Pubdate: Tue, 10 Jul 2001
Source: New York Times Drug Policy Forum
Website: http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/index-national.html
Note: This, and the series of forums, is being archived at MAP as an 
exception to our web only source posting policies.

FORUM SCHEDULE:

Tues. July 17, 2001 8PM Eastern/5PM Pacific - NY Times Drug Policy Forum: 
Steve and Michele Kubby

Sun. July 22, 2001 8PM Eastern/5PM Pacific - Drugsense Chat Room: Steve and 
Michele Kubby

Future guests already scheduled in the series include Al Giordano, Renee 
Boje, and Al Robison.  See http://www.cultural-baggage.com/schedule.htm for 
details.

TRANSCRIPT OF KEITH STROUP'S VISIT TO THE DRUG POLICY FORUM

On Monday, July 9, the NYTimes.com's Drug Policy forum hosted Keith Stroup, 
founder of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, 
NORML. This discussion was part of the speaker series organized by forum 
participants.

rkstroup: Hello, friends. This is Keith Stroup. I'm pleased to be here 
tonight and will try to answer any questions you may have about my narrow 
area of expertise, marijuana or marijuana policy.

dean_becker: Each day seems to bring more call for reform of the marijuana 
laws to the UK. Home Secretary David Blunkett has now called for a formal 
debate on the decriminalization of marijuana. Assuming they move toward 
decrim or legalization, how will that affect US attitudes and laws toward MJ?

rkstroup: Dean:

I think what is happening in Canada and in England is the most significant 
progress we have seen in my lifetime, and it will clearly have a positive 
impact in this country. Our government seems to be able to ignore and 
misrepresent what happens in Holland and in many other parts of the world, 
but we can't simply make things up about Canada and England and expect to 
get by with it. Our common culture and language, and with Canada our common 
border, make these pending changes terribly important for us in the US.

donaldway: Hi Keith, and welcome!

I don't know if you've noticed or not, but the New York Times has been 
running these "antidrug" ads with increasing regularity.

Has NORML ever tried running ads with the New York Times or other corporate 
media outlets? Have you ever been refused?

Or is it all just a question of money?

rkstroup: We have used paid public advertising in s number of instances, 
and we have had our money rejected on at least one occassion.

In the 1970s, a funder gave us money to purchase a full-page ad in Time or 
Newsweek, and we tried in both, and were turned down by both. They have the 
legal right to reject you simply because they think your message is too 
extreme, or whatever. And they did.

We have not been turned down in more recent years when we have attempted to 
purchase air time on radio or print space in a newspaper. That will be 
given a more serious test this fall when theNORML Foundation launches a 
fairly significant ($600,000) public ad campaign, and it is quite possible 
that some of the stations we want will reject our ads. We'll just have to see.

That's not always bad, as the free press coverage can sometimes be more 
valuable than the paid space.

dean_becker: Now that the head of the UN drug policy is under fire, the US 
has been kicked out of the UN human rights and drug war panels, will the UN 
do anything to undermine the failed US drug war?

rkstroup: Now that the head of the UN drug policy is under fire, the US has 
been kicked out of the...

I fully expect the UN will hold firm to the US anti-drug position for as 
long as possible. They are even further removed from the people than our 
federal elected oficials, and thus they are even less responsive to 
changing attitudes.

zooneedles: How many times have you been busted for cannabis, Keith?

rkstroup: Only once, for a single joint in my pocket when I was entering 
Canada to give a NORML lecture in the 1970s. We raised the Pierre Treadeau 
defense, to no avail!

ajdectis: Now that Britain has said that it is no longer going to make any 
effort to chase down marijuana smugglers and sellers , does this not mean 
defacto legalization?

rkstroup: This is really some of the most exciting news I have heard in 
many years. It is wonderful that they have decided to focus on more 
dangerous drugs, and to apply that principle evento major traffickers. It's 
not legalization quite yet, but it sure does seem like a transition phase 
that will likely lead to actual legalization at some point.

celaya: Welcome Keith!

I have been a member of NORML for some years now and I feel like the 
membership is under utilized.

