Apparently-to: rich.woods@245.genesplicer.org
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 17:53:02 -0500
From: eplurib@megalinx.net (J.J. & Helen Johnson)
So, you think the ballot box works, America ?
New York Times
U.S. Government to Prosecute Doctors Who Prescribe Marijuana    
December 23, 1996
By TIM GOLDEN 
 
 WASHINGTON -- Struggling to limit the effect of recent ballot initiatives
in California and Arizona that relax restrictions on the medical use of
marijuana and other illegal drugs, federal officials say they plan to
prosecute and strip prescription licenses from doctors who help supply such
drugs to even seriously ill people. 
 The officials said that after an intense and sometimes unwieldy debate over
the past six weeks about how the federal government should respond to the
new state laws, the Justice Department has decided against filing suit to
try to block either of the measures in court. 
 Instead, officials said, the Clinton administration will undertake a
public-relations offensive to reiterate the health dangers of illegal drugs,
leave it to state and local police to arrest people for marijuana
possession, and focus federal law-enforcement efforts on the doctors who
help to provide otherwise illegal drugs and the dealers who distribute them. 
 "I think we are going to end up with a smaller group of these physicians
than we ourselves once expected," the head of the Drug Enforcement
Administration, Thomas Constantine, said in an interview. "And we are going
to take very, very serious action against them." 
 The plan to move against the doctors -- both by revoking the DEA
registration they need to prescribe controlled drugs and, in more serious
cases, by prosecuting them -- is the centerpiece of a package of measures
that were recommended to President Clinton on Friday by his drug-policy
chief, Gen. Barry McCaffrey, officials said. The plan was based on the
recommendations of a half-dozen Cabinet departments. 
=========================== ENOUGH SAID =========================
The remainder of this article follows my comments.
First, a word from our forefathers:
 
  ...He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary
  for the public good...
This was the first of 27 grievances listed in the Declaration of 
dependence.
Are you furious yet ????
Okay. It normally isn't popular for patriots to dive into the "legalization
of drugs" debate. But when it is plainly IN YOUR FACE that the federal
goverment chooses to IGNORE the will of the electorate, even when they
operate within the law, something has to be done.
Here's a suggestion for Doctors in CA and AZ:
Make a public statement vowing NOT to treat any DEA employee if a doctor is
prosecuted under this executive order. This boycott could even be expanded
to include other federal workers.
It's time for some good'ol CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE !!!!
Any doctor who complies with this federal THREAT helps throw the 10
amendment out the window, and deserves whatever they get from the FED's.
Make your stand now, and take the sting out of the Feds' next move.
And for those who voted for Doctors to LEGALLY prescribe certain drugs for
their patients...
... Welcome to the Revolution.
==============================================================
A formal announcement of the administration's approach is not expected until
early January. But while Clinton has yet to approve the package, several
officials involved in its creation said some basic elements of the federal
response to the state measures were almost certain to go ahead as proposed. 
 McCaffrey and other administration officials contend that the two
initiatives represent a significant threat to the nation's drug-control
strategy. They complain that at a time when drug use among teen-agers is
rising sharply, the state laws send a resonant message that marijuana is not
only less than harmful, it may be medically valuable. 
 "I would have preferred to see a straight-up vote on legalization, because
it would not have won in either state," McCaffrey said. "When it came up
under the guise of the 'compassionate use' of marijuana, we got the worst of
both worlds." 
 The Arizona law, which opponents are vowing to amend or repeal in the
Legislature next year, allows sick people to receive illegal drugs for pain
relief or the treatment of certain illnesses if two licensed physicians
concur on its use and offer scientific research to show that it is
appropriate. The California measure, which is at once less precise and more
difficult to overturn, decriminalizes the possession of marijuana by
patients and care givers if its use is "recommended" by a physician. 
