

Indeed, American-financed aerial spraying campaigns like the one here
have been the principal means by which the Colombian government has
sought to reduce coca- and opium-poppy cultivation for nearly a
decade. The Colombian government fleet has grown to include 65
airplanes and helicopters, which fly every day, weather permitting,
from three bases. Last year, the spraying effort resulted in the
fumigation of 104,000 acres of coca and 20,000 acres of opium poppy.

Yet despite such efforts, which have been backed by more than $150
million in American aid, cocaine and heroin production in Colombia has
more than doubled since 1995.

In an effort to reverse that trend and weaken left-wing guerrilla and
right-wing paramilitary groups that are profiting from the drug trade
and threatening the country’s stability, the Clinton administration is
now urging Congress to approve a new aid package, which calls for
increased spending on drug eradication as well as a gigantic increase
for crop-substitution programs, to $127 million from $5 million.

Critics, like Elsa Nivia, director of the Colombian affiliate of the
advocacy organization Pesticide Action Network, see the eradication
effort as dangerous and misguided. “These pilots don’t care if they
are fumigating over schools, houses, grazing areas, or sources of
water,” she said in an interview at the group’s headquarters in Cali.

“Furthermore,” she added, “spraying only exacerbates the drug problem
by destabilizing communities that are trying to get out of illicit
crops and grow legal alternatives.”

Those who have been directly affected by the spraying effort here also
argue that fumigation is counterproductive. In this cloud-shrouded
region of waterfalls, rushing rivers, dense forests and deep mountain
gorges, poppy cultivation was voluntarily reduced by half between 1997
and 1999, to 250 acres, said Mr. Chicangana, the former mayor.

He said it was well on its way to being eliminated altogether when the
spraying began.

“We were collaborating, and now people feel betrayed by the state,” he
lamented.

“The fumigation disturbs us a bit,” said Juan Hugo Torres, an official
of Plante, the Colombian government agency supervising
crop-substitution efforts, who works with farmers here. “You are
building trust with people, they have hopes, and then the spraying
does away with all of that.”

In an interview in Washington, R. Rand Beers, the American assistant
secretary of state for international narcotics and law enforcement
affairs, said aerial spraying flights are strictly monitored and
targets chosen carefully.

The fumigation program is designed so that pilots “shouldn’t be
anywhere close to alternative development projects,” he said, since
“officials in the air and on the ground should be equipped with
geographic positioning devices that pinpoint where those activities
are taking place.”

“If that happened, the pilot who flew that mission should be
disciplined,” Mr. Beers said in reference to the specific accusations
made by residents here. “That shouldn’t be happening.”

But the area fumigated here is wind-swept mountain terrain where
illicit crops and their legal alternatives grow side by side, making
accurate spraying difficult. And in some other places, pilots may be
forced to fly higher than might be advisable, for fear of being shot
at by the guerrillas, whose war is fueled by the profits of the drug
trade.

As for the complaints of illness, the American Embassy official who
supervises the spraying program said in an interview in Bogota that
glyphosate, the active ingredient in the pesticide used here, is “less
toxic than table salt or aspirin.” Calling it “the most studied
herbicide in the world,” he said it was proven to be harmless to human
and animal life and called the villagers’ account “scientifically
impossible.”

“Being sprayed on certainly does not make people sick,” said the
official, “because it is not toxic to human beings.”

Glyphosate “does not translocate to water” and “leaves no soil
residue,” he added, so “if they are saying otherwise, to be very
honest with you, they are lying, and we can prove that
scientifically.”

But in an out-of-court settlement in New York state in 1996, Monsanto,
a leading manufacturer of glyphosate-based herbicides, though not
necessarily identical to those used here, agreed to withdraw claims
that the product is “safe, nontoxic, harmless or free from risk.” The
company signed a statement agreeing that its “absolute claims that
Roundup ‘will not wash or leach in the soil’ is not accurate” because
glyphosate “may move through some types of soil under some conditions
after application.”

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency has approved
glyphosate for most commercial uses. But the E.P.A.’s own
recertification study published in 1993 noted that “in California,
where physicians are required to report pesticide poisonings,
glyphosate was ranked third out of the 25 leading causes of illness or
injury due to pesticides” over a five-year period in the 1980’s,
primarily causing eye and skin irritation.

In addition, labels on glyphosate products like Roundup sold in the
United States advise users to “avoid direct application to any body of
water.” Directions also warn users that they should “not apply this
product in a way that will contact workers or other persons, either
directly or through drift” and caution that “only protected handlers
may be in the area during application.”

The doctor in charge of the local clinic here, Ivan Hernandez,
recently was transferred and could not be reached for comment about
the impact of the spraying on the health of residents. Gisela Moreno,
a nurse’s aide, refused to speak to a visiting reporter, saying, “We
have been instructed not to talk to anyone about what happened here.”
When asked the origin of the order, she replied: “From above, from
higher authorities.”

Here in Rioblanco de Sotara, half a dozen local people say they felt
so sick after the spraying that they undertook a 55-mile bus trip to
San Jose Hospital in Popayan, the capital of Cauca Province, for
medical care. There, they were attended by Dr. Nelson Palechor
Obando, who said he treated them for the same battery of symptoms that
more than two dozen residents described to a reporter independently in
recent interviews.

“They complained to me of dizziness, nausea and pain in the muscles
and joints of their limbs, and some also had skin rashes,” he said.
“We do not have the scientific means here to prove they suffered
pesticide poisoning, but the symptoms they displayed were certainly
consistent with that condition.”

Because this is an area of desperate poverty where most people eke out
a living from subsistence agriculture, there is no stigma attached to
growing heroin poppies, and those who have planted the crop freely
admit it. Yet even those who claim never to have cultivated poppies
say that their fields were also sprayed and their crops destroyed.

“They fumigated everywhere, with no effort made to distinguish between
potatoes and poppies,” complained Oscar Ceron, a 32-year-old farmer.
“We could even hear their radio transmissions on the FM band, with the
ground command referring to us in a vulgar fashion.”

Other farmers said that the air currents constantly swirling down from
the 14,885-foot Sotara volcano, on whose flank this town sits, blew
the herbicide over fields planted with legal crops.

“A gust of wind can carry the poison off to adjacent fields, so that
they end up more badly damaged than the field that was the original
target, which sometimes is left completely intact,” explained Fernando
Hormiga.

In the United States, glyphosate users are specifically warned not to
spray by air “when winds are gusty or under any other condition that
favors drift.” Usage instructions also say that “appropriate buffer
zones must be maintained” to avoid contaminating surrounding areas.

Once word got out about the illnesses that followed the spraying here,
prices for milk, cheese and other products that are a mainstay of the
local economy dropped by more than half. “The rumors are that the
land is contaminated, so we no longer get orders from outside, and the
middlemen can now name their own price,” said Fabian Omen, a farmer
and town councilman.

Worse still, government and private creditors are nonetheless
demanding that the loans made for crop-substitution projects like the
fish farms must still be repaid, even though the enterprises
themselves have been destroyed.

Asked about the lack of an integrated policy that implies, Alba Lucia
Otero, the Plante director for Cauca Province, expressed
frustration.

“The state is a single entity, but we work on one side while those
doing the fumigation work on another,” she said. “There should be
coordination, but they take their decision at the central level, and
we are not consulted.”

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor:

Thank you for printing the story “To Colombians, Drug War Is A Toxic
Foe,” (May 1) and exposing yet another terrible consequence of the
drug war.

