Drug War Chronicle

According to figures from the California Criminal Justice Statistics Center, more than 550,000 people were charged with misdemeanor marijuana possession in the Golden State between 1999 and 2009. Last year, 61,164 people were charged with pot possession, down slightly from 2008's record 61,388.

The number of small-time pot arrests hovered at around 50,000 a year for most of the decade. But in 2007, it jumped to just under 60,000, and crossed that threshold in 2008.

That could change this year, though. A bill, SB 1449, approved by the state legislature last week would change the misdemeanor to a civil infraction. It awaits action on Gov. Schwarzenegger's desk. The Proposition 19 marijuana legalization initiative would allow people 21 or over to possess up to an ounce without fear of arrest and grow up to 25 square feet. It goes before the voters on November 2.

That wouldn't be a minute too soon, for some.  "It's morally offensive that in a state like California, where a majority of Californians favor outright legalization and where as far back as 1977 they thought they had it decriminalized, the law enforcement community continues to ignore the will of the citizens of the state," said Keith Stroup, founder of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML).

"This is just another example of why we need to end marijuana prohibition and why we hope California voters will pass Proposition 19 this November," said Mike Meno, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. "We're criminalizing people and turning their lives upside down simply for using a substance that's safer than alcohol. It's also a huge misallocation of law enforcement resources. Even if they're not going to jail, these busts are still taking up police officers' time and clogging up the court system. This is all the more reason I hope voters really flock to the polls in November."

Under California law, possession of up to an ounce is a misdemeanor punishable only by a maximum $100 fine for a first offense. But because it is a misdemeanor -- not a civil infraction -- you can be arrested, and each offense requires a court appearance, leading to costs for the criminal justice system, as well as costs and a criminal record -- at least temporarily -- for the arrestee.

"People are usually cited and released, but they could be arrested," said Omar Figueroa, a Sebastopol-based marijuana defense attorney. "The law says they can be arrested for misdemeanor marijuana possession, and they will be if they don't have satisfactory proof of ID or if they ask to go before a judge."

It varies from locality to locality, Figueroa said. "In Berkeley, they try to process them in traffic court, even though it's technically a misdemeanor. A lot depends on the cop's discretion."

People charged with a misdemeanor have the right to counsel and the right to a jury trial. Ironically, both Figueroa and Dale Gieringer, longtime head of California NORML, said that exercising that right to trial could result in the charges being dropped.

"Some people have demanded jury trials," noted Gieringer, "and when you do that, you almost always find the charges getting dropped, because when the worst outcome is a $100 fine, it just isn't worth it."

"With the maximum sentence being a $100 fine, the system doesn't want to put out that much energy in picking a jury," said Figueroa, but don't count on it. "My first jury trial was pot possession misdemeanor in Los Angeles County. But if you're in San Francisco or Alameda County and you insist on your right to a jury trial, it will probably be dismissed."

Pleading guilty means a criminal record and all that entails, including collateral consequences like loss of access to public housing, but only for two years. Then, if you've managed to stay out of trouble, the conviction is expunged. But some judges push minor pot offenders into treatment, said Gieringer.

"Many judges railroad the defendants into not taking the misdemeanor plea, but instead doing a drug program, the advantage of which is that you have no conviction at all, but it's very expensive and time consuming," he said. 

Even having to show up for a court appearance can be burdensome, Gieringer said. "I know one UCLA student who had to go to Arcata [600 miles away] for a court appearance. It's also an inconvenience for the court. It's got to cost well over $100 for the state to assemble all the manpower for a pot misdemeanor hearing, and with 60,000 cases, that's $6 million wasted right there."

"It would be good to see that decrim bill signed into law or Prop 19 pass," said Stroup. "Or both," he laughed.

"Back when we did the decrim bill in the 1976, the district attorneys said it had to remain a criminal offense," said Gieringer. "The bill now pending would abolish that status. If Schwarzenegger can't sign this current decrim bill, there is something really sick in California politics." Gieringer laughed ruefully, adding, "Of course, we know there is something really sick in California politics."

"This same decriminalization proposal was defeated here three times in the past," said Gieringer. "I think its passage this year is an indication that you can get lawmakers to reduce penalties as a cost-cutting measure. The reason it passed this time was the budget crisis -- even the prosecutors and the courts supported the bill on the grounds of cutting costs."

That's just misdemeanor pot possession. An additional 135,000 people have been arrested on felony marijuana cultivation or distribution charges in the past decade. For all drug felonies, that figure rises to 1.4 million over the past decade.

An additional 850,000 arrests were made for non-marijuana drug misdemeanors. These are typically possession of personal use amounts of hashish, non-opiate prescription medications, and similar drugs on Schedules III, IV, and V of the state drug law, which can be charged as either felonies or misdemeanors. Figueroa called such charges "wobblers," since they can be charged either way.

