Back to Map

MAPTalk-Digest Thursday, December 7 2006 Volume 06 : Number 144

001 US ND: State to begin taking applications for hemp farmers
    From: Allan Erickson <>
002 [FWD] Congress To Vote On Poisoning People
    From: Richard Lake <>
003 Fw: Congress to Vote on Poisoning People
    From: Rick Steeb <>
004 US CA: Judge Tosses County's Medical Marijuana Challenge
    From: Richard Lake <>


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subj: 001 US ND: State to begin taking applications for hemp farmers
From: Allan Erickson <>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 22:26:08 -0800

State to begin taking applications for hemp farmers
http://www.in-forum.com/ap/index.cfm?page=view&id=D8LQADC01

By JAMES MacPHERSON Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press - Monday, December 04, 2006

North Dakota farmers may start applying for state licenses to grow 
industrial hemp next year but no seed may be sown until federal drug 
agents approve, Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson says.

"We'll see where it goes," said Johnson, who has been pushing 
industrial hemp as a crop in North Dakota for more than a decade. 
"Hopefully, North Dakota will be the first state where producers can 
grow hemp for legitimate uses."

The federal Drug Enforcement Agency remains a major hurdle for would-be 
growers of marijuana's biological cousin.

Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem said last month that the rules crafted 
by North Dakota's Agriculture Department comply with state law. A state 
legislative committee approved the rules on Monday, with no changes, 
Johnson said.

"Nobody has ever put something like this in front of the DEA," he said. 
"We want to make industrial hemp happen.

"We have put these rules together in such an airtight fashion that we 
know we are not going to have illicit drugs being grown in North 
Dakota," Johnson said."

Hemp contains trace amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, a banned 
substance, and it falls under federal anti-drug rules, said Steve 
Robertson, a DEA special agent in Washington.

"There is no differentiation between hemp and marijuana," Robertson 
said. "The regulations for hemp are the same as they are for 
marijuana."

The rules, which take effect on Jan. 1, require a criminal background 
check on farmers who want to grow hemp. The sale of hemp and the 
location of the hemp fields must be documented.

The application fee for the state license will cost at least $150, said 
Ken Junkert, the state agriculture department's plant industries 
manager. He said the total amount of the application fee won't be known 
until next month.

Industrial hemp would be an alternative cash crop for North Dakota 
farmers because it's used to make food, clothing, cosmetics, paper, 
rope and other products, Johnson said. It's the only crop that would 
have to be licensed in North Dakota, he and Junkert said.

Johnson and Junkert said several North Dakota farmers are interested in 
getting a state license, despite the unknowns with DEA.

"I don't think there is going to be a stampede, but there are going to 
be some farmers who will want to go through this process with the 
intent of at least planting a small amount of industrial hemp this 
spring," Johnson said.

It would be up to farmers to seek the final approval from federal drug 
agents once the state license is approved, Johnson said.

"Only after they do that can they can humbly ask the DEA for its stamp 
of approval," Johnson said.

Robertson said the DEA would review each application fairly under the 
law.

Johnson said farmers who want to grow hemp might go to court if the 
state issues them a license but the DEA ignores or denies it.

"It's possible their (DEA's) response will be no response," Johnson 
said. "The license holder then would probably be in a position to take 
the matter to some sort of legal proceedings."

------------------------------

Subj: 002 [FWD] Congress To Vote On Poisoning People
From: Richard Lake <>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 10:05:43 -0800

CONGRESS TO VOTE ON POISONING PEOPLE THIS WEEK

Dear Fellow Reformer,

Earlier this year we warned you about a bill in Congress that would 
revive controversial research on the use of toxic, mold-like fungi 
called mycoherbicides to kill illicit drug crops in other countries. 
This provision could unleash an environmental disaster of monumental 
proportions. But Congressman Mark Souder and Senators Hatch and Biden 
are rushing it to the House and Senate floors this week. Here are 
three things you can do:

1) Call your two U.S. Senators and one U.S. Representative today or tomorrow.

If you don't know who they are, simply call the Capitol Switchboard 
at (202) 224-3121 and give them your address. They'll connect you 
directly with their offices. You can also look them up online at 
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm 
and http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt.asp?u=12750&l=134462

When you get a staffer on the phone, politely say something like:

"My name is [your name] and I live in [your city]. I'm calling to 
urge [the Senator or Representative] to oppose the ONDCP 
Reauthorization bill if it comes to the floor this week, especially 
its mycoherbicide provision.  Please let me know how [the 
Senator/Representative] votes."