While it’s clear that dumping pesticides on any community is a bad
idea, the description of a Colombian elementary school being sprayed
with poison while classes were in session is heart breaking. The cruel
extremists who run the drug war often claim that they are trying to
eradicate drugs to save children, but here is yet another example of
children being hurt while illegal drugs become more available every
day.

If chemical warfare was conducted over American cities, I’d like to
think our citizens would have stood up and demanded an end to the
whole rotten enterprise immediately. The question remains, though, of
whether the powerful institutions that run the drug war are ever going
to acknowledge the misery they are causing.

Stephen Young

IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone
number

Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it
at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the
same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work.
—————————————————————————-

ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing
efforts

3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm

Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm

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

TO SUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP, OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL SEE

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

TO UNSUBSCRIBE SEE http://www.drugsense.org/unsub.htm

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

Prepared by Stephen Young – http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus
Alert Specialist

Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000
Subject: 60 Minutes II An All Time Low On Ecstasy Sensationalism And

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 170 April 27, 2000

60 Minutes II an All Time Low on Ecstasy Sensationalism and
Inaccuracy

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 170 April 27, 2000

The 60 Minutes II show producers need to be told that their unbalanced
presentation of the harms of MDMA and their total ignoring of its
therapeutic potential is poor journalism. Their hysterical
exaggeration of the dangers of MDMA (it is supposedly likely to
produce a generation of depressed people) is counterproductive in
terms of reducing excessive use of MDMA abuse since the message will
be discounted as unbelievable.

The supposed 40 deaths in Florida due to MDMA was taken as a fact yet
the evidence supporting these claims has never been made public so
that it could be critically reviewed. The show failed to explain that
the statistic of 1100 emergency room visits due to MDMA is from the
Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) system, which links visits to
specific drugs even if the drugs did not cause the visit. All that is
needed is for the person who went to the ER or any of their friends to
have claimed the person consumed MDMA. Blood tests confirming the
mentioned drug are not required so ER visits could due to fake MDMA
are lumped together with visit related to genuine MDMA.

When the 60 Minutes II producers called MAPS to gather information for
their show, my initial impression was positive. I was told they wanted
to look at all aspects of MDMA, therapeutic use as well as rave use,
and they wanted to do a balanced treatment of the neurotoxicity issue.
I started to get a bad feeling when it became clear that none of the
people I recommended who could talk about therapeutic use were
contacted, nor were any experts who would offer a less than hysterical
presentation about neurotoxicity.

The program should at least have given a moment of air time to a
doctor or researcher who doesn’t believe the evidence supports an
alarmist conclusion about neurotoxicity, as well as someone who could
speak to its therapeutic potential.

The 60 Minutes producers should be help accountable for a presentation
that was put together without even an attempt at basic journalistic
balance.

Please write a letter to 60 Minutes II expressing your views or
concerns using the contact information below.

Thanks for your effort and support.

WRITE A LETTER TODAY

If not YOU who? If not NOW When?

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID ( Letter,
Phone, fax etc.)

Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the sent
letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or by
E-mailing a copy directly to [email protected] Your letter will then
be forwarded to the list with so others can learn from your efforts
and be motivated to follow suit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.

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

CONTACT INFO

Online form to CBS http://cbsnews.cbs.com/feedback/frameset/0,1712,412,00.html

Email address [email protected]

Please send your letter to BOTH.

NOTE: Those who missed the 60 Minutes II piece you can review a text
version at:

http://cbsnews.cbs.com/now/story/0,1597,188049-412,00.shtml

***************************************************************************
EXTRA CREDIT

USA Today also had a blatantly unbalanced piece on MDMA on April 19.
While this is a bit stale for letter writing a LTE correcting
inaccurate reporting is always a good thing.

Read the article at: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n518/a08.html

Write a letter and send it to

USA Today [email protected]

****************************************************************************
SAMPLE LETTER

Dear 60 Minutes II

Regarding your segment on MDMA:

The supposed 40 deaths in Florida due to MDMA was taken as a fact yet
the evidence supporting these claims has never been made public so
that it could be critically reviewed. The show failed to explain that
the statistic of 1100 emergency room visits due to MDMA is from the
Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) system, which links visits to
specific drugs even if the drugs did not cause the visit. All that is
needed is for the person who went to the ER or any of their friends to
have claimed the person consumed MDMA. Blood tests confirming the
mentioned drug are not required so ER visits could be due to fake MDMA
are lumped together with visit related to genuine MDMA.

When the 60 Minutes II producers called MAPS to gather information for
their show, my initial impression was positive. I was told they wanted
to look at all aspects of MDMA, therapeutic use as well as rave use,
and they wanted to do a balanced treatment of the neurotoxicity issue.
I started to get a bad feeling when it became clear that none of the
people I recommended who could talk about therapeutic use were
contacted, nor were any experts who would offer a less than hysterical
presentation about neurotoxicity.

The program should at least have given a moment of air time to a
doctor or researcher who doesn’t believe the evidence supports an
alarmist conclusion about neurotoxicity, as well as someone who could
speak to its therapeutic potential.

The 60 Minutes producers should be held accountable for a presentation
that was put together without even an attempt at basic journalistic
balance.

Rick Doblin Executive Director Multidisciplinary Association for
Psychedelic Studies (MAPS)

IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone
number

Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it
at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the
same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work.
—————————————————————————-

ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing
efforts

3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm

Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm

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

TO SUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP, OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL SEE
http://www.drugsense.org/hurry.htm

TO UNSUBSCRIBE SEE http://www.drugsense.org/unsub.htm

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

Prepared by Stephen Young – http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus
Alert Specialist

Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000
Subject: More Drug Tests And Forced Treatment Are Not The Answer

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 169 April 14, 2000

More Drug Tests And Forced Treatment Are Not The Answer

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

NOTE: Please forgive the duplication. The contact info was incorrect
in the original alert. Please send your LTEs to the Wall Street
Journal _NOT_not the Boston Globe. Contact info below.

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 169 April 14, 2000

As the failure of the drug war becomes impossible to ignore, even many
drug warriors understand the tactics of its supporters are failing.
John Q. Wilson, the Pepperdine professor who occasionally tries to
give the drug war a veneer of academic and moral credibility, is at
least honest enough to see that sending more resources to Colombia is
not going to affect the level of drug use inside the US.
Unfortunately, as he writes in the Wall Street Journal this week,
Wilson believes that more drug testing and more coerced treatment for
illegal drug users will be a wonderful success while “legalization”
would be a disaster.

To make his case he uses facts selectively. While suggesting the
Netherlands’ more liberal policy of dealing with marijuana has caused
an increase in marijuana use, he ignores the fact that rates of
marijuana and hard drug use are lower for Dutch kids than American
kids.

Worse than his abuse of the facts is his attempt to dehumanize drug
users by calling them “barbarians … incapable of being improved by
free and equal discussion.” Wilson has spouted similar justifications
for totalitarianism for more than a decade, which makes it clear he is
incapable of being improved by free and equal discussion. Please write
a letter to editors at the Wall Street Journal to identify the real
barbarian.

Thanks for your effort and support.

WRITE A LETTER TODAY

If not YOU who? If not NOW When?

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID ( Letter,
Phone, fax etc.)

Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the sent
letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or by
E-mailing a copy directly to [email protected] Your letter will then
be forwarded to the list with so others can learn from your efforts
and be motivated to follow suit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.