While last year's 78,514 marijuana arrests (felonies and misdemeanors) is an all-time high, arrests for other drug offenses are declining. Narcotics (heroin and cocaine) felony arrests peaked at more than 56,000 in 2007, but declined to just under 44,000 last year, while dangerous drug felony arrests have declined by half since peaking at nearly 93,000 in 2005.

The huge number of drug arrests in general and marijuana arrests in particular come as the state is experiencing its lowest crime levels in three decades and a skyrocketing criminal justice system budget. In 1968, total criminal justice system (law enforcement, corrections, courts, prosecutors, public defenders) were at about $100 million, by 1984, when crime rates had already begun falling, the criminal justice budget was at about $5 billion. Last year, it was about $33 billion, mostly for police ($17 billion) and prisons ($15 billion).

Passage of Prop 19 or the signing of the decriminalization bill could begin to rein in the California criminal justice juggernaut, but that would just be a start. Still, you have to start somewhere. Real decrim would be good, but if California votes for legalization, it will be a political earthquake.

The Israeli Health Ministry Sunday moved to broaden access to medical marijuana by approving five more doctors to prescribe it, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported. Until now, the ministry had authorized only one doctor, Dr. Yehuda Baruch of the Abarbanel psychiatric hospital, to prescribe it to an ever-growing number of patients.

Sunday's announcement is part of a pilot program designed to increase the number of doctors allowed to prescribe medical marijuana. If this expansion of prescribing privileges pans out, it will then be extended to doctors who are department managers in Israeli health maintenance organizations.

The number of Israelis who have been prescribed marijuana was two in 2000, 10 in 2005, 700 in the middle of last year, and may be as high as 2,000 now. A Health Ministry official estimated that, with the lessening of the prescribing bottleneck, the number could increase to 5000 by year's end and tens of thousands in the future.

Doctors are authorized to prescribe medical marijuana to patients suffering from chronic pain, including patients with fibromyalgia, cancer, HIV/AIDS, neurological disorders, multiple sclerosis, asthma and glaucoma, as well as to Israel Defense Forces veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.

The broadening of prescribing privileges will also mean an increase in authorized production. Currently, only three of 14 authorized grow ops are operating, but that will probably change quickly. The medicine is provided free, but patients must pay a monthly fee of $95 to help cover growing expenses.

(Update: On Saturday, September 18, Emery supporters are organizing Free Marc Emery rallies worldwide. Read the listings and other information here. Supporters are also calling on the Canadian government to repatriate Emery into the Canadian justice system, a right they have under treaty.)

In a Seattle Times op-ed Saturday, former US Attorney for the Western District of Washington John McKay defected to the other side. As the federal prosecutor in Seattle, McKay oversaw the indictment and prosecution of Canadian marijuana seed seller and pot advocate Marc Emery, who now sits in an American federal detention facility awaiting the formal handing down of a five-year prison sentence later this month.

But while he thinks Emery and most pot-smokers are "idiots," McKay has come to see the futility of continuing to enforce marijuana prohibition. "As Emery's prosecutor and a former federal law-enforcement official, however, I'm not afraid to say out loud what most of my former colleagues know is true: Our marijuana policy is dangerous and wrong and should be changed through the legislative process to better protect the public safety," he wrote.

Marijuana prohibition "has utterly failed," McKay concluded. "The demand for marijuana in this country has for decades outpaced the ability of law enforcement to eliminate it," he declared, ready to throw in the towel.

"Brave agents and cops continue to risk their lives in a futile attempt to enforce misguided laws that do not match the realities of our society," he wrote. "These same agents and cops, along with prosecutors, judges and jailers, know we can't win by arresting all those involved in the massive importation, growth or distribution of marijuana, nor by locking up all the pot smokers."

Pot prohibition fills the pockets of "Mexican and other international drug cartels and gangs," even though marijuana is nowhere nearly as harmful to users as other illegal drugs, McKay wrote.

"So the policy is wrong, the law has failed, the public is endangered, no one in law enforcement is talking about it and precious few policymakers will honestly face the soft-on-crime sound bite in their next elections. What should be done?" McKay asks.

It is a rhetorical question, of course, and McKay has answers: Recognize that the real public safety danger to Americans is not from marijuana but from prohibition, build policy on "sound science, not myth," and... drum roll please... "We should give serious consideration to heavy regulation and taxation of the marijuana industry (an industry that is very real and dangerously underground). We should limit pot's content of the active ingredient THC (tetrahydrocannabinol), regulate its sale to adults who are dumb enough to want it and maintain criminal penalties for sales, possession or use by minors, drivers and boaters."

Not to worry, though, McKay assures his erstwhile partners in the prohibition racket. There will be years to come of extirpating criminality from the former black market, and that means job security: "DEA and its law-enforcement partners must therefore remain well equipped and staffed to accomplish this task: to protect our families from truly dangerous drugs and to drive drug cartels, gangs and dope dealers from our society."

