Latest

[Courtesy of Vote Hemp] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 1, 2008 CONTACT: Adam Eidinger at 202-744-2671 or [email protected], or Tom Murphy at 207-542-4998 or [email protected] Vermont Hemp Farming Bill Becomes Law Controversy Resolved by Opinion of Attorney General’s Office MONTPELIER, Vermont – Vote Hemp, a grassroots advocacy organization working to give farmers the right to grow non-drug industrial hemp, is extremely pleased that the Vermont Secretary of State‘s office accepted Formal Opinion #2008-1 from the Office of the Attorney General and gave H.267, the Hemp for Vermont bill, the designation of Act No. 212 last Friday. There had been a constitutional controversy as Governor Jim Douglas forwarded H.267 to the Secretary of State intending it to become law without his signature. The bill had overwhelmingly passed both the House (127 to 9) and the Senate (25 to 1). The new law sets up a state-regulated program for farmers to grow non-drug industrial hemp which is used in a wide variety of products, including nutritious foods, cosmetics, body care, clothing, tree-free paper, auto parts, building materials and much more. Learn more about industrial hemp at: www.VoteHemp.com. Smart and effective grassroots organizing by Vote Hemp and the Vermont-based advocacy group Rural Vermont (www.RuralVermont.org) mobilized farmers and local businesses, many of which pledged to buy their hemp raw materials in-state if they have the opportunity. Rural Vermont’s Director Amy Shollenberger says that “the Hemp for Vermont bill is another step toward legalizing this important crop for farmers. The United States is the only industrialized nation in the world that doesn't allow this crop to be grown. Looking at the Canadian experience, hemp provides a good return for the farmer. It's a high-yield crop and a great crop to mix in with corn.” Vermont grows an average of 90,000 acres of corn per year, a small amount compared to Midwest states; however, the need for a good rotation crop exists nationwide. From candle makers to dairymen to retailers, Vermont voters strongly support hemp farming. Admittedly a niche market now, hemp is becoming more common in stores and products across the country every day. Over the past ten years, farmers in Canada have grown an average of 16,500 acres of hemp per year, primarily for use in food products. In Vermont, the interest in hemp includes for use in food products, as well as in quality and affordable animal bedding for the state’s estimated 140,000 cows. “Vermont’s federal delegation can now take this law to the U.S. Congress and call for a fix to this problem of farmers missing out on a very useful and profitable crop,” comments Eric Steenstra, President of Vote Hemp. “North Dakota farmers who want to grow hemp per state law are currently appealing their lawsuit in the federal courts. The real question is whether these hemp-friendly state congressional delegations feel compelled to act,” adds Steenstra. Rural Vermont’s Shollenberger states that “the Vermont law is significant for two reasons. First, no other state until now has followed North Dakota’s lead by creating real-world regulations for farmers to grow industrial hemp. Second, Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont is Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, as well as a member of the Committee on Agriculture – both relevant committees that could consider legislation. We also have a friend at the USDA in new Secretary Ed Schaffer who signed North Dakota’s hemp bill as Governor. I plan to visit Washington, DC and try to figure out what Congress and the Administration intend to do.” # # # Vote Hemp is a national, single-issue, non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for low-THC industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow this agricultural crop. More information about hemp legislation and the crop's many uses may be found at www.VoteHemp.com and www.HempIndustries.org. BETA SP and DVD Video News Releases featuring footage of hemp farming in other countries are available upon request by contacting Adam Eidinger at 202-744-2671.

