Will Foster: Almost a Free Man?

**** AS OF NOVEMBER 11TH, THE OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATION OF THE OKLAHOMA JUDGE IS THAT FOSTER BE RELEASED AND ALL OF HIS PAROLE REVOKED-- ESSENTIALLY MAKING HIM A FREE MAN. GOVERNOR BRAD HENRY OF OKLAHOMA MUST SIGN THE RECOMMENDATION TO FREE WILL. PLEASE FAX/EMAIL/CALL A BRIEF LETTER ASKING HIM TO FREE WILL FOSTER!!
EMAIL CLICK HERE
PHONE: 405.521.2342
FAX: 405.521.3353

Man sentenced to 93 years for marijuana cultivation finds himself in hot seat after parole
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
By Scott Cooper





For years, William Joseph Foster says he’s suffered from back pain, and the best remedy for easing his ache is marijuana. But the 51-year-old’s cultivation and usage of the drug led him through a 15-year journey of jail and court battles that are knotting up two states over his freedom.


A LONG, STRANGE TRIP TRIAL BY PHONENO REGRETS


Last week, the journey landed in an Oklahoma parole revocation hearing which at times was as bizarre as Foster’s case itself. Now the governor will have the final word on where the case ends.


The short version of the story goes something like this:


William Foster was arrested and charged in 1995 for growing marijuana at his Tulsa home. He was convicted and sentenced to 93 years in prison, considered an extreme punishment by marijuana advocates. A year after his conviction, a state appeals court reduced his sentence to 20 years. He was out on parole by 2001 and moved to California, where he would be supervised. In 2007, California ended its supervision, prompting Oklahoma officials to revise Foster’s supervision. A disagreement emerged between Foster and Oklahoma over the length of the parole, causing the state to issue a warrant, bringing Foster back to Oklahoma in 2008.


“It is very, very unusual,” said Milt Gilliam, administrator of parole and interstate services for the Oklahoma Department of Corrections.


A LONG, STRANGE TRIP


It all started in December of 1995 when Tulsa police raided Foster’s home and found dozens of marijuana plants and baggies. Foster claimed he grew the illegal drug for medical purposes, and his defense attorney called on Ed Rosenthal, an expert on marijuana cultivation and columnist of the pro-cannabis magazine High Times, to testify at his 1997 trial. Rosenthal told a jury that, while the amount of plants Foster was growing seemed like a lot, only a small portion could be used for smoking and not for distribution.


The case generated national attention, spurred by Rosenthal’s testimony, but what happened at the end of the trial took the case to the front pages.


Foster was found guilty on charges of cultivating and possessing marijuana with intent to distribute and having marijuana in the presence of a child as well as failing to obtain a drug tax stamp. For cultivating, Foster received a 70-year sentence, two years for intent to distribute, 20 years for the presence of a child and one year for the tax stamp charge.


The Tulsa World reported at the time that the judge in the case, Bill Beasley, had a standard practice of running the sentences consecutively, as opposed to many judges who run sentences concurrently, and Foster was given a total of 93 years in prison. The judge footnoted in his remarks that Foster could have received a lighter sentence if he had taken a plea deal offered by prosecutors of a 10- to 12-year prison sentence. Because he received such a lengthy sentence, prosecutors dropped drug charges against Foster from a different case.


But a year later, after Foster appealed his conviction and sentence to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, the court affirmed the conviction but found the sentence excessive and “disproportionate” to the facts of the case. The appeals court slashed the sentence from 93 years to 20.


“I think the discrepancy (currently between Foster and the state) is due to the fact that his original sentence was modified by the court of criminal appeals,” said Oklahoma City attorney Mike Arnett, currently representing Foster.


A few years after the new sentence, Foster was paroled by the state and allowed to move to California under the Interstate Compact Agreement. The compact involves one state allowing a parolee to relocate to another as long as the new state agrees to supervise its new resident.


But in 2007, Foster’s California parole officer believed the parole period had ended and released Foster from supervision — a move which scurried Oklahoma officials into action.


“The interstate compact rules basically state that the sending state determines how long the person is to be supervised,” Gilliam said. “They notified us they were closing the case. That’s why we attempted to get him back under supervision.


“When we talked to the state of California, they agreed (the case) shouldn’t have been closed.”


A year later, Foster’s home was raided by the FBI and California officers, yielding hundreds of marijuana plants. Foster was arrested, which led to his eventual return to Oklahoma.


TRIAL BY PHONE


Another year passed when Foster found himself sitting in a conference room on North Classen Boulevard fighting for his freedom. While the original case is rooted in Tulsa County, Oklahoma County had the only jail with space to house Foster.


Last week, the state began proceedings for a parole revocation hearing before an administrative law judge. The hearing operated as if it were held in a courtroom with a judge presiding. The state presented its case, submitting evidence and calling witnesses with Foster sitting next to his attorney doing the same and cross-examining. The unorthodox proceeding resembled a company board meeting more than a court trial as witnesses had to testify over the telephone. The room was not wired for long-distance phone calls, and witnesses gave testimony through the speaker of Gilliam’s cell phone.


The main point of contention is whether Foster’s parole closing date comes in 2011 or 2015. Foster contends it’s the first and signed an agreement with the state to abide by the supervision rules while in California. But the state claims it sent a second agreement proposal to Foster with the 2015 date. The second letter was mailed to Foster while he was still in California. Foster testified he took the letter to his California attorney who advised him not to sign it.


