Christmas Bud Life logo image

The only marijuana magazine bringing you the stories of other pot smokers and smugglers.



Home | Quick Hits | Growin' Our Own | Pipeline | Bare Your Buds | Head Sounds | Happy Trails | Dictionary for Heads | Cream of the Crop Reviews | Comments | Submit Your Stories | Merchandise | Score | Advertise | Grassroots | Smoke Signals | Previous Editions

Quick Hits (page 4)


Who couldn't love COPS?

By: Norml

imageThe federal Community Oriented Policing Services program, to be more specific. Unveiled in 1994 with great flourish by President Clinton, it promised to make Americans safer by putting 100,000 new police officers on the streets.

Now President Bush wants to cut funding for the program - and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) is upset. "I led that fight in the Senate to put 100,000 cops on the streets," he recently told "ABC News This Week."

"They're now cutting them," even though COPS has "reduced crime."

The reality is a bit different. Two studies, including one published by the Justice Department, show that the program hasn't come close to fielding that many new officers. (The number is closer to 57,000, and many are officers who have simply been reassigned from desk jobs.) And its goals - to curb neighborhood crime by encouraging innovative and effective policing styles - haven't been met.

But the worst part is that it's turning some police officials into criminals - or at least serial misusers of federal funds.

That's what has been happening in Massachusetts. Take the Worcester Police Department, which was awarded $4.9 million in COPS funds to hire 55 new officers and redeploy more than a dozen others. According to the Justice Department, Worcester used a substantial portion of its COPS money to pay the salaries of officers already employed by the department. Meanwhile, the city cut its police force by 27 officers - and then couldn't show that it had redeployed officers to street duty.

Quincy didn't do much better. COPS officials claim that the city's police department hired 39 new officers with $2.9 million in grants. But the Justice Department discovered that it hired only 17 new officers. Quincy was also supposed to hire 10 civilian clerks with $231,000 to move officers from desk duty, but it never did so.

Then there's the Massachusetts State Police, which received more than $5 million in COPS funds to hire and redeploy officers. It was supposed to hire 56 new officers, but the Justice Department found that it downsized its force by 151 officers. In addition, police officials used almost $400,000 to pay for such impermissible expenses as vacation reimbursements.

Federal auditors have found similar problems in numerous other communities nationwide, including El Paso, Texas; Morehouse Parish, La.; Inglewood, Calif.; Live Oak, Fla., and even the campus police force at American University in Washington, D.C. In each instance, the police agencies didn't hire the officers they promised to hire, didn't keep them as long as required to get the grants or spent the money for unauthorized purposes.

A few localities went further.

The police chief of Novinger, Mo., for example, received probation and was ordered to pay restitution for allegedly keeping COPS checks for personal use. In northwest Minnesota, the White Earth Band of Chippewa Indians got $2 million to team with police from neighboring counties to curb crime in Indian communities. Instead, the tribe used the money to set up speed traps, failed to report crimes to surrounding counties as they had agreed to do, and tried alleged violators in tribal courts, even though those courts have no power to prosecute speeding violations against tribe members.

The Justice Department continues to chase $400,000 in misused COPS money from Oxford, Mich., which disbanded its police department in 1999 after voters twice refused to continue funding it. Local politicians are scrambling to find a way to repay or reach a settlement with federal officials, and the former police chief faces criminal charges, including alleged misuse of COPS funds.

The officers in charge of the COPS money in these communities used it to solve what they considered more pressing problems. The rules of the program - that the federal government pays decreasing percentages of officer salaries until, after three years, the communities pick up the tab - became a trap. Communities found they couldn't afford the officers, so they robbed Peter to pay Paul until the auditors caught up.

Why not take the approach President Bush has recommended? Eliminate COPS hiring grants and consolidate other federal law-enforcement grant programs into one Justice Department program where money would be dispensed only to those who have a plan to use it and the wherewithal to measure their plan's effectiveness.

One can only hope that Sen. Kerry and other COPS supporters realize that anything less does a disservice to those trying to fight crime - and to the taxpayers who foot the bill.


Click here for more Quick Hits.



Tan 'n' Trends

Tan 'n' Trends


Growin' Our Own (page 4)


America in a Fix

By: John L. Kane

imageOur present War on Drugs began in 1972 when pot-smoking demonstrators against the Vietnam War mocked all authority, ridiculed President Nixon and challenged the very assumption of his authority. His response has resulted in a society subjected to draconian remedies. The War on Drugs - through stringent, puritanical measures - attempts to set the public right. Not only is justice not done, it is threatened and derided.

Our national drug policy hasn't changed significantly with changes in administration. It emphasizes interdiction, police action and imprisonment with a pious and pseudo-reverential nod to treatment and education. The policy persists in spite of all evidence, even the government's own, demonstrating that it is foolish and unworkable.

And despite the billions of dollars spent each year in drug enforcement programs, less that $1 out of every $100 is spent on research and evaluation to find out why it isn't working. As recently as March 29 of last year the National Research Council of the National Academy of Science and the National Academy of Engineering advised that the nation's ability to evaluate whether the drug policies even work is no better now than it was twenty 20 years ago when the War on Drugs was escalated from bravado to guns and blood.

Without hard, well-researched information, it is not even possible to articulate a new or improved policy. All that is left is the frequently expressed inanity that changing our drug policy would "send the wrong message to our children.''

In this darkest of comedies, the government hasn't the slightest notion what message our children are presently receiving. Perhaps we should send a message to our children about the causes of death in the United States. We would have to tell them that tobacco is legal and, at 430,700 deaths per year, is the leading cause of substance-abuse deaths; that alcohol is legal and 110,600 die from it each year; that adverse reactions to legal prescription drugs cause 32,000 fatalities a year; that 30,500 commit suicide; 18,000 are homicide victims; and that 7,600 people die each year from taking anti-inflammatory drugs such as aspirin. Of course, we don't want to send them the wrong message that the total number of deaths caused by marijuana is zero.

Perhaps the message we should be sending our children is that local, state and federal governments now spend more than $9 billion per year to imprison 458,000 drug offenders. What would be the cost of our current drug policy if it were succeeding rather than failing? Incarcerating all cocaine users in the U.S. would cost $74 billion, but only after constructing 3.5 million more prison beds at an initial cost of $175 billion. It would cost $365 billion to jail everyone who smoked marijuana last year - five times the total national, state and local spending for all police, courts and prisons combined. To contain this crowd behind walls, we would need a cadre of guards and other prison employees larger than all of our military forces combined. These projections are not entirely academic: The nation is completing the construction, on average, of a new prison every week.

More costly than money, however,is the price we now pay for this failed policy in terms of the decline in public safety, the breakdown of our criminal justice system, the erosion of our civil liberties and the pervasive public disrespect of the law. Good citizens, who are otherwise law-abiding, ignore or evade drug laws. With literally tens of millions of people using illegal drugs or related to those who do, an ever-increasing part of the population has become cynical about our laws, legal system and political process.

Each year since 1989, more people have been sent to prison for drug offenses than for violent crimes. At the same time, only one in five burglaries is reported and only one in 20 reported burglaries ends in arrest. Yet detectives continue to be reassigned from burglary details to investigation of street sales of drugs. The cost for this particular aspect of our national folly is absorbed in significantly increased insurance premiums.

Furthermore, interdiction efforts are utterly futile.

Using data supplied by the federal Office of National Drug Control Policy, we learn that the price of heroin has dropped, not increased, while its production has risen greatly. The illegal market price of cocaine in 1981was $275.12 per gram and by 1996 it had dropped to $94.52. Because a kilogram of raw opium sells for $90 in Pakistan, but is worth $290,000 in the United States, law enforcement seizures have little, if any, impact on operations or profitability.

And, as New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis observed on April 28, 2001, "The effort to stop cocaine exports from Peru has cut the flow from there substantially. But that reduction has been more than made up by a huge increase in coca cultivation and production in Colombia. As Plan Columbia, the military anti-drug program, gets under way there, production is reportedly beginning to shift to Ecuador." Lewis listed the costs to other nations of our current drug policies: the rise of drug gangs, the poisoning of peasants from the spraying of undesirable crops, the corruption of governments and increased deaths by violence. "Yet,'' he notes, "the amount of cocaine and heroin entering the United States is as great as ever.'' Police agencies still need to protect the public by holding those who cause accidents or commit crimes while under the influence of drugs and alcohol fully accountable for their acts, but we must get them out of the business of financing their operations through the seizure and forfeiture of private property. The costs of law enforcement should be funded from the public treasury so that we can determine how much the implementation of government policies is costing. In other and harsher words, we need to terminate the symbiotic business relationship that law enforcement has with the illegal drug industry. Each scratches the other's back.

Indeed, the two groups who would suffer most from an elimination of the black market in drugs would be, in nearly equal measure, organized crime and law enforcement. Those who would benefit the most would be the people, especially children, who have never before tried drugs because there would be no economic incentive to turn them into customers. Those who are already addicted or abusing drugs or who will no matter what law obtains can be treated rather than imprisoned at a cost of one-seventh the amount needed to imprison them.

And let's not forget the "other victims" of the so-called War on Drugs - those people and businesses who can't get into court to have their cases heard; the victims of traditional crimes such as burglary, rape and robbery who can't get justice because the police are tied up with drug cases; merchants going bankrupt because the police no longer have time to investigate or prosecute bad-check cases; battered spouses whose mates are not sent to jail because there's only room there for pot smokers; physicians and other medical care providers who cannot treat their patients according to conscience and the discipline of their profession; the sick and dying who endure unnecessary pain; children whose parents are taken from them; the police who have given up honorable and challenging work investigating and detecting crime because they have become addicted to and dependent upon an informant-based system reminiscent of Lenin's dreaded Cheka; families forced to select one member to plead guilty lest the entire family be charged; prosecutors and defense attorneys who have turned the temples of justice into plea-bargaining bazaars; and, most painful to me, judges who let this happen and don't say a word.