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

CONTACT INFO

Source: Wall Street Journal (US)
Contact: [email protected]

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

ARTICLE

Pubdate: Thu, 13 Apr 2000
Source: Wall Street Journal (US)
Copyright: 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Section: A Page: 20
Contact: [email protected]
FAX: (212) 416-2658
Address: 200 Liberty Street, New York, NY 10281
Website: http://www.wsj.com/
Author: James Q. Wilson
Note: Mr. Wilson is a professor of public policy at Pepperdine University
and author of “The Moral Sense,” available in paperback from Free Press.

A NEW STRATEGY FOR THE WAR ON DRUGS

Neither Legalizing Drugs, Nor Trying To Block Supply, Is Likely To Work.
There Is A Third Way: Reduce Demand Through Manditory Testing.

The current Senate deliberation over aid to Colombia aimed at fighting
narcotics reminds us that there are two debates over how the
government ought to deal with dangerous drugs. The first is about
their illegality and the second is about their control. People who
wish to legalize drugs and those who wish to curtail their supply
believe that their methods will reduce crime. Both these views are
mistaken, but there is a third way. Advocates of legalization think
that both buyers and sellers would benefit. People who can buy drugs
freely and at something like free market prices would no longer have
to steal to afford cocaine or heroin; dealers would no longer have to
use violence and corruption to maintain their market share. Though
drugs may harm people, reducing this harm would be a medical problem
not a criminal justice one. Crime would drop sharply.

Prices Would Fall

But there is an error in this calculation. Legalizing drugs means
letting the price fall to its competitive rate (plus taxes and
advertising costs). That market price would probably be somewhere
between one third and 1/20th of the illegal price. And more than the
market price would fall. As Harvard’s Mark Moore has pointed out, the
“risk price”–that is, all the hazards associated with buying drugs,
from being arrested to being ripped off–would also fall, and this
decline might be more important than the lower purchase price.

Under a legal regime, the consumption of low priced, low risk drugs
would increase dramatically. We do not know by how much, but the
little evidence we have suggests a sharp rise. Until 1968 Britain
allowed doctors to prescribe heroin. Some doctors cheated, and their
medically unnecessary prescriptions helped increase the number of
known heroin addicts by a factor of 40. As a result, the government
abandoned the prescription policy in favor of administering heroin in
clinics and later replacing heroin with methadone.

When the Netherlands ceased enforcing laws against the purchase or
possession of marijuana, the result was a sharp increase in its use.
Cocaine and heroin create much greater dependency, and so the increase
in their use would probably be even greater.

The average user would probably commit fewer crimes if these drugs
were sold legally. But the total number of users would increase
sharply. A large fraction of these new users would be unable to keep
a steady job. Unless we were prepared to support them with welfare
payments, crime would be one of their main sources of income. That
is, the number of drug related crimes per user might fall even as the
total number of drug related crimes increased. Add to the list of
harms more deaths from overdose, more babies born to addicted mothers,
more accidents by drug influenced automobile drivers and fewer people
able to hold jobs or act as competent parents.

Treating such people would become far more difficult. As psychiatrist
Sally Satel has written on this page, many drug users will not enter
and stay in treatment unless they are compelled to do so. Phoenix
House, the largest national residential drug treatment program, rarely
admits patients who admit they have a problem and need help. The
great majority are coerced by somebody–a judge, probation officer or
school official–into attending. Phoenix House CEO Mitchell Rosenthal
opposes legalization, and for good reason. Legalization means less
coercion, and that means more addicts and addicts who are harder to
treat.

Douglas Anglin, drawing on experiences in California and elsewhere,
has shown that people compelled to stay in treatment do at least as
well as those who volunteer for it, and they tend (of necessity) to
stay in the program longer. If we legalize drugs, the chances of
treatment making a difference are greatly reduced. And as for drug
use prevention,. forget it. Try telling your children not to use a
legal substance.

But people who want to keep drugs illegal have problems of their own.
The major thrust of government spending has been to reduce the supply
of drugs by cutting their production overseas, intercepting their
transfer into the U.S. and arresting dealers. Because of severe
criminal penalties, especially on handlers of crack cocaine, our
prisons have experienced a huge increase in persons sentenced on drug
charges. In the early 1980s, about 1/12th of all prison inmates were
in for drug convictions; now well over one third are.

No one can be certain how imprisoning drug suppliers affects drug use,
but we do know that an arrested drug dealer is easily replaced.
Moreover, the government can never seize more than a small fraction of
the drugs entering the country, a fraction that is easily replaced.

Emphasizing supply over treatment is dangerous. Not only do we spend
huge sums on it; not only do we drag a reluctant U.S. military into
the campaign; we also heighten corruption and violence in countries
such as Colombia and Mexico. The essential fact is this: Demand will
produce supply.

We can do much more to reduce demand. Some four million Americans are
currently on probation or parole. From tests done on them when they
are jailed, we know that half or more had a drug problem when
arrested. Though a lot of drug users otherwise obey the law (or at
least avoid getting arrested), probationers and parolees constitute
the hard core of dangerous addicts. Reducing their demand for drugs
ought to be our highest priority. Mark Kleiman of UCLA has suggested
a program of “testing and control”: Probationers and parolees would be
required to take frequent drug tests–say, twice weekly–as a
condition of remaining on the street. These tests are inexpensive and
show immediate results. If you failed the test, you would spend more
time in jail; if you passed it, you would remain free. This approach
would be an inducement for people to enter and stay in treatment.

This would require some big changes in how we handle offenders.
Police, probation and parole officers would be responsible for
conducting these tests, and more officers would have to be hired.
Probation and parole authorities would have to be willing to sanction
a test failure by immediate incarceration, initially for a short
period (possibly a weekend), and then for longer periods if the
initial failure were repeated. Treatment programs at little or no cost
to the user would have to be available not only in every prison, but
for every drug dependent probationer and parolee. These things are
not easily done. Almost every state claims to have an intensive
community supervision program, but few offenders are involved in them,
the frequency with which they are contacted is low, and most were
released from super vision without undergoing any punishment for
violating its conditions.

But there is some hope. Our experience with drug courts suggests that
the procedural problems can be overcome. In such courts, several
hundred of which now exist, special judges oversee drug dependent
offenders, insisting that they work to overcome their habits. While
under drug court supervision, offenders reduce drug consumption and,
at least for a while after leaving the court, offenders are less
likely to be arrested. Our goal ought to be to extend meaningful
community supervision to all probationers and parolees, especially
those who have a serious drug or alcohol problem. Efforts to test Mr.
Kleiman’s proposals are under way in Connecticut and Maryland.

If this demand reduction strategy works, it can be expanded. Drug
tests can be given to people who apply for government benefits, such
as welfare and public housing. Some critics will think this is an
objectionable intrusion. But giving benefits without conditions
weakens the character building responsibility of society.

Prevent Harm to Others

John Stuart Mill, the great libertarian thinker, argued that the only
justifiable reason for restricting human liberty is to prevent harm to
others. Serious drug abuse does harm others. We could, of course,
limit government action to remedying those harms without addressing
their causes, but that is an uphill struggle, especially when the
harms fall on unborn children. Fetal drug syndrome imposes large
costs on infants who have had no voice in choosing their fate.

Even Mill was clear that full liberty cannot be given to children or
barbarians. By “barbarians” he meant people who are incapable of
being improved by free and equal discussion. The life of a serious
drug addict–the life of someone driven by drug dependency to
prostitution and crime–is the life of a barbarian.'”

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the Editor:
James Q. Wilson’s recommendation that present drug policy be retained
and modified by increased drug testing and compulsory treatment (A
New Strategy for the War on Drugs, April 13) – is best seen as an
unwitting example of the vicious thinking which spawned our
catastrophic drug war; not as a basis for any rationale public policy.

