Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001
Subject: #217 Doctors Try To Legitimize Failing Drug Propaganda

Doctors Try To Legitimize Failing Drug Propaganda

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #217 Wednesday August 15, 2001

Drug policy reformers have been much more successful than
prohibitionists at distributing accurate, persuasive information on
the Internet.

Some prohibitionists are rightly worried about this, but instead of
trying to check their facts or attempting to determine what makes a
web site appealing, they have simply resorted to attacking
reform-oriented web site. The New England Journal of Medicine recently
published a letter from some doctors who are concerned that “partisan”
sites are more popular than the allegedly impartial sites sponsored by
the federal government. This analysis completely ignores the
ideological basis of most government sponsored anti-drug sites, which
in turn unmasks the clear bias of the authors.

Please write a letter to the editor of the NEJM to let them know that
far from having a monopoly on drug truth, federal web sites are just
another tool in the endless propaganda campaign of the drug war.

************************************************************************
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 followsuit

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

Contact Info:

Source: New England Journal of Medicine (MA)
Contact: [email protected]

Extra Credit

Reuters reported on this letter, and the story was picked up by at
least one newspaper – The Arizona Republic. The story started this
way: “Internet surfers are far more likely to come upon Web sites with
wrong and potentially dangerous information about illicit drug use
than they are to find more reliable, informed sites, a new study
shows.” Please send a letter to the Republic to challenge this
interpretation of the letter.

Title: US: Drug Web Sites Provide Harmful Information – Study
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1469/a01.html
Pubdate: Wed, 8 Aug 2001
Source: Arizona Republic (AZ)
Copyright: 2001 The Arizona Republic
Contact: [email protected]
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/24
Website: http://www.arizonarepublic.com/

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

ARTICLE

URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1473/a08.html
Pubdate: Thu, 9 Aug 2001
Source: New England Journal of Medicine (MA)
Copyright: 2001 Massachusetts Medical Society
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.nejm.org/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/290
Authors: Edward W. Boyer, Michael Shannon and Patricia L. Hibberd

WEB SITES WITH MISINFORMATION ABOUT ILLICIT DRUGS

To the Editor: As part of our research on the relation between the Internet
and substance abuse, we have identified several Web sites that promulgate
information about illicit drugs. These “partisan” Web sites are easily
identified by common search engines if one uses the names of illicit
substances as search terms.1 With some pages viewed more than 160,000 times
per day, partisan sites appear to be effective in reaching adolescents and
young adults. In a recent study, 24 percent of college students used the
Internet to obtain information on illicit substances, and 27 percent of
Internet-using college students reported that Internet use increased the
likelihood that they would use drugs.2

The popularity of partisan Web sites may arise from their plausible
descriptions of the preparation, dose, administration, and
psychoactive effects of drugs ( Table 1 ). Partisan sites also offer
recommendations for management of the adverse effects of illicit
drugs. As one partisan site says, “it is up to the drug user to stay
out of [the physician’s] hands.”11 To evaluate the quality of such
information, we conducted a survey of seven partisan Web sites. With
high interobserver reliability ( kappa=0.81 ) between experts unaware
of the source of the information, we found that every partisan site
made potentially harmful recommendations for the management of the
adverse effects of illicit drugs. Information from partisan sites has
been linked to adverse outcomes: some partisan sites have described
their own role in the deaths of drug users and some have been
implicated in poisoning from 1,4-butanediol.12,13

Table 1. Features of Partisan Web Sites as of May 24, 2001. See URL:
http://www.mapinc.org/nejmtbl.htm

Unfortunately, Internet-based efforts to prevent drug use may not
deflect visitors from partisan Web sites. We performed five separate
searches using identical key words ( “GHB” [[]-hydroxybutyric acid],
“ecstasy” [methylenedioxymethamphetamine or MDMA], and “psychedelic
mushrooms” ) over a period of 10 months. Our first two searches listed
8 partisan and 2 federal antidrug Web sites in the top 10 results. The
third search identified nine partisan sites and one federal site,
whereas the final two searches identified eight partisan and no
federal sites. In all searches, antidrug sites from the federal
government failed to appear as often as the partisan sites, which
dominate the search results. Moreover, sites of the Federal Website
Initiative, part of a billion-dollar multimedia program for the
prevention of drug abuse, did not appear in any of the search results.
These data suggest that the U.S. government, despite extensive and
costly efforts, currently does not provide effective alternative
sources of information about drugs on the Web, where partisan sites
still get the attention of both search engines and users.

Edward W. Boyer, M.D., Ph.D. Michael Shannon, M.D., M.P.H. Patricia L.
Hibberd, M.D., Ph.D. Children’s Hospital Boston, MA 02115

(See http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1473/a08.html for
references.)

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

Dear Editor:

As the Executive Director of DrugSense and MAP, both very popular drug
policy information web sites, I have seen tens of thousands of
articles on drug policy issues. I would consider many either biased or
inaccurate but, of all of them, possibly the most misleading and
biased I have ever witnessed was the letter to the editor (disguised
as a meaningful “study”) in the latest issue of the New England
Journal of Medicine. (“Web Sites with Misinformation about Illicit
Drugs” by Boyer, E. W. and Hibberd, P. L. NEJM 8/9/01)

To refer to hundreds of valuable and informative web sites that urge
sensible alternatives to our failed drug policy “partisan” while
simultaneously insinuating that the web sites provided by the federal
government are accurate and supposedly unbiased, is mind numbing in
its incredibility. Such a view could only be reached by those who have
either never made a serious study of such sites or who have a hidden
agenda.

I defy any objective observer to analyze the content and accuracy of web
sites such as Drug War
Facts http://www.DrugWarFacts.org or The Media Awareness Project (MAP)
http://www.mapinc.org
and compare them for accuracy and content with the silliness at sites like
the Partnership for a “Drug Free” America, which takes funding from the
pharmaceutical (drug) industry. See: http://www.drugfreeamerica.org/

Look at the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP)
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/ or their “youth” site Freevibe
http://www.freevibe.com/ there is simply no comparison between these
weak and misleading sites as compared to the best of the drug policy
reform information sites. The federal government sites are inaccurate
and, all to often, appear to be intentionally so. Instead of drawing
this conclusion, the authors of the article sought out obscure quotes
from sites such as http://www.erowid.org. While this site archives
thousands of pages of valuable information, it demonstrates less than
half the popularity of the MAP web site http://www.mapinc.org
mentioned above for example. Any of these sites can be objectively
evaluated and compared for relative popularity (which is a fairly
reliable indicator of accuracy) by utilizing independent web site
popularity evaluation sites such as http://www.marketleap.com/
Invariably the drug reform oriented sites out perform the government
sites.

The MAP site above is the most popular drug policy information web
site in the world. This can be verified by a truly unbiased and
accurate study that DrugSense developed last March comparing relative
popularity of web sites generally supporting existing policy compared
to those suggesting sensible alternatives. It can be viewed at
http://www.drugsense.org/webpop/

The “study” referred to got this point correct. Reform sites dominate
the Internet. There is no contest. Why are these sites so popular even
though they encourage an end to our insane and failed drug policy? It
is really quite simple. They tell the TRUTH. The government, to put it
as politely as possible, has been lying about drugs, drug policy, and
the “effectiveness” of current policy for decades. The Internet has,
at long last leveled the playing field so that the public can finally
have access to some accurate information on the damage our existing
drug policies have caused to our nation.

Finally the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) web site has
numerous web pages similar to those disparaged in the table in this
article as “partisan.” The DEA even offers step by step directions for
growing marijuana http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/intel/01001-intellbrief.pdf
. This is precisely what the article accused the “partisan” web sites
of doing.

If you hope to continue your long and prestigious reputation as a
publication who strives towards objectivity and solid science, I hope
and expect to see this letter published in your next issue.

Mark Greer
Executive Director
DrugSense (MAP Inc.)

contact info

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

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://www.maximizingharm.com
Focus Alert Specialist

Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001
Subject: #216 Universal Pictures Prostitutes “TRAFFIC”

Universal Pictures Prostitutes “TRAFFIC”

PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #216 Wednesday, July 25, 2001

When the movie ‘Traffic’ was released, the media and the drug policy
reform community both credited it with opening the debate on drug
policy. See http://www.mapinc.org/traffic.htm

That the Drug Czar, played by Michael Douglas, would walk away from
the job after seeing the drug war as a war on Americans sent a strong
signal.

Many drug policy organizations helped promote ‘Traffic,’ running
banner ads and contests, or distributing leaflets outside
theaters.(br)(br) Last week Universal Pictures sent a message to
reform organizations asking them to promote with banner ads the Pay
Per View release of the film. The message said, in part:

“I just finished checking out your drug policy related website.
I’ve been looking for sites and newsgroups that in some way connect
with the Universal Pictures film TRAFFIC, (which features Benicio Del
Toro, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Dennis Quaid, Michael Douglas, and Don
Cheadle)”

“Obviously this film raised some interesting issues dealing with
current drug policy… though not taking any sides in the debate, it
helped open up new dialog about the debate.

“As for TRAFFIC, we are doing online promotions for the film which
begins it’s Pay Per View run tomorrow, on July 17th. Would you be
into helping us promote the film and get the word out? If so, here’s
what you can do to help. Put up a banner on your site and link to the
film’s page on Universal’s site, we’ll send you some swag in
return….”

“Just make sure you LINK the banner to this site,
http://www.universalstudios.com/ppv/ Webmasters who help out will be
entered into a random drawing to win a very cool prize package that
relates to the film.”

An interesting offer, until the webmasters check out the link above.

At the link you are invited to “Tell-A-Friend and $1 will be
donated to Partnership for a Drug-Free America” Really! And they
then provide a link to http://www.drugfreeamerica.org/ where the
headline is “The War on Drugs is Working”

Universal Pictures wants you to send friends messages thru their page
about their Pay Per View release, and they will donate when you
do!

The DrugSense webmaster provided a firm NO response to the request as
did others. On Tuesday, 24 July Universal Studios issued a spin
control press release trying to defend their tie to the
Partnership.

PLEASE HELP REFORM by sending your own message to Universal Pictures
telling them what you think about this offer!

If enough of you act, Universal Pictures may well listen.

Your actions in the past have caused others to back away from big
mistakes!

The easy way to do it is to simply compose your message, then copy it
into the webform for as many of the contacts as you wish at this
webpage: http://www.universalstudios.com/homepage/html/contact_us/

There you need to click an “I Accept” link to go to a page which has
links to webforms of this huge company.

Each webform reaches a different office. There are about a dozen
contacts who deserve to receive your message. Of particular
importance are the Links at

Universal Pay-Per-View
Philanthropy / Corporate Giving / Movies / General & Miscellaneous
Business Development / Marketing / Promotions / Link Requests

PRESS RELEASE
There is also a press release rationalizing this egregious behavior at
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n000/a008.html

Just DO it

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR MESSAGE 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 one important way we have of
gauging our impact and effectiveness.

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

SAMPLE MESSAGE

Dear Sir,

I was shocked to hear about a Universal Pictures promotion for the Pay
Per View release of TRAFFIC.

As you may know, drug policy reform groups worldwide promoted TRAFFIC
upon it’s release because it so clearly opens the debate on drug policy.
These same groups were offered rewards for placing a banner on their
sites linked to http//www.universalstudios.com/ppv/

But at that webpage we find that you wish us to use a webform to
“Tell-A-Friend and $1 will be donated to Partnership for a Drug-Free
America”

This is an insult to us all! The Partnership does not stand for debate on
drug policy.

Their name says it all. On their homepage the feature article is
titled “The War on Drugs is Working.” Didn’t anyone at Universal
actually watch TRAFFIC? At the very end the drug czar walked away
from the job because the War on Drugs is really a war on the people
of the U.S. A war that has a half million in jail. A war that
is step by step turning this land into a police state. We know that
the Partnership has close ties with the Office of National Drug
Control Policy. Could it be that Universal Pictures will obtain
payola from ONDCP for this action?

We all know how much damage was done to a variety of media, TV shows,
magazines, and so on, when it was discovered that they had (and the
FCC said it was illegal for TV) altered content to receive ONDCP
payola.

The word about your action is rapidly spreading across the internet.
Don’t expect any support from the drug policy reform community until
this blunder is corrected!

Yes, we encourage everyone to see TRAFFIC. But not thru Pay Per View
under these conditions.

Richard Lake
Chief Warrant Officer, U.S. Army, Retired
Senior Editor
DrugNews
[email protected]

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

Please note If you choose to use this as a model please modify it at
least somewhat so that Universal Pictures does not receive numerous
copies of the same message.

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

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 Richard Lake
htt://www.mapinc.org/rlake/
Focus Alert Specialist

Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001
Subject: # 215 Activist Gives Ann Landers Advice On The Drug War

Activist Gives Ann Landers Advice On The Drug War

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #215 Tuesday, July 10, 2001

The reform message was distributed around the world this week as the
most prolific author in the MAP published letter archive explained how
the drug war endangers children in an Ann Landers column. Robert
Sharpe responded to an earlier Landers column featuring drug war
propaganda by a DEA bureaucrat.

Landers seemed sympathetic to Sharpe’s points, and she also published
a number of varying views on Ecstasy. Please write your own letter to
offer Ann even more information on the counterproductive nature of the
drug war.

************************************************************************
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: Ann Landers
Contact: [email protected]

You can also send snail mail to your local newspaper that carries the
Ann Landers column.

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

ARTICLE

Pubdate: Mon, 09 Jul 2001
Source: Sun Herald (MS)
Copyright: 2001 The Sun Herald
Website: http://web.sunherald.com/content/biloxi/2000/12/28/pageone/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/432
Author: Ann Landers

ECSTASY, RAVES ELICIT PERSONAL RESPONSES

Dear Ann Landers:

This is in response to the letter from DEA administrator Donnie
Marshall about ecstasy. The ecstasy knockoff known as PMA that has
been taking the lives of young Americans is today’s version of bathtub
gin. The black market has no controls for quality or user age. Unlike
legitimate businesses that sell alcohol, illegal drug dealers do not
ask for ID. They push trendy, synthetic “club drugs” when given the
chance. The drug war fails miserably at its primary mandate:
protecting children from drugs.

The Netherlands has successfully reduced overall drug use by
regulating and taxing marijuana as a legal drug and establishing age
controls. Politicians should stop worrying about the message drug
policy reform sends and start thinking about the children. – Robert
Sharpe, MPA, Program Officer, the Lindesmith Center-Drug Policy
Foundation, Washington, D.C.

Dear Robert Sharpe: Thanks for your interesting viewpoint. I hope your
letter will wake up some of those “sleeping beauties.” Here’s more on the
subject:

From Dallas: Ecstasy is fun. It gives you an overwhelming sense of
happiness and love. True, it’s not real, but so what? If you take ecstasy,
be sure you get it from a trusted source and drink lots of water. Also,
don’t take any alcohol with it. It could result in brain damage or death.

Johnstown, Pa.: I am a senior in high school and have been going to
raves almost weekly. I took my mother to a rave, and we danced until 5
a.m. She had the time of her life. We were drug-free and surrounded by
friends.

Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio: I am 19 and have been attending raves for two years.
People go for the music, not the drugs. Security personnel frisk everyone.

Nashville: It’s been two years since my experience with ecstasy, and I am
still in therapy. I was almost raped and have lost my short-term memory.

Sydney, Australia: Here in Australia, there are RaveSafe organizations that
provide guidelines on how to stay safe while using ecstasy, including the
need to drink water to prevent dehydration. You also can buy testing kits
that will tell you if the pills contain MDMA or something more dangerous.

Bloomfield Hills, Mich.: While the letter about ecstasy was valid, I
would like to point out that glowsticks are not a dependable sign of
ecstasy use. Glowsticks are very popular dance props with teen-agers
who listen to techno, electronic or rave music.

Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.: A lot of ravers use drugs, but it is not fair to
label all of us as drug users. I am 17 and go to raves every Saturday,
and I don’t use drugs. Ecstasy is available in lots of places,
including rock concerts and college parties. If I want ecstasy, I
don’t have to go to a rave to get it.

Oakland, Calif.: If ecstasy were legal, rave promoters and staff would
be able to help injured kids without fear of legal reprisal. People
are worried they will be arrested if they take someone to the hospital
or call 911. That’s the real problem.

Cincinnati: Some raves let you in for a reduced fee if you bring canned
goods for food drives. Others raise money for local charities. Ravers have
a saying, P.L.U.R., which means Peace, Love, Unity, Respect.

New York: I used ecstasy for five years, but only on weekends. I often felt
depressed on Monday mornings, but continued to take ecstasy because it was
so pleasant. This is classic addicted behavior. I can no longer ignore the
effect it has had on my health. My hair is thin and breaks off easily. My
skin is sallow, and I have perpetual acne. Due to the grinding, my teeth
have become crooked and sharp. Ecstasy is not worth the misery you suffer
later on.

To find out more about Ann Landers and read her past columns, visit
the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com

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

Dear Ann Landers,

Thank you for publishing Robert Sharpe’s outstanding letter in
response to the letter from Donnie Marshall, the outgoing DEA
Administrator.

Our policy of drug prohibition has proven to be just as
counterproductive as alcohol prohibition. Illegal drug buyers are
buying drugs of unknown quality, unknown potency and unknown purity.
Not unlike the bathtub gin our grandfathers bought that resulted in
needless deaths and blindings.

Best regards, Kirk Muse contact info

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

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.
—————————————————————————-
TARGET ANALYSIS Ann Landers

Ann Landers is syndicated in hundreds of newspapers around the world.
The value of a published letter is difficult to calculate, but it is
tremendous.