“He takes it to his attorney and says, ‘What about this,’ and his attorney says, ‘Don’t sign it, it will extend your parole by four years,’” Arnett said. “He basically hires counsel and acts on the advice of counsel.”


The argument centers on whether Foster is serving a sentence for one or two counts. Foster believes when the appeals court changed his sentence, it combined the counts. The state sees it differently, which is why the second letter was sent.


The state is asking that Foster’s parole be revoked on the grounds he violated the provisions of his parole and failed to sign a letter of agreement. Foster argues he did not violate his parole and did sign a letter.


The parole violation allegation stems from the raid on his California house. Authorities found Foster was growing nearly 300 marijuana plants in his garage. They also allege methamphetamine and Ecstasy pills were found in the house.


But Foster claims the marijuana cultivation is legal under the California Medical Marijuana Program and denies having meth and Ecstasy in his house. Arnett said federal prosecutors decided not to file any charges after Foster requested the confiscated drugs be sent to a lab for testing.


NO REGRETS


Under Oklahoma law, the governor decides whether convicted felons may be released from parole or have their parole revoked and sent back to prison. The hearing’s administrative judge will make a recommendation to the governor.


The governor actually has several options to choose besides revoking or not, including leaving Foster on parole but modifying the parole discharge date.


“Worst case is they revoke his parole,” Arnett said. “Best case is they don’t, and he goes back to California.”


Leaving the hearing in chains and shackles, Foster said he could have signed the second letter and would be back in California living a freer life. But he said he has no regrets about his decision because for him it’s about the principle of the matter.


The case comes amid the backdrop of California’s laws, which allow for the cultivation of marijuana, and the recent decision by the federal government to not pursue criminal cases of medical marijuana where states have legalized it. Advocates for the drug argue more states should adopt the California model, which would help with prison overcrowding and save taxpayer dollars from prosecuting marijuana users looking to relieve pain.


But Gilliam said never once did it enter into his mind when pursuing to revoke Foster’s parole that his was a case of medical marijuana, nor is it his intent to send Foster back to prison.


“The purpose is not to punish Mr. Foster,” Gilliam said. “Under the interstate compact agreement, I am bound that if someone is in their state in violation of that compact, I am bound to get them out of the state one way or another. That is why we attempted to get him under supervision there or return him to Oklahoma.”


There is no timetable on when the judge will make a recommendation or when the governor will make a final decision on revoking Foster’s parole. —Scott Cooper

Join Ed at the MPP 15th Anniversary Party in Washington D.C. on Capitol Hill in

Marijuana Policy Project is celebrating 15 years of working to reform marijuana laws in the United States.

Ed has purchased a table (ten seats) and would like you to join him and his wife, Jane, at the party! Tickets are a $200 donation to MPP and there are eight seats available. If there is more of a demand for tickets more will be made available.

Guests will sit with Ed at the MPP party and enjoy some goodies with him as well (and a thank you bag c/o Ed for donating to MPP). You are welcome to also to donate a seat to a legislative aid or activist.

Please contact Ed's assistant, Angela if you are interested in purchasing a ticket. angela@quicktrading.com/ (510) 533-0605 ext.5#.

Checks can be made out to Marijuana Policy Foundation and sent to:

Ed Rosenthal
c/o Quick Trading Company
9 Lake Ave
Piedmont, CA 94611

Facebook Cause: Green Aid

Donate to Eugene Davidovich for my birthday!

http://apps.facebook.com/causes/birthdays/211437

Prop 215 Anniversary Surprise

Today is Friday, November 6, 2009. Thirteen years ago the day after the state election when voters passed Proposition 215 and made medical marijuana legal in California. It has been momentous, a slow moving earthquake that is convulsing around the world.

Dennis Peron, now a San Francisco icon, was honorably discharged from the armed services and arrived in San Francisco with a pound of Southeast Asia’s best. He first realized marijuana was also a medicine when it helped his life partner as he died of AIDS before the antivirals were developed. Soon after he opened up the first dispensary and put himself on the line, Dennis decided to start an initiative. The rest is history, or I should say, current events. But pinch yourself; we are in an historic moment.

When Dennis opened his dispensary he created an avalanche that is still reverberating around the world. Every dispensary owes its creation in some way to this man. Yesterday, I was down in Los Angeles and happened to pick up the L.A. Times. I was surprised when I read a headline “Pot Seizures Quadruple in L.A. County”. But that doesn’t tell the full story, it was accompanied by a graphic that showed that between 2004 and 2008 the number of plants seized rose from 1 million to more than 4.5 million-- and this wasn’t Iowa ditch weed either. (Iowa: Fields of Opportunities!)


(PICTURE: a good place to grow).



You would think that cops might get the idea that people think pot should be legal. Here in California gym classes have 60 students, schools are dropping their after school enrichment programs, The California State University System gets a “furlough holiday” once a week, the physically disabled are being thrown off of welfare, nutrition programs for pregnant women have been cut. With such a high rate of pot seizures, one could assume that California law enforcement has solved virtually every murder, rape, or robbery in the state, why else would the cops have been able through all of this to spend so much time on pot?