Space won’t permit a full listing of Wilson’s sins against both logic
and history; the first is his assumption that the major purpose of any
drug policy is reducing crime. In truth, crime wasn’t associated with
drug use until America initiated drug prohibition. Before 1915 users
weren’t criminals and addicts didn’t have to steal.

Another erroneous assumption is his equation of drug use with
addiction in attempting to justify forcing those who test positive
into “treatment.” Most repeat users of any agent do not become
addicts; they either continue sporadic recreational use for the
balance of their lives or give it up completely; much like the
situation with (legal) alcohol. Even where daily compulsive use is
acknowledged to be harmful to health, our society hasn’t seen fit to
force (legal) alcoholics and nicotine addicts into treatment.

In his last paragraph, Wilson reveals the full dimensions of his
inhumanity and arrogance. By his definition, all “addicts” (users) are
“barbarians,” thus they don’t deserve full liberty. This is neither
sociology nor responsible policy; it’s the cant of the bogus religion
of repression intended to grace a brave new zero-tolerance world.

No, thanks.

Tom O’Connell MD

IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone
number

Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it
at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the
same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work.
—————————————————————————-

ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing
efforts

3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm

Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm

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

TO SUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP, OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL SEE

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

TO UNSUBSCRIBE SEE http://www.drugsense.org/unsub.htm

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

Prepared by Stephen Young – http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus
Alert Specialist

Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000
Subject: ONDCP Attacks MAP And Journalist Dan Forbes

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 168 April 8, 2000

ONDCP Attacks MAP And Journalist Dan Forbes

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 168 April 8, 2000

If you’re unable to challenge the facts, attack your opponent. Barry
McCaffrey’s Office of National Drug Control Policy brought those words
to life this week after assailing Daniel Forbes, the writer whose
Salon.com stories have helped to shed light on the ONDCP’s practice of
paying media outlets in return for submerging “anti-drug” messages in
content.

The Boston Globe ran a story this week (below) that not only allowed
ONDCP officials to say bad things about Forbes, but also to suggest
that Forbes is somehow in cahoots with all of us who work with MAP.
The article quotes a cog in the ONDCP propaganda machine who proudly
demonstrates that his willful ignorance of drug policy extends out to
the activities of MAP.

The ONDCP’s ability to understand irony also appears to be limited.
The ONDCP attacks an individual for expressing alleged bias, while
they have spent millions to make sure that their own bias is
effectively expressed in media reports, sitcoms and magazines. Please
write a letter to the Boston Globe to protest the fabrications and
dirty tricks of the ONDCP.

Thanks for your effort and support.

WRITE A LETTER TODAY

It’s not what others do it’s what YOU do

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID ( Letter,
Phone, fax etc.)

Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the sent
letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or by
E-mailing a copy directly to [email protected] Your letter will then
be forwarded to the list with so others can learn from your efforts
and be motivated to follow suit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.

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

CONTACT INFO

Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Contact: [email protected]

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

ARTICLE

Newshawk: Richard Lake
Pubdate: Fri, 07 Apr 2000
Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Copyright: 2000 Globe Newspaper Company.
Section: The Media Page: D12
Contact: [email protected]
Address: P.O. Box 2378, Boston, MA 02107-2378
Feedback: http://extranet.globe.com/LettersEditor/default.asp
Website: http://www.boston.com/globe/
Author: Mark Jurkowitz, Globe Staff
Note: Mark Greer is quoted below. MAP’s Sr. Editor makes a rare comment
following this item.
Bookmark: MAP’s link to the ONDCP Media Campaign
http://www.mapinc.org/campaign.htm

ONLINE JOURNALIST TANGLES WITH FEDS OVER ANTIDRUG AD POLICY

There’s a new battlefront in the White House war on drugs. Daniel
Forbes.

Forbes, 44, is the freelancer who recently authored two big stories
for the online magazine Salon ( www.salon.com ) that revealed a
controversial financial link between the media and the government’s
antidrug campaign.

Now he’s the focus of a heated dispute between the Office of National
Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) – which is asking Salon to disclose
Forbes’s ”bias” against the drug war – and Salon, whose editor
accuses the ONDCP of ”coming close to Nixonian behavior in trying to
nail the messenger … ”

In January, Forbes reported that six TV networks earned millions by
airing prime-time programs with antidrug themes deemed appropriate by
the ONDCP. Media outlets taking ONDCP antidrug ads must provide
additional space or time of equal value or other forms of public
service, and those prime-time programs allowed the networks to reclaim
some discounted ad time.

Last week, Forbes named six magazines – US News & World Report, The
Sporting News, Family Circle, Seventeen, Parade, and USA Weekend –
that hoped to reap similar rewards by submitting content with antidrug
messages to the ONDCP. This week, the antidrug office told the Globe
that several other publications – including Family Life, Ladies’ Home
Journal, Hispanic magazine, and NEA Today – also submitted content
that is currently being evaluated under the ONDCP program.

The ONDCP says it’s properly enlisting the media in the drug war. But
Forbes’s stories have ignited a debate about whether the media should
be part of what he calls a ”government campaign to influence the
control of popular culture.”

In a March 30 letter to Salon, ONDCP assistant director for strategic
planning Robert Housman, said ”it is clear that Dan Forbes … is
more than just a disinterested reporter in search of a story. Mr.
Forbes has been a regular contributor to the Media Awareness Project’s
Website, an organization that essentially advocates for the
legalization of drugs.”

The MAP ( www.mapinc.org ) is part of the DrugSense organization whose
”primary objective is to get a national dialogue so we can start
getting sensible alternatives … to our failed policy,” says
DrugSense executive director Mark Greer.

The MAP postings include a lengthy 1998 piece Forbes (using the pen
name Daniel Hill) wrote for Brandweek magazine casting doubts on the
research behind the government’s antidrug ad campaign. Greer says the
MAP will ”archive virtually any article we can find that is
drug-policy-related,” and that Forbes received no money from the
organization. Greer says the MAP became aware of Forbes’s work when he
mentioned the Brandweek piece to one of the group’s editors at a seminar.

Forbes says ”I had no great interest in the drug issue” until he
began examining the antidrug ad campaign for Brandweek at an editor’s
request. ”There’s been no editorializing in the Salon pieces,” he
adds. ”I am not an advocate for any policy situation or drug policy
organization. They [the ONDCP] descend to ad hominem attacks on me,
but they don’t seem to want to discuss the substance of the articles.”

”I’m not accusing him of anything,” says Housman. ”I’m trying to
make them [Salon] play honest journalism. I’m not asking the guy not
to write .. I don’t care what his view is. But I think the readers
should know.”

When asked if Salon should disclose Forbes’s views, editor David
Talbot says, ”whatever biases Dan Forbes has about US drug policy …
I think the biases were not the driving factor in the stories he did
for us … What’s really going on here is the White House is coming
close to launching a preemptive strike on the reputation of a
journalist.”

Meanwhile, even as magazine editors say they did not know that
editorial content was being submitted to the ONDCP, the journalistic
debate over that practice rages. NEA Today publisher Sam Pizzigatti
says his publication submitted material on student health that
referenced an antidrug Web site, noting that we ”do that anyway,
regardless of advertising.”

Family Life editor in chief Peter Herbst says his magazine submitted a
story that wasn’t actually about drugs, but contained ”positive stuff
about raising kids.”

