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.