I get an occasional newletter and requests to contribute money to one 
project or another. But I feel like we, as members, could be a great 
political machine if we were well coordinated.

Is there any future plan to organize the NORML membership for these kinds 
of actions?

rkstroup: Iconcur that we do not generally utilize the average NORML 
supporter as a grassroots organizer or activists to the degree we would 
like. It is largely a result of limited resources, and the need to focus on 
streamlining and modernizing other areas of our work since the new board 
took over the organization in the fall of 1994. I believe we do a better 
job of local and grassroots organizing now than we have in the past, with a 
sophisticated (and expensive) computer tracking program on our website that 
makes it easy and quick for any visitor to the site to register their 
support for or opposition to any pending marijuana-related legislation 
pending inCongress or in any state legislature. But we need to do much more 
to help train, motivate and support the efforts throughout the country. I 
hope we can raise the resources to finally permit us to more effectively 
address this part of our work.

aahpat: Hi Keith;

Could you talk some about these issues? Thanks.

1. Lobbying the congress. Both as individuals and in terms of what the 
major organizations are doing to expand the effort.

2. Regarding the coming 'off year' 2002 national political campaigns for 
the U.S. congress. What is the collective reform camp doing to participate 
in the U.S. Senate and House elections? What can individuals do to raise 
the profile of drug policy reform in the elections?

rkstroup: 1. Lobbying the congress. Both as individuals and in terms of 
what the major organizations are doing to expand the effort

Could you talk some about these issues? Thanks. 1. Lobbying the congress. 
Both as individuals and in terms of what the major organizations are doing 
to expand the effort.

As to Congress, I do a limited amount of work with them, making sure we get 
Rep. Frank's medical use bill reintroduced each new Congress, and 
continuing my search for a sponsor for a full federal decriminalization 
bill. Frankly, so long as the Republican party continue to control the 
House, the Frank medical use bill will continue to be ignored by the 
appropriate committee chair and subcommittee chair, either of whom could 
schedule a public hearing on the bill and at least permit us to make our 
best case. But the Republican leadershi has for several years confused the 
question of the medical use of marijuana with the war on drugs, and have 
made the anti-medical use position an integral part of their anti-drug war. 
So realisticly, until there is a change in Congressional leadership, or 
until the average member of Congress receives a lot more mail, calls and 
visits from constituents supporting the Frank bill, there simply will be no 
action on the federal bill in Congress.

The real action will continue for a few more years to be at the state 
level. Once we have gathered a critical mass of states -- which might be 15 
or 18 or whatever -- the Congress will have no choice but to pay attention 
to this issue, regardless of who is in control of the Congress, and to 
support medical use because their constituents told them that's what they want.

celaya: Thanks Keith. I look forward to more opportunities to become a 
NORML activist. I think ajdectis' idea of creating social events for NORML 
members is a great one also. This would create great solidarity and raise 
committment levels.

On another note, why do you think that there is such a void of entertainers 
who are willing to stand up and denounce marijuana prohibition?

Is there no idealism in these people anymore? Are they just in it for the 
bucks? One would think that, for some, like rock musicians, it would 
actually be a boost to their careers.

rkstroup: Celaya made a good point. With all the cannabis users in the USA 
we could be a potent force if organized. Why have the cannabis users failed 
to organize well? Is it becaue there is too much fear and apathy? Is it the 
lack of an organizational mechanism that reaches enough people?

The most significant hindrance to our winning the rights to wich we are 
entitled is the fear that the majority of responsible marijuana smokers 
feelabout the possibility that they might be identified as smokers. And it 
isunderstandable that they would havethose concerns, asthe reprocussions 
for many people is disasterous.

At a minimum the individual likely loses his or her job, and depending on 
where they live, may lose their housing, custody of their child or 
children, student loans and other professional lisences. And they have to 
hire an attorney to try to assure that they remain out of jail.

So it is no wonder that most smokers, and this is especially true for the 
middle-class, professional folks who enjoy smoking when they relax on the 
weekends, are too paranoid to "come out of the closet." Until we change the 
climate that causes folks to fear to express their own political 
preferrences, for fear of being hurt personally and professionaly, we 
cannot expect to fully exercise our full political potential.