[Courtesy of Drug Policy Alliance] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 1, 2008 CONTACT: Reena Szczepanski at (505) 699-0798 or Julie Roberts at (505) 983-3277 Advocates Hail Today’s One-Year Anniversary of the Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act Patients’ Right to Medical Marijuana Protected for One Year in New Mexico Drug Policy Alliance: Program Has Made Progress but Still Has Further to Go NEW MEXICO—Today marks the one-year anniversary of the start date of New Mexico’s landmark medical cannabis law, the Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act. The New Mexico Department of Health (NMDOH) has certified 160 patients with identification cards, affording them the right to protection under state law from prosecution for possessing small amounts of medical cannabis. “The New Mexico Department of Health has done a wonderful job of issuing ID cards to patients who meet the program criteria,” said Reena Szczepanski, director of Drug Policy Alliance New Mexico, “They’ve been very careful to ensure that all of the applications are verified and correct, and they’ve been a real resource for patients and physicians with questions.” The program has further to go, however. According to the state law, the Department of Health should have issued rules and regulations by October 1, 2007 to govern some aspects of the program, including the medical advisory board, the identification card system, and the production and distribution of medical cannabis. On April 15 the regulations governing the medical advisory board were published. The medical advisory board has not yet met, though the law requires the board to meet at least twice per year to consider petitions for new medical conditions. The remaining two sets of regulations have not been finalized. NMDOH convened two public hearings concerning the regulations on October 1, 2007 and January 14, 2008. Patients and advocates anxiously await these final two sets of regulations, partly to improve patient access to medical cannabis. Because these regulations are not finalized, no caregivers have been certified to assist patients in maintaining a supply of medicine, and the state licensed production and distribution system has not been implemented to ensure a safe and secure supply for patients. New Mexico’s law is the first in the nation to require the state to create a production and distribution system. “We recognize that the production and distribution system is very complex and should be carefully designed. That system will allow New Mexico to do what no other state has done - ensure a safe and secure supply of medical cannabis for patients,” said Szczepanski, “But it’s time to publish the identification card regulations and start certifying caregivers, who can help their patients until the distribution system is up and running. It’s been nearly six months since the last public hearing on these regulations.” Qualified patients whose doctors believe they would benefit from the medicinal use of cannabis will finally be protected as the New Mexico Department of Health issues the first patient identification cards next week. Applications for identification cards for both patients and their primary caregivers are available at the Department of Health’s website, http://www.health.state.nm.us/marijuana.html . Following a seven-year fight to pass legislation, New Mexico’s landmark medical cannabis law passed in the 2007 legislative session. During the legislative debate on the issue, advocates had predicted that the program would grow over five years to 250-500 patients. New Mexico was the twelfth state to endorse the use of medical cannabis and only the fourth state legislature to enact such a measure. The law protects qualified patients suffering from certain debilitating medical conditions, HIV/AIDS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, epilepsy, spinal cord injury with intractable spasticity, or admittance into hospice care, to use medical cannabis for relief of their symptoms. For questions regarding qualification for the program or the application process, please contact Melissa Milam with the Department of Health at (505) 827-2321. ###

[Courtesy of Transnational Institute] TNI Press Release June 26, 2008 Download PDF: http://www.ungassondrugs.org/images/stories/pr260608.pdf UNODC rewrites history in new World Drug Report to hide failure The new UN World Drug Report is an elaborate exercise of obscuring the failure of ten years of international drug control policy, according to the Transnational Institute (TNI). TNI is one of the leading non-governmental research institutes on drugs policy. In spite of claims made in the report released today, the world is not any closer to achieving the 10-year targets set by the 1998 UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on drugs. These goals were "eliminating or significantly reducing the illicit cultivation of coca bush, the cannabis plant and the opium poppy by the year 2008." Instead global production of opium and cocaine has significantly increased over the last ten years. According to UNODCs own figures global illicit opium production doubled in the last ten years and cocaine production increased by 20%. "There is overwhelming evidence that the current approach to drug control has failed", says Martin Jelsma, coordinator of the TNI Drugs & Democracy Programme. "Instead of setting unrealistic targets, we need to introduce a more rational, pragmatic and humane approach to the drugs phenomenon." In an attempt to draw attention away from this clear failure, the