**********************************************************
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://www.maximizingharm.com
and Kirk Muse -www.drugwarinfo.com
Focus Alert Specialists

Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001
Subject: #214 NY Times Crackdown On Raves Not The Answer

——- PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE ——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #214 Monday, June 25, 2001

NY Times Crackdown on Raves Not the Answer

Ecstasy is the catalyst for the latest wave of drug hysteria to be
making headlines, leading to a crackdown on rave culture and a
stiffening of both federal and state sentencing guidelines. Following
a long standing pattern established with alcohol prohibition, the Drug
Enforcement Administration’s enforcement of drug laws is leading to
increased profitability, followed by increased violence and calls for
yet even tougher laws. The relationship between drug enforcement and
violence is especially glaring in the case of ecstasy, which is known
as the “hug drug” and enhances feelings of empathy and closeness.

A lengthy front page article in Sunday’s New York Times provides drug
policy reform activists with the opportunity to leverage numerous drug
policy reform arguments into additional coverage in the opinion pages
of one of America’s largest and most respected newspapers. Along with
prohibition-fueled violence, possible angles include the need for harm
reduction-based drug policies such as those pioneered by DanceSafe
(http://www.dancesafe.org) and speculation on how middle America will
react when white suburbanites are jailed in increasing numbers.

====

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 one important way we have of
gauging our impact and effectiveness.

===========================

CONTACT INFO

Source: New York Times ( NY )
Contact: [email protected]
Please note that the New York Times limits letters to 150 words!

=====================

EXTRA CREDIT

This article, using different titles, was printed in at least three
other newspapers on Sunday. Please click the URL line to see these
versions – and please consider writing to these newspapers too!

Contra Costa Times (CA) URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1127/a08.html

Register-Guard, The (OR) URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1124/a08.html

Seattle Times (WA) URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1121/a13.html

By the time you receive this Alert, other target newspapers that
printed versions of the article may have been added. Click this link
to check for more Letter to the Editor targets: http://www.mapinc.org/authors/Butterfield

======================

ARTICLE

US: Violence Rises As Club Drug Spreads Out Into The Streets

URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1122/a01.html
Newshawk: Robert Field www.csdp.org www.drugwarfacts.org
Pubdate: Sun, 24 Jun 2001
Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 2001 The New York Times Company
Contact: [email protected]
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/298
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Author: Fox Butterfield

VIOLENCE RISES AS CLUB DRUG SPREADS OUT INTO THE STREETS

LOS ANGELES, June 21 — It was finding an Israeli drug dealer dead in
a car trunk at Los Angeles International Airport 18 months ago that
gave the authorities here the first hint that the club drug Ecstasy
was becoming a serious problem. He had been killed by two hit men from
Israel, said Drug Enforcement Administration officials.

Then there was the shipment of 2.1 million Ecstasy pills, worth $40
million on the street, that the United States Customs Service seized
at the airport last July. The pills, labeled clothing, arrived on an
Air France flight from Paris, intended for another Israeli dealer
here. The authorities say it was the world’s largest Ecstasy bust.

And now law enforcement officials say they have seen another worrisome
development this year. At a number of large all-night dance parties
called raves, drawing thousands of young people to the desert east of
Los Angeles, rival gangs have fought over the sale of Ecstasy. At one
rave at a fairgrounds at Lake Perris in March, 102 people were
arrested on charges of selling Ecstasy, assault or resisting arrest,
according to the Drug Enforcement Administration.

What is happening in Los Angeles mirrors what is occurring across much
of the nation, law enforcement officials and drug experts say. Not
only is the use of Ecstasy exploding, more than doubling among 12th
graders in the last two years, but it is also spreading well beyond
its origin as a party drug for affluent white suburban teenagers to
virtually every ethnic and class group, and from big cities like New
York and Los Angeles to rural Vermont and South Dakota.

At the same time, the huge profits to be made — a tablet that costs
50 cents to manufacture in underground labs in the Netherlands can be
sold for $25 in the United States — have set off increasingly violent
turf wars among Ecstasy dealers.

“With drugs, it’s always about the money,” said Bridget Brennan, the
special narcotics prosecutor for New York City. “And the dealers are
starting to see there is so much money in Ecstasy that more people are
getting involved, and with that comes more violence.”

Homicides linked to Ecstasy dealing have occurred in recent months in
Norfolk, Va.; in Elgin, Ill., outside Chicago, and in Valley Stream,
N.Y., police records show.

This spring, in Bristow, Va., a suburb of Washington, a 21-year-old
college student, Daniel Robert Petrole Jr., was shot 10 times in the
head as he sat in his car outside a new town house he had recently
bought. According to court records, the local police believed Mr.
Petrole was responsible for distributing more than $1.5 million in
Ecstasy and marijuana in Prince William County. Two young dealers who
worked with Mr. Petrole have since been arrested and charged with
killing him.

In New York City last month, Salvatore Gravano, the former Gambino
crime family hit man, pleaded guilty to running a multimillion-dollar
Ecstasy ring in Arizona, where he was living under the federal witness
protection program. Court documents showed that Mr. Gravano was
accused of hatching four homicide plots to consolidate his control of
the Arizona drug market, and that his organization was being supplied
by Ilan Zarger, a drug dealer based in Brooklyn who had ties to the
Israeli mob.

Most Ecstasy is produced in the Netherlands or Belgium and smuggled
into the United States by Israeli or Russian organized gangs, either
flown in as air cargo or carried on commercial flights by couriers,
often dancers recruited from topless nightclubs, according to drug
enforcement and Customs Service officials.

Some Dominican groups have also become involved recently, using their
own established routes, and now sell Ecstasy along with heroin and
cocaine from drug houses in Washington Heights in Manhattan to buyers
who arrive by car from as far away as Pennsylvania, Maryland and
Virginia, the officials say.

Because it is sold as pills, Ecstasy is much easier to smuggle than
heroin, cocaine or marijuana, the authorities say. Large imported
shipments, originally flown into New York, Los Angeles or Miami, are
then broken down and sent out by regular overnight delivery services,
like Federal Express, to mid level dealers in other cities.

Ms. Brennan, the New York narcotics prosecutor, said Ecstasy was also
widely available on the Internet. Last year, her office arrested a man
in Orlando, Fla., who had been selling Ecstasy on a site called House
of Beans to customers in New York.

Seizures of Ecstasy by the Customs Service have jumped sharply, to 9.3
million pills in 2000, up from only 400,000 pills in 1997, said
Charles Winwood, the acting commissioner of the Customs Service.

The law enforcement officials and drug experts do not suggest Ecstasy
will lead to the same levels of violence or social turmoil as crack
cocaine did in the late 1980’s, when thousands of teenage dealers
armed themselves with handguns and many mothers neglected their children.

For one thing, Ecstasy does not cause the same dangerous changes in
mood and judgment as crack does. For another, crack gave only a brief
high, driving addicts back to the street repeatedly in search of
another dose and often leading them to rob or steal to support their
habit.

Ecstasy instead induces a high of up to six hours, enhancing feelings
of empathy and closeness, its users say.

But interviews with drug experts and with teenage Ecstasy addicts in
treatment programs here show that the drug, known scientifically as
MDMA, both a stimulant and a hallucinogen, can be disruptive and
expose them to violence.

“We are dancing with danger here, because the kids and their parents
think of Ecstasy as a benign party drug,” said Michele Leonhart, the
special agent in charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Los
Angeles office. “They don’t see what we see, that it’s a neurotoxin
with serious side effects, that people die from overdoses and that
some of the dances in the desert are no longer just dances, they’re
like violent crack houses set to music.”

Marcos M., a tall Hispanic teenager living in Phoenix Academy, a
residential treatment center for adolescent drug addicts run by
Phoenix House in Lake View Terrace, a suburb in the San Fernando
Valley, said he had always thought of Ecstasy as “the white man’s
drug.” In his neighborhood, Lincoln Heights — “the ghetto,” he called
it — people usually did crack or heroin. Besides, Ecstasy was too
expensive, at $25 a pill. Marcos, 17, said his attitude toward Ecstasy
was, “I’d rather spend my money on good stuff.”

But in the past year, dealers on his street suddenly started selling
Ecstasy, reducing the price to a more manageable $8 a pill.

“One day a friend was cleaning out his car and gave me a pill,” Marcos
recalled. “So I tried it, and an hour later, I was rolling – relaxed,
kicking and chilling.”

Now, he sees all ethnic groups using Ecstasy, no longer just
whites.

As with other drugs, dealers often fight over Ecstasy, Marcos said. A
dealer who is a friend of his sold a “boat,” a package of 1,000
Ecstasy pills, to another dealer, but the second dealer claimed the
delivery was short. So a fight ensued, in which his friend broke into
the other man’s house and took the drugs back, and the second dealer
then smashed his friend’s car.