”In general, this kind of [content for credit] swap is a bad idea,”
Herbst says. ”It contaminates the process.” But he adds that ”no
editors have created material to satisfy this demand and no editors
have ever been aware of this.”

Thanks to Forbes, they’re aware now.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following is by Richard Lake, MAP’s Sr. Editor:

It comes as no surprise that ONDCP’s Robert Housman would try to
distort the relationship between Dan Forbes and MAP. We know that
ONDCP follows the MAP effort to collect news and opinion about the War
on Drugs worldwide and provide the results in an educational research
archives. Apparently this makes some ONDCP folks unhappy as just last
summer they had the Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey attack MAP in testimony
to Congress for having links to sites that had links to sites that our
Czar did not like – as if we were guilty of something. I guess they
don’t know that we are not responsible for the content of the sites of
others, twice removed – no more than we are responsible for the
content of the writings of any author who’s work may be found in our
archives.

Unlike our ONDCP, MAP has never paid anyone for what they
wrote.

Yes, Dan Forbes did ask me to add the Brandweek article Drug Money to
our archives at a seminar. At the time I doubt he even knew about the
MAP efforts other than that we gathered drug policy related items and
placed them on the web. I took a copy, OCRed it, and added it to the
archives. This is not unusual at all. Editors, reporters and authors
frequently send their published writings from their newspapers and
magazines to [email protected] – just as they use our archives for
research for their writing. However, of the six articles in our
archives by Dan Forbes, only that one was provided by him. Our
NewsHawks found the others. Mr. Forbes is hardly a “regular
contributor.”

Maybe ONDCP thinks this is somehow unfair? We note that there are over
two dozen items by the Czar himself in our archives. We have no idea
if any were newshawked by someone from ONDCP to us – but they are
welcome to contribute. We promise not to ask for any of the ONDCP
payola funds in exchange!

It is interesting that ONDCP’s Robert Housman would say Dan Forbes, or
Michael Massing, or anyone is biased. Their ad hominem attacks don’t
represent a bias? Well, I guess it would be too much to ask our
taxpayer supported point team for ‘approved’ drug war media content to
adopt MAP’s motto of “Moving the Discourse on Drugs from Hysteria to
Sanity and Humanity.”

(NOTE: to see a list of items cataloged in the MAP archive authored by
both Forbes and drug czar Barry McCaffrey see URL:
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n462/a11.html)

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

SAMPLE LETTER

Dear Editor:

In general I applaud Mark Jurkowitz for accurate reporting (Online
Journalist Tangles With Feds Over Antidrug Ad Policy BG 4/7.) The
items I would take issue with in his article are the predictably
inaccurate statements by ONDCP spokesman Robert Housman who referred
to the Media Awareness Project (MAP) as “an organization that
essentially advocates for the legalization of drugs.” I will endorse
or oppose “legalization” if Housman will define it. If he means crack
vending machines in the junior high schools I am adamantly opposed. If
he means sensible alternatives to the boondoggle of a policy we
currently endure I am likely a proponent.

MAP and DrugSense comprise a non profit organization that provides
more in the way of accuracy and fact on drug policy than ONDCP could
ever hope to compete with. ONDCP director Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey
has been documented in advancing more fabrications, distortions and
half truths on drug policy matters than perhaps all prior drug czars
combined. Many of these inaccuracies have been documented in the MAP
news archive (www.mapinc.org) and in the collection of ads entitled
“Is truth a casually of the drug war” run by Common Sense for Drug
Policy (www.csdp.org). These ads have appeared in major publications
nationwide and can be accessed off the DrugSense web page
(www.drugsense.org). They document the ONDCP and McCaffrey as at least
being horribly misinformed.

Housman also claims that journalist Dan Forbes “has been a regular
contributor to the Media Awareness Project’s Website.” Yet another
fallacy. Forbes has made MAP aware of but one single article that he
authored in Brand Week entitled “Drug Money” and our archive contains
a total of six articles by Forbes out of 35,000 total articles. The
MAP archive also contains no less than 25 articles by Drug Czar Barry
McCaffrey not to mention hundreds of articles in which McCaffrey is
quoted. ONDCP employees access the MAP archive on a daily basis and we
have received letters of appreciation from a number of them for the
accurate research service it provides.

It sounds to me as if the ones with less than journalistic integrity
might be our “leaders” at ONDCP who steadfastly refuse to admit that
existing drug policy is a monumentally expensive and unassailably
failed policy.

Mark Greer
Executive Director
DrugSense (MAP Inc.)

IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone
number

Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it
at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the
same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work.
—————————————————————————-

ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing
efforts

3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm

Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm

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

TO SUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP, OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL SEE

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

TO UNSUBSCRIBE SEE http://www.drugsense.org/unsub.htm

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

Prepared by Stephen Young – http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus
Alert Specialist

Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000
Subject: Magazines Paid To Spout Drug War Propaganda

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 167 April 5, 2000

Magazines Paid To Spout Drug War Propaganda

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 167 April 5, 2000

A few months ago, Salon.com published a story explaining how
television networks were getting paid federal money to insert
government approved anti-drug messages in their programming. The
networks got the money as part of the billion-dollar propaganda
campaign organized by the Office of National Drug Control Policy and
the Partnership for a Drug-Free America.

Many were rightly shocked by this arrangement, but some argued that it
revolved around entertainment programming on television, where people
don’t necessarily expect to find objective or accurate information.
Daniel Forbes, who wrote the original story for Salon, is back with
another story about how supposedly objective and serious magazines
also got paid if the ONDCP/PDFA liked the slant of their stories (The
entire story of “The Drug War Gravy Train” by Forbes can be read at
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n428/a04.html, below is a short
Associated Press report on the subject.)

Forbes identifies the following magazines as those that took money for
publishing propaganda approved by the ONDCP: US News & World Report,
The Sporting News, Family Circle, Seventeen, Parade and USA Weekend.
While the editors at the magazines deny that the payoffs impacted the
stories published in the magazines, evidence collected by Forbes
suggests otherwise.

“Take the case of two magazines: Family Circle and Woman’s Day, the
latter published by Hachette Filipacchi Magazines Inc. To the average
reader, these books probably appear about as different as Tweedledum
and Tweedledee. But appearances can be deceptive. According to
Hall’s Magazine Reports Inc., an industry research group, Family
Circle ran a hefty eight-and-a-half pages of anti-drug editorial
matter in 1999. Woman’s Day, on the other hand, ran none, states
Hall’s research director, Sandy Santora. Family Circle was the
recipient of a $1.4 million drug-office ad buy, second only to Parade.
The Woman’s Day buy? Zero.”

Please write letters to some or all of the magazines that took the
payments expressing disappointment at their willingness to place ad
revenues and drug war orthodoxy over independence and
objectivity.

Thanks for your effort and support.

WRITE A LETTER TODAY

It’s not what others do it’s what YOU do

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID ( Letter,
Phone, fax etc.)

Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the sent
letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or by
E-mailing a copy directly to [email protected] Your letter will then
be forwarded to the list with so others can learn from your efforts
and be motivated to follow suit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.