As I looked at this, I was sort of detached from it in that I didn’t have a direct one to onr relationship with this - or to translate that, I wasn’t growing a large pot field out in the country, so I wasn’t worrying about any pot being seized.

That was yesterday, November 5th; the 13th anniversary of the vote, today is November 6th, 13 years to the day the initiative became effective. I went to the airport to fly back to Oakland, and of course I was carrying my pipe and pot as well as my medical marijuana ID card and as fate would have it, I was stopped because of it.





The TSA assistant directed me to remove the contents of my right pocket and I pulled out my wallet, when he asked me to empty the contents of my left pocket I pulled out my pipe.

“What’s this?” he asked, “It’s my medical marijuana pipe, ” I said. He asked me to step aside and escorted me to another location where we were accompanied LAPD. “Obama, Obama, Obama,” I muttered under my breath.

The TSA and the cop conferred and decided that they would be confiscating my pipe.

“You can’t have this pipe, it’s my pipe,” I said.

They then informed me that they would not only take it, but would be citing me for having it.

“If you take my pipe, you will see me in court because there is no law you can cite me for.”

The TSA tell me that because he is a TSA he has to take it.

I say to the cop, “Are you going to arrest me or is he going to cite me?”

I turn to the TSA agent, and say “There is no law which either of you can cite or arrest me, that’s why it is my pipe.”

The two of them conferred again and decided I could go, with my pipe.

Most people they would harass would just have given up the pipe. I wouldn’t be surprised if these bullies don’t have a business selling stolen pot and used pipes. I picked up my carry on and as I was leaving I said to the cop, “You know, people wouldn’t resent you if you treated them with respect and didn’t hassle them about pot. Have a nice day sir.”

In that moment I realized something, he had distanced himself from the situation just as I had the day before – he believe he had nothing to do with the headline “Pot Seizures Quadruple in Los Angeles County.” Did they think if they took my pipe and pot I would stop using it? Just think of it, they are helping the drug trade, because if they seize my pot, I am going to replace it and they can keep the price high!

So there is only one solution to this problem- overgrow the government!

Ask Ed Marijuana Grow Tip #8: Bud Storage

My harvest has been cured and is drying. I have more than I can use in the next three months. How can I package it to preserve it?

Jimmy Joint,
Albany, AL

---

Place the bud in wood, glass, or hard plastic containers. Keep the containers in the refrigerator at 40-45° F (4.5-7 °C). This will preserve your buds for months with no degradation. To store them for longer periods, place the sealed containers in the freezer. Your buds will be enjoyable and potent for many years to come.

U.S. v. $186,416 in Currency (9th Cir. - Oct. 20, 2009)

From Scott and Shaun via Facebook
---

Here's a timely opinion. Particularly given the Obama administration's recent statement that it will generally no longer go after medical marijuana clinics as long as their activities are legal under state law. (Needless to say, the focal point of this exception is right here in California.)

The opinion by Judge Clifton highlights a variety of things; most particularly, the complexities that arise as a result of marijuana being legal (in certain settings) under state law but still illegal under federal law. As applied here, this creates for both doctrinal and practical difficulties in two settings: (1) in ascertaining the legality of searches, and (2) in assessing the validity of asset forfeitures.

Here, for example, the LAPD got a search warrant from a state court judge to raid a marijuana clinic in LA -- the United Medical Caregivers Clinic ("UMCC") on Wilshire. The problem being that in getting the warrant, the LAPD pitched the facility as just being a regular old place where you can buy pot, and didn't tell the judge any of the facts the LAPD knew that suggested that the place was providing weed legally under the Compassionate Use Act. So the state judge approved the warrant, but the district court (rightly) held that this warrant was invalid given the LAPD's deception, and hence the search was illegal under the Fourth Amendment.

So that solves any potential criminal liability. But what about the $186,000+ the LAPD seized from the place? UMCC wants it back, but the LAPD -- not surprisingly -- wants to keep it. It knows, however, that the warrant was no good, and also doesn't want to have to prove that the place was illegal under state law, since it probably wasn't.

So what does the LAPD do? It turns the money over to the feds. Who then file their own action to forfeit the cash under federal law, since -- remember -- marijuana's still illegal under federal law and hence the assets subject to forfeiture.

So UMCC seems like it's in trouble. But it responds: "I'm still entitled to my cash back because you got it -- and all the evidence against me -- from an illegal search." Which is true, of course. But the district court (Judge Wilson) says: "Not so, at least for forfeiture purposes. That UMCC may have been selling medical marijuana was admittedly relevant to whether a warrant for state law violations was proper, but clearly UMCC possessed chronic in violation of federal law. Given this fact, I don't think application of the exclusionary rule is proper." (There's some more stuff about some procedural complexities under Rule 41, but I'll leave this aside. You get the gist.)

UMCC then appeals to the Ninth Circuit. Which unanimously reverses. Judge Clifton authors the opinion and holds that, no, the exclusionary rule indeed applies here because even though there may have been a violation of state law, that's not what the warrant was based on: a state judge issues warrants for state violations, and for that, the warrant here was improper. Maybe a federal judge could have issued a warrant, but that didn't happen. So given that the warrant was improper and the search illegal, we're going to exclude the results of the search and give the cash back to UMCC.

Doctrinally, Judge Clifton's analysis makes sense. But he also makes a practical point that I found equally -- if not more -- compelling.

