Professional Documents
Culture Documents
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE
OF To
S. Res. 199
EIGHTY-NINTH CONGRESS
ON
SPiEuL SUBcouMIrrm
THOMAS J. DODD. Connecticut, OAairmax
PHILIP A. HART, Michigan ROMAN L. HRUSKA, Nebraska
BIRCH BAYH, Indiana HIRAM L. FONG, Hawaii
QUENTIN N. BURDICK, North Dakota JACOB K. JAVITS, New York
JOSEPH D. TYDINGS, Maryland
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
CARL L P2axAX, Staf Director
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Statement of-Continued
Markham, Dean F., former Executive Director of the President's Page
Advisory Commission on Narcotics --------------------------- 605
McClory, Hon. Robert, U.S. Representative, 12th District, Illinois..- 569
Murphy, Hon. George L., U.S. Senator from California ------------ 313
Neurauter, John director, vice control, Chicago Police Department
(accompanied by Thomas Kernan, Chicago Police Department)--- 181
Rasor, Dr. Robert W., chief medical officer, Federal Narcotic Hospital,
Lexington, Ky. (accompanied by Dr. G. P. Ferazzano, Director,
Division of Hospitals) --------------------------------------- 531
Robinson, Dr. Robert J Acting Director, Bureau of Medicine,
FDA (accompanied Dr. James L. Goddard) ------------------- 320
Sherwood, Paula, New York City ---------------------------- 543
Stewart, Dr. William H., Surgeon General of the United States
(accompanied by Dr. Stanley F. Yolles, Assistant Surgeon General;
Director, National Institute of Mental Health) ----------------- 259
Tannenbaum, Bernard, consultant, Special Judiciary Subcommittee
on Narcotics ----------------------------------------- 231
Trembly, Capt. Alfred W., commander, Narcotics Division, Los
Angeles Police Department ------------------------------- 193
Ungerleiderc Dr. J. Thomas, the Neuropsychiatric Institute, UCLA
Medical enter (accompanied Dr. Duke Fisher) ---------------- 353
Wood, Roland, superintendent, California Rehabilitation Center,
Corona, Calif ----------------------------------------- 111
Yolles, Dr. Stanley F., Assistant Surgeon General; Director National
Institute of Mental Health (accompanied Dr. William ff. Stewart,
Surgeon General of the United States) ----------------------- 259
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES
JANUARY 25, 1966
Katzenbach, Nicolas deB., Attorney General of the United States ------ 14
Alexander, Myrl E., Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons --------------- 14
Lynch, Thomas C., attorney general, State of California --------------- 37
JANUARY 26, 1966
Javits, Hon. Jacob K., U.S. Senator from New York ------------------ 49
Kennedy, Hon. Robert F., U.S. Senator from New York --------------- 85
Wood, Roland, superintendent, California Rehabilitation Center, Corona,
Calif -------------------------------------------------- 111
JANUARY 27, 1966
Acheson, David C., Special Assistant to the Secretary, Department of
Treasury ----------------------------------------------- 135
MAY 12, 1966
Louria, Dr. Donald B., representing the Honorable Nelson A. Rockefeller,
Governor, State of New York -------------------------------- 154
Healy, Joseph J., superintendent, Division of Narcotio Control, State of
Illinois ....-------------------------------------------------- 173
Neurauter, John, clirector, vice control, Chicago Police Department (ao.
companied by Thomas Kernan, Chicago Police Department) ---------- 181
MAY 13, 1966
Trembly, Alfred W., commander, Narcotics Division Los Angeles Police
Department --------------------------------------------- 193
Tannenbaum, Bernard, consultant, Special Judiciary Subcommittee on
Narcotics ----------------------------------------------------- 231
Leary, Dr. Timothy, president, Castalia Foundation of Millbrook, N.Y.. 239
CONTENTS
55. Article by Dr. J. Thomas Ungerleider and Dr. Duke D. Fisher entitled
"LSD-Research and Joyride," from the Nation magazine, May 16, Pan
1966 ----------------------------------------------------- 360
56. Article by Dr. J. Thomas Ungerleider Dr. Duke Fisher and Marielie
Fuller, entitled, "The Dangers of LSD," from the Journal of the
American Medical Association, August 8, 1966, volume 197, No. 6-.- 369
57. Chart: History of narcotic addiction in the United States, submitted
by Henry L. Giordano, Commissioner, Bureau of Narcotics ------ 428
58. Chart: Population, crime and narcotics in the United States, 1958-64__ 430
59. Chart: Active narcotic addicts in the United States as of December 31,
1965 ----------------------------------------------------- 431
60. Chart: Active narcotic addicts as of December 31, 1965 ------------ 432
61. Active narcotic addicts reported in several selected States as of
December 31, 1965 ----------------------------------------- 433
62. Chart: Ten leading cities in active narcotic addicts reported in the
United States as of December 31, 1965 ------------------------ 434
63. Chart: Active narcotic addicts in the United States under 21 years of
age as of December 31, 1965 ---------------------------------- 435
64. Chart: Age of active narcotic addicts as of December 31, 1965, in
the United States ------------------------------------------ 436
65. Chart: Active narcotic addicts reported in the United States as of
December 31, 1965 ----------------------------------------- 437
66. Chart: New narcotic addicts reported to the Federal Bureau of Nar-
cotics, 1953-65 --------------------------------------------- 438
67. Chart: Average length of narcotic sentences in U.S. district courts,
fiscal years 1948-65 ----------------------------------------- 439
68. Table: Active narcotic addicts in the United States as of December
31, 1965 -------------------------------------------------- 440
69. Table: New narcotic addicts reported to the FBN from all States
during the calendar years 1961-65 ----------------------------- 441
70. Table: Active narcotic addicts recorded by the FBN as of December
31, 1965 by State ------------------------------------------- 442
71. Table: New narcotic addicts reported to the FBN during the calendar
years 1961-65 ---------------------------------------------- 443
72. Table: Active narcotic addicts in the United States as of December
31, 1964 and December 31, 1965 by State ----------------------- 444
73. Table: New narcotic addicts reported during calendar years 1964-65
by State ---------------------------------------------------- 445
74. Table: New narcotic addicts reported to the FBN by race, 1956-65..- 446
75. Paper entitled "What Is So Bad About Marihuana?", submitted by
Henry Giordano, Commissioner, Bureau of Narcotics ------------- 458
76. "Suggested Aspects on Creative Research on LSD," submitted by
Aulen Ginsberg -------------------------------------------- 502
77. Paper describing the conceptual framework of New York City's nar-
cotic and rehabilitation program, submitted by Larry Allen Bear,
office of narcotics coordinator, New York City ------------------- 512
78. Report to Mayor John Lindsay by the task force on corrections, sub-
mitted by James V. Bennett ---------------------------------- 582
79. Federal Youth Corrections Act, submitted by James V. Bennett ------ 598
80. Excerpts from a report of the White House Conference on Narcotics
dealing with the sentencing provisions of the Narcotic Control Act
of 1966 --------------------------------------------------- 613
U.S. SENATE,
SPECIAL SrBCoMMwrEE OF THE
COMMITrF ON TIIE JUDICIARY,
IVashington, D.C.
The subcommittee (composed of Senators, Dodd, Tydings, Burdick,
Bayh, Hart, Kennedy of Massachusetts, Hlruska, Javits, and Fong)
met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m., in room 318, Old Senate Office
Building, Senator Thomas J. Dodd (chairman of the subcommittee)
presiding.
Present: Senators Dodd, Burdick, Kennedy of Massachusetts, and
Hruska.
Also present: Carl L. Perian, staff director; William F. Mooney,
chief investigator; and Eugene Gleason, editorial director.
Senator DODD. I will call this hearing to order.
Today we begin hearings on the merits of S. 2152.
This proposal which was made by President Lyndon Johnson will
usher in a whole new era in the Federal Government's approach to the
problem of narcotic addiction.
This bill is another part of the President's legislative package to
Congress to bring under control the crime problem in this country.
If enacted, this legislation will offer certain eligible narcotic addicts
charged with Federal crimes the choice of civil commitment for the
purposes of medical and psychiatric treatment prior to and instead of
a criminal trial.
It will establish indeterminate sentences not to exceed 10 years for
narcotic addicts convicted of Federal offenses to improve their
chances for rehabilitation.
It will broaden the coverage of the Young Adult Offenders Act of
1958, by making any narcotic or marihuana offender between the ages
of 22 and 26 eligible to be handled under the Federal Youth Correc-
tions Act.
It will make all marihuana offenders eligible for parole.
Finally it will allow the parole boards to review the sentences of all
marihuana offenders and of narcotic offenders under 25 years of age.
We also have before us two other bills, S. 2113 and S. 2114, intro-
duced respectively by Senators Jacob Javits and Robert Kennedy.
They are similar to the administration bill in that they call for a more
enlightened approach to the treatment of the addict. It is an approach
that emphasizes treatment instead of punishment.
I think we all agree on this goal.
The question now is one of methods.
That is the purpose and subject matter of these hearings.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
No one knows the total number of addicts on our streets and in our
institutions. The estizuates range front 50,000 to 100,000 and more.
The effects of drug ut are not confined to the addict himself. Even
without fostering crime, addiction brings misery and disorganization
to the families, to the nighborhoods and to the communities where it
exists.
It draws young girls into prostitution.
It fosters delinquency and corruption among the teenagers in our
big city slums.
And perhaps what is most. tragic, it kills the motivation among its
victims, to strive for advancement and success, for occupational and
economic stability, for education, and for the kind of progress in every
field that. is the very essence of this country.
Because drug addiction undermines the welfare of the entire Nation,
it is important that we move against it with all the resources at our
command.
The Federal Government must develop a whole new approach to
this problem because I think we have made crucial errors in our former
efforts to control addiction.
We have passed laws which were used to punish addicts rather than
to help cure the emot ional problems that. are at the core of their addic-
tions.
We have sent them to prison under unreasonable penal sentences in-
stead of using more effective tools of rehabilitation and treatment.
And we have stubbornly disregarded the factual information in-
creasingly available from the medical and psychiatric professions
which tells us that effective treatment of the addict is possible.
These professions now tell us that in part our past failures have been
in the most crucial area of rehabilitation, the followup, aftercare
treatment of the narcotic addict, after this release from an institution.
Unless we provide the framework in the legislation before s for a
thorough program of supervised aftercare, then we will aeom our
efforts to failure.
We know that the availability of drugs, be they narcotics or danger-
ous drugs, is a key factor in the sustenance of drug addiction. There-
fore, while we will be primarily concerned with treatment measures,
I will underscore heavily during these hearings the need to maintain
relentless efforts by law enforcement to cut off sources of supply of
drugs and to minimize their availability.
Tile Federal Government has historically been assigned the task of
policing t he international narcotic traffic.
In view of the fact that ii e are still faced with a gigantic smuggling
problem I feel it is time for a full review of our enforcement policies
and an outline of our present posture in our fight against the narcotic,
marihuana, and dangerous drug traffickers.
I will, therefore include in these hearings expert witnesses from
the fields of law enforcement and the judiciary with the view toward
additional Federal legislation based on recent developments in nar-
cot ic-dangerous drug trafficking.
The spectrum of drug abuse in the 1960's is wide ranging. It goes
from the traditional hard core heroin addict to the relatively recent
appearance of the LSD user.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
A BILL To amend title 18 of the United States Code to enable the courts to deal more
effectively with the problem of narcotic addiction, and for other purposes
Be itc'actcd by the Senate and House of Repreentatites of the United States
of Arntrica inCongress assembled, That titles I and 11 of this Act may be cited as
the "Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act of U."'.
DECLARATION Or 'OUCY
S .'c.2. It is the policy of the Congres that certain individuals charged with, or
convicted of, violating Federal laws should be afforded an opportunity for treat-
ment if it Is determined that they are narcotic addicts and such treatment ib
likely to result in their rehabilitation and return to society as useful members.
It Is the further policy of the ('ongres that alternative procedures should be
afforded for use in sentencing certain Individuals convicted of violating Federal
laws relating to narcotic drugs or marihuana.
TITLE I--CIVIL COMMITMENT IN LIEU OF PROSECUTION
DWFUNTIONS
SEc. 102. (a) If a United States district court believes that an eligible indi-
vidual is an addict, the court may advise him at his first appearance that the
prosecution of the criminal charge will be held in abeyance if ht. elects to submit
to an immediate examination to determine whether he is an addict and is likely
to be rehabilitated through treatment. In offerink an individual an election, the
court shall advise him that if he elects to be examined, he will be coifiued dur-
ing the examination for a period not to exceed sixty days; that if he Is deter-
mined to be an addict who Is likely to be rehabilitated, he will be civilly com-
mitted to the Surgeon General for treatment; that he may not voluntarily with-
draw from the examination or any treatment which may follow; that the treat-
ment may last for thirty-six months; that during treatment, he will be confined
in an institution and. at the discretion of the Surgeon General, he may be con-
ditionally released for supervised aftercare treatment in the community; and
that if he successfully completes treatment the charge will be dismissed, but if
he does not, prosecute, a on the charge will be resumed. An individual shall be
permitted a maximum of five days after his appearance In which to elect, and
he shall be so advised. Except on a showing that a timely election could not
have been made, an individual shall be barred from an election after the pre-
scribed period. An individual who elects civil commitment shall be placed in
the custody of the Attorney General or the Surgeon General, as the court directs,
for an examination by the Surgeon General during a period not to exceed thirty
days. This period may, upon notice to the court and the appropriate United
States attorney, be extended by the Surgeon General for an additional thirty
days.
(b) The Surgeon General shall report to the court the results of the examina-
tion and recommend whether the Individual should be civilly committed. A
copy of the report shall be made available to the individual and the United
States Attorney. If the court, acting on the report and other information coui-
ing to its attention, determines that the individual is not an addict or is an
addict not likely to be rehabilitated through treatment, the individual shall be
held to answer the abeyant charge. If the court determines that the individual
is an addict and is likely to be rehabilitated through treatment, the court shall
commit him to the custody of the Surgeon General for treatment. No individual
shall be committed under this title if the Surgeon General certifies that adequate
facilities or personnel for treatment are unavailable.
(c) Whenever an individual is committed to the custody of the Surgeon Gen-
eral for treatment under this title, the criminal charge against him shall be
continued without final disposition and shall be dismissed if the Surgeon Gen-
eral certifies to the court that the individual has suc essfully completed the
treatment program. On receipt of such certification, the court shall discharge
the individual from custody. If prior to such certification the Surgeon General
determines that the individual cannot be further treated as a medical problem,
he shall advise the court. The court shall thereupon terminate the conimitnient,
and the pending criminal proceeding shall be resumed.
(d) An individual committed for examination or treatment shall not be re-
leased on bail or on his own recognizance.
COM MITMENT
SEC. 103. (a) An individual who is committed to the custody of the Surgeon
General for treatment under this title shall not be conditionally released from
institutional custody until the Surgeon General determines that he has made
sufficient progress to warrant release to a supervisory aftercare authority. If
the Surgeon General is unable to make such a determination at the expiration
of twenty-four months after the commencement of institutional custody, he shall
advise the court and the appropriate United States Attorney whether treatment
should be continued. The court may affirm the commitment or terminate it and
resume the pending criminal proceeding.
(b) An individual who is conditionally released from institutional custody
shall, while on release, remain in the legal custody of the Surgeon General and
shall report for such supervised aftercare treatment as the Surgeon General
directs. ie shall be subject to home visits and to such physical examination
and reasonable regulation of his conduct as the supervisory aftercare authority
establishes, subject to the approval of the Surgeon General. The Surgeon Gen-
eral may, at any time. order a conditionally released individual to return for
institutional treatment. The Surgeon General's order shall be a sufficient war-
rant for the supervisory aftercare authority, a United States marshal, a pro-
bation officer, or an agent of the Attorney General, to apprehend and return the
individual to insttutional custody as directed. If it is determined that an in-
dividual has returned to th., use of narcotics, the Surgeon General shall inform
the court of the condhtions underr which the return occurred and make a recom-
mendation as to whether treatment should be continued. The court may affirm
the commitment or terminate it and resume the pending criminal proceeding.
(e) The total period of treatment for any individual committed to the custody
of the Surgeon General shall not exceed thirty-six months. If, at the expiration
of such maximuni period, the Surgeon General is unable to certify that the in-
dividual has successfully completed his treatment program the pending criminal
proceeding shall be resumed.
(d) Whenever a pending criminal proceeding against an individual is resumed
under this title, he shall receive full credit toward the service of any sentence
which may be imposed for any time spent In the institutional custody of the
Surgeon General or the Attorney General or any other time spent in institutional
custody in connection with the matter for which sentence is imposed.
SEC. 101. The determination of narcotic addiction and the subsequent civil
commitment under this title shall not be deemed a criminal conviction. The
results of any tests or procedures conducted by the Surgeon General or the super-
visory aftercare authority to determine narcotic addiction may only be used
in a further proceeding under this title. They shall not be used against the ex-
anmined individual in any criminal proceeding except that the fact that he is a
6 TnO NARCOTIC REHABLITATION AOT Or 1966
"Sec.
"CHA,'TER 314--NARCOTIC ADDICTS
"4251. Deflnltioues.
"4252. Exauiatlon.
"4253. Comumitment.
"4254. Condltonal releas.
"4M. Suprvalton In the community.
41251. Definitions
"As used in this chapter--
"(a) 'Addict' means any individual who habitually uses any narcotic drug as
defined by section 4781 of the flternal Revenue Code of 194, as amended, so as
to endanger the public morals, health, safety, or welfare, or who Is or has been
so far addicted Lo the use of such narcotic drugs as to have lt the power of self-
control with reference to his addiction.
"(b) 'Crime of violence' includes voluntary manslaughter, murder, rape. may-
hem, kidnaping robbery, burglary, housebreaking, extortion accompanied by
threats of violent, assault with a dangerous weapon or with intent to commit
any offense punishable by imprimouent for more than one year, arson punishable
as a felony, or an attempt to commit any of the foregoing offenses.
"(c) Trreatment' includes treatment. in an institution and under supervised
aftercare in the community and includes, but is not limited to, medical, educa-
tional social, phychological, and vocational services, corrective and preventive
guidance and training, and other rehabilitative services designed to protect the
public and benefit the addict by correcting his antisocial tendencies and ending
his dependence on addicting drugs and his suspectibllity to addiction.
"(d) 'Felony' Includes any offense In violation of a law of the United States,
any State, any possession or territory of the United States, the District of Colum-
bia, the Canal Zone, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, which at the time of
the offense was punishable by death or imprisonment for a term exceeding one
year.
"(e) 'Conviction' and 'convicted' mean the final Judg,-ent on a verdict or find-
Lug of guilty, a plea of guilty, or a plea of nolo contendere, and do not Include
a final Judgment which has been exparged by pardon, reversed, set aside or
otherwise rendered nugatory.
• (f) 'Eligible offender' means any individual who Is convicted of an offense
against the United States, but does not include-
"(1) An offended who Is convicted of a crime of violence.
"(2) An offender who is convicted of selling a narcotic drug, unless the
court determines that such sale was for the primary purpose of enabling
the offender to obtain a narcotic drug which he requires for his personal use
because of his addiction to such drug.
"($) An offender against whom there is pending a prior charge of a felony
which has not bees finally determined or who is on probation or whose
sentence following conviction on such a charge, Including any time on parole
or mandatory release, has sot been fully served: Procdd, That an offender on
I€
TIU.B NARCOTIC RIHARILITATION ACT OF 1908
Sam 801 Section 4200 of title 18, United States Code is amended by (1) Insert-
lng immediately before the first sentence thereof "(a)" and (2) adding at the end
thereof the following new subsections:
"(b) A defendant described In subsection (a) of this section who Is convicted
of a violation of any offense enumerated in section 7M3(d) of the Internal Reve-
nue Code of 1964, as amended, shall, If the court is considering sentencing him to
the custody of the Attorney General pursuant to the provisions of the Federal
Youth Corrections Act, be committed to the custody of the Attorney General for
observation and study in accordance with the provisions of section 5010(e) of
this title. Before sentencing such a defeLdant to the custody of the Attorney
General for treatment and supervision pursuant to the Federal Youth Corrections
Act, the court must affirmatively find, in writing, that there is reasonable ground
to believe that the defendant will benefit from the treatment provided
thereunder."
"() Section 5010(a) of this title shall not be applicable to a defendant de-
scribed in subsection (a) of this section who is convicted of a violation of any
offense enumerated in section 7237(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1964, as
amended."
Sao. 803. Section 7237(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1964, as amended,
Is amended to read as follows:
"(d) No Sustizmsiox or Sa:nTxcs; No PaoaaTION; ZT.-Upon conviction-
"(1) of any offense the penalty for which is provided in subsection (b) of
this section, subsection (c), (h), or (i) of section 2 of the Narcotic Drugs
Import and Export Act, as amended, or such Act of July 11, 1941, as amended,
or
"(2) of any offense the penalty for which is provided in subsection (a) of
this section, If it is the offender's second or subsequent offense,
the imposition or execution of sentence shall not be suspended, probation shall
not be granted, and inthe case of a violation of a law relating to narcotic drugs,
section 4202 of title 18, United States Code, and the Act of July 15, 1932 (47 Stat.
696; D.C. Code 24-201 and following), as amended, shall not apply."
So. 804. The Board of Parole Is hereby directed to review the sentence of any
prisoner who, before the enactment of this Act, was made inellgble for parole by
section 7237(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and (1) who
was convicted of a violation of a law relating to marihuana or (2) who was con-
victed of a violation of a law relating to narcotic drugs and had not attained his
twenty-sixth birthday prior to such conviction. After conducting such review
the Board of Parole may authorize the release of such prisoner on parole pur-
suant to section 42M of title 18, United States Code. If the Board of Parole finds
that there are reasonable grounds to believe that such prisoner may benefit from
the treatment provided under the Federal Youth Corrections Act (18 U.S.C., ch.
402), It may place such prisoner in the custody of the Youth Corrections Division
of the Board of Parole for treatment and supervision pursuant to the provisions
of the Federal Youth Corrections Act. Action taken by I te Board of Parole under
this section shall not cause any prisoner to serve a loL.:er term than would be
served under his original sentence.
TITLE IV-MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Sac. 401. Section 341 of the Public Health Service Act, as amended (58 Stat
698; 68 Stat. 80; 70 Stat. 622; 42 U.S.(Q 257), Isamended to read as follows:
"Sac. 841. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized to provide for the con-
flnement, care, protection, treatment and discipline of persons addicted to the
use of habit-forming narcotic drugs who are civilly committed to treatment or
convicted of offenses against the United States and sentenced to treatment under
the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act of 1965. addicts who are committed to the
custody of the Attorney General pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Youth
Corrections Act, addicts who voluntarily submit themselves for treatment, and
addicts convicted of offenses against the United States and who are not sentenced
to treatment under the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act of 1965, including
persons convicted by general courts-martial and consular courts. Such care
and treatment shall be provided at hospitals of the Service especially equipped
for the accommodation of such patients or elsewhere where authorized under
other provisions of law, and shall be designed to rehabilitate such persons, to
restore them to health, and, where necessary, to train them to be self-supporting
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 19060
and self-reliant, but nothing in this section or in this part shall be construed to
limit the authority of the Surgeon General under other provisions of law to
provide for the conditional release of patients and aftercare under supervision.
"(b) Upon the admittance to, and departure from, a hospital of the Service
of a person who voluntarily submitted himself for tntatment pursuant to the
provisions of this section, and who at the time of his admittance to such hospital
was a resident of the District of Columbia, the Surgeon General shall furnish
to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia or their designated agent,
the name, address, and such other pertinent Information as may be useful in the
rehabilitation to society of such person."
Szc. 4002. The Surgeon General and the Attorney General are authorized to
give representatives of States and local subdivisions thereof the benefit of their
experience in the care, treatment, and rehabilitation of narcotic addicts so that
each State may be en ouraged to provide adequate facilities and personnel for
the care and treatment of narcotic addicts In its Jurisdlction.
Stc. 403 The table of contents to "PART Ill--PRISONS AND PRISONERS"
of title 18, United Statei Code, is amended by Inserting after
"31& Mental detective - - - - -- --..... 4241"
a new chapter reference as follows:
"814. Narcotic addicts ...------------- . - ----------- 4281".
Sto. 404. If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person
or circumstance Is held itvalid, the remainder of the Act and the application of
such provision to other pt-rsons not similarly situated or to other circumstances
shall not be affected thereby.
Sm 405. Title I of this Act shall take effect three months after the date of Its
enactment and shall apply to any case pending in a district court of the United
States in which an appearance has not been made prior to such effective date.
Titles II and III of this Act shall take effect on the date of Its enactment and
shall apply to any case pending In any court of the United States in which
sentence has not yet been Imposed as of the date of enactment.
Sac. 40& There are auLhu,'ldd to e appropriated such sums as an nccesary
to carry out the provisions of thIs Act.
Exunrr No. 2
[1. Ill, Both Coax., 1st sem.
A BILL To authorize dvii commitment to lieu o criminal pualsbuat la certain eam
Involving narcotic, addicts
Be it enacted by the Senate and Houee of Repe ntatti of the United Stae*
of Anm in COngre. asembIed, That as used In this Act-
(1) the term "narcotic drug" or narcoticse" shall include the substances
defined as "narcotic drugs", "isonlpecalne", and "opiate" in section 4731 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended; and
(2) the term "narcotic addict" means any person who habitually uses
any habit-forming narcotic drugs so as to endanger the public morals, health.
safety, or welfare, or who is or has been so far addicted to the use of such
habit-forming narcotic drugs as to have lost the power of self-control with
reference to his addiction.
Sze. 2. (a) Subject to the provisions of subsection (c) of this section, any
person charged with a violation of a Federal penal law relating to narcotics shall.
upon his appearance before a committing magistrate, be informed that (1) the
prosecution of the criminal charges against such person (unless he is a person
within the purview of subsection (c) of this section) shall be held in abeyance in
the manner hereinafter provided, If he elects to submit to an examination to de-
termine if he is a narcotic addict; (2) he shall have ten days following his ap-
pearance before the committing magistrate within which to make such an elec-
lion; and (8) if he makes such an election within the prescribed ten days and It is
determined on the basis of an examination that he is a narcotic addict, the court
shall have jurisdiction to order him to submit to a mandatory civil commit-
ment in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
(b) Any person who elects consideration for civil commitment in accordance
with the provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall be placed under the
66-4W8--G----6
10 TJ NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT Of 1966
(c) Upon the return of any person to the committing court pursuant to para-
graph (1) of subsetion (a). the court may order an immediate resumption
of the prosecution of the erxainal charges against such person which were held
In abeyance by reason of his comnitmeunt.
Sm 5. (a) If, while under any aftercare treatment program pursuant to see-
tiou 4. any person--
(1) falls or refuses to comply with any order of the Surgeon General
which (A) commands such person to refrain from further use of any nar.
cotic drug, and (B) was isued after such person had been found by the
Surgetxn General, while under such program, to have been using such drugs; or
(2) fails or refuses to comply with any other order or directive of the
Surgeon General Issued In connection with such program;
the Surgeon General shall Immediately notify the committing court of that fact.
Upon receiving such uotiflcationi, the court way order the United States marshal
to take such person into custody and mauy order the immediate resumption
of the prosecution of the criminal charges against him.
(b) Whenever the Surgeon General determined that any person placed under
the Surgeon General's custody pursuant to subsection (b) of section 4 of this
Act has successfully completed his probationary aftercare treatment program,
the Surgeon General shall certify that fact to the committing court and the court
shall Immediately dismiss the criminal charges against such person which were
held In abeyance by reason of his commitment.
Src. 0. In any case In which the prosecution of criminal charges against any
person under this Act Is resumed after having been held in abeyance, such person
shall receive full credit, against any sentence which may be imposed. for the
time spent by such person in the custody of the United States marshal and the
Surgeon General pursuant to this Act.
Swc. 7. Any determination by a court under this Act that a person is a nar-
cotic addict shall not be considered a criminal conviction, nor shall such person
be considered a criminal by reason of much determination. The results of any
hearing, examination, test, or procedure, conducted to determined whether a
person is a narcotic addict for purposes of this Act, may be used in a further
proceeding under this Act, but may not be used against such person in connec-
tion with any criminal charge held in abeyance under this Act, or In any other
criminal proceeding.
Sac. 8. The Surgeon General Is authorized to enter Into contracts with the
several States (including political subdivisions thereof) under which appro-
priate institutions and other facilities of such States or subdivisions will be made
available, on a reimbursable basis, for the confinement, care, treatment, rehabill-
tation, and aftercare of persons civilly committed pursuant to this Act.
Svc. 9. As used in this Act, the term "State" shall include the District of
Columbia.
Ste. 10. The provisions of this Act shall not be applicable to any ease pending
In any court of the United States arising out of an arest rmade prior to Iecem-
ber 31, 196.
Exuarr No. 8
iS. 2114. 89th Cont., 1st soss..
A BILL Relatintg to the Twenaltles for violations of certain narcotic and marihuana laws
of the United states, and to the treatment ot narcotic addicts and other persons sufferinla
from a mental or physical condition committed to the custody of the Attorney Ueneral
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representaive*of the United States
of America in Congress aaaemblcd, That section 2(h) of the Narcotic Drugs
Import and Export Act, as amended (21 U.S.C. 176a). is amended (1) by striking
out "not less than five or" and inserting in lieu thereof "for not"; (2) by striking
out "less than ten or"; and (8) by striking out "For provision relating to sen-
tencing, probation, etc., see section 7287(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of
195,4.".
Sro. 2 (a) Subsectlon (a) of section 7237 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1954. as amended, Is amended (1) by striking out "not less than 2 or" and in-
serting In lieu thereof "for not"; (2) by striking out "not les than 5 or" and
by Inserting In lieu thereof "for not"; and (3) by striking out "not less than
10 or" and inserting In lieu thereof "for not".
(b) Subsection (b) of section 7287 of the Internal Revenue Code of 196, as
amended, is amended to read as follows:
12 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
"(b) "(1)
SALz 01 OTus T&Aiqrn WrrHouT Wwrmrzx OiDz.L-
Whoever commits an offense, or conspires to commit an offense,
described In section 4705(a) or section 4742(a) shall be imprisoned for not
more than 20 years and. in addition, may be fined not more than $20,000.
For a second or subsequent offense, the offender shall be imprisoned for not
more than 40 years and, in addition, may be fined not more than $20,000.
"(2) If any offender under paragraph (1) attained the age of 18 before
the offense and-
"(A) the offense consisted of the sale, barter, exchange, giving away.
or transfer of any narcotic drug to a person who had not attained the
age of 18 at the time of such offense, or
"(B) the offense consisted of a conspiracy to commit an offense de-
scribed in paragraph (A),
the offender shall be impriionmed not less than 5 or more than 40 years and,
In addition, may be fined not more than $20,000."
Svc. 3. Subection (d) of section 723T7 of the Internmi Revenue Code of 1954,
as amend d, Is amended to read as follows:
"(d) No Susprm:a or Sz Ttscz: No PaonATxoN.-Upon conviction of any
offense the penalty for which is provided In subsection (b) (2) of this set-tim
or in subsection (c)or (I) of section 2 of the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export
Act, as amended, the Imposition or execution of sentence shall not be suspended
and probation shall not be granted. Any person convicted of any such offense
(including convictions in the District of Columbia) and sentenced to a definite
term of years other than life shall be eligible for Parole In accordance with the
provLs loas of section 42(Y2 of title 18 of the United States Code after such person
has served for a period of not less than the mandatory minimum penalty pre-
scribed by any such subsection for such offense. Any such person so convicted
and sentenced to a term of life shall be eligible for parole In accordance with
such section 4202 after such person has served for a period of at least 15 years
of such life sentence."
SLc. 4 (a) Chapter 402 of title 18 of the United States Code Is amended by
adding at the end thereof the following new sevtlon:
1 S27. Applicability to certain narcotic violators
"Subject to the provisions of subsection (d) of section 7237 of the Internal
Revenue ('ode of 1964, as amended, the provisions of this chapter shall be appli-
cable to all Iersons otherwise eligible, who are convicted of violations of any
Federal penal law relating to narcotics notwithstanding the fact that a manda-
tory penalty is prescribed for any such violation."
(b) The analysis of chapter 402 of title 18, United States Code, Is amended
by adding at the end thereof the following:
"5027. Applicability to certain narcoUe violators."
Sz. 5. Section 4209 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end thereof the following new sentence: "Subject to the provisions of sub-
section 1d) of section 7237 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended,
the provisions of this section shall be applicable to all persons otherwise eligible,
who are convicted of violations of any Federal penal law relating to narcotics
notwithstanding the fact that a mandatory penalty is prescribed for any such
violatioms."
Src. 8. (a) Chapter 301 of title 18 of the United States Code In amended by
inserting immediately after section 4002, the following new section:
I 4002A. Use of State facilities for narcotic addicts
"(a) For the purpose of providing for the confinement, care, treatment, and
rehabilitation (including vocational rehabilitation) of persons held under the
authority of any enactment of Congress who are narcotic addicts, or who are
suffering from a mental or physical condition which might be helped by proper
care, treatment, or rehabilitation (including vocational rehabilitation), the
Director of the Bureau of Prisons is hereby given authority, In addition to other
authority available to him, to enter into contracts with the several States (in-
cluding political subdivisions thereof) under which appropriate institutions and
other facilities of such States and subdivisions, specially equipped to provide
such care, treatment, or rehabilitation, will be made available, on a reimbursable
basis, for the aforementioned purposes.
"(b) As used in this section, and ftions 4082A and 4082B of chapter 306
of this title, the term "narcotic addict' means any person who habitually uses any
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 19066
4203 of this chapter, the Board may, in its discretion, Impose a a condition to
such release a requirement that the person be placed, during the period of his
parole, under the supervision of an appropriate State, public or private agency,
organization, or group, which, In the opinion of the Board, is (1) qualified to
supervise such person during the period of his parole; and (2) specially equipped
to provide such care, treatment, rehabilitation, or aftervare as he might require
during such period. The Board shall receive and consider any reconuiendation
of the Attorney General which In his opinion would be helpful to the Board with
respect to the parole dispomtion of any case pursuant to this section.
"(b) For the purposes of subsection (a) of this section, the Board of Parole
is authorized to utilize the services and facilities of any State, agency, organiza-
tion, or group referred to in subsection (a) in accordance with a written agree-
ment entered into between such State, agency, organization, or group and the
Board of Parole. Payment for such services and facilities shall be made In such
amount as may be provided in such agreement"
(b) The analysis of chapter 311 of title 18, United States Code Is amended
by inserting Immediately after
"4203. A4jpllcaUoa and release; terms and caditions."
the following:
"4203A. Use of certain public and private agencies for purposes of supervising certain
parolees."
Senator Dow. We have as the first witness, the distin wished Attor-
ney General of the United States, Mr. Nicholas deB. Vatzenbach.
We are glad to have you here, Mr. Attorney General. I always look
forward to your testimony on any occasion, and particulary on this
occasion.
VTATEZXET OF ION. NICHOLAS deR KATN CH, ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF T11 UNITED STATES; ACCOPA ED BY NYRL XI
ALEXANDER, DIRECTOR OF PRISONS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Attorney General KAmNsACH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am
accompanied here by Mr. Myrl Alexander, who is Director of the
Prisons.
I have a prepared statement which with your permission I would
like to read, because I think it summarizes our views with respect to the
acts.
Senator DODD. Please do.
Attorney General KIzrziB.cK. The Narcotic Addict Rehabilition
Act, S. 2152, that is before us today represents a first step toward disen-
tangling medical and criminal elements in the knot of problems we call
drug addiction. Essentially, the bill seeks to recognize in law what
has long been established in medicine; tCat narcotic addicts, even those
who commit criminal offenses, should nt be treated, invariably and in-
evitably, as common criminals.
Addiction has roots so deep in the mys tries of psychology and medi-
cine, and it winds its branches through s, many dark areas of sociology
and criminology that I think any of u, here would hesitate to give
precise definition to the problem.
Yet the step we hope to take through th i legislation rests on a simple
and unassailable understanding: that ad,, iction itself is not cured by
prosecuting and imprisoning the addict. To attack it at the root, we
must search out and apply the more flexible tools of medicine and
psychiatry, reeducation and job training, family, and neighborhood
rehabilitation.
THE NARCOTIC REI7BILITATION ACT OF 1986
This bill does not pretend to offer a total solution, but the fact that
the road ahead is long makes it all the more imperative that we begin.
Narcotic addiction has received much long-awaited attention in
the last several yeLrs. The White House Conference on narcotic and
drug abuse in 1962 drew together the fruits of careful research in
many specialized fields. And a highly qualified commission under the
distinguished chairmanship of Judge E. Barrett Prettyman, Sr., was
appointed by President Kennedy to follow up the conference discus.
sons with specific recommendations.
As you know, numerous bills reflecting these recommendations have
been introduced into the Congress--all of them representing ambi-
tious, innovative approaches to the problem of narcotic addicton.
For a number of reasons that I would like to explain this morning, I
think that S. 2152, which was prepared b the Departments of Justice,
Treasury, and Health, Education, and Ielfare, represents a successful
acconunodation of many valuable views.
The bill has three parts:
Title I would empower a Federal district judge to offer a narcotics
addict charged with a Federal crime the choice of civil commitment for
medical treatment prior to and instead of a criminal trial. If the ad-
dict chose the program, and if the Surgeon General found him likely
to be rehabilitated, he would be civilly cormnitted, for a maxmium
period of 86 months in institutional confinement and aftereare treat..
meant. Criminal charges would be dropped only if the treatment were
successfully com pleted.
Title II would make treatment available to addicts who did not
choose civil conunitment, or who were not chosen for the civil pro-
gram, or who failed to complete it. It would allow a narcotics addict,
whom the court considered likely to be rehabilitated, to be sentenced
for treatment after conviction. The sentence to treatment should run
as long as the criminal sentence that might have been imposed, but in
no case could the sentence to treatment run longer than 10 years
After a minimum of 6 months institutional treatment, whenever the
Attorney General and Surgeon General certify that release is war-
ranted, the person would be eligible for conditional release to an after-
care program of counseling and assistance in finding employment in
the community.
Title III would for the first time include narcotics and marihuana
offenders under the provisions of the Young Adult Offenders Act of
1958, which extended the flexible sentencing standards of the Federal
Youth Corrections Act to persons between the ages of 22 and 26.
Title III would also make parole available again to marihuana
offenders.
President Johnson, in his message on crime last March, declared
that our present laws on drug control are inadequate and made reform
of our narcotics laws one of his principal objectives.
In his message the President said:
The return of nartUcs and marihuana users to useful, productive lives Is of
obvious benefit to them and to society at large. But at the same time, it in e-
sential to assure adequate protection of the general public.