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

CONTACT INFO

Source: U.S. News and World Reports
Contact: [email protected]

Source: Parade Magazine
Contact: http://www.parade.com/email/index.html

Source: USA Weekend
Contact: http://www.usaweekend.com/about/mail_letter_eds.html

Source: Seventeen
Contact: [email protected]

Source: Family Circle
Contact: [email protected]

Source: The Sporting News
Contact: [email protected]

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

ARTICLE

Pubdate: Sun, 02 Apr 2000
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Copyright: 2000 Los Angeles Times
Contact: [email protected]
Address: Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA 90053
Fax: (213) 237-4712
Website: http://www.latimes.com/
Forum: http://www.latimes.com/home/discuss/
Author: From Associated Press

6 MAGAZINES GIVEN ANTI-DRUG DISCOUNTS

WASHINGTON–The White House drug policy office offered financial
incentives to at least six magazines that ran stories discouraging
drug use, an arrangement similar to one with television networks.

The drug office and the publications say there were never any attempts
to influence the content of articles. Under the deal with the
networks, which drew public attention earlier this year, programs that
carried anti-drug messages could be exempted from requirements to run
anti-drug ads.

Stephen G. Smith, editor of U.S. News & World Report, one of the six
named in a report by the online magazine Salon, told Associated Press
that people on the editorial side were “utterly ignorant of any kind
of arrangement or even the hint of any kind of arrangement.”

He noted that an article in the January issue of the magazine
questioned the propriety of television networks including anti-drug
themes in entertainment shows in exchange for public service
announcements.

Salon reported that the Sporting News, Family Circle, Seventeen,
Parade and USA Weekend also made use of the arrangement that gave them
financial credits worth thousands of dollars in ad space they owed the
Office of National Drug Control Policy.

“We have been open about this from the beginning,” Bob Weiner,
spokesman for White House drug policy director Gen. Barry R.
McCaffrey, said in an interview.

He said there was “no attempt and no action that dictates any content
control whatsoever.” The magazines’ editorial sides were unaware of,
and played no role in, negotiations between the office’s ad agency
that bought ad space and their sales departments, he said.

Congress in 1997 approved a $1-billion program to buy anti-drug ads in
the national media.

The agreements with the networks and magazines reduce their public
service obligations when they carry anti-drug messages in their shows
or articles.

U.S. News Publisher Bill Holiber said in an interview that dealings
with the drug office occurred before he started his job in January.
He said the magazine no longer gets ads from the office because it is
against the magazine’s policy to link editorial content to financial
incentives.

Holiber said U.S. News never submitted articles for review, but the
ad agency representing the drug office looked at articles on its own
to see if they met the criteria for exemptions. He said articles in
the publication never qualified.

Revelations that the drug office reviewed such television shows as
“ER” and “The Practice” raised concerns of government interference in
editorial independence. In January, the White House announced new
guidelines making clear that it would not review program episodes for
ad credits until after they have been aired.

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor:

I was surprised and disappointed to read at Salon.com that your
publication accepted money from the Office of National Drug Control
Policy in return for approval of stories with an “anti-drug” slant.

Some may argue that it is appropriate to join forces with government
agencies that claim to fight illegal drugs since the illegal drug
market is related to may societal ills. However, an honest appraisal
of the situation shows that the drug war that has been continually
waged for decades causes much more harm than good. Scare stories and
calls to “get tough” on drugs may seem effective to those who don’t
look past the surface, but attempts to use coercion to stop drugs only
leads to bad results. Throughout the 1990s the U.S. has used more
resources and jailed more people in the name of the drug war only to
see rates of drug use increase along with levels of drug potency. By
taking the money and sticking to the party line your publication is
shamelessly supporting these terrible results.

Stephen Young

IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone
number

Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it
at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the
same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work.
—————————————————————————-

ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing
efforts

3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm

Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm

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

TO SUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP, OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL SEE

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

TO UNSUBSCRIBE SEE http://www.drugsense.org/unsub.htm

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

Prepared by Stephen Young – http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus
Alert Specialist

Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000
Subject: IMPORTANT Are YOU Writing At Least One Letter Per Week?

You are receiving this because you have either signed up to receive
Focus Alerts from the Media Awareness Project (MAP) of the DrugSense
organization at http://www.drugsense.org/hurry.htm or you are on a
drug policy reform listserv. Apologies to those who are in fact
writing one or more letters a week. This message is for those who are
not.

—

Sure we’re all busy and it’s easy to procrastinate or simply delete
DrugSense Focus Alerts and assume that someone else will write those
letters but every so often it’s important that we remind ourselves how
important it is for every drug policy reformer to commit to writing at
least one letter a week utilizing the tools provided by MAP. There is
little that most drug policy reform advocates can do that is more
effective and rewarding.

Recently we have seen a bit of a drop off in the number of letters
that are sent in reply to our weekly alerts despite the fact that we
have more letter writing volunteers than ever. Perhaps you are writing
letters but you are not sending copies of them to the sent letters
list? (If so see below)

It is vitally import that we keep participation in the MAP effort at
high levels. We have had a profound effect on the print media as can
be evidenced by scanning the headlines at http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/
on any given day.

Four years ago it was difficult to find a pro-reform article. Today
after 4 years of MAP and tens of thousands of letters influencing and
educating the media and the public, it is difficult to find a pro-drug
war article unless it is written by Barry McCaffrey, Joe Califano or
some other drug warrior with an agenda and a fat paycheck to protect.

Please help us help reform by writing a letter a week. You can either
utilize our weekly Focus Alerts or use the DrugSense Weekly Newsletter or
the news archive to select an article that particularly interests you.
Nearly all articles include the email address of the newspaper making this
a very easy task. Numbers matter. Even a short LTE sends a powerful
message. Please consider recommitting yourself to this important endeavor.

Remember to send a copy of your letter in so they can be archived. Simply
put the word SENT in the subject and send your letter to
[email protected] if you are subscribed. You can subscribe to this list
at http://www.mapinc.org/lists/index.htm#form
If you are not subscribed to the Sent LTE list please send a copy of your
letter to [email protected] and I will forward your letter to the list.

We are also interested in any ideas that you may have that would help to
encourage greater participation in the MAP letter writing effort.

Thanks for your efforts. Together We ARE making a difference.

—

HOW TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE AT PROMOTING SENSIBLE DRUG POLICY ALTERNATIVES

One of the best, most effective, and cheapest ways of gaining positive PR
is the methods developed by the Media Awareness Project (MAP). All members
encouraged to be on the lookout for any news articles on drug policy
issues. They should be posted to our central clearinghouse at
[email protected] See
http://www.mapinc.org/hawk.htm
for more info on how to be a NewsHawk

You can also use topical shortcuts to read the articles others have posted
to the DrugNews archive these have been developed for most states and most
issues so you can see articles you want for locations or issues of
particular interest to you or your group

There are hundreds of past news articles complete with the publications
email addresses for easy letter writing in each topical shortcut.

A concerted effort to write letters to these publication should be
undertaken by all list members. You will be amazed at how quickly the media
can be educated. Impressive PR can be managed with a consistent letter
writing effort. We have seen it hundreds of times in hundreds of newspapers
and localities over the last few years.

Letters to the editor (LTEs) when published are like small ads that have
been taken out for drug policy reform. They are read by many thousands
(sometimes millions) of individuals. The MAP effort has reported nearly
3,000 published LTEs to date with an overall advertising value of more than
$2.7 MILLION. The average advertising value of just one published LTE is
more than $1,000. An LTE in USA Today can be worth more than $10,000. See
http://www.mapinc.org/lte/

Be sure to send a copy of your sent LTEs to [email protected] if you
are subscribed to that list or to me at [email protected] if not and I will
forward them for archiving. Any published LTEs should go to
[email protected] for permanent archiving. It is helpful if you put SENT or
PUBLTE in the subject.