Still, a remarkably candid confession from a man who made a living prosecuting marijuana offenders. Too bad he didn't find himself on the road to Damascus when he still had the prosecutors' powers.

California's Proposition 19, the tax and regulate cannabis marijuana legalization initiative, continues to lead in the latest SurveyUSA poll of likely voters, but with a smaller lead than two previous SurveyUSA polls. The latest poll has the support for the initiative at 47%, with 43% opposed and 10% undecided.

July and August polls from SurveyUSA had support for Prop 19 at 50%, opposition at 40%, and 10% undecided. The poll numbers suggest that the opposition is managing to peel away some people who had previously indicated they would support the measure.

The initiative, sponsored by Oakland medical marijuana entrepreneur Richard Lee, would legalize the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by people 21 or over. It would also allow adults to grow up to 25 square feet of pot and possess the resulting harvest. It would give cities and counties the local option of taxing and regulating marijuana sales.

According to the poll, Prop 19 has majority support among men (54%), but not women (40%); people under 50 (51%), but not those over 50 (43%); Democrats (51%), but not independents (49%) or Republicans (39%); and whites (52%), but not blacks (40%), Asians (39%), or Hispanics (38%).

With now less than two months until election day, it seems more clear than ever that the Prop 19 campaign is going to come down to the wire. Turnout will be key, especially among young voters. The 18-to-34 age group supports Prop 19 by 59% to 33%. The only demographic in the poll that exceeded that was liberals, with 61%.

Voters in Dane County, Wisconsin, the home of Madison, the state's capital and second largest city, will be asked if they support passage of a state medical marijuana law, and they might not be alone. A city councilman in River Falls last week filed petitions seeking to put the same question on the local ballot in that town of nearly 15,000 in west-central Wisconsin, near the Twin Cities.

In the November 2 election, Dane County, voters will be asked: "Should the Wisconsin Legislature enact legislation allowing residents with debilitating medical conditions to acquire and possess marijuana for medical purposes if supported by their physician?"

The move comes after medical marijuana activists such as Is My Medicine Legal Yet (IMMLY) have spent years trying to get the state legislature to pass a bill, to no avail. It is designed to show legislators they have nothing to fear politically by approving medical marijuana, and to suggest that the opposite could be the case.

The Madison resolution was approved by the Dane County Board in a unanimous voice vote on July 15. The charge was led by east side supervisors John Hendrick and Barbara Vedder, according to a report from IMMLY's Gary Storck.

"I would just invite all of you to join Representative Vedder to represent our constituents and to represent the opportunity for all of your constituents to vote on this in November and to advise the legislature that they have nothing to fear from the people of Wisconsin if they decide to pass a bill to  legalize medical marijuana," Hendrick told his colleagues before the vote.

And they took him up on it. Now, the city council in River Falls will have the same opportunity, after City Council Member Bob Hughes filed more than 800 signatures last week with the city clerk's office seeking to put a referendum question with identical language there.

Now, the city attorney will review the referendum question and then submit it to the city council. The council will then vote on whether to add the question to the ballot.

"Some community members contacted me about it and asked if I was willing to help," Hughes said. It is another step in the process of bringing medical marijuana to Wisconsin, he said. 

Fourteen states and the District of Columbia have already approved medical marijuana, although programs are not yet in effect in New Jersey or the District. Arizona will vote on it in November.

Drug policy has become a hot-button issue in the Kentucky US Senate race, albeit in a weird and tangential way. The race pits insurgent tea party/libertarian Republican Rand Paul, the son of anti-prohibitionist US Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), against Democrat Jack Conway, the Kentucky attorney general.

Neither candidate even mentions drug policy on their campaign web sites, but remarks by Paul earlier this month that he opposed federal earmarks such as those that fund the anti-drug task force Operation UNITE and drug treatment programs, and that drug policy was not a "pressing issue" for Kentucky voters have reverberated across the Bluegrass State.

"I don't think it's a pressing issue," Paul said in response to a query from the Associated Press about his opposition to federal earmarks for drug law enforcement. He suggested that eastern Kentucky voters are more concerned with fiscal and cultural issues. "They're socially conservative out there," Rand said. "Jack's not. They're fiscally conservative. I am. Jack's not. I think we'll swamp him."

Paul's comments left an opening for Conway, who is trailing by about eight points in the most recent polls, to go on the attack. And the back and forth between the two campaigns has kept the drug issue in the spotlight since mid-August.

"Rand will handcuff local sheriffs trying to combat the drug epidemic, and I will make sure Kentucky's law enforcement has the tools they need to protect our families," Conway said. "That's my record as attorney general, and that's what I'll do in Washington."

Conway said that Kentucky, which is suffering from budget cuts, can't take on drug traffickers without federal help. Paul countered that that federal involvement is justified only when drugs are crossing state or federal borders.