I believe that the legislation I have just outlined satisfies both of
those demanding standards. I commend S. 2152 to you for the ob-
16 TMSI NA2MCIC REHEABILJTATION ACT OF 1968
Colorado Psychopathic Hospital (Den- Emory John Brady Hospital (P) (Col-
ver) (treats acute reactions associ- orado Springs) (occasionally admits
ated with withdrawal; refers to addicts).
another facility for long-term treat- Mount Airy Hospital (V)* (Denver)
ment). (psychotherapy: chemotherapy; oc-
Colorado State Hospital (Pueblo) (ad- cupational therapy; physical ther-
mits addicts, but no formal program). apy; other supportive auxiliary thera-
Denver General Hospital (Denver) (no pies).
special services; only emergency
treatment).
OORNQTfCUT
-0"nowwdj / X - grwm .. h
Go~wwst No~semmmwl
Baldpate Hosupitl (P) (Ueorgeiwn)
acceptss addicts).
Washingtonian Hospital (V) (Boston)
specializess In addictive diseases).
MICHIGAN
0overmewl N o rwl
Austin State Hosptal (Austin) (treats
addicts).
U.S. Public Health Service Hospital
(Fort Worth) comprehensivee medi.
cal, surgical, psychlatrie and rehabil-
itative services for voluntary and
court-committed users).
UT?'
Utah State Hostpital (Provo) (admits
addicts; pIychiatric services).
Salt Lake Couuty General Hospital
(Salt Lake City) (withdrawal treat-
ment; no special program).
VrKMONZI
Vermont State Hospital (Waterbury)
(treats addicts. but o suvure4
program).
WMAW<O"
Seattle King County Department of
Public tlealth (Seattle) (sedation
during acute withdrawal).
Tacoma-Pierce County Health Depart.
meant, Mental Health Division
(Tacoma) (medical and psychiatric
evaluation; short-term treatment;
psychotherapy and counseling).
WEST VLMGIAII
West Virginia State Mental Hospital %
Kanawha County Mental Hygiueu
Commission (Charleston) (narcotic
user treated undw "inebriate" treat-
nmnt program). ,
GOV~rm4~*GNongovenmenal
California Institute -or M") (CAkao). Educational Alliance (Los Angeles).
California Institute for Wmm. (I.?a.t Teen Challenge Center (Los Angeles).
tera).
California Rehabilitation Center
(Norco-Corona).
California Institute for Men (San
Quentin).
California Rehabilitation Center &
(Techachapi).
Santa Rita RehablItatUou CUnic
(Santa Rita).
26 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 19 680
GovormatenSol Nows~ovenwntual
AL AS&"
Birmingham Police DepartmeJUt.
AaIZONA
Arisona Health Department.
AREASA$
Arkansas Board o Health.
oAWLORIA
Pasadena Police Department. California Association for the Preven-
State Department of Mental Hygiene lion of Addiction to Narcotics (Loe
(Sacramento). Angeles).
Educational AUiance (Los Angeles).
Integrators Foundation (Los Angeles).
o0NwrWUT
Narcotics Advisory Council (Hartford). Community Council of Greater New
Haven (New Haven).
Narcotic Addiction Swvice Oenter
of Southwestern Fairfield County
(Stamford).
xz4Um
State Board of Health, Bureau of
Narcotics.
Vocational
Guidance Service (Hous-
ton).
UTAH
AaNAN5AD
N6*e U!wnme*1
Board of Health littlee Rock).
THE NARCOTIC REHABIITATION ACT OF 1966 29
lIN OM AN* 0suAuo-Coatnoed
vomfewn"m"a
San Diego County ProbaUon Depart- Lose Aso&"e
ment. Education Allance.
Pamdua Police Departmest. Narcotc Education Feumiation.
Welfare Planning Council, Los Ange s
stagim.
CON JUOTICU?
ConnecUcut Department of imdcatiom Foundation for Alcohol Education
(Brifdeport).
5Th101' Or 0OLUXLA
East Los Ajeles Halfway House (Los Synanou House (Santa Monica).
Angeles). Synanon House (Ban Diego).
Tvn Challenge Center (Los Angeles).
CONMTICUT
Synanon House (Westport).
IrLOMA
Teen Challenge Center (Miami).
ILLINOS
St. Leonard's House (Chicago),.
St. Mark's Episcopal Church Halfway
House (Chicago).
Teen Challenge Center (Chicago).
NEVADA
NEVAD"A
Reno State Prlson.(Reno)
, ' L' ~itetr arcoic
ptr a*s Wallp
)u*WaU11s
in W41ls Wteia . .
Jw~aim
NNWMll, ' :
Chapters in Hackensack:
Newark
lassaic. (Rbaptr
P
Jersey City (tqe edtablishbo) ,
Union City (to Iestablshed)
Senator Dow. I wonder how many additional addicts you think the
present facilities would accomwiiodate within reason# What I am
getting at is, should not we be looking ahead and establishing some
new facilities?
I: Attorney General KArzzNBAcjL I think as far as institutional care
within the Federal system is concerned, I think our facilities would
be adequate presently to deal with what would occur under this act if
it were to pass in its present form.
As far as aftercare facilities are concerned, it is our judgment that
existin facilities would expand if the Federal Government_ either
through the Surgeon General or through the Department of j ustice,
were to enter into contracts for supervision, that there would be some
expansion of these based on the contract in terms of then having the
money to hire and train further personnel.
In addition to that, there are a good many pro m which pres-
ently exist in the Federal Government which would provide financial
assistance both as far as bricks and mortar are concerned under Hill-
Burton, as far as training programs and so forth are concerned under
-nity
number
.e. ionk HEW programs, as well as even under OEO and oommu-
of program.
I4I' do not think new authorizing legislation is needed to take care
of the expansion of these facilities. I think it exists in present law.
And to what extent it would require an additional appropriation
would, I think, depend on some experience under it. It would hard
to estimate now. I
90D TIM NARCOTIC REHABI~ITATION ACT OF 19 66
stnd it, older addidt perlaps are more susceptible to bei'g cured
than perhaps some of te younger ones I I think that this is at least
the opinion of Richard McGe, Administrtor of California's Youth
and Adults. Correction Agency. And I am just wondering whether,
under a rather strict defintion which has been outlined in admin.
istration bill, whether this might perhaps-if a person had run foul of
the law in his earlier years, and had committed his two felonies, he
would, as he became older still be restricted from participating in this
program. Would 'ou still possibly suggest that since this is the expor-
mental program 9hat it would bt to wait and see how it works
outI
Attorney General KANzJUckt. That would be my judgment on it.
And I think there is a good deal of werit in broadening i because I
believe it will work out. But I can only really repeat what I have said,
it is experimental and I think it is important that there be some public
assurance that this is just not going to be the easy way back on the
streets.
Senator KzNiwiy of Massachusetts I have just one more final area,
Mr. Chairman.
This is with regard to the facilities which are available. You have
mentioned the Lexington, Ky., and the Fort Worth facilities. Now, it
is my understanding that at the present time they are fairly well
crowded u far as thee facilities are concerned. And also the State
facilities in New York and California. Is this your information as
well t
Attorney GetneralKAUHWNACS. I think as far as the Federal isti-
tutions are concerned that the Surgeon General has taken the view that
be could cope with the Federal prisoners here. I think the area you
run into dAidcult is with some of the State facilities, which I would
think would need expansion, but where I believe there is enough au-
thority wider existing law to deal with all of those problems 1 And
sometimes the expanaon is just an expansion of personnel, and some-
times it will be bricks and mortars. And there is a whole variety of
programs of Federal assistance prewntly available to do that.
I think the real problem, Senator, as in so many prograxns,
is that with a very low rate of uutowployinent it is dilicult to get the
quaJfi.d people trained and iitcrested in this kind of work,, You are
compe[tinig with all kinds of other work to get people with adequate,
training tad medical background, phy4hia~rits ad ocal worke
apd so forth invovly4 . 'd I't
$enator Kzx Nx&ar of Masacuisets, I think you related In your.
tesnimonF the importance of aftercare. And I feel that pobably the
States wh hav, been most suceessIul.have been those wo have pro-
vided atbiezxtensive aftercare Pxocedures.
4U.t r General KzATZZDA(MA. Yes,
#>A awr. Uxr of Massahuse" I think probably your om-
.11t txnwas r]ee to the diffiulty in obtaining the Federal prob-;
.ti94a
tm y, ents
i *;who are
thatad.quatdy
I ,
rig t! and,*w1P cannot work
oiad with
,,,i,
fqr yI Gia:4 tes.Or State ppl It ksj,*.
t.b you
owho
We en 2]ot gun of fldnng np,,
hgaw quiuS* people to do thws ki , of wor,,
a"4"r)UxWjp1 of )sar41usef is Doo uh*e a reoqx end
tione just on this matter here, as to what steps might De suggested"
taken to help and assist in providing these facitiesV
36m THR NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1960
I have nuted in reading the proposed legislauon dwt where any re-
view authority is mentioned, i is the bar of Par"ls, which is com-
parable to the adult auty in CalifornA You may be interested
to know that the California aB=iitation Act now provides a sepw-
rate review boar! for the addict treatment program.
This board, known as the narcotic addict evaluation authority, was
established following a criticism that civil commitment casm should
not be controlled by the same review board which handles prison sN-
tences and the granting of paroles. No criticism was intended of the
prison boards. The 'iue involved removing the appraisal of adec&ic
treatment progrem from the official apparatus.
This evaluation board is cha by law with a yearly review of
the treatment progress of all addfctsin the program. This is an ad-
ministrative safeguard to prevent the staff of the treatment facility
from withholding any addict from review for release. Beyond the
administrative safeguards, every patient, of couue, has the constitu
tional right to petition for a writ of habeas corpus to inquire into the
facts of his cae. The California courts have clearly indicated that
meticulous attention will be given to all such petitions.
tionMany of the changesinvolved
authority-have in the program--includin
undeo g its civiltheapects.
addict evalua-
In the
De La 0 case, the California Supreme Court was critical of what it
tanned "indicia of criminality" in the original statute. These changes
emphasizing the civil process have extended from the recodiication of
the laws, removing them from the penal code, to the terminology and
lexicon used at the facility.
The act itself has been placed in the welfare and institutiom ode.
In the area of terminology, them chan have been made:
"Person"has beei substituted or"defedut""
"Out-patient status" is used rather than "n parole";
"C.onditions of Mlease" has supplanted "conditions *I parole";
Individuals remain at the facility for a "period" rather than a
Individuals are "committed" instead of being "onfined"; .&Z&n
Thurogram isnow one of "control" rather than 7
The scope ofthe California ac ompaed toths vamius
posals offers interesting onsideration
We most recently epended the act to provide for the compulsry
civil commitment of nonardminal addicts. Afw 8 years of o ain
under the aWt, we concluded this was emutia to the control of the nar
cotics problem in California. [ notice that none of the Federal pro-
posals consider this poeibility.
A most important provision of the Califora sat is that the addict
tending beo r s judge hs unocho.eindeermii" whether he should
be treae. As I read all the Federal propel , itap that the
addict will be able to decide if he will accept tm ea MayI ho,lyoM
tmt My 80 yem in law enforcement have taught W m that few ad
will ubmit to treatment. If they would, there would be nismed to
consider this program tody In California, a .flcaMtnumber of
narcotic addicts who would not have elect to ro= the prog ar
today reoelvin car, treatment and ealtto.
Any cho in the commitment of addits is left with e judge yet
even the court isrequired to owsider commitment in all cae where it
THU NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 166 41
4
may apply. This requirement on the court applies to all addicts, in-
cluding those accused of nonnarotic crimes. Considering the number
of addicts in California who have been committed following conviction
for a crime not associated with narcotics I would suggest you study
carefully the portions of the proposed bills which exclude many
criminals from the commitment program.
In framing the California law, we, too, were careful, to exclude those
persns who-had committed crimes of violence. I was a district attor-
ney at the time this program was enacted and I paid particular attn-
tion to this safeguard against abuse of civil commitment and treatment
by hardened and'vicious criminal. However, I note that the proposals
beWore you today would also exclude permns guilty of burglary and
hounbieaking--crimes consistently linked to the nonpeddling addict
who must find money to support his habit. The proposed exclusion
from your progr! also appears to be arbitrary with regard to prior
convictions, and particularly to a ror record of narcotic addiction.
In Califonis we have reved to courts some leeway in selecting
likey candidates for &.e treatment program.
Another feature of the California program is the minimum 8-month
requirement for institutional treatment. We believe it should be sp-
cified. Our experience has shown that this is absolutely the shortest
possible period for succesful treatment.
Te committee may wish to consider another major difference be-
twen the California act and your propoae : namely, we provide treated
ment in lieu of sentencing for criminals, rather than in lieu of proeecu-
tion, as the Federal proposal would do. In other words, we suspend
the steing
l not th prscution.
It was our legislature's belief that treatment for addiction should
not examt an individual from prosecution for criminal acts committed
s anaddt t. As a practical matter Inadjudication it would be ex-
tremely diffimlt to rsums prosecution and present or defend a case that
had been delayed 9 or 3a rs
Planners of the Ca.iforntia prog also realized that treatment
in the coamitumt facility ii only the first step in rehabilitation of an
addi. It h for this reason tht Califomis has established half.
way houe and a thorough program of out patient care in the com-
munity. I am pleased to see that the Federal propols all recognize
the need for aftieae In California, we believe that realtic after-
care includes regular narcotic-detection test, which may be either the
chemical injection or urinalysis type.
Since the various proposals seem to empow the Surgeon General
to contract with the Stat s for treatment and the States currently have
varied narcotic treatment programs the committee may wish to con-
sder provi ns for uniform treatment standard. Perhape the stand-
ards 4cold be tied to Peerl support fund.
I p weme
you a.e prepared to consider the funding of this pro-
gram. Our erpetrence has taught us that addict treatment is cosly.
In Cal ifori it is a multimid'ion-dollar. program4te California.
Rehabilitation Ceter alone coet us $6 million annually to operate,
We believe that it would be unreasonable to ask us to undertake the
treatment and rehabilitation of Federal patients without reimburse-
mint.
ALA
dltt
42 THR NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACr OF 196
' t
t -..... 143 ," 0 A-3
TH NARCOTIC RSHABUTATION ACT OF 1906
Senator Burdick I
Senator BumiwcK. I just have one question of the attorney general.
In the middle of page 8 you say:
We most recently expanded the act to provide for the compulsory civil commit-
ment of noncringnal addicts.
Mr. Lrxcu. Yes, sir.
Senator Buimck. What is the basis of law for that oneI
Mr. LYmu. The same basis, Senator, that you have for the men-
tally ill, for venereal disease, or for quarantining or anything thut is
a menace either to the person himself or to society in general. And
this has been upheld by our courts. I would compare it to our sexual
psychopath act.
Senator BuiwicK. And it has been upheld !
Mr. Lrwcii. It has been attacked by writ. The way the law reads
now the district attorney may file a petition if he believes the person
is an addict or likely to become an addict. This may also be done by
a peace officer with proper safeguards. There must be a medical
examination and certification by a doctor, and then a hearing in the
courts. I would compare it completely to a petition to commit the
mentally ill.
Senator BIRDicK. Just like an insanity hearingI
M r. LYNCn. Right.
Senator BUwiczi. As far as you know that has not been attacked
successfully ?
Mr. LYNcU. It has been attacked unsuccessfully.
Senator Doo. Senator Kennedy ?
Senator KzEN y. I have no questions. I just want to commend
the attorney general for his very helpful statement.
Senator = . I wonder if you have any explanation for the dis-
crepancy between the Federal and State addict figures. Them is quite
a spread, as I recall.
Mr. LyNcy. You will pardon me for saying so, Senator. We do
keep comprehensive statistics in the State of California. I think the
discrepancy lies in the manner of counting. I think we consider an
addict for a longer period of time than perhaps the Federal Govern-
ment does. I do not dispute that they are giving what they consider
a correct figure under this method of counting. But without going
into a great detail, it is a method of counting. We would consider
a man an addict for a period of at least 5 years, wilet* we know tlat
he has been cured of his addiction or is deceased.
Senator DooD. You think itis a matter, then, of computing figures?
Mr. LyiqCir. I think it is just a different way of counting.
Senator Dow. I notice at you put a good deal of stress on the need
for precautions against procedural breakdowns. Of course, I agree,
that this is a very important factor. Would you suggest that we set
up some administrative body, do you think that would be wise, a par-
ticular administrative body to administer this act
Mr. LYNcH. I believe that would be w'se, Senator. And I think
that the procedural aspects should be none into very carefully.
And i fI may be permitted, I Would like to a.pliofy one thing that
was said that might be in response to a question that Sunator Kenedy
asked of General Katzenbach. . q
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 47
I am very much concerned, as I pointed out in my statement, about
the type of person who would be eligible for this program. I think I
could sum it up by two things. We are interested in the civil aspect,
because this is where you really reach the addict who has not yet be-
come the criminal problem. He may be a petty thief or he may have a
criminal record, but it is not necessary to catch him in a criminal act
in order to bring him under the program.
I am interested, No 2, in the type of persons who might possibly be
excluded. Senator Kennedy mentioned, and I think I mentioned in my
statement, a housebreaker or a burglar. I used to work, as you know, in
the Federal Government. And the definition of a felony under the
Federal system is not the same as a definition under a State, most States
at least.
I have in mind one simple example. A man in California who goes
into a locked automobile and takes anything of value is guilty of
burglary. If he was charged with burgar',even though he received
a small sentence under the Federal law, he was charge with a crime
which would call for a penitentiary sentence.
Well, I think we all know that this is a typical activity of the narcotic
addict, as we refer to it in the trade of car boosting.
Housebreaking is a pretty general term. Presently in California we
allow a considerable amount of discretion to the judge in serious cases
with the consent of the district attorney. This may be waivers of some
of the disabilities which appear in the statute. I think, if I may reconi-
mend it, that a close examination of our law and our practice could be
useful in the final draft of these bills.
Senator Dome. I am greatly interested in your point that it would be
wiser and better under your practice to follow the procedure which
really calls for the suspension of sentence rather than the prosecution.
Do you find this to work well I
Mr. Lyzcm. It works both ways. It works for the man who goes
successfully through the program. Obviously there is very little desire
on the part of the prosecuting attorney-I am sure none--to prosecute
the man who has successfully rehabilitated himself as an addict.
No. 2, it takes care of persons who may be referred back by tihe facil-
ity after a very short period of time as being unsuitable. And because
the prosecution has been suspended, lie can still be prosecuted for an
original crime he may have committed.
Senator DODD. '1Thank vou again, Mr. lTvnch.
Senator KzNNrDrY of Massachusetts. Mi. Chairman, just on that
point that I was referring to earlier with the Attorney General, when
he did not have any suggestions as to how we might be able to frt
around that question? in the legislation, of course, it describes "Fel-
ony," on page 11, "includes any offense in violation of the law of the
United States, any State, any possession or territory of the United
States, the District of Columbia, the Canal Zone or the Common-
wealth of Puerto Rico, which at, the time of the offense was punish-
able by death or imprisonment for a period exceeding I year.
I was trying to bring that out as an additional bart'ier to inclusion
in this, that although felony is defined in this legislation, nonethe-
less, there is, I think, an opportunity for variance as far as where some
offenders would fall into the definition of a felony and be precluded
48 Tax NABOIC "5"AMBIfTATIQW AM OF, e6
9
w7be pret (alifeaa law peri"e for tdo dii oum, Whe
aotet
at -addicted to nareati o who am In Ismnet da r of becomlg addicte&L
The law distinguishes: thire *stepureI apuremwboemay
of hacivilly cmitd
"(2) persons convicted ot midmeaor
(2) Vesodus sannv! m
V* ta
tf WOW otherb ms at IfAisoeF s a" d
"(3) peenot changed wU1 crime wo empseto the isWtt4 attorn
S
and thef bels that tiew m% ot we abou eto becum, addicted; sr who ane
ivoasptftl 4he dieft*M aftoo by relav~ek trlsm"isa o thawW -,,! i
54' T AXtC6TIC OAoN A& or' 196
"In the case of those convicted of a misdemeanor or felony, where the Judge
Us reason to believe that the defendant may come under the civil commItment
laW further criminal proceedings are suspended after a convlcton or pies of
guilty, a petition Is ftled, and a Judicial hearing Js held. If It is found that ths
defendant In addicted or In Imminent danpr of becoming addicted, the court bar-
Ing Jurisdiction over the commitment proceedings may commIt him to the director
ot the State department of corrections to a maximum period of ? years; on a
finding that he Is not, the court will return W= to the court having Jurisdiction
over the criminal proceedings for sentening. If at any time after O0 days the
director o correctose concludes that a committed defendant is not a fit subject.
for treatment, he Is returned to the ourt1having jsdiction over the criminal,
proceedings for futher d1sposton,
"In the case of those who a mot charged with the commission of a crime, the
court having Jurbdiction over the commitment proceedings may, after a medll
examination and a Judicial hearing, deny the petition and discharge the person,
or It may order him committed to the drectar of corrections If the person volun-
tarily sought commitment, the maximum period of commitment Is 2% years. I
the commitment Is involuntary, the maximum period Is I years. The dlrtetor of
corrections may discharge him It he concludes at any time after 00 ays that
he Is not a At subject for the program.
n those who are Committed under this law are sent U Patients to the Oall-
"All
fornia Rehabilitation Oenter In Oorona, Oalilf, administered by the department
of corrections. At the rehabilitation center, the patient enters upon a group
psychotherny program and participates In a remedial educational program, vo-
cational training, and other rehabilitative activities. He must remain at the
rehabilitation center at least 6 mouths before he is eligible for release as an
outpatient. After release, he Is kept under close supervision by s/vially trained
parole ofters, Nallue tut ae periodically ad to detec any relapse.
It It becomes necessary, he may be returned to the rehabilitation enter for
further treatment and again released under superviSion. If a, pervaon who has
been committed abstains from the use of narcotics for 8 consecutive years as an
outpatient, he may be discharged from the rehabilitation progrwz. It hs com-
mitment followed a criminal conviction, the criminal proceedings may be dis-
missed after Ids discharge. If a convicted person Is not discharged prior to
the expiration of his term of commitment, he Is returned for further disposition
to, the court having juredictioe over the commitment proceeding The court
maY extend his commitment for a period not to exceed 8ar or It may return
him to the, court having jurisdiction ovw th or isalpoerceed ins o
resumption of those proceedings
' "The California program Is rftehinga signiiant number of narcotie abusers.
On September 80, 1^8, there wet 1J%3 persons at the rehabilitation center and
001 outpatients. tshe f acilitm of the program will be broadened. Additional
halfway houses for persons under civil commitment are planned for the northern
and southern sections of the State. Finally, It should be noted that research on
narcotic abuse and on the efiaey of the ivil ecommltmt progam Is gradually
being built Into the program as an Integral part of IL
"JEE NEW TOnE NWGLM
"Th New York eivil oomiuMnent law, popularly known as the Metcalf-Volker
Act, provides, like the California law, for both inpatient and outpatient treat,
ment. But heree the California law lodges the responsibility for the establish-
ment and operation of the treatment program with the director of correctiom,
the New York law lodges It with the of the Stat d-eartment of
atoae
mental hygiene.
"Under the New York law there are thes eatgoreas o addicts eligible for
admission to the program. The prase of commitment, the length of time fo
which an addict can be held, and the procedures of the program, differ with
respect to each category.
"The largest category covers narcotic addicts who have been arrested for nar-
eode law violations or other criminal offmm, except certain serious crimes,
but have not yet been convicted. There must be no extesive htory ot prior
felonies or of failures under pror tmut, and there mast be no objectlon
from the district attorney.
"The addict offeder vous requt.- ommitment within 10 days of his arrest.
If he does, he may be committee for tratmet. The c- om r ot mental
hygiene must be willing to accept hims, ad there must be adequat trestment
faeilitis, althefth trement eed nt be wlly Imw tm . b bow
totnl
TEN -NARCOTIC AILITATION ACT OF" 10 66 56
of commitment, however, may not exceed 8 years, whether spent in a treatment
facility or In the community under supervision. If the addict offender is com-
mitted, prosecution of the original criminal charge is held in abeyance. If In
the course of treatment It Is found that the addict offender Is unre"rpondve or urn.
cooperative, he is returned to the court. If he completes the treatment program
sucesfully, he is diwchrgd and the criminal charge In dism e.
'Another category includes nareoic addicts who voluntarily commit them-
selves to a treatment facility or, If under the age of12. are committed on appli-
cation by their next of kin. They may be held without Judicial hearing and
given treatment for a period of at least 46 days, and longer If they consent.
Where there has been a Judicial hearing, they may be held and given treatment
for a period of not more than a year. The addict may be discharge before the
expiration of a year If he has recovery or If he Is not amenable to treatment.
"The third category covers addicts convicted of a crime, usually offenders
placed on probation by the court on condition that they submit to treatment
Again, the commissioner of mental hygiene must be willing to accept the addict
for treatment, and adequate facilities must be available. The treatment pro-
gram need not be wholly institutional and may include outpatient care in the
community under supervision., The entire course of treatment cannot exceed
the period of probation Imposed by the cuort. Th addict nay be returned to the
court before expiration of the probationary period If he has reovered or it,on
the other hand, he is unresponsive or uncooperative.
"The department of mental hygiene has established special treatment units
for committed addicts in six State hospitals: one In New York City, three within
70 miles of New York City, and two In upstate New York. These units have a
total capiclty of 408 beds. Local authorlti, especially In the large cities, are
expected to provide supplementary facle fo detoxifica and, In some
casts facilities for short-tern treatment
"When an addict Is released from inpatient care and treatment In a State hoe-
pital unit and returned to the communIty on an outpatient basis, he Is required
to report periodicaUy to a facility designated by the commiaoner of mental
hygiene " suitable to supervise a treatment program for former addictL Such
faciUties may be under public or private auspices. In the New York City area,
the State department of mental hygiene operates aftercare clinics on Wards Is-
land and on 17th Street. Throughout the outpatient period, addicts are subject
to home visits and to reasonable regulation ot their conduct by the aftereare
facility. They must submit to medical treatmeit and nalUzs tests to detect any
relapse. The New York civil commitment law came into effect on January 1,
1968 On October 28, 1968, the program had 87O lnpaiente In the various State
hbopita treatment units and M outpatients."
Room of S" Yege To#* Utese D"W*Nf" f Msffla Hypie for lsroetde
Ad.... Re for oeo g IMS-EE
L. Tnam&mswWL
1cr Ln opwt~km S Dtrea
t
uIt In t s 41I 616T hav b ,ss,.ndw
atowaof -Bu!luo. Utkc, M for 2 yem I,,,
butn. il d C4Atnl ai"p. "new -Mta
,,l isls,,
N mAac.M.......... bedi ............ I=9
ous............... 1SD I 115nopUm.
-
TUhboeanpwlse
_ ot p Ilep, os
Droki Am
Cft.... SWO Now- Bhztn ofrOMILs aw
an whom"~ soPKis
QUsms AtW 0MrCClink ......-----------...... oUwO Do.
&.Shr00gg
41 York city 0U=Wmt hIM& ....... I~ W Now-so -I sot
WoeClay Mmlad Deowd Nr bsu~g S.000 New-100 pjm&oog.
rm h of ammsrbd
iure................. a0 NOW.
r .. .o Do.
For asbla Worksbop ............. -- 50000 Do.
4.a Hm study, Miudbg45tW kpaUM wo.. IM 06 ftb hts bern MeargUM
2%IIU . .em.
68 TUN NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1964
Mr. JAvrg. Mr. President, meanwhile the Federal Government has continued
to Ignore the adrice of virtually very expert group In the country s well as the
New York and Callfwnia experience. It has continued to rely solely upon a W
roar-old,, wholly punitve approaCh to naroctics addlction without any aignicmant
regard to ldentifying Isolating, and treating Its social, psychological causes. The
Federal experience coamlts of approximately 800 convictions each year: Only
two Federal lhospttal--at Fort Worth, Tem and Lexi41o- Ky.--deal with the
subject, and they register a stggering rate of recidivism,
A long series of expert studies and reports make it abundantly clear that there
Is a coueum among the medical and law enforcement commualtes about at
least four major, glaring defects In the existing Federal approach:
Firvt There must be legislation to provide Federal aid to State and local
governments and nonprofit private groups for the construction and operation of
facilitis to provide treatment and rehabilitation programs in the home wommu-
nity ot those alicted. Evqrome who hs studied the matter agrew that the two
existing Federal hospital faclities in their present locatlono--whatever their in.
trInsic juerit--cannot begin to meet the treaendous need for rehablltative after-
care, Involving a wide range of service--medlcal, pqychletrlc, psychological,
;kMily counseling, Job trainins-which appear at this polat to be the only ap
proach which has a chanc of meeting the narcotics challenge.
Second. There must be legislation authoriing Federal civil commitmt for
the treatment of narcotics users as an alternative to criminal prosecutor and
Imprisonment and there must be some amelioration ot the rigid restrictions en
the postconvictiou fencing in the Feerl courts of dat adwto who am
narcotics addict.
Third. There is a great lack of reliable Information about the extent ot nar-
cotics addiction and about the proper techaliques for achivig permanent cures..
Everyone seems to agree that a much greater efort In research must be qtade by
the Federal Government
Fourth. Finally, there Is also general agreement that since narcotics are the
product of nations overseas, there must also be a massive effort to achieve effec-
tive International control over the Illegal distribution and entry of sareotic drugs.
These basic conclusions have been supported generally by such groups a the
American Medical Association and Ameriqan Bar Ameocatloa In a joint repwt In,
195. the AMA and the National Research Oouncil In 12 statement, the New
York Academy of Medicine awd the National A4visory Council of Judges of the
National CouaclI on Crime and Dellnquency.
A Whte House Vonference on Narcotics pn4 Drug Abuse, whicb Senator Kest
Ing and I had loss advocated, was called In September 19 and forced the basis
for the President's Advisory Comml&Ion on Narcotic and Drug Abuse, which
issued its final report along these Unts In November 163 The Medical Society
of the county of New York has added ts colusioas o January 19B5. And the
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigtions In a report Issued In March
1965, following 1964 hearings on the Illicit traffic in narcotics, also endorsed
these basic conclusions& These distinguished bodies have set the stage for t.e&*
oral action. The bills Senator Kennedy and I are offering now are designed to
achieve that action.
I It Is noteworthy In this connection that one of the few signs of prqgvem in the
Federal Establishment was a report In April 1962, to the Senate Judiciary Com-
mittee from the Justic Department-which was then headed as Attorney Gen-
eral. by Senator Kennedy of New York-favoring the civil commitment bill whi/h
Senator Keating and I had Introduced In the 87th Congress and which is the fore-
runner of ne of the measures which I am Introducing with my colleagues today.
Wrting for the Department, Byron I. White, thea Deputy A0omy Oenre] and
now Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, stated :
"In summary, the bill treats the narcotics problem from an approach whieh
recognizes that the drug addict Is a sick person and that Is some Instances he
and society as well would be benefited Itf he were dealt with initially as sucl
Since the violation of penal laws is often attributable to narcotic addiction. the
Department ot Justice favors this new, yet limited, apposch to the subjWt
Accordingly, enactment Is recommended."
This approach received a great boost when Prmaidemt Johnson. in his crime
message to Congress this year, endorsed a civil commitment measure. I very
much hope that the adminstratIon will follow through on this bY either en-
dorsing the legislation we are today Introducing or by Introducing legislation
of Its own. I also very much bope that the Congress will at last act. _r
TIM NAN C C EHABJTAT0oN ACT OF IS , 57
The only action which Congress has taken at this point has been In connec-
tion with the Mental Health Centers Construction Act of 1968, Public Law 88-
164. At my Inssece, the conferees on that measure made It clear that the
act would permit States to Include facilities for some treatment of narcotics ad-
diction within such federally assisted mental health centers. The pogra=
authorized by that act is now Just beginning to get underway, and It Is unclear
as to the extent to which the State* will be able to make use of It for the pmr-
pose of narcotics addiction treatment. Senator Kennedy and I have inquired
of the National Institute of Mental Health and have been advised that New York
State is preparing to participate in the program.
One area which has received widespread attention by the expert groups should
be discussed in greater detail. That Is the matter of research. The Public
Health Service Act, section 8S. presently authorizes the National Institute of
Mental Health to make up to 100-percent grants to governmental and private,
nonprofit agencies for research and demonrtions in the tieatwent o mental
Illness. In 1962, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare advised
me that there was little use of this section for research Into narcotic addiction
in part because the Department was doubtful as to the legal scope of section 308
In regard to narcotics addiction. Accordingly, the legislation which Senator
Keating and I introduced In the 87th and 88th Congresses Included a measure
specifically extending section 808 to cover research Into addiction. I have now
been advised by the Department that their legal doubts have been resolved so
that suchunanimous
I ask Is unnecessary.
leg"tlon consent that there be printed In the Record at tiAe point In
my remarks my exchange of correspoudence with HEW.
There being no objection, the exchange of correspodetee was ordered to be
printed Ju tba $ wd, as follows: "smau~ar 9, 1965.
"Hon. AMTUON Y J. CgLUaza,&
"8eoretarjof He.fhA. Zdsali.o &*4 W-/fre,
'Wa'gion, D.O.
"Data Ma. Sscuarr~x: As you know, I have long been deeply concerned about
the need for a medically oriented Federal program against narcotice addiction
and have repeatedly ntroduoed a series of measures in the Besiate to establish
auch a program.
-One of a* key factors, In my Judgment, Is the present lack of definitive In-
forulatlon on how addiction can be effectively treated and resisted after treat-
menL For some time I have be convinced that the Fesra Oevernment could
make a significant contribution to scimtific knowledge In this area thruh seto
808 of the Public Health Service Act, which authorizes up to 100-pmuat grats
to Staro and local, public or nmprofit ageeces ft research in the Aldd o mental
health.
"The Public Health Service advised me in 192 that section 308 funds were
very little used for narcotics research, in part because there was uncertainty in
the Service as to whether narcotics addiction was legally Includable within that
program. I then Introduced legislation, which was & 800 In the 87th Congres
and 8. 82 in the 88th CIongreek which would have made this authority clear
ad specific
"I am now In the process of reintroducing this legislation and would very
much appreciate your giving me at your earliest opportunity up-to-date data
on the following pIts: (1) the extent of the entire section 808 research pro.
gram; (2) the extent to which It has or is being used for narcotics research in-
eluding specific data as to the locations and types of projects; (8) the extent
to which legal problems have prevented full utilization of section SW for nar-
cotics reseeaeh; (4) and the extent to which ala&of funds or a lack of public
information about the program or other factors hame prevented full use of this
section for narctics research.
"Particularly as the ranking Republican member of the Senate Labor and
Public Welfare Comnmittee and Its Subcommittee on Health. I would very much
hope that we may a.on be able to take a significant ste forward In at last meet-
ing the growing menc of narcotics addict. .,
"With warm regards,
"JACeM K. Jivrrs
"U.S. 8oeslor."
68 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION. AC OF 1 Sg
"TwAzsuaT DxFAxTMrNT,
"BumtAu or N&AooTncs,
"Waef ngton, D.C., May 10, 1965.
"Da&a SrEAToAa JAvlns and KswitznY: This will acknowledge receipt of your
letter of April 24. 1965, which concerned the language used in section 151.32,
title 20, code of Federal regulations.
"Upon receipt of Report No. 72 of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on In.
vestigatons, I noted the recommendation on page 127 that the Bureau of
Narcotics give further close study to the language used in section 151.892 to
determine whether it could be revised for purposes of clear interpretation. Ac-
cordingly, this matter is currently under study, although final determination has
not been made.
"I can assure you. however, that we are giving this matter full attention and
at the appropriate Ume we will be in contact with other interested agencies
and organizations.
"Before any proposed changes in the regulation could take effect, a notice
would first have to be published in the Federal Register. Thirty days would
then have to elapse before the regulation would became al upon second
publication.
"Sincerely yours,
"HzwuT L GzoAwIo,
"0ouswe of NGVOOkoe."
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1968
"Tu.Lsuay DiPARTMIMT,
"BUnAU or NAucoTIcs,
"Ws"h fsto , D.C., June t,1965.
"Drzc SzjAavos JAvrrs and KxmNT : In response to your further inquiry
relative to the Joint letter I received front you, I wish to make the following
observations on the four questions raised therein:
"(I) The part of section 151.3W which appears to be at issue Is as follows:
"'An order purporting to be a prescription issued to an addict or habitual
user of narcotics, not in the course of professional treatment but for the
purpose of providing the user with narcotics sufficient to keep him comfort-
able by maintaining his customary use, is not a prescription within the
meaning and Intent of section 4705(c) (2).'
"(2) The Bureau is carefully studying section 151.392 to se what change
In language or additional phraseology may be necessary to clarify any misunder-
standing that this section was intended to restrict bona tide medical treatment.
Initially, section 151.W2 was carefully phrawed to hwure compliance with the
provision of 28 U.S.C. 4705(c)(2) which requires that narcotic drugs be dis-
pensed or distributed by a practitioar ,00 * in the course of his professional
practice only ,* 0'. Both 4705(c) (2) and 151.392 are Intended to discourage
those few practitioners who are inclined to do so, from abusing their nurvtic
privileges by dispensing narcotic drugs for other than for bona fide medical
need. In considering any revision of 151.W392 our purpose in to insure compli.
ance with 4705(c) (2). and at the same time to make it clear that prescriptions
may be sued for the treatment of a habitual user of narcotics in accordance
with accepted medical practice.
"(3) If section 151.302 Is revised, It would be submitted to Treasury and
Justice Department officials for review and cunuent Subsequently, any revi-
sion would be discussed with the American Medical Association, the National
Research Council and other interested medical groups.
"(4) In view of the careful and extensive review which It intended to be
afforded any revision of section 151-V2, It would not be possible at this time
to select a date when this matter would be reWolved.
"Sincerely yours,
"Ul.ar L. GIORDANO.
"Conwn eieow of Nrcoti ."
Mr. JAvrrs. Mr. President, finally, a word should be said about one feature
of the narcotics picture which has perhaps caused more trouble and more excuse
for delay In this field than any other. Nothing tends to divert attention from the
principles outlined above and incorporated in the bills now being Introduced than
reference to the so-called British system of allegedly maintaining addicts on free
narcotics supplied by the GovernmenL The controversy immediately boils up over
what the British system really is,whether addicts can in fact be maintained on
stable dosages, whether chemical substitutes such as Methadone can be utilized,
or whether conditions exist in the United States which would make any such sys-
tern workable.
I do not believe controversy over these issues should becloud the pressing urgen-
cy for action on the series of proposals which :re here being introduced. Per-
sonally, I favor a limited research effort toward determining what the answers
are to the arguments for maintenance of the addicts on drugs from medical
treatment sources, and a few such experiments are presently under way, notably
by the State of New York department of mental hygiene. But it should be clear
that the bills now introduced do not call for or advocate adoption of much a system
and the debate over that system and Its testing should accelerate not frustrate
prompt action by the Congress on these measures, so critical is the problem now.
I yield now to my colleague from New York [Mr. Kennedy).