report reviews 100 years of history, claiming success in comparison with Chinese opium production and use in the early 20th century. "The UNODC is trying to hide failures behind a bad history lesson", says Jelsma. "The report not only tries to rewrite history, it is also out of touch with today's dramatic consequences of drug policies." TNI's research shows that the World Drug Report: - Deliberately overestimates opium abuse in China in the early 20th century. Opium use in China was mostly moderate and relatively non-problematic, often for medicinal use. - Wrongly attributes reductions in global opium production to the international drug control system. - Mentions unintended consequences that have resulted from international drug control policies, but ignores the fact that to improve access to medicines, respect human rights, avoid militarisation and reduce current rates of imprisonment, fundamental changes in the treaty system are necessary. On the positive side, the report concludes that the international control system needs to be refined and made 'fit for purpose,' focusing on crime prevention, harm reduction, and human rights. "The report contains many useful data and ends with meaningful proposals," says Jelsma. "Drug control policies should be based on evidence, fully respect human rights and take a harm reduction approach," says Jelsma. "Otherwise we will see another ten years of failure." TNI also released the Drug Policy Briefing, Rewriting history http://www.ungassondrugs.org/images/stories/brief26.pdf, as a response to the 2008 World Drug Report. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please contact: Drugs & Democracy Programme (TNI) Tel: +31-20-6626608 | Martin Jelsma at +31-6-55715893 ([email protected]) or Tom Blickman at +31-6-21535809 ([email protected]) See also TNI's website www.ungassondrugs.org. http://www.ungassondrugs.org launched to coincide with the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND)'s meeting in Vienna to review UN General Assembly Special Session on drugs for more background. -- Drugs & Democracy Transnational Institute (TNI) De Wittenstraat 25 | 1052 AK Amsterdam (The Netherlands) Tel +31-20-6626608 | Fax 6757176 [email protected] http://www.tni.org/drugs/

Drug Truth Network Update: 4:20 Drug War NEWS from 90.1 FM in Houston and dozens of radio affiliates in the US and Canada & on the web at www.kpft.org. We provide the "unvarnished truth about the drug war" to scores of broadcast affiliates in the US and Canada. 4:20 Drug War NEWS 06/30/08 to 07/06/08 now online (3:00 ea:) Select online at www.drugtruth.net Sun - Nurse Mary Lynn Mathre of Patients Out of Time + Eugene Fields, reporter for Orange County Register Sat - Richard Watkins, former Texas Warden, member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Fri - 4th of July PSA Special Thu - Drug War Facts with Doug McVay + "Bush of La Mancha" Wed - Poppygate Report with Glenn Greenway Tue - Terry Nelson reports for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Mon - CBS NEWS on Afghan situation Next - Century of Lies on Tues, Cutural Baggage on Wed (Now With Transcripts): PLEASE, Check Out the Transcript with Dr. Donald Tasking of National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) at: http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/?q=node/1842#comments - Cultural Baggage 12:30 PM ET, 11:30 AM CT, 10:30 AM MT & 9:30 AM PT: Prof. Arnold Trebach - Century of Lies 12:30 PM ET, 11:30 AM CT, 10:30 AM MT & 9:30 AM PT: Cliff Thornton Hundreds of our programs are available online at www.drugtruth.net, www.audioport.org and at www.radio4all.net. Check out our latest videos via www.youtube.com/fdbecker: Please become part of the solution, visit our website: www.endprohibition.org for links to the best of reform. "Prohibition is evil." - Reverend Dean Becker, Drug Truth Network Producer Dean Becker 713-849-6869 www.drugtruth.net

This town ain’t big enough for the two of us: After my 6 presentations to staffers on Monday, I entered the Metro subway to start the journey home. Tired and satisfied I was. On the platform was a young man in large cowboy hat. Experience told me he was a cowboy. Breaking out of my shyness, I walked boldly up to him and said, “This town ain’t big enough for two cowboy hats as big as ours. One of us has to leave.” In a soft Oklahoma drawl he immediately volunteered to go home. He and his dad have been in DC since May, lobbying for the National Cattlemen’s & Beef Association. DC was driving him crazy. We enjoyed 15 minutes talking about horses, ranch work and life in Texas and Oklahoma. It reminded me of my previous life & how much I miss it. It was bitter sweet. Spring Cleaning: I am now nearly done with my second round of meetings with aides in the House. One aide a year ago told me that he knew in his gut that use of drugs would skyrocket in a legal market. He stated he had no need to hear from experts on the issue. He has since left & I meet with his replacement this week. I have detected noticeable changes in the staffers the past 2 years. No doubt, the muffinhead’s replacement will be more likely to listen to science than their gut. Congressman, it is a pleasure to meet you: Earlier in the week, LEAP was contacted by a Congressional office. The Congressman wanted to meet with our representative. On Wednesday, the Congressman, his Chief of Staff and I sat down for a solid hour discussing federal prohibition and strategies forward. I am not at liberty to say more. This was the first time I have had a long discussion with a MOC. Medium step.