Conway and his supporters have frequently resorted to describing drug use in Appalachian Kentucky, known as a marijuana growing hotbed and the home of numerous pill-poppers and meth cooks, as an "epidemic," and the conventional wisdom in Kentucky is that the area is rife with drug abuse.

But the conventional wisdom doesn't match up with the numbers. According to a recent report from the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, drug use levels in eastern Kentucky are in line with those in the rest of the state and the rest of the country. The "epidemic," in other words, is a politically convenient figment of the collective imagination.

But that doesn't stop either campaign from bemoaning it. After an initial round of attacks from Conway and his supporters on the drug issue, Paul made a point of showing up at a privately-funded drug treatment center to insist that he does care about "the drug problem."

"It's been recently insinuated that somehow I don't care about the drug problem in Kentucky, and that's absolutely wrong," Paul said last week. He accused Conway of "pandering" on the drug issue.

The back and forth continued this week, with the Paul campaign accusing Conway of not doing enough to combat methamphetamine production as attorney general and the Conway campaign bringing out sheriffs to attack Rand for undercutting their drug war.

But for all the blows thrown around the drug issue, Paul's attack on federal funding for drug task forces and drug treatment does not appear to be part of an anti-prohibitionist assault on drug war orthodoxy -- Paul does not call for ending marijuana prohibition or drug prohibition in general. Instead, it is part and parcel of his anti-federal spending campaign message.

And while Paul supported medical marijuana in the primary campaign, he has gone a bit squishy on the issue since then. In August, the AP ran a story saying that "he said he opposed the legalization of marijuana, even for medicinal purposes." The campaign didn't deny or confirm that report for more than a week, until asked directly about it by Mike Meno of the Marijuana Policy Project. Campaign staffers then told Meno Paul was standing by his states' rights position on the issue, but refused to say whether Paul personally supported medical marijuana.

"His big campaign message is to cut back on the size of the federal government, get the deficit under control, and he's been heavy-handed in going after earmarks like Operation UNITE, and those are very important in this state," said University of Louisville political scientist Laurie Rhodebeck. "So some of the sheriffs and mid-level political people, particularly in Eastern Kentucky, are not happy with what Paul's been saying about that. I don't know that these folks were likely to support him in the first place, but I've seen even some Republican county executives who seem appalled he's taking this position," she said.

"Part of Paul's strategy is to try to make Conway look like just another robot for Pelosi and Obama," said Rhodebeck. "Conway has to latch onto some issues, and the drug issue presented itself as something he can run with. I think it's a reasonable strategy for him to pursue this."

"Those federal task forces are just another way to waste money on an utterly failed strategy," said Ted Galen Carpenter, an analyst with the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, who agreed with Paul's attack on Operation UNITE. "If we want to spend money studying a way out of prohibition, that's one thing, but I wouldn't favor spending another dollar to enforce our idiotic drug laws."

Still, Carpenter took Paul to task for saying drug policy was not "a pressing issue" for Kentucky voters. "This most certainly is a pressing issue," he said. "Aside from the continuous civil liberties issues, people in Kentucky should be just as concerned as most of the rest of the country about that conflagration we have going on across our southern border. As long as the US maintains its prohibitionist policies, we are giving billions of dollars to the Mexican cartels, and that's dangerously unwise. One wonders whether Rand Paul has taken a look at what's happening in Mexico."

The emergence of the drug issue in Kentucky and especially the critique from a Republican candidate suggests that it is an issue that can prove useful to either party, said Bill Piper, national affairs director for the Drug Policy Alliance. But if Republicans want to make drug reform an issue, they have to be more coherent than Paul, he said.

"That Rand Paul is stepping out on drug policy reform and his opponent attacking him for it shows that reformers shouldn't take for granted that the Democrats are the party of reform," said Piper. "There was also a Republican drug reformer in the primary against Texas Gov. Rick Perry, and a Republican running against Barney Frank has said some things, so you have a legalizer Republican versus a legalizer Barney Frank."

But while Republicans are increasingly challenging the drug policy status quo, they don't know how to reach voters on the issue, Piper said. "Rand Paul doesn't know how to talk about this," he said. "He's talking about this in the context of taxes and spending, but as much as voters dislike taxes and spending, they've always made an exception for the drug war. He needs to be talking about how drug reform reduces the harms of drugs and keeps families safer."

Paul could take a lesson from another libertarian-leaning Republican, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, Piper said. "Gary Johnson got beaten up savagely before he learned how to frame it," he recalled. "Johnson still talks about freedom, but now he does a lot to reassure the listener that he cares about the problems associated with drug use."

"If Paul took this on head-on like Gary Johnson does and began saying it better, he would sound more rational than the Democrats," Piper said. "But by limiting the discussion to what the federal government should be doing, he's almost conceding his opponent's points. I suspect Rand Paul gets it about drug prohibition and he wants to wrap it in a safe way, but drugs is not an issue you can do that with. You have to say the war on drugs is making your teens less safe."