In a manner, we need, as a culture, to come out of the closet, and to 
demonstrate that the vast majority of marijuana smokers are good, decent 
Americans who are good neighbors and good citizens, as well as marijuana 
smokers.

rkstroup: On another note, why do you think that there is such a void of 
entertainers who are willing to stand up and denounce marijuana 
prohibition? Is there no idealism in these people anymore? Are they just in 
it for the bucks? One would think that, for some, like rock musicians, it 
would actually be a boost to their careers.

It is true that most celebrities and entertainers, regardless of their 
personal habits, refuse to publicly identify with the marijuana issue for 
fear they will be identified as potheads and it will negatively impact 
their careers. They all have managers whose job it isto foresee problems 
such as this, and to head them off to protect the source of income, the 
celebrity's popularity.

But don't forget that there are a few notable exceptions, and there will 
certainly be new names and faces who will decide the time is right to be 
honest over the coming year or so. Willie Nelosn is one of my personal 
favorities. He has always insisted that those who like Willie be prepared 
to accedpt his marijuana smoking, and I frequently tease him that he is 
"America's most beloved marijuana smoker." And Woody Harrelson and Bill 
Maher, and a few others, but the list is embarassingly short, which does 
not speak well for the courage level of the Hollywood community.

donaldway: Any estimates on the number of people who are dead today but who 
otherwise might be alive were marijuana available as medicine?

rkstroup: I've never seen any attempt to estimate the number of patients 
who migh be alive today had they been permitted to use medical marijuana, 
but clearly Pter McWilliams is far from the only one. Perhaps more dramatic 
are the tens of thousands of seriously ill patients who were required to 
suffer needlessly, when a chea; and effective medication could have largely 
spared them the pain and agony.

It has always seemd stupid and counterproductive to me that we would treat 
social smokers like criminals. It is absolutely unconscionable that we 
would deny an effective medication to the seriously ill and dying.

jerryt9: Questions for the visitors:

1) Do you predict an END to the War On Drugs during the coming decade?

2) What events need to happen in order for the War On Drugs to end?

3) What can WE do to bring about major changes in Drug Policy?

rkstroup: 1) Do you predict an END to the War On Drugs during the coming 
decade? 2) What events need to happen in order for the War On Drugs to end? 
3) What can WE do to bring about major changes in Drug Policy?

(1) Yes, without much doubt I expect we will stop arresting marijuana 
smokers, and I hope we will treat other nonviolent drug offenses as a 
medical matter, not an appropriate matter for the criminal justice system. 
I believe we are finally headed in that direction, and itis clear the 
American people really do make a serious distinction between violent and 
nonviolent offenses, even if many of our elected officials have tried to 
blurr that important distinction.

(2)We must overcome the years of demonization of drug users, and marijuana 
smokers particularly, and demonstrate that most marijuana smokers (and thus 
most drug users) are good people. That fact, while it seems obvious to 
those of us who smoke, is the one we have to win in order to finally move 
the political system to reflect a new reality in attitudes. As I said in an 
earlier answer, to some degree this involves the millions of Americans who 
smoke marijuana responsibly to come out of the closet, or at least to 
contact their elected oficials at all levels and demand they stop arresting 
marijuana smokers. (3) The two most basic things each American can do to 
change public policy is to contact you elected officials (and do it more 
than once, at at all levels from the city council to the state legislature 
to Congress) so they know their constituents want a change in marijuana 
policy, and to donate a few bucks each year to any of several good public 
interest groups working to end the drug war. Most Americans need to work 
during the day to support themselves and their families, and they can't 
spend as much time as they might like working for their favorite charity. 
But each of us can give $25, or $50, or whatever, and help provide the 
overall funding that is necessary for us to finally end the drug war, once 
and for all.