Chapare coca growers cut ties with USAID after years of poorly-framed, ineffectual initiatives. Prepared by the Andean Information Network, June 27, 2008 On June 24, 2008 Chapare coca grower unions announced that they will no longer sign new aid agreements with USAID.[i] This announcement comes after two decades of poorly-focused policies, which did little to improve the lives of the majority of Chapare residents, especially during forced eradication. These development programs also provoked division and friction within the region by dividing communities and linking aid to controversial coca reduction. As a result, it is not surprising that Chapare coca growers made this decision; it is only surprising that they waited so long. Furthermore, the announcement is largely a symbolic gesture; USAID plans to shift the bulk of its already restricted Chapare activities to the La Paz Yungas in the coming year, and Chapare municipalities have found other funding partners. According to the 2008 INSCR, “Relatively more resources will be devoted to the Yungas, an under-developed coca growing region ….Assistance to the Chapare will continue to decline….” As a result, the number and scope of projects affected is minimal. It is interesting to note that there has been no rejection of cooperation with the U.S. Narcotics Affairs Section or the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) in the Chapare. Coca grower representatives affirm the need for their presence, “because their policy is to fight drug trafficking, like ours, but now it’s on our terms.”[ii] Coordination on cooperative coca reduction and interdiction remain unaltered. It is crucial to look beyond the initial perception of an anti-American political stance to address the genuine popular discontent generated by these programs in order to properly re-evaluate the structure and impact of USAID initiatives. In an environment where the weight of US funding has diminished greatly, it makes sense to accept the Chapare farmers’ “no thank you,” and allow the region’s residents to determine who they would like to work with to improve the lives of their families. The long term frustration with USAID in the Chapare is real, but the threat of violence is highly unlikely. There is no apparent backlash against USAID workers. According to MAS congressman Asterio Romero, “We cordially request that they (USAID) leave; we won’t use force or take over their facilities, but we want them to go quickly.”[iii] While some cocaleros may have said some provocative things such as calling the Chapare a “USAID-free territory,”[iv] USAID has not been entirely expelled from the Chapare – the few ongoing projects will most likely continue until their designated end dates. Coca growers are simply moving toward other sources of aid and away from the conditions and failures of USAID projects. The cocaleros made their decision to reject USAID at the same time that several large projects have ended and new projects through the European Union funded Social Control and Integrated Development initiatives – which focus on working with local communities and do not impose coca eradication – were launched. A history of failure and friction During the past ten years, AIN, WOLA and other investigators have repeatedly highlighted the inherent flaws of USAID alternative development initiatives in the Chapare, especially during forced eradication. Key areas of concern included: - Externally-designed and imposed initiatives developed without significant consultation with Chapare farmers. - The great majority of funds dedicated to overhead, salaries of foreign consultants and other costs. “Eighty percent of these resources went to pay the salaries of the Alternative Development personnel; twenty percent went to production, and only six percent for the producers. We only got crumbs, and we are still poor.”[v] - From 1998-2003, farmers could only have access to USAID assistance after the complete eradication of their coca crop. As a result, families with no alternative income went hungry before agricultural initiatives kicked in, forcing them to replant coca. - USAID projects refused to work directly with coca growers unions, although these strong organizations could have helped facilitate the implementation of projects. Instead, they formed parallel ‘associations” and demanded that farmers leave unions to receive assistance. This practice generated divisions and conflict within Chapare communities. - Community promoters were asked to inform USAID contractors about their neighbors who continued to plant coca or spoke out against alternative development, further heightening tensions in the region. - Poorly-designed agricultural initiatives lack affordable transportation mechanisms and markets. Many farmers found that it was cheaper to let their products rot in the field than it was to take them to market. - The majority of these projects failed due to impracticality of transporting heavy produce without proper roads, the low-market price offered locally for fruit, and the inability for small-scale Bolivian producers to compete on international