For Rand Paul, the real issue is not drug reform, but reining in federal spending. Whether his foray into the morass of drug politics will derail his campaign remains to be seen.

(This article was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)

German press reports a couple of weeks ago carried headlines saying "Lawmakers Ready to Approve Medical Marijuana" and "Germany Plans to Legalize Medical Marijuana." Those reports were incorrect, and so was the Drug War Chronicle story based on them, "Germany Legalizing Medical Marijuana." (The title to that story, which we have since updated, now reads "Reports of Germany Legalizing Medical Marijuana Are Premature.")

According to the International Association for Cannabis as Medicine, whose executive director, Dr. Franco Grotenherman, also heads the German Association for Cannabis as Medicine, what actually happened is that the German government has modified its drug laws to reclassify marijuana from Annex I (no medical use) to Annex II, as long as it is "intended for the productions of preparations for medicinal purposes" -- not raw marijuana.

The health ministry also approved adding "cannabis extract (extract obtained from plants and parts of plants belonging to the species cannabis) in preparations approved as medicines" to Annex III of the drug law. That means that Sativex, a sublingual marijuana extract composed primarily of the compounds Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and Cannabidiol, will qualify as medicine under German law, and that its maker, Britain-based GW Pharma, can now apply to market it there.

GW Pharma is partnering with the pharmaceutical giant Bayer in marketing Sativex. Approval to use Sativex in Germany is expected to happen next year. It will only be approved for the treatment of spasticity in multiple sclerosis.

GW Pharma's move in Germany is part of a broader roll-out of Sativex, which has already been approved for limited use in Britain, won preliminary approval in Spain, and this week, was approved for MS spasticity in Canada. The company also plans to seek approvals in other European Union countries, including France and Italy.

"There are media reports that the German government is intending to ease the access to cannabis for medicinal purposes," said Dr. Grotenhermen in response to a Chronicle query. "Most of the reports are misleading. The German government has agreed to allow pharmaceutical companies to apply for approvals on cannabis-based medicines in Germany. No other changes with regard to the medical use of cannabis are intended by the German government. The German Association for Cannabis as Medicine is calling the media reports initiated by the German government 'misleading,' since they suggest that cannabis will be available in Germany soon for many patients, while it is only for spasticity in MS after the approval of Sativex for this indication," Grotenherman said.

"The German government announced a 'major breakthrough' for cannabis as medicine in Germany, and nearly all the newspapers repeated this without knowing what the 'breakthrough' actually was," explained German hemp activist Steffen Geyer. "The next day, the real decision was made public, and it basically said they will change the law so Bayer can sell Sativex to patients with multiple sclerosis. The 'breakthrough' is really a small step, and they aren't doing it for the patients, but for the companies."

And that means no relief in sight for most of Germany's medical marijuana patients.  As things now stand, people in Germany who want to use medical marijuana have two choices: If all other treatment options have been tried already, they can be prescribed Marinol, which is expensive and typically not covered by health insurance. Or, since a German court ruling forced the government's hand, they can apply to the government for special permission to use medical marijuana.

Only about 40 patients are permitted to do so, and they must buy their medical marijuana from a Dutch supplier, Bedrocan, in German pharmacies. They cannot grow their own, and no one can grow it for them, either. Just last month, the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices rejected a patient's bid to grow his own. The patient had permission to get cannabis at the pharmacy, but said he could not afford it.

"Most patients who tried Marinol said it didn't work like natural cannabis, so after a couple of years, the institute 'invented' an extract made from cannabis flowers and sesame seed oil," said Geyer. "That didn't work, either. It was even worse than Marinol. Again, a couple of years went by, some more patients died, then the court ruling forced the government to allow some patients to use cannabis as medicine. But that Dutch medical marijuana is expensive, so most patients can't afford the amount they actually need. But since, like everybody else, they are not allowed to buy or grow their own, some of them are in jail."

Pharmaceutical Bedrocan goes for $18-30 a gram, while black market marijuana sells for $6-15 a gram, Geyer reported.

"So, none of this changes, and now the wonderful news that Germany will be the next country where Bayer can get richer by selling Sativex," the activist sardonically noted. "But it won't be in the pharmacies, it will only be for specified conditions, you will still have to try all the other therapies first, and health insurance won't pay the bill."

The German government's resistance to expanding access to medical marijuana comes even as opinion polls show strong support for it among the citizenry. An August poll had 76% of German voters in favor of medical marijuana and only 18% opposed. Similarly, 65% said health insurance should pay for it.

Medical marijuana patients and would-be patients need to continue to organize, said Geyer. "We need to get the German patients more political," he said. "For the last 10 years, there was often a gulf between 'good' patients and 'bad' recreational users, and that sucked the political power out of the movement. But patients started to see this as a problem, and have begun to ask hemp activists about advice for political campaigns. This year, for example, for the first time, we had legal patients marching in the Hemp Parade, and that led to widespread news coverage related to cannabis medicine." 