The leading survey of teenage use of drugs, known as Monitoring the
Future and done by the University of Michigan, has found that the
proportion of 12th graders who had used Ecstasy in the previous 12
months more than doubled to 8 percent in 2000, from 3.5 percent in
1998. That is a very large increase, said Lloyd Johnston, a research
scientist who directs the annual survey. Among 10th graders the
percentage who had used Ecstasy in 2000 rose to 5 percent, from 3
percent in 1998.

“It is definitely continuing to increase, across all parts of the
country, and equally among males and females,” Mr. Johnston said.
Ecstasy is still enjoying a honeymoon among young people, just as LSD
did in the 1960’s, before its dangers were widely known, he said.

Jessica D., a 17-year-old high school junior who came to Phoenix
Academy from Canoga Park, a Los Angeles suburb, said she started
taking Ecstasy pills at nightclubs and raves. She soon found herself
“rolling” on the drug all the time. “I used to go to school high,” she
said, a smile brightening her face at the memory. “It made school more
fun. Class went by faster.”

Dr. Alan I. Leshner, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse
in Bethesda, Md., said, “Contrary to what a lot of people think, that
Ecstasy is a harmless drug, we are learning more and more
scientifically about its damaging effects.”

The bad short-term effects, Dr. Leshner said, are quick increases in
blood pressure, heart rates and body temperature, leading to
dehydration and hypothermia, particular problems for people who have
danced in hot, crowded rooms all night.

In the longer term, Dr. Leshner said, there is now evidence that
repeated use of Ecstasy can damage the brain cells that produce
serotonin, the neurochemical that is critical for preventing
depression and sleep disorders.

People who have used Ecstasy frequently experience memory loss and
depression when the drug wears off, Dr. Leshner said.

The contest with drug smugglers continues.

Last month, the Drug Enforcement Administration in New York announced
the arrest of Oded Tuito, who was said to head the largest
Ecstasy-smuggling organization yet identified.

Mr. Tuito, an Israeli who kept homes in New York, Los Angeles and
Paris, “imported millions of Ecstasy pills” from Paris, Brussels and
Frankfurt into New York, Miami and Los Angeles, the drug
administration charged.

His organization recruited dozens of couriers, typically dancers at
topless nightclubs, who each smuggled in 30,000 to 60,000 pills at a
time and also took hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash in drug
proceeds back to Europe, the authorities said.

To combat Ecstasy, the federal government and more than half the
states, including New York, New Jersey and Florida, have raised the
penalties for selling the drug in the past few years.

Under new federal sentencing guidelines that went into effect in May,
a person selling 800 pills can now receive a sentence of five years, a
much stiffer standard than the old threshold of 11,000 pills.

New York’s law, enacted in 1996, is tougher than the federal standard,
requiring a minimum sentence of three years for mere possession of 100
pills.

An Illinois bill, passed by the Legislature last month and awaiting
the governor’s signature, would carry the toughest penalties of all —
an automatic 6 to 30 years for selling as few as 15 pills.

State Senator Rickey Hendon warned that the Illinois law cast too wide
a net, treating teenage partygoers the same as professional drug
traffickers. But Senator Hendon, a Chicago Democrat, who is black,
said the law might help Illinois legislators understand the racial
disparities of drug laws.

“When you see 14-year-olds going to jail for a mandatory 30 years and
their complexion is no longer black,” Senator Hendon said, “maybe
we’ll stop and think about what we’re doing.”

=========================

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor:

Regarding the June 25th article on so-called ecstasy related violence,
the drug ecstasy promotes feelings of empathy. The prohibition of
ecstasy promotes black market profits. There is a big difference
between the unprincipled greed of organized crime and the peace, love,
unity and respect ethic of rave culture. U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration agent Michele Leonhart has a lot of nerve to be calling
rave dances “violent crack houses set to music.” Ecstasy
distributors were not gunning each other down in turf battles and when
the drug was still legal and used in psychotherapy. Don’t blame
ravers for the violence. The blame lies squarely with the insane drug
war and the parallel war against youth culture. I for one am sick of
my tax dollars being used to subsidize organized crime so that the
shameless bureaucrats at the DEA can then use the resulting violence
to justify ever-expanding budgets.

Robert Sharpe

contact info

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

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.

==============

TARGET ANALYSIS – New York Times

With a circulation of 1.2 million weekdays – 3 million readers (and
about 50% more for the Sunday edition), from all over the US outside
the NYC market area – and an audience of which 3/4ths have a college
degree, this newspaper is an important target for Letters to the Editor.

Our analysis of the 163 published letters at http://www.mapinc.org/mapcgi/ltedex.pl?SOURCE=New+York+Times
indicates a strong preference for printing short letters. The average
published letter is only 113 words long, with a range from 45 to 143
words.

The New York Times is one of the most widely read and influential
newspapers in the country A published letter of only 2 column inches
(about 80 words) printed in this paper has an equivalent advertising
as if you bought a $1,440 advertisement on behalf of reform and had it
published in the NY TImes.

Please note that the New York Times limits letters to 150
words.

===============

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 Robert Sharpe – Focus Alert Specialist

Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001
Subject: #213 US Drug War Pushes Canada Toward Police State

US Drug War Pushes Canada Toward Police State

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #213 Tuesday, June 19, 2001

The Canadian government may not pursue the drug war as ruthlessly as
the United States, but Canadian politicians aren’t immune from drug
war stupidity. As the National Post reported last week, new banking
rules will put many Canadian citizens under suspicion as
money-launderers.

National Post columnist Terence Corcoran noted: “The common thread
running through these money-laundering and other anti-crime laws
around the world leads straight to Washington and the most futile
crime crusade since prohibition: the war on drugs. Hundreds of
billions of dollars, global prosecution regimes and out of control
police actions are doing little to stop the drug trade. But they are
lining the pockets of bureaucrats and police workers and laying the
groundwork for institutionalized state control.”

Please write a letter to the National Post to say that the US, with
its mixture of high drug abuse rates and high incarceration rates, is
no role model for drug policy.

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

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 followsuit

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

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

Contact Info

Source: National Post (Canada)
Contact: [email protected]

Additionally, Corcoran’s column was published in two other
papers.

Source: Calgary Herald (CN AB)
Contact: [email protected]
Pubdate: Mon, 18 June 2001
Headline: Big Brother has a brand new weapon

Source: Halifax Daily News (CN NS)
Contact: [email protected]
Pubdate: Sat, 16 Jun 2001
Headline: War on drugs a war on Canada

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

ARTICLE

Canada: Column: One Step Closer To A Police State

URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1062/a08.html

Newshawk: Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy http://www.cfdp.ca/
Pubdate: Fri, 15 Jun 2001
Source: National Post (Canada)
Copyright: 2001 Southam Inc.
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.nationalpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/286
Author: Terence Corcoran, National Post

ONE STEP CLOSER TO A POLICE STATE

Claiming to be fighting a valiant war on crime, governments around the
world — but especially in Canada — are actually fighting an
escalating war on people. This includes Ottawa’s draconian
“money-laundering” regulations. If you send $15,000 in cash to pay for
your grandmother’s hip replacement at a U.S. hospital, your name will
go on the list of potential money launderers. Privacy? Freedom? Guilt?
Innocence? Forget it. Under some definition, sending cash into the
U.S. health-care system probably is money laundering.

Another manifestation of Ottawa’s war on people at the expense of
individual freedom is Bill C-24, a law to fight organized crime.
Introduced last April, C-24 whipped through final third reading on
Wednesday, just before the MPs fled Ottawa with their pockets stuffed
with the proceeds of organized politics.

The new law vastly expands government power and gives police the right
to break the law to enforce the law. The Canadian Civil Liberties
Association has called parts of the legislation “evil,” but that
didn’t phase the government. People who tried to follow C-24 on its
rapid run through the Commons say it is as bad in the final version as
it was the day it was introduced.

Provincial and local governments have their own power-expansion
ambitions and are more than ready to hand police fresh authority to
stomp on basic rights. Ontario last month reintroduced its own
infamous organized crime legislation, noted mostly for giving
government the ability to seize the assets of innocent people if
prosecutors think the assets were acquired, directly or indirectly,
through some organized criminal activity.

That these laws go overboard and trample on people’s rights nobody
seriously doubts. Oddly, though, it’s not until the laws and
regulations are on the books that people begin to realize how much
power governments have taken and how many rights have been lost. The
federal money laundering law, which sets up a new federal money
laundering agency to monitor every transaction over $10,000, passed
last year with plenty of warning. But now that the law is in place,
law societies are calling for amendments. There is also growing
recognition the law will do nothing to stop organized crime.

It’s a little late for these concerns. Banks, investment houses and
others are also trying to fight regulations that would impose massive
paper-pushing and monitoring costs — estimated at up to $100-million
— and turn bankers, lawyers and accountants into government spies on
their customers. It’s not a police state yet, but the laws are in
place to create one should anyone get the urge.

