Monday, May 31, 2004

'Drugged driver' law facing court challenges It's really, really bad law and the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal reports that it's about to get some constitutional scrutiny at the state level. A new law aimed at so-called drugged drivers is facing constitutional challenges as the first prosecutions under the legislation go to court. Instead of establishing a threshold by which drivers who have used illegal substances could be judged to be impaired, lawmakers have made it unlawful for drivers to have "any detectable amount" of drugs such as cocaine, marijuana and Ecstasy in their bloodstreams. Those words are now the targets of defense attorneys. "Unlike consumers of alcohol for which empirical evidence shows a relationship between blood level and impairment, drug users can be penalized for the mere use of a restricted substance even after considerable time has passed, so long as it is allegedly detected even under what is here an undefined standard," defense attorney Laurence M. Moon wrote in a case involving a Milwaukee man being prosecuted under the law. "This discrepancy is irrational." I'm not sure what the grounds would be specifically at the state level, but I hope this law gets shot down. I'd be interested to watch the government try to defend their compelling interest in an "any detectable amount" provision. "It is very typical for the question to be raised about whether the new law is constitutional," said Janine Geske, a distinguished professor at Marquette University Law School and former state Supreme Court justice. "Because this law is not like operating while intoxicated and there is no specified amount, I think that is a serious, legitimate issue to raise. "Whether it will rise to the level of making it unconstitutional remains to be seen." We'll be watching. 5:30:01 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Positive Development in Hemp Fiber An interesting release came out about 2 weeks ago from Hemptown Clothing: Hemptown Clothing Inc., a leading provider of environmentally responsible clothing, is pleased to announce that it has entered into a collaboration with the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) on the development of a patentable enzyme technology process that may see hemp fibers replace cotton worldwide. The collaboration between Hemptown and NRC is intended to produce hemp clothing fabric that would match cotton in price, while eliminating the tons of pesticides and enormous water consumption required by cotton. Furthermore, industrial hemp is 5 times as efficient as the same acreage of forestry in the conversion of atmospheric carbon dioxide into plant materials for industrial application, thus allowing the latter to remain as the reservoir of the greenhouse gases. In addition to the textile sector, the availability of clean hemp fibers at reasonable cost will enable widespread application in industry to provide rigidity for plastics as vehicle interior trim with reduced weight and ease of recycling, and in buildings as a natural insulator, as compared to the traditional fiberglass. An efficient enzyme system will give a competitive advantage to Hemptown or to any third party companies to whom it licenses the process. This ground-breaking fiber technology is expected to be delivered into the market within the next 3 years. "Hemptown was identified as an ideal partner for NRC," said Scott Ferguson, Business Development Officer for the NRC Institute for Biological Sciences. "Their understanding of the Hemp Fiber industry, coupled with their stability and strong corporate profile, made them an excellent candidate with which to help develop this new generation biotechnology. We are excited about the prospects for this collaboration, which could ultimately revolutionize the apparel industry as well as many other industrial applications." "If we are able to provide our environmentally friendly hemp fiber activewear, at a price that is equal or better than that of current cotton products, there is no reason for consumers to not make the smart choice." commented Hemptown Clothing President, Jason Finnis. "We are enthused about the initial developments, and intend to use this technology to launch a proper hemp textile industry in Canada, as well as all other industrial hemp growing nations around the world. The potential market for the use and licensing of this hemp production technology worldwide may be in the billions of dollars." I wish the best of luck to the new collaboration and fervently hope that they succeed. If hemp can compete financially with cotton, then the whole ballgame will change. When the international (including American) garment industry starts puchasing Canadian hemp instead of U.S. cotton, all hell will break loose. And then, you'll see one of these two outcomes: American farmers are allowed to grow industrial hemp, creating the beginnings of a booming American hemp industry; or We invade Canada. 4:36:43 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Tobacco, Drugs, and Regulation Adam J. Smith of Progressive Capitalist has a very interesting post on recent moves to have the FDA assume regulatory control over tobacco. In part: We live in a society in which most "recreational" drugs are prohibited. That is to say, they are completely unregulated. Illegal under almost all circumstances to produce, market and possess, recreational drugs such as cannabis, ecstasy, cocaine, methamphetamine, psychadellics and heroin are nonetheless easily available without age restriction, purity requirements, or labelling in every part of the country. Perversely, the very fact of their prohibition means that these substances are more, rather than less likely to be sold to young people, and are often the self-medication of last resort for thousands of mentally ill people who lack medical insurance or prescription drug coverage. ... So what does all of that have to do with Tobacco? If the FDA does gain authority over tobacco products we as a society will have an opportunity for a serious debate on what it means to rationally and effectively regulate potentially harmful -- along with some not-so-harmful -- recreational substances in a free society. Right now, the debate is often mis-framed as an either-or choice between all-out prohibition, with its attendant unintended consequences, and the type of loose regulation that we have now with tobacco (and to a lesser extent, alcohol) meaning few labelling requirements, broad-based (if somewhat restricted) advertising, and a product that is available in every corner convenience store in every community in the nation. The post is well thought out and quite provocative. To his credit, Adam recognizes the potential dangers that can come from over-regulation (increased black-market, etc.) and doesn't assume that regulation can cure all ills (on either side). I'm not sure I'm as optimistic, given our government's reputation -- I figure that this move toward regulating tobacco might just as easily create a new "war on tobacco" prohibition spree (Adam also notes this possibility). But I'd like to believe that he's right and a rational discussion could take place. Read the full post. What do you think? Can FDA regulation of tobacco actually help create a sane drug policy? 3:26:06 PM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []