Pubdate: Sun, 24 Jun 2001
Source: Little Rock Free Press (AR)
Copyright: 2001 Little Rock Free Press
Contact:  http://www.aristotle.net/FREEP
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/526
Section: Cover Story
Author: Jalisha Vandiver, Joseph Emmel

THE NEW CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT: ENDING THE DRUG WAR

Between May 29th and June 2nd, close to 1000 activists, religious leaders, 
elected officials, law enforcement officers, attorneys, doctors-- some from 
as far away as Switzerland, Australia and the Nether-lands-- gathered in 
Albuquerque, New Mexico for the International Drug Policy Conference. The 
conference was the 14th one-sponsored by the drug reform organization The 
Lindesmith Center-Drug Policy Foundation. The conference attendees cut 
across all political, social, religious and generational boundaries. There 
were Democrats, Republicans, Greens and Libertarians. Catholics, Southern 
Baptists, and dreadlocked Rastafarians ate together. T-shirt and jean clad 
students conversed with older businessmen in suits. Doctors, lawyers and 
policemen not only rubbed elbows with convicted drug felons, they applauded 
them each time they spoke--right along with those Southern Baptist.

In his introductory speech, Ethan Nadelman, director of the Lindesmith 
Center, asked the attendees, "Who are we." He then went on to answer his 
question. "We are millions of Americans who have a mother, father, brother, 
sister or child be-hind bars. We are the ones who want to see them 
released. We are the people with HIV and AIDS and we are the people who 
love and care for them. We are the people who smoke marijuana and love 
marijuana.

And you know who else we are. We are the people who don't smoke marijuana 
and are afraid of it. We are the people who demand the right to put into 
our bodies what-ever we choose. And we are the people color who have not 
forgotten where the drug laws first came from." The one thing uniting this 
large and diverse gathering was the awareness of the failure and true cost 
of the drug war and a commitment ending that war, freeing it's prisoners 
and bringing peace to our communities.

Although the conference received no media attention in this part of the 
country, reporters from western states packed press conference rooms and 
besieged speakers and panelists. The New Mexico press was especially well 
represented, which is understandable given the identity of the conference' 
s keynote speaker: New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. Governor Johnson is 
not just any ordinary Republican Governor. He has the honor of being the 
only governor in the United States who has openly said that marijuana 
should be legalized. Even the independent maverick, Jesse Ventura wouldn't 
venture beyond decriminalization. For better or worse, it took a Republican 
to make this step. Because of his outspoken and unashamed stand on 
legalization and complete overhaul of drug policy, The Lindesmith 
Center-Drug Policy Foundation sees New Mexico as a model for other states 
to follow.

When he first made his controversial announcement on the subject, it lit a 
firestorm within his state. Upon Johnson' s announcement, he drew the 
attention of the Lindesmith Center, which began working with him to test 
policy ideas on the people of New Mexico to see how receptive they might 
be. Johnson said, "two years ago I'd never heard of the Lindesmith Center. 
I wouldn't have imagined that New Mexico would have embraced the drug 
reform dialogue." As Johnson said, speaking of the results of his stand, 
"in two years we went from status quo to neutral on drug policy in this 
state." The next step for Johnson and the New Mexico legislature is to move 
from neutral to change.

That step has already been set in motion. In this year' s legislative 
session the New Mexico legislature passed some significant drug policy 
reform bills. One of the bills that passed was a medical marijuana law that 
allows qualified patients who are certified by the state's department of 
health to use medicinal marijuana. Another bill changed asset forfeiture 
laws to require a court order for property seizure and clear and convincing 
evidence that the property is subject to forfeiture. Other bills 
decriminalized possession of less than an ounce of marijuana, allows 
pharmacies to sell syringes without fear for criminal penalties, expansion 
of drug treatment funding, and restoring the right to vote to convicted 
felons who have completed their sentences.

Legislation also requires the state's department of corrections to develop 
eligibility criteria for inmates indicated of nonviolent drug offenses for 
early release into reentry drug or programs for the last 18 month of their 
sentence.

With all this legislative activity and enormous public support for changing 
drug laws, as well as holding out hope for re-formers struggling in other 
states, New Mexico was the most appropriate location for this historical 
event. This event was historical because it represents the beginning of a 
new civil rights movement in this country. As Ethan Nadelmann, said in his 
introductory speech, "we are following in the steps of the civil rights 
movement, women's suffrage, and the gay and lesbian rights movement. Every 
one of these movements was about political and social justice. We are 
following in that tradition and that is what unifies us all." Nadelmann 
continued, "we have to recognize our place in this continuity, and 
continuing this movement for more freedom, rationality, and tolerance."

Reverend Edwin Sanders compared the drug reform movement to the civil 
rights movement. Reverend Sanders is an African-American minister at the 
Metropolitan Interdenominational Church in Nashville, Tennessee. His 
congregation has outreach ministries in areas of substance abuse, child 
advocacy, sexual violence, drug harm reduction and support for people with 
HIV and AIDS. Reverend Sanders is a member of Religious Leaders for Just 
and Compassionate Drug Policy, which represents over 600 religious leaders 
who are taking a stand against the drug war, and using their pulpits as an 
opportunity to educate people about its destruction, failure and immorality.

Reverend Sanders stated, "The windows of opportunity are opening just like 
in 1950 when a few doors were opening and more people were starting to 
speak out on civil rights. The place where we stand now in this battle is 
the same place where the civil rights movement was in 1950." The potential 
in this moment, according to Reverend Sanders, is great. " What is 
happening in this room can have a transforming effect on this world. This 
movement can allow the United States of America to have another opportunity 
at living up to the ideals and principles we all hold dear that were born 
out of nothing less than the spirit that created us all." Reverend Sanders 
says that we are all messengers and our message is "wake up! This war on 
drugs is immoral. Wake up! It's unjust. Wake up! It's dangerous" He went on 
to say," It's a war where people in power are profiteering, exploiting 
fear, and taking advantage of those more vulnerable people in our society. 
We have to wake up to the fact that we cannot continue in our racist ways, 
in our classist ways, in our elitist ways."

At a press conference on the first day, Dr. Alex Wodak, a physician, 
president of the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation and President of the 
International Harm Reduction Association spoke to re-porters about the 
impact of U.S. drug policy on the rest of the world and the role of doctors 
in reforming drug policy. " This may seem to Americans to be a very 
American struggle, but I can assure you that what happens in the U.S. 
certainly plays out in the rest of the world and certainly in my country." 
Dr. Wodak believes that politicians are primarily the reason the drug war 
continues. " The war on drugs has been a passport for politicians to get 
elected and re-elected. It is easier to win campaigns based on fear than 
science and rationality." Wodak continued, "The cost of change occurs in 
the present and the benefits are delayed in the future." Therefore, 
according to Wodak, most politicians are afraid to challenge current policies.

But to see change, says Wodak, we have to see this issue primarily as a 
health and medical issue. "Doctors have a critical role if this is to be 
considered a health issue. We need leadership in the medical community."

When speaking at the conference, Governor Johnson talked about how he came 
to advocate marijuana legalization and drug policy reform. He said he 
already knew that " the war on drugs is a failure and we need to look at 
alternatives--and I said to my staff that one of the alternatives is 
legalization. What I didn't know at the time," said Johnson " was the 
compelling argument for legalizing marijuana. All I advocated was the 
legalization of marijuana and harm reduction strategies. I never dreamed at 
the time what a controversy that would be and the rapid changes that would 
follow."

The conference covered a wide range of topics, but the sessions regarding 
civil rights and liberties and racial disparity seemed to strike the 
deepest cord in most of the participants. One such session was called 
"Collateral Consequences of Over-reaching Government Practices: Today's Jim 
Crow." The director of the ACLU Drug litigation Project, Graham Boyd spoke 
about how the war on drugs affects people of color, and he compared the 
current laws with those of the past. "The war on drugs is just a 
re-capitulation of slavery. In 1999 there were 900, 000 black men in the 
criminal justice system. In 1820 there were 900, 000 black men enslaved in 
the plantation system. By 1860 there were 1.5 million enslaved. If we 
continue incarceration at the current rate, we will have achieved in 17 
years what it took the plantation system 40 years to reach." Although 
blacks and whites use drugs at about the same rate, given that whites make 
up the majority population, blacks are disproportionately arrested and 
incarcerated. Whites make up about 72 percent of all drug users, blacks 15 
percent, and Hispanics 10 percent. Yet blacks constitute 36.8 percent of 
those arrested for drug violations and over 42 per-cent incarcerated in 
federal prisons. The United States incarcerates black men at four times the 
rate of black men in South Africa.