markets. - A USAID contracted lawyer filed narcoterrorism charges against over one hundred coca growers, the bulk of the Six Federations leadership, for attacks on alternative development installations. - USAID took over the bulk of the funding of FAO projects, like the Jatun Sacha forestry initiative, forcing the project to incorporate US conditioning on coca eradication. - Unlike the more cost effective European Union initiative, Praedac, the US refused until 2003 to work with coca grower municipalities in the Chapare. - USAID placed increasing emphasis on work with private enterprise in the Chapare, which failed to pass profits on to or fairly compensate their employees. A short-lived policy shift In late 2003, after the resignation of Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, USAID decided to begin to work collaboratively with coca grower municipalities in the Chapare, in an effort to alleviate the high tensions around US programs in the region. Coca growers welcomed the change and actively participated – a significant shift in acceptance of USAID initiatives in the region. - Unfortunately, with the election of Evo Morales, USAID froze these joint initiatives for a year, wreaking havoc with municipal planning. In the interim, Chapare mayors sought out and obtained significant alternative funding from the EU, European governments and Venezuela, without any of the political strings and conditioning attached to US efforts. - Even though they had frozen funding, the US claimed that the lack of violence in the region was due to “a new, integrated alternative development approach in the Chapare [which] provides for participation by municipalities in GOB decisions on development, implementation and monitoring of programs. This has helped reduce coca-related conflict and strengthen local commitment to licit development.”[vi] Coca growers were understandably angered by this misleading statement. - When USAID initiatives resumed in the region, they were increasingly irrelevant. New requirements, such as renewed conditioning on coca reduction, although now on a global and not family level, and the obligation to sign an agreement certifying that recipient communities were “terrorist-free zones” exacerbated this situation. In addition, after the election of Morales, USAID began to block meetings of NGOs, such as AIN and WOLA, with its Chapare contractors. When asked, one high-ranking USAID official in Bolivia explained that, “It would be problematic to allow contractors to speak in the name of the US government,” and said that AIN could tour alternative development facilities escorted by USAID personnel. This lack of transparency is quite surprising, considering that in prior years, both organizations had always had free access to all USAID projects, even during the peak of violent conflicts. AIN attempted to find contact information for over twenty USAID contractors within Bolivian, could only identify nine, and when contacted, only one organization accepted a meeting. This lack of transparency around USAID initiatives is problematic and inexplicable, when nongovernmental investigation in the past had led to significant improvement in programs. With the history of failed alternative development, lack of transparency, and conditionality of coca eradication, it is hardly surprising that Chapare growers have rejected further ties to USAID funding. In a region where local unions and grassroots organizations were already highly politically mobilized, these programs served to undermine the history of community organizing. After living through the tensions and failures associated with USAID, Morales’ and his administration’s mistrust of USAID initiatives is hardly inexplicable. In light of repeated Morales administration accusations of USAID funding of the opposition’s political agendas, the proposed doubling of US assistance in the FY2009 Budget Request from economic development to “rule of law, good governance, electoral processes, consensus building, civil society and education,” has intensified these underlying tensions. Chapare growers are moving toward different funding sources such as the European Union and Venezuela, which come with far less strings attached and do not condition assistance on reducing the coca crop. The MAS administration, while critical of many US policies and frustrated with conditional aid, continues to work with and receive funding from the US, especially anti-narcotics programs. Voices from the Chapare tell the real story. The mayor of Villa Tunari said, “We don’t want USAID anymore, if they are going to cooperate, it would have to be without conditions like the European Union.”[vii] Time to re-evaluate US development initiatives Although it may be tempting to characterize Chapare coca growers as ungrateful “beneficiaries,” blindly tied to their leader’s anti-US political agenda, their rejection of USAID projects is an important example of negative impact of development policy tied to political agendas. It is important to note that more pragmatic, grounded U.S.