 "It sounds like they are retreating," Sam Vagenas, coordinator of the
campaign for the Arizona measure, said of the federal plan. "Barry McCaffrey
has been saying that the Arizona initiative was in conflict with federal
law. Now they're saying they're not going to file suit against it, and
they're not going to go after people for possession. We consider that a
major victory." 
 Law-enforcement officials said the government also will not challenge other
key parts of the Arizona initiative, Proposition 200, which, if fully
implemented, would limit the prison sentences that can be applied to certain
drug offenders. 
 Officials familiar with the memorandum sent to Clinton on Friday by the
general's Office of National Drug Control Policy said it did call for the
Department of Health and Human Services to wage a campaign to discredit the
notion that smoking marijuana has medicinal benefits -- a campaign for which
they said there is ample scientific evidence. 
 Also, the officials said, McCaffrey's office recommended that government
agencies remind Americans that the medical use of marijuana and other drugs
will not be accepted as an excuse in the application of drug-testing laws to
airline pilots, truck drivers, members of the armed forces and others.
Transportation Secretary Federico Pena issued the first such warning last
week. But some law-enforcement officials say that the planned message is
unlikely to be forceful enough. 
 "No one in the government is drawing a conclusion from all of this, a sound
bite to argue, and that's where they beat us," said one senior
law-enforcement official. Referring to McCaffrey, he added "This is a debate
that he's going to have to take to the American people." 
 Officials now acknowledge that the two initiatives, which the voters
approved in November by comfortable margins, took the Clinton administration
largely by surprise. 
 While wealthy supporters of the measures poured money into television
advertisements that emphasized compassion in California and policy reform in
Arizona, state and federal officials opposed to the propositions admit that
they campaigned only intermittently and, for the most part, ineffectively. 
 "I'm not sure anyone really recognized how these laws developed and what
their impact would be," Constantine said. 
 For weeks after the initiatives passed, the confusion continued, several
officials said. While some in the administration vowed to impose federal
drug laws whatever the states did, U.S. attorneys in California and Arizona
cautioned that unless the prosecutions were chosen carefully, they could
swamp courts and jails with minor possession cases and make martyrs of
seriously ill people who would insist that marijuana helped to relieve their
pain. 
 Federal agents and prosecutors in fact pursue only a small fraction of the
country's drug cases. In most districts, officials said, U.S. attorneys only
bring federal charges if a marijuana case involves the cultivation of at
least 500 plants grown indoors, 1,000 plants grown outdoors, or the
possession of more than 1,000 pounds. 
 Federal law-enforcement officials said they will prosecute large-scale
marijuana distributors, including buyers' clubs like one in San Francisco
that was raided by state agents last summer. They say they will also seek
out doctors who become the source of drug recommendations for many patients,
using surveillance and informants if they cannot identify suspects by
word-of-mouth, news articles and the Internet. 
 Federal law-enforcement officials said doctors could be prosecuted under
laws against conspiring to distribute drugs, drug possession and improper
record-keeping. 
 Administration officials acknowledged that their proposed strategy relies
on state and local officials, some of whom support the new laws, continuing
to arrest people for drug possession. Those arrested with small amounts of
marijuana will be able to argue in court that they had a medical
authorization for the drugs, they will then have to identify their doctor. 
 The Federal Controlled Substances Act allows the attorney general to deny,
suspend or revoke a license to prescribe controlled substances from any
physician who acts in a manner "inconsistent with the public interest." The
sanction would not necessarily affect a doctor's license to practice 
medicine. 
 Although some doctors advocate the use of marijuana for patients suffering
from nausea caused by chemotherapy, eye pressure related to glaucoma and the
wasting that often afflicts people with AIDS, national medical and health
associations generally reject its use. 
 Federal law requires that doctors only prescribe a drug if it has a proven
medical purpose. In a 1992 brief, the drug agency ruled there was none for
--- GIGO+ sn 132 at genesplicer vsn 0.99 pl3
--- DLG Pro v1.16g1/PDQMail v2.60
worth! (1:209/245)
---------------