Recall who (effectively) lied to the state court judge in order to get the warrant. The LAPD. As well as who conducted the illegal search: The LAPD. Finally, who's likely to get the bulk of the proceeds from any permitted forfeiture? Yep, that same LAPD.

This matters. To Judge Clifton -- an eminently reasonable fellow -- as well as Judges Hawkins and Berzon, both of whom share Judge Clifton's keen (and important) understanding of the way the world actually works. Judge Clifton says:

"We are particularly concerned by the possibility that the LAPD might stand to profit from unlawful activity. It would be objectionable that any unit of government might profit from the LAPD’s actions, but even greater concern arises here from the suggestion in UMCC’s opening brief, not denied by the government, that the LAPD 'stands to receive up to 80% of any forfeiture obtained by the federal government in this case.' Although the record on appeal contains no indication of how any forfeiture proceeds might be divided between the federal government and the LAPD, we recognize the distinct and disturbing possibility that the LAPD could profit from its own illegal activity, were the government to prevail."

I hear ya. That'd matter to me as well. Generally, you shouldn't make money -- lots of it -- as a result of conducting an illegal search. Which is another reason, wholly beyond doctrine, why the illegality of the initial search should extend to the present forfeiture action.

So Judge Wilson gets reversed and UMCC gets its $186,000 back. Plus interest.

So there should be a good party on or around Wilshire Boulevard tonight.
Posted by Shaun Martin at 2:19 PM

Sunday, OAKLAND TRIBUNE: GOLDEN STATE's GREEN FUTURE

Just in from Stockton, Mary parks her car and enters the downtown Oakland coffeehouse -- but she hasn't come all this way for a cup of joe.

Instead, she peruses a menu of dozens of strains and preparations of marijuana, all grown in California, all taxed, all legal. Producing a wad of cash and proof of her age -- but no doctor's note -- for a fragrant ounce of "purple kush," she departs a satisfied customer, perhaps grabbing a snack at a nearby restaurant before hitting the highway.

This could be California's near future, what with three marijuana-legalization initiatives in circulation for the November 2010 ballot. A legislative bill is pending as well, although it's being revamped by its author.

Groups such as the National Association for the Reform of Marijuana Laws and the Marijuana Policy Project favored waiting at least until 2012, when a presidential vote might mobilize a younger, more progressive electorate. But these measures' proponents believe shifting attitudes and the economic crisis make 2010 the time to act.

They say legalization makes fiscal sense as well as moral sense -- ending the centurylong practice of criminalizing a widely used substance that's less harmful than alcohol, America's legal drug of choice. They tout an immediate, massive savings in state and local law enforcement and corrections costs, and perhaps significant new revenue; a state Board of Equalization study found California could reap $1.3 billion a year from licensing and taxing what's already its biggest -- albeit off-the-books -- cash crop, if the federal ban on marijuana is lifted.

But many in law enforcement contend whatever money is saved and made wouldn't be worth the harm done to communities.

Measure of Movement

Of the three ballot measures seeking petition signatures, the one with the most money and buzz behind it would legalize personal cultivation and use but would let local governments choose whether to allow commercial cultivation and retail sales of up to an ounce at a time, creating a patchwork of "wet" and "dry" cities and counties.

"It's up to the local jurisdictions for what works best, just as we have alcohol laws," said co-proponent and Oaksterdam University President Richard Lee, who could see his business -- providing "quality training for the cannabis industry" -- grow exponentially if his measure passes.

Co-proponent Jeff Jones directed the now-defunct Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative and now runs its successor, the Patient ID Center, in Oakland and Los Angeles. They've hired a professional petition drive management firm, and went in expecting to spend about $1 per signature.

"We got 206,000 in the first three weeks, so that's about 32 percent in 14 percent of the time," Lee said. "We think we'll be done maybe a little after Thanksgiving at the rate we're going. People have been ripping the petition blanks out of our hands, they're so eager to sign them."

But would marijuana be sold in coffeehouses, in dedicated stores, in liquor stores or in a neighborhood drugstore? Where and when could one smoke? What kind of advertising would be permitted? Could California employees of national companies be fired for testing positive for cannabis? All these questions and many more would be left up to state and local lawmakers.

Lee hopes places that choose to allow, regulate and tax commercial sales -- most likely the more liberal, coastal areas at first -- would adopt a "coffeehouse" model like Amsterdam's, which proliferated for a while in Oakland under California's medical marijuana law. Such businesses balance sensitivity to the community with knowledgeable customer service, better than impersonal mass-market retail sales, he said.

Nation vs. States

The wild card is federal law, which still bans all cannabis cultivation, use and sale. The Obama administration advised federal prosecutors last month not to pursue medical marijuana patients and providers adhering to their states' laws. But while health is often constitutionally considered to be within states' purview, interstate commerce and control of dangerous drugs has been federal territory, and there's no telling whether the first county to authorize a big, commercial farm growing marijuana for recreational use would see it immediately busted by the Drug Enforcement Administration.

All the measures' proponents hope legalization in California -- a state comprising about 12 percent of the nation's population, and a higher percentage of its agriculture and commerce -- would lead other states and eventually the federal government to do the same. Until then, California once again would be a trailblazer, with all the potential headaches accompanying that distinction.

Those headaches would include increased drug abuse and its accompanying crime, according to law enforcement officials who testified at an Assembly Public Safety Committee hearing Wednesday in Sacramento.

Committee chairman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, in February introduced a bill that would legalize marijuana cultivation, sales, possession and use by adults, regulating it somewhat like alcohol; Wednesday's hearing was to gather input as he rewrites the bill to address concerns raised this year.

Officials from various law enforcement agencies and associations testified that legalization under any scheme could lead to more, not less, use by children; more people driving under the influence, causing more injuries and deaths; decreased worker productivity that could hurt the economy; and the continuance of a thriving black market. California Peace Officers' Association President John Standish said there's "no way marijuana legalization could protect or promote society -- in fact, it radically diminishes it."

After the hearing, Sally Fairchild -- deputy director of the Northern California High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, who had testified on behalf of the California Narcotic Officers Association -- said a wet-and-dry county scenario like that envisioned by Lee and Jones' measure would be "unenforceable" as a practical matter. Any county choosing to regulate commercial cultivation and sale will become "the dope dealer for that region," fueling rampant black market operations.

Cops Aren't Only Critics

Some say Lee and Jones' measure doesn't go far enough. Dennis Peron, a proponent of 1996's successful medical marijuana ballot measure, Proposition 215, recently likened limits set by Lee and Jones' measure to a hypothetical law allowing only one bottle of wine in a home: "These limits guarantee confusion, harassment and black marketeering forevermore."

There's no exception from the prohibition on "smoking cannabis in any space while minors are present" for parents in their homes, he noted in a recent statement. "We don't lock up parents for having a glass of wine with dinner, and we certainly don't tell the kids to leave the house for the purpose of consuming any other substance, so why start with cannabis?"

And taxation would maintain cannabis "as the most expensive, blatantly overpriced product on the market thus forcing most people to choose cheaper, more dangerous drugs," Peron wrote. "Surely we can do better than this. How about just legalizing it?"

Alternative Views

Another proposed ballot measure seems closer to that scenario. One of its proponents, San Francisco attorney James Clark, was helping Lee and Jones draft their measure when he hit upon what he believes is a better plan.

Lee and Jones' limits on personal cultivation and use encourages "very much a commercial model, very much keeping prohibition alive," Clark said, while his proposal seeks to "make this like soybeans" so anyone can grow and use as much as they want for themselves, which he believes will actually reduce demand in the long run. Commercial cultivation and sales would be licensed and taxed; Clark envisions big farms furnishing cannabis products to retail outlets -- perhaps liquor stores, perhaps drugstores.

Clark said his measure "was never meant to be a really viable petition," lacking funding and full-time staff members, but "we're really starting to get traction. "... If our growth continues to be exponential, it's possible we'll make the ballot." He acknowledges, however, that Lee and Jones' measure is more likely to qualify.

John Donohue, 84, of Long Beach -- a marijuana user since 1946, embittered by his five arrests for the drug -- offers another measure, co-authored with longtime marijuana and Peace and Freedom Party activist Casey Peters, of Los Angeles. Donohue said they tried to keep it simple -- specifics of taxation and regulation would "just have to be worked out in the process" -- and hoped people would get behind it, but their petition drive has stalled as Lee and Jones' measure gets most of the exposure.

"(We are) giving various interviews and telling people what our position is and hoping we can start a movement," he said. "The main point is: Stop arresting people for a non-crime. I have bumper stickers that say, 'Show me the crime.'"%"

The Next Budweiser?

Ultimately, any legalized marijuana scenario will have pluses and minuses, says Mark Kleiman, professor of public policy and director of the Drug Policy Analysis Program at the UCLA.

"How much different does it look than today? You don't have to get a phony doctor's recommendation," he said. "How much bigger would the market be than it is today? There's no way to tell."

But Kleiman predicts it would be bigger, especially if commercial advertising -- print, online, radio and television ads, billboards, catchy jingles -- becomes commonplace.

"Do we get brand names? You can imagine this becoming like the liquor industry," he said. "I don't think it's the end of the world. But if we go the whole commercial route, I think you will have more drug abuse."

If a million more Californians take up marijuana use, "we'll have another 100,000 pretty screwed up on it. Being screwed up on marijuana might not be as bad as being screwed up on alcohol, but it's still bad enough," Kleiman said. "Unlike some people, I don't think the stuff's harmless."

Yet, with careful regulation and steps to avoid commercialization, California could do far worse, he said. "Do I believe the state could get half a billion out of this (in taxes)? Yeah I do. Do I think it could also save a couple of hundred million (on law enforcement)? Yes, probably."

[sidebar]

THE PLANS TO LEGALIZE POT

. Assembly Bill 390: Introduced in February by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, it would legalize marijuana cultivation, sales, possession and use by people 21 and older, regulating it somewhat like alcohol. A license to grow for sale would cost $5,000 to start and then $2,500 to renew each year, and a $50-per-ounce tax would be placed on retail sales. Ammiano said he hopes this would bring upward of $1.4 billion per year for drug abuse prevention efforts. No taxation would occur unless the federal marijuana ban is lifted; otherwise, the bill's only effect would be legalization of personal cultivation and use. Ammiano held the bill in committee this year, and is now rewriting it to put it forth again in January.