The common thread running through these money-laundering and other
anti-crime laws around the world leads straight to Washington and the
most futile crime crusade since prohibition: the war on drugs.
Hundreds of billions of dollars, global prosecution regimes and out of
control police actions are doing little to stop the drug trade. But
they are lining the pockets of bureaucrats and police workers and
laying the groundwork for institutionalized state control.

The international rhetorical campaign against money laundering,
organized crime and so-called “gang” laws, has escalated into what one
legal specialist called a “regulatory jihad.” The objective is to
enroll the whole world in the U.S. drug war. The enrolment technique
is to grossly exaggerate the crime. Ottawa’s money laundering
legislation was adopted on the grounds that somewhere between
$5-billion and $17-billion in crime proceeds were being washed through
Canada every year. Those bogus numbers were concocted by a consultant
who defined money laundering as an “economic crime.” It’s a handy
catch-all that included insurance fraud ( $2.5-billion ), cellular
phone fraud ( $650-million ), stock market fraud ( $3-billion ),
telemarketing fraud ( $4-billion ). Even if these numbers are
accurate, and they look wildly implausible, most of the crimes have
nothing to do with money laundering or the drug industry.

The New Yorker magazine estimated last year that the U.S. government
spends US$16-billion a year on the war on drugs. State and local
governments another US$24-billion. The result is two million people in
prison, up from 750,000 a year ago. But the number of drug addicts has
not changed.

Where do Canada’s governments get such enthusiasm for joining this
absurd U.S. war — and at such expense to Canadians’ rights and
protections? The new laws expand police powers, break down the trust
between bankers and customers, and between lawyers and clients, and
give governments new authority to prosecute and harass innocent
people. The U.S. war on drugs is fast becoming a Canadian war on
Canadians. And we don’t even have a drug problem worth worrying about.

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor:

On behalf of Americans whose tax dollars are used to fund our
misguided War On (some) Drugs, please accept our apologies that these
horribly failed policies are creating a ripple effect which increases
government intrusion into the affairs of your country’s citizens.

Here in the United States, many of our weak willed politicians use the
Drug War as motivation for all manner of government snooping and
legislative silliness. As your report from Mr Corcoran related, we
also have invasive inquiries into even modest cash transactions by
otherwise law-abiding citizens.

In recent months, consideration has been given to criminalizing free
speech on the Internet that may contain references to any kind of
illegal drug use. And in this past year, we have approved funding for
several billion dollars in military hardware which is being used to
poison the agricultural lands in Colombia and other parts of South
America. This in a supposed effort to crush cocaine production and
thus ‘save’ less than 1% of our population from their own self
destructive choices. Of course such strategies do nothing to address
the very real problems of drug abuse in our country or yours.

An encouraging remedy may be near at hand, however. In your country,
serious discussion is being raised with regards to ending the criminal
sanctions against responsible adult use of cannabis.

Those of us who work closely with drug-policy reform in the U.S. are
fully aware that cannabis Prohibition accounts for over 2/3 of all
monies expended in The War. As your country makes the very sensible
decisions relating to ending criminal laws against cannabis, the U.S.
will find itself further isolated from our irrational strategy of
warring against our own citizenry.

At that time, you will likely see much relief in Canada from the
pressures being exerted by the U.S. government to enlist your
participation in the ill-fated Drug War.

Stephen Heath

Drug Policy Forum of Florida contact info

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

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.

————————————————————————

TARGET ANALYSIS NATIONAL POST

Canada’s version of USA Today, The National Post, is available
everywhere in Canada. The MAP Published Letter archives shows 23
pro-reform letters published at http://www.mapinc.org/mapcgi/ltedex.pl?SOURCE=National+Post

While the letters published from United States writers are few, this
is probably more a reflection of where the majority of the letters
they receive come from rather than any bias towards Canadian writers.

The National Post clearly prefers to print short letters. The average
published letter is only 136 words long, with a range from 40 to 244
words.

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

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 Heath, Richard Lake and
Stephen Young – http://www.maximizingharm.com/
Focus Alert Specialists

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001
Subject: #212 DEA Won’t Save Us From OxyContin

DEA Won’t Save Us From OxyContin

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #212 Thursday Jun 14, 2001

Anti-drug hype usually focuses on illegal drugs, but for the past
several months, the legal painkiller OxyContin has been the subject of
many drug scare stories. Like most drug hysteria, this crisis has been
fueled by the media and the drug warriors.

See http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n794/a04.html for an excellent
analysis from the Cleveland Free Times.

USA Today this week took a sensible editorial position on a possible
crackdown on OxyContin by the US Drug Enforcement Agency (see below).

Editorialists at the paper note that enhanced enforcement proposals by
the DEA will cause unnecessary suffering for those who really need the
drug. A DEA official was allowed to respond (also below) with typical
DEA tactics – obfuscation and misinformation.

Please write a letter to USA Today to cheer the paper’s stand for
people in chronic pain, and/or to highlight the DEA’s deadly mix of
incompetence and hypocrisy.

If you don’t do it, who will? Thank you!

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

PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID

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 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]

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

ARTICLES

US: OPED: DEA Overreaches In Effort To Stop Abuse Of Painkiller
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n1054.a01.html
Newshawk: Jane Marcus
Pubdate: Wed, 13 Jun 2001
Source: USA Today (US)
Copyright: 2001 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nfront.htm
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/466
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?186 (Oxycontin)

DEA OVERREACHES IN EFFORT TO STOP ABUSE OF PAINKILLER

The headlines are enough to scare any user of prescription
painkillers: ”OxyContin addicts, crime wave linked.” The numbers
scarier still: 120 dead from abusing the powerful drug along with
thousands treated for overdoses, mostly in a string of Eastern states
from Kentucky to Maine.

Now the Drug Enforcement Agency ( DEA ) is stepping in to curb what
law enforcement describes as ”epidemic abuse” of ”poor man’s
heroin,” with its first-ever plan to attack abuse of a specific brand
of prescription.

But the public isn’t likely to applaud the DEA’s heavy-handed
solution, if it goes into effect. It would set up needless
bureaucratic hurdles that could limit access to other painkillers.
Worse, it threatens to undermine the decade-long fight to reform pain
treatment.

OxyContin was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in December
1995 to treat moderate to serious pain in a host of medical
conditions. While the active ingredient, oxycodone, has been around
for a half-century, OxyContin’s innovation, and the reason it was
prescribed by doctors 6 million times last year, is its timed release
of ingredients that allows the drug to work for 12 hours, twice the
normal range.

Like other painkillers, OxyContin also is popular with drug abusers
who crush the pills and snort or inject the powder. That’s why the DEA
wisely requires pharmacies to maintain detailed records on OxyContin
prescriptions and other drugs with the most potential for abuse.
Similarly, it forbids the refill of such prescriptions and imposes
limits on supplies provided to manufacturers.

Even so, the DEA claims that OxyContin abuse has become such a
powerful threat that it requires new interdiction efforts.

For instance, the DEA has asked Purdue Pharma, the drug’s
manufacturer, to restrict those writing OxyContin prescriptions to
pain specialists and other doctors who regularly deal with chronic
pain. But there are fewer than 4,000 certified pain specialists in the
USA. If the restrictions move forward, millions won’t have access to
the specialists who can prescribe a medicine they need.

The DEA also has told Congress that it is considering limits on
supplies of the painkiller, even though it’s used by more Americans
than Viagra. Unless the Bush administration steps in and stops those
plans, thousands of Americans in serious pain from devastating
illnesses could be deprived of the painkiller their doctors believe is
most appropriate.

The DEA argues that such efforts are justified because of OxyContin’s
high potential for abuse. But 40 other prescription drugs contain
oxycodone, and the DEA isn’t seeking to restrict their use. At least
six other prescription drugs are linked to more deaths and
emergency-room visits than oxycodone but don’t face similar DEA
attention. And regardless, 90% of deaths blamed on oxycodone involve
other drugs as well.

More importantly, there’s little evidence that restricting patients’
access to painkillers will do much to fight drug abuse. Only last
year, The Journal of the American Medical Association published a
study, based in part on the DEA’s own data, concluding that increased
prescribing of powerful painkillers did not increase drug abuse.

The DEA has plenty of law-enforcement tools to fight the illicit use
of prescription painkillers. There’s no reason that its war against
one drug should interfere with the legitimate practice of medicine.

=======================================================================

US: DEA Goal – Protect The Public
Newshawk: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/
Pubdate: Wed, 13 Jun 2001
Source: USA Today (US)
Copyright: 2001 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nfront.htm
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/466
Author: Donnie R. Marshall
Note: Donnie R. Marshall is administrator of the Drug Enforcement
Administration.

DEA GOAL – PROTECT THE PUBLIC

Recently, the Drug Enforcement Administration ( DEA ) has become aware
of the increasing abuse and diversion of the powerful narcotic
OxyContin. For those suffering from intractable pain, it provides
critical relief. For others, it is a powerful substitute for heroin.
The DEA’s responsibility is to prevent the diversion of addictive
pharmaceutical controlled substances while ensuring adequate supplies
for legitimate medical needs.

Since its introduction in 1996, the number of OxyContin prescriptions
has increased 1,800% to 6 million in 2000. There are also increased
reports from medical examiners, drug-abuse treatment centers, law
enforcement personnel and pharmacists about the abuse and diversion of
this drug.

Emergency department and coroner reports involving the active
ingredient in OxyContin have increased 200% and 400% respectively
since 1996. For the year 2000, the DEA has also received 291 coroner
reports from the six states most affected. Treatment programs in such
states as Kentucky, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Virginia reported
between 50% and 90% of new patients said OxyContin was their primary
drug of abuse. In some cases, entire towns have suffered the effects
of illicit OxyContin abuse.

The DEA responded to this critical public-health problem in a measured
and reasonable manner by establishing an ongoing dialogue with the
health-care community, pharmaceutical industry and other government
agencies to ensure OxyContin is appropriately prescribed and available
to those who truly need it. There is consensus within the
pain-management community that many doctors don’t have the training to
properly treat chronic pain, leading many to prescribe this powerful
narcotic to individuals who seek the drug for non-medical reasons.

The DEA appreciates the attention given to this issue, as it has
increased the awareness of the medical community and the public about
the potential dangers of potent narcotics such as OxyContin. However,
it has also served to unfairly raise concerns that the DEA may place
undue restrictions on the availability of this drug, depriving those
with a legitimate need. This is untrue. Americans should be confident
that the DEA will not only ensure that OxyContin is adequately
supplied, but also that the public will be protected from injury or
death associated with the diversion and abuse of OxyContin.

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor of USA Today:

I applaud USA Today for defending people suffering from chronic pain.
Challenging the DEA’s new proposed restrictions on the painkiller
OxyContin is the right thing to do (“DEA Overreaches In Effort To Stop
Abuse Of Painkiller,” June 13).

The response from DEA Administrator Donnie Marshall, stating that new
regulations won’t hurt legitimate OxyContin users while restricting
recreational use, is both unbelievable and hypocritical. A look at DEA
efforts to “protect” us from illegal drugs like Ecstasy indicates his
assertions don’t add up. Ecstasy is much more widely used and
infinitely more profitable since it was outlawed in the mid-1980s, but
impossible to obtain through legitimate channels for therapeutic use.
As for the DEA’s compassion for people suffering with chronic pain,
ask a medical marijuana user how helpful the DEA in addressing their
problems.

Like all drug crackdowns, the DEA’s proposed get-tough rules means
that a black market catering to recreational users will grow, while
people who really need the drug will find it tougher to obtain through
legal means. This pattern is so frequently repeated, it’s hard not to
wonder if this isn’t the ultimate goal of all drug wars.

Stephen Young contact info

————————————————————————

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.

————————————————————————

TARGET ANALYSIS USA Today

With a U.S. circulation of over 2.3 million, the readership
demographics are: Total Adult Readers 4.3 million. Male/Female 66/34%.
Median Age 41 years. Attended College 80%. Median HH Income $71, 661.

The average published letter would cost over $5,000 if purchased as an
ad.

The MAP published letter archive has 45 letters from USA Today. A
recent sample shows they tend to be short – about 40% being under 100
words. The average published is 169 words, and the largest about 300
words.

The published letters can be viewed here:

http://www.mapinc.org/mapcgi/ltedex.pl?SOURCE=USA+Today

————————————————————————

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://www.maximizingharm.com/
Focus Alert Specialist

Date: Wed, 23 May 2001
Subject: #211 Taliban’s Tyranny No Problem For Anti-Drug Aid

Taliban’s Tyranny No Problem For Anti-Drug Aid

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #211 Wednesday May 23, 2001

The moral bankruptcy of the drug war was highlighted again last week
as US officials announced that the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan would
be receiving about $43 million in anti-drug funds for forcing farmers
to abandon opium crops that had previously been tolerated.

As columnist Robert Scheer pointed out in the Los Angeles Times
(below), the Taliban has created one of the world’s most repressive
governments. Women have been effectively stripped of all rights in
Afghanistan, and leaders have caused other recent international
uproars by destroying ancient Buddhist statues and announcing that
religious minorities will soon be required to wear identification tags.

But all this can be forgiven by the Bush administration, because these
totalitarians are allies in the drug war. US leaders and the Taliban
are also aware that farmers who had been growing opium will likely
starve, but aside from expressing mild regret, they are doing nothing
to change the situation.

Please write a letter to the Los Angeles Times to express outrage that
the drug war is again being used as an excuse to support cruel oppression.

************************************************************************
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 followsuit

This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is one important way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.
************************************************************************

Contact Info

Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Contact: [email protected]

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

ARTICLE

US CA: Column: Bush’s Faustian Deal With The Taliban
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n922/a09.html
Newshawk: Terry Liittschwager
Pubdate: Tue, 22 May 2001
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Copyright: 2001 Los Angeles Times
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.latimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/248
Author: Robert Scheer
Note: Robert Scheer Is a Syndicated Columnist.

BUSH’S FAUSTIAN DEAL WITH THE TALIBAN

Enslave your girls and women, harbor anti-U.S. terrorists, destroy
every vestige of civilization in your homeland, and the Bush
administration will embrace you. All that matters is that you line up
as an ally in the drug war, the only international cause that this
nation still takes seriously.

That’s the message sent with the recent gift of $43 million to the
Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American
violators of human rights in the world today. The gift, announced last
Thursday by Secretary of State Colin Powell, in addition to other
recent aid, makes the U.S. the main sponsor of the Taliban and rewards
that “rogue regime” for declaring that opium growing is against the
will of God. So, too, by the Taliban’s estimation, are most human
activities, but it’s the ban on drugs that catches this
administration’s attention.

Never mind that Osama bin Laden still operates the leading
anti-American terror operation from his base in Afghanistan, from
which, among other crimes, he launched two bloody attacks on American
embassies in Africa in 1998.

Sadly, the Bush administration is cozying up to the Taliban regime at
a time when the United Nations, at U.S. insistence, imposes sanctions
on Afghanistan because the Kabul government will not turn over Bin
Laden.

The war on drugs has become our own fanatics’ obsession and easily
trumps all other concerns. How else could we come to reward the
Taliban, who has subjected the female half of the Afghan population to
a continual reign of terror in a country once considered enlightened
in its treatment of women.

At no point in modern history have women and girls been more
systematically abused than in Afghanistan where, in the name of
madness masquerading as Islam, the government in Kabul obliterates
their fundamental human rights. Women may not appear in public without
being covered from head to toe with the oppressive shroud called the
burkha , and they may not leave the house without being accompanied by
a male family member. They’ve not been permitted to attend school or
be treated by male doctors, yet women have been banned from practicing
medicine or any profession for that matter.

The lot of males is better if they blindly accept the laws of an
extreme religious theocracy that prescribes strict rules governing all
behavior, from a ban on shaving to what crops may be grown. It is this
last power that has captured the enthusiasm of the Bush White House.

The Taliban fanatics, economically and diplomatically isolated, are at
the breaking point, and so, in return for a pittance of legitimacy and
cash from the Bush administration, they have been willing to appear to
reverse themselves on the growing of opium. That a totalitarian
country can effectively crack down on its farmers is not surprising.
But it is grotesque for a U.S. official, James P. Callahan, director
of the State Department’s Asian anti-drug program, to describe the
Taliban’s special methods in the language of representative democracy:
“The Taliban used a system of consensus-building,” Callahan said after
a visit with the Taliban, adding that the Taliban justified the ban on
drugs “in very religious terms.”

Of course, Callahan also reported, those who didn’t obey the
theocratic edict would be sent to prison.

In a country where those who break minor rules are simply beaten on
the spot by religious police and others are stoned to death, it’s
understandable that the government’s “religious” argument might be
compelling. Even if it means, as Callahan concedes, that most of the
farmers who grew the poppies will now confront starvation. That’s
because the Afghan economy has been ruined by the religious extremism
of the Taliban, making the attraction of opium as a previously
tolerated quick cash crop overwhelming.

For that reason, the opium ban will not last unless the U.S. is
willing to pour far larger amounts of money into underwriting the
Afghan economy.

As the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Steven Casteel admitted, “The
bad side of the ban is that it’s bringing their country–or certain
regions of their country–to economic ruin.” Nor did he hold out much
hope for Afghan farmers growing other crops such as wheat, which
require a vast infrastructure to supply water and fertilizer that no
longer exists in that devastated country. There’s little doubt that
the Taliban will turn once again to the easily taxed cash crop of
opium in order to stay in power.