Learn about how to write better and more effective letters at our writer’s
resources web page
http://www.mapinc.org/resource/

It’s fun it’s easy and how else can you contribute thousands of dollars in
value to the drug policy reform effort for free, in just a few minutes, and
while at home in front of your computer?

Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000
Subject: Stop The Violence By Stopping The Drug War

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 166 Thursday March 23, 2000
Stop The Violence By Stopping The Drug War

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 166 Thursday March 23, 2000

The horrors of the drug war don’t seem to have much impact on
reporters on the business beat. They often seem to assume that the
drug war represents “business as usual,” but this week a business
columnist at the Dallas Morning News decided otherwise.

After visiting San Diego, Scott Burns (in a column below) determined
that the terrible violence plaguing Mexican towns on the U.S.-Mexico
border is caused by drug prohibition. He also arrived at the obvious
solution that seems so difficult for elected officials to understand:
End the drug war.

“Have the guts, as a nation, to realize that we are awash in substance
abuse and that the legality or illegality of substances ranging from
alcohol and prescription tranquilizers to cocaine and heroin are
transitory social conventions that allow criminals to make fortunes,
cost the lives of substance abusers and inflict agony on their loved
ones. Do that and we can enjoy a magnificent decline in the domestic
crime rate,” Burns wrote.

Please write a letter to the Dallas Morning News to let editors and
readers know that Burns is on the right track.

Thanks for your effort and support.

WRITE A LETTER TODAY

It’s not what others do it’s what YOU do

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID ( Letter,
Phone, fax etc.)

Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the sent
letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or by
E-mailing a copy directly to [email protected] Your letter will then
be forwarded to the list with so others can learn from your efforts
and be motivated to follow suit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.

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

CONTACT INFO

Source: Dallas Morning News (TX)
Contact: [email protected]

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

ARTICLE

Pubdate: Tue, 21 Mar 2000
Source: Dallas Morning News (TX)
Copyright: 2000 The Dallas Morning News
Contact: [email protected]
Address: P.O. Box 655237, Dallas, Texas 75265
Fax: (972) 263-0456
Feedback: http://dmnweb.dallasnews.com/letters/
Website: http://www.dallasnews.com/
Forum: http://forums.dallasnews.com:81/webx
Author: Scott Burns, DMN Business Columnist

Drugs Cast Shadow On Border Cities

SAN DIEGO — It’s easy to think of San Diego as a sports dreamland.
On the ride from Yuma, I passed huge sand dunes where dune buggies
were cavorting, a mountain peak circled by strangely out-of-scale
hawks that turned out to be hang gliders and parasails, a gigantic
skating park and finally San Diego Bay itself, stately with sails,
busy with small fishing boats. If you want to be active and outdoors,
this city has got to be one of the great places in America to live.

But a dark shadow looms over San Diego and reaches into every corner
of America. It is from Tijuana and drugs. In the first two months of
the year, according to news reports, 70 people have been killed in
Tijuana, presumed victims in drug turf battles.

TV news is interrupted on the day of my arrival by an announcement
that Tijuana Police Chief Alfredo de la Torre Marquez was shot to
death on his way to work. Ambushed by assassins with automatic
weapons, his vehicle was hit by at least 100 shots. Fifty-three
bullets were found in his body.

Murder isn’t unique to Tijuana. It is increasing along the entire
border. In Juarez, Mayor Gustavo Elizondo has successfully petitioned
the government of Mexico to rename the major drug cartels after their
leaders instead of the city in which they operate. Overnight, the
“Juarez Cartel,” disappears from public reporting.

Not surprisingly, the mayor was concerned with the image of his city
after November’s highly publicized search for mass graves. While 100
to 300 bodies were sought, “only” nine were found. Since 1993, over
200 people have disappeared in Juarez. Why is this happening?

Drugs. Only the incredible money in illegal drugs can explain the
rising level of violence along the border.

Skeptical?

Then consider this. Just west of Del Rio, after riding over the
Amistad Reservoir Bridge, a single Border Patrol agent, Alex Lopez,
stopped me. Mr. Lopez is part of a Special Response Team in the area.
Officer Lopez was alone in a region that resembles the surface of the
moon.

I commented that he had a tough job.

“Not so bad.” He answered. “It gets exciting sometimes.”

I asked how it was exciting.

“This is a major area for drug smuggling. A lot of stuff comes
through here, and we’re here to stop it.”

It’s a tough job. You can understand by looking at a map. The
U.S.-Mexico border is 2,000 miles long. Large areas of Texas, New
Mexico and Arizona — like the area between Del Rio and Langtry — are
virtually devoid of population. It is easy to cross the river and
meet waiting transportation. And if you want to operate big time,
you’ve got thousands of square miles of empty land in Texas to scrape
out a airstrip.

Now consider the economics of heroin in the Sierra Madre. According
to Edwin Bustillos and Alan Weisman in The Late Great Mexican Border,
an acre of land can support about 44,000 poppy bulbs, which can
produce at least 13,200 grams of opium gum. That, in turn, will
refine down about 1,320 grams of pure heroin that is valued at $80 to
$500 a gram in the United States.

So do the math.

Depending on productivity and price, an acre of dirt in the Sierra
Madre can produce a heroin crop worth from $105,600 to $2.2 million.
That’s a lot more than can be earned from raising cattle, hunting
exotic game, farming pecan groves, citrus groves — or even renting RV
spaces. What we’re talking about here is the ultimate crop, the crop
that displaces (or corrupts) everything.

While most of the border area struggles to leapfrog from a subsistence
agricultural and mining economy to an industrial economy — one where
manufactured homes displace farmland in McAllen and RVs replace orange
groves in Yuma — the crop that beats industrialization cold is
heroin. It is an irresistible force.

Our “war on drugs” is a Vietnam: Whatever we spend to turn the entire
2,000-mile border into an American version of the Great Wall of China, it
will not be enough to stop the movement of drugs across the border or
reduce the carnage on both sides.

What to do?

Something radical: eliminate the profit in illegal drug
traffic.

Decriminalize the production, distribution and use of drugs.
Disembowel criminal levels of profitability. Have normal levels of
profitability by conventional companies that produce and distribute
high-quality, low-cost drugs. Use taxes on drugs to support drug
treatment programs for people who want to recover.

Have the guts, as a nation, to realize that we are awash in substance
abuse and that the legality or illegality of substances ranging from
alcohol and prescription tranquilizers to cocaine and heroin are
transitory social conventions that allow criminals to make fortunes,
cost the lives of substance abusers and inflict agony on their loved
ones. Do that and we can enjoy a magnificent decline in the domestic
crime rate. We can build treatment centers instead of prisons. We
might even restore millions of Americans who live in the shadow world
of drugs.

I did not think this way when I left Dallas and headed for Brownsville
on Feb. 5. I was convinced it was the only solution by the time I
left San Diego.

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor:

I applaud Scott Burns for looking at the facts about drug prohibition
(“Drugs Cast Shadow On Border Cities,” March 21). Like anyone who
attempts to analyze the realities of the drug war honestly, Burns came
to an obvious conclusion: The only way to stop the violence
surrounding the illegal drug market is to eliminate the astonishing
profits made possible by prohibition.

It is well past time to end the current version of prohibition.
Alcohol prohibition was lifted in the 1930s in part because people got
sick of the black market violence. The same thing will happen
eventually with drug prohibition. The question is how many more bodies
are we going to allow to pile up before a majority demands that this
madness stop? As the recent assassination of the Tijuana chief of
police illustrates, anyone can become a fatality in the drug war.