Boyd continued his comparison with Jim Crow. The plantation system and Jim 
Crow banned black men from voting, restricted the rights of blacks to 
travel, exploited them for labor, and forcibly took their children away. 
Nearly 1.5 million black men out a total voting population of 10.4 million 
have lost their right to vote due to felony convictions. In Florida alone, 
one third of all black men cannot vote. Whereas in the days of slavery, 
slave patrols pre-vented escape to freedom and beat and harassed freed 
slaves, the new Jim Crow enforces "driving while black," where black 
motorist are pulled over and their cars and persons searched for no other 
reason than the color of their skin. Of course, it is all done in the name 
of fighting drugs. And just as blacks were forced to labor without 
recompense, the for-profit prison system and corporations use the cost-free 
labor of prisoners at anywhere from 12 to 50 cents per hour. Our prison 
system is the new plantation slavery. Then, the children of slaves were 
sold away "down the river" from their parents. Now, African-Americans lose 
their children to the child protection agencies, whether because they 
themselves have been incarcerated, or be-cause they have tested positive 
for drugs. Even though black and white women use illicit drugs at the same 
rate during pregnancy, black women are 10 times more likely than white 
women to be reported to child welfare agencies for prenatal drug use. And 
the current trend is to arrest pregnant or post partum black women and 
charge them with child abuse and neglect, send them to prison and terminate 
their parental rights based on the chemical com-position of their urine.

But of all the facts and figures presented by Boyd and other speakers at 
this session, nothing was as frightening and gut wrenching as the story of 
Tulia, Texas told by Reverend Charles Kiker, a retired Baptist minister. As 
he told this story of injustice and racism in his hometown, the elderly, 
white minister's voice shook and his eyes watered. By the time he was 
finished his weren't the only wet eyes in the room. The story began in 1997 
when the school district of Tulia decided to conduct random and 
suspicionless drug tests on its students. A couple of parents resisted and 
took the school district to federal court. In the meantime, the Fisher 
County sheriff launched an undercover drug operation. The undercover agent 
he hired was named Tom Coleman, who had a checkered past, involving 
corruption and misuse of public funds. Coleman conducted his sting 
operation for 18 months. In July 1999, just be-fore the court ruling on the 
school drug testing case was to be handed down, the mass arrests began in 
the little town with a population of 5, 000. Forty-three people were 
arrested; all but three of them black, and even those three had 
relationships with or had children by blacks. These 43 people were indicted 
for selling drugs--mostly powdered cocaine. Reverend Kiker said his wife 
commented as they watched the foot-age of the arrests, "if 43 people are 
selling drugs in Tulia, who is buying." The operation resulted in the 
arrests of half the adult, black male population in Tulia, and represented 
17 percent of the total black population.

And then the trials began. The juries convicted their neighbors of drug 
charges based solely on the word of one, corrupt white man. There was 
absolutely no physical or circumstantial evidence--not a wit-ness, a 
wiretap, confession, or any confiscated drugs. The sole witness and 
evidence was Tom Coleman. The first man tried was a 57-year-old pig farmer 
who was sentenced to 90 years. One of the three whites convicted was a 
mentally challenged young man who had committed no prior offenses and whose 
only crime seemed to be that he had fathered a mixed race child with a 
black woman-who was also indicted. He was sentenced to 400 years. After the 
first conviction, some citizens of Tulia, both black and white, became 
concerned and began investigating on their own and bringing national 
attention to the tragedy and travesty of justice in their community. But 
many of those arrested, frightened by the long sentences being handed down, 
pled guilty to crimes they did not commit.

"Earlier this morning," Reverend Kiker said, "Ethan was talking about who 
we are. Well, I'm one of those abstainers. I don't know what a joint looks 
like and I don't care if I never learn. So, you might think, this guy don't 
have no dog in this fight. And you're right. I don't have a dog in this 
fight, but you could say I have a whole passel of pups. I'm talking about 
the kids--the children of the adults who were arrested on what I call 
'operation drug entrapment. I'm talking about Jennifer, Justice, Jackson, 
Keara, and Kenneth and Corinne and all the other 47 children whose parents 
were hauled to jail. These children are now six times more likely to be 
incarcerated them-selves. I'm talking about children who were already 
poverty children who have been further impoverished. This collateral 
con-sequences of overreaching government practices is not exaggerated in 
Tulia. Tulia is not the exception. I've realized that the war on drugs is 
really a war on people, especially poor people and people of color. And it 
is also a war on children. I know I may not have a lot in common with many 
of you, but let's work together to end the madness." After Reverend Kiker 
sat down to a thundering applause, Graham Boyd added, "I think Tulia is an 
example of how the drug war is used as a tool to control black people."

According to Nancy Campbell, assistant professor at Rensselaer Polytech 
Institute, and Lynn Paltrow, an attorney and the executive director of 
National Advocates for Pregnant Women during the session called "Women and 
the Drug War," the war on drugs is not only used as a tool to control black 
people, it is also a tool to control women-regardless of race. Not only are 
pregnant women, particularly poor women, subjected to involuntary drug 
testing, they also stand to lose social services and even be prosecuted and 
incarcerated for "fetal abuse" or murder.

Nancy Campbell said that this kind of focus on female drug use began in the 
1920's around the same time that policy makers were concerned about the 
falling white birth rates. By focusing on "out of control" female addicts, 
the state acquires the power to control them, their sexuality, and when 
they form families and with whom. Since women, says Paltrow, are 
responsible for social reproduction, drug use is used as an excuse to doubt 
the ability of women to discharge parental duties. Fe-male drug users have 
always been viewed more harshly than male users, and as a result they are 
portrayed as "dissolute women" which the state and society equates with 
being "bad mothers." As recently as the late 1980's lawmakers were 
referring to the crack epidemic as a "crisis of maternal instinct." Male 
addicts were and still are viewed as addicts, but females are just bad 
women and mothers. " It's really about what women are expected to do and 
what we do when they don't," said Campbell. By creating public policies 
that focus on individual women, society and law-makers are excused from 
addressing the real social issues of poverty and lack of access to 
healthcare, which has more to do with untreated drug addiction than 
any-thing else. Drug treatment slots for pregnant women and women with 
children are either seriously unavailable or nonexistent.

Paltrow said that no one should be punished for what they do to their body, 
but pregnant women have been made the exception. Although no state 
legislature has made it a crime to be pregnant and a drug user, 18 states 
have expanded their civil penalties for drug use. Those penalties usually 
involve termination of parental rights. "It's not really about drugs or 
fetal rights, it's really about controlling women." Paltrow gave example of 
a young black woman who tested positive for drug use during labor, yet 
delivered a healthy baby. Her baby was taken from her and she was sentenced 
to eight years in prison. "Com-pare that," Paltrow said, "to a white, 
middle- class woman who took fertility drugs, which produced six embryos. 
Although her doctors told her that trying to carry them all to term risked 
the lives of all six, she chose to carry them all. One of her babies dies, 
and she gets $30,000 and free supply of diapers. Both of them," Paltrow 
continued, "took drugs during pregnancy."

Another disturbing trend in government policies had its beginning in the 
1996 welfare reform act, which had provisions al-lowing states to drug test 
welfare recipients. So far, only Michigan has implemented the testing. 
"Forcing them to pee in a cup in order to receive benefits," said Boyd, 
"preys on and degrades the most vulnerable members of our society." But 
Boyd thinks that probably one of the worst things about this practice is 
the dangerous precedent it is setting. "If welfare recipients can be tested 
in order to receive benefits, then any of us can be tested. What is to stop 
the government from requiring drug testing in order to qualify~ for SSI, 
student financial aid, tax credits, driving license, or any other 
government related benefit or service. We have to stop this right here."