. The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010: Proposed by Oakland marijuana activists Richard Lee and Jeff Jones, it would legalize personal possession of up to an ounce of cannabis and up to 25 square feet of cultivation per home. It also would give local governments the option of whether to permit, regulate and tax commercial sales, a system akin to show alcohol is or isn't sold in "wet" and "dry" counties in some states. This seems to be the measure to watch; the proponents say their petition drive is surging, and its endorsements include that of Oakland mayoral candidate and former state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata. For details, go to www.taxcannabis2010.org.

. The Tax, Regulate and Control Cannabis Act of 2010: Advanced by proponents Joe Rogoway, Omar Figueroa and James Clark, all of San Francisco, it would legalize personal cultivation and use without limits, but would require -- not just allow -- state and local governments to regulate and tax commercial marijuana cultivation and sales. Tax revenues would have to be spent on education, health care, environmental programs, public works and state parks. For details, go to www.californiacannabisinitiative.org.

. The Common Sense Act of 2010: Advanced by proponent John Donohue, of Long Beach, it would require the Legislature to adopt laws regulating and taxing marijuana within one year, but would let local governments choose whether to also tax marijuana's cultivation, sale, and use. For details, go to www.grasstax.org.

MAKE ME! (Do It)

Regular readers of my blog know that one of the problems that the U.S. and the world are facing is Obama’s severe case of Marijuana Deficiency Syndrome (MDS). Symptoms of this condition, are loss of grounding and acceptance of facts that are “generally regarded as true” without thorough examination. One example: dithering over whether to just continue the war, obliterate Afghanistan, or give them war reparations in the form of a trade agreement allowing the import of Afghani hash. Which would you choose?

Another symptom is Obama taking advice from the pinstripe bankers and speculators, rather than outfitting them in horizontal black and whites with the occasional orange or spring green jumpsuit for variety (or as Maricopa County, Arizona’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio- pink underwear).

However, his handling of the health care bill wending its way through Congress has been astute. Marijuana activists can gain insight by looking at this struggle for health care. It has a lot of parallels with our efforts to reform marijuana laws.

Obama was in favor of both marijuana and single-payer health care in the past. When he took office he started working on health care but single-payer wasn’t part of his original proposal. There was outrage among his supporters who started a campaign to energize the public and pressure recalcitrant legislators.

This is exactly how Roosevelt moved some of his most important programs including Social Security. He created expectations. Then when the proposals didn’t deliver what people had expected, public pressure eventually pushed the programs forward.

Attorney General Holder’s recent half-hearted memorandum calling off the DEA from enforcement of federal laws in medical states has changed the paradigm and increased the distance between expectations and the reality of enforcement. Most people see “A Great Awakening” or “A New Opening” and have believed the headline version of Holder’s story.

A closer reading of his statement doesn’t leave me as optimistic about federal policy. It can be easily summed up- “DEA Agents: our policy is not to bust medical marijuana suppliers and users… But if you do, no harm done, and don’t worry, defendants can’t use government policy as a defense in court.” You can see how far apart expectations are from reality.

Expectations presuppose future action. You know, WE WANT POT LEGAL NOW rather than “Please Mr. Legislator, would you pretty please consider changing the marijuana laws?” A slight difference in inflection says it all.

Will you just accept Holder’s statement with a hearty thank you? Or will this slight concession create a demand for more?

I think the answer can be seen in the California marijuana movement. Tom Ammiano’s bill (A.B. 390), which would legalize marijuana, is being discussed in the state legislature today.

Along with A.B. 390, two competing initiatives are gathering signatures and are likely to be on the ballot. Both will make marijuana legal. The legalization movement is flexing its muscles. It can smell the smoke of legalization coming from the dispensaries and can taste the future without having cops in the marijuana equation.

So what can you do to help? There are two ways.

First, GET ACTIVE: participate in demonstrations, write letters, join organizations, and pass on the information to your friends and family.

Second, - JOINTS FOR OBAMA. Barack is still suffering from MDS! Ever since he won last November he hasn’t been able to get any good stuff and has to sneak cigarettes. Send him a joint. Maybe one will get through, he’ll get high and get more grounded- even though he’ll be flying.

(AP) Parole Revocations Sought For Pot Grower

By SEAN MURPHY
Associated Press Writer

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) -- In a case highlighted by advocates seeking to reform Oklahoma's drug laws, the state on Wednesday sought to revoke the parole of a man sentenced to decades in prison for growing marijuana that he says was used to treat his arthritis pain.

William Joseph Foster, 51, initially was sentenced in Tulsa County to 93 years in prison after authorities uncovered a pot growing operation in the basement of his Tulsa home in 1995. A state appeals court later reduced that term to 20 years in prison, and he was released on parole in 2001.

During Wednesday's parole revocation hearing, the Department of Corrections argued before an administrative law judge that Foster violated the terms of his parole while living in California by using and growing marijuana in that state and failing to follow his parole officer's directions.

Milt Gilliam, administrator of parole and interstate services for the Department of Corrections, said the parole revocation was sought because Foster refused to sign paperwork that would have kept him under the department's supervision.

"Our main issue and concern is that Mr. Foster is still under parole and needs to be under supervision," Gilliam said.

Foster maintains he was released from supervision by a parole officer in California overseeing his case, and he claims he refused to sign the paperwork on the advice of an attorney because it would have extended his parole by four years.