In order to deal successfully with drug abuse, this nation must abandon its failed policies and rhetoric of misinformation. I suggest that federal drug law should be severely cut back. The importing of unauthorized drugs should continue to be a federal crime and the regulation of manufacturing drugs for distribution in interstate commerce should likewise be a federal concern, but the several states should regulate sales and decide which activities are criminal - such as selling or inducing minors to take drugs - and which drugs, if any, should be prohibited. In sum, the policy should be to end the black market, end the freebooting financing of law enforcement by forfeiture and treat those drug and alcohol abusers who want to be treated.

At the present time, our national drug policy is inconsistent with the nature of justice, abusive of the nature of authority and ignorant of the compelling force of forgiveness. Our drug laws, indeed, are more mocked than feared. These are the messages we are sending our children.

[Ed. note: John L. Kane is a United States senior district judge in Denver, Colorado]


Click here for more Growin' Our Own.


Pipeline (page 4)


Big Brother on Steroids

By: The Libertarian Party (Press release)

imageA lobbying campaign to persuade the U.S. Senate to block the Pentagon's Total Information Awareness (TIA) program came up short -- but the Libertarian Party has vowed to continue to try to kill the massive surveillance system.

In mid-November, the Libertarian Party joined an emergency coalition of more than 30 organizations to try to scuttle the TIA project, charging that it was an "Orwellian intrusion" into the lives of American citizens.

The TIA program will create a massive database that the federal government will use to try to "detect patterns" of terrorist activity.

On November 18, LP Communications Director George Getz signed a letter, drafted by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), that urged U.S. Senators to pass an amendment to the then-pending Homeland Security Act that would halt the development of the program.

The letter, addressed to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, noted that "there are no systems of oversight or accountability contemplated in the TIA project."

The letter noted that several major newspapers -- including the New York Times and the Washington Post -- oppose the TIA system as an assault on privacy rights.

"We urge you to act immediately to stop the development of this unconstitutional system of public surveillance," said the letter.

Also signing the anti-TIA letter was the Free Congress Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Eagle Forum, the University of Michigan School of Information, the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and others.

However, the U.S. Senate passed the Homeland Security Act on November 19 without the proposed amendment. President George W. Bush signed the bill into law on November 25.

Because the TIA program is so dangerous to the nation's civil liberties, Libertarians will continue to work to try to stop it, said Getz.

"The threat to privacy that such an un-American system could have is far-reaching," he said. "The Libertarian Party remains firm in its opposition to any government database that amasses personal information on Americans."

The TIA system, which has a $200 million budget this year, is being developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

According to news reports, the project is currently in the development and testing stage, and will not be implemented for several years.

When completed, it will feature a database that includes the telephone, bank, and medical records of every American, as well as airline ticket information, educational records, gun purchases, drivers licenses, ATM transactions, rental car contracts, arrests, flying lessons, phone calls, and e-mail.

Pentagon spokespeople said the database will allow them to spot "suspicious" activity -- such as a person who purchases explosives and then buys a one-way airline ticket -- that might indicate a terrorist plot.

Eventually, the database is scheduled to be connected to a system of biometric identification such as face recognition technology or digital fingerprints. The project is being directed by former Navy Rear Adm. John Poindexter.

The Libertarian Party views the program as "Big Brother on steroids," said Getz.

"This project sends a message that every American should find repugnant," he said. "Namely, that politicians and bureaucrats view America as a sea of criminal suspects whose private behavior must be tracked, catalogued, and analyzed, just in case they commit a crime. So much for the presumption of innocence and the right to privacy."

Although the U.S. Senate refused to pass the amendment that would have blocked funding for the Total Information Awareness system, Getz said it may still be possible for public pressure to kill the program.

"We hope that a public outcry similar to that which crushed the proposed Terrorism Information and Prevention System (TIPS) earlier this year will also rise up to defeat this legislation," he said.

"The Libertarian Party urges everyone to contact their representatives in Washington, DC, and speak out against the Terrorism Information Awareness system immediately."

Since no legislation has been filed to specifically abolish the TIA, Libertarians should call their U.S. House Representatives and U.S. Senators, and ask them to introduce such a bill, he said.

To contact Congress, call the U.S. House switchboard toll-free: (888) 449-3511. For e-mail or mailing information, visit: www.congress.org.


Click here for more Pipeline.



Disclaimer | Privacy policy | Home
© 2002 Bud Life. All rights reserved.