There were several retired police officers present at the conference, but 
Officer Joseph Feather with the Albuquerque Police Department was the only 
uniformed officer present. This was a detail that seemed to disturb him. 
"Drug reform policy is something the police need to be involved in. Police 
are on the cutting edge of the drug war, but unfortunately, those who 
support decriminalization or legalization see us as the enemy. If you talk 
to officers they say that the drug war is not accomplishing its purpose."

Howard Wooldridge, a retired police officer from Texas, wore a t-shirt with 
the words "Cops Say Legalize Pot--Ask me Why.' When the Free Press 
reporters asked him why, he said that legalizing marijuana would reduce the 
exposure of young people to harder drugs. The dealer they buy their 
marijuana from, he told us, also sells them some cocaine and heroine. " 
Be-sides," he said, " the drug war has not re-moved a single dealer from 
the streets. Every time a street dealer is arrested, there is another to 
replace him instantly." Wooldridge also said that adult dealers do not 
usually sell to kids. "It's kids who sell to kids. Dealers recruit 14 year 
olds who go to school and sell to other 14 year olds and younger children. 
The dealers know that the consequences for kids for dealing drugs is pretty 
minimal and it is kids who have the most access to other kids."

Wooldridge had this to say about the conference, "The most important thing 
about this conference in terms of law enforcement is education. I think the 
more law officers know about the drug war and the ramifications on 
individuals and their communities it would go a long ways to-ward helping 
officers understand the bigger picture as opposed to their small part in 
what they are doing."

Officer Feathers seemed to disagree with officer Wooldridge on this one. "I 
think a lot of officers know the drug war isn't working but don't know what 
the solution is. I'm the only uniformed officer here and I'm a 
representative of the Albuquerque Police Department. I think a lot of the 
solutions presented here are too much in the opposite direction. They 
expect a utopian sea change to happen and that's not going to happen. And 
it's especially not going to happen without those on the cutting edge of 
the drug war buying into it--because there's going to be resistance."

"I agree that education is the key here," Officer Wooldridge told Officer 
Feather and us. "I don't think most of society ready to see drugs as a 
medical problem. The war on drugs is not being effective protecting our 
society and our children and is not keeping drugs and drug dealers away 
from our children. All of us need to become informed on these issues, 
especially moms and dads, and begin to at least start talking about it," 
Wooldridge continued.

Wooldridge believes that fear is the primary reason for lack of change in 
drug policy. "Everyone's afraid to even talk about change because being 
seen as soft on drugs is a death sentence, and this is particularly true 
for police officers." When asked how the Albuquerque police feel about 
Governor Johnson, Officer Feather said, "Most officers like Governor 
Johnson and his policies in general. But I think you'll find though, that 
most officers don't think legalization is the way to go. The drug war 
demonizes drug users and dealers. But what I've seen at this conference," 
he continued, "almost turns them into angels."

Wooldridge wrapped up the joint inter-view by saying, "What you do in your 
own home, if it arguably doesn't hurt anyone but yourself isn't a situation 
where the police need to come knocking your door down because you're 
smoking a joint."

A session called "Race and the Drug War" was a particularly powerful one. 
An assertive and controversial young man, James Forman challenged everyone 
in the room to "move beyond their comfort zone" in their work in the drug 
policy reform movement. He believes that if everyone white person in the 
room had the experience of being the only white in a room of blacks that 
large, there would be more progress and understanding. He also challenged 
everyone to face some of the more controversial and uncomfortable issues of 
the drug war." If we don't talk about drug selling," he said, "then we are 
not talking to all the black and brown brothers and sisters who are 
incarcerated. That's where the long sentences come from--from drug 
trafficking. If we're not willing to talk about drug selling then that is a 
whole entire community we're writing off."