The Taliban may suddenly be the dream regime of our own war drug war
zealots, but in the end this alliance will prove a costly failure. Our
long sad history of signing up dictators in the war on drugs
demonstrates the futility of building a foreign policy on a domestic
obsession.

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor,

I’m glad Robert Scheer took the Bush administration to task for giving
millions in anti-drug aid to Afghanistan’s Taliban, a government that
insists on dehumanizing women and committing other crimes (“Bush’s
Faustian Deal With The Taliban,” May 22).

US leaders seem to think that despite all the horrors that have been
visited on the people of Afghanistan, a successful drug eradication
program shows some light shining in an otherwise very dark government.
To the contrary, America’s relentless support of the drug war helps to
magnify the darkness in our own government.

Instead of rewarding these despots, the administration ought to
reevaluate its own policies and goals regarding drugs. If we have to
bribe the Taliban to display a degree of ruthlessness suitable to us,
that should surely indicate the depth to which we have sunk in the
immoral cesspool of the drug war.

Stephen Young contact info

*************************
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.
—————————————————————————-
TARGET ANALYSIS Los Angeles Times

Circulation. 1.2 Million Readers. A 160 word Letter published in this
paper has an advertising value of about $2,880.

The MAP published letter archive has 164 letters from the Los Angeles
Times. A recent sample showed that they published both long and short
letters, some as brief as 65 words, one as long as 450 words. On
average, the letters sampled were about 160 words long.

The published letters can be viewed here:

http://www.mapinc.org/mapcgi/ltedex.pl?SOURCE=Los+Angeles+Times+(CA)

**********************************************************
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://www.maximizingharm.com
Focus Alert Specialist

Date: Wed, 16 May 2001
Subject: #210 Former Czar’s Memory Faulty On “Successful” Drug War

Former Czar’s Memory Faulty On “Successful” Drug War

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 210 Wednesday May 16, 2001

Former drug czar William Bennett has been busy cranking out oped
pieces defending John P. Walters, who has been chosen to be the new
drug czar. Walters subscribes to the same dangerous “lock ’em up”
mentality as Bennett. Unfortunately for both of them, the failure of
their strategies have been documented thoroughly. But, never one to
let facts get in the way of his opinions, Bennett evoked a
mythological golden age of the drug war in the Wall Street Journal
this week.

He boasts: “…far from being a failure, drug-control programs are
among the most successful public-policy efforts of the later half of
the 20th century.” Bennett acknowledges that the past 8 years have
seen increases in drug use statistics, but he blames that on the
Clinton administration. He conveniently ignores the fact that under
Clinton the number of drug arrests and prison sentences soared, as did
federal funds allocated for the drug war.

But somehow, Walters will win the drug war by getting even tougher.
Please write a letter to the Wall Street Journal to expose Bennett’s
nonsense for what it is.

************************************************************************
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 followsuit

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

Contact Info

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

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

ARTICLE

US: OPED: The Drug War Worked Once – It Can Again

URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n863/a06.html
Newshawk: Douglas Caddy
Pubdate: Tue, 15 May 2001
Source: Wall Street Journal (US)
Copyright: 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.wsj.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/487
Author: William J. Bennett
Note: Mr. Bennett is co-director of Empower America and co-chairman of the
Partnership for a Drug-Free America. He was director of the Office of
National Drug Control Policy under President George H.W. Bush

THE DRUG WAR WORKED ONCE – IT CAN AGAIN

George W. Bush recently announced the nomination of John P. Walters to
serve as the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
The new “drug czar” is being asked to lead the nation’s war on illegal
drugs at a time when many are urging surrender.

The forms of surrender are manifold: Buzzwords like “harm reduction”
are crowding out clear no-use messages. State initiatives promoting
“medical marijuana” are little more than thinly veiled legalization
efforts ( as underscored by yesterday’s 8-0 Supreme Court ruling
against medical exceptions ). The film “Traffic” portrayed the war on
drugs as a futile effort. In a recent survey by the Pew Research
Center for the People and the Press, 74% of Americans believe the war
on drugs is a failure.

And yet recent history shows that, far from being a failure,
drug-control programs are among the most successful public-policy
efforts of the later half of the 20th century. According to a national
drug survey, between 1979 and 1992, the most intense period of
antidrug efforts, the rate of illegal drug use dropped by more than
half, while marijuana use decreased by two-thirds. Cocaine use dropped
by three-fourths between 1985 and 1992.

Why is this record described as a failure? For those who would
legalize drugs, all drug-control efforts must be painted as
disastrous. But for most Americans, frustration with the drug issue
stems from the fact that over the past eight years we have lost ground.

During the Clinton administration, our nation’s drug policy suffered a
period of malign neglect. President Clinton’s two clearest statements
about illegal drugs were his infamous statement “I didn’t inhale” and
his immediate and dramatic cut in the size of the federal antidrug
staff. Morale and political leadership were both compromised, and a
national cynicism about drug use resulted. Hiring a four-star general
may have fooled the public and the Washington press corps for a while,
but it didn’t add up to a meaningful program.

To paraphrase Arthur Miller, attention was not paid, and the problem
quickly worsened: Between 1992 and 1999, rates of current drug use —
defined as using once a month or more — increased by 15%. Rates of
marijuana use increased 11%. The situation was far worse among our
children: Lifetime use of illegal drugs increased by 37% among
eighth-graders and 55% among 10th-graders. We have reached the point
where more than one-quarter of all high school seniors are current
users of illegal drugs; indeed, rates of monthly drug use among high
school seniors increased 86% between 1992 and 1999.

We must re-engage this fight. What we were doing in the 1980s and
early 1990s — vigorous law enforcement and interdiction coupled with
effective prevention and treatment — worked. It can work again.

The most important component of any antidrug strategy is prevention.
Children who reach the age of 21 without using illegal drugs are
almost certain never to do so. The Partnership for a Drug-Free America
has crafted some of the most memorable and effective advertisements in
history, encouraging children to turn down illegal drugs. The message
that drug use is dangerous and immoral is the essential key to prevention.

In addition, we must continue to develop effective treatment programs.
Many criticisms have been leveled at America’s lack of treatment
capacity, but more troubling is the lack of treatment efficacy.
However, 12-step programs ( akin to Alcoholics Anonymous ) have been
shown to be both inexpensive and effective in private-sector drug
treatment. Hopefully, their success can be extended to public-sector
treatment as well.

Everyone agrees on the necessity of effective treatment and strong
prevention efforts. Some people, however, believe that law enforcement
should have no role in the process. This is an altogether simplistic
model: Demand reduction cannot be effective without supply reduction.

It is true that there will always be a supply of illegal drugs as long
as there is a demand. But forceful interdiction can help to increase
the price and decrease the purity of drugs available, a critical means
of intervening in the lives of addicts, who can only beg, borrow and
steal so much to support their habit. Government reports document that
recovering addicts are more likely to relapse when faced with cheap,
plentiful drugs. Aggressive interdiction efforts, then, are not supply
reduction so much as the first step in demand reduction.

Some people will admit that there is a place for law enforcement, but
contend we spend too much on this effort, to the detriment of demand
reduction. In fact, according to Robert DuPont, who led the nation’s
antidrug efforts under Presidents Nixon and Ford, there has never been
as much federal money spent on prevention education as is being spent
today. The U.S.’s total spending on drug-demand reduction far exceeds
the amounts spent in the rest of the world combined.

A more pragmatic point: While treatment is often centered at the
individual and local levels, interdiction and law enforcement must be
federal responsibilities. Given the scope and complexity of drug
trafficking, the federal government can and must assume the
responsibility for stopping the traffic of drugs across and within our
borders. The drug czar’s first concerns, then, must be interdiction
and law enforcement, if only because they are tasks no other agency
can perform as effectively.

I believe that the position of drug czar ought to remain at the
cabinet level, but more important is the president’s personal support
and commitment to the office. I had that backing, and I expect the new
drug czar will enjoy that same support and commitment from Mr. Bush.
If Mr. Walters is to have any success, he must enjoy it.

The past eight years are, once again, illustrative: Gen. Barry
McCaffrey never enjoyed that support from President Clinton. In
renewing the drug war, the new drug czar will not be alone. He will be
able to draw on the assistance of people — parents, teachers,
substance-abuse counselors, clergymen and elected officials — who
have continued to fight drug use over the past eight years. These
groups are our first lines of defense; without them, the regression
since 1992 would have been far worse. Their dedication gives the lie
to the gospel of futility.

I look forward to America re-engaging in the war on drugs — and
continuing the success that we had between 1980 and 1992.

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor,

I find it interesting that former Drug Czar William J. Bennett
attributes rising drug use during the ’90s to Bill Clinton’s “malign
neglect” of the Drug War (“The Drug War Worked once – It Can Again”,
May 15).