Mr. KvnnzDy of New York. Mr. President, I introduce for appropriate refer-
ence, on behalf of myself, Senator Javits, Senator Ervin, Senator Hart, Senator
Williams of New Jersey, Senator Tydings, Senator Kuchel, and Senator Case, two
bills concerning the problems of narcotics and drug abuse-a bill providing cer-
tain reforms in the Federal criminal law as It relates to narcotics, and providing
a post-conviction sentencing program by which convicted persons may be sen.
tended to a treatment program instead of to prison, and a bill to assist States,
political subdivisions and private nonprofit organizations In providing treatment
and rehabilitation services for drug abusers. Senator Saltonstall is also a co.
62 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
sponsor of the former bill. and Senator Long of Missouri is a cosponsor of the
latter bill.
Preceding my introduction of these bills, Senator Javits has introduced two
other bills; one which provides for pretrial civil commitment for Federal nar-
cotics violators, and the other providing aid to the States for construction and
acquisition of treatment facilities.
The package of four bills will, in my Jud-ment, go a long way to updating the
Federal approach to narcotics problems and. perhaps even more important, to
stimulating more extensive State. local, and private efforts to help narcotic
addicts and other drug abusers.
We have somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 narcotic addicts in this country.
Their affliction affects not only their own lives, but the lives of their families as
well. As a result of the crimes they commit to get money to support their addic-
tion, they cost society hundreds of millions of dollars annually. We need to do
much more to get at the roots of this problem than we have done up to now,
and that In why we introduce this legislation today.
These bills are the product of months of effort and study. Many of their pro-
visions are based upon the findings and recommendations of the President's Ad-
visory Commulsion on Narcotic and Drug Abuse in 1963. In addition, in preparing
the bills we have consulted extensively with knowledgeable officials at the Depart-
ment of Justice, the Department of Health. Education. and Welfare, the National
Institute of Mental Health, and the Bureau of Narcotics.
I cannot say that each and every provision of each bill has the full agreement of
every relevant official in these executive departments, but I can say that I think
these bills represent a resolution of the sometimes conflicting views that can be
found among the experts In the field. With the extensive support which we have
among our colleagues in the Senate, and the wide interest on the House side in
introducing the bills, these bills have the best chance of pa.ssage of any narcotics
reform legislation to Ie offered In recent years.
I have listed our cosponsors in the Senate, and in the House. Some or all of
the bills will be offered by ('ongresszuen Celler, Harris, Mills, Delaney. Farb-
stein. Ryan, and Ottinger. amonr the Democrats, and ongremen McCulloch,
.-pringer, Reid. Lindsay. Bell. and Mathias among the Republicans. I am par-
ticularly grateful for the support of the Senator from North Carolina, Mr. ]grvin.
His long interest in law reform and in the narcotics field and his wide knowledge
of these matters make his support particularly helpful.
President Johnson in his message on crime earlier this year called for legis-
lation to establish civil commitment and to make the Federal narcotics law more
flexible. I look forward to supporting these bills when they come up and to
working for their passage in conjunction with the program we are offering today.
Let me turn to discussion of the bills we introduce today. One of the most
important efforts which the Federal Government can make to help in connec-
tion with narcotics and drug abuse problems Is to stimulate increased efforts by
States. cities, and private individuals %.ndorganizations to treat and rehabilitate
addicts and to engage in research into the problems of drug abuse.
That Is the basic purpose of the services bill which I am Introducing. It
authorizes $7,500,000 a year for grants for treatment and rehabilitative serv-
ice, not only for narcotic addicts, but for users of depressant and stimulant
drugs--like the barbiturates and the amphetamines-as well. New York, Call-
fornia, and other States have made a start in this area, at least so far as narcotic
addicts are concerned, but more-much more-is needed.
One basic reason why more has not been done is that scientists and psychia-
trists and medical experts have been reluctant to enter upon research and treat-
ment efforts regarding addicts. This is understandable, because 76 percent of
the addict population comes from te 20 percent of society whose incomes are
the lowest. It is hard to convince an addict that there really is hope, that be
should seriously commit himself to a program which seeks to make him a mem-
ber of a society that never before did anything good for him. The difficulty of
dealing with addicts has, unfortunately, discouraged too many competent scien-
tists and researchers from involving themselves in the addiction problem. It is
an essential purpose of this bill to reverse that pattern of reluctance.
The aid which the bill provides is for treatment and rehabilitation services of
all types-Including medical treatment, family counseling, psychotherapy, voca-
tional training, help in flndinz employment and probation-type supervision.
Most of the aid would go to the States, cities, and private, nonprofit organizations
under a State plan and wuld be on a two-thirds to one-third matching basis,
IV, I
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 63
but up to 20 percent could be given directly to nonprofit organizations. These
groups often find it hard to obtain other financing, and therefore are in need
of 100-percent grants.
Underscoring the emphasis on bringing new programs Into existence, the bill
specifically provides that aid is to be available for the training of personnel in
all relevant fields, and for the undertaking by the States of specific statistical
studies to determine the full extent of the drug abuse problem and to follow par-
ticular groups of young people to see why some become addicts and others do not.
The purpose of the bill to encourage new efforts and the entry of new personnel
into the narcotics and research fields is reflected also in the duties given the
advisory committee which in created by the bill. That committee is charged
with advising the Surgeon General in his administration of the research grants
now available under section 303 of the Public Health Service Act, for the pur-
pose of encouraging new research efforts, particularly on a long-term contract
and collaborative study basis.
This purpose is borne out in title II of the services bill as well. This title
broadens the mission of the Public Health Service hospitals In Lexington, Ky.,
and Fort Worth, Tex., to include research. training, and demonstration in the
care and treatment of drug abusers. Equally Important, the mission of these
hospitals is, considered with the overall purpose of the bill, broadened to include
the problems of all types of drug abusers, including those who use barbiturates,
amphetamines, and other stimulant and depressant drugs. We know all too
little about the problems associated with these dangerous drugs, but we do know
there are Increasingly serious problems stemming from their widening use. Re-
search and treatment in the dangerous drug area at Lexington and Fort Worth
would be most helpful.
These aspects of the bill complement the regulatory provisions of H.R. 2,
which has been passed by the House and was reported yesterday by the Senate
Labor and Public Welfare Committee. That bill provides badly needed regu-
lation of the traffic in dangerous drugs; my services bill, together with Senator
Javits' construction bill will. among other things, provide treatment facilities
for those wiho have been the victims of the traffic.
We cannot ever lose sight of the fact that many of the problems underlying
addiction are the same ones that underlie much of the problem of crime in the
streets and delinquency. We will never erase addiction until, we erase poverty
and discrimination-until we can give the addict adequate educational and em-
ployment opportunities as an alternative way to turn.
Nevertheless, since the addict's personal problems are psychological and should
be susceptible of treatment as is any mental illness, there is much that can be
accomplished through better and more extensive treatment programs and better
and more extensive research. Momentarily, the bill is oriented primarily toward
the former category, since research money is available under section 803 of the
Public Health Service Act, but in overall purpose, the bill's point is to encourage
greater efforts In both the research and treatment areas.
I hope that the aid provided by this bill will be used for all types of treat.
ment programs, since we do not yet have any one sure-fire way to bring addicts
permanently into organised society. In general, I think it is safe to say that
It would be extremely useful to devote a substantial portion of the aid which
the bill offers to the critical period of aftercare-making sure that the former
addict has close attention, over an extended period of time, both psychiatric and
vocational, to make sure that he always has someone and something that can
offer tangible reason for not slipping back.
Beyond this. however, there are many questions. Should the addict be re-
moved from his original environment and placed in drug-free surroundings for
a long period of time while he is getting psychiatric help and vocational train-
ing? Or should an attempt be made to place him In some kind of halfway
house or other facility in his home environment once he Is no longer physically
addicted, where he will live and participate while he gradually attains member-
ship in organized society? Or Is the addict such an inherently weak personality
that he can never successfully return to his original environment, so that the
only possible program is one which removes him permanently from his original
surroundings and gradually makes him a part of an entirely new and permanent
social arrangement, of what might be called a reservation village? To what ex-
tent should all of this Involve only the addict, and to what extent should the
rest of his family be brought into it as well?
64 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196
All of these approaches deserve a full look. To some extent such a took can
be provided by the research grants avallable under section 803 of the Public
Health Service Act, but if we are to have a comprehensive set of treatment pro-
gram on a continuing basis, the services bUl which I am Introducing today is
an absolute must. The research moneys under section 803 are by deinltion not
available for contiuin proJects. I think It isimperative that we act now to
create the kind of Federal eouragement to the StMes and others which this bUl
ontemplates.
Turning to the other bill of which I am the principal sponsor, its design Is
twofold:
First. To enhance prosecutoral discretion In the enforcement of the Federal
narcotics laws, and
Second. To provide incentive for addicts convicted of Federal crimes to in-
volve themselves successfully in a treatment program in the prison system.
The person who violates the Federal narcotics laws Is ordinarily guilty of two
violations: violation of the Narcotic Drug Import and Export Act, the provi-
dons of which are in title 21 of the United States Code, and violation of the
regulatory tax provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. At present there are
mandatory minimum sentences for violation of both of these sets of provisions,
with some minor exceptions.
What the bill would do would be to eliminate most of the mandatory mini-
mum sentences in the Internal Reveaue Code, while retaining the mandatory
minimum provisions in the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Act Since the
latter i the more stringent act, this reform would give prosecutors a discretion
to decide whether an accused is a major peddler of narcotics and should be
tried under the stringent provisions of the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export
Act, or is an addict who has been arrested for what amounts to be a posseasory
offense and deserves more lenient treatment. The overall point of this reform,
and of the other reforms which the bill accomplishes. is to give the addict-
violator some incentive to rehabilitate h1,self successfully while he In in custody.
As long as he faces a long mandatory minimum sentence, that Incentive is practi-
cally destroyed.
Along the same lines, the bill extends the flexible sentencing provisions of
the Federal Youth Corrections Act to all violators up to the axe of 26, regardless
of whether a mandatory sentence is involved for the violation. In addition,
the bill extends the possibility of parole, on a limited basis, to those convicted
of offenses for which there is a mandatory minimum. It makes them eligible
for parole once they have completed their minimum sentence, amuming they are
otherwise eligible at that time. These chnnges all provide a useful and Impor-
tant flexibility without jeopardising the effectiveness of the strong penalties of
the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Act.
Part of the needed flexibllity has been accomplished by an administrative
directive, put out while I was Attorney General. that required first offenders
to be tried under the more lenient provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, but
far more flexibility is needed if the requisite level of reform and incentive for
rehabilitation is to be attained. That additional flexibility can be obtained only
by amending the law.
For all the offenses as to which the bill eliminates the mandatory minimum
sentence, that elimination carries with it elimination of the ban on parole,
suspension of sentence, and probation. The incentive which these reforms will
create for rehabilitative efforts must be given concrete application through the
cre tion of an addict treatment program. Tfo that end, the bill provides that the
sentencing judge or the Attormey General may send a narcotic addict convicted
of any Federal crime, or really anyone who has the same kind of underlying
mental or physical problem, which would include the user of dangerous drugs,
to a postcouvietlon treatment program In an appropriate Federal facility or In a
State or local facility operated on contract with the Bureau of Prisons. The bil
also provides that anyone released on parole following such a treatment program
an be released Into a special after-care program nMead of the ma parole"y
suervision.
Ropefully, the provisions of this bill will result in far greater flexibility in
the administration of the Federal criminal law and in far more effective treat.
ment and rehabilitation of addicts who are convicted of a Federal crime. We
all agr that we must continue to sare no effort In trying to stop the Illegal
trfi in narcotics and to apprehend those Involved. I Was certaty doepoy
1H NARCOTIC R:HABILITATION ACr OF 1966 65
involved in that Wort while I was Attorney General Nevertheless, better pro-
tectlon and incentive for the addict-violator Is needed, and I think the bill
which I Introduce today can provide that without in the least jeopardisng the
law enforcement effort against major traMckers In narcotics.
Mr. JAvrrs. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a mammary of our
bills, a section-by-sectioa analysis of our bills, and the text of the bills may be
made a part of our remarks, and that the bills Ue on the desk for additional
osponsos for 1 week.
Them being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record,
as follows:
"8vuX r or zm a'zoa ox NAaomos AXD Dav Asluss
'The civil commitment bill is similar to the New York State law in this area,
and to proposals which have been advanced at the Federal level for some tima
It provides that certain persons aeused of a violation of the Federal narcotics
laws can be given the option of undertaking a mandatory civil commitment
program of medical treatment and rebabiUtation Instead of standing trial. This
program would not be available to persons charged with selling narcotics for
resale, to persons convicted of two or more felonles, to persons agUnst whom a
prior felony charge is already pending, ad to persons previously partleipating
In civil commitment programs at the State or Federal level on two or more
occasions.
'"he period of civil commitment would be up to 86 months, followed by a
period of probationazy aftercare for up to 2 years. The bill provides for reamp-
tion of criminal prosecution against those who refuse to cooperate or are other.
wise nonresponsive to the program.
"The bill relating to reform of the existing criminal law is designed to enhance
prosecutoral discretion In enforcing the narcotics laws and to provide incentive
for narcotic addicts convicted of Federal crime, not necessarily only narcotics
violations, to Involve themselves successfully in a treatment program In the
prion sy0tea.
"The bill eliminates mandatory minimum sentences for marihuana violators
and for vlolators of the regulatory tax provisions of the Internal Revenue Code.
The bill would retain the stringent provisions which now exist in the Narcotic
Drugs Import and ],port Act and are necessary to deal with major peddlers of
narcotcs.
"In addition, the bill makes the parole provisions of title 18 and the Federal
Youth Corrections Act applicable to those offeuses for which mandatory minimum
sentences are retained. them changes provide a useful flexibility without
Jeopardizing the hard core of stringent penalties available under the Narcotic
Drugs Import and Export Act for persons as to whom these penalties are
appropriat.
"Fnally, the bill provides that either the Attorney General or the sentencing
judge may send any narcotic addict or any person with a similar under
mental or physical condition (which would include those who use dangerous
drugs) into a treatment program instead of into the usual prison atmosphere
The bill further provides for extensive aftercare treatment for such persons
when they are paroled, In lieu of the uuaml lm intensive parole supervision.
These provisions, together with the parole reforms mentioned above, will provide
a realistic incentive for the narcotic addict or dangerous drug abuser to make
a genuine attempt to rehabilitate himself and obtain the vocational training
neesary to he him becom a usef member of organized soclt.
"The services bil provides $TAOu a year for 8 years to aid in the establisb-
menk developmnt, and maintenance of trtment and rehabilitation services
for drug abusers The services include the full range of medical and pschiatric
seves, optional training of personal in the various relevant fields, and for
the under t by the States of statitical studies to determine te full extent
othe drug abem problem.
60 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 19 06
"The bill contemplates that at least 80 percent of the grants will go to the
States on a two-thirds-one-third matching basis, pusmuant to State plans filed
with the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. The States will use the
furds themselves and also distribute them to the political subdivisions and to
private nonprofit organizations in ae.ordance with their plan. Up to 20 percent
of the funds can be given by way of direct 100-percent pants to private nonprofit
organizations after consultation with the State.
"The bill specifically provides that the State plan is to be filed along with and
as a separate part of the mental health plan which the State Ales under title III
of the Public Health Services Act.
"rhus, the bill is keyed directly into the existing procedures under the Public
Health Services Act, and Is directly related to existing Federal programs on
mental health.
"A major aim of the bill, which Is reflected both in the type of aid which can
be given and In the duties with which the advisory committee created by the bill
is charged, is to encourage new people to enter the narcotics treatment field.
Perhaps the most significant problem in the narcotics area today Isthe lack of
sufcient professional people engaged in treatment. One of the most important
reasons for having a program such as the one contemplated by the bill isto put
the full force of the Federal Government behind the process of encouraging new
people to enter this field.
"The bill also has a tile II, the purpose of which is to broaden the definition
of narcotics and narcotic drugs in the Public Health Service Act, so that the
efforts of the Public Health Service in this area will extend to the barbiturates,
amphetamines, and other dangerous drugs, Instead of merely to the opiates
and other narcotics. Specifically, these amendments would result in broadening
the mission of the Public Health Service bospitals at Lexington, Ky., and Fort
Worth, Tex., to include research into and treatment of the problems of dangerous
drug users.
"Iv
"The bill to provide aid for construction and acquisition of treatment facilities
is structured in much the same way as the bill to provide aid for services, except
that the aid is to be distributed entirely in accordance with the State plan.
The bill provides an authorization of $15 million a year for 8 years.
"The bill is, again, designed as a supplement to the mental health aid which the
States have already received. Grants under this bill are limited to two-thirds
of the project cost.
"The facilities contemplated by the bill include the entire possible range of
treatment facilities for narcotic addicts and other drug abusers. Thus, the facil.
ity might be a halfway house, or a camp, or a sheltered workshop. The facility
might be one which offers vocational training and help in finding employment, as
well as psychiatric aid and counseling.
"A major aim of the bill is to aid the States and their subdivisions in providing
needed facilities for the crucial period of aftercare and adjustment of those who
have been taken off narcotics."
"A bill relating to the penaltie for violations of certain narcotic and marihuana
laws of the United States, and to the treatment of narcotic addicts and other
persons suffering from a mental or physical conditii committed to the custody
of the Attorney General (Senator Kennedy of New York)
"Section 1: Eliminates the mandatory minimum sentence for marihuana
violators now provided in 21 U.S.C. 176. Eliminates the prohibition on pro-
batlon, suspension of sentence, and parole for marihuana violators.
"Section 2(a): Eliminates the mandatory minimum penalties for certain
aspects of the natotics law which are contained in the regulatory tax provisions
of the Internal Revenue Code. (26 U.S.C. sections 4704, 470A, etc.)
"Section 2(b) : Eliminates the mandatory minimum sentence for the offense
of sale of narcotics in violation of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. section
7=7(b)), as opposed to the mandatory minimums for sale of narcotics In viola-
Uon of the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Act (21 U.S.O. section 171 et seq.),
which are retained. Section 2(b) further provides that a 5-year mandatory
minimum for the offense of selling or conspiring to sell narcotics to persons
under 18 In violation of the Internal Revenue Code Is retained.
"Section 3: Amends 7237(d) of the Internal Revenue Code to allow parole
for all narcotics violations and to allow suspension of sentence and probation for
THE NARCOTIC REIHABUITATION ACT OF 196q
"A bill to provide financial assistance to the States to assist them in establishing
treatment and rehabilitation services for drug abusers (Senator Kennedy oc
New York)
"Section 101: Short title, Drug Abusers Treatment Services Act.
Section 102(a): Authorizes $T,0,000 annual!1 for 8 fiscal years to aid the
States in providing treatment and rehabllltata services for drug abusers.
"Section 102(b) : Provides that at least 80 percent of the funds each year will
be distributed to the States in accordance with a State plan as provided in
section 104. The grants to the States are to include grants for the training of
personnel who will administer treatment services and grants for the obtaining
of accurate statistics regarding the extent of the drug abuse problem. Up to
20 percent of the funds can be distributed directly to private nonprofit organisa-
tlons which offer treatment services
"Section 102(c) : Sums appropriated under section 102(a) are to remain avail-
able until expended, except that applications must be filed before July 1, 196
and approved before July 1, 196.
"Section 108(a): Directs the Secretary of HEW to issue regulations. Bpe-
ciflcally directs that the regulations are to Include proviions for the kind of
services for which grants can be made--Including, but not limited to, detoxi-
fication or other medical treatment, physical therapy, family counseling, psye.o-
therapy, vocational training, help In finding employment, and probation-type
o provides that the regulations may require that applicants
for grants promise to make a reasonable amount of their services available to
people unable to pay.
THE NARCOTIC JELABIITATION ACT OF 1.96 69
"Section 104 (a): Provides for the State plan. Requires that the State plan.
among other things:
"1. Set forth its program, and
"2. Designate a single State agency to supervise the plan.
"Section 104(b) : Provides that the State plan is to be submitted as a separate
and distinct part of the State mental health plan which It submits to the Public
Health Service annually under tile III of the Public Iealth Service Act.
"Setlon 104(c): Provides that the Secretary may approve any State plan
which conforms substantially with section 104 (a), and may not disapprove any
plan without reasonable notice and opportunity for a hearing.
"Section 105(a) : Provides for the form and content of specific applications for
grants pursuant to approved State pleas and allows joint applications by 8tates,
subdivisions and nonprofit organizations working on joint projects.
"Section 105(b) : Provides that the Secretary may appove any species appli-
cation filed under section 105 (a) if It confm to the r tions and State plan.
"Section 106(a) : Provides for the form and content of applications for pants
by nonprofit organizations apart from the State plan, as provided for In section
102(b), which allows up to 20 percent of the fwud to be gained diretly to now
profit organization.
Section 100(b) : Provides that the Secretary may aare an application un.
der section 106(a) if he finds that It conforms to the law and regulations, and
that, after consultation with the agency, the application Is not Inconsitet with
the State plan.
"Section 106(c): Provides that the Secretary may squire reports by pant
recipientsL
"Section 107: Allows grants to be in advance or by way of relnbursemat
and In such Installments and on such conditions as the Secretary finds neceeary.
Grants under the State plan are limited to two-thirds of the project cost. Grants
directly to private organizations may cover 100 percent of the project cost.
"Section 108(a) : Creates a n*n-memr advisory committee on drug abuse,
and provides for the time sequence of appointments. Provides, also, th&a
members of the advisory committee are to be drawn from all fields concerned
with drug abuse.
"Oectlon 108(b) : Sets out the duties o the advisory committee to advise the
Secretary and to asss the States in the preparation of their State plans and
to assist in encouraging the development of research projects and treatmat
programs at the local level.
"S4ectlon 108(c) : Provides $75 per diem compensatilon for member of the
advisory committee.
"Section 108(d) : Directs the committee to elect a chairman and directs the
Secretary to provide needed technical and clerical a ee to the committee.
"Section 109(a): Provides for cutoff of funds by the SecretMry wbem he dfi
that State agency Is not caring out its pln
"Section 109 (b) : Provides for cutofof funds by the Secretary when he Inds
that a nonprofit organization Is not Living up to the terms o the grant.
"Section 110(a): Describes the technical astetanc which the Secretary may
render under the aet, Including the training of personnel amid the making of
studies relating to treatment and rehabilitation o drug abuser
"Section 110(b) : Authorises the Secretary to gather and dissemlinte informa-
tion and materials relating to the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers.
"Section 111: Provides judicial review In the courts of appeal for
States and nonprofit orgaulstlons
"Section 112: Defines terms. Drug abuser is defined broadly, to insure Lncia
slon of those who us barblturats, amphetamines, and other daerom dru as
well as the opates.
"Sections 201, 202, and 20S amend the Public Health Service Act to extend
Its application to the socalled dangerous drugs as well as the oplates and other
drugs previously Included. The major effect of this is to broaden the mission of
the Public Health Service hospitals at Lrexlston, 1y, and Frt Worth. Tex,
to allow them to treat all tpm of drug abusers instead of jut these who an
narcotics as previousy defined. Section 20 also se ily broadens the ais
sion of the Lexington and Fort Worth hoopite to cW e research, tranln& and
demonstration In the care and treatment of all types of drug abuser. Section 2K
is intended to encourage the Surgeon GeWml to select for rsea&ch and demon-
etration programs those patients who ae most suitable therefore, and who are
most amenable to the particular program involved."
70 TUZ NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1066
"A bill to provide financial assistance to the States to assist them in the cone
struction of facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers
(Senator Javits)
"%ecton 1: Short title of the act-Drug Abusers Treatment Facilities Act.
"Section 2(a): Authorizes appropriation of $15 million a year for 8 years.
"Section 2(b): Provides that such funds are to be available to assist the
States in constructing facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug
abusers and to provide relevant technical assistance to the States.
"Section 2(c) : Sums appropriated under section 2(a) are to remain available
until expended, except that applications must be fied before July 1, 1908 and
approved before July 1, 1900.
"Section 8(a) : Provides that the regulations may require that applicants for
grants promise to make a reasonable amount of their services available to people
unable to pay.
"Section 8(b) : Provides that the relations way require that applicants for
grants promise to make a reasonable amount of their services available to
people unable to pay.
"Section 4(a): Provides for the State plan. Requires that the State plan,
among other things:
"1. Set forth its program, and
"2. Designate a single State agency to supervise the plan.
"Section 4(b) : Provides that the State plan is to be submitted as a separate
and distinct part of the State mental health plan which it submits to the Public
Health Service annually under title III of the Public Health Service Act.
"Section 4(c) : Provides that the Secretary may approve any State plan which
conforms substantially with section 4(a), and may not disapprove any plan
without reasonable notice and opportunity for a hearing.
"Section 5(a) : Provides for the form and content of specific applications for
grants pursuant to approved State plans, and allows Joint applications by States,
subdivisions and nonprofit organizations working on joint projects. Requires
that the application shall describe the site, the project plan, and shall contain
various assurances.
"Section 5(b) : Provides that the Secretary may approve any specific applica-
tion filed under section 105(a) if it conforms to the regulations and State plan.
"Section 6: Allows grants to be in advance or by way of reimbursement and In
such h.stallments and on such conditions as the Secretary finds necessary. Pro-
vides further that amounts paid are limited to two-thirds of the construction
costs.
"Section 7: Provides for cutoff of funds by the Secretary when he finds that
a State agency is not living up to the terms of the grant.
"Section 8: Provides for appropriate recovery by the United States If, within
20 years, the faciulty Is sold to any nonprofit organization or ceases to be used
for the purpose for which it was constructed.
"Section 9: Provides judicial review in the courts of appeals for dissatisfied
Stated.
"Section 10: Authorizes the Secretary to appoint committees as he deems it
necessary.
"Section 11: Defines ter'm. drug abuser is defined broadly, to Insure inclusion
of those who use barbiturates, amphetamines, and other dangerous drugs, as
well as the opiates. 'Facilities' are defined as 'buildings or other facilities which
are operated for the primary purpose of assisting in the treatment and rehabill-
tation of drug abusers by providing, under competent professional supervision,
detoxification or other medical treatment, physical therapy, ft.mily counseling,
psychotherapy, vocational services, help in finding employment, or other services.'
facilities ' Include facilities for medical care, laboratories, community clinics,
halfway houses, sheltered workshops. Construction' Includes not only any new
building but also acquisiton, expansion, remodeling, and alteration of existing
buildings, and payment of architect's fees. 'Construction' specifically does not
Indude the cost of offa-lte improvements and acquisitions of land."
The Pusnmroe Orncc. The bills will be received and appropriately referred;
and without objection, the bills will be printed in the Exoa, and held at the
desk fot additonal cosponsors, as requested.
j) ,, ' ;
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Th. bills were received, read twice by their titles, appropriately referred, and
ordered to be printed in the Record. as follows:
"&S2118. A bill to authorize civil commitment in lieu of criminal punishment
in certain caves involving narcotic addicts; to the Commlttee on the Judiciary,
introduced by Mr. Javits (for himself, Mr. Kennedy of New York, Mr. Case, Mr.
Ervin, Mr. Hart, Mr. Kuchel, Mr. kaltonsa Mr. Scott, Mr. Tydings, and Mr.
Williams of New Jersey).
"Be U esesoed by the Senate ad Now# of &RJ-eematifee of the United
Stats of Amwic a (oiJnegrs .eembkd, That as used In this Act-
"(1) the term 'narcotle drug or 'naretics' shall Include the substances
defned as 'narcotic drugs', 'isonlpecalne', and 'opiate' In section 4781 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended; and
"(2) the term 'narcotic addict' means any person who habitually uses
any habit-forming narcotic drugs so as to endanger the public morals, health,
safety, or welfare, or who is or has been no far addicted to the use of such
habit-forming narcotic drugs as to have lost the power of self-tcotrol with
reference to his addiction.
"Sa 2. (a) Bubject to the provisions of subsection (c) of this section, any
penwon charged with a violation of a Federal penal law relating to narcotics
shall, upon his appearance before a committing magistrate, be informed that (1)
the prosecution of the criminal charges against such person (unless he Is a person
within the purview of subsection (c) of this section) shall be held In abeyance
In the manner hereinafter provided, If lie elects to submit to an examinat ion to
determine if he is a narcotic addict; (2) he shall have ten days following his
appearauce before the committing magistrate within which to make such an
election; and (3) if he makes such an election within the prescribed ten days
and It is determined on the basis of an examination that be Is a narcotic addict,
the court shall have jurisdiction to order him to submit to a mandatory civil
commitment In accordance with the provisions of this Act.
"(b) Any person who elects con-ideration for civil commitment in accordance
with the provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall be placed under the
custody of the Surgeon General for the purpose of an appropriate examination
to determine whether such person Is a narcotic addict, In no came shall any
person who elects consideration for civil commitment under this Act be admitted
to ball (or released on his own recognizauce) during the period beginning at
the time of his election and ending at the time a determination is made by the
court as to whether such person should be civilly committed thereunder.
"(c) The provisions of this Act shall not be applicable ia the case of any
person charged with a violation of a F'ederal law relating to narcotics if It
appears"(1)that--
the violation involved the sale of narcotics by such person so charged
to another, with knowledge that the person to whom the ale was made
intended to dispose of such narcotics by resale;
"(2) there Is pending against the person in a court of the United States
or of any State a prior charge of a felony and such charge has not been
finally determined, or the person has been convicted of a felony and the
-sentence following such conviction, including any Lime on parole, has not
been fully served;
"(8) the person has been convicted in a court of the United States or of
any State on a total of two or more prior occasions of a felony; or
"(4) the person has been civilly committed by the United States or any
State on a total of two or more prior occasions because of his narcotics use.
"Sa. 3. (a) Within ten days following the date on which any person is
placed In the custody of the Surgeon General pursuant to subsection (b) of
section 2, the Surgeon General shall cause such person to be examined for the
purpose of determining whether he Is a narcotic addict and shall transmit to the
court a certified report of he result of the examination. Upon the transmission
of such report, the Surgeon General shall return such person to the court for
such further proceedings under this Act as may be necessary. A copy of the
report shall be made available to the person examined and to the United States
attorney. It the person with respect to whom such report was made wishes to
contest tWe findings contained therein, the court shall promptly set the matter for
bearing. The court shall cause a written notice of the time and place of uch
hearing to t'e served personally upon such person.
72 THE NARCOTIC IIEHADILITATION ACT OF 19O6
"(b) In conducting such hearing, the court shall receive and consider all
relevant evidence and testimony which may be offered, including the contents
of the report referred to in subsection (a).
"(c) If the court determines. on the basis of the report or, if a hearing is re-
quested, on the basis of such bearing, that such person is not a narcotic addict,
the court shall order such person to be held to answer the criminal charges which
were previously held in abeyance. If, however, the court determines that such
person is a narcotic addict, the court way order him committed to the custody
of the Surgeon General for confinement, care, treatment, and rehabilitation in
any appropriate institution or facility which is specially equipped to provide the
aforementioned. The Surgeon General may transfer such person from any one
such institution or facility to any other such institution or facility.
"(d) Whenever a drug user has been civilly committed pursuant to this Act,
the criminal charges which led to his arrest shall be continued without final di-
poition until dismissed in accordance with the provisions of this Act,
"Sin 4. (a) Any person committed to the custody of the Surgeon General
pursuant to subsection (c) of section 8 of this Act shall be committed for aL
indeterminate period of not to exceed thirty-six months. Any person so commit.
ted shall be released by the Surgeon General and returned to the committing
court whenever any one of the following events first occurs:
"(l) a determination by the Surgeon General that such person cannot
be treated as a medical problem because of his incorrigibility or nonrespon-
slveness to medical treatment;
"(2) a determination by the Surgeon General that such person has bern
effectively removed from the habitual use of narcotic drugs; or
"(8) the expiration of thirty-six months following the date on which such
person is so committed.
"(b) With respect to any person returned to the court pursuant to the pro-
visions of paragraphs (2) or (3) or subsection (a), the court, In order to insure
that such person does not return to the use of narcotic drugip totIowing his re-
lease from confinement, nmiy again place such person under the custody of the
Surgeon General for a period of not more than two yearr tor such probationary
aftercare treatment program as the Surgeon General may direct
"(c) Upon the return of any person to the comumitUhg court pursuant to para-
graph (1) of subsection (a), the court way order an inmmediate resumption of the
pr~mecuL'on of the criminal charges against such person which were held in abey.
dance by reason of his comment.
"Smc. 5. (a) If, wiale under any aftercare treatment program pursuant to sec-
tlon 4, any person-
"(1) fails or refuses to comply with any order of the Surgeon General
which (A) commands such person to retrain from further use of any
narcotic drug, and (B) was issued alter such person bad been found by
the Surgeon General, while under such program, to have been using such
drugs; or
"(2) falls or refuses to comply with any other order or directive of the
Surgeon General Issued In connection with such program;
the Surgeon General shall immediately notify the committing court of that fact.
Upon receiving such notification, the court may order the United States Mar-
shal to take such person into custody and may order the immediate resump-
tion of the prosecution of the criminal charges against him.
'(b) Whenever the Surgeon General determines that any person placed under
the Surgeon General's custody pursuant to subsection (b) of section 4 of this
Act has successfully completed his probationary aftercare treatment program,
the Surgeon General Phall ,certify that fact to the commtting court and the court
shall immediately dim -Is the criminal charges against such person which were
held in abeyance by re son of his commitment.
"Sm. 8. in any cast in which the prosecution of criminal charges against any
person under this Act is resumed after having been held In abeyance, such person
shall receive full credit, against any sentence which may be Imposed, for the time
spent by such person In the custody of the United States Marshal and the SU1.
geon General pursuant to this Act.
"Stc T. Any determination by a court ander this Act that a person is a narcotic
addict shall not be considered a criminal conviction, nor shall such person be con-
sidered a criminal by reason of such determination. The results of any heerin,
examination, test, or procedure, conducted to determine whether a person is a
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 106 73
narcotic addict for purpmes of this Act, may be used in a further proceeding
under this Act, but may not be used against such person in connectou with any
criminal charge held in abeyance under this Act, or in any other criminal pro.
ceeding.
"S. & The Surgeon General is authorized to enter into contracts with the
several States (including political subdivisions thereof) under which appropriate
institutions and other facilities of such States or subdivisions will be made avail-
able, on a reimbursable basis, for the coufinement, care, treatment, rehabilita-
tion. and aftercare of persons civilly committed pursuant to this Act.
"Suo.9. As used In this Act, the term "State' shall Include the District of Colum.
bia.
"Sc. 10. The provisions of this Act shall not be applicable to any case pending
In any court of the United States arising out of an arrest made prior to Decem-
ber 31, IUU&"
"8. 2114. A hill relating to the penalties for violations of certain narcotic and
marihuana laws of the United States, and to the treatment of narcotic addicts and
other persons suffering from a mental or physical condition committed to the
custody of the Attorney General; to the c ommittee on the Judiciary, introduced
by Mr. Kennedy of New York (for himseu, Mr. Javits, Mr. Case. Mr. Ervin, Mr.
Hart, Mr. Kuchel, Mr. Saltonstall, Mr. Tydings, and Mr. Williams of New Jer-
sey).
"Be 0i eusod by the BSeate and House of Representatives of the United States
of America in Conpge assembled, That section 2(h) of the Narcotic Drugs Im-
port and Export Act, as amended (21 U.S.C. 176a), is amended (1) by striking
out 'not less than ive or' and inserting in lieu thereof 'for not'; (b) by striking
out 'less than ten or'; and (3) by striking out 'for provision relating to sentenc-
ing, probation, etc., see section 7237(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1964.'.
"Sac. 2. (a) Suslection (L) of section 7'17 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1964 as amended, is amended (1) by striking out 'not less than 2 or' and insert-
ing in lieu thereof 'for not'; (2) by striking out 'not less than 5 or' and by insert-
ing in lieu thereof 'for not' and (3) by striking out 'not less than 10 or and in-
serting in lieu thereof 'for not'.
"(b) Subection (b) of section 7287 of the Inter-al Revenue Code of 1934, as
amended, is amended to read as follows:
"'(b) Sale or other transfer without written order.
'(I) Whoever commits an offense, or conspires to commit ai offense, described
in section 4705(a) or section 4742(a) shall be imprisoned for not more than 20
years and, In addition, may be fined not more than $20,000. For a second or
subsequent offense, the offender shall be imprisoned for not more than 40 years
and. in addition, may be fined not more than $:M,000.
' (2) If any offender under paragraph (1) attained the age of 18 before the
offense and-
" '(A) the offense consisted of the sale, barter, exchange, giving away, or-
transfer of any narcotic drug to a person who had not attained the age of 18.
at the time of such offense, or
"'(B) the offense consisted of a conspiracy to commit an offense described
in paragraph (A),
the offender shall be imprisoned not less than 5 or more than 40 years, in.
addition, may be fined not more than $0,000.'
"Smc. & Subsection (d) of section 7237 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954,
as amended, is amended to read as follows:
"'(d) No suspension of sentence; no probation.
"'Upon conviction of any offense the penalty for which is provided in subsec-
tion (b) (2) of this section or in subsection (c) or (I) of section 2 of the Narcotic
Drup Import and Export Act, as amended, the imposition or execution of sen-
tence shall not be suspended and probation shall not be grantedL. Any person
convicted of any such offense (including convictions In the District of Columbia)
and sentenced to a definite term of years other than life shall be eligible for parole
in accordance with the provisions of section 4202 of title 18 of the United States
Code after such person has served for a period of not less than the mandatory
minimum penalty prescribed by any such subsection for such offense. Any such,
person so convicted and sentenced to a term of life shall be eligible for parole
In accordance with such section 4202 after such person has served for a period of*
at least 15 years of such life sentence'
z6 so -4
74 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
"SEC. 4. (a) Chapter 402 of title 18 of the United States Code is amended by
adding at the end thereof the following new section:
"'1 5027. Applicability to certain narcotic violators.
"'Subject to the provisions of subsection (d) of section 7237 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, the provisions of this chapter shall be
applicable to all persons otherwise eligible, who are convicted of violations of
any Federal penal law relating to narcotics notwithstanding the fact that a
mandatory penalty is prescribed for any such violation.'
"(b) The analysis of chapter 402 of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end thereof the following:
"5027. Applicability to certain narcotic violators.'
"Sc.5. Section 40 of title 18, United States Code, Isamended by adding
at the end thereof the following new sentence: 'Subject to the provisions of
subsection (d) of section 7=1I7 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended,
the provisions of this section shall be applicable to all persons otherwise eligible,
who are convicted of violations of any Federal penal law relating to narcotls
notwithstanding the fact that a mandatory penalty is prescribed for any such
violations.'
"SEc. 6. (a) Chapter 301 of title 18 of the United States Code Is amended by
Inserting immediately after section 400'', the following new section:
"'5 4002A. Use of State facilities for narcotic addicts.
"'(a) For the purpose of providing for the confinement, care, treatment, and
rehabilitation (including vocational rehabilitation) of persons held under the
authority of any enactment of Congress who are narcotic addicts, or who are
suffering from a mental or physical condition which might be helped by proper
care, treatment, or rehabilitation (including vocational rehabilitation), the
director of the Bureau of Prisons is hereby given authority, in addition to other
authority available to him, to enter into contracts with the several States (in-
cluding lwlitical subdivisions thereof) under which appropriate Institutions
and other facilities of such States and subsections, specially equipped to provide
such care, treatment, or rehabilitation, will be made available, on a reimbursable
basis. for the aforementioned purposes.
"'(b) As used in this section, and sections 4082A and 40S2B of chapter 305
of this title, the term "narcotic addict" means any person who habitually uses
any hal it-forming narcotic drugs so as to endanger the public morals, health,
safety. or welfare, or who Is or has been so far addicted to the use of such
narcl'ti drugs as to have lost the power of self-control with reference to his
addiction. As used in this subsection, the term ",arcotic drugs" shall include
the substances defined as "narcotic drugs." 'isonipecaine," and "opiate" In
section 4731 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended.
"(b) The analysis of chapter 301 of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by inserting immediately after '4002. Federal prisoners in State institutions;
employment,' the following:
"'4002A. Use of State facilities for narcotic addicts.'
"Szc. 7. (a) Chapter 305 of title 18 of the United States Code is amended by
inserting in'inedlatey after section 4082, the following new sections:
"'4082A. Treatment authorized for certain persons committed to the custody of
the Attorney General.
"'(a) If the Attorney General determines that any person committed to his
custody pursuant to section 4082 of this chapter is a narcotic addict, or is suffer-
Ing from a mental or physical condition, and might be helped by proper care,
treatment, or rehabilitation (including vocational rehabilitation), the Attorney
General Inhereby authorized, In addition to other authority available to him.
to designate as the place of confinement for such person, any appropriate institn-
tion or other facility of the United States, or any appropriate Institution or
other facility made available pursuant to section 4002A of this title, which is
specially equipped to provide such care, treatment, or rehabilitation. The
Attorney General may order any such person transferred from any one such
institution or facility to any other such institution or facility.
-' 0s) Whenever the Attorney General determines that any person confined
in an institution or facility pursuant to a designation by the Attorney General
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 75
under subsection (a) of this section, or purmant to an order of a United States
court wnder section 4082 of this chapter. is no longer In need of such care,
treatment, or rehabilitation, or that his tontinued confinement therein is no
longer necessary or desirable, the Attorney General may transfer such person
to any penal or correctional Institution deaiguated by the Attorney General to
complete his original sentence. The time spent by such person in confinement in
such institution or facility shall be considered as part of the term of his
imprisonment.
'I 4082B. Treatment authorized by the court for certain persons committed to
the custody of the Attorney General.
"'g 4082B. In any case in which the court believes that a person convicted
therein of violating a Federal penal law is a narcotic addict, or is suffering
from a mental or physical condition, and might be held by proper care,
treatment, and rehabilitation (including vocational rehabilitation), the court
may, after pronouncing sentence against such person, order the Attorney Gen-
eral to conflne such person in an appropriate institution or facility in accord-
ance with the provisions of section 4082A of this chapter.'
"(b) The analysis of chapter 305 of title 18, United States Code, in amended
by Inserting immediately after '40h2, Commitment to Attorney General; trans-
fer.' the following:
"'4082A. Treatment authorized for certain persons committed to the custody
of the Attorney General.
"'4082B. Treatment authorized by the court for certain persons committed to
the custody of the Attorney General.'
"Szc. & (a) Chapter 311 of title 18 of the United States Code Is amended by
inserting immediately after section 420L, the following new section:
"'5 4203A. Use of certain public and private agencies for purposes of super.
vising certain parolee.
'(a) In any case in which a person confined In any institution or other facility
In accordance with the provisions of section 4082A or 402B of this title is
thereafter authorized by the Board of Parole to be released on parole under sec-
tion 42 3 of this chapter, the Board may, in Its discretion. impose as a cildition
to such release a requirement that the person be placed, during the period of his
parole, under the superviion of an appropriate State, public or private igency,
organization, or group, which, in the opinion of the Board is (1) qualified to
supervise such person during the period of this parole; and (2) apecizally
equipped to provide such care, treatment, rehabilitation, or aftercare as he
might require during such period. The Board shall receive and consider any
recommendation of the Attorney General which In his opinion would be helpful
to the Board with respect to the parole disposition of any case pursuant to this
section.
"1(b) For the purposes of subsection (a) of this section, the Board of Parole
ie authorized to utilize the services and facilities of any State, agency, organize.
tion, or group referred to Ia subsection (a) in accordance with a written agree-
ment entered into between such State agency, organization, or group and the
Board of Parole. Payments for such services and facilities shall be made in
such amount as may be provided In such agreement.'
"(b) The analysis of chapter 811 of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by Inserting Immediately after '4203. Application and release; terms and con-
ditlons.' the following:
"'4203A. Uz;e of certain public and private agencies for purposes of supervising
certain parolees.'
P"A) contain satisfactory evidence that the Agency will have1 st~horitr
suffcient to carry out such plan in conformity with this title;
"(4) provide such methods of administration of the State plan, Including
methods relating to the establishment and maintenance of personnel stand-
THE NARCOTIC AEHAB STATION ACT O 19 66 77
ards on a merit bais (except that the Secretary shall exercise no authority
with respect to the selection, tenure of office, or compensation of any individ-
ual employed in accordance with such methods), as are found by the Secre-
tary to be necessary for the proper and efcient operation of the plan;
"(M) provide that the Agency will make such reports, i such form and
containin such information, as the Secretary may from time to time
require, and comply with such provisions as he may from time to time find
necessary to assure the correctness and verification of such reports;
"(6) provide for affording to every applicant for a grant for a project
pursuant to a State plan an opportunity for hearing before the Agency;
"(7) provide that the State will from time to time, but not less often
than annually, review its State plan and submit to the Secretary any
modifications thereof which it considers necessary.
"(b) Any State desiring to submit a State plan as provided under subsection
(a) shall, submit such plan as a separate and distinct part of its State mental
health plan submitted to the Public Health Service by the State's mental health
authority In accordance with title III of the Public Health Service Act.
"(c) The Secretary m.y approve any Sitate plan (and any modification
thereof) which is in substantial conformity with the provisions of subsection
(a). The Secretary shall not finally disapprove a State plan except pfter rea-
sonable notice and opportunity for a hearing to the State.
"e. 105. (a) Any State, political subdivision of a State,, or nonprofit orgw
aniation desiring to secure financial assistance for any project for the treatment
and rehabilitation of drug abusers pursuant to an approved State plan shall
submit, through the Agency, an applicatiou for a grant under this title to assist
it in carrying out such project. If any State, subdivision, or organization Jointly
rcipate In any such project, the application may be led by one or more of
ticrant, The appication shall set forth-
"(UI the kinds of treatment and rehabilitation services which will be
provided under the project with respect to which such application Is filed;
"(2) r~mmonable assurances that the applicant is legally qualified and is
competent to provide such services;
"(8) reasonable assurances that the applicant will meet the requirements,
if any, for furnishing treatment and rehabilitatio services to 4Mu abuse=
who are unable to pay for suc ,wvices; and
"(4) such other hdformation and assuranos as the Secretary may. by
regulation, requiem.
"(b) The Secretary may approve any appliction filed under this secti, If
he finds that the application (1) Is in substantial conformity with subsection (a)
4d this section and all applicable regulations Issued pursuant to this title, (2) is
In substantial c with the tate plan approve under netion 104 of this
title, and (8) has been approved and recommended by the Agency. No applica-
tion filed puruwant to this Section shall be disapproved by the Secretary until
Ie has afforded tLe applicant an opportunity for a hearn&
"S 106. (a) Any noaprnot organisation desiring to secure financial assist-
ance for any project for the treatwmt and rehabilitation of drug abusers as
provided under clause (2) of subsection (b) of section 102 of this title shall sub-
mit to the Secretary an application for a grant under such clause to assist it in
carrying out such project. If two or more suck organizations Jointly participate
in such project, the application may be filed by one or more at the participants.
The application shall set forth-.
"(M) the kinds at trsitnt and rehabuiltation services which will be
provided under the project with respect to which such application is filed;
"(M) an Amrmce that the applicant is legally qualited and is competent
to provide such services;
"(2) reasonable uances that the applicant will meet the requirements,
if any, for furnihi.ng tratmmt and rehabilitation serves to drug abusers
who are unable to pay for such servios; and i
"(4) such other IhOmatm sad asmsuaI I as the Beeretar may, by
regulation, quir. I :1
"(b) 2Ue Secretary may approve any applcation filed under this section, If
he Ande (1) that the applkttion is tn sumtntal esfomity with the provisions
4C subsedtom (a) di this WeU and all alktble roul4tios Issued pursuant to
this tle; and (2) afti oMUltatlo with the Agecy, that the application Is
Sot inconsistentwith te Staro pamL No application fied pursuant to this MUMils
78 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF' 1986
"& 2116. A bill to provide financial assistance to the States to assist them in
the construction of facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug
abusers; to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, introduced by Mr.
Javits (for himself, Mr. Kennedy of New York, Mr. Case, Mr. Ervin, Mr. Hart,
Mr. Kuchel, Mr. Long of Missouri, Mr. Tydings, and Mr. Williams of New
Jersey).
Be it eymcfed by #he Seoes ad House of Represestfiee of the Unised Statee
of Amewrimto Oompreas osembled, That this Act may be cited as the 'Drug
Abusers Treatment Facilities Act'.
"SEQ. 2 (a) For the purpose of financially asaisting the several States in the
construction of facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers,
there is hereby authorized to be appropriated for the fiscal year beginnin
July 1, 1965, and for each of the two sumeding fiscal yea the supof
- I
S,(Nooo,ooo
"(b) Bums appropriated pursuant to subseation (a) shall be available fot
use by the Secretary of Health, ducaton, and Welfare (hereinafter referred
to as the 'Secetarr) in (1) making grats under this Act to assist financial
THE NARCOTIC AEHABIL ATION ACT OF 1986 81
any State (which has submitted and has approved a State plan as hereinafter
provided in this Act) in the construction of facilities for the treatment and
rehabilitation of drug abusers; and (2) furniahlug technical assistance to such
State in designing, locating, and constructing such facilities.
"(c) Sums appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall
remain available until expended for payments with respect to projects on which
applications have been filed under section 5 of this Act before July 1, 1968, and
approved by the Secretary before July 1. 1960. The full amount (as determined
by the Secretary) of any grant for a project under this Act shall be reserved
from any appropriations available therefor; and payments on account of such
grant may be made only from the amount so reserved.
"Stao 8. (a) Within six months after the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall Issue such regulations, applicable uniformly to all the States, as be may
determine necessary to enable him to carry out the provisions of this Act. Such
regulations shall include, among others, provisions prescribing-
"(1) general standards of construction for any such facility the construc-
tion of which is financed at least In part from a grant under this Act; and
"(2) the kinds of facilities and services needed to provide adequate treat-
ment and rehabilitation for drug abusers.
"(b) The regulations referred to In Vubsection (a) may Include provisions
requiring that (1) before approval of any application for a project pursuant to a
State plan is recommended by any Agency, an assurance shall be received, by the
State filing such plan, from the applicant that a reasonable volume of treatment
and rehabilitation services for drug abusers shall be made available to such drug
abusers who are unable to pay for such services.
"8w. 4. (a) After the regulations referred to in section 2 have been Issued,
any State desiring to secure financial assistance under section 2 of this Act shall
submit a State plan for carrying out the purposes of such section. Such plan
must-
"(1) set forth a program for construction of facilities for the treatment
and rehabilitation of drug abusers which conforms with the regulations
prescribed under section 8;
"(2) designate a single State agency (referred to in this Act as the
"Agency") as the sole agency for supervising the administration of the
plan;
"(8) contain satisfactory evidence that the Agency will have authority
sufficient to carry out such plan in conformity with this Act;
"(4) provide such methods of administration of the State plan, including
methods relating to the establishment and maintenance of personnel stand-
ards on a merit basis (except that the Secretary shall exercise no authority
with respect to the selection, tenure of office, or compensation of any individ.
ual employed in accordance with such methods), as are found by the Secre-
tary to be necessary for the proper and efficient operation of the plan;
"(5) provide that the Agency will make such reports, in such form and
containing such information, as the Secretary may from time to time require,
and comply with such provisions as he may from time to time find necewar
to assure the correctness and verlficettion of such reports;
"(6) provide for affording to every applicant for a grant for a project
pursuant to a State plan an opportunity for hearing before the Agency;
"(7) provide that the State will from time to time, but not less often
than annually, review its State plan and submit to the Secretary any modi-
fications thereof which it considers necessary.
u(b) Any State desiring to submit a State plan as provided under subsection
(a) shall submit such plan as a separate and distinct part of Its State mental
health plan submitted to the Public Health Service by the State's mental health
authority in accordance with title III of the Public Health Service Act.
"(e) The Secretary may approve any State plan (and any modification thereof)
which Is In substantial conformity with the provisions of subsection (a). The
Secretary shall not finally disapprove a State plan except after reasonable notice
and opportunity for a hearing to the State.
"S 5. (a) Any State, poUtical subdivision thereof or nonprofit organization
desiring to secure financial assistance under this Act for any project for the con-
strueton of fselties for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers pur-
suant to an approved State plan shall submit, through the Agency, an application
fat a grant umder this Act to ast It In caring out such proJect. It any
82 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
State, one or more political subdivisions thereof, or one or more nonprofit or-
ganisations Jointly participate in any such project, the application may be filed
by one or more of the participants. The application shall set forth-
"(1 ) r.description of the site for such project;
"(2) plans and specifications for such project in accordance with the
regulations prescribed by the Secretary under subsection (a) of section 3
of this Act;
"(8) reasonable assurances that title to such site is or will be vested in
one or more of the applicants filing the application;
"(4) reasonable assurances that adequate financial support will be avail-
able for the construction of the project and for its maintenance and opera-
tion when completed;
"(5) reasonable assurances that the applicant will meet the requirements,
If any, for furnishing treatment and rehabilitation services to drug abusers
who are unable to pay for such services;
"(M) such other information and assurances as the Secretary may, by
regulation, require; and
"(7) reasonable assurances that all laborers and mechanics employed by
contractors or subcontractors in the performance of work on construction of
the project will be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on
similar construction in the locality as determined by the Secretary of Labor
in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 270a-
276a-5) : and the Secretary of Labor shall have with respwet to the labor
standards specified In this paragraph the authority and functions set forth
in Reorganization Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 (15 F.R. 3176; 5 U.S.C. 133z-15)
and section 2 of the Act of June 13, 1934, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276c).
"(b) The Secretary may approve any application filed under this section if he
finds that the application (1) is in substantial conformity with subsection (a)
of this section and rll applicable regulations issued pursuant to this Act; (2) is in
substantial conformity with the State plan approved under section 4 of this Act;
and (3) has been approved and recommended by the Agency. No application filed
pursuant to this section shall be disapproved by the Secretary until he has
afforded the applicant an opportunity for a hearing. Any amendment of an
application approved under this Act shall be subject to approval in the same
manner as the original application.
"Sre. 6.The payment of any grant to a State, political subdivision, or non-
profit organization under this act way follow the approval by the Secretary of the
application of such State, subdivision or organization. Any grant made pursuant
to this Act for the construction of a project in any fiscal year shall include such
amounts as the Secretary determines to be necessary in succeeding fiscal years
for completion of the Federal participation in the project as approved by him.
Payment of a grant may be made in advance or by way of reimbursement, and
in such installments as may be determined by the Secretary, and shall be made
on such conditions as the Secretary finds necessary to carry out the purposes of
this Act. Amounts paid under this Act with respect to any project for the con-
struction of a facility shall not exceed two-thirds of the construction costs of such
facility as determined by the Secretary.
"Stc. T. Whenever the Secretary, after reasonable notice and opportunity for
hearing"(1)to the Agency,
that finds-
the Agency is not complying substantially with the provisions
required by subsection (a) of section 4 to be included in its State plan, or
with regulations under this Act:
"(2) that any assurance required to be given in an application filed under
subsection (a) of section 5 is not being or cannot be carried out; or
"(3) that there is a substantial failure to carry out plans and specifica-
tions approved by the Secretary under section 5; the Secretary may forth-
with notify such Agency that no further payments will be made under this
Act for any project or projects designated by the Secretary as being effected
by the action or inaction referred to in paragraph 1, 2 or 8 of this subsection;
and. except with regard to any project for which the application has already
been approved and which is not directly affected, further payments In con-
nection with such State plan may be withheld, In whole or in part, until
there Is no longer any failure to comply (or to carry out the assurances or
plans and specifications, as the case may be) or, If such compliance (or othUr
action) is impossible, until the State repays or arranges for the repayment
of Federal moneys to which the recipient was not entitled.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
"Szc. 8. If any facility with respect to which funds have been paid under this
Act shall, at any O1me within twenty years after completion of its construction-
"(1) be sold or transferred to any nonpublic organization; or
"(2) cease to be used for the purposes for which it was constructed, unless
the Secretary determines, in accordance with regulations, that there is good
cause for releasing the applicant from the obligation to continue such facility
for the purpose of providing treatment for drug abusers;
the United States shall be entitled to recover from the recipient of such funds
an amount bearing the same ratio to the then value (as determined by agreement
of the parties or by action brought in the United States district court for the
district in which the facility is situated) of the facility, as the amount of the
Federal participation bore to the cost of construction of the facility.
"Szc. 9. If any recipient of a grant under this Act is dissatisfied with any
action taken by the Secretary under section 4(c), 5(b), 7, or 8 of this Act, such
recipient may appeal to the United States court of appeals for the circuit in
which such recipient is located, by filing a petition with such court within sixty
days after such action. A copy of the petition shall be forthwith transmitted by
the clerk of the court to the Secretary, or any officer designated by him for that
purpose. The Secretary thereupon shall file in the court the record of the pro-
ceedings on which he based his action, as provided in section 2112 of title 28,
United States Code. Upon the filing of such petition, the court shall have juris-
diction to affirm the action of the Secretary or to set it aside, In whole or in part,
temporarily or permanently, but until the filing of the record, the Secretary may
modify or set aside his order. The findings of the Secretary as to the facts, if
supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive, but the court, for good
cause shown, may remand the case to the Secretary to take further evidence, and
the Secretary may thereupon make new or modified findings of fact and may
modify his previous action, and shall file in the court the record of the further
proceedings. Such new or modified findings of fact shall likewise be conclusive
if supported by substantial evidence, The judgment of the*court affirming or
setting aside, in whole or in part, any action of the Secretary shall be final, sub-
Ject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States upon certiorari or cer-
tification as provided in section 1264 of title 28, United States Code. The com-
mencement of proceedings under this section shall not, unless so specifically
ordered by the court, operate as a stay of the Secretary's action.
"8.c. 10. (a) The Secretary is authorized to appoint such technical or other
advisory committees as he deems necessary to advise him in connection with car-
rying out the provisions of this Act.
"(b) Members of any such committees not otherwise in the employ of the
United States, while attending meetings of their committee, shall be entitled to
receive compensation at a rate to be fixed by the Secretary, but not exceeding $75
per dieat, Including travel time; and while away from their homes or regular
places of business, they may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in
lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law for persons in the Government service
employed intermittently.
"Sax. 11. As used in this Act, the term-
"(1) 'State' shall include the District of Columbia;
"(2) 'drug abuser' means any 'person who repeatedly uses. on a periodic
or continuous basis, for their psychotoxic effects alone and not as therapeutic
media prescribed in the course of legitimate medical treatment, any drug or
drugs capable of altering or affecting, to a substantive degree, the conscious-
ness, mood, motivation, or critical judgment of an individual, or the psycho-
motor coordination or the perception of the auditory or visual sense of an
individuaL Such drugs shall include, without limitation thereto, the opiates,
cocaine, marihuana, barbiturates, and amphetamines, but shall not-inclu4o
alcohol;
"(8) 'facilities' means buildings or other facilities which are operated for
the primary purpose of assisting in the treatment and rehabilitation of drug
abusers by $oviding, under competent professional supervision, detoxifica-
tion or other medical treatment, physical therapy, family counseling, psy.
chotheraphy, vocational training, help in finding employment, or other serv-
les. The term 'facilities' shall Include, among other, facilities for medical
care, laboratories, community clinics, halfway houses, sheltered workshops,
and camps;
"(4) 'construction' includes the creation of new buildings, acquisition, ex-
pansion, remodeling, and alteration of existing buildings, and payment of
84 TU NARCOTIC RPKUBILITATION ACT OF 1966
architect's fees The term 'construction' does not Include the cost of off-site
improvemeuts and acqultltous of land."
Mr. JAvrrs. Mr. President, I yield now to my collsa the Senator from
New Jerwey [Mr. Case.
Mr. Cm. Mr. President, I am happy to join with my colleagues from New
York and several other States In aponorship of tbs lgl4aton to advance our
baIttle against the tragedy ot narcotics addictlo.
Far too many of our citia are the victims of this terrible fate; tar too much
time has passed without the achivement ot 'astig results In the campap
against this age-old amIction.
It Is my belief that if these bills can be acted we can make Important strides
in the direction of returning thousands of addicts to normal, useful Uves.
I am particularly pleased that these measures have recognlsed the work being
done by private, nonprofit organisations in the field of treatment. By providing
these organLations with working capital to continue and Improve their efforts
we will be assured of both balance and additional strength In this good fight.
But I would emphasize that treatment is not the last step In the rehabilitation
of the narcotics addict. The typO and qualtay of aftercare ar crucial. Here we
have something less than a spectacular record. According to available estl.
mates the relapse rate of drug addicts has ranged up to 90 percent. The chief
problem seems to be In the addict's dlmculty, after release from a hospital or
rehabilitation center, In making a succemful adjustment to his social eaviron-
ment.
One of the Important purposes of our legislation Is to deal with this particular
'phseof the problem and It Is my hope that the commitee which take up these
will give It the most careful attention.
Mr. JAvns. Mr. Presidet, my. I express our Joint gratitude to the distin.
guished Senator from Now Jersey.
Senator Don. Well, Senator Javits, of course, you know I share
your views very largely on this problem and I can assure you-there
is really no need for my assurance at all because you know how I feel
about your bill and Senator Kennedy's bill, that we will give them
both full consideration.
But undoubtedly there are parts of them which should be in the ad-
ministration bill.
I have been concerned about whether we have adequate medical fa-
cilities. And yesterday when the Attorney General was here, we asked
him particularly if he thought that the existing facilities would be
sumcient to take care of te number of persons who are very lilmly
to be conunitted and he said he thought they wers.
My recollection was he thought there would be, but the feeling
I have is that we need to introduce more testimony s to the sufficiency
of present facilities, in the course of these hea"rig&
Senator Jarms. May I make one observatio on that, Mr. Chair-
man I
In the State of New York, great progress having been made in the
art of curing tuberculosis through the uoe of antibiotics, it was found
that a good my beds became available in the State hospital, because
of that, which might be diverted for use in connection with the medical
treatment of narcotics.
. Therefore, I believe that we ought to frame our legis4ion of any
aid tothe Ste in e of suchf c so that the facilities could
be Federal-State facilties so that we have great flexibility in the kind
of aid we gave.
That ic it would nt be necesary to construct brick and mortar
structures or anything else so long as the end resul; was obtained of
a bed awd aervce being available for the public no matta whe
THB NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 85
I would leave it to the Adminitrator t. administer a sum of money
with theend purpose to be served rather than tying him down to some
strict opting lacility--Federal in character-as I believe the con-
tract service4, contractbeds can prove to be available for this purpose
without the necessity for undertaking the construction of new estab-
lslhmenta •
Senator Dow. That makes good sense to me.
I think in most States many of the tuberculosis institutions are now
becoming available for other purpose&,
Iust ve one other question, if I may.
What do you think about the restrictions on eligibility in this ad-
ministration bill, such as the exclusion of addicts charged with bur-
glary, housebreakirng-this question was raised, incidentally, by Sena-
tor Kennedy of Massachusetts, and we had some discussion here with
the Attorney Qeneral
Senator Avrm. Our bill-t hat is, the bill Senator Kennedy and I
sponsored-deals with eligibility based only upon other narcotics
charges-that is,if you are a narcotics dealer, et cetera.
The Federal bilI ta is, the administration bill-deals with an
offense against the United States and so on.,
Personally, I believe that penology ought to count on the rehabil-
itation of criminals and therroi* T think our bill is the preferred.
In othei- wordst Iwoujd leave it to the judge to have available in a
flexible way the medical treatment capability even for a person who
has been convicted of an offense or a, felony, rather then to close that
door to him in tie law itself.
I believe that the most modern theories of penology--and there are
few authorities better than the Chair itself.-would rather assume the
possi'bility of rehabilitation and make the tools available to the judge
instead of foreclosing them ab initio.
Senator Doo. Well, Senator. Javits, I am grateful to you.
Senator Kennedy, do you have any questions
Senator Kmir of Massachuset. That was the one area I was
interestedin.
Senator Dow. Very well wa will gile fufl consideration to your bill
and we thank you, Senator Jivit&
Senator JAvrrs Thank you.
Senator Dom Senator Kennedy of New York is our next witness. I
want to welcome you this morning, Senator, and I know you are deeply
interested in the bill which you have introduced with Senator Javits
and we know of your great interest in this problem as Attorney Gen.
eral and now as a Member of the Senate.
Senator KzNxvznr of New York. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8TATEXENT OF 2OA ROBERT . KY, 01'TEE STATE OF
NEW YORK
Souator XItvziy of New York. Mr. Chairman and Senator Ken.
nedy of Massachusetts, I am pleased to be able to appear this morn-
dismi the proI ed n
hto oti legislation which is before your
Subcommittee.
These ha 4-4wd tiehriW which have beew hed IQ tbe
Hout-are an indication of a'stromg cmgirmional interest in m
081 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
to bring him back into society. That is the purpose of the legisla-
tion before us today.
I would turn now to specific consideration of S. 2152. In my judg-
ment, there are two major areas in which the bill can be improved.
First its eligibilit provisions are far too narrow; and second, it
gives the Surgeon General the power to contract for facilities and
services for treatment and supervision in the community, without
providing any assurance that such facilities and services will be
available.
I. ELIGIBILITY"
"-66"-6---7
90 THE - NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
ExaIUN No. 7
STATU IMT or RoHAzD A. McGM, AnaxmunATOa, YOUTR AND ADULT
UOAacrONS AGENCY, 8TATS or CAUIVOINIA, ON THz TasATMivr, oNmToL
A3D RhxUaxnxATzo or NAnows Amemr
The outline statement which follows does not addreo itself to any one of
the specific bills before the Oounmlttee but deals with subject matter pertinent to
all of them.
. sOU DOCUMULTD 5AOKOSOUeMD FACTS
1. Narcotic addiction and other abuses of dangerous drugs ae related to
delinquent attitudes and behavior.
2. A combination of adolescent rebellion, subcult-al deprivation, personal feel.
Wings of social inadequacy, delinquent and criminal associations, and the avail-
ability of illegal dangerous drugs is the soil In which drug addiction takes root,
grows and flourishes.
3. Most narcotic drug addicts begin using opiates between the ages of fourteen
and twenty.
4. Most known addicts had some kind of police record before first using heroin.
5. The most common offenses for which nmale addicts are arrested are those
involving ome form of theft (forgery, burglary, car theft, and the like).
& The active addict is the chief source of the spread of addiction--one addict
on the streets will make several new ones in his career. He is the veotor of the
diseasee."
7. Only a very few addicts will volunteer for treatment.
I. OONLUS1ONS
I Admissions of voluntary narcotic addicts to the Public lfealth Service narcotic hospit"s Include to.
admissions of the rume patients duri't the same fiscal year and sulsequent years. The average length of
stay of voluntary addict ptenats is W04tys.
Narcotic addict patients admitted to Fort Worth and Lexingtor U.S. Publo
Health Siervice hospitals by age-prsoner patien$a, fiscal year# 1968-66
Also, both the California and New 'ork laws have contested the
constitutionality and so, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask unanimous
consent to include a memorandum on what has happened in those
cases.
I think in both cases the constitutionality was sustained and whether
or not certiorari was refused where there was some doubt-I think it
is worth while to put a memorandum in the record.
400 THE NARCOTIC REHABIIATION ACT OF 1906
been guilty of any irregular behavior there, Inflicts a cruel and unusual punish.
meant In vocation of the Fourteenth Amendment. To be sure, Imprisonment for
ninety days is not, in the abstract, a punishment which is either cruel or unusual.
But the question cannot be considered In the abstract. Even one day in prison
would be a cruel and unusual punishment for the *crime' of having a common
cold." ( p. 666)
The cumulative effect of the above language striking down 1 11721 of the Cali
fornia Health and Safety Code would appear to be the barring of the conviction
of any person for the status of narcotic addiction not only in California, but else-
where as well, i.e., the proof of the physical status of narcotic addiction cannot
be the basis of criminal conviction and coutintement.
But in so doing, the Court leaves intact those provisions of 1 5350 el seq. of the
California Welfare and Institutions Code which calls for the civil commitment of
narcotics addicts for medical treatment. In this respect, the Court's decision
appears not only to give recognition to civil commitment of addicts incompetent
to live In society, but also seems to firmly hold that such commitment is not
violative of the Constitution. The language employed by the Court in this regard
was as follows (as pages 64, (M) :
"Tie broad power of a State to regulate the narcotic drugs traffic within its
borders is not here in issue. More than forty years ago, in Whipplo v. Martlnson,
256 U.S. 41, this Court explicitly recognized the validity of that power: 'There
can le no question of the authority of the State in the exercise of its police power
to regulate the administration, sale, prescription and use of dangerous and habit-
forming drugs . . The right to exercise this power Is so manifest In the Inter-
est of the public health and welfare, that it is unnecessary to enter upon a dis-
cussion of it beyond saying that it is too firmly established to be successfully
called into question." 256 U.S. at 45.
**Such regulation, it can be assumed, could take a variety of valid forms. A
State might impose criminal sanctions, for example, against the unauthorized
manufacture, prescription, sale, purchase or possession of narcotics within its
borders. In the interest of discouraging the violation of such laws, or in the
interest of the general health or welfare of its inhabitants, a State might estab-
lish a program of compulmory treatment for those addicted to narcotics. Such
a program of treatment might require periods of involuntary confinement. And
peul sanctions sight be imposed for failure to omply with established oom-
pulsor trcatmciit procedures. Cf. Jacobsan v. Mataachuctts, 197 U.S. 11. Or
a State might choose to attack the evils of narcotics traffic on broader fronts
also-through public health education, for example, or by efforts to ameliorate
the economic and social conditions under which these evils might be thought to
flourish. In short, the range of valid choice which a State might make In this area
is undoubtedly a wide one, and the wisdom of any particular choice within the
allowable spectrum is not for us to decide." (Emphasis supplied).
The quoted language underlined above clearly contemplates, and was directed
to, the civil commitment statutes of the various states as the Court. In delivering
this language, was clearly aware of the civil commitment provisions of 1 5350
et scq. of the California Welfare and Institutions Code and cited them in wonder-
ment as to why they were not utilized in the Instant case (See: Robinson,v. call.
fornia, supro, a.7 at 665).
Consequently, in the light of the above underlined language seemingly directed
to the apparent Court approved 1 .5350 calling for the civil commitment of addicts,
it is respectfully submitted that similar State statutes calling for. or providing
for. the compulsory or voluntary civil commitment of addicts for medical treat-
ment would probably be held constitutional.
(The amendments to S. 2152 referred to were marked "Exhibit No.
10," and are as follows:)
ExumUT No. 10
AMXINDMENTs To Bi OFFmD sy SENATOa Kgjorqvy or Nmw Yoax To 8. 2152
On page 2 beginning with line 11, strike out all through line 16 and insert In
lieu thereof the following:
"(a) 'Addict' means any Individual who habitually uses (1) any narcotic
drug as defined by section 4731 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1964. as amended,
or (2) any depressant or stimulant drug. so as to endanger the public morals.
health, safety, or welfare, or who is so far addicted to the use of any such drugs
as to have lost the power of self-control with reference to his addiction."
102 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
On page 2. line 20, beginning with "robbery", strike out all through the second
comma on line 24.
On page 3, line 25, Immediately before the comma, insert "or a depressant or
stimulant drug".
On page 4, line 2, immediately after "drug" insert "or a depreamant or stimulant
drug".
On page 4, beginning with line 13, strike out all through line 17.
On page 4, between lines 17 and 18, insert the following:
"(h) 'Depressant or stimulant drug' shall have the same meaning as that given
to such term in subsection (v) of section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321)."
On page 5, line 7, strike out "thirty-six" and insert "sixty".
On page 8, line 9, immediately before the comma, insert "or depressant or
stimulant drugs".
On page 8, line 17, strike out "thirty-six" and insert 'sixty".
On page 9, line 4, strike out "narcotic".
On page 9, line 8, strike out "narcotic".
On page 9, line 12, strike out "narcotic".
On page 10, line 9, strike out "NARCOTIC".
On page 10, beginning with line 12, strike out all through line 17 and insert
In lieu thereof the following:
"(a) 'Addict' means any Individual who habitually uses (1) any narcotic
drug as defined by section 4731 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended.
or (2) any depressant or stimulant drug, so as to endanger the public norals,
health, safety, or welfare, or who Is so far addicted to the use (if any such drugs
as to have lost the power of self-control with reference to his addiction."
On page 10, line 19, beginning with "robbery", strike out all through the
second comma on line 2, page 11.
On page 12. line 6,Immediately before the comma, Insert "or a dt,'-rcssaut
or stimulant drug".
On page 12. line 8, Immediately after "drug", Insert "or a depressant or
stimulant drug".
On page 12, line 18, Immediately after the period, Insert quotation marks.
On page 12, beginning with line 19, strike out all through line 24 and insert
In lieu thereof the following:
"(g) 'Depressant or stimulant drug' shall have the same weaning as that
given to such term in subsection (v) of section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321)."
On page 13, between lines 21 and 22, Insert the following new subsection:
"(b) The Attorney General is authorized to enter Into arrangements with
any public or private agency or any person under which appropriate facilities
or services of such agency or person will be made available, on a reimbursable
basis or otherwise, for the examination or treatment of Individuals committed
to the custody of the Attorney General under this chapter."
On ige 13, line 22., strike out "(b)" and insert "(c)".
On lge 19. line 8. immediately after the period, insert the following: "Such
hospital shall, in addition to providing such care and treatment, engage in
research, training, and demonstration In the techniques of treatment and social
rehabilitation of addicts."
On page 19, between lines 17 and 18. Insert the following new Section:
See. 401A. (a) Paragraph (J) of section 2 of the Public llealth-Service Act
Is amended by adding at the end thereof the following: "depressant or stimulant
drugs (as defined it subsection (v) of section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmnetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321) :".
(b) Paragraph (k) of section 2 of the Public Health Service Act Is amended
to read as follows:
"(k) The term 'addict' means any person who habitually uvse any habit-form-
Ing narcotic drugs or depressant or stimulant drugs (as defined In subsection
(v) of section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321)
so as to endanger the public morals, health, safety, or welfare, or who is or has
been so fMr addicted to the ime of such habit-forming narcotic drugs or depressant
or stimulant drugs as to have lost the power of self-control with reference
to his addiction ;".
On page 20, line 4, strike out "314. Narcotics addicts" and insert In lieu
thereof "314. Addicts".
At the end of the bill, &ddthe following new titles:
THE NARCOTIC RUHABILITATION ACT OF 196 103
"TITLE V-TRkATMENT AND RkMABILITATION SERVICES Fil DRUG
ABUSERt
"Szc. 501. This title way be cited as the 'Drug Abusers Treatment Services
Act'.
"Sc. W'2. (a) For the purpose of financially assisting the several States In
establishing, developing, and maintaining treatment and rehabilitation services
for drug abusers, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated for the fiscal
year beginning July 1, 190, and for each of the two succeeding fiscal years, the
sum of $7,500,000.
"(b) Of the amount appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) fer each such
fiscal year (1) not less thau b0 per ceutum thereof shall be available for use by
the Secretary of Ilealth, Education, and Welfare (hereinafter referred to as the
'Secretary') in (A) making grants under this title to assist uny State (which
has submitted and had approved a State plan as hereinafter provided in this
title), in defraying expenses and other costs incurred by it in establishing,
developing, and maintaining treatment and rehabilitation services for drug
abusers (including the training of personnel necessary to operate such services
and the conducting of statistical and blometric programs necessary for carry-
ing out epldemiologic and longitudinal studies of drug addiction and abuse);
and (B) providing technical assistance to such State In carrying out such herv-
ices; and (2) not more than 20 per centum thereof shall be available for use by
the Secretary in (A) making grants under this title to assist any nonprofit
organization (which has submitted and had approved an application as herein-
after provided in this title) in defraying expenses and other costs incurred
by It In establishing, developing, auid maintaining such treatment and rehabilita-
tion services as are referred to in clause (1) of this subsection; and (B) provid-
ing technical assistance to such organization In carrying out such services.
"(c) Any sums appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall
remain available until expended for payments with respect to projects on which
applications have been filed uder section 105 or 106 of this title before July 1.
t18, and approved by the Secretary before July 1, 19W8. The full amount (as
determined by the Secretary) of any grant under this title shall be reserved
from any appropriations available therefor; and payments on account of such
grant may be made only from the amount so reserved.
"Szo. 503. (a) Within six months after the enactment of this title. the Secre-
tary shall issue such regulations, applicable uniformly to all the States, as he
ay determine necessary to enable him to carry out the provisions of this title.
Such regulations shall Include, among others, provisions prescribing the kinds
of treatment and rehabilitation services for drug abusers for which grants may
be wade under this title, such as, but not Unilted to. detoxification or other
medical treatment, physical therapy, family counseling, psychotherapy, voca-
tional training, help in finding employment, or lprobation-type supervision.
"(b) The regulations referred to In subsfcton (a) may include provisions
requiring that (1) before approval of any application for a project pursuant
to a State plan is recommended by any agency, an assurance shall be received.
by the State filing such plan. from the applicant t,at a reasonable volume of
treatment and rehabilitation services for drug abu.emrs shall 1* made available
to such drug abusers who are unable to pay for such services; and (2) each
application filed by a nonprofit organization for tlnamial assistance under claustM
(2) of subsection (b) of section 102 of this title cmttain an assurance that a
reasonable volume of such services shall be maade available to such drug abusers
who are unable to pay for such services.
"Sc.504. (a) After the regulations refei red to In section 103 have been imbued.
any State desiring to secure financial assistance under clause (1) of subsection
(b) of section 102 of this title shall submit a State plan for carrying out the
purposes of such clause. Such State plan must-
"(1) et forth a program for providing for treatment and rehabilitation
&ervicca for drug abusers which conforma with the reirulations preserilled
under section 108:
"(2) designate a single State agency (referred to Ii this title s, Ie
'Agency') as the sole agency for supervising tie adintil, lratii4ll of the 1,' )1:
"( contain satisfact-ory evideaev that tie Agency will have atitlerilty
uttficieat to 'arry out such plan In conformity with thl title:
I'4) irivihe such ileto4tIt of adininist rat ion of the State polan. including
meot hd.s relint i ag )i,the estalnJ-hiieut and nalitenatile of lersomilel st atid-
104 TH NARCOC R AB=I ACTION ACT OF 1966
ards on a merit basis (except that the Secretary shall exercise no authority
with respect to the selection, tenure of off1ce or compensation of any indi-
vidual employed In accordance with such methods), as are found by the
Secretary to be necessary for the proper and efficent operation of the plan;
"(5) provide that the Agency will make such reports, In such form and
containing such Information, as the Secretary may from time to time require,
and comply with such provisions as he may from time to time find necessary
to assure the correctness and verification of such reports;
"(6) provide for affording to every applicant for a grant for a project
pursuant to a State plan an opportunity for hearing before the Agency;
U(7) provide that the State will from time to time, but not less often
than annually, review Its State plan and submit to the Secretary any modi-
fications thereof which It considers necmary.