Antonio Gonzales, from Texas and the president of the William Valasquez 
Insti-tute, spoke about the role Latino politicians and leaders have played 
in the drug war. Since Latino leaders were very much be-hind taking a hard 
line on drug use and the drug culture, they have been very silent on the 
consequences of the drug war. "Individuals within the Latino community are 
ahead of the leadership. The individuals know the drug policies are not 
working because it's their families and communities that are suffering."

Gonzales had some other observations. " The drug war has become the new 
anti-communism. A generation ago, if you wanted to neutralize someone who 
was working for social justice and fighting for the working class and 
minorities then you call them a communist--and say it loudly and repeatedly 
and eventually they will be neutralized in mainstream politics and their 
ideas kick out. Today, drug-baiting has re-placed red-baiting." Such drug 
baiting, he went on to tell us is being used to destroy the chances of a 
progressive, Latino of being elected mayor of Los Angeles. This candidate 
could be the first Latino elected to that office.

At the Friday, June 15th luncheon, Maxine Waters, a California member of 
the U.S. House of Representatives (D) gave a rousing speech that garnered 
her as much applause as Governor Johnson had. " I had decided," 
Representative Waters said, "some time ago that for the remainder of my 
time in office I'm basically going to give my public policy time and effort 
to the re-form of drug policy, reform of the prison system in this country, 
and helping to garner the resources necessary to deal with HIV/AIDS." She 
made many comments about the political diversity of the conference, one of 
which was "We find that some times the right and the left agree and I think 
it is going to be this kind of coming together that is going to change drug 
policy." Representative Waters expressed great admiration of Gary Johnson. 
"I think Governor Johnson is a man of courage. He is on the cutting edge of 
drug policy re-form and we should thank him for that."

She also commended the other elected officials at the conference who have 
taken stands on these issues, saying, and "I know what it is like when 
other elected officials won't come near an issue because their afraid that 
somehow they will become tainted." Waters said she is beginning to see more 
elected officials beginning to ad-dress these issues and that in almost all 
cases it is turning out to be bi-partisan efforts. I am finding more and 
more friends on either side of the aisle, who want to see these laws 
change. I know it is lonely now, but I believe that it won't be long until 
you will be seen as heroes and she-roes."

On the final day of the conference we interviewed some attendees who were 
lounging in the atrium of the Hyatt Regency. "Governor Johnson has just 
energized our movement here. We were basically ignored until Governor 
Johnson brought it above the horizon," said a grinning Bruce Bush (no 
relation) who is a native of New Mexico and has been involved in the 
cannabis movement for years. Rosalyn, who is employed by the New Mexico 
Department of Health said, "I've learned a lot. I've also changed my mind 
completely. I feel now that we need to change our policies nationally as 
well as locally." A retired professor of history from California said, "my 
hopes are that this conference will have an impact on drug policy in this 
country. I don't see why the government should be involved in what we put 
in our bodies."

Three other men, Ken, Mike and Rufus were having a discussion among them 
and allowed us to join in. Mike is a constitutionalist professor from 
California who teaches political science. He was exited about being a part 
of the change and said he was thrilled to be at the conference. It was 
Ken's first time to attend. Rufus summed up the drug war in this way, "if 
the drug war is a success, then it is a nation ending one."

"I couldn't agree more," Mike said. "I'm mortified by what the drug war is 
doing to the American system of government. It's horrific. It's a frontal 
assault on the American Constitution."

Another attendee was a young man from Sacramento, California who said, " I 
think the most important thing about this conference is how it shows the 
racial disparity of the drug war. I think that's the most important thing 
to take away from here."

At lunch that last day, Governor Johnson was presented the Richard J. 
Dennis Drugpeace Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Drug 
Policy Reform. In his acceptance speech Johnson said, " I've always 
believed politics was high calling. I've been elected and given the 
opportunity to do good by people, which I believe public office is about. " 
But I'm sure that you wouldn't have a hard time finding 50,000 people to 
picket out there and swear that I have been nothing but scourge on this 
state," Johnson said, laughing. " I've never been in involved in politics 
before. This is my first political office." When Johnson decided to first 
run for governor the Republican Party of New Mexico told him it was 
impossible for him to win the election because of his political 
inexperience. Undeterred, Johnson, who owned his own successful company, 
which he had started as a small business, decided he would pay for his own 
campaign. "That meant I wasn't indebted to anyone once took office."