Foster has been in jail since March 2008, when he was arrested in California on a parole violation warrant that Oklahoma issued.

A federal drug enforcement agent testified via conference call Wednesday that officers recovered hundreds of marijuana plants, five pounds of processed marijuana, methamphetamine and Ecstasy pills when they raided his Santa Rosa, Calif., home.

But Foster was never charged in California, and his attorney presented evidence that Foster had a license to grow and use marijuana in that state for medicinal purposes.

As prison guards shackled Foster after Wednesday's hearing, he acknowledged he likely could have remained in California with his family if he'd signed the paperwork, but said, "It's more the principle. I just didn't agree with it."

The administrative law judge now will issue her recommendation to Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry, who can choose to revoke any portion of the six years remaining on Foster's parole.

Advocates for reforming marijuana laws in Oklahoma say a tremendous amount of state resources is being wasted on the nonviolent drug case.

"We're spending all this time, effort and money on one man when our prisons are already full," said Norma Sapp, director of the Oklahoma chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. "I bet we could send six kids to college on what we've spent to keep Will in prison."

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

2010 Big Buds 16 Month Calendar is NOW AVAILABLE!

New 7" size, click below to order yours today! Makes a great gift for Christmas!!

Ask Ed Marijuana Grow Tip #7: Are My Buds Ready?

So I recently harvested my buds, are they ready for consumption?

---

The “stick test” is a good indication of bud dryness. Bend the little stem that holds the bud together. If it bends, the bud is still too wet. If it snaps, the bud has dried sufficiently.

The next test is the joint test- roll a thin joint. If the bud stays lit a bit and doesn’t go out between puffs, then it is ready for storing and aging. It is still too wet when it needs constant relighting. Wet bud is not only inconvenient, it won’t get you as high as dry bud because the cannabinoids have not become active.

Obama's Statement on Federal Medical Marijuana Busts

I was so overjoyed when I first heard about Obama’s statement regarding the prosecution of medical marijuana patients and caregivers that I started singing “Happy Days Are Here Again”. I was overjoyed that our Joints for Obama campaign had finally shown some results. As I understand it, the White House received over 10,000 joints.

When you read the newspapers, you heard that the federal government has changed its policy regarding busting medical marijuana suppliers who are staying within state regulations. That is exactly what we wanted, but the devil is in the details, and further down in the pronouncement he says that even though this is the federal government’s policy, if a DEA agent or prosecutor violates the policy, he says “no harm done’

Then, Obama makes a statement that defendants should not expect to be able to bring up the federal policy as their defense. So even though a supplier is following state policy and it is against federal policy to bust them, a federal agent can still bust them, the person can still be prosecuted, and cannot use federal policy as a defense. Thanks a lot! You better smoke some more joints President Obama, because you still haven’t gotten it right. It is not the heads that should be busted, it’s the feds who violate every moral principal when they bust the healers!

President Obama is the world’s biggest arms dealer. He is advocating expansion of the war in Afghanistan. He has overseen the biggest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the upper class with his $2 trillion bailout package of rich gamblers. He is pushing for continuation of the USA PATRIOT Act, and he wont even allow gardeners to grow herbs to heal the sick.

Maybe Lech Walesa, the Nobel laureate, former prime minister of Poland, and the labor union leader who stood up to the Soviet Union and helped bring it down, was right. The Nobel Prize may have been a bit premature. A peace prize to the world’s biggest arms dealer? A generalissimo who is in charge of bases in 80 lands with active wars going on in five: Iraq, Afghanistan, Columbia, Pakistan, and the Drug War fought here at home, and who is threatening other countries worldwide from North Korea to Venezuela to Cuba and Iran.

It is obvious. Obama smoked some bunk. He needs to smoke some really good stuff that will get him thinking about where he is at, where the country is at, and how he can actually help people besides his banker friends.

While the pundits may have some good prognostications about the health of this country, I see a different story when I walk down the street and see the stores for rent, I am sure you see that too. Serious analysts are predicting a real recovery years away that will be coupled with the restructuring of the world’s economy.

With all of these problems, my question is, why cant Obama do this simple thing, an executive order NO MORE BUSTS FOR MARIJAUNA, save the money for college scholarships instead.

Hey Prez, I know you read my blog, Just do it.

The Age of Unreason

Ed is and will be in Amsterdam for most of the month of October.

The battle between myth and reason was the heart of the Renaissance, which ushered in the Age of Reason. For the first time in two millenia, philosophers and scientists were discovering or rediscovering ideas that we take for granted today; the ideas of cause and effect, the use of observation and controlled experiments.

We use these simple and elegant thought processes and the science created through these methods in our daily lives. We know that when we flip a switch a light will turn on but not necessarily how electricity works. This seems so apparent that most of us don't think to question it. We experience science at work in our lives all day long without questioning it- from the time we turn on a light, use a car or an elevator or cook food using a microwave.

So there is a cognitive dissonance when we accept the scientific concept of observation and controlled experimentation for only part of our decision making and continue to rely on myth for the rest.

In essence, this is the war being fought between the fundamentalist Christians of the west and the fundamentalist Muslims of the East, Are we living in a world where effect follows cause or is there some supernatural force that like Greek or Roman Gods, alters human fate?