-funded development efforts in Bolivia, such as the Interamerican Foundation projects, continue to be well-received in all departments, and by MAS and prefectural officials. Especially on the eve of a national election, the predictable rejection of USAID assistance by coca growers should serve as a wake-up call to US planners and policymakers. It is crucial to reassess the design, orientation and objectives of US-funded development effects to meaningfully involve the participants and eliminate political conditioning. Background reading on USAID Alternative Development in Bolivia Failures of alternative development: Linda Farthing’s “Rethinking Alternative Development” Political conditioning of USAID: Linda Farthing and Benjamin Kohl’s: “Conflicting Agenda’s: The Politics of Development Aid in Drug-Producing Areas” Linda Farthing and Kathryn Ledebur’s: “The Beat goes On: The US War on Coca” 2006 USAID funding freeze and its impact: Coletta Youngers and Kathryn Ledebur: “Update on Drug Policy Issues in Bolivia” Failures of USAID and potential benefits of EU projects: Kathryn Ledebur and Coletta A. Younger’s “Balancing Act: Bolivia’s Drug Control Advances and Challenges” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [i] “Usaid deja el trópico y EEUU teme por la seguridad de su personal.” Los Tiempos, 26 June, 2008. [ii] Cocaleros piden la salida de otras agencias cooperantes.” La Razón 27 June 2008. [iii] Ibid. [iv] “Funcionarios de Usaid salen del Chapare,” La Rázon, 26 June 2008. [v] “Cocaleros piden la salida de otras agencias cooperantes.” La Razón 27 June 2008. [vi] The 2007 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report is available at http://www.sta te.gov/p/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2007/vol1/html/80855.htm [vii] “Funcionarios de Usaid salen del Chapare.”

Virginia: Governor Receptive to Disenfranchisement Reform for those Charged with Non-violent Offenses The Washington Post editorialized in support of Virginia Governor Timothy Kaine's effort to re- enfranchise citizens who have completed their felony sentences. "We have no reason to believe Mr. Kaine is acting on political motives, but even if he were, his actions affirm a truth that all but a few states have accepted: Felons who pay their debt to society should not be denied the right to vote," the editorial states. Virginia is overly restrictive in its disenfranchisement policies and should not permanently exclude individuals with felony records from the voting process, the Post contends. Appearing on WTOP's "Ask the Governor" program earlier this week broadcast in the Washington, D.C. area, Gov. Kaine expressed his willingness to support changes in the Commonwealth's laws - but only to those convicted of non-violent offenses. "When somebody wants to participate, I think we ought to have procedures that enable them to once they've shown that [they] can do fine in civil society," he said. "It would have to be a constitutional amendment that would give the legislature the power to set up that kind of format and I think it should be in most instances, more automatic." In response to a Daily Press column , Janice Puffenberger commented on the issue of offering formerly incarcerated individuals a second chance in society. "The fact that we refuse to let felons return to full membership in society after paying their dues, by refusing them the right to vote, leads to recidivism," she writes. We don't give a break to those who make mistakes, so technically their problem is really our problem." Florida: To the Governor, Congrats … and Continue On "Gov. Charlie Crist is to be congratulated" for his part in helping to restore the rights of 115,000 citizens with felony offenses, a St. Petersburg Times editorial states. As more await voting rights eligibility notices, Crist has the option of streamlining the entire civil rights restoration process, which would include allowing those with felony offenses to apply for professional licenses. According to the Times, if Crist moves in this direction, the state could return to the Executive Clemency rules of 1975 under Gov. Reuben Askew, when restoration of rights was automatic after completion of parole or probation. The move could further eliminate the current backlog that the Parole Commission is experiencing as it continues to go through a backlog of 60,000 restoration cases. An additional 4,000 applications are submitted each month for review by the Commission. Massachusetts: Voting Not a "Privilege for the Virtuous" "Voting is a fundamental right, not a privilege for the virtuous," contends a Boston Globe editorial. Commenting on the Brennan Center for Justice's recent study on the various laws and impacts of disenfranchisement, the editorial further states that the fact that voting rights vary state by state is "bizarre." As recently as eight years ago, Massachusetts allowed those incarcerated to vote. Now, however, voting rights are restored upon release from prison. - - - - - - Help The Sentencing Project continue to bring you news and updates on disenfranchisement! Make a contribution today. Contact Information -- e-mail: [email protected], web: http://www.sentencingproject.org