Johnson tells his detractors who say he is sending the wrong message to 
kids, " I say we should tell kids we love them and tell them the truth 
about pot, the truth about heroine. My message to my kids is don't do any 
of this stuff, but if you do and you're going to get in a car, call me and 
I'll come get you--no questions asked." In his denouncement of the drug 
war, Johnson said, "First of all we need to legalize marijuana.

Then we have to eliminate mandatory sentencing. We are letting violent 
criminals out of jail to make room for non-violent drug offenders. I say 
control, regulate, and tax marijuana you'll eliminate the gateway access. 
But saying marijuana is a gateway drug is like saying drinking beer is 
going to lead to Everclear, or that drinking milk is a gateway to alcohol." 
There was a roar of laughter from the crowd on this one. " Legalize 
marijuana and I believe overall there will be less substance abuse.

A powerful and eloquent orator, Johnson ended his speech by saying, "I 
believe this country was founded on life, liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness. I believe in limited government, individual responsibility and 
accountability and I believe in the Constitution of the United States of 
America. Drug prohibition is what is tearing this country apart--not drug 
use. This the biggest civil rights issue in the country. It is the biggest 
issue that will have the most positive impact on the world."

At the conclusion of the conference we briefly interviewed Ethan Nadelmann, 
the director of the Lindesmith Center. Millionaire, George Soros, who is 
devoted to ending the drug war, largely funds the Lindesmith Center. Since 
the foundation has put much money and resources into achieving victories in 
the war, we asked him what criteria the foundation uses to determine which 
states to target for their assistance. He said that the center looks for 
three things: elected officials who are willing to support drug policy 
reform, polls showing that at least 60 percent of the state's population 
supports the reforms, and the severity of the drug laws in that state. If 
the state meets the three criterions, then it receives the help it needs. 
The Lindesmith Center has been involved with all of the reform legislation 
passed over the last few years-- starting with California's Proposition 
215--medical marijuana. We-- the Free Press reporters asked him what he 
thought the chances of Arkansas be-coming one of the targeted states in the 
near future were. He told us that in 1997, the Center polled Arkansans on 
the medical marijuana issue and received only 50 percent support. "That was 
too low for us to take that kind of risk. But that was four years ago. I 
was just talking to Denele Campbell with the Alliance for the Reform of 
Drug Policy in Arkansas, and she told me things have changed a lot since 
then. We might give Arkansas a chance at the poll again sometime in the 
future." We asked him about the possibility of the conference being held in 
Little Rock, and he laughed and said, " You wouldn't believe the number of 
people who've been pitching me on holding it in their home town. There is a 
good chance, though, that we might have it somewhere in the South--

maybe Mobile or New Orleans but right now I just can't say. Los Angeles is 
also a possibility."

Based on that interview, it is clear that we have a lot of work to do in 
Arkansas, but if we accomplish some more, very soon, we will receive some 
significant help. One of good signs recently was the introduction of the 
marijuana decrim bill in the senate and it's current status as an interim 
study. In just the past year, many more Ar-kansans are becoming better 
educated on the issue and much more open to change. Right now, the Alliance 
for Reform of Drug Policy in Arkansas (ARDPARK) is gather-ng signatures on 
petitions to get the medical marijuana act on the ballot. If they succeed, 
then the eyes of the nation will be on Arkansas.

Of all the comments made by the attendees when we interviewed them, a 
middle-aged man named Dormy, who owned a hemp store in Athens, Ohio, made 
the one that was most descriptive and gripping. "I think the symbol chosen 
for the conference was really important-- the dove rising out of the water. 
That represents where the movement has been and where it's going. We were 
drowning, but now it looks like we're about to take off." He is right, and 
this conference and the huge advances made in New Mexico are just more 
proof that he is right. As of yet, no Southern state has made any serious 
attempts at drug policy reform. Why can't Arkansas be the first to rise up 
and take flight. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: GD