This is the same type of civil war that is being fought in many Western countries. The fight of reason versus ideology. With reason you have to change your opinion to match observed reality. With ideology as your guide, you just have to change facts to match your opinions. That sounds crazy, doesn’ t it?

Let’s see how it works in action. In Holland they decided to deal with the drug problem they were facing in the late 20th century by dividing drugs into two groups, soft and hard. Soft drugs were pot, hash, and psilocybin mushrooms. Everything else was considered hard. Coffee shops were permitted to sell soft drugs but not hard in order to separate the sources of supply.

This experiment has worked out extremely well according to the psychologists and sociologists who have studied the results. Holland has the lowest rate in Europe for both hard and soft drug use. There is little crime associated with it.


In the United States marijuana was cassified as a dangerous and illicit substance. Millions of people were incarcerated, their lives shattered at a cost that has bankrupted several state governments.

Today in Holland, right-wing ideologists don’t really care that this harm reduction strategy has been amazingly successful. It doesn’t fit into their world view so it isn’t right and the program must be eliminated. They believe the coffee shops should be shut down. The growers should be jailed and the seed breeders must be stopped.

Will it hurt the tourist industry? It doesn’t matter.

Will it put kids in harm's way from hard drugs like cocaine and heroin? The kids who use drugs shouldn’t. These are "bad kids" so it doesn’t matter.

Will it be costly and ineffective? It doesn’t matter. We know what is right.

So there you have it folks. The Age of Unreason is unfolding in Holland, the center of rational government for 400 years. Brought to you by a group of people who just don’t know about evolution, but they know what and who is right and wrong. And if you’re reading this blog, you are probably one of the evildoers, who must be controlled.

It would be laughable to think that Holland is going backwards while the rest of the world is marching forward, if it weren’t true.

CA Narcotic Offcer's Association Awards for Operation Green Rx

Please join us in recognizing CNOA Region IV's (San Deigo and Imperial Counties) Award Recipients:

Frank Cortez, DOJ/BNE- Narcotic Officer of the Year

Tia Quick DDA - Prosecutor of the Year

Operation Stampeded and Operation Endless Summer (AKA OPERATION GREEN RX)- Teams of the Year

tickets can be purchased in advance by contacting:

James Doherty at (619) 980-8274
Mary Ellen Barret (619) 807-0887
Roxie Vigil (619) 454-4051

or cnoa4reservations@gmail.com

WE ARE ASKING THAT YOU COME TO THIS EVENT AND PEACEFULLY PROTEST. PLEASE DO NOT INTERRUPT THE MEETING BUT SHOW YOUR SOLIDARITY FOR THE VICTIMS OF OPERATION GREEN RX.

YOU DO NOT NEED TO PURCHASE TICKETS BUT ARE WELCOME TO.

IF YOU DO NOT LIVE IN OR AROUND SAN DIEGO, CA OR ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND, YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO SEND LETTERS OF -RESPECTFUL AND ARTICULATE- PROTEST TO

CA NARCOTIC OFFICER'S ASSOCIATION
10/22/2009
C/O DOUBLETREE HOTEL
7450 HAZARD CENTER DRIVE
SAN DIEGO, CA 92108

US Farmers Plant Hemp on DEA Front Lawn

By David Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 14, 2009

You want to dig a garden, you need a shovel. You want to dig a guerrilla garden of illegal hemp on the front lawn of Drug Enforcement Administration headquarters and get arrested for the cameras, you need a symbol.

Shortly before they all were happily handcuffed Tuesday, the farmers took one look at what the activists had brought to dig with, and just shook their heads.

The symbolic shovels were shiny, chrome-plated affairs, the kind for turning the earth in a Washington photo op, stamped with slogans: "Reefer Madness Will Be Buried." When the shovel blades were experimentally pressed into the mulch outside the group's hotel, they bent like toys.

"You'll have a real hard time getting through the grass," observed Wayne Hauge, 51, a North Dakota farmer whose previous interactions with police amount to a ticket for driving an overloaded truck of lentils. "Not exactly the divot I was thinking of."

But never mind.

Time to leave for the demonstration, the protest, the blow against the empire of DEA regulations.

They piled into a 1985 Mercedes-Benz painted the color of a Granny Smith apple. Its diesel engine had been converted to run on waste cooking oil supplied for free by a restaurant in Columbia Heights. For the adventure, Adam Eidinger, communications director for the advocacy group Vote Hemp and owner of the Mercedes, spiked the cooking grease with waste hemp oil. He was wearing pants, shirt, socks and shoes all made from hemp.

The hemp mobile purred over the Potomac River on the road to Arlington.

Farmers and activists say that industrial hemp, as they call it, will not get you high. It has minuscule levels of THC compared with marijuana. But unlike governments in Canada, Europe and China, the DEA will not allow it to be cultivated in the United States, much less on its own front lawn across from the Pentagon City mall. So the expanding industry, estimated at $360 million annually by advocates, is based on imports.

Hauge has been certified to grow hemp by North Dakota. He thinks the crop will help his fourth-generation family farm thrive. He has a federal case on appeal to force the DEA to yield to the state law.
ad_icon

Also in the car was Will Allen, 73, an organic sunflower and canola farmer from East Thetford, Vt. He has been arrested for protesting the Iraq war, he said. He wants to add organic hemp in rotation with his other crops.

(Read the rest at the Washington Post)