"(b) Any State desiring to submit a State plan as provided under subsection
(a) shall submit such plan as a separate and distinct part of its State mental
health plan submitted to the Publie-Health Service by the State's mental health
authority In accordance with title III of the Public Health Service Act.
"(c) The Secretary may approve any State plan (and any modification
.thereof) which is in substantial conformity with the provisions of subsection
(a). The Secretary shall not finally disapprove a State plan except after reasor.
able notice and opportunity for a hearing to the State.
"Sax. 50. (a) Any State, political subdivision of a State, or nonprofit orga-
nization desiring to secure financial assistance for any project for the treatment
and rehabilitation of drug abusers pursuant to an approved State plan shall
submit, through the Agency, an application for a grant under this title to assist
it In carrying out such project. If any State, subdivision, or organization Jointly
participate In any such project, the application may be filed by one or more of the
participants. The application shall set forth-
"(1) the kinds of treatment and rehabilitation services which will be pro.
vided under the project with respect to which such application is filed;
"(2) reasonable assurances that the applicant is legally qualified and
is competent to provide such servl"es
"(8) reasonable assurances that the applicant will meet the requirement%,
If any, for furnishing treatment and rehabilitation services to drug abusrs
who are unable to pay for such services; and
"(4) such other information and amurances as the Secretary ma, by
regulation, require.
"(b) The Secretary may approve any application filed under this section. ifhe
fids that the application (1) Is In substantial conformity with subection (a)
of this section and all applicable regulations issued pursuant to this title, (2) is
In Wtial conformity with the State plan approved under section 104 of this
Mt and (8) has been approved and recommended by the Agency. No applica-
tion filed pursuant to this section shall be disapproved by the S9cXetar until he
has afforded the applicant an opportunity for a bearing.
"SOa 5M6 (a) Any nonprofit organiation desiring to secure financial mazii.
ance for any project for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers as pro.
vided under clause (2) of subsection (b) of section 102 of this title shall submit
to the Secretary an -application for a grant under such clause to assist it in
carrying out such project. If two or more such orgaizions Jointly partici,-
pate In such project, the application may be filed by one or more of the partici-
pants. The application shall set forth-
"(1) the kinds of treatment and rehabilitation services which will be
provided under the project with respect to which such application is filed:
"(2) an assurance that the applicant is legally qualified and is competent
to provide such services;.
"(8) reasonable assurances that the applicant will meet the requirements,
if any, for furnishing treatment and rehabilitation services to dru abusers
whe ,treunable to pay for such services; and
"(4) such other information and assuaees as the Secretary may, by
regulation, require.
"(b) The Secretary may approve any application filed under this section, ifhe
finds (1) that the application is in substantial conformity with the provisions of
subsection (a) of this section and all applicable regulations isued pursuant to
this title; and (2) after consultation with the Agency, that the application is not
inconsistent with the State plan. No application filed pursuant to this section
THE NARCOTIC REHABITATION ACTr 19o 105
shall be disapproved by the Secretary until he has afforded the applicant an op.
portunity for a hearing.
"() The Secretary may, by regulation, provide for regular reports to him
by any recipient of a grant under this section.
"Sm 507. The payment of any grant to a State, political subdivision of a
State, or nonprofit organization under this title may follow the approval by the
Secretary of the application of such State, subdivision, or organization. Such
payment may be made by the Secretary in advance or by way of reimbursement,
and In such Installments as he may determine, and shall be made on such condi-
tions as he finds necesary to carry out the purposes of this title. Amounts paid
under this title with respect to any project covered by an application made un-
der section 105 shall not exceed two thirds of the cost of such project as deter-
mined by the Secretary.
"Szc. 508. (a) There is hereby created an Advisory Commitee on Drug
Abuse (hereinafter referred to as the Committee), which shall consist of nine
members appointed by the Secretary. Such members shall be appointed from
among indivlduql concerned with the medical and social aspects of drug abuse
and who are eminent in fields relating to the treatment and rehabilitation of
drug abusers (including the field of reseafeth), such as psychiatry, psychology,
general medical practice, pharmacology, internal medicine, vocational training,
correctioal rehabilitation, and law enforcement. Mach member of the Com-
mittee shall hold ofliceor a term of 4 years, except that (1) any. member ap-
pointed to fill a vacancy occurring prior to thIe-wiration of the term for which
his predecessor was appointed shal pointed for ainder of such term,
and (2) the terms of t mem of the first Committee a ted shall expire,
as designated by the at the time of appointment; follows: three
at the end of 16 months r their appointment, three at the en 32 months
after their appointnen and three at the end ear after their a intent.
"(b) It shall beth utyof the Com ttee
"(I) advise, It with; a ke mmen one to the retary
on matters re gto the a stream on of title;
States 4lal t under thiscie the
preparation d filing of elr State
" (s) the Secreta
801 Of Pulic Health SI t Peet n reotics by
couraging states, local agencies, pu c d non t
and other uallfied Kldualb t eolla
tive studi on a WIt-set, rga
to enable e varl gove tal entiI to.
and cor the many blens ulting buss,
U(c) Memnbe of h 1o pyofthe U
States while at ding mee th
the request ofth Secretary be enti v corn nat ra to
be fixed by t!e but not exceed, per di md , tra e;
and while away their homes o gular places busi , they be
allowed travel diem in '
by law for persons In e Govem ed ety
"(d) The shl lc a from among its and
shall be provided, by the try, with such Jechnlcal, consultatlv nical, and
other aelast as he d es necessary to enable it to u Its duties
under this section.
"Swo. 500. (a) Whenever the tary, after reasonable ce and opporiunity
for hearing to the Agency. n
"(1) that the Agency is not complying substantially with the provisions
required by saboetion (a) of section 104 to be Included in Its State plan, or
with regulations under this title;
"(2) that any assurance relulred to be given In an application filed under
subeecton (a) of section 105 is not being or cannot be carried out; or
"(g) that there is a substantial failure to carry out the treatment and reha-
bilitation services approved by the Secretary under section 105;
the Secretary may forthwith notify such Agency that no further payments will. bq
made under this title for any project or projects designated by the Secretary as
being affected by the action or Inaction referred to In paragraph 1, 2, or 8 of this
subsection ; and, except with regard to any project .*orwhich the application has
6
--- -6 8
106 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
already been approved and which is not directly affected, further payments in
connection with such State plan may be withheld, in whole or in part, until there
is no longer any failure to comply (or to carry out the assurances or services, as
the case may be) or, if such compliance (or other action) is impossible, until the
State repays or arranges for the repayment of Federal moneys to which the
recipient was not entitled.
"(b) Whenever the Secretary, after reasonable notice avid opportunity for
hearing -to any nonprofit organization, which is the recipient of a grant under
clause (2) of subsection (b) of section 102of this title, finds-
"(1) that such recipient is not complying substantially with the provisions
required by section 106 of this title to be included in its application for
such grant, or with regulations under this title;
"(2) that any assurance required to be given in such application filed
under section 106 is not being or cannot be carried out; or
"(3) that there is a substantial failure to carry out the treatment and
rehabilitation services approved by the Secretary under section 106;
the Secretary may forthwith notify the recipient that no further payments will be
made under this title for any project or projects designated by the Secretary as
being affected by the action or inaction referred to in paragraph (1), (2), or (3)
of this subsection; and, except with regard to any project for which the applica-
tion has already been approved and which is not directly affected, further pay-
ients under this title to such recipient may be withheld, in whole or in part,
until there is no longer any failure to comply (or to carry out the assurances or
services, as the case may be) or, if such compliance (or other action) is impos-
sible, until the recipient repays the moneys to which it was net entitled.
"SEC. 510. (a) In providing technical assistance pursuant to this title, the
Secretary is authorized to make studies with respect to matters relating to the
treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers, including the effectiveness of
projects financed in whole or in part by grants made pursuant to this title to
cooperate with and render technical assistance to States. political subdivisions
of States, and nonprofit organizations with rempet to such matters, and to provide
short-term training and instruction n technical matters relating to the treat-
mnent and rehabilitation of drug abusers.
"(b) The Secretary is authorized to collect, evaluate, publish, and disseminate
lntormation and material relating to studies conducted pursuant to this title, and
to such other matters involving the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers
as the Secretary may determine feasible. The Secretary may, to the extent he
determines appropriate, make such Information and materials available to the
general public or to any agency or other organization concerned with, or engaged
in, the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers.
"Sm. 511. In any case in which a State Is dissatisfied with the actions of the
Secretary under section W404(c), 108(b), or 109(a), or in which a nonprofit orga-
nization Is disatsfed with his actions under section 106(b) or 109(b), such State
or organization, as the case may be, may appeal to the United States court of
appeals for the circuit in which such State or organization is located, by filing
a petition with such court within sixty days after such action. A copy of the
petition shall be forthwith transmitted by the clerk of the court to the Secretary,
to the Secretary to take further evidence, and the Secretary may thereupon
shall file in the court the record of the proceedings on which he based his action,
as provided in section 2112 of title 28, United States Code. Upon the filing of
such petition, the court shall have Jurisdiction to affirm the action of the Sec-
retary or to set it aside, in whole or in part, temporarily or permanently, but
until the filing of the record, the Secretary may modify or set aside his order.
The findings of the Secretary as to the facts, if supported by substantial evidence,
shall be conclusive, but the court, for good cause shown may remand the case
to the Secretary to take further evidence, and the Secretary may thereoupon
make new or modified findings of fact and may modify his previous action and
shall file in the court the record of the further proceedings. Such new or
modified findings of fact shall likewise be conclusive if supported by substantial
evidence. The Judgment of the court affirming or setting aside, in whole or in
part, any action of the Secretary shall be final, subject to review by the Supreme
Court of the United States upon certiorari or certification as provided in action
1254 of title 28, United States Code. The commencement of proceedings under
this section shall not, unless so specifically ordered by the court, operate as a
stay of the Secretary's action.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 107
"S. 512. As used in this title, the term-
"(1) 'State' shall include the District of Columbia; and
"(2) 'drug abuser' means any person who repeatedly uses, on a periodic
or continuous basis, for their psychotoxic effects alone and not as therapeutic
media prescribed in the course of legitimate medical treatment, any drug
or drugs capable of altering or affecting, to a substantive degree, the con-
sciousness, mood, motivation, or critical judgment of an individual, or the
psychomotor coordination or the perception of the auditory or visual sense
of an individual. Such drugs shall include, without limitation thereto,
the opiates, cocaine, marihuana, barbiturates, and amphetamines, but shall
not include alcohol.
'TITLE VI-TREATMENT FACILITIES FOR DRUG ABUSERS
"SFc. 601. (a) For the purpose of financially assisting the several States in
the construction of facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers,
there Is hereby authorized to be appropriated for the fiscal year beginning July 1,
1V5, and for each of the two succeeding fiscal years, the sum of $15,000,000.
"(b) Sums appropriated pursuant to subseetion (a) shall be available for use
by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfaie (hereinafter referred to as
the ISecretary') in (1) making grants under this Act to assist financially any
State (which has subrlitted and has approved a State plan as hereinafter pro-
vided in this Act) in the construction of facilities for the tretvtment and reha-
bilitation of drug abusers; and (2) furnishing technical assistance to such State
In designing, locating, and constructing such facilities.
"(c) Sums appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall remain
available until expended for payments with respect to projects on which applica-
tions have been filed under section 5 of this Act before July 1, 1968, and approved
by the Secretary before July 1, 1969. The full amount (as determined by the
Secretary) of any grant for a project under this Act shall be reserved from any
appropriations available therefor; and payments on account of such grant may
be made only from the amount so reserved.
"SEc. 602. (a), Within six months after the enactment of this Act, the Sec-
retary shall Issue such regulations, applicable uniformly to all the State% as
he may determine necessary to enable him to carry out the provisions of this
Act. Such regulations shall include, among others, provisions prescribing-
(1) general standards of construction for any such facility the construc-
tion of which is financed at least in part from a grant under this Act; and
(2) the kinds of facilities and services needed to provide adequate treat-
ment and rehablitation for drug abusers.
"(b) The regulations referred to in subsection (a) may include provisions
requiring that (1) before approval of any application for a project pursuant to
a State plan is recommended by any Agency, an assurance shall be received, by
the State filing such plan, from the applicant that a reasonable volume of treat-
ment and rehabiitation services for drug abusers shall be made available to such
drug abusers who are unable to pay for such services.
"SEc. 603. (a) After the regulations referred to in section 3 have been issued,
any State desiring to secure financial assistance under section 2 of this Act shall
submit a State plan for carrying out the purposes of such action. Such plan
must-
" (1) set forth a program for construction of facilities for the treatment
and rehabilitation of drug abusers which conforms with the regulationz pe-
scribed under section 3;
"(2) designate a single State agency (referred to in this Act as the
'Agency') as the sole agency for supervising the administration of the plan;
"(3) contain satisfactory evidence that the Agency will have authority
sufficient to carry out such plan in conformity with this Act;
"(4) provide such methods of administration of the State plan, including
methods relating to the establishment and maintenance of personnel stand-
ards on a merit basis (except that the Secretary shall exercise no authority
with respect to the selection, tenure of office, or compensation of any individ-
ual employed In accordance with such methods), as are found by the Secre-
tary to be necessary for the proper and efficient operation of the plan;
"(5) provide that the Agency will make such reports, in such form and
containing such information, as the Secretary may from time to time require,
108 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
and comply with such provisions as he may from time to time find necessary
to assure the correctness and verification of such reports;
"(6) provide for affording to every applicant for a grant for a project
pursuant to a State plan an opportunity for hearing before the Agency;
"(7) provide that the State will from time to time, but not less often than
annually, review its State plan and submit to the Secretary any modifications
thereof which it considers necessary.
"(b) Any State desiring to submit a State plan as provided under subsection
(a) shall submit such plan as a separate and distinct part of its State mental
health plan submitted to the Public Health Service by the State's mental health
authority in accordance with title III of the Public Health Service Act.
"(c) The Secretary may approve any State plan (and any modification thereof)
which is in substantial conformity with the provisions of subsection (a). The
Secretary shall not finally disapprove a State plan except after reasonable notice
and opportunity for a hearing to the State.
"SEc. 604. (a) Any State, political subdivision thereof or nonprofit organiza-
tion desiring to secure financial assistance under this Act for any project for the
construction of facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers
pursuant to an approved State plan shall submit, through the Agency, an applica-
tion for a grant under this Act to assist it in carrying out such project. If any
State, one or more political subdivisions thereof, or one or more nonprofit organi-
zations jointly participate in any such project, the application may be filed by
one or more of the participants. The application shall set forth-
"(1) a description of the site for such project;
"(2) plans and specifications for such project in accordance with the regu-
lations prescribed by the Secretary under subsection (a) of section 3 of this
Act;
"(3) reasonable assurances that title to such site is or will be vested in one
or more of the applicants filing the application;
"(4) reasonable assurances that adequate financial support will be avail-
able for the construction of the project and for its maintenance and operation
when completed:
"(5) reasonable assurances that the applicant will meet the requirements,
if any, for furnishing treatment and rehabilitation services to drug abusers
who are unable to pay for such services;
"(6) such other information and assurances as the Secretary may, by regu-
lation, require; and
"(7) reasonable assurances that all laborers and mechanics employed by
contractors or subcontractors in the performance of work on construction of
the project will be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on
similar construction in the locality as determined by the Secretary of Labor
in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-
5) ; and the Secretary of Labor shall have with respect to the labor standards
specified in this paragraph the authority and functions set forth in Reorgani-
zation Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 (15 F.R. 3176; 5 U.S.C. 133z-15) and section
2 of the Act of June 13, 1934, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276c).
"(b) The Secretary may approve any application filed under this section if he
finds that the application (1) is in substantial conformity with subsection (a)
of this section and all applicable regulations issued pursuant to this Act; (2) is
in substantial conformity with the State plan approved under section 4 of this
Act; and (3) has been approved and recommended by the Agency. No applica-
tion filed pursuant to this section shall be disapproved by the Secretary until he
has afforded the applicant an opportunity for a hearing. Any amendment of an
application approved under this Act shall be subject to approval in the same
manner as the original application.
"SEc. 605. The payment of any grant to a State, political subdivision, or non-
profit organization under this Act may follow the approval by the Secretary of
the application of such State, subdivision or organization. Any grant made pur-
suant to this Act for the construction of a project in any fiscal year shall include
such amounts as the Secretary determines to be necessary in succeeding fiscal
years for completion of the Federal participation in the project as approved by
him. Payment of a grant may be made in advance or by way of reimbursement,
and in such Installments as may be determined by the Secretary, and shall be
made on such conditions as the Secretary finds necessary to carry out the pur-
poses of this Act Amounts paid under this Act with respect to any project for
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
the construction of a faility shall not exceed two-thirds of the construction costs
of such facility as determined by the Secretary.
"Szc. 606. Whenever the Secretary, after reasonable notice and opportunity
for hearing to the Agency finds--
"(1) that the Agency is not complying substantially with the provisions
required by subsection (a) of section 4 to be included in its State plan, or
with regulations under this Act;
"(2) that any assurance required to be given in an application filed under
subsection (a) of section 5 is not being or cannot be carried out; or
"(3) that there is a substantial failure to carry out plans and specifica-
tions approved by the Secretary under section 5; the Secretary may forth-
with notify such Agency that no further payments will be made under this
Act for any project or projects designated by the Secretary as being affected
by the action or inaction referred to in paragraph 1, 2, or 3 of this subsec-
tion; and, except with regard to any project for which the application has
already been approved and which is dot directly affected, further payments
In connection with such State plan may 'e withheld, in whole or in part,
until there is no longer any failure to cor .ply (or to carry out the assurances
or plans and specifications, as the case may be) or, if such compliance (or
other action) is impossible, until the State repays or arranges for the repay-
ment of Federal moneys to which the recipient was rot entitled.
"S~a. 60T. If any facility with respect to which funds have been paid under
this Act shall, at any time within twenty years after completion of its con-
struction-
"(1) be sold or transferred to any nonpublic organization; or
"(2) cease to be used for the purposes for which it was constructed, un-
less the Secretary determines, in accordance with regulations, that there
is good cause for releasing the applicant from the obligation to continue such
facility for the purpose of providing treatment for drug abuses;
the United States shall be entitled to recover from the recipient of such
funds an amount bearing the same ratio to the then value (a determined
by agreement of the parties or by action brought in the United States dis-
trict court for the district in which the facility is situated) of the faclly,
as the amount of the Federal participation bore to the cost of construcion of
the facility.
"Sac. 608. If any recipient of a grant under this Act is dissatisfied with any
action taken by the Secretary under section 4(c), 5(b), 7, or 8 of this Act, such
recipient may appeal to the United States court of appeals for the circuit In which
such recipient is located, by filing a petition with such court within sixty days
after such action. A copy of the petition shall be forthwith transmitted by the
clerk of the court to the Secretary, or any officer designated by him for that
purpose. The Secretary thereupon shall file in the court the record of the pro-
ceedings on which he based his action, as provided in section 2112 of title 28,
United States Code. Upon the filing of such petition, the court shall have juris-
diction to affirm the action of the Secretary or to set it aside, in whole or in
part, temporarily or permanently, but until the filing of the record, the Secretary
may modify or set aside his order. The findings of the Secretary as to the facts,
If supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive, but the court, for good
cause shown, may remand the case to the Secretary to take further evidence,
and the Secretary may thereupon make new or modified findings of fact and
may modify his previous action, and shall file in the court the record of the
further proceedings. Such new or modified findings of fact shall likewise be
conclusive If supported by substantial evidence. The Judgment of the court
affirming or setting aside, in whole or in part, any action of the Secretary
shall be final, subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States
upon certiorari or certification as provided in section 1254 of title 28. United
States Code. The commencement of proceedings under this section shall not,
unless so specifically ordered by the court, operate as a stay of the Secretary's
action.
"1Sx. 609. (a) The Secretary is authorized to appoint such technical or other
advisory committees as he deems necessary to advise him in connection with
carrying out the provisions of this Act.
"(b) Members of any such committees not otherwise in the employ of the
United States, while attending meetings of their committee, shall be entitled
110 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
A person charged with selling a narcotic drug unless the court de-
termines the primary purpose of the sale was to enable the person to
obtain a narcotic drug which he requires for his personal use because
of his addiction to the use of drugs.;
And the fourth-a person against whom there is pending a prior
charge of a felony-
We feel that this prior charge of a felony should be disposed of
before a civil commitment proceeding is begun.
Previous civil commitments for narcotic addiction should not be
made exclusionary except at the discretion of the court as many addicts,
if properly handled in a good program, might be excluded ar-bitrarily
and quite unnecessarily.
One should remember here, too, that rehabilitation is not the only
objective of this program but control and management of the addict
as measures of health and criminal prevention are also important..
Note also that we do not recommend exclusion of persons arbitrarily
because of two or more previous felony convictions. "Felony" is so
-. widely and differently interpreted throughout the country that this
would result in a great many persons being excluded who might prove
to be the best subjects for the program.
For example, in Californa petty theft with a prior felony is a
felony; walking away from a county jail camp is a felony; writing
checks without a balance in the bank is a felony, and so it goes.
So it would exclude a great many of these people who might well
otherwise profit from the program.
With respect to those individuals who are ndt found guilty of any
crime these should include any person found to be a narcotic addict
who presents himself through appropriate channels for commitment
for a period of treatment anfrehabilitation.
Such voluntary commitment should be for a fixed period or until
discharged by the court. Otherwise, many will sign out against pro-
fessional advice before treatment and a demonstrated period of ab-
stinence has been completed.
Volunteering into the program should be encouraged: volunteering
out of the program should be forbidden, just as a committed mental
patient is not allowed to leave the hospital until the doctors think he
is improved sufficiently to make such return to the community safe
for the community._
Therefore, based upon our experience we strongly urge that you en-
courage volunteers into the program but certainly not the provision
for volunteering out of the program.
Eligibility should include addict offenders under special procedures
as opposed to only those addicts who have violated the Federal narcotic
laws.
This would provide for opportunities for States to use this program
as well as other Federal commitments.
Additional physical facilities would have to be provided in addition
to adequate provisions for aftercare programs
Contrary to the testimony that has been given thus far particularly
yesterday, I do not feel that the present facilities are adequate.- We
are overtaxed in California already and certainly are in need of addi-
tional space at the presenttimv-e
116 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
They are individuals who have been resisting the treatment pro-
gram yet basically they need control and they need the treatment so
that they are kept in the program as provided by the law.
Senator KzNNwr of Massachusetts. One final question I would like
to ask you, Mr. Wood. We had the attorney yesterday who
1geral
testified upon the adequacy of the existing facilities and he said that
he had been informed in consultation with the Surgeon General that
he could responsibly assume the posture that present facilities could
meet the new requirements called for by the administration's bill.
He testified that there were provisions in the Federal legislation
currently in existence to provide for additional construction, if such
construction was necessary.
I am just wondering--and the testimony of Senators Kennedy of
New York and Javits where they felt that special legislation should
be addressed to the problem of construction of halfway houses and some
of these other aspects which you have mentioned this morning-I am
wondering once again-and I don't know what your experience in
this particular area would be-if you could comment on what you feel
currently the needs are for this kind of aftercare treatment, even pre-
care treatment which is necessary today-whether you feel that present
facilities are adequate or not.
Mr. WooD. I would have to say that the facilities are not adequate,
Senator, and I am unaware of any provision that would permit us to
draw upon Federal funds for construction. I feel certain that some-
one in California would have done this if it were possible to do so.
We did in the construction of our halfway houses--our first one
that was opened for felon addicto-we did receive a grant of about
$100,000 for 2 successive years for research in that halfway house.
But certainly nothing for operating or construction funds. As a
matter of fact we lease the building. We don't even own it. In our
own situation here in opeing the two halfway houses that we opened
this past year-if there'were funds available for setting up these facili-
ties-we certainly didn't know anything about it.
We are leasing the facilities-one of.them was a rather modem motel
that was inappropriately placed in an area that no longer received
the traffic necesswy for its existence. It is a beautiful facility. It
has adequate provision for 50 men. We had to put in a dining room
and a group meeting room.
. The other house for women was an old small hotel near the intersec-
tion of Hollywood and Vine and we are leasing this from a private
concern who remodeled the building to meet our needs.
So.I am unaware of any money available for construction. Certainly
our experience in California indicates that we will need additional
Yesterday the attorney general testified that there are over 18,000
addicts identified in the State of California. We know where over
half these are at the present time. I have in round figures 2,000 in
the center. There are another 1,700 on outpatient, release status.
The department of correction in its regular felony program-there
ame another 4,500 addicts; another 2,500 under felony parole super-
vision.
So this accounts for more than half the addicts known in California
and yet with the increase in population and with the increasing use of
0
TM NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196 6 121
dangerous drugs and narcotics the Bureau of Narcotics enforcement
is identifying about 200 addicts each and every month in California.
So if we are to program for these people we will need space.
Senator Kaxniw of Massachusetts. Does your answer also relate
to the need for trained personnelI
Mr. WooD. Decidedly so--it is a very difficult job to work with these
individuals. We find that we have been successful in identifying and
training sufficient to our needs at the present time, although we are
just keeping our heads above water. We have some very highly
trained individuals, most of them have their master's degree.
Certainly there is never going to be enough psychiatrists-we have
five psychiatric positions-we have never had more than four of them
filled at any one time.
At the present time we have three filled. So there is a shortage of
adequately trained and experienced personnel. We hope to get in-
dividuals who have the ability to learn. Most of them have not had
nce working with addicts.
senator KNzNEDY of Massachusetts. Thank you very much, Mr.
Wood.
Senator DoDD. I want to compliment you, Mr. Wood, on your excel-
lent statement which I have read. I had to attend another meeting and
that is why I was absent.
Mr. WOOD. I understand, sir. -
Senator DoDD. I guess you were here and heard both Senator Ken-
nedy and Senator Javits and others refer to your outstanding work.
We are all aware of it.
I notice in your statement that you made reference to the fact that
you applied for a surplus building-a Federal building-if there is
anway we can help, I am sure we will be glad to do so.
Mr. WOOD. Thank you, Senator. This is a naval surplus supply
depot. The name of it is--Miraloma Air Force Naval Supply Depot.
It is located near the town of Riverside-there are about 220 acres
involved there. Big warehouse facilities, plus additional space that
we could easily convert for about 600 men for a treatment program and
we would appreciate your help and assistance in getting this facility
when it becomes available.
Senator DODD. If we can help, I am sure we will.
Mr. WOOD. Thank you.
Senator DoDD. I thank you. I am grateful for your staying over.
Senator KiwNyv of Massachusetts. I have just one final question-
the existing bill, as I understand it, doesn't provide for the opportunity
for Federal funds for private groups, Mr. Wood.
I am wondering whether you feel this would be helpful if there were
provision in there for private groups
Mr. Wooe. I think if this was adequately protected by standards that
could be well policed, that this would be a good provision. I think
the difficulty would be if the money was made avaNilable without pro-
visions for adequate standards of housing and care and followup.
Senator KNwY'ED of Massachusetts. If those standards could be es-
tablished, have you found in your own experience that there are a num-
ber of worthwhile private groups that are devoted to this effort in
making a useful contribution, that could be assisted, could productively
6-6 --6----9
122 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1968
The legislation enacted and amended in 1963 and 1965 drew upon experience
in the Narcotic Treatment Control Project and provides for-
(1) A civil commitment for treatment.
(2) The California Rehabilitation Center.
(3) A mandatory after-care program, including reduced caseloads, anti-
narcotic testing to determine narcotics use, and authorization for a halfway
house.
(4) A mandate for research into the rehabilitation of narcotic addicts.'
The program was made compulsory and a long period of legal control was pro-
vided for therapeutic reasons and after carefully evaluating experience here
and elsewhere. Without a legal, enforceable commitment, a very large percent-
age of addicts will not undertake treatment. Given the opportunity, an extremely
high percentage of addicts will leave treatment before this is medically indicated.
Without a legal, enforceable commitment, there is no way post-institutional
treatment can be Insured. The lack of such treatment has been widely blamed
for the high rate of failure In other efforts to control and treat addiction.
The commitment proceedings are essentially those employed for the commitment
of the mentally Ill.
Once the person is committed, he is committed for a definite period even though
he may have actually volunteered himself for treatment. The law now provides
1 Originally Chapter 11, Title 7 of Part 3, California Penal Code, enacted 1961 and
Amended 16M. In 1965 Placed In the Welfare and Institutions Code, Division &,Narcotic
Addicts, Chapters 1 &2, Sections 8000-B305 Inclusive.
124 THM NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 19 6
for a two-and-one-half year commitment for volunteers, and a seven year commit-
ment for those committed following a misdemeanor or felony conviction.
The first six months, however, must be spent as an in-patient. The former
addict may then be placed. in out-patient status. If he abstains from the use of
narcotics for three consecutive years, he is discharged from his commitment and
the criminal charges against him, if any, may be dropped.
The law provides return to n-patient status upon detection of narcotl* use. It
also provides that if the person is ineligible for discharge from the program, he
shall be returned to court for Imposition of the original sentence or, perhaps, for
recommitment to the program. A graphic presentation of this is presented In the
attached chart. (See p. 182.)
The institutional treatment is only the first phase. The test comes in the
community and only in the community. I should emphasize that we are not ex-
pecting to "cure" the addict. We are looking for signs that he has gained suffi-
cient control of himself that he is worthy of an opportunity to test the strengths
that he has gained. We will never know if he is not given the opportunity to
test himself and certainly our experience has shown that excessive time in con-
finement does not bring about this desirable change.
CHARACTERISTICS OF CALIFORNIA REHABILITATION CENTER ADMISSIONS IN 1964
Malte
1. A Young Group.-A median age of 25 establishes the California Rehabilita-
tion Center residents as being about four years younger than felony offenders
committed to California Correctional Institutions. Those under 21 account for
11.2% of those received.
2. Intcligent.-Ube measured intelligence of the California Rehabilitation Cen-
ter residents is on the whole, slightly above that of the general population with
most falling in the "normal" and "high average" categories.
3. Need Education.--Over fifty percent of the population measures below the
8th grade level Thirty-one percent have a grade placement of 9.5 or better.
4. Marijuana and Drugs-Then Opiatcs.-Between the ages of 16-18 a large
majority of the California Rehabilitation Center commitments experimented with
marijuana and dangerous drugs. The use of opiates, especially heroin, occurred
at about 20 years of age.
5. Not Necessarily Delinquent Prior to Drug Use.-One-half of the California
Rehabilitation Center group had no indication of an arrest prior to their first
experimentation with drugs. 98%o had no prior prison commitment before first
drug use.
6. Mostly Felony Convictions.-Seventy-three percent of the admissions to the
California Rehabilitation Center were committed following conviction on felony
charges; twenty-one percent following conviction on misdemeanor charges; and
six perce-nt were committed without a criminal charge. 82% had no prior prison
commitments.
7. Narcotic Convictions Predominate.-Seventy-four percent of the California
Rehabilitation Center commitments followed conviction on a narcotic offense;
18% were convicted of crimes against property of persons; six percent had no
criminal charge.
8. Most Commitments from Los Angeles County.--Over sixty-five percent of the
California Rehabilitation Center commitments were from Los Angeles County.
Eighty-four percent were from Southern California.
9. Basically a CaliforniaProblem.-More than one-half of the California Re-
habilitation Center residents were born in California and eighty-six percent have
lived in California 10 years or more.
Female
Data on California Rehabilitation Center female residents reveal some dif-
ferences when compared with the male population. There is some evidence that
there are somewhat larger number of voluntary commitments for the women as
contrasted with the men. Also, the women are slightly older than the men with
a median age of almost 26. They do differ significantly with respect to ethnic
background with the largest group composed of the Caucasian white as com-
pared to the males where those of Mexican-American ancestry predominate.
1. Slightly Ode.-The median age for women is 25.7 years. Those under 21
account for 8.7% of those received.
2. Intelligent.-The measured intelligence is slightly above the general popula-
tion. Education ranges from 5th grade through college graduates; twenty-three
percent tested at a school grade placement of 9.5 or better.
3. Use of Drugs.-The median ages for first use of marijuana is 16.9 years; for
dangerous drugs 18.4 years and for narcotics 21.2 years.
4. Arrest History.-About 95% had no trouble with the law as juveniles; 62%
had no indication of arrest prior to their first experimentation with drugs. More
than 93% have no prison commitment in their record.
CASE WORK CONTI-NUES IN THE COMMUNITY
The field (community) staff becomes involved with the resident soon after his
commitment. The caseworker contributes an extensive review of the resident's
home environment, family feelings and attitudes, work record and prospects to
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 127
the case history while the initial sumnivry is being compiled. The caseworker
may at this time make his first contact with the resident.
When the institution staff feels the resident Is ready to leave, the caseworker
to whom he will be assigned in the field contacts him. Together they work out
release plans and begin to build a constructive relationship.
The caseworker is specially trained to work with addicts and his caseload of
30 are all addicts. The group continues while the former resident Is on outpatient
status in the community. Each caseworker meets weekly with his caseload as a
group. Counseling attendance is regarded as particularly important for those
who are unemployed. Use Is also made of the Parole and Community Services
Division's out-patient psychiatric clinics where indicated.
The caseworker meets individually with each release weekly at his home or at
his Job. He also contacts others in a position to evaluate the progress being
made-his family, his employer, the police.
In addition, each out-patient is chemically tested five times a month for at least
the first six months. Four of these "nallue" tests are given on a regular basis
and one is a surprise test. If all the indications are good, this test schedule may
ie cut to two surprise tests a month after the first six months. Test failure or
other indication of relapse to narcotic use results in return to In-patient status.
We have recently added the use of urinalysis in the testing procedure and our
research is continuing to determine the best Vossible methods of early detection
of re-use. On the other hand, many of our returnees are returned, not because
they were using narcotics, but because they started drinking heavily or because
they failed to. maintain adequate employment or violated other conditions of
their release. We look at some beginning delinquent behavior as a danger sign
and we bring him right back. The point Is that a man's return to the Center is
not failure. When a man goes out of the hospital after a pneumonia case, the
doctor keeps his eyes open. If he sees a sign of relapse coming, he gets him back
to the hospitaL That is what we are doing. A doctor never really considers a
tubercular patient cured. When they release them after hospitalization, they
keep checking back, usually every three months, then every six months and then
every year. It is the same kind of control that we think we are dealing with, in
terms of the addict, and consequently a person who relapses is not seen as any
more of a failure than a person who has to have further treatment for a tuber-
cular condition.
Some of those who have returned have gone out convinced they "had it made."
They encountered unexpected problems and reverted to narcotics use.
On return, instead of the bitterness and blaming of others that might be ex-
pected, counselors found an atttiude of new appreciation of their problems and a
new determination to lick them.
THM HALF-WAY HOUSE PROGRAM
In May, 1965, a half-way house program for males was activated in the metro-
politan Los Angeles area. This facility, the Parkway Center, provides added
short time support for 50 male residents in the community and helps to bridge
the gap between institutional living and the full freedom of the community.
Not only does the Parkway Center provide control and guidance for those re-
leased on out-patient status during the critical first phase of transition to con-
structive living in the community, but It also provides an opportunity to work
more intensively with those Individuals who may be making a marginal adjust-
ment while on out-patient status It can be halt-way back to Corona for those
who neol this additional support.
The program for women was opened in August in the Hollywood area. The
facility called the Vinewood Center will eventually house 25 women. 'Since the
female addict generally does not have the supportive family consteUatlon to
which to return, this is seen as a most valuable addition to our treatment
facility.
WHAT HAS BE= OUR EXPERMNCE WITH THZ AW10r WHEN REMASE ?
We do have some positive indications that the program is working and are
encouraged at this point that we can make headway in returning men and
women to the community where they can live responsible drug free lives.
Since the beginning of the program in September, 1961, there have been over
5,300 men and women committed. As of December 1, 1965, there were 1,672
males and 268 females in the Center. By December 31, 1965, 2,578 men and 665
women have been released to out-patient status in the community. Of those
128 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
released to out-patient status 1,11 men and 268 women have been returned to
the Center for additional treatment. It is quite signilicant that of those males
returned to the Center only 10% were convicted of a new charge, while 90%
were returned on the original commitment. With respect to the women, only
4.4% returned with new charges While It is too early to make any predictions
based upon these small numbers, the results are encouraging when it is recog-
nled that one woman who had been released in August 1962, has completed three
drug free years in the community. She has been discharged from the California
Rehabilitation Center program and many additional men and women will soon
be eligible for discharge. I Just recently received a listing of 148 names of in.
dlviduals who have been out 18 months or longer.
We do have preliminary studies on those released from the California Reha-
bilitation Center on out-patient status and although they do involve only a mall
number to report major findings, some preliminary facts are available.
A report on the first releases during 1982 and covering one year of experience
in the community, a total of 108 addicts, 52 men and 56 women, indicates that
only two men had been convicted of a felony offense and 14 men and 2 women
of offenses; and that 85% of the men and 386% of the women re-
mained in the community with no evidence of drug use. That of the group re-
turned to the California Rehabilitation Center, Corona, for further In-patient
care, a little less than one-half of them were charged with opiate use and the
remaining returnees were split fifty-fifty between no drug use and use of mari-
juana and dangerous drugs
We as staff and society must learn to recognize that a return to the Center for
an additional period of treatment, perhaps once, twice or three or more times
should not be looked upon as failure. We must continue to offer the addict
intensive, probing programs of counseling, psycho-therapy and psychiatry. And
our programs should not and do not stop when he leaves the Center. We must
continue to supervise, help, yes even control the addict in the community; we
must provide enough aid to bolster him over periods when society again, as it
will, appears about to overwhelm him.
And when the addict has begun the re-use of narcotics we must promptly
return him for further treatment aimed at making him fit for another oppor-
tunity back in the community. As Mr. Richard A. McGee, Administrator, Youth
and Adult Corrections Agency, has aptly put It:
"If society naively expects today's techniques to turn off addiction with a
flick of a needle or a single dose of treatment, society is due for disillusionment
Society has to learn that an addict's problems are so varied and so deeply seated
that repeated treatment may be necessary before he ultimately Is free of his
addiction."
DOB
7 GOZSMaB IRESEARCH
Although there has been a great deal of interest and concern in research about
addicting drugs, little Is still known about the addict himself and we are pre-
pared to undertake research along these lines. At the California Rehabilitation
Center we have the unique advantage of having a specific mandate In the law for
research. We are beginning to make some gains, but we see the need for well-
structured research In the medical, physiological, psychiatric, psychological, and
sociological aspects of narcotics addiction. Some of the questions we are pre-
pared to ask ourselves sound like this:
1. Is there a specific physiological proce which develops in narcotics addic-
tion and Is this process subject to control?
2. What Is the nature of addiction, independent of the addicting agent?
8. Is there an addiction-prone personality and, If so, what are Its dimensions?
4. What are the sociological factors in addiction; why do some social groups
tend to have a higher addiction rate than others?
5. What Is the relationship between narcotics addiction and various forms of
social maladjustment generally described as criminal?
6. What happens as a result of our community group approach?
What Is the nature of the process itself and what are its outcomes? These
and many other questions need answers before we can hope to "cure" narcotics
addiction. An important part of our task at the California Rehabilitation Center
Is to start answering some of these questions and to exploit the interest of others
in an attempt to answer them. Our research budget, as such, is not tremendous,
and we are going to have to rely on the Interest of the major universities, the Na-
tional Institutes of Health, and the large research foundations to undertake
much of the needed research.
I ~ ~ ~ ~~
INor"JI III....
TIB NARCOTIC RZHABILIATION ACT OF 1966 129
, oOMM 3nATIMPS 10M 1MEUAL A5SISMACS 05 NIX=D LWUSLATION
I have been asked to comment on changes In the proposed legislation and other
federal asutance needed. I am cognizant of the fact that I must limit my re-
marks to those related to the control and treatment of the addict rather than to
the enforcement of the narcotic laws and its many ramifications of which I am
not competent to speak. Law enforcement in Its many subdivisions has been
and must continue to carry out their very Important phase of the control for
addicts If we are to be able to successfully treat the addict in a therapeutic
setting.
In response to the specific observations and questions raised by the Honorable
Senator Thomas J. Dodd in his recent communication, I would like to comment
briefly on these various matters.
1. The rationale behind the bill* before your subcomrwittee supports the view
that s otic addiction t a disease rather than oritnlalit.-ItIs difficult to
separate the many problems involved In determining the status of the addict in
relationship to the psychological factors which caused him to use drugs originally
and the later patterns of criminality which go hand end hand in the addictive
process. Our statistics disclose that over one-half of iur commitments had no
indication of an arrest prior to their first expermenta-!ns wih drugs. Most
assuredly they were In the "delinquent fringe" and as their use of drugs in-
creased, the need for additional stimulation, the lack of stable employment
brought on by their failure to maintain their responsibility to their employer,
made the transition to full blown patterns of criminality, prostitute( n and sales
of narcotics an easy and necessary step to finance their ever ncreas ng need for
narcotics. Regardless of how he arrived at his present state, it remains clear
that he needs both control and treatment. The United States Supreme Court
decision in Robinson versus California' which held that drug addiction is not in
itself a crime, made it clcar that drug addicts may be forced to accept treatment
and public constraints not as punishment, but as a measure of public health and
public protection.
2. Restriction on eligibility under S. 115 .- The present exclusionary clauses
would ellinate most of the individuals who might profit by placement In a civil
commitment program. It is therefore recommended that consideration be given
to a pattern of eligibility similar to that established by Section 3052 Welfare
and Institution Code.$ For example, legislation might provide for-
(a) Eligibility of those charged with federal orime should Include any
addict found guilty of any federal offense except (1) a person guilty of a
crime of violence (burglary and housebreaking should not be defined as
crimes of violence unless a weapon was used) ; (2) a person guilty of any
crime for which the minimum penalty is more than five years; (3) a person
charged with selling a narcotic drug unless the court determines the primary
purpose of the sale was to enable the person to obtain a narcotic drug which
he requires for his personal use because of his addiction to such a drug; and
(4), a person against whom is pending a prior charge on a felony.
Previous civil commitments for narcotic addiction should not be made exclu-
sionary except at the discretion of the court as many addicts, if properly handled
in a good program, might be excluded arbitrarily and quite unnecessarily. One
should remember here, too, that rehabilitation is not the only objective of this
program-control and management of the addict as measures of public health
and crime prevention are also important. Note, also, that we do not reconmnend
exclusion of persons arbitrarily because of two or more previous felony convic-
tions. "Felony" Is so widely and differently interpreted throughout the country
that this would result In a great many persons being excluded who might prove
to be the best subjects for the program. For example, in Callfornia petty theft
with a prior is a felony; walking away from a county jail camp is a felony;
writing checks without a balance in the bank is a felony, and so it goes. It Is as.
sued here that we are attempting to exclude only those who are primarily
either dangerous or habitual criminals aside from narcotic addiction.
(b) Eligibility of those not charged with or found guilty of a crime.
These should include any person found to be a narcotic addIc who presents
himself through appropriate channels for commitment for a period of treat-
ment and rehabilitation who is not excluded under (a), above.
Such voluntary commitments should be for a fixed period or until discharged
by the court. Otherwise, many will sign out against protessional advice before
I ......
T-a NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 131
the most desirable solution as their criminality and need for control far exceeds
their amenability for treatment with our present knowledge. For others, proba-
tion with chemical testing may be the best solution.
7. Other ooideratiow.-(a) Treatment centers should be developed with a
nonpunitive atmosphere where the individual is under treatment and he is not per-
initted to leave at will, but must remain until such time as It can be rea.imably
assured that he will not immediately return to drug use.
Certainly our experience has shown us that for the most part men and women
will not volunteer for treatment if they are xot free to leave as soon as the initial
discomfort of withdrawal has passed. In the California Rehabilitatiin Center
program, one may volunteer, but after entry into treatment It is no longer volun-
tary. At the present time about 5 percent of the population are volunary commit-
ments. Treatment should be something more than an opportunity to reduce one's
habit and then immediately be free to go back and pursue a course which leads to
more severe addiction and criminal activity to support the habit.
(b) Supportive supervision upon return to the community with return to
the Center for additional treatment if re-use of drugs is begun should be an
integral part of the process. There is no easy solution to the problem of nar-
cotic addiction and as I have previously mentioned we cannot expect that an in-
dividual with evidence of serious maladjustment may be able to refrain from re-
use when he again faces the pressures in the community after a short period
of confinement and treatment. Like the alcoholic-and there are many simllarl-
ties4--he may relapse a number of times before he can become a useful citizen,
husband and father.
(o) At Corona, we have capacity for 1,900 males and 400 females. In a mouth
or so we will reach full capacity in our male units. While provisions have been
made for temporary placement in existing facilities of the Department of Cor-
rections at an institution at Tehachapi, we are desperately in need of additional
space to house and program addicts who will be committed to us. The Bureau of
Narcotic Enforcement are identifying 200 new addicts each month which, of
course, is related to the enormity of the problem and the growth of California.
With the recent changes in the law, we have been advised that Los Angeles Coun-
ty alone will be committing between 30 and 5) additional addicts each month.
To carry out the obligation expected of us, we must have additional space and
recruit and train personnel to program these individuals for return to the
community. Preliminary investigations have located a surplus federal facility
near us and our application is awaiting release of this facility. To make this
space available to our Center would be of material and immediate assistance
to the orderly development of our progress in treating the addict.
CONCLUSIONS
LMAL F;,OCIJ.,
DIST4 T ATTORNEY
Petitions Superior Cnurt for
C-miltment to C.R.C.
3100r6 w &I.
! ears
*Comttemt is 21 years for those who volunteer themelves for oomitmtj 7 yeara.
for those comitted wnder this section upon the initative of others.
Sections 3051s 3050, 3190, and 3100.6 Welfare & Institution Code tcaxe effective
Septe4mr 17, 1965. Legislatim z..drpale axt.qon a 51, 6450# and 6500 P.C. and
pl"*o, 3^J. tho W & T Oode,
TH NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 133
Senator Dom. We have scheduled Mr. David Acheson as our next
witness. Mr. Acheson, we are embarrassed a little bit. I consider
your testimony of great importance and the embarrassment arises out
of the fact that I am afraid we might be shut off by the situation on
the floor.
I would not want to get you started and have it broken and then have
to get you to come back tomorrow. However, if it is inconvenient to
you in any way you can start and then complete your testimony to-
morrow. I suggest that we start at 10 tomorrow morning. What do
you want doneI
Mr. Acrisoz;. I think it would be more convenient for both of us
to go on in the morning.
Senator DoDt' Well, I do also and I really think your testimony,
your statement is an excellent one and it ought to be given time so that
the other Senators can be here and consult with you and ask ques-
tions and ask you your views. After all, you are an important public
official and you have been U.S. district attorney and you know some-
thing about this. I don't think we ought to rush through it.
M r.AcHEsov. I will be here at 10 in the morning.
Senator DoDD. Very well.
We will stand recessed until 10 am. tomorrow.
(Whereupon, at 12:10 pm., the committee recessed, to reconvene at
10 a.m. Thursday, January 27,1966.)
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
U.S. SENATE,
SPECIAL SUBCOM MTrEZ OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIURY,
WahitWto, D.C.
The subcommittee (composed of Senators Dodd, Tydings, Burdick,
Bayh, Hart, Kennedy of Massachusetts, Hruska, Javits, and Fong),
met, pursuant to recess, at 11 a.m., in room 235 Old Senate Office
Building, Senator Thomas J. Dodd (chairman oi the sulbommittee)
prsiding.
Present: Senator Dodd.
Also present: Carl L. Perian, staff director.
Senator DODD. The hearing will be in order.
We have as our witness today Mr. David Acheson, the Special
Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. Acheson was the
U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, has served with great dis-
tinction, and he has firsthand knowledge with respect to this problem
of narcotics
We are happy to have you here this morning.
STATEMXET OF DAVID Q ACHESON, PEAL ASSISTANT TO THE
SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Mr. AcHmsoN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very glad to be
here this morning.
I have a prepared statement. To allow time for questions, discus-
sion, I thought I would not read it all, but read parts of it.
Let me say preliminarily that the Treasury Department feels very
strongly that although it is charged primarily with enforcement of
the Federal narcoticslaws, it is quite clear at this point in history that
enforcement measures alone are not an answer to the narcotics problem
in the United States. I think we all feel when we talk about the nar.
cotics problem, we are talking about a great many different kinds of
traffic, and a great many different kin d of pple who are involved
in it, all the way from the commercial tialkers to the addict who
may be caught with occasional possession.
Now I will discuss further the talent of various c ie of
these okenders and the addicts themselves
At the beghi i I would like to say that, of the three bills that
were mentioned in your letter, Mr. Chairman, we see important advan-
tage in S. 2152. - ! ;I
We feel that there am four fetur,all of whih this bill has, t A
the other two bills do not h6v% that we think are importantw.
136 THE NARCOTIC REHABIITATION ACT OF 196
lieve that they shouldn't get a mighty stiff penalty, and I think it has
been a deterrent as well.
Mr. AczsozN. I understand, Mr. Chairman, from takin with
Federal prosecutors in New York, that there has been a considerable
migration away from the narcotics traffic by some of the old, well-
entrenched racketeers there, simply because they regarded the risks of
going to jail for a long time as being incommensurate with the profits.
This legislation will give us the flexibility and the tools to do what
should be done for the victims of the narcotics traffic and for the
profiteers as well as for the many shades and degrees of other offenders.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to turn to the questions that were
posed in your letter to the Secretary of the Treasury, and I think some
of those questions may generate discussion, particularly on some of the
subects of Mr. Lynch's testimony.
w, the first question dealt with the mandatory minimum penalties.
The Treasury is strongly convinced that the mandatory minimum
sentence provisions in the narcotics laws should be retained, except
to the extent mitigated by S. 2152. There is evidence that they have
been a healthy deterrent. Prosecutors say that many sizable racke-
teers have abandoned the narcotics traffic in the belief that the risk of
a long prison term had become unacceptably high. This attitude can
have an important shrinking effect on the tragc, and perhaps proof
of this can-be found in the recent severe shortage of heroin in New
York for many months and in the much greater dilution of the drug.
Finally, in plotting the curve of the addiction rate per head of popu-
lation, there appers to be a downward trend in the curve following
the enactment of the mandatory minimum penalties in 1950 and 1956.
I can submit a graph to be included in the record that shows that
curve very dramatically.
(The gTaph referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 11," and is as
follows:)
ExumT No. 11
200
to
160
140
120
I00
so
so
40
20
-o
140 THE NARCOTIC 1XHABUJTATION ACM] Of 1966
.sntencing, I am not sure that itis not just as well to give their
discretion a nudm
Senator Dow).-Ican well understand from what you have explained
with respect to the task of the Bureau of Narcotics. I know it is
tremendous--* long border, and a vast number of people flowing
both ways. I don't believe it could ever be manned in the sense of
having somany officers there to inspect every car, every individual.
at obvious impossible.
I think you said as well that the Federal Government must be more
concerned With the bigtime operation.
Idon't find any fault with all thi& know this issm
What troubles me is how do we handle this problem of what I call
the smalltime criminals who I think are increasing! They don't
bring in a big load, but they bring it in, and more of them are doing it.
This seems to me a dilemma.
Mr. AaSON. It is a dilemma.
Senator Dow. What do you think ! Do you have any idea how this
can be licked I
Mr. Aomasom. If I had an answer to that, I would probably be
Chairman of the President's Crime Commission right now. But I
don't. I really don't.
I think the local enforcement problem does tax the resources of
even the big and rich States. Yet it is not an answer to take a small
Federal or anization that is designed for the importation rackets,
and throw them into local enforcement.
On that point, Mr. Chairman, I think one of the problems that the
Federal courts see in this patterz of narcotics prosecutions has been
that because we are dealing with Federal statutes, the Federal Gov-
ernment very often is prosecuting cass that are fairly small in a
Federal court. And I think the Feral judges a i to discour-
age that so that that traffic will be diverted into the State courts.
Senator DowD. Yes. Of course you will agree, I am sure, that what
we are talking about here is smuggling, really.
Mr. AcHzsox. That is right,
Senator Dow. And, of course, that is a Federal task- I am frank
to say that I have found no way that everybody would agree on.
Mr. AcrvsoN. It will be interestWi to see what happens now in the
heroin market after this seizure that was made in Georgia. That was
a seizure of a size that will very radically affect the national supply
of heroin, we would think. It will be very interesting to see where
the shortage occur, and what the prices become. It may be that
that will be felt in California as well as in New York City and Chicago.
I don't know.
Senator Dom This was the shipment from Europe I
Mr. Acmsom. That is correct, 96 kilos, I think of pure heroin.
Senator DoDm.The attorney general of California, you may remem-
ber from his testimony, showed us, I believe, two packages-one of
white colored heroin, and the other one of a darker hue, which was
from Mexico. I don't remember whether that darker variety is in-
creasing in this country or not-do you know!
Mr. AcH N. Well, it is regularly appearing in California-we
know that. I don't know what the proportion of it is.
THE NARCOTIC RHBILITATION ACT OF 1966 149
Senator Dow. I don't know that he said what the percentage was.
Mr. AcmzsoN. In California. Nationally, of course, some per-
centage way up in the 90*s of all the heroin in the United States comes
from France. And perhaps some of that comes through Mexico.
That is not the brown heroin. That is the white heroin.
Senator DowD. I know.
I am interested, too, in your reference to the dangerous drugs. We
certainly give that a lot of consideration.
Do youknow how successful the Customs Bureau has been in appre-
hending smugglers of these dangerous drup over the border!
Mr. Aazs . Well, they are just beginning that effort, as I under-
stand it. They have had meetings with the new bureau chief at HEW.
They have made seizures, of course, before this.
I gather that it is just one of the most difficult things in the world
to do.
Someone told me in the Customs Bureau that the new hallucinating
drug, LSD, can be smuggled by tak paper products, letter paper or
some paper product that is coming m, and soaking that with ISD,
bringing it i--it is absolutely undetectable, unless you make a very
difficult chemical analysis of the paper. And then when you bring
the paper in, you can extract the diug, and get it back and sell it.
Now that is the kind of difficult job that customs will have to do
when these drugs become more common.
Senator Dow. Mr. Perian has some questions.
Mr. Pza~u . Would it be possible, Mr. Acheson, to give us later
on a list of the types of sentences being given to apprehended danger-
ous drug smugglers I
The reason ask this question is we have been advised that it would
probably be better to make smuggling of dangerous drugs a straight
felony offense. In other words, many times today in the Federal
courts it is handled as amisdemeanor, or it is referred to aState court,
and the dangerous drug smnuggleris handled as a a t.
Could you give us such a I nlt
Mr. AawcoN. I will see if we have that available, and if we do I
will certainly provide it.
Mr. Px•i.In view of the fact that witnesses have indicated
with the mp of H.R. 2, which will substantially decrease the avail-
ability o dangerous drugs in this country--they anticipate increased
smuggling across the border. Do ou feel a straight felony provi-
sion for Tuis type of smuggling would be advisable I
Mr. Action. I am not familiar enough with the smuggling
statutes to know whether there is a felony provision there that would
catch it. But perhap-
Mr. Pkauw. At the present time it could be handled as either--
Mr. ACHIESON. A misdemeanor or a felony.
Mr. PtRiu. Yes. In other words, one of the Customs Bureau wit-
nesses said that many dangerous drug peddlers are getting no more
stiff penalties than someone smuglnm-g -arakeets.
Mir. Aouuso. Right. I think that is probably true. Let me see
if I can extract those figures for you.
(The information referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 13" and
i as follows:)
150 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT 01 1966
ExHaIB No. 13
U.S. GovWIMENT MEMORANDUM
BuWAu oF CUSTOMS,
Febriary 3, 1966.
File: IN 6-01-L
To: Mr. David . Acheson, Special Assistant to the Secretary (Enforcement).
From: Lawrence Fleishman, Assistant Commissioner.
Subject: Dangerous Drugs--(Depressant and Stimulant).
This is in reply to your memorandum dated January 28, 1968.
At the present time, as in the past, violators arrested at all ports of entry
found smuggling dangerous drugs (depressants and stimulants) into the United
States are charged with Section 497, Tariff Act of 1930, or 18 U.S.C. 545.
Seizures ranging up to 500 pills are generally handled administratively with
penalties assessed at approximately ten cents per pill when Section 497 is applied.
When amounts of from 500 or more are seized, they are referred to U.S. Attor-
neys for prosecution under the provision of 18 U.S.C. 545. Defendants in
these cases receive sentences of from one to two years; however, sentences are
often suspended and the defendant is placed on probation. Occasionally, a small
fine is imposed.
The provisions of 18 U.S.C. 545 carry a penalty of from 0 to 5 years and/or
a maximum fine of $10,000.
To illustrate more clearly, there are listed below a few of the most prominent
seizures of dangerous drugs reported by Regions III and V with dispositions
shown in some cases, all qf which were charged with violation of 18 U.S.C. 545.
REGION III
Quantity
Date File Defendant Of Disposition
drugs
REGION V
Aug. 26,1963 8D 7-556-.-- Terryman --------- 3,014 3 years to serve; 5 years probation; $500 fine.
May 6,1964 8D 7-W.... King------------ 5. 000 3 years sentence; $1,000.
July 14,194 SD 7-64.-... Cst ------------ 5...800 2 years suspended; 2 years probation.
Sept. 7,1904 qD 7-674....- Garca. ----------- 0,000 2 years sentence; time to serve to be deter-
mined by board of parole.
Sept. 4,1965 SD 7-503.... Griffin-- -..- 99,268 Case pending'
Oct. 29,1966 8D 7-406..... Green------------ 4, 000 Defendant reins a fugitive; failed to ap-
pear.
Nov. 12,1965 8D 7-00 I....
Ross ------------ 6,000 Case pending.
Along the California border, customs agents have been successful in referring
small seizures of drugs to local police departments where defendants are proc-
essed in local city courts for violation of state laws which is a misdemeanor.
Defendants in these cases receive fines of up to $200 or a Jal sentence of from
5 to 30 days.
Penalties for violation of 21 U.S.C. 174 and 21 U.S.C. 176A (smuggling narcot-
ics or marihuana) are minimum 5-year and maximum 20-year sentences with
no probation given.
Generally, for first offenders in these cases, federal judges impose sentences
or five years in prison for those found smuggling commercial amounts of narcot-
ics or marihuana into the United States. Commercial amounts may be consid-
ered any over 10 grams of heroin and I to 3 pounds of marihuana.
Violators arrested with small amounts of the above which could be regarded
for their personal use are usually charged in federal courts with violation of the
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 151
Marijuana Tax Act, 26 U.S.C. 4744, or in the case of heroin, Section 26 U.S.C.
4705 (tax provision). These violators generally receive a 2 or 3 years sentence
which is often suspended.
Mr. Pmwu. Now, on page 13 of your statement you discuss the dif-
ficulty of differentiating between the small pusher addict and the
major trafficker or wholesaler.
Initially, do you think it is possible that certain of these so-called
small pusher addicts could be successfully treatedI
Mr. AcEmSoN. I think so.
Mr. Pwaux. I think you more or less hinted that in your statement.
Mr. ACIJzSON. I think so.
Mr. PzAu. The second question is, Do you really think S. 2152
adequately provides judicial discretion to allow for this? In other
words, at what point or how much power is given to the judge to de-
termine that an addict pusher, even though h is selling perhaps for
funds, other than his own use, could benefitby treatmentI
Mr. AcHisoN. Well, of course, an addict-I suppose if an addict
can be treated successfully, what particular offense that man has com-
mitted doesn't have much to do with whether he can be treated or not.
Somewhere we think a line ought to be drawn between commercial
sellers and addicts who sell for their own use.
Now the small pusher who is an addict is probably going to turn
up in the exception to category 2 here oIpage 4 of the bill, at the top
of the page-if he can show that he is an habitual user and selling in
Vert small quantities.
he small pusher who is not an addict, would be treated like a
trafficker.
Mr. PERiAzA. I think the key phrase in your statement is "unless the
court determines that such sale was for the primary purpose." I think
primary is probably the key word there. You do indicate although
this language is not free from difficulty, it will give the judge at lw.st
some discretion.
Mr. ACHESON'. Right.
Mr. PEIAN. There has been some question raised by the California
people and Senator Kennedy as to exactly how much discretion we
sKould give the judge, and this is a major crime of many of the
middle-class addicts.
Mr. ACHESON. Well, I don't think we are ever going to be able to
define the dividing line in the statute so that all the right people will
fall on the right side of it and all the wrong people will aon the
wrong side. The line has to be drawn partly by the judge, with the
guidelines in the statute.
Now, these guidelines that are in the bill pose a rather difficult
evidentiary problem. How do you prove that a person is selling
merely to obtain money for his own habitV Well, it is difficult.
But it is not impossible.
The judge with commonsense and with some testimony in front of
him about the man's habit, the size of the sale transaction, ought to
be able to decide that question.
Mr. Rai;r. But in effect you do agree that certain of these types
could benefit from treatment, and that the bill does to a degree pro-
vide for that.
152 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
S ACX.
SuBcoxM -MT ON N"ARCOcs
o a Co x"m ONl =ai JUDICIARY,
This program to reduce and prevent criwe and ease the fears crime
MsI4rought. to major coimwuties and neighborhoods ol the Stake is
based o accomplhing two tectal objectives:
1.. Removing the pushem of. uarotics from the streets, parks, and
Mhoolyard of our cities n4
suburbs to prevent. these evil carriers
from spread their co ago - .
2.. Provide to.$ years of intensive treatment rehabilitation,
A AUs
&f.OM or the addict W useful, drug-free life.
. tgn_
I wight say that tha ten is the heart 9 the Governor'a program
4! (714Jtag
~ (l~a 4 ivarcO Wil
Addiction spreads through a neighborhood like.a virulent infection.
Its wnortunatewictmn, prisoner's of a relentless craving, lure the weak
into tlhe habit in ordei to help obtain drugs for themselves. With this
direction com crnme; theft burglary, ,prostitution, assauk,
dldnurder.- .
A desperate addict wiW stel.att.ck and eve kill:to get money'f6r
drus or the drug itself.
,Thumany of our urban streets, parks, schoolyards, play unds,
and subways have' become unsafe at high . Even in hroad daylight,
they are often the hunting grounds for pushers of narcotics.,
Addiction threatens divndusl and ndan family life in every
segment of our society. ,
SNeither geographic location nor economic status offers reliable pro-
tection against the tragedy of addiction. It invades the split-level
home as well as the cold-water tenement. In the heart of every parent
is the fear tht this terrible tragedy, could come to one of 1 own
children
Feigshamefully on thshuman, misery is organized crime, ruth-
ks in its methpd, worldwide in its scope, and reaping a harvest from
addiction totaling billions of dollars to finance an iaternatiopal hier-
archy of crime, as this subcommittee well knows.
The New York City police reports highlight the relation between
narcotics and crime.. Between 1988 aud 1964, there was a 75-percent
increase in the number of children under 16 years of age tke into
custody for criminal offenses who were admitted narcotics users; a
95-percent increase in arrests for violation of the narcotics law by
young people from 16 to 20 years old; and a 49-percent increase, in
arrests for murders by addicts.
In addition? 80 percent of all women arrested for prottution were
narcotics addicts; 20 percent of.those arrested for felonies against
property were narcotics addicts; and almost half of all the persons
arrested for serious misdemeanors and offenses were admitted nari
cotics users.
Senator Dow. -'These are figures from the New York State crime
statistics I
Dr. Lou=A. These are figures from the New York City Police De-
partment. These are based upon the 1964 figures. The 1965 figures,
which I have with me are generally very similar. There have ben
increases in the arrests among young people. There has been..an in-
crease especially in the arrests of marihu-aa users and those who-use
other dangerous drugs.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 157
I wouldn't want to leave the impression that we feel that heroin
addiction is related to crimes against persm. I think everybody is
well aware that this is not so.
In point of fact, if you study the murders-and there were some 32
homicides last year reported by the New York City Police Depart
ment--the majority of these are actually related to altercations over
narcotics. There are relatively few cases in which the narcotics addict
goes out and commits a crime of violence. Indeed, I don't think per-
sonally that it is any greater than among others in his environment
who don't use narcotics.- .
- ,
Senator DoDo. I did not mean to interrupt you, but I was interested
in those figures.
II. The RespoMe: pCmpmehee and F iblo AllOut War
Dr. Louin. Society has failed to face the challenge of narcotics
addiction. For years dedicated men and women have devoted their
time, energy, andresources, through both public and private agencies
and groups, din efforts to deal with the problem. They have made
encouraging inroads. But such efforts are necessarily small in relation
to the size of the problem and experimental in nuue. For y
New York State hIs been laying the groundwork for an all-out attack
on narcotics addiction.
Step by step, year by year, the legislature has supported my request
for the expansion of programs to deal with narcotics addiction,
I might say in this regard that one thing that has been very im-
presmve i New York State, especially this year, is that the massive
bill that the Governor introduced was put through with amazing
bipartisan support. Indeed, it vu introcued in the assembly by the
Democratic leaderhip.•
A. Now York's program
The four essential elements of our new program are: stiffer sentences
for pushers; compulsory treatmentrehabilitation, and aftercare fov
addicts; centralization of operating re~pmibiity; and, fill mobilize&
tion of resources.:
1. SMiFER 8E ES~F UU~
We must remove the carriers of this 'disease, the pushers, from the
stree parks, and schoolyards of our communities. Law enforcement
activities must be accelerated to apprehend the pushers, particularly
those who are not addicts themselves and engage in this filthy com-
merce for profit alone. I
Once convicted, pushers will be given stiffer prison sentences, geared
to thesheinous c of their crime
The most crucial step in combating narcotics addiction is the effort
to get the "pusher of the pusher," to control the flow and availability
of narcotics. It is here that the Federal Government has its greatat
responibility. It is absolutely imperative that the Federal Buresa
of Narcotics substantially increase its personnel, its undercover agent
both her in the United States andaroa, We had drma=tCproof
of the positive effect, diminishing the supply of drugs has, when New
158 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 198
This new massive effort, in addition to over 1,000 State and New
York City beds presently available and the efforts of over 40 volun-
ta.. community, and religious agencies conducting programs for
Adicts, is concrete proof that New Yorkers are concerned and mean
to do somethingmore about this problem.
Why, then, does the Federal Government delay I There are few
areas of human concern where it is clearer that the Federal Govern-
ment has the prime responsibility.
The legislation which is before the subcommittee, S. 2152, is one of
a number of bills introduced to bring about the much-needed change
in the Federal laws. All these steps are encouraging, but similar bills
have been introduced in the past and none has been enacted into law.
Session after session Senator Javits, former Senator Keating, and
recently Senator Robert Kennedy have introduced bills.
It is my earnest hope that this subcommittee will be able to develop
the needed Federal legislation. S. 2152 in my view, is a start but
does not do the complete job that needs to be done. Last June, Senator
Javits and Senator Kennedy introduced a series of four bills, along
with a bipartisan group of cosponsors, to deal with the problem of
narcotics addiction.
I urge that S. 2152 be amended to include the provision of S. 2115
and S. 2116 regarding financial assistance to the States to assist them
in the construction of facilities for the treatment and rehabilitation of
drug addicts.
Since 1962 1 have called for a financing formula similar to that now
used in the urban renewal program: two-thirds of the funds pro-
vided by the Federal Government, and one-third provided by the
State and localities. Human renewal should command at least as
much support as urban renewal.
In addition, title IV of S. 2152, in my opinion, should be amended
to provide Federal funds to assist the States and community agencies
in staffing, operating, and maintaining facilities for the treatment,
rehabilitation, and aftercare of addicts. This would be a helpful wa
for the Federal Government to encourage such services as the bi
presently states.
Well, apparently that has already been done. Might I ask, are
the funds suggested in the range of the original Kennedy-Javits
proposal-that is, would they provide for a total of about $70 million
over a 3-year period?
Senator DDD. As I recollect, that-is about right.
Dr. Loru. Of course, I know the Governor would be delighted to
hear that, as we all are. I think this is highly constructive.
I might say from our own estimate of the costs that we hope that
this is indeed just a beginning, because the amount that will have to be
spent in this battle would be far in excess of the amount that would
come to New York State under those provisions. That would be about
$22 million, say, over a 3-year period from the Federal Government.
We would hope that this would be be augmented substantially. I
think the amount that would be needed would be probably three times
that, to effect the kind of war we would really like to start.
In conclusion, I would like to make clear that the State of New York
and New York, City are taking~thi leadership in initiating a major
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 163
war on crime and narcotics addiction, with every right under the cir-
cumstances to expect the Federal Government to shoulder its full share
of the cost and responsibility. The Federal Government should revise
its laws to include:
1. A compulsory civil commitment program that protects the rights
of the individual and makes available a full range of treatment, re-
habilitation, and aftercare services.
2. A full-scale Federal aid program for the construction of the
needed facilities by States and localities as well as Federal financial
participation in the operation and maintenance of such facilities.
3. A massive increase in the personnel of the Federal Bureau of
Narcotics to stop the flow of narcotics into this country.
Every delay 'meansmore crime, more suffering, more human misery.
We must act now to give hope to our young, and to every citizen, that
the future will see this malignant affliction removed from our society.
Senator Dow. I thank you very much for that statement. I quite
agree with some of the points you have made. Many of these things
should -bedone, and that is what this bill tries to do. The amendments
offered by Senators Javits and Kennedy would increase the amount
of money for the additional facilities needed.
There has been some dispute about the need for additional facilities.
Do you think there is a need for new institutional facilities to be
granted to New York State, for example?
Dr. Louax. I don't think there is any question about that.
My understanding of the argument against giving moneys for new
facilities is that the Mental Health Centers Construction Act and the
Public Health Service Act would both provide the necessary funds.
I think this clearly is wrong. In point of fact, in terms of Federal
contribution to research programs, et cetera, in narcotics for addi-
tional experimental r earch, according to studies that were made by
the New York State Council on Drug Addiction, there were five mental
health grants and three research grants of $360,000. I think that is
clearly inadequate.
The Mental Health Centers Construction Act would allow you to
construct facilities for narcotic addicts, but only as part of a compre-
hensive program. What we desperately need are moneys that are
directed specifically to narcotic addiction and to nothing else. ,
I think the funds that have been infused into New York State Under
the act are clearly inadequate. The Governor's program is for $75 mil-
lioni ust in the first year. This will be used primarily for construction.
We have in New York City-and these are approximate figures;
they are not quite accurate, but they are not far off. We have about
400 beds that are under the aegis of New York City itself, and an-
other 600 beds readily available to New York City under State aegis.
So we have now a thousand beds for narcotics addicts, and we nied
at least five times that just as a starter. That is just for institutional
care. That does not even consider what we need for the rehabilita-
tion centers.
The crux of the Governor's program is that emphasis be placed
not on inhospital care but rather on rehabilitation in specific centers
directed towad or commencing education, vocational retraining, et
Cetera. We have nothing likq this in New York City, and I don't
164 Two NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT o 1966
think there is any Federal act that would currently provide moneys
directly for that.
Senior Doo. Would you be good enough to give u&your views
regarding some of the restrictions on eligibility in the administra-
tio's bill
Dr. Lou'iA. In 2152?
Senator DODD. Yes, the one we have under consideration.
Dr. LoUum. Right.
Senator Dom. I refer to such matters as the exclusion of addicts
charged with housebreaking and burglary
Dr. LorumX. If I may, Senator Dodd, working on the premise that
this is a highly constructive bill, I would like to refer specifically to
n page 4,in the middle of the pae, there are restrictions, includ-
ing an individual who has been convicted of a felony on two or more
occasions and, right after that, an individual who has been civilly com-
mitted under this act or any one State proceeding because of narcotic
addiction on two or more occasions
Senator DowD. Yes.
Dr. LOuMA, I would urge that both of those be deleted. I would
delete the second one because we know so little about the most effective
way of treating addicts. Even if a man has failed two or more times
with civil commitment, that is no reason not to give him another
chance, on the grounds that the civil commitment program may itself
have grown and changed in this period.
In regard to his conviction of a felony, I should not think this
ought to preclude his being permitted to enter a rehabilitation pro-
gram. I think one would Uve to be cautious about that.
I notice that you have been quite careful in excluding violence
felonies. I must say that is certainly our feeling that that question
is entirely justified. The addict is not normally violent, and those
that are may be doing so for other reasons than their addiction.
oon page 10 is the point you just brought up, Senator Dodd,
about burglary and housebreaking.
Senator%]o.Yes.
Dr. Lom. I think that should be deleted, too. I think that if, in
the process of burglary or housebreaking, there is a crime against a
person, then I think that falls r.ader the "crimes of violence" cate-
gory. But if the person merely burglaries or housebreaks, this is the
trade of an addict, and I don't think he should be excluded if there
is. Finally,
no injuryonto a person during the burglary or housebreaking.
pae 12 at the bottom, there is another statement about
the felonies and the "previously ha' been committed on one or more
occasions." Again, ? would be for deleting those.
Senator DowD. We have had testimony on this subject from others
It is a problem I am concerned about.
What do you think about the advisability of leaving the election
of civil commitment up to the addict?
Dr. IoumA. Yes, this is a very touchy problem. I don't think I
can give you what is really a good answer. I can tell you what hap-
pened in New York State under Metcalf-Volker. I just looked up
wnoe of these figures on the way down.
THU NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 165
In a 9-month period recently in 1965, under Metcalf-Volker, there
were 6,623 eligible arrested addicts or users. Of those, 1,110 requested
civil commitment in lieu of trial this being 17 percent.
Our experience with Metcalf-Volker over a 4-year period was that
less than 40 percent of the addicts elected civil commitment. Now,
this is a bit different from the Federal level.
So, at the New York State level, less than 20 percent of the eligibles
elected it, and this was the reason that the law, wliich was really a good,
humanitarian law, had to be changed as the'Governor did.
At the Federal level it is somewhat different. The average sentence
for narcotics convictions on the Federal level is about 6 years now, so
that there would be much more impetus for one to elect civil commit-
ment in lieu of trial. - -
However, I think you have to make a clear distinction between those
who are being tried under provisions that would permit a nnimum
2-year sentence and those with a minimum 5-year sentence. For those
with a minimum 2-year sentence I think you are going to have sub.
stantial trouble. My suspicion would be that the majority of those
people will not elect civil commitment, on the grounds that if it is a first
offense, they can get suspension, probation, et cetera.
My inclination would be, for a proved addict, that it ought to be
after trial if he is being tried for an offense that would have a 2-year
sentence.
Senator DoDD. Would you include treatment of dangerous drug and
LSD users under the bill
Dr. Loumu. No, sir. I think it is entirely appropriate to keep them
separate.
In point of fact, we have no idea what the treatment should be for
LSD, for barbiturate or amphetamine users, let alone addicts, and I
would urge that we keep these entirely separate.
Senator DooD. I take it, then, you do not consider the LSD users in
the same category as the other drug users I
Dr. Lou . 3h, I think they are quite different.
What has happened to us today is that we are now in a real legal
quandary. Inadvertently, when the laws were passed regarding, say,
marihuana in 1937, this was put into the narcotics category. So now
we have cocaine, which is a stimulant rather than a narcotic, the
opiates, and of course heroin included, and marihuana, which is a
hallucinogen, lumped together.
I think at the Federal level there is a great deal of difficulty with
this, because we are now in the bizzare position of saying that some-
body who possesses marihuana can be sentenced for 2 years and, if it is
a second offense, for a 5-year commitment, but if a person possesses
LSD, in the same category of drug, LSD is at least a thousand times
more potent, but he can possess a gallon of LSD and there is no pen
alty. If he sells LSD, there is a 1-year penalty; it is a misdemeanor.
So we are now treating LSD, the most dangerous hallucinogen
known to man, very lightly at the Federal level, and marihuana, one
of the mildest ones, very harshly.
I think the Federal Government, just as New York State, is going
to have to face the problem that it must recodify its laws and put tie
hallucinogens together, and the tranquilizers and barbiturates to-
gether, and the narcotics together, in a completely separate category.
166 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
66-668-661-----2
170 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1986
. , •. ,.2
176 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1,966
Iii regard to this question, I feel there is some merit in the idea that
addiction is a disease. However, I also feel very strongly that while
crime and addiction are closely related problems, some distinction
must be made between the two, and that many addict crimes should
continue to be punishable in penal institutions, that not all are ame-
nable to treatment.
Based on my experience of 43 years in law enforcement, 15 of which
have been exclusively in the narcotics enforcement field, I believe that
the addict group in Chicago would continue to commit crimes of vio-
lence such as robbery, burglary, housebreaking, and other crimes
against the person with the knowledge that if they were arrested they
could spend their time in a Federal facility rather than a penal
institution. I f
These treatment facilities could better be utilized by young offenders
and persons who have not become hard-core addicts
The specific question has been asked as to whether or not a person
charged with or convicted of a crime such as burglary housebreaking,
or assault should be excluded from the provisions of this bill.
Our statistics show that more often than not, criminal behavior pre-
cedes involvement with narcotic drugs, aid it seems doubtful that the
type of individuals who commit serious crimes of this type would
profit from hospital treatment; and they should bo imprisoned for
their crimes the same as nonaddicted criminals.
8. The eighth topic for discussion regards the merit in including
all eligible addict offenders under special procedures, as opposed to
only those addicts who have violated the Federal narcotic laws, and
topic 9-1I am going to answer 8 and 9 to the--requeste an opinion
regarding the advisability of wider use of rotation as well as parle
services in the treatment of addicts at the Federal level
We are in favor of all of the procedures as outlined presently in the
administration's bill. We feel there are sufficient addicts who could
still qualify and benefit under restrictions that are outlined in Senate
bill 2152.
-We have no objection at all to including all eligible addict offenders
in these programs as opposed to those who have violated Federal nar-
otic laws only. 4
Actually, we have more addicts Who come to the attention of State
courts for various nonnarcotic crimes as compared with those who
were arrested for violating Federal narcotic laws.
Although I am not too familiar with probation or parole on the
Federal level I do feel that any probation or parole services concern-
ing addicts should be coupled with a Nalline-urinalysis testing pro-
gram in order to maintain closer supervision on the person while sub-
ject to probation or parole.
10. This topic for discussion is stated as follows:
Hearings regarding the abuse and distribution of the dangerous
drugs and the passage of the Drug Abuse Control Act of 1965 indicate
a growing problem in connection with the habitual use of 'these drugs
for nonmedical purpose& Based on your experiences, is it reasonable
to assume that by and large, many dangerous drug abusersg wouldineed
treatment similar to that reguired by narcotic addicts, and that both
kinds of drug abusers may require the same physical facilities such as
hospitals, clinics, and aftercaxefiacilities ,
180 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 19g 6
11. The following question was posed as topic 11 and these two ques-
tions will be answered at the same time. Should habitual users of other
dangerous drugs such as the various stimulants and depressants be
brought under the provisions of the bills before our subcommittee I
I am in complete agreement with the anxiety and concern expressed
by the experts at the recent drug abuse hearings regarding the growing
problem of nonmedical drug abuse.
I think we can assume based on our experience, that this type of
drug abuser would beneft from treatment similar to that required
by narcotic addicts, and that physical facilities such as are in opera-
tion at the present time, and proposed facilities, be made available to
these dangerous drug users.
Therefore, I certainly do feel that users of dangerous drugs such
as stimulants and depressants should be included in any program for
treatment and rehabilitation and aftercare.
12. The 12th and last topic for discussion is a request for comment
on additional provisions necessary in these bills to carry out their
expressed prpose to the maximum extent.
Although cannot offer any additional provisions to be added to
this bill, I would like to say that I am impressed with the provisions
that are included.
I have also been asked to comment specifically on the wisdom of
amending this legislation to include provisions for staff and facilities.
It is my opinion that we should proceed with the facilities and per-
sonnel that now exist for treatment, rather than immediately training
large numbers of new personnel and building new facilities.
The possibility of new facilities should be considered at such time
when we are able to better evaluate thisprogram as administered with
existing facilities and personnel. We o not feel that it is necessary
for the adminisration bill to provide for the construction of new med-
ical facilities at this time. Ifowever, we do feel that moneys could be
provided for the purposes of improving aftercare treatment. This
could be in terms of grants to organizations such as those certain pub-
lic and private agencies outlined-in Senate bill 2114.
In this statement, I have tried to answer the questions as outlined in
Senator Dodd's letter. I would like to thank you for the courtesy of
allowing me to testify before your committee. I would again like to
emphasize that the State of Illinois is extremely interested in the
addict treatment program and is willing to cooperate to the fullest
extent in any way with the Federal authorities.
Thank you.
Senator Dow. Well, Mr. Healy, thank you. That was very valuable
testimony, and it will be very helpful to us on the committee in consid-
ering this legislation.
I was particularly interested in your reference to the recent influx
of Mexican heroin into Illinois. I do not know whether you are aware
or not, but we on the subcommittee have been concerned about the
traffic from Mexico into the United States.
Mr. HrA.Lb We have increasingly been running across Mexican
heroin, which is brown heroin.
Senator Dow. Yes.
Well, with respect to marihuana, I think you have said you thought
we should strike at the source of Mexican marihuana.
Mr. lHBAL. Yes, that is right.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1.960 181
Senator Dow. I have introduced legislation which encompassed
this in the form of a joint resolution, calling upon the President of the
United States to establish a joint American-Mexican commission as
the first step in alleviating the problem of the flow of narcotics and
marihuana into the United States. What do you think of that idea?
Doyu think that would be helpful I
Mr. H Y. It would be helpful, Senator.
Senator DODD. I hope we can get something done on that.
Mr. HwAY. I know the Federal NaricsBureau has men stationed
in Mexico, working on this problem.
Senator DoD. Yes, I know they do. It has always seemed to me,
though, that we needed more. My thought wa4 that the idea of a
joint commission would help us Cgnsiderably, and I am glad you think
so, too.
Mr. *HuIY.Yes.
Senator DODD. Well, you have helped us a lot, and we will certainly
study your testimony and give it great consideration in considering
this bill. I thank you for coming.
Mr. HzwL. Thank you, Senator.
Thank you, gentlemen.
Senator DoDD. Our next witness is Mr. John Neurauter.
Mr. Neurauter, we are glad you could come here today.
For the record, let me say that Mr. John Neurauter is the director
of vice control of the Chicago Police Department, and he has had ex-
perience with the Chicago Police Department for 20 or more years, as
I understand it. Prior to becoming director, he was the deputy chief
of detectives and district commander.
He is accompanied this moving by Lt. Thomas Kernan of the Nar-
cotics Section of the Chicago Police Department.
I am glad you are here, and I know it was something of a hardship
for you to make the tripher But I am sure it will be helpful to us,
and we do thank you for coming.
STATEMENT OF JOHN . NEURAL DIRECTOR, VICE CONTROL
DIVISION, CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT; ACCOMPANIED BY
LT. THOMAS KERNAN, NARCOTICS SQUAD, CHICAGO POLICE
DEPARTEN
Mr. NmUATrte. We are happy to be here, Senator. Thank you.
Senator DODD. You go right ahead with your statement.
Mr. NzRAuTFR. Honorable Chairman, members of the committee,
ladies and gentlemen, I have a prepared statement based upon ques-
tions submitted to me by Senator Dodd. and at this time, would like
to submit it to you.
Five specific areas have bee covered and these areas are further
divided into subsections, each of which will be read before the perti-
nent information is presented.
Opiates:
Heroin ............................................. 4,565 MM 5,62
pium ............................................. 101 3 107
orphine ................................. 22 7 2 84
Paregoric......--------------------------------.. 64 a 82
Coeie----------------------3
............
.oen ............. .. ... .. ......| 6 ....... 1 12
2
- - -
Dlaud& -....................................
M-- - - - -
, 46 M44 3,257
Cocaine ...... .-................................... 17 3 10
Dangerous drugs:
Barbiturats ....................................... 106 304 17 617
Amh-
' $nbtO -- "------------- --------- 18 164 U 218
Demerol ........................................... 11 8 ...... ..9 10
Dol~hne..............
.............. 9 ............
D . ~ d....................-- .........
-------------- ----------------... ......
..............
...... 10-
Mielanm : in, ---------- a' so 44
H~a-Uside drw:
------------------------------------------------
yot.............................................................
184 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1968
1066 19 1o 4 1085
66-668--i6---
186 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
concern, you had 9 noles arrested for marihuane, and that jumped to
184 in 1985. That would seem to me to be a very substautW inreas.
You may not have .it before you. It is ou, pages 16 and 172of 'the
re rt,•.L.
-euteunant k AN. Yes. These figures are correct, and I can show
no reason why this occurred .
Senator Donw. No, I know. I do not expect that you could. But
it seems to me something to be concerned about. That is a sizable
jump. In other words, not only were there 134 males so opPofod to
9 males the year before, but in addition, there were 11 female& So
you had a total of 145 over 9 for the previous year. In the area of
dangerous drugs in 1964,167 males were a= ; and the next year, it
jumped to 442. ,
Lieutenant KZRNAX. Senator, I am going to attribute part of this
rise in the figures to a better recordkeeping system that was initiated
during 1964.
Senator DODD. Is that so I
Lieutenant KMNAN. I think these people are more closely tabulated
now than they were previously to this.
Senator Dodd. Yes, I understand that That would account for
some of it, anyway. This might also explain the figures in your report
having to do with arrests of persons 18 years and over. I noticed a
big jump in marihuana. There were 56 in 1964, and it jumped to 853
in 1965. I would also understand, of course, that that would be attrib-
utable to better statistics and better reporting. I
Mr. NzuRaurm. Senator, we did embark on another program in
the Chicago Police Department in 1964, known as the police community
workshop program. Generally, the district commander has called
upon the narcotics sections to explain to the local residents the various
types of drugs. As a result of this, our attention was called to more
of these violators.
Senator DoD. I understand that, and I know how it works out. It
does make a difference in the report.
It interested me that you sai you had practically no LSD problem in
Chiago. I recall one of our staff members talking with one of your
officials--I think it was in December. My recollection is that they
turned over the LSD cases, there were only three or four, to the Fe-
eral Food and Dru office in Chicago, because there was no law in
Illinois against . I .
Lieutenant KWRAN. Yes, I recall that this was mentioned to me,
something like three or four cases were referred to the Federal Food
and Drug Administration.
Senator DoDD. That would also explain the lack of any sizable num-
ber of cases or the reason why the department would not be involved
in the use of the drug.
Well, you have been very helpful to us. There was one other ques-
tion I would like to ask you, because I am greatly interested in it. We
hear a lot about the use of marihuana among college students. I think
you said that it was a small problem in Chicago. 'Have you conducted
a lot of investigations in this area?
Lieutenant KiRIAX We have made numerous investigations in-
volving high schools and colleges with regard to marihuana, and these
fruits of these investigations, I'm sorry to say, produced a very meager
number of arrests.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILATION ACT OF 1966 191
Senator DODD. Very meagerI
Lieutenant KERNAN. Yes.
Senator DoDD I don't think you should be sorry about that.
Lieutenant KERNAN. Well, if there is a problem there, which cer-
tain news media indicate, we would like to find more of it.
Senator DODD. I understand that. But it is interesting, because we
hear that generally across the country, it is increasing. I just won-
dered why it would not be increasing in that area when it appears
to be on the increase generally across the country.
Lieutenant KERNAN. Well, I don't know if these figures would be
exactly correct, but the colleges in the city of Chicago, most of the
students are living at home, and they would be under some parental
control.
Senator DODD. I am not questioning the facts, you understand.
Lieutenant KEJNAN. No, I understand, Senator. I think if the child
is under some more close supervision, he doesn't tend to get involved
in these various illicit acts.
Senator DoDD. I think that is all I have to ask you about.
Well, gentlemen, I will say to you what I have said to the other
witnesses before. I think you have been very helpful, both of you,
and Superintendent Healy and Dr. Louria. You have all helped us
a great deal.
Tomorrow we will resume these hearings at 10 a.m. We will have
Captain Trembly of the Narcotics Division of the Los Angeles Police
Department, one of our own staff investigators, and I)r. Timothy
Leary, the LSD experimenter, here tomorrow on the same subject.
The committee will now recess.
(fhereupon, at 12:35 p.m., a recess was taken until 10 a.m. the
following day, Friday, May 13, 1966.)
1 J. .
; 4 1
4
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1965
ExHmIT No. 19
i., :
.4 -~
4 '
4 A,
IW1
I
V
K4,,1
h
4iv.
Sugar Cubes containing LSD (Lysergic Acid Diethylamlde). Ninety seven (97)
sugar cubes containing LSD were taken from a hitch-hiker in the Malibu
Beach area. Subject, who was carrying a bed roll, stated he had purchased the
sugar cubes In San Francisco and was living on them as an experiment.
198 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
ExHIBIT No. 22
1 f I
'a
SI',1\ \ . 11" I, !i ,, I t' i, 0, r I
Ii i 4*
7 ,2. o
V,
;~' ~
EXHIBIT No. 23
Liquid LSD obtained from marijuana user who refused to reveal source of sup-
ply. Suspect stated he obtained the LSD for $8.00 per vial and sold it for
$10.00 per viaL
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 199
EXHMT No. 24
Forty red capsules containing LSD; street value $400. Federal Food and Drug
Inspectors made 4 purchases totaling 100 vials or 300 doses of LSD from the
suspect. These purchases were made by Federal officers In Las Vegas, New
York and Los Angeles. At the time of the arrest by Sheriff's Narcotic Depu-
ties and Federal Food and Drug Inspectors, the 40 capsules were recovered
from the suspect's vehicle.
200 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
EXHuT No. 25
EXHIMT No. 28
August 19M, 850W block, Stuset Boulevard, West Hollywood.
EXHIr No. 30
T
1
A
I.,
I I I, I
206 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
ExHiUI? No. 82
Captain Tucimi. The purchases were made with relative ease and
without the benefit of a special introduction into the group. Three of
the cases have since been adjudicated. One peddler received a 30-day
suspended sentence; a second received a straight 30 days in jail retro-
active to include the 29 days spent in jail awaiting trial; the third, a
juvenile, was declared a ward of the court and placed in a mental in-
stitution. The remaining cases are pending.
The psychiatric damage resulting from_ the use of LSD is slowly
becomingavailable. Fifteen percent of the patients committed this
year to t e UCLA Psychiatric Clinic are victims of bad trips with
LSD requiring necessary psychiatric care. Some of the students have
permanent mental disabilities as a result of the ingestion of this drug.
The last criterion available for a calculated estimate is the number
of instances the drug has come to our attention during routine police
contacts. In the past 6 months 111 cases were reported where LSD
was one of the causation factors in some type of delinquent behavior.
I would like to present for your perusal at this time the case studies
of these deviates as typical examples of how a police agency becomes
involved with a drug that apparently is still legal at this time.
I would just take the very first case as an illustrative example.
This is where a Fairfax High student-
Senator DODD. Is that at igh school I
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 207
Captain TaEMBLY. Yes, he was in the 11th Arade, 16 years of age
anid he turned himself in to the Mount Sinai hospital in Hollywood
as going out of his mind. The next day he was interiewed by juve-
nile investigators and I would like to read their statement:
The subject stated that on January 1 he purchased one clear capsule which
contained a white powder for $4.50. This capsule was LSD, and stated that it
contained 500 milligrams. He stated the effects of the drug was felt in approxi-
mately one-half hour after It was taken. He stated that the feeling was very
good and that everything appeared beautiful when he began hallucinating. He
stated that everything appeared in rainbow colors. Whenever he would move
his hands, they would leave rainbow trails. He stated that he was making
figure eights and all types of designs with his hands. The music coming from
the stereo was also in color. He stated that he could actually see music in
various colors coming from the stereo. This continued for several hours.
Approximately three hours later, his hallucinations were no longer beautiful,
and they had become very frightening. He stated he would look into a mirror
and ol, re his face to take different forms. His eyes appeared the size of
dollars. Half his face was bearcled and the other half would not be. Subject
stated that he thought he was golig insane and was very frightened. He asked
a friend of his to take him to Mount S!aai Hospital on Beverly Boulevard.
Subject stated that the effect stayed with him for several days, and while
being interviewed by investigating officers was still experiencing some effects
of the drug, and that was two days later.
This young lad has since been committed to the Los Angeles Hospi-
tal psyclatic ward, where ie is being treated presently.
I would like to present the committee with the case history.
Senator DODe. Yes; that will be made part of the record.
Captain Tux u. Of these 111 cases I referred to, 21 were juve-
niles, or under 18. And the vast majority involved persons under
the age of 21. In 50 cases, LSD was recovered or sold in conjunction
with marihuana, indicating the close relationship between the two
drugs. Twenty-five cases were documented where a user was under
the influence of the drug to the extent that it was necessary to in-
carcerate him for his own protection or that of society.
Attached to this report are briefs of the more illustrative case his-
tories coming to our attention and indicating the seriousness and scope
of the problem.
I would like to cover a few of these cases now.
On October 8,1965, a radio car responded to a call at 6047% Bartin
in the Hollywood area. They observed two male Caucasians on the
front lawn at this location eating gTass off the lawn and bark off the
trees. Both of these persons admitted to taking LSD capsules some
time prior to the officers' arrival. A subsequent search of the house
revealed 772 capsules of LSD, and a bag of loose LSD powder, along
with 5 cans of marihuana in clear plastic bas. Both of the persons
arrested at this time were in a stupor and insensitive to their sur-
roundings.
The officers returned a few hours later and arrested the legal occu-
pants of the apartment. Three male Caucasians, ages 20, 2T, 27, and
one female, age 26, were arrested. One of the male Caucasians stated
he was a salesman employed at Marsh International. The other two
males, and the female, were not employed and showed no occupation.
The female and one of the males stated they were students at Los An-
geles City College.- A third male claimed to be a Princeton graduate.
On October 2, 1965, a young Caucasian, 22, was observed standing
on one of the pagodas on the waterfront of Venice making obscene
208 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
gestures. When he observed the officers alp roach on foot, he ran into
the water thxpped to his knees and started praying. While praying,
he was yelling, 'Ilove you, I love you." After 10 minutes, the otihcers
were forced to go into the water after him and remove him to a special
cell for his safeLy.
On Novemlr 2, 1965, a male Caucasian, 20 years of age, was arrested
in front of the Greyhound depot under the influence of drugs. While
being interviewed at that location, the suspect kept asking the officers,
"Can't you see the bullets, dont you see the people shooting at us?
1Why do they want to kill me? I love everyone.
On February 8, 1966, a young female Caucasian, age 10, was appre-
biended under a sex delinquency charge. She admitted getting high on
acid and phlnned to put LSD in her mother's coffee the following
night so that she and her mother would better understand each other.
On February 28,1960, a young Caucasian, age 20, who gave his occu-
pation as a college student, was arrested aboard Western Airlines flight
220. The airliner returned to Los Angeles after the student, obviously
under the influence of LSD, attempted to enter the locked cabin of the
captain. When the airline stewardess attempted to seat the young
student, he viciously assaulted her. Upon being removed from the
airplane, the student struck the arresting officer and resisted to such
extent that physical force was necessary to subdue him. The following
M.T., by Dr. Mueller, Santa Monica Receiving Hospital, reads:
Patient became psychotlc on plane with antisocial behavior attacking steward-
ess and officer. Ile Is halluclaatlng and appears under the Influence of LSD.
Behavior favorable with other persons observed under the influence of similar
drugs. Delusions of end of the world.
On March 3, 1966, information was received from a very distraught
father-and I can assure you this father was very distraught because
the phone call was made to me--that his son had marilitana and LSD
capsules in his Possession. The father provided the address of the
location where his son had received the drug. The location was 11844
I)arlington, in West Los Aneles. The information led to the arrest
of 7 persons for possession of marinhuana and confiscation of approxi-
mately 245 LSD capsules, 7 ounces of marihuana, and a quanitjty of
dangerous drugs.
Six male Caucasians and one female Caucasian were arrested. The
males' ages were 15, 15, 17, 17, 18, 19; the female was 19. The male
juveniles were all high school students. Three attended University
High and one attended Palisades High. One of the male adults stated
he was an unemployed actor, while the other stated he was an unem-
ployed ski shop attendant. The female stated she was an unemployed
dress designer. The unemployed actor had $1,500 in his possession at
the time of his arrest. (The document referred to was marked "Ex-
hibit No. 83," and is as follows:)
EXHIDrT No. 88
NoMworTUX CASE oxi L.S.D.
On September 23, 196, a radio car received a "woman screaming" call at
13576 Rye St., Sherman Oaks. When the officers arrived, they obe rved a
male Mexican, 28 years old, and a female Caucasian, 21 years old, completely
nude laying on the floor in the hallway of the apartment house at that address.
Both were screaming and under the Influemce of L.S.D. at the time. The male was
on top of the female and hollering words like "GOD," "LIFE" and then spelling
T1HE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1066 209
them out. Both were yelling for help. The officers arrested the pair and a
subsequent search of their nearby apartment revealed a quantity of loose
marijuana, ten marijuana cigarettes and numerous marijuana roaches along
with 18 capsules of L.S.D. Both admitted taking 200 milligrams of L.S.D.
about five hours prior to being arrested. The male Mexican was a self-employed
importer. The female Caucasian was living with him as common-law wife and
was not employed.
On October 8, 1905, a radio car responded to a call at 047% Barton In the
Hollywood area. They observed two male Caucasians on the front lawn at
this location eating grass off the lawn and bark off the trees. Both of these
persons admitted taking L.S.D. capsules sometime prior to the ofilcera' arrival.
A subsequent search of the house revealed 772 capsules of L.S.D., and a bag
of loose L.S.D. powder, along with five cans of marijuana In clear plastic bags.
Both of the persons arrested at this time were very stuporous and insensitive to
their surroundings. The officers returned a few hours later and arrested the
legal occupants or the apartment. Three male Caucasians, ages 20, 27, 27, and
one female, age 20, were arrested. One of the male Caucasians stated he was
a salesman employed at Marsh International. The other two males, and the
female were not employed and showed no occupation. The female and one of
the males stated they were students at Los Angeles City College. The third
male claimed to be a Princeton graduate.
On October 10, 1985, officers from the Los Angeles Police Department Narcotic
Division arrested seven persons for possession of marijuana and L.S.D. at 2977
La Castana Dr. In the Hollywood Hills. At the time of the arrest, several of
the arrestees were under the influence of marijuana and L.S.D. Thirty-six
capsules of L.S.D. and several marijuana cigarettes were found in a search of
the premises along with $050 in small bills. One of the persons arrested Is
believed to be a dealer In both marijuana and L.S.D. in the Hollywood area.
Several of the males at the scene had long unkempt hair and stated they be-
longed to various peace movement organizations. There were 6 male Cau-
casians, ages 19, 20, 20, 21, 24, 25, and one female Caucasian, 20 The female
was a hostess at a beatnik-type bar called The Trip. One of the male Uau-
casians stated he was an entertainer working for Mirror Production. None
of the other males were employed. Two stated they were students.
On October 25, 1965, a young Caucasian, 22, was observed standing on one of
the pagodas on the water front of Venice making obscene gestures. When he
observed the officers approach on foot, he ran into the water, dropped into his
knees and started praying. While praying, he was yelling, "I love you. I love
you." After 10 minutes, the officers were forced to go Into the water after him
and remove him to a special cell for his safety.
On November 2, 1965, a male Caucasian, 2) years of age, was arrested in front
of the Greyhound Depot under the influence of drugs. While being interviewed
at that location, the suspect kept a 164-- the officers, "Can't you see the bullets,
don't you see the people shooting Why do they want to kell me? I love
everyone."
On December 7, 1965, a young male Caucasian, 1T years old, was arrested in
the Harbor area un&'-r the influence of LS.D. The subject had a rubber band
around his right arm which he claimed he could not get og and which was getting
tighter and tighter and was going to in time cut his arm off.
On December 22, 1965, a female Caucasian, age 10, In the Hollywood area
sold 2 os. of marijuana to an undercover, police officer. At the time of the sale,
she gave the officer one capsule of L.S.D. as a Christmas present. The same
female, psychologically addicted to L..D., has since been committed to a mental
Institution.
On January 1, 1968, a 16-year-old male Caucasian student of Fairfax High
School turned himself in to Mount Sinai Hospital in West Los Angeles as going
out of his mind. The young 16-year-old admitted ingesting one capsule of LS.D.
which he purchased earlier in the evening for $4.50 In Hollywood.
On February 8, 1966, a young female Caucasian, age 16, was apprehended under
a sex delinquency charge. She admitted getting high on acid and planned to
put L.S.D. In her mother's coffee the following night so that she and her mother
would better understand each other.
Officers from the Los Angeles Police Department Narcotic Squad received
Information that a sale of LS.D. was to take place at a hamburger stand at
Sunset Blvd. and lillldale in the County. The officers went to this location
on February 14, 1966, and they arrested two male Caucasians, one 22 years old,
the other 84 years old, for 79 Stat. 228 U.S. Code See. 511.C. The officers con-
210 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
fiscated 44 capsules, purple in color, whichh the arrestees stated were L.S.D.
One of the arrestees was an unemployed artist, the other was an accountant
employed at Home Beauty, Inc. Neither was under the influence of L.S.D. at
the time of their arrest.
On February 28. 1966, a young male Caucasian. age 20, who gave his occupa-
tion as a college student, was arrested aboard Western Air Lines, Flight 220.
The airliner returned to Los Angeles after the student, obviously was wider the
influence of L.S.D., attempted to enter the locked cabin of the captain, When the
airline stewardess attempted to 4eat the young student, he viciously assaulted
her. Upon being removed from the airplane, the student struck the arresting
officer and resisted to such extent that physical force was necessary to subdue
him. The following M.T. by Dr. Mueller, Santa Monica Receiving Hospital,
reads: Patient became psychotic on plane with antisocial behavior attacking
stewardess and officer. He is hallucinating and appears under the Influence of
L.8.D. Behavior favorable with other persons observed under the influence of
similar drugs. Delusions of end of the world.
On March 3, 1966, information was received from a very disturbed father
that his son had marijuana and L.S.D. capsules in his possession. The father
provided the address of the location where his son had received the drug. The
location was 11844 Darlington in West Los Angeles. The Information led to the
arrest of seven persons for possession of marijuana and confiscation of approxi-
mately 245 L.S.D. capsules, 7 ounces of marijuana and a quantity of dangerous
drugs Six male Caucasians and one female Caucasian were arrested. The
males' ages were 15, 15, 17, 1T, 18, 19, the female was 19. The male juveniles
were all high school students. Three attended University High and one attended
Palisades High. One of the male adults stated he was an unemployed actor
while the other stated he was an unemployed ski shop attendant. The female
stated she was an unemployed dress designer. The unemployed actor had $1p50
in his possession at the Pme of his arrest
They wer filed on and are presently waiting trial for posesmion
and sale of marihuna....
I would like to leave this committee with an imnpresioi that I
have formed through many years of experience in the field. Before
any narcotic problem can exist, there must by necessity be two ingredi-
ents--the supply and the'demand,
The recently psed Federal bil HR. 2 governing the disibution
of dangerous drugs and hallucinatmng agents will not in itself stop the
flow of drugs to our youths. I believe that it will restrict or curtail
'the distribution of drugs originating from legal sources. ' Iowever,
as long as there is a, huV profitmak. npxket m e somewhere,
willbe willing to take the attending risk.
I introduced that bill, and I quite agree with you., You have no
idea what a struggle I had tb get it through the Congress. It jA: a
rather mild piece of legjSlation., ,X gives you some idis of.what we
are up against.
There is a pretty powerful element in this country and they have got
a lot of influence where they sh uld not have it* It took me about 3
years to get that bill through.
Go right ahead. .,,
Captain TEMjYmr. Bathtub chemists are presently appearing in
Uirger quantities. in, our communitiess, Even- youngsters c4rry drug
formulas in their wallets,
We arrested a boy this last week. In his wallet-the youngster
was 18 years of age-he had the chemical formula for LSD. *He was
arrested for possession of Mar hu4n "
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT 0F 196 6 211
Senator DODD. We will make that part of the record.
(The document referred to was marked "ExhibitNo. 34," and is
as follows:) ExNarT No. 84
LI
bHfrt)FXN ig
9.. , --
toNP
. o
10
.1 I f If1 I. . .
. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 'L
t'.
Exuma No.3s
TAWAv, BASTOKs, HAMISHRM, ENGLAN,0
March *4,1965.
MAWLOLM GOZZN,
0/o Jeke -DavijosOptkcl Oo.,
San Ratae, 0aTf.
Dra" Sm: Thank you for your letter of the 16th.
We would confirm that we are sending under separate cover 100 mgm and trust
that the material reaches you safely.
We would strongly advise the booking of your next order which will be available
for despatch within the next five weeks. We would prefer cash with order to
avoid any complications.
We look forward to hearing further from you.
Very truly yours, M. O'Dwyx.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 213
IExm No. 87
ANxiz: Thought it about time that I wrote to you.
Things down here on the financial end aren't going to well. Have had trouble
keeping myself alive for the present time. I'm going to find out about my unem-
iloyment Tuesday (tomorrow). If and when it comes thru will send some money
ie find you and start off our little business. Hope you aren't disappointed.
I've made a few contacts and things look favorable.
I'm Just making thia letter brief, because I'm not sure that you will receive it.
The "Heat" down here seems to have lifted for the time being and that's good.
About the money I had coming. My boss deducted $0.00 out of it that I
owed to some people. So I couldn't manage any to send to you, however, if
we are going to do any kind of business we should have stock on hand after the
money Is raised for the first shipment.
My unemployment is to be $55.00 a week for up to a year. So I'll have money
coming in to start and continue our partnership.
If you do receive this letter make it a point to let me know how to contact the
"Roaming Lady from the North." Say the Red Dog Saloon In Virginia City
as a home base.
When my money starts coming, I will be coming up there to find your where-
abouts.
This is just to let you know that I wasn't jiving to you and I am gathering
equipment for the breakdown of the acid.
Good luck to you and will see you soon I hope.
Your Partner,
Lox.
P.S.-Contact me thru General Delivery Santa Barbara.
Exnmrw No. 88
AuTLk 6, VALLATA Pl GUADALAJARA, JAL., Mtxxoo0
66-668-66--I---1
218 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196
1_XHIJUT No. 40
Photograph of suspect in previous exhibit showing rear of leather jacket and who
Is described as having taken the "Acid Tst" at an LSD party in the Fi-estone
area of Los Angeles, Calif.
As the interest grew among the nonconformists, the news media gave
the corresponding attention to the drug. An example of the attrac-
tiveness of LSD magnified the problem a thousandfold.
A typical example is this newspaper article appearing in the Los
Angeles Times of January 9, 1966, and I quote from the second
paragraph:
It is known as an hallucinogen--even the tiniest dose taken in pill, injection
or liquid form can send a person Into instant ecstasy. For many of those who
take it, all things become glorious. The pink on a flower petal turns to fire * * 0
a clock's chimes vibrate in exotic, utterly beautiful depths * fantastic
images float before the eyes--sexual stimuli are heightened ** * inhibitions
vanish * * * long-forgotten events are dredged up and relived.
The newspaper even goes on to later quote:
Cary Grant admits he ha. taken LSD. He has been quoted as saying, "I was
a self-centered boor. I only thought I was happy. Because I never understood
myself how could I have hoped to understand anyone else? That's why I say
now that I can truly give a woman love for the first time."
Senator Dowe. I think in fairness to Cary Grant, we do not know
that he ever said any such thing.
Captain Tuzox-r. I did not say he said it, sir. I said this newspaper
article which I am presenting to the committee is quoted as saying
that
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1968 219
Senator Dow. I know, but I want the record to show that we are not
accepting the statement.
Captain Tummiy. I Certainly did not intend that. The intention
was that the news media, by reporting this drug, has reported the
attractiveness of tle drug, and as such has become attractive to our
teenagers and our youth of today.
Senator Dow. I get your point very clearly and it is all right,
but I just want to be careful and accurate so that it does not appear
here that we accept it as a statement from anybody.
Captain Tlti. Sir, it is my opinion that articles such as these
encourage the youth of today to experiment with this so-called new
instant ecstasy. All of society, including the news media and those
who knowingly or unknowingly extol the virtues of drugs, must
shoulder the responsibility for the creation of the problem. Society
itself has createdan atmosphere conducive to the use of drug
(The article referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 41," and is
as follows:)
ExHIriT No. 41
[From This Week. Los Angeles Times, Jan. 9, 19681
THz NIGIITMm DRuo--FIVE Y&& s Ao, DocT*ros HELD HGH Hors ioa LSD
BUT Now THEY'RE BEGINNING TO WONDxI-AND WouRY
(By Dr. Cyril Solomon, This Week's Medical Consultant, and Lester David)
When LSD-25---d-Lyaergo acid diethViamido-flrst came to light some 20 years
ago is a Swiss laboratory, it was hailed as a fun-lovin' drug that would light up
the world. And that it has done-the fireworks are still flying.
It is known as an "hallucinogen" (similar to meomake and psilocvbn)--even
the tiniest dose taken In pill, injection or liquid form can send a person into
istant ecstasy. For many of those who take It, all things become glorious.
The pink on a flower petal turn to fre... a clock's chimtm vibrate in exoti-,
utterly beautlul depth*... fatautlo images float before the o ... casual
atimuli are heightened . . . InAh tion#s i . . .lme-forpotte events are
dredged up and relived.
Some doctors and scientists explain It as "total awarenem"; normally we use
only a small portion of our brain's billions of nerve cells, they say, and thus we
see and feel far lea than we can. LSD seems to put every cell on Its toe, ready
to blast off at the slightest stimulation. The profound emotional reactions pro-
duced, say these proponents of LSD, make the drug a potential mental cure-all
for whatever ils us in the fields of alcoholism, sex, drug addiction and psychiatry.
Fantastic results have been reported after a single dose.
But other expert. esU LSD a mena e, a deadly ohomios brainwaeh that oan
in the wrong hands, wreck a mind and shatter a lfe. The United States govern-
menWkeepit der tight oontrol won't release owe gram of it to even a qua ted
phgysloa or ealentiet eooept for mw in the most rigifl stissred reoerch
program. But a competent organic ohemit, oith a littl study, can produce
LSD in AUi own lab-od a epirtted black market Ae prwm up.
West Ooast beatnik., sinning for science, dub It The Experience. Big Ten col-
lege kids take it for kicks Hollywood stars rush to try it as a quick substitute
for months on the psychiatrist's couch.
Carij Grant admits he hA" take. LSD. He As been quoted a saying, "I
was a self-centered boor. I only thought I was happy. Because I never under-
stood myself, how ooud f have hoped to understand anyone eloef That'8 why
L say now that I can trwly give a woman love for the firet time."
Two Harvard profemwor--Drs, Timothy Leary and Richard Alpert-were
fired recently from the faculty for giving it to students and friends, and have
been bouncing ever since from New England to Mexico to the Caribbean to New
York State, seeking a place that will allow them to continue experimenting with
220 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Meanwhile, underneath all the furor, scientists and doctors all over the world
quietly pursue the real target-the truth. Can LSD do all-or even part-of
what it promises? Can it be taken with safety, with or without expert super-
vision? There were high hopes, as recently as five years ago, even among these
cautious guardians of the public welfare. But today the tide luts turned. Re-
search has established this bitter and alarming fact:
LSD seems to be a monumental bust.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has warned: "This drug is considered
one of the most powerful chemical agents known. It Is capable of tausing serious
mental changes with extremely small doses. It nmy cause nervous breakdowns
and suicidal states."
One nationally known woman psychiatrist who has conducted experiments
with LSD upon human patients made this fiat statement to T is W"x'K: "There
is nothing, not one thing, LSD can do that other former of treatment we already
posses# cannot do as well or better."
Declares Dr. Roy R. Grinker, Sr., eminent Chicago psychiatrist who is chief
editor of the prestigious journal, "Archives of General Psychiatry": "Some
years ago, a number of doctors thought insulin shock was going to cure mental
illness but the method is hardy used any more. Then there was lobotomy (cer-
tain nerve connections in the brain are cut by surgery to bring about change in a
patient's mental condition). That didn't work either and few employ It. Now
we have LSD.
"But LSD hasn't performed any miracles and I've seen nothing so far to In-
dicate it will."
Recently the editor of the famous "British Medical Journal" was asked Just
how good the drug is in treating emotional ailments. The editor replied that the
results are about the same as "standard psychotherapy"-no better and no worse.
Another disenchanted investigator is Dr. Robert C. Murphy, Jr., a psychiatrist
of Waverly, Pa. Reporting to a conference on the use of LSD in psychiatry,
held in Amityville, L.I., recently, he admitted that, a few years earlier, he had
stood "in awe of what seemed to me a bewildering and almost limitless thera-
peutic future" for the drug. The substance, he admitted, seemed to him "utterly
magic." Now, however, after trying it on patients, he reported a "decay of
enthusiasm." He added: "The most it seems to do ij to help patients decide
whether or not they are prepared to undergo the upheaval offered by psycho-
therapy itself."
But there is no decay of enthusiasm among the public. The most truly dan-
gerous aspect of the LSD story is that the drug is rapidly becoming a public
health menace. New York City's famed Bellevue Hospital reports a recent up-
surge in LSD cases, many in a state of "panic reaction" and seeking relief from
their drug-induced states of terror. f
Jaded persons, hungry for kicks, clamor to try it. LSD parties are now the
rage in a number of communities. Bootleggers sell sugar cubes impregnated
with small quantities of the chemical and dyed with food coloring to Identify
them. The cubes, which sell for about $5, are either dissolved in the mouth
or taken with tea or coffee. Effects begin in about 40 minutes and usually last
10 to 12 hours. In some cases, the parties end up ax orgies since, with certain
individuals, the chemical acts as a strong erotic stimulant.
Government and private health authorities are genuinely alarmed. LSD
overuse by the wrong persons can lead to severe mental illness, even death. In
a Long Island hospital right now is a young couple who had gone on a number
of LSD binges with a hip set in New York City. Both are now seriously ill.
The husband had begun to consider himself a Messiah and his wife, scarcely
out of her teens, was seeing haloes around his head.
UNPasDICTAL--ID DA2IGUOU5
LSD to Jangeroue even under medical aupervisim. In the treatment of emo-
tional problems, according to LSD therapists, the drug acts as a kind of psy-
chiatric short cut, enabling patients to recall, swiftly and vividly, long-buried
memories as far back as early childhood. Face to face with these old fears, they
can then grapple with them, understand them, and ease the tensions that are
causing illnesses. That's the theory. But...
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 221
A patient at Metropolitan State Hospital in Norwalk, Cal., a victim of phobias
and anxiety, was given LSD treatment. After one session, he sank into a de-
pression that lasted two days. After the second, he "saw" himself at the age
of four and envisioned a horrible scene-he was smothering his baby brother
to death to stop his crying! Whether the scene dredged up by the drug was real
or fantasy is Irrelevant. What mattered was the result-it plunged him into
a severe mental Illness from which it took six months to recover.
A medical Journal records the pathetic story of a sensive young man who,
under treatment for an emotional condition, vividly recalled his early childhood
when his father was away in the Navy. His pretty but immature young mother
did not pine for her husband--she gave her love to an assortment ot suitors who
came knocking. The revelation that his mother had been promiscuous depressed
the young man so deeply he tried to kill himself. Luckily he failed but it took
intensive psychotherapy-without LSD-to bring him back to a level emotional
keeL
A 4"ear-old women w" not so fortunate. She, too, tons plunged into a
suicidal depression by LSD. Fek days after the treatment she had a blazing
argumentwith her husband, took poison and died.
These and others are not instances of persons who took the drug by themselves
without proper supervision but documented cases of patients given LSD by re-
sponsible physicians.
Three years ago, in a special editorial in the "Archives of General Psychiatry,"
Dr. Grinker warned that "latent psychotics are disintegrating under the influence
of even single doses." He added a warning to the psychiatric profession: "...
greater morbidity, and even mortality, is in store for patients unless controls
are developed."
"PERMANICNT EARM"
Later he wrote in an editorial published in the "Journal of the American Medi-
cal Association" that "from experimental subjects there are increasing numbers of
reports indicating that temporary or even permanent harm may be induced"
as a result of LSD despite precautions taken by doctors.