Under Clinton, the amount budgeted for domestic drug law enforcement
rose 74 percent. Arrests for cannabis possession soared from 271,900
in 1992 to 620,500 in 1999, a 128 percent increase. On average, annual
drug arrests were 30 percent higher under Clinton than under Bennett’s
boss George H.W. Bush. Yet, according to Bennett, “rates of monthly
drug use among high school seniors increased 86% between 1992 and
1999.” How tragic if, as both Bennett and the evidence suggests,
Clinton’s costly escalation was less significant than his quip on MTV.

Unfortunately, due to a lack of research funding, no one really knows
why usage rates rise and fall. A recent government-commissioned study
by the National Research Council found that “Neither the necessary
data systems nor the research infrastructure to gauge the usefulness
of drug-control enforcement policies exists.” As Charles Manski, a
professor of economics and chairman of the study committee put it, “It
is unconscionable for this country to continue to carry out a public
policy of this magnitude and cost without any way of knowing whether,
and to what extent, it is having the desired result.”

Matthew M. Elrod

contact info

*************************
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.
—————————————————————————-
TARGET ANALYSIS Wall Street Journal

There are 61 letters to the WSJ in the MAP archive. A sampling of
recent letters shows some as short as 93 words and some as long as 340
words, with an average of about 180 words.

The published letters can be viewed here:

http://www.mapinc.org/mapcgi/ltedex.pl?SOURCE=Wall+Street+Journal+(US)

**********************************************************
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 Matt Elrod and Stephen Young – http://www.maximizingharm.com
Focus Alert Specialists

Date: Tue, 08 May 2001
Subject: #209 New Drug Czar May Be Worse Than McCaffrey

New Drug Czar May Be Worse Than McCaffrey

——-
PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE
——-

DrugSense FOCUS Alert #209 Tuesday May 8, 2001

There’s a new drug czar in town, and warning alarms are being sounded
by those who understand drug policy. Columnist William Raspberry, who
has written many enlightened pieces on the drug war in recent months,
noted that former ONDCP employee John P. Walters will likely push drug
policy in the wrong direction (see http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n762/a04.html?15547).

Another reason to be wary of Walters is the strong support shown for
him by professional anti-drug huckster William Bennett, a former
failed drug czar himself. Bennett attempted to rebut Raspberry’s
assessment of Walters in the Washington Post (see article below). A
careful reading of the column actually shows Bennett’s willful
ignorance and his deceptive way of discussing drug problems.

Please write a letter to the Washington Post to refute Bennett’s
slippery appraisal of the situation and to remind editors that
Bennett’s own tenure as drug czar was a disaster that helped push the
US drug war to the wasteful and destructive level we find it at today.

************************************************************************
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 one important way we have of gauging our
impact and effectiveness.
************************************************************************

Contact Info

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

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

ARTICLE

US DC: OPED: A Superb Choice For Drug Czar
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n803/a11.html
Newshawk: Jo-D and Tom-E
Pubdate: Mon, 07 May 2001
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 2001 The Washington Post Company
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/491
Author: William J. Bennett
Note: The writer, co-director of Empower America, was in charge of drug
policy for President George Bush in 1989-90.

A SUPERB CHOICE FOR DRUG CZAR

William Raspberry devoted his April 30 column to President Bush’s
reportedly imminent nomination of a new federal “drug czar,” the
position I held in his father’s administration. Raspberry has a long
and distinguished record of well-written and thoughtful columns on a
variety of public policy issues. His column of last Monday therefore
was out of character: incautious in its choice of “experts” on whom to
rely for evidence about the drug war status quo and doubly incautious
— bordering on irresponsible – — in its use of such distorted
testimony to tar the reputation of an unusually conscientious public
servant.

John P. Walters, the president’s apparent choice to lead the White
House drug-policy office, has been a friend and colleague for 20
years. He is not the man Raspberry imagines.

Raspberry has persuaded himself that Walters is a Torquemada on the
question of drug addiction, someone who believes “we can incarcerate
our way out” of the problem — indeed, someone who is “on record”
asserting that “we’d be better off” if the nation sent a still greater
number of “nonviolent drug offenders” to prison automatically, even on
first convictions for simple possession.

Every bit of this is ridiculous, and Walters believes none of it. He
is “on record” that not just first-but second-time arrestees carrying
small quantities of drugs should be routinely diverted from the
criminal justice system to treatment and prevention programs.

Which, despite popular mythology and Hollywood’s pseudo-docu-drama
“Traffic,” is pretty much what happens already. In the federal system
and nearly every state, the law now generally refuses to imprison
defendants for simple small-time possession violations. In 1999, for
example, the federal law enforcement programs that John Walters would
supervise as the drug czar secured roughly 23,000 courtroom drug
convictions, fewer than 700 on simple possession charges. And it is
only a subset of this already small group of arrestees who are even
theoretically subject to a mandatory prison sentence. Nonviolent first
offenders, in particular, face mandatory federal prison terms for
possession only if they have been arrested with crack cocaine and then
only when the quantities involved are those associated with retail,
street-level drug dealing.

This, then, is the crux of the matter: Should street-level drug
dealers go to prison? John Walters says yes. I would have expected
William Raspberry to agree with him. But Raspberry listened instead to
people who advocate a sweeping relaxation of penalties against drug
offenders — up to and including the proprietors of open-air crack
markets. Raspberry has naively accepted the word of one such fringe
advocate, Ethan Nadelmann, that rates of drug abuse in America “are
roughly equal for blacks and whites.” And that racial disparities in
drug-crime arrest rates must reflect institutional bias in the
nation’s justice system. And that Walters’s reluctance to abandon the
federal minimum mandatory sentence for crack possession represents an
extremist’s endorsement of such bias.

It does African Americans no favor to twist the numbers this way. It
is beyond serious dispute that cocaine and crack addiction
disproportionately plague black people. It is similarly beyond serious
dispute that retail cocaine distribution is disproportionately
concentrated in inner-city black neighborhoods — which is why the
protection of those neighborhoods remains an object of special effort
for federal and state law enforcement agencies and why the resulting
pool of criminal defendants looks the way it does.

Yes, there is a racial skew in the statistics. But I cannot see the
“bias.” What I can see is the disaster that would befall our urban
centers were the Nadelmann’s of this world to get their way. In 1995
John Walters opposed a proposal by the U.S. Sentencing Commission to
raise the threshold quantity of crack necessary to trigger a mandatory
federal prison term. Had this “reform” been adopted, as Nadelmann
wishes, drug dealers arrested with 50 grams of crack — enough for
1,500 sales — would be escaping prison entirely. Fortunately, the
idea was rejected by bipartisan majorities in Congress and by
President Clinton. It pleases Nadelmann to discern racial
insensitivity in this decision. I would have thought it beneath
Raspberry to imply that he is right.

As a senior drug policy official during and after my tenure as drug
czar, Walters did as much as anyone to ensure enactment of five
consecutive federal budgets in which spending on direct drug treatment
services nearly tripled, spending on drug treatment research more than
tripled and general funding priorities were redirected to those
effective “demand reduction” efforts Raspberry properly endorses. It
is an unprecedented record; eight succeeding Clinton administration
drug budgets haven’t come close to matching it. And it should more
than confirm Walters’s commitment to a humane, sensible and
comprehensive federal drug policy.

John Walters would make a superb drug czar. Neither President Bush nor
the country could hope to do better.

The writer, co-director of Empower America, was in charge of drug
policy for President George Bush in 1989-90.

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

SAMPLE LETTER

To the editor

William Bennett’s “A Superb Choice For Drug Czar” response to William
Raspberry’s excellent column condemning the choice of John Walters for
Drug Czar was a predictable if disappointing piece.

Bennett claims that Walters will not go after first- and second-time
users in his quest to end the drug war. Yet Walters has said as much,
claiming that the prisons are not filled with users, but rather
big-time dealers. This despite the fact that an American citizen is
arrested every 45 seconds for simple marijuana possession.

John Walters may indeed one day be regarded as a capable drug czar.
But this will only happen if he has the courage to open his eyes and
realize that the nation’s drug laws are far worse for the average
American than the illegal drugs themselves. If he is willing to
regulate currently illegal drugs in a manner similar to alcohol and
tobacco (which kill ten times as many people every year as illegal
drugs), he will be one day regarded as a great drug czar.

Until this happens, though, John Walters must be looked at with
suspicion, if you love America and the Constitution in your heart.

Sincerely,
Kevin M. Hebert

contact info

*************************
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.
—————————————————————————-
TARGET ANALYSIS Washington Post

Circulation 1.15 MILLION – Advertising Value Of A 150 Word Published Letter
– $2,587

The Washington Post is an influential newspaper that has 71 published
letters in the MAP archive. A sampling recently published letters
shows the average length tends to be about 160 words, with some as
short as 90 words and others as long as 280 words.

The published letters can be viewed here:

http://www.mapinc.org/mapcgi/ltedex.pl?SOURCE=Washington+Post+(DC)

**********************************************************
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://www.maximizingharm.com
Focus Alert Specialist