Geyer has a plan. "The next step on my medical cannabis agenda is to get more patients to ask for legal permission to grow their own marijuana," he said. "The cost problem may make that possible. Both Marinol and the Bedrocan are far, far more expensive than the plant, and most patients just don’t have the money. There is a chance this will work soon. After the first couple of 'I Can Grow' patients, I would like to establish a patients' cannabis social club, but that's at least two or three years away."

Germany has allowed corporate cannabis medicine a foot in the door, but it is so far still leaving the vast majority of possible beneficiaries of medical marijuana -- the patients -- on the outside waiting to get in.

Oh, temptation, such a torment for the weak-willed. A South Carolina cop peddles his drug dog's training dope, an Iowa cop gets caught with a bunch of coke, and a Florida trooper is profiling out-of-state pain patients and stealing their medicine. Let's get to it:

In Swansea, South Carolina, a Swansea police officer was arrested Monday for allegedly selling "training drugs" to people in the community. Charles Schuler, 37, was a K-9 officer and would be given small amounts of drugs to train his dog. But the department got a tip that Schuler was visiting a "known drug house" while on duty, and when police raided the place Monday, two people inside said Schuler supplied them with drugs. He is charged with misconduct in office and is being held at the Lexington County Detention Center on $100,000 bond. Oh, and he's now a former Swansea police officer. He was fired the same day he was arrested.

In Muscatine, Iowa, a Muscatine police officer was arrested Saturday after getting busted with 1.5 ounces of cocaine. Officer Scott Burk, 47, is charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and a drug tax stamp violation, both felonies. He's looking at up to 15 years in prison if convicted on both counts. His arrest came after an investigation by the Iowa Bureau of Investigation, which has so far not released further details. Burk had worked an overnight patrol shift since November, but for a year before that, he had been an officer on the Muscatine County Drug Task Force. Last month, the state auditor reported that at least $8,810 in cash and money orders held by the task force could not be accounted for. Burk has not been named as a suspect in that. He is jailed on a $2,500 cash bond. He has been fired.

In Fort Pierce, Florida, a former Florida Highway Patrol trooper faces a drug possession charge after being accused of targeting cars with Kentucky and Tennessee license plates and stealing prescription drugs from their drivers and passengers. Former trooper Gary Bach faces one count of misdemeanor oxycodone possession. He went down after two separate complaints, one that alleged the theft of six Oyxcontin pills in October, and one in January in which a trooper was accused of stopping a vehicle because it had Kentucky plates. During an investigation that included the DEA, Bach told investigators it was "common knowledge" that people from Kentucky and Tennessee drove to Florida pain clinics to get prescriptions and that for two weeks last November he didn't stop anyone except people from those states as he investigated "doctor shopping." He was charged in May and resigned August 24.

Swiss cannabis pioneer Bernard Rappaz has renewed his hunger strike after being returned to prison on the failure of his appeal to the country's Federal Tribunal. Rappaz is serving a 68 month sentence for cannabis distribution after running afoul of conservative pot laws in the canton of Valais, where he lives.

Rappaz had been on a 50-day hunger strike while imprisoned earlier this year and was hospitalized in Bern while Valais authorities dithered over whether to force-feed him against his written wishes. Instead, they released him to house arrest last month pending his appeal.

The appeal was turned down last week and Rappaz was returned to prison. He restarted his hunger strike on Monday.

Rappaz, a long-time cannabis and hemp activist, has long been a burr under the saddle of authorities in the conservative canton. They responded first with his original prosecution and sentencing (a partner was sentenced only to parole), then again by bringing a series of new charges against him shortly after he was released on house arrest last month. The new charges, for offenses that allegedly took place between 2002 and 2006, include document falsification, money laundering, violation of drug laws, and social benefits fraud.

There is an international campaign to free the Swiss activist, who is sometimes referred to as "the Gandhi of hemp." There is a French language Support Bernard Rappaz Facebook page and Solidarity with Bernard Rappaz web site. For English speakers, the European Coalition for a Just and Effective Drug Policy (ENCOD) has a Bernard Rappaz web page.

In an August 26 ruling, the Wayne County Circuit Court refused to order the Detroit city clerk to put a municipal marijuana legalization initiative on the November ballot. Initiative organizers, the Coalition for a Safer Detroit had gathered sufficient valid voter signatures to qualify for the ballot, but in a surprise move earlier this month, the city's Election Commission removed the measure from the ballot, saying it was preempted by state law.

The Coalition for a Safer Detroit is now considering an appeal to the Michigan Court of Appeals. But with election day little more than two months away, there are questions about whether a decision would come quickly enough to get the measure back on the ballot in time.

The Wayne County Circuit Court took and decided the case on an expedited basis. It is not clear whether the appeals court could or would also do so.