Stephen Young

IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone
number

Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it
at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the
same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work.
—————————————————————————-

ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing
efforts

3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm

Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm

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

TO SUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP, OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL SEE

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

TO UNSUBSCRIBE SEE http://www.drugsense.org/unsub.htm

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

Prepared by Stephen Young – http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus
Alert Specialist

Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000
Subject: Colombia Aid Can Only Make Drug War Disaster Worse

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 165 Saturday March 18, 2000

Colombia Aid Can Only Make Drug War Disaster Worse

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE

Write a Letter – Make a Difference ——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 165 Saturday March 18, 2000

A few editorialists and columnists have come out against congressional
plans to send $1.6 billion to Colombia, but few have done so with the
clarity of Arianna Huffington. The money is supposed to be used to
fight the drug war, but Huffington showed how the Colombian aid plan
is really a very destructive form of corporate welfare.

In a column from this week appearing in at least three newspapers,
Huffington also illustrated the perversity of current priorities in
the drug war.

Please write a letter to one or all of the newspapers – San Francisco
Examiner, Chicago Sun-Times, or Washington Times – where the column
ran. Remind editors and readers that the plan to send more than a
billion dollars to Colombia, like most plans in the drug war, will
cause a great deal of trouble. Benefits will go only to those who
already profit from the drug war.

Thanks for your effort and support.

WRITE A LETTER TODAY

It’s not what others do it’s what YOU do

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID ( Letter,
Phone, fax etc.)

Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the sent
letter list ([email protected]) if you are subscribed, or by
E-mailing a copy directly to [email protected] Your letter will then
be forwarded to the list with so others can learn from your efforts
and be motivated to follow suit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.

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

CONTACT INFO

Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA)
Contact: [email protected]

EXTRA CREDIT

The Washington Times also ran Huffington’s column under the headline
“Latest Priority In The Drug War” (URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n370/a07.html),
while the Chicago Sun-Times ran the story under the headline “Drug War
Comes At High Price” (http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n367/a08.html)
on March 15. Please also send your letter to one or both.

Source: Washington Times (DC)
Contact: [email protected]

Source: Chicago Sun-Times (IL)
Contact: [email protected]

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

ARTICLE

Pubdate: Wed, 15 Mar 2000
Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA)
Copyright: 2000 San Francisco Examiner
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.examiner.com/
Forum: http://examiner.com/cgi-bin/WebX
Page: A 19
Author: Arianna Huffington

MISGUIDED? $1 .7 BILLION FOR COLOMBIA IS NUTS

We’re about to spend $1.7 billion to escalate the drug war in
Colombia, while here at home we have 3.6 million addicts not receiving
the treatment they need.

On Thursday, the House of Representatives will vote on an emergency
aid package initiated by the White House and enthusiastically backed
by the House Republican leadership. It’s a product of the drug war’s
perverse priorities and another example of the disturbing link between
campaign cash and public policy.

Let’s start with the cash spread around to help grease the wheels for
the aid bonanza. The Colombian government hired Vernon Jordan’s old
law firm — Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, which he has since
left – to stump for it on The Hill.

Indeed, when the House Appropriations Committee met last week to
consider the White House proposal, a member of the committee, Rep.
Jesse Jackson, Jr. D-Ill, noticed that an Akin, Gump lobbyist was in
attendance. He must have gone away happy. The committee not only
approved the president’s $1.2 billion request but added another $500
million.

The Colombians have other powerful allies in Washington. Most
persistent has been a collection of multinational corporations with
operations in Colombia — including Occidental Petroleum, BP Amoco
and Enron — that has been lobbying both Congress and the
administration for a big-buck package that would serve their business
interests there.

And speaking of business interests, more than $400 million of the aid
will be spent on the purchase of 63 helicopters manufactured by two
U.S. firms — Sikorsky Aircraft, a subsidiary of United Technology
and Bell Helicopter Textron.

In the last two election cycles, Textron and its employees donated
close to a million dollars to both Republicans and Democrats, and
United Technologies gave more than $700,000.

“It’s business for us, and we are as aggressive as anybody,” one Bell
Helicopter lobbyist told Legal Times, “I’m just trying, to sell
helicopters,”

Underscoring the incestuous relationship between commerce and drug
policy, Tom Umberg the architect of the administration’s Colombian
initiative, is moving from the White House Office of Drug Control
Policy to the law firm of Morrison & Foster to represent Colombia and
other Latin American countries on trade issues.

Colombia is in the midst of a protracted three-way civil war, pitting
the Colombian army, which has one of the worst human-rights records in
the Western Hemisphere, against leftist rebels and right-wing
paramilitary groups, both largely funded by the drug trade.

The army will receive the largest share of the U.S. money, prompting
senior defense officials to express privately their fear that our
military’s expanding role in fighting the war on drugs could draw the
United States into another Vietnam.

Maybe that’s why the Clinton administration decided to introduce the
Colombian aid as part of a larger emergency-spending package, The
potentially controversial measure is bundled with proposals only a
coldhearted misanthrope would oppose.

Along with the money for Colombia, the bill includes $2.2 billion for
relief from natural disasters such as Hurricane Floyd and $854 million
for military health care.

It’s an old legislative ploy designed to squelch debate and force
politicians to vote for wasteful — or even terrible — measures
just because they don’t want to be painted as being against God,
country and disaster relief.

Jackson is one of the members who will nevertheless vote against the
bill.

“It’s absurd,” he told me. “There wasn’t even any language added
tying the aid to human-rights concerns. And (Rep.) Nancy Pelosi’s
(D.-San Francisco) amendment to spend equivalent amounts of money on
the demand side was defeated during the Appropriations Committee
mark-up — even though treatment has been proven to be 23 times more
cost-effective than eradication of crops and 11 times more
cost-effective than interdiction.”

The cost of the helicopters alone would provide treatment for almost
200,000 substance user’s or drug-prevention services for more than 4
million Americans.

When Richard Nixon — hardly one to be accused of being soft on crime
— declared a war on drugs in 1971, he directed more than 60 percent
of the funds into treatment. Now, we’re down to 18 percent. This
despite the fact that drug czar Barry McCaffrey’s budget is expected
to rise to a proposed $19.2 billion next year.

Since 1980, the emphasis has turned to interdiction, crop eradication,
border surveillance and punishment.

It’s been a misguided use of resources. But putting $1.7 billion into
Colombia, in the middle of a civil war, is more than misguided —
it’s nuts. And if it’s not voted down in the House on Thursday, it
needs to be stopped in the Senate.

Arianna Huffington’s e-mail address is [email protected] Her
new book, “How to Overthrow the Government,” is published by
Harper-Collins.

MAP posted-by: Don Beck

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor:

Arianna Huffington correctly describes plans for $1.6 billion in
alleged drug war aid to Colombia as “nuts.” The aid package will not
make drugs disappear from either the U.S. or Colombia. But the average
American will experience no benefits – we’re just along to foot the
bill. Undesirable as that is, it doesn’t begin to describe the
situation for most people in Colombia, where an influx of war related
resources can only result in intensified violence.

The aid plan is attractive only to a few corporate profiteers and
government officials in both countries. They appear ready to use more
force to achieve their goals, whether those goals have anything to do
with stopping drugs or not.

Stephen Young

IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone
number

Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it
at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the
same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work.
—————————————————————————-

ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing
efforts

3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm

Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm

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

TO SUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP, OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL SEE

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

TO UNSUBSCRIBE SEE http://www.drugsense.org/unsub.htm

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

Prepared by Stephen Young – http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus
Alert Specialist