[osint] Your License, Your Urine

[Tefft, Bruce]

http://www.alternet.org/story/19008/

Posted on June 21, 2004

Your License, Your Urine
By Paul Armentano

Imagine if it were against the law to drive home after consuming a
single glass of wine at dinner. Now imagine it is illegal to drive after
having consumed a single glass of wine two weeks ago. Guess what? If you
smoke pot, it's time to stop imagining.

Legislation weaving its way through the US Congress demands all 50
states pass laws granting police the power to drug test drivers and
arrest anyone found to have "any detectable amount of a controlled
substance ... present in the person's body, as measured in the person's
blood, urine, saliva, or other bodily substance." Though the expressed
purpose of the law is to target and remove drug-impaired drivers from US
roadways, the proposal would do nothing of the sort.

Most troubling, the proposed law -- H.R. 3922 -- does not require
motorists to be identifiably impaired or intoxicated in order to be
criminally charged with the crime of "drugged driving." Rather, police
have only to demonstrate that the driver has detectable levels of
illicit drugs or inactive drug metabolites in their blood, sweat, saliva
or urine. As many pot smokers know, marijuana metabolites are fat
soluble, and remain identifiable in the urine for days and sometimes
even weeks after past use. Consequently someone who smoked a joint on
Monday could conceivably be arrested on Friday and charged with "drugged
driving," even though they are perfectly sober!

Here's how the law would work. Police, at their discretion, could order
motorists during a traffic stop to undergo a drug test, most likely a
urine test. If the driver's urine tests positive for prior pot use then
he or she would automatically be charged and eventually found guilty of
the criminal offense of driving under the influence of drugs -- even if
the pot in question was consumed weeks earlier. Under the law, the fact
that the driver is not impaired is irrelevant; the only "evidence"
necessary is the positive test result.

So Who's Behind This?

Over the past five years, a small cabal of prohibitionists, drug testing
proponents and toxicologists have pushed for legislation criminalizing
drivers who operate a vehicle with inert drug metabolites present in
their system. To date, their efforts have persuaded ten states --
Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island, Utah and Wisconsin -- to pass such "drugged driving" laws,
known as zero-tolerance per se laws. Leading this charge is the Walsh
Group, a federally funded organization that develops drug testing
technology and lobbies for rigid workplace drug testing programs. Walsh
Group President, Michael Walsh, is the former Director of the Division
of Applied Research at the US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
and formerly served as the Associate Director of the Office of National
Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), informally known as the Drug Czar's office

In November 2002, the group partnered with the ONDCP to lobby state
legislatures to amend their drugged driving laws. Every state has laws
on the books prohibiting motorists from driving "under the influence" of
a controlled substance. Like drunk driving laws, virtually all of these
laws require the motorists to be impaired by their drug use in order to
be charged with "drugged driving."

Nevertheless, the Walsh Group argued that these existing laws are too
lax on illicit drug users. To bolster their claim, they argued --
without explanation -- that actually linking illicit drug use to
impaired driving is a "technically complicated and difficult task."
Their solution? States should enact zero tolerance per se laws
redefining "drugged drivers" as any motorist who tests positives for any
level of illicit drugs or drug metabolites, regardless of whether their
driving is impaired.

"There is clearly a need for national leadership at the federal level to
develop model statutes and to strongly encourage the states to modify
their laws," the organization concluded in a widely disseminated report.
Notably, the authors failed to mention that the widespread enactment of
such a policy would be a political and financial windfall for the Walsh
Group's drug testing technology and consulting services.

The Walsh Group is hardly the only organization with something to gain
from the Bush administration's proposed "drugged driving" crackdown.
Speaking at a White House-sponsored symposium in February, former 1970s
Drug Czar Robert Dupont -- another ex-NIDA director who now heads the
workplace drug testing consultation firm Bensinger, Dupont & Associates
(BDA) -- also demanded the federal government mandate zero-tolerance
drugged driving laws.

"Workplace drug testing has prepared us for drugged driving testing,"
Dupont told attendees, arguing that just as many public and private
employees are subjected to random drug screening, so should be
motorists. Those drivers who test positive, says Dupont, should then be
monitored through regularly scheduled drug tests, including hair
testing, for a period of two to five years.

"The benefits of this approach will be improved highway safety," he
concluded, failing to explain how punishing sober drivers while
simultaneously lining BDA's pockets would make America's roadways any
safer.

Cruising on Cannabis: What's the Problem?

"Driving under the influence of, or after having used, illegal drugs has
become a significant problem worldwide," states the preamble to H.R.
3922. However, despite the government's claim, epidemiological evidence
on the number of motorists who drive under the influence of illicit
drugs is scarce.

Further, among the limited evidence that does exist, much of it finds
that pot's measurable yet relatively mild effects on psychomotor skills
do not appear to play a significant role in vehicular crashes,
particularly when compared to alcohol. "Crash culpability studies have
failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are
significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road
crashes," summarized researchers Gregory Chesher and Marie Longo in the
recent book Cannabis and Cannabinoids: Pharmacology, Toxicology, and
Therapeutic Potential. A 2002 Canadian Senate report was even more
succinct, stating, "Cannabis alone, particularly in low doses, has
little effect on the skills involved in automobile driving."

Nonetheless, Congress' proposed bill specifically and disproportionately
targets motorists who may occasionally smoke pot because marijuana's
metabolites exit the body more slowly than other drug metabolites, often
remaining detectable in urine for several weeks at a time. Equally
troubling, there currently exists no technology that can accurately
correlate drug metabolite concentration to impairment of performance.

Of course, such concerns are no bother to those in Congress who intend
to ride this latest wave of drug war rhetoric to reelection. Nor are
they of much worry to those in the drug testing industry who stand to
make a fortune prosecuting and jailing sober pot smokers.

As for everybody else, be afraid; be very afraid. And be sure to keep a
fresh sample of urine in the glove compartment.

This article originally appeared in Heads Magazine in Canada.

(c) 2004 Independent Media Institute.





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/TySplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list,
discuss-osint at yahoogroups.com.
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
bisoldi at intellnet.org

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint at yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    osint-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
  Unsubscribe:  osint-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use
has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a
part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to
OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods,
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational
purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the
copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright
Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own
that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     osint-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


--- end forwarded text


-- 
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'