The initiative would have legalized the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana on private property for people 21 or older. It would have done so by simply removing all references to simple marijuana possession by adults from the city code.

The coalition handed in more than 6,000 voter signatures earlier this year, and the initiative was approved by the same Detroit Election Commission that killed it August 9. After it was approved, in accordance with city law, the initiative went before the Detroit City Council, which could have voted to make the initiative law. By failing to vote on the initiative, the Council cleared the way for the voters to make their preferences known in November -- or so everyone thought.

But the Election Commission voted 3-0 to remove the measure from the ballot. The surprise move came after Detroit Corporation Counsel and commission member Krystal Crittenden told the commission that in the opinion of the city's law department, which she oversees, state law forbidding marijuana possession preempted the measure.

Canada's Conservative minority government hopes the third time is the charm for its controversial measure to increase sentences for marijuana cultivation and introduce mandatory minimum sentences for some drug offenses. Now known as S-10, the measure will be taken up by the Senate when it returns from recess at end of next month.

The bill is designed to "send a message" that "if you sell or produce drugs, you'll pay with jail time," Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said when re-filing the bill in May.

Under the bill, anyone growing six or more plants for the purpose of drug trafficking could face a mandatory minimum six month jail sentence, with a one-year mandatory minimum for up to 200 plants and two years for up to 500 plants. Hash makers also face a one-year mandatory minimum.

The mandatory minimum sentences could be increased by half if any of a number of aggravating factors are claimed. These include whether a weapon was found on the premises, if minors were involved, if the location was unsafe, and whether pot production posed a danger to the public in a residential area.

The Conservatives' bill comes even as crime rates in Canada have fallen to a 30-year low and with majorities supporting marijuana legalization in recent polls.

"This is a terrible bill," said Jacob Hunter of Why Prohibition?, a web site set up by opponents of the bill to encourage online activism and social networking to defeat it. "I think the single worst provision is the 18-month mandatory minimum for making one pot brownie if the police can show you shared it with friends."

"The Conservatives have less than a third of the popular vote, and they think they have a mandate for these draconian measures," said Eugene Oscapella, an Ottawa law professor and head of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy.

Last year's version of the bill, known as C-15, made it through the House of Commons with the support of the Liberals, but was softened slightly by Liberals in the Senate. But before the amended measure could pass, Prime Minister Harper ended the parliamentary session, killing the bill for the year.

In power since the 2006 elections, the Conservatives have been unable to win enough seats to form a majority government. Right now, the Conservatives hold 143 seats of the 307 in the House of Commons, with the Liberals holding 103, the Bloc Quebecois 51, and the New Democrats (NDP) 51.

That means the Conservatives are once again going to have to win over members of other parties to pass S-10. With the NDP and the Bloc both in solid opposition, the Conservatives will have to pick up support from the Liberals, but whether they will be able to do so remains to be seen. Last time, Liberal support got the bill over the top in the House, but this year, the Liberals are preparing for a possible called election in the fall or winter and may have had an infusion of spine-stiffener on the issue.

"The Liberals are running around like the cowardly lion," said Oscapella, who expressed dismay at their lack of principle. "There is no sign yet that they are doing anything other than kowtowing to the government on this issue."

"Last time the Liberals did support C-15 in the House, but modified and delayed it in the Senate," said Hunter, who was slightly more positive about the Liberals. "They were terrified of being soft on crime. This time, I'm hearing the Liberals won't be so easily cowed. They feel they can counter the soft on crime attack by attacking the Conservatives on cost. It will be a purely political decision for the Liberals."

Noting that the parliamentary budget office has set the price-tag of S-10 at $10 billion, Hunter said the high cost would be a wedge to use against the bill. "This has emboldened the opposition to attack the Conservative's law and order crime agenda as too costly," he said. "Plus, crime is a historic low, and these mandatory minimum policies have been tried in the US to poor effect."

In the Senate, Conservatives do have an outright majority of 54 of 105 Senate seats -- if the two Progressive Conservative senators are counted. The Liberals have 49 seats, and there are two independents. Conservative strength in the Senate may explain why the Harper government decided to place S-10 in the Senate instead of the House of Commons.

Opponents of S-10 are gathering their forces. They will have months or perhaps even a year to mobilize opposition as the bill moves through the parliamentary process.

"There is a lot of opposition to this bill in the media, which is coming out strongly against mandatory minimums and in favor of ending the war on drugs," noted Oscapella. "Yet the government wants to plow ahead. Faced with strong opposition, the more adamant they are that they will succeed," he said.

"This is all the more depressing because for years, the excuse was that the US would never let us do drug reform," the Ottawa attorney continued. "Now the rhetoric and the attitude in the US is changing, and this would be a time for us to move forward, but we're set to move backward. It's like George Bush came to Canada."