A little time, and a little money. There are enought of us that if each 
regular marijuana smokers did only these two simple steps, we would 
havemarijuana legalized within 5 years.

galan14: Hi Keith -- Just got here, so apologies if someone else has 
already asked this. But a few years ago you or somebody mentioned at a 
NORML Conference that a new advertising campaign was being planned, 
according to which celebrities and other well-known people would speak out 
about their use of cannabis and what it had meant or done for them. Could 
you give us an update on how that's coming? Has the climate changed enough 
within recent years to make that feasible? Thanks / Al

rkstroup: a few years ago you or somebody mentioned at a NORML Conference 
that a new advertising campaign was being planned, according to which 
celebrities and other well-known people would speak out about their use of 
cannabis and what it had meant or done for them. Could you give us an 
update on how that's coming? Has the climate changed enough within recent 
years to make that feasible? Thanks / Al

Al, nice to hear from you. I am new at this chat room experience, and I 
missed you're message altogether.

The original idea was to combine several prominant Americans, including 
Willie Nelson, Peter Lewis and Carl Sagan, and to publish a full-page ad in 
several newspapers across the country. The purpose of such a campaign would 
obviously be to attack and overcome the negative stereotype marijuana 
smokers frequently encounter, and which undoubtedly holds back our 
political progress.

Unfortunately, Peter lewis needed to avoid this for some time because of 
personal or business reasons, and Carl Sagan became ill before we could 
fully discuss the possibility with him, and sadly, henever recovered. His 
widow Ann Druyan is an active member of the NORML and the NORML Foundation 
boards, and her continuing support is invaluable.

Nonetheless, you can see that our original idea was never realized.

However, the NORML Foundation is currently working with our advertising 
people to develop a public advertising campaign that we hope to run with 
this fall. We havenot selected the thrmr yet, but we will likely do 
something designed to reinforce the idea that responsible marijuana smoking 
is okay, and that is designed to motivate marijuana smokers to come out of 
the closet, get involved politically, andhelp us change this situation.

I was personally impressed with the full-page ad that the couple in Oregon 
ran recently, with the headline, We're jeff and Tracy, we're your good 
neighbors, and we smoke marijuana. We may consider some variation onthat 
theme for our campaign, but again, it is alittle early to know. We will 
certainly try to make the campaign newsworthly, so we can benefit from the 
free media coverage that should result.

ajdectis: Keith, What was the process you used to found Norml in the early 
1970's? How involved was the founder of High Times ( his name escapes me 
for the moment). How does one just one day say: "I am going to start an 
organization to legalize marijuana"?

rkstroup: The founder of High Times you asked about was Tom Forcade, a 
friend of mine during the 1970s and an interesting individual. He showed 
great vision when he founded High Times.

I started NORML as a result of the anti-war (Vietnam) movement that was at 
its peak in 1970, and my experience working with Ralph Nader (actually with 
the National Commission on Product Safety, a Presidential Commission, but 
we worked closely with Ralph and I was impressed with the way he had taken 
the consumer perspective and made it a powerful interest in the public 
policy debate)

Many anti-war activists were arrested on marijuana charges, and there were 
years when anyone with long hair and an anti-war bumper sticker would be 
pulled over and searched for marijuana by the police. The marijuana laws 
were a major way for the government at the time to punish anti-war 
organizers and demonstrators. As a oung lawyer right out of Georgetown Law 
School, I was called by several people seeking representation, and my 
friends were having the same experience. So we decided to found an 
organization to try to fight back.

Because I was impressed with the mannerin which Ralph had turned consumer 
power into real political power, I wanted to make our focus that of the 
consumer -- or the smoker -- and thus NORML was born.

Of course we were fortunate to get the early and generous support of the 
Playboy Foundation during the early years, that made it possible for us to 
grow, and to eventually lead the reform efforts that resulted in 11 states 
decriminalizing marijuana during the 1970s.

Sadly, we lost ground during the 1980s and mostof the 1990s, but since 1996 
the pendulum has begun swinging back in our direction, and if it should 
continue for a few more years, we will make some extraordinary progress 
towards ending the drug war altogether and devising more effective drug 
policies.

The political climate is more positive today than I have seen it since at 
least 1978.

rkstroup: Friends:

I need to wrap things up for tonight. It has been fun.

I wish I were a bit more facile with the chat room format, but I'm still 
new at it.

Thanks for letting me use your open mike for the evening.

Help us legalize marijuana.

Regards,

Keith Stroup
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D