If they ask, the mycoherbicide section is Section 1111. The bill 
being brought to the floor is a combination of a House and Senate 
bill, so it doesn't have a bill number yet. It will be brought to the 
Senate floor under a unanimous consent agreement and to the House 
floor under suspension of the rules--both of which limit debate.

2) Phone calls are the most effective way of stopping this bill.  But 
if you don't feel comfortable making calls or you don't have the 
time, we urge you to fax or e-mail your elected officials instead. 
You can contact your two Senators at 
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm 
and your one Representative at 
http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt.asp?u=12750&l=134462

3) Please forward this alert to everyone you know. Unless thousands 
of Americans contact Congress, this bill could pass by the end of this week.

Sincerely,

Bill Piper Drug Policy Alliance Network

MORE INFORMATION

Mycoherbicides have already been extensively studied over the last 
thirty years - and the results make it clear that they are not an 
option for controlling crops of coca or opium poppies. They attack 
indiscriminately, destroying fruit and vegetable crops, and sickening 
animals and humans as well. The toxins mycoherbicides produce 
contaminate soil for years, so that nothing can grow where they have 
been. Mycoherbicides are so destructive that governments have even 
stockpiled them as weapons!

Incredibly, the proposal now before Congress advocates using 
mycoherbicides in "field studies" in countries such as Colombia and 
Afghanistan - something the world would certainly see as an act of 
biological warfare.

Office of National Drug Control Policy head John Walters spoke out 
against further mycoherbicide research last year, but this terrible 
proposal is now part of the ONDCP Reauthorization Act.

For more information on mycoherbicides, read the recent report 
commissioned by DPA, "Repeating Mistakes of the Past: Another 
Mycoherbicide Research Bill" (PDF: 
http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt.asp?u=12750&l=134463).

Here's the full text of the mycoherbicide provision in the ONDCP 
Reauthorization Act:

Sec. 1111 Requirement for Scientific Study of Mycoherbicide in 
Illicit Drug Crop Eradication

Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act, the 
Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall submit 
to the Congress a report that includes a plan to conduct, on an 
expedited basis, a scientific study of the use of mycoherbicide as a 
means of illicit drug crop elimination by an appropriate Government 
scientific research entity, include a complete and thorough 
scientific peer review. The study shall include an evaluation of the 
likely human health and environmental impacts of mycoherbicides 
derived from fungus naturally existing in the soil.

------------------------------

Subj: 003 Fw: Congress to Vote on Poisoning People
From: Rick Steeb <>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 10:50:48 -0800