NDP MP Libby Davies, the party's drug policy critic, has been a stalwart in the fight against earlier incarnations of the bill and is likely to do so again. While, the East Vancouver MP was out of the office this week, Davies spoke out against the new bill back in May when it was introduced.

"I have been working at every turn to stop this failed, George Bush style war-on-drugs Bill that proposes mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes," Davies said. "My NDP colleagues and I voted a resounding no when this bill was introduced in the House as Bill C-15, but it was passed with the support of the Liberal Party. Now we have a second chance to stop this wrong-headed and costly legislation. The Conservatives’ iron fisted approach that criminalizes drug users is taking Canada in the wrong direction."

Why Prohibition? and other activist groups are preparing protests across Canada on October 2, as well as bombarding parliament and the government with messages opposing S-10. And that will be just the beginning of the campaign.

It looks like the Liberals hold the key to whether S-10 passes or fails. In the months ahead, expect the pressure on them to increase dramatically. And let's hope for the Conservatives that instead of third time is the charm, it's three strikes and you're out.

by Bernd Debusmann, Jr.

Mexican drug trafficking organizations make billions each year smuggling drugs into the United States, profiting enormously from the prohibitionist drug policies of the US government. Since Mexican president Felipe Calderon took office in December 2006 and called the armed forces into the fight against the so-called cartels, prohibition-related violence has killed more than 28,000 people, the government reported this month. The increasing militarization of the drug war and the arrest of dozens of high-profile drug traffickers have failed to stem the flow of drugs -- or the violence -- whatsoever. The Merida initiative, which provides $1.4 billion over three years for the US to assist the Mexican government with training, equipment and intelligence, has so far failed to make a difference. Here are a few of the latest developments in Mexico's drug war:

Thursday, August 19

In Ciudad Juarez, 12 people were killed in various parts of the city. In one case, a man on a bus was killed after being shot by another passenger, who was apparently following him and waiting for an opportune moment to strike. In another incident, a group of armed men stormed a house, killing one man and leaving a woman and a child wounded.

Friday, August 20

In Monterrey, two private security guards were killed after a shootout in front of the prestigious American School Foundation, known for educating the children of many wealthy locals and those of American expatriates. The gun battle apparently began after the guards had a verbal altercation with a group of armed men who were driving near the school. Four guards who disappeared under unclear circumstances during the gunfight turned up safely on Friday. It is unclear whether the men fled or were kidnapped by the gunmen, as has been reported in the Mexican media.

Saturday, August 21

In El Paso, a bullet fired during a gunfight in Ciudad Juarez struck a building belonging to the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP). At least eight rounds fired in Ciudad Juarez have struck buildings in El Paso in recent weeks.

Sunday, August 22

In Cuernavaca, four bodies were discovered hanging from a bridge. The bodies had been decapitated and mutilated, and their genitals had been removed. A note left at the scene indicated that the men were affiliated with American-born cartel figure Edgar Valdez Villareal, who is currently in a power struggle with Hector Beltran-Leyva for control of the Beltran-Leyva Organization. Cuernavaca has seen a dramatic surge in violence since cartel boss Arturo Beltran-Leyva was killed in December, leaving his organization leaderless.

Monday, August 23

In Hidalgo, seven bodies were discovered inside two mines that were being used as clandestine graves by suspected drug cartels. Authorities were led to the mine by several suspects arrested last week, including three police officers. In May, a similar discovery in Taxco led to the discovery of 55 bodies.

In Ciudad Juarez, five people were killed in several incidents in the city. Among the dead was a federal police officer who had been decapitated, dismembered, and whose body parts were left strewn along a highway. In another incident, a municipal policewoman was shot dead off-duty as she drove in a car with her child, who was left uninjured.

Tuesday, August 24

In Tamaulipas, 72 bodies were discovered at a farm after a gun battle in San Fernando, about 100 miles from Brownsville, Texas. The bodies were discovered by Marines acting on a tip from a man who claimed he was an illegal migrant who had been kidnapped. Initial reports suggest that the dead are mainly Central American immigrants who were killed after refusing to pay an extortion fee. Drug cartels, particularly the Zetas Organization which is powerful in Tamaulipas, have increasingly begun kidnapping migrants in addition to narcotics smuggling.

Near Acapulco, two bodies were discovered hanging from an overpass bridge on the highway from Chilpancingo. Their arms had been chopped off and a note was left with the bodies threatening extortionists, kidnappers, and the army.

In Mexico City, investigators from the UN and the OAS said that Mexico was the most dangerous place for journalists in the Americas. Some 60 journalists have been killed in the country since 2,000, according to the National Human Rights Commission.

Wednesday, August 25

In Sinaloa, three young men were found dead inside a car near the town of Las Palmas. All three had been reported missing on Sunday. At least one of the bodies, found in the trunk of the car, had signs of torture. All three had been shot.

Total Body Count for the Week: 301

Total Body Count for the Year: 7,331

Read the previous Mexico Drug War Update here.