- ----- Forwarded Message ----=0AFrom: "Bill Piper, DPA Network" <>=0ASent: Tuesday, December 5, 2006 9:28:15 AM=0ASub
ject: Congress to Vote on Poisoning People=0A=0ACONGRESS TO VOTE ON POISONI
NG PEOPLE THIS WEEK=0A=0AEarlier this year we warned you about a bill in Co
ngress that would revive controversial research on the use of toxic, mold-l
ike fungi called mycoherbicides to kill illicit drug crops in other countri
es. This provision could unleash an environmental disaster of monumental pr
oportions. But Congressman Mark Souder and Senators Hatch and Biden are rus
hing it to the House and Senate floors this week. Here are three things you
 can do:=0A=0A1) Call your two U.S. Senators and one U.S. Representative to
day or tomorrow.=0A=0AIf you don't know who they are, simply call the Capit
ol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and give them your address. They'll connec
t you directly with their offices. You can also look them up online at http
://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt.asp?u=3D10054&l=3D134461 and http://acti
oncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt.asp?u=3D10054&l=3D134462 .=0A=0AWhen you get a 
staffer on the phone, politely say something like:=0A=0A"My name is [your n
ame] and I live in [your city]. I'm calling to urge [the Senator or Represe
ntative] to oppose the ONDCP Reauthorization bill if it comes to the floor 
this week, especially its mycoherbicide provision.  Please let me know how 
[the Senator/Representative] votes."=0A=0AIf they ask, the mycoherbicide se
ction is Section 1111. The bill being brought to the floor is a combination
 of a House and Senate bill, so it doesn't have a bill number yet. It will 
be brought to the Senate floor under a unanimous consent agreement and to t
he House floor under suspension of the rules--both of which limit debate. 
=0A=0A2) Phone calls are the most effective way of stopping this bill.  But
 if you don't feel comfortable making calls or you don't have the time, we 
urge you to fax or e-mail your elected officials instead. You can contact y
our two Senators at http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt.asp?u=3D10054&l
=3D134461 and your one Representative at http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org
/ctt.asp?u=3D10054&l=3D134462.=0A=0A3) Please forward this alert to everyon
e you know. Unless thousands of Americans contact Congress, this bill could
 pass by the end of this week.=0A=0ASincerely,=0A=0ABill Piper=0ADrug Polic
y Alliance Network=0A=0AMORE INFORMATION=0A=0AMycoherbicides have already b
een extensively studied over the last thirty years - and the results make i
t clear that they are not an option for controlling crops of coca or opium 
poppies. They attack indiscriminately, destroying fruit and vegetable crops
, and sickening animals and humans as well. The toxins mycoherbicides produ
ce contaminate soil for years, so that nothing can grow where they have bee
n. Mycoherbicides are so destructive that governments have even stockpiled 
them as weapons!=0A=0AIncredibly, the proposal now before Congress advocate
s using mycoherbicides in "field studies" in countries such as Colombia and
 Afghanistan - something the world would certainly see as an act of biologi
cal warfare.=0A=0AOffice of National Drug Control Policy head John Walters 
spoke out against further mycoherbicide research last year, but this terrib
le proposal is now part of the ONDCP Reauthorization Act. =0A=0AFor more in
formation on mycoherbicides, read the recent report commissioned by DPA, "R
epeating Mistakes of the Past: Another Mycoherbicide Research Bill" (PDF: h
ttp://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt.asp?u=3D10054&l=3D134463).=0A=0AHere
's the full text of the mycoherbicide provision in the ONDCP Reauthorizatio
n Act:=0A=0ASec. 1111 Requirement for Scientific Study of Mycoherbicide in 
Illicit Drug Crop Eradication=0A=0ANot later than 90 days after the date of
 enactment of this act, the Director of the Office of National Drug Control
 Policy shall submit to the Congress a report that includes a plan to condu
ct, on an expedited basis, a scientific study of the use of mycoherbicide a
s a means of illicit drug crop elimination by an appropriate Government sci
entific research entity, include a complete and thorough scientific peer re
view. The study shall include an evaluation of the likely human health and 
environmental impacts of mycoherbicides derived from fungus naturally exist
ing in the soil.=0A=0A=0A++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A

------------------------------

Subj: 004 US CA: Judge Tosses County's Medical Marijuana Challenge
From: Richard Lake <>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 06:06:06 -0800

URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v06/n1661/a10.html

Newshawk: Hawked with Hawkform www.mapinc.org/newshawk
Pubdate: Thu, 07 Dec 2006
Source: North County Times (Escondido, CA)
Copyright: 2006 North County Times
Contact: 
Website: http://www.nctimes.com
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1080
Note: Gives LTE priority to North San Diego County and Southwest 
Riverside County residents
Author: Gig Conaughton, Staff Writer
Note: The decision http://www.safeaccessnow.org/downloads/SD_Ruling.pdf
Cited: San Diego County Board of Supervisors 
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/general/bos.html
Cited: American Civil Liberties Union 
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/medmarijuana/index.html
Cited: National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws 
http://www.norml.org
Cited: Americans for Safe Access http://www.safeaccessnow.org
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/SB+420
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/San+Diego+County+supervisors
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Marijuana - Medicinal)

JUDGE TOSSES COUNTY'S MEDICAL MARIJUANA CHALLENGE

SAN DIEGO -- Medical marijuana advocates declared victory and San 
Diego County officials mentioned the word "appeal" Wednesday when a 
Superior Court judge rejected -- for the second time -- the county's 
controversial challenge to overturn California's "Compassionate Use" act.

Superior Court Judge William R. Nevitt, reaffirming the tentative 
ruling he issued Nov. 16, rejected the county's argument that 
California's voter-approved Compassionate Use act should be 
pre-empted by federal law.

Federal law says marijuana has no medicinal value and its use is 
illegal in all situations.

San Diego County supervisors, in a move that angered local medical 
marijuana patients and national advocacy groups, voted to try to 
overturn the law in December 2005. Supervisors said the Compassionate 
Use act was "bad law" and would promote drug abuse.

But Judge Nevitt, in his final ruling Wednesday, said the county 
failed to prove that the state law was in legal conflict with the 
federal law. He also ruled the state law did not "require" people to 
break the federal law, as the county's pre-emption argument claimed.

Nevitt said the county's pre-emption argument failed because a 
corollary to the U.S. Constitution's "Supremacy Clause" -- which says 
federal law should be "supreme" over state laws -- says state laws 
could take precedence over federal laws in some cases.

John Sansone, the county's top lawyer, said Wednesday afternoon that 
supervisors would meet in closed session Tuesday to decide whether 
they want to appeal Nevitt's ruling.

Bill Horn, the county board's chairman, did not return calls Wednesday.

Sansone, meanwhile, said he would advise the supervisors that he 
believed an appeal could be successful.

Medical marijuana advocacy groups, however, said Nevitt's ruling was 
clear. They called on the county to immediately obey California's law 
by issuing identification cards to valid medical marijuana users.

Meanwhile, one local medical marijuana patient, Vista resident Craig 
McClain, was clearly ecstatic when he received the news of Nevitt's ruling.

"Wow, man, that's good news," said McClain, a spinal cord injury 
victim. "I can't believe it. I'm just so pleased to hear that, God. 
I'm ecstatic. It just goes to show you, you gotta hang tough."

McClain, whose spine was crushed several years ago in a 
construction-related accident, said he has used marijuana for several 
years to ease the severe, chronic spasms the injury has left him with.

McClain and other medical marijuana patients have said they have 
found it increasingly difficult to get marijuana this summer, after 
the county and local law enforcement worked with federal drug agents 
to essentially close down medical marijuana dispensaries.

Adam Wolf, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union -- which 
successfully sued to intervene in the county case to defend the 
patients -- said he now expected the counties of San Diego, San 
Bernardino and Merced to begin issuing medical marijuana 
identification cards to patients. San Bernardino and Merced counties 
joined San Diego's lawsuit challenge last year.

"We hope that San Diego sees the wisdom of the court's ruling and 
agrees to abide by the law," he said, "to stop its ill-founded, 
unconstitutional challenge, and begin issuing ID cards."

The Compassionate Use act that voters approved in 1996 did not 
require counties to issue the medical marijuana ID cards, but the 
state Legislature did by passing Senate Bill 420 in 2003.

San Diego County's challenge to overturn the Compassionate Use act 
began in November 2005 with a split vote by supervisors to defy SB 
420 -- which legislators said would help state police officers tell 
who legitimate medical marijuana patients are.

The county's lawsuit, filed against California Department of Health 
Services Director Sandra Shewry and the San Diego chapter of the 
National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, sought to 
overturn both SB 420 and the Compassionate Use act.

Teresa Shilling, a spokeswoman for state Attorney General Bill 
Lockyer, said Wednesday that it was not the attorney general's 
position to compel counties to comply with the law. Shilling said 
that historically, when laws need "to be tested," lawsuits force the 
courts to compel governments to comply.

Sansone, meanwhile, said he believed that Nevitt did a thorough job 
analyzing the lawsuit's "complicated" legal arguments. However, 
Sansone said he believed that Nevitt's ruling left "very strong room" 
for a successful appeal.

"I think we anticipated all along that this was going to be decided 
at a higher level," Sansone said. "Where we go? It's up to the board."

William Dolphin, spokesman for Americans for Safe Access, a medical 
marijuana advocacy group that also sued to intervene in the county 
lawsuit, said the group was very happy with Nevitt's ruling.

But Dolphin said he was disappointed to hear that San Diego County 
could decide to appeal.

"I hope not," Dolphin said. "The legal argument cannot be clearer or stronger."

Meanwhile, McClain said he also hoped that county supervisors would 
drop their challenge and give him -- and other medical marijuana 
patients -- their ID cards.

"I've been waiting to get that," he said. "To me, that's protection. 
I've already got a doctor's prescription. I just want something I can 
hold in my hand. That's what we voted for.

"It may seem silly to some people," McClain said. "But that's like 
having a driver's license, or your Social Security number. It means 
I'm doing things the right way." 

------------------------------

End of MAPTalk-Digest V06 #144
******************************


HomeBulletin BoardChat RoomsDrug LinksDrug NewsFeedback
Guest BookMailing ListsMedia EmailMedia LinksLettersSearch