Some psychiatrist who give LSD also take it themselves and may even be
"hooked" on it. A number of medical men have stated they undergo the LSD
experience often and critics are frankly worried about the practice. In an un-
usually frank comment, two psychiatrists recently took some of their colleagues
to task for their personal preoccupation with the drug. Writing in the journal,
"Comprehensive Psychiatry," Drs. Jerome Levine, attached to the Psychopharm-
acology Service Center of the National Institute of Mental Health, and Arnold M.
Ludwig, a staff psychiatrist at Mendota State Hospital, Madison, Wis., stated:
"Although it seems perfectly reasonable for an investigator to acquaint him-
self with the LSD experience before initiating a study, when the investigator
persists in taking the drug on innumerable occasions, we are forced to consider
the possibility of psychic addiction, or habituation to the drug. Moreover, when
a 'drugged' therapist attempts to treat a 'drugged' patient, it is likely that the
therapist's ability to critically evaluate the therapeutic situation will be
impaired."
In rebuttal, the LSD champions insist that the drug does work with remark-
able effectiveness
In 11 separate studies by Canadian investigators, 311 alcoholics were treated
using LSD. After follow-up periods ranging to three years, 47 per cent were
reported much improved and another 14 per cent improved. Only 14 per cent
of other alcoholics treated without LSD were considered much improved and
nine per cent improved.
In New Westminster, British Columbia, 121 persons were treated by Dr. 3. Ross
MacLean and a staff for various psychiatric problems, including homosexuality,
acute anxiety and mental depression. Results: 46 per cent were rated much
improved and another 37 per cent improved.
In London's Marlborough Day H'spltal, 43 patients were treated with LSD by
Dr. T. Ling for wide-ranging psychiatric disorders. After three years, he reports
that 84 or nearly 80 per cent of these "are completely well and socially well
adjusted."
222 THE NARCOTIC REHABIITATION ACT OF 1966
Critic, however, point out that these etude are wither "reudomtaed" nor
"double-bl nd"--hesoe Lkk rellabi~y. In raomised teste, subjeoft are ohoeens
as they com listed o1 being apeoiUly selected. In a double-blnd Invesigation,
*either p.*deW8 nor door#a know what drug a 6eng
" oaLmustered and to whom,
Some PatiLen* reookv plaobo#, inert meddoatios, or other drug. The e5ootive-
se8 ofl tho medi4tos is then tmp.orUy judgeL
The LSD story is not ended. It has Its champions who are conducting research
here and in foreign countries. Perhaps one day It may turn out to be an effective
psychiatric weapon against man's mental and emotional Ills but as of now the
word from the U.S. government health authorities In:
0"s~st protved
Recently, the Long Beach State College newspaper took a poll of
their students on the campus which revealed that the vast majority of
the students believed that it should be sociably and legally acceptable
for a person to take drugs, if he so desired. Two high school teachers
at Garfield High School in Los Angeles were arrested Tuesday of this
week for selling heroin. Although their illegal behavior was in no
way connected with their school activities, one cannot help but wonder
what type of responsibility these teachers taught our youth.
It is my firm belief that the latent field of demand for drugs must
be thoroughly explored and programs developed and that any hope
to control the drug problem in our society today must be directed at
the reason for drug usage.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear.
(Documents attached to Captain Tiembly 's statement were marked
"Exhibits Nos. 42 through 46" and are as folows:)
Zxmar No.42
Juvenile nsrootwo astte toa, 1957-65
Total arrests ............... 78 647 64 163 680 760 744 1,081 1,274 U4
Sex:
M&1W ..................... 899 493 492 44 12? 127 033 822 1,0M7 487
Females ...................... 176 154 162 118 103 223 191 230 267 76
Narcotics:
MOa6 642 407 229 1 334 733 730 404
09 88 43 46 28 27 26 27 1s 9
Other (drugs) ................
LSD ......................... ... . 0 69 210
......
426 0 384 321 620 1264
...... ..... ...
Adults ....................... 107 83 62 91 a 148 M 13
Division of arrest:
central ...................... 0 2 01 7 61 4 84 100 20
University-......1............ 83 6 s 96 104 96 14 117 63
HoUen-be ...................
- 7 6 134 6 100 117 148 113 82
Harbor ......... 00..............
46 62 1 49 22 40 44
I --- 16 19 80 21 It 30 2? 64 61 33
WISL,----------M 13 31 36 31 84 63 96 122 so
West Los Angeles-. . 14 11 4 11 13 9 17 3 30
Van Nuys ........- 36 3 28 34 9 15 18 28 28 27
West Valley .................. 19 8 20 11 17 4 32 21
Hiphiad Park------------...9 61 78 45 86 80 88 91 81 24
M 8tnet----------------122 I 116 102 97 162 152 91 130 246 91
Newton Street ................ M 43 39 40 78 8 77 78 20
Venie .............
- . 34 3 40 0 22 42 24 0 0 18
North Hollywood2 1 7 24 22 47 14
Foothill .... .......... 7 60 23 9
Outside ants .................... ......- 6 6 11 3
NARCOTIC DIVISION
19M5....... 1,806 637 41.1 383 29. 3 920 704 386 215.A........ ......
19M6....... 1,338 575 42.97 308 23.01 883 6599 465 U34 ... ....
195 ....... 1,1 " 675 67.3 204 17.3 879 74. 6 298 253........ ....
195.......1,114 31 58 6 191 17.1 822 737 292 26.2..............
1).......1,23 3 241 19.4 9 78 336 2 ................
196 ....... 1,335 0327 61.9 373 27.8 1,200 8W.6 14 10.
1961... ..- 1,017 59 58.7 239 23.5 880 812 147 1L4. ... ....
1962.......1,215 800 60.9 244 20 1,044 85.9 163 13.4
INS ....... 1,62 974 03. 343 22.5 1,317 864 209 137.................
.
14. 1,75 1,072 60.9 335 19.1 1,406 80 351 2 ........ ........
1965...... 1,895 1,05 55.9 420 2Z2 1,479 78 416 22 ................
1968..................... ... ....................................................
OTHER DIVISIONS
EJZL1T N0644
1BnumT No. 45
Dangero" dug arrest, by month and year
Year Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total
19M .............. 12 8 12 12 1 6 4 8 10 5 8 8 94
195 ..------------ 16 7 3 5 6 12 7 9 13 13 12 11 114
1957 .............. 12 3 19 11 17 5 9 12 5 13 18 21 145
1958 ------------- 34 22 17 17 21 14 27 16 32 35 31 72 338
195 ------------- 26 17 45 31 30 35 47 26 31 58 30 42 422
1960 -----........ 38 48 47 45 96 49 62 85 62 86 64 88 766
1961------------- 77 68 51 32 63 53 67 88 63 104 112 129 874
1962.............. 127 110 151 1(2 127 110 113 102 81 64 97 96 1, 270
19063 .............. 57 53 67 58 49 43 48 39 67 42 39 31
1964 ------------- 63 75 38 56 58 64 70 80 67 74 71 68 .62
1965 ------------ 131 79 88 99 84 100 65 73 87 101 87 84 1 087
1966-------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------..------ ------...--------
Enxanr No. 46
Narooto weizurea
Dangeros drugs
195 ........ I pound, 13 ounces, 16 97 pounds, 14 ounces, 23 grams, 2,924 6, 987 5,664
grams, 12 grains. cigarettes.
1956 ........ 2 pounds, 12 grams, 8 grains. 167 pounds, 10 ounces, 20 grams, 43,036 17,351
4,666 cigarettes.
1957 ........ 7 potmds, 4 ounces, 4 grams, 118 pounds, 3 ounces, 3,815 cigarettes. 17,955 4,129
1o grains.
195 ........ 12 pounds, 2 ounces, 4.76 148H1 pounds, 6.8 ounces, 92 plants, 89, 747 4, 523
grams, 8 grains. 4,387 cigarettes, 67% pounds
plants.
190 ------ 13 pounds, 8 ounces, 7 grams. 167 pounds, 2 ounces, 5,705 cigarettes. 117,325 15,415
1960 -------- 13 pounds, 11 ounces, 2 388 pounds, 4 ounces. 2 grams, 5,487 6,640 119, 642
grams. cigarettes, 145 plants.
1961 ........ 11 pounds, 3 ounces, 24 480 pounds, 2,500 cigarettes, 113 280,196 120,985
grams. p lnt.
1962 -------7pounds, 8 ounces, 21 grams. 489 pounds, 13 ounces, 178 plants, 267,642 8, 072
2,860 cigarettes.
1963 -------- 8 pounds, 7 ounces, 9 grams, 580 pounds, 5 ounces, 804 plants, 124,749 64, 534
5 graIns. 6,381 cigarettes.
1964L.-- 15 pounds, 10 ounces, 20 2,028 pounds, 3 ounces, 147 plants, 99,884 79,177
-
grams, 12 grains. ...... . 7,121 cigarettes.
1965 ....... 113 pounds, 17 grams, 4 1,52 pounds, 7 ounces, 13 grams, 12 467,429 282,634
gris grais7,1 cigarettes, 460 planih.
6- 66 - 16
-6
234 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
are shocking. The committee expects to have officials of the Food and
Drug Adninistrtion testify, I hope next week, with respect to the
need for additional controls over the production and use of this drug.
Mr. TAxziNBaux. I think that is an excellent suggestion.
Senator DoD. I am sorry to interrupt.
Mr. TAymN LuM. Thaf is xll right.
Senator DoDD. In fairness to the Food and Drug Administration I
want to make that statement.
Mr. TAxiNqNxENL Yes, sir.
Unfortunately, from nowhere in the country, neither from police
departments nor medical authorities, nor government agencies can
we, today, obtain accurate figures with respect to LSD use. And we
must certainly work in the public interest to get this information. But
I believe the information that we do have supports in full measure
the statement, Mr. Chairman, with which you opened this phase of
hearing yesterday, "that we owe it to the public to get to the bottom
of this problem before it gets further out of hand."
You have also noted in past hearings on another topic the case
wherein the Surgeon General found that a few batches of polio vac-
cine manufactured by a certain company were defective, dangerous
and, in fact, had caused the very disease it was designed to prevent. In
at least one instance a child innocently infected by way of vaccination
had been permanently handicapped as a result.
What happened I To spare even one additional child from such a
fate, the Government immediately confiscated the total available sup-
regardless of the high financial loss involved and the high proba-
itythatit might not happen again. I believe that we have a case at
hand where equal drastic action is indicated.
I want to stress once again that the considerable evidence we have
from medical authorities indicates that one of the most common re-
current reactions to LSD use is a psychotic breakdown of an extended
but unknown duration.
What this means, of course, is that many LSD abusers become insane
in a few short hours under the influence of the drug, a reaction rarely
if ever reported in connection with any other of the traditional drugs
hand where equally drastic action is indicated.
What this means is that the behavior of these drug users is virtually
unpredictable as is the behavior of any patient who has suffered a
psychotic break with reality.
What this means is that many of these persons are prone to crimi-
nality suicide, and other bizarrebehavior.
And what this means is that any person in the vicinity of a tempo-
rarily psychotic LSD user is poteatially in danger of being harmed or
even killed by such an individual. One cannot escape the conclusion
that if uncontrolled LSD abuse continues, we may ope day be required
to defend a murderer under the Durham rule or some other rule of
criminal responsibility after he became voluntarily insane by taking
LSD.
I stress the insanity factor as a frequent effect in S) use because at
the same time that we have growing medical evidence regarding the
acute psychotic effects of the drug, paradoxically we have university
students tryig to break down doors to hear an advocate of an opeu-
THE NARCOTIC REHABILTATION ACT OF 196 6 235
in;nded approach to this substance and we have a budding pseudo-
religious cult in the Neo-American Church that teaches its members
the formula for producing LSD.
It is not my purpose here to question the sincerity of people advocat-
ing an open approach to the ue of LSD. I do not think we want to
criticize the drug out of existence.
There is no evidence that all users of LSD become temporarily
insane;
Nor is there evidence that the drug cannot be used to produce
beneficial effects in medicine or in some other discipline;
Nor is there conclusive evidence tha the drug cannot increase
productivity or social adjustment or artistic performance.
But I believe that the evidence gathered by this committee and the
observations I have obtained from those working on the control or
treatment of the effects of the drug are sufficiently clear to warrant
specific conclusions with respect to the steps which must be con-
sidered at this time:
1. The private and unsupervised use of the drug should be pro-
hibited until proper research by qualified scientists has determined
both the Iong- and short-range effects of the drug on human beings.
This research should include current testing with these experimental
drugs and such additional research that is deemed necessary to estab-
lish the efficacy of the drugs.
2. The Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare should take whatever steps are necessary to initiate studies
to determine the potential dangers and positive effects associated with
LSD use.
3. The Secretary of the Department of Health Education, and Wel-
fare should periodically issue to the public whatever warnings are
necessary based on new findings with respect to the dangers prevalent
in the uncontrolled use of LSD.
This action is particularly necessary because LSD is essentially an
odorless, tasteless and colorless substance which appears to be more
harmful when ingested by a person without knowing that he has
taken it.
4. The appropriate authorities either of the legislative or the admin-
istrative branch should undertake an objective study of such activi-
ties with respect to LSD as are carried on by Dr. Timothy Leary
and his colleagues, by the Neo-American Church and by any other
groups or individuali, the activities of which involve preoccupation
with LSD and other hallucinatory drugs.
I believe that a sober investigation of these operations would only be
fair to Dr. Leery and other members of these several groups. And I
feel the public should know both of the potentially questionable as
well as of the positive and possibly valua services performed by
thesegroups.
5. The appropriate authorities of the legislative and the adminis-
trative branch should undertake a sudy to determine if an changes
are necessary in the Federal laws which presently control the manu-
facture, distribution, and possession of the halliog ec and asso-
citdParticularly LSD and suchadtoOl u gess
marjuanla, peyote, meclne and othersmf~ eea
036 TB NARCOTIC REZABILITATION ACT OF 1966
'II
THE NARCOTIC RETAILITATION ACT OF 1966 247
Senator Krz~xzD of Massachusetts. Mr. Leary, since you have been
quoting the New Republic article, it says right in there rather clearly:
It is more likely that the individuals who use this are usually already psychi-
atrically deranged before talking LSD. This, of course, emphasizes even more
the absolute necessity of competent psychiatric screening of every person who is
to use any kind of .ailucioens.
Dr. LwAAR. I agree with that conclusion. I am urging that there
be some kind of licensing, I
Senator K m "ol Massachusetts. You know you are the one
who is quoting this. I thought the point made by the chairman
about the types of people who are using it substantiates not only what
the chairman observed but it was also previously testified to, and so I
think there has been substantial evidence to that matter, that those
that do use it are already psychologically deranged or can be, or at
least the predominance that are using it lean that way. At least that
is the testimony which has been presented to this committee Now
if you have different conclusions on that, I think that from either
your years of study or others, I think it would be helpful to have
that material.
Dr. Lruit. Yes. Senator Kennedy, I cannot allow the University
of Stanford students to be described as psychotic or as criminals. A
sample in the New Republic article by Dr. O'Chota:
A sampling of students at Stanford University showed that at least 40 percent
have been taking haUucinogen&
Now I will defend very fiercely the sanity and the social construc-
tiveness of the 40 percent of the Stanford University student body,
even though I maybe unpopular-
Senator Kmmmy of 'Massachusetts. That is not res onsive to the
question but I will accept the statement. Mr. Leary, Ihave been con-
tinually confused by your testimony. Maybe that is my own limita-
tion of understanding as to the nature of the subject that we are
consider here today. You mentioned earlier and I am trying to
clarify at least to some extent my own understanding, that you needed
a microscope in order to indicate the degree or the quantity in which
this LSD should be taken; is that correct?
Dr. L"Y. Ye&.
Senator KxmzrDY of Massachusetts. That you use a microscope.
Dr. Luier. As a metaphor; yes, sir.
Senator KF.Nrmw of Massachusett& And do you use it to measure
the quantity, to make up the consistency of the particular drug at a
particular time to determine what kind of ride you want to have; is
that right I
D.LaR. Yes, air; we caa be fairly precisoa.
S tor KZNXEDT of Massachusetts. No, this is all right if you can
just answer these questions. So, you use the miorosoope each time
you see the drug, is that correct, each time when you participated or at
least observed or helped to administer the drug to the 3,000 cases; is
that right?
Dr. LMLZ. I am using microscope here as a metaphor, sir We
ask a person, "Why do you want to take LSD I" and he tells us and
then we give him the dosace that will get him to the level of conscious-
ness that would be most likely to reveal what he is looking for.
248 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Dr. LeAty. Yes, sir. I agree completely with your bill, the 1965
Drug Control Act. I think thim -
*Senator Dom. That the Federal Government and the State govern.
nents ought to control it I
Dr.LAuIT. Exactly. I mn in 100 percent agreement with the I95
drug control bill.
Senator KzxrmmY of Massachusetts. So there shouldn't be,
Dr. Lu". I wish the States, I might add, would follow the wisdom
of this committee and the Senate and Congress of the United States
and follow your lead with exactly that kind of legislation.
SDator KuWoimr of Masaachsetts. So there should not be indis-
criminate distribution of this drug should there I
Dr. ImAr. I have never suggeted that, sir. I have never urged
anyone to take LSD. I have Vways deplored indiscriminate or un-
pmpared us..
Senator ,.rxNEy of Massachusetts. And at least if it is going to be
brought into this country, its entrance into this country ought to be
car regulate
Dr. Lait. Absolutely, I am definitely in favor of such legislation.
Senator KzNzDY of Massachusetts. And there ought to be strict
regulations then with regards to those who possess itI
Tr LAur. No, sir.
Senator KENNF.DY of Massachusetts. Well now wait a moment, Dr.
Leary. You just stated somewhat earlier that you thought anybody
who was going to use it ought to be carefully trained, ought to under-
stand. Do you think now that we ought to have indiscriminate pos-
session I I don't find the consistency of your argument when you say
that we ought to have careful restrictions on LSD when it comes into
the country, that we ought to have strict control over its production,
but that we shouldn't have strict control over who has it.. How do
you--
Dr. LEaur. Because I am facing, as I urge all of us to face, the
reality of the situation, that millions of Americans are using this
drug indiscriminately in their own pursuits. Now I am not in favor
of t but I am not in favor of passing laws which would put 40 per-
cent of the Stanford University student body in the category of
criminal&-.
Senator Kvrmir of Massachusetts. But you are not in favor of
it getting that far.
Dr. LWazr. I feel there should be no law for the possession of any
substance the main function of which is to alter consciousness.
Senator KExnNEDr of Massachusetts. Well, you are not in favor of
indiscriminate ion of this drug, are you I
Dr. LE RY. So, sir.
Senator KENmDY of Massachusett. All right.
Dr. LUARY. I am against laws which would put people in prison.
Senator KrEN oy of Massachusetts. That is a decision, but here is
someone who has had the experience that you have had, and the study,
and have been associated with this institut, coming down here as one
who believes in as strongly as you have who says that you do not be-
lieve there should be indiscriminate possession.
Dr. LwrR. Yes.
Senator KzNmEY of Massachusetts. There is a question, you feel,
whether we can legislate or not legislate on it, but that is a matter for
TE NARCOTIC RZIIABILTATION ACT OF'1946 251,
legislators to consider, whether we feel, ati legislators, that any law
can achieve the desired end. But your tNtimony as I understand
it extremely clearly, it is becoming more clear now, you feel there
shouldn't be indiscriminate possession. It is something that yon do
not support.
Dr. LERY. For 6 years, sir, I have been iLgainst indiscri at use.
Senator Kzwx?#T of Massachusett& Inc iscriminat use, all right.
Dr. L ARY. Yes.
Senator Doo. Do I understand eorrect~y that the research with
respect to this drug is till going on I
Dr. LAARY. Yes, sir. Rieearch has been al most halted because of the
present hysteria. There are very few Govirnmntapproved grants
now because of the grand motherly. 'panic that is sweeping over the
contry~. Doctors and psychiatrists who should be doifig studies are
afraid to.
Senator Dono. My point is a different on 3,however. If it is still
in the research stage, obviously it may turn out to be a most dread-
fully harmful drug. Certainly, you would not advocate in that event
its production or its use or anything of the kind I
Dr. LTEAn. No, sir. If research shows that there are any serious
physiological side effects, or irreversible psychological effect, I would
be the first one to urge its ban. I assure you, having taken this drug
perhaps more than any scientist in the world, that . am more curious
than anyone else as to any report as to its physiological effect or pOsW'-
bilities of brain damage. Every time I meet Eomeone who says this
Isay, "Well where did ou hear that I" and they say, "Well my cousin,
the doctor told me." I sa, "Will you please wire me collect if you
have any penal information on brain damage"
Senator Kwwzr of Massachusetts. You read the New Republic
article quoted earlier I
Dr. I4A'r. Pardon, sir
Senator Kuirrn of Massachusetts. Did you read the New Repub.
lic article that you quoted earlier I
Dr. Wa Yes, I did, sir.
Senator Kvmiu-ni of Massachusetts. Are you in general agreeInt I
Do you think it is a fair analysis of it I
Dr. LAr. Dr. O'Chota's article is, I think, a very sound middle
position on the benefits of LSD.
Senator KrENNDy of Massachusetts. Did you note that in that arti-
cle he says, and I direct your attention to page 22, the third paragraph:
There is one uniform agreement among the invtigators of LSD; namely,
that LSD can be extmoly dangeru when aasd Impropsr1r.
Dr. LWARY. Sir, I agree with that.
Senator KzNiDr of Massachusetts. Yes.
Dr. Lr-nr. Any form of energy, alcohol, and the motor car is
dangerous if used improperly.
Senator Kzrixy of Massachusetts. That is right.
Dr. LEARY. I couldn't be in more agreeme nt.
Senator KExNEDY of Massachusetts. It is dangerous then I
Dr. LEARY. If used improperly.
Senator DoDD. That is why there is control over alcohol.
252 THU NARCOT I RCHABIITATION ACT OF 1966
Senator Dora. I think Senator Kennedy's point is that them are all
kindsofdrugs. Itis the abuse ofthm
Dr. LEAY. Yesir.
Senator Down. That makes them dangerous; is that not it?
Senator Kzwxwy of Massachusetts Exactly right, indiscriminate
abuse.
.So, in any event, you agree that there should be restrictions with
regard to the manufacture and production of these drugs; is that right?
Dr. LARY. I am in complete agreement.
Senator KrENrEY of Massachusetts. And you are not satisfied that
there is sufficient Federal legislation that is going to do that job?
Dr. LEART. I think the current legislation that came out of this
committee in 1965--
Senator Kxwamr of Massachusetts. Is completely sufficient I
Dr. tmr. Is adequate; yes, sir.
Senator Kziimor of Massachusetts. You support that?
Dr. LrARr. I support it and have supported it.
Senator Kauwrin r of Massachusett& But with regard to LSD, you
still feel that there should be careful control and supervson in those
areas which we have just described I
Dr. LZAY. Yes, sir.
Senator KNEDY of Massachusett Now you also feel that anyone
who distributes that ought to be carefully trained; is that correct?
Dr. Azy. Yes, sir.
Senator KzzomY of Massachusetts. And ought to be extremely
knowledgeable about its use?
Dr. LEzR. Yes, sir.
Senator KmNxFDy of Massachusetts Now, why do you think that?
Dr. LiRy. Because LSD opens up powerful neurological energies.
Again I use the example of the microscope.
Senator Kszoxwi of Massachusetts. Well, we know that, but what
is so wrong I Why does a fellow, have to be so carefully trained if this
is like taking a drink or something like that I Why does he have to
be carefully trained?
Dr. LEAR. If he is not carefully trained, he will be using it for
kicks and ecstasy and amateur religious confrontations wit
and so forth. But for scientific and educational--
Senator KExxNND of Massachusetts Well, if you are interested in
sort of the consumer on that, that is desirable, but that should be
something which an individual ought to determine, would you not say,
rather than that there should be regulation,# That is why I do not
understand why you are for regulation, or why you feel that the
person who distributes it ought to be carefully trained.
Dr. LzARur. Well, I think----
Senator KrNmwy of Massahusetts. Because you see if it is just
because he is not going to get everything that he really wants by this,
then
Dr.that
Lais reallyhis
. I agree,disadvantage,
yes. I thinkis it
wenot I
need laws about controlling
the possession and the individual's use of barbiturates, alcohol.
Senator KzNNEDY of Massachusetts I will accept your statement
that there is a need for that. I will accept it rather than argue about
that, because I agree with you.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1962 255
Now the question comes, I think, which. was certainly the third as-
pect, and that is the indiscriminate possession of the drug. Now if we
follow your logic, which you just mentioned earlier, you feel that the
fellow who distributes the drug ought to be carefully trained so hean
make sure he gives this fellow the right ride, as I understand it.
Maybe that is an ov implication.
Dr. LERY. Like your brwers have to be trained to make beer.
Senator K.xwr of Massachusetts. That is right, sure.
Do you not think whoever has the drug shouldbe controlled so lie
will know as well what kind of ride he is going to get I
Dr. LWARY. Because the use of LSD goes into every aspect-
Senator KExNEDy of Massachusetts. If you use the same logic, Dr.
Leary, you say that the fellow who distributes it ought to be caref ull-
trained, so that the person that he gives it to is going to know exactly,
so he will not use it frivolously I
Dr. LEAr. Yes.
Senator KzNiEDY of Massachusetts. We could get those records ex-
actly from the record.
Dr. LEARY. That was the idea.
Senator KzNxEDY of Massachusetts Now, using the same logic, I
wonder why you do not say that the person who ust has son of
it ought to be licensed, because you do not want hun just taking a friv-
olous ride either, do you I
Dr. I"Y. It is none of my business what he does.
Senator KzNmy of Massachusetts. Then why is it any business of
yours that there be a trained fellow to administer itI
Dr. LEARY. I am just urging that. It is not up to me.
Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. You are suggesting that we
consider legislation on that line.
Dr. LEAR. Constructive legislation, licensing.
Senator KENDmwY of Massachusetts. Constructive?
Dr. LEA Y. The situation is this, Senator Kennedy: Here is a primi-
tive tribe, which we are. You give them a microscope, and they might
use that microscope just to look at the pretty things, and say please,
members of this tribe, use this microscope to.cure illness and use it to
discover science. But they might use that microscope just to have
kicks.
Senator K.NNDY of Massachusetts. That is right.
Dt. IUART. I do not think we can pass laws forcing them to use the
microscope.
Senator KE.Nmmy of Massachusetts. You do not think that is a de-
sirable end I I mean you are such a believer in this drug that you do
not think that it should be used for frivolous means, do you?
Dr. LEARY. It is none of:iy business. If a person wants to use the
automobile for kicks, if a pemon wants to use any form of energy for
kicks, as long as they are not hurting anyone else it is not my busifiess to
tell him how to do it. I would deplore his use of the microscope in some
way that does not use its potential, but it is none of my business if i1,
buys the microscope and Uas it home in his possession and does not
take advantage of its wondrous possibilities.
Senator KEmNmNr of Massachusetts. Yet it is an injurious drug if it
is used improperly.
256 THE NARCOTIC REMAILITATION ACT OF 19066
Dr. Lzrar.I have not aid thatsir. I have said that of all the
forms of ener g available to the modern American, LSD is the least
Sector Kgr of Massachusetts. Even accepting that, Churchill
said that &-mcracy is the worst form of government except for all the
others tried. I mean just accepti, that as beingthe leat dangerous,
it is stil dangerous is it no itsMindiscUrinate use I
Dr. LAuR. Anyth is dangerous if it is misused or unwisely used.
Senator Dow). Ithuink you miss another important point. Think
you have said, and certainly other witnesses have said that one of the
elementary hazards involved in this drug is that it is odorless, colorless.
Dr. LUiR. Tasteless.
Senator Dom And tasteless. Yet we have got a dangerous thing on
our hands and it is not possible by the ordinary use of the senses to
know what it is. I think that by itself to me, would lead me to the con-
clusion that it should be very carefully controlled.
Dr. Liaar. But it also raises incredible problems of control. It is
like air. LSD is like water. In the first place, ID is practically free.
It cod about $100 to make 20,000 doses, and if it is put in mass pro-
duction LSD would cost less than the chlorine in this water, so you
not only have the problem of it being odorless and tasteless, but it is
so easily available. It poses vexing problems.
Senator Dowo. I have the same problem Senator Kennedy is hav'mg.
If it is odorless and tasteless and colorless, if you can get it and it
does damage to people----
Dr. IArr. I do not believe it does, sir.
Senator KENrY of Massachusetts. You did agree, you did admit
that it can be dangerous if it is misused; is that correctI
Senator DowX. That is what I meant.
Senator KxiNEDY of Massachusetts. So we do not get into the ques-
tion of seniantics, I think the point of the chairman, at least it is my
point, is that by your own admission you have got hundreds of thou-
sands of people who are using it around the country, and who have
not been trained in the college classrooms and have not had the oppor-
tunity to go to your institute, and are using the drug which by your
own admission, perhaps a person who knows as much about this drug,
certain aspects of this drug, and I take your testimony on this point,
that it can be dangerous ifit is misused, and I think this is the int.
The question remains now whether we feel, the members of this
committee-we receive this expert testimony from you-the question
remains whether this committee can effectively legislate controls on it.
That is something that we have to wrestle with. But your testimony
on these other fact about its distribution, its manufacture, the
indiscriminate use of it, not being administered, or the dangers of it
being administered by people who are not carefully traie I think
is extremely weighty evidence, and I think this gets back to where
I was before, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dowo. Yes.
How would you describe the use of LSD in the United States today !
Would you say that it is widespread, for example I You can answer
that just yes or no.
Dr. TLzui. I have no hard research evidence on this, but letters I
get and the people I talk to when I lecture at the universities would
n NICOTIC SRI -ITITIWN 4IPT OF 1906 257
lead me to confirm the veportsxthat I would say Around one-hird of
our college students are experimenting witA these drugs. {ow this
is very geographically spotty. . ,
In San Francisco and Los Angeles it is very high. I am sure there
college who use it.
are other States where there are very few people iii
Senator Dow. But I am tryn to get t omething. .
It seems to me from what I have heard you ad others saythat
there are thousands of people using it, so I do not think it wot4d.be
an exaggeration to say its use miwidespread. J
Dr. Lirar. It is definitely widespread, sir.
Senator Dom. All right, would you say that it is out oi ntrol I
Dr. LruRY. Ye sir.
Senator Dowv. You do say there is need for control I
Dr. LZARn. There is whatI
Senator Dow). There is need for control. Here is something that
is widespread and is out of control. I think the conclusion is in-
escapable that t here is a need for control.
Dr. I&Ay. Well, as I said earlier, there are many things that are
out of control Of all the energies out of control in this country, I
would say that LSD is the least t you have to worry about.
I am saying there should be licensing and I hope that Congress in
the coming months will provide licensing so it can be used in addition
to being controlled. For 6 years I havebeen in the unfortunate posi-
tion of warning society that this was going to happen. We knew 6
years ago that iere was going to be an LSD paic. - We saw it coming
like meteorologists can see a hurricane coming. We said energy is
coming, energy is coming, let's be ready for it and use this construc-
tively. But every attempt so far has been to put it underground, to
push it down. All that energy just cannot be kept underground, and
some sort of constructive licensing procedures and training courses
in high schools possibly and certainly in colleges should be developed
so thit the youngsters who will want to grow and use this would be
able to do it.
Senator DoDD. That remark about the schools leads me to a question.
I want to be fair about it. I have read several times I think in the
newspapers, a statement attributed to you, that students should drop
out of school if they cannot find LSD teachers in universities. Did
you say thatI
Dr. la"r. About 2 weeks ago at a university I said that if students
are seriously interested in expanding consciousness that they should
get professors to teach them. If not, they should drop out of school
and go some place where they will find people who Will take their
interests and needs seriously. I suggested they go to India and find a
philosopher or a minister or a priest or someone who will. help them
go within rather than, as I think the American educational system
is doing, focusing on the outside.
I will even go further than that, with your permission, sir, and step
on another sacred cow of our American culture.
I believe that there are many aspects of American education which
are addicting our youngsters to symbols, and I think my advice to
youig people, and I talked to them and they listen to me, sir, my
advice to young people is to turn on to the internal neurological energy,
tune in, hook this up with the world around you, and drop out.
258 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Now this may sound reckless advice today, but it is the oldest advice
that philosophers and religious leaders have passed on. Detach, drop
out, find what is within. And I stand by tha statement which I made
at the university.
Senator DODD. I do not want to embarrass ou, none of our ques-
tions are intended to. You are a researcher anlyou have said yourself
that there is a lot that is not known about this drug.
What reasons as a researcher do you have to justify advising the
youngsters to drop out of school uness they have the services of an
Dr. LPA. I have been in psychology for 20 years, but I have not
done any research on educational psychology, but it is the function
of the scholar and the psychologist, in this country to pass on the
conclusions from his research. My conclusions as of 20 years of
psychological research are that modern university education may be
doing neurological dama b erfocusing
Marshal McCluen is ano person our attention
saying in hisonown
symbols.
measured
prose, and I am saying here, that it is better to watch bad television
than to read a good book because your nervous system which has been
built up for 2 million years is used to the multimedia flow of energy
which you get on even a bad television show and what our colleges
are doing is to make us think in straight square linear ways that have
nothing to do with the reality around us.
Senator DoDD. Thank you, Dr. Leary, for coming before us.
Dr. LEARr. Thank you, sir.
Senator DoDD. We will now recess subject to further call.
(Whereupon, at 1:05 p.m., the committee recessed, subject to call.)
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
'U.S. SzNATr,
SpmciAL SuBCoMMiTE oN NzAcons
OP THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,
Wa.Aington, D.C.
The subcommittee (composed of Senators Dodd, Tydings, Burdick,
Bayh, Hart, Kennedy of M ausetta Hnuka, Javits and Fong)
met, pursuant to recess, at 10:30 am in room 318, Old Senate Offce
Building, Senator Thomas J. Dodd (chairman of the subcommittee)
presiding.
Present: Senators Dodd Kennedy of Massachusetts, and Javits.
Also present: Carl L. Perian, staff director; William C. Mooney
Jr., chief investigator; Eugene W. Gleason, editorial director, and
Bernard Tannenbaum, special counsel.
Senator DoDi. I will call this hearing to order.
Our first witness this morning is Dr. William Stewart, Surgeon
General of the United States.
Prior to his appointment as Surgeon General, Dr. Stewart spent
more than 14 years, I believe, in Government service in which he dis-
tinguished himself m a variety of assignments.
In 1965 he was appointed Director of the National Heart Institute
and served in this capacity until his appointment as Surgeon General.
He is a member of the American A y of Pediatrics, of the
American Medical Association, of the Heart Associti , of Publio
Health, and is certified by the American Board of Pediatric
I do this, Doctor, not to embarrass you but we do it in the case of all
witnesses so we properly identify for the record their competence in
the field with which we are concerned.
I know how busy you are and I amgrateful to you for coming this
morning and I had the pleasure of having dinner the night before last
with your predecessor, Dr. Terry, who was my doctor, as you may
know.
Anyway, we are glad you are here.
Do you have a statement that you are going to present?
*Dr. Sizwwrr. Yes; I do, Mr. Chairman.
STAEMET OF DR. W11IIL H.SEWART, SUREON GEE A
OF THE UNITED STATES; A0OXPAIED BY DIL STANLEY P.
YOLLES, ASSISTANT SURGEON GENERAL, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEATH
Dr. S.m rr_. Before I begin, I have with me Dr. Stanley Yolles
on my right, Director of the National Institute of Mental Health.
Senator DODD. Yes I was going to refer to him.
259
260 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
has returned to the use of narcotics, the Surgeon General will inform
the court of the conditions under which the return occurred, and make
a recommendation as to whether treatment should be continued.
The court may affirm the commitment or terminate it and resume the
pending criminal proceeding.
The kind of agencies we expect to utilize as supervisory aftercare
authorities would include, for example, halfway houses such as South-
more House in Houston, Tex., operated by the Vocational Guidance
Service of Houston; the special cinic operated by the New York City
Health Department whose primary interest is in providing step by
step support for the addict emerging from hospital treatment so that
he can fid his place in society; the drug addiction program in New
Jersey, newly established b e Statepartment of Mental Health
the Diug Treatment and R ilitation Center in Boston, operated
by the nfassaehusetts Department of Mental Health. He would also
use PHS outpatient clinics, contract physicians, and social workers,
working with public and private agencies in the community.
By desigrnng specific agencies to be responsible for the addct upon
discharge from the hospital and by paying for medical, vocational,
psychological, educational, and other services needed by the addict
we expect to reduce recidivism and to assist addicted persons toward
productive living.
Through the maintenance of careful records during the patient's
total treatment program we expect to build up a reservoir of knowl-
edge about treatment methods which can be utilized, and to refine
and delineate those programs of hospital and posthospital care which
are most successful in the rehabilitation of the narcotic addict and
which can be used by other agencies interested in the addict. One
of the most useful aspects of the treatment and rehabilitation pro-
grams will be the increase in our store of knowledge about addicts,
as we follow addicts through the aftercare program.
But significant gaps exist in our ability to gain the increased knowl-
edge neossary to ded with addiction in the long run. Comprehen-
sive and contin statistical and biometric programs necessary for
carrying out epidemiological and longitudinal studies of drug
addiction and abuses are desirable, and would wholeheartedly sup-
port such an effort through appropriate amendments to the Public
Health Service Act. We believe the mission of our Public Health
Service hospitals at Lex.ngtn and Fort Worth already include the
functions ofresearch, training, and demonstration. However, we feel
that increased clinical research in the entire field of drug abuse is
also necessary.
In stating our views on the basic features of the bills before this
committee, believe I have indicated our answers to the questions
which the chairman asked in his letter to Secretary Gardner, dated
December 15, 1965, and his letter to me dated December 13,1985. But
I want to be sure to be responsive and, therefore, if the Chairman
wishes, I would like to answer them briefly in order, and add such
further information as may be desired either now or for the record.
Senator Doiw Go right ahead.
Dr. STwAirr. Question I in both letters relates to the number and
type of narcotic addicts treated by the Public Health Service hospital
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 265
and the Department, the procedures and institutions available for their
treatment, and the success that we have had in treating them.
The Public Health Service is the only agency in the Department
providing direct treatment for narcotic addicts, although ragen
cies in the Department certainly are concerned with the problem. The
Public H Service h t at Lexington, Ky., and Fort Worth,
Tex., are the only institutions we have for any substantial treatment
of addicts, and their procedures are limited to inpatient treatment,
which includes medical, psychiatric, educational, vocational, and re-
lated services in the hospital, but leaves the patient on his own when
he walks out the gate.
As to the number and types of addicts treated, we have statistics for
certain classifications: The numbers of prisoners, probationers, and
voluntary patients; age, sex, ethnic group, occupation, education,
State or residence, and other such broad categories. But we have very
little data on family and social background, the history of addiction in
relation to delinquency, various personal and environmental factors
that might throw light on the origins of drug addiction and methods
of prevention and treatment.
Estimation of our success in treating addicts depends more on
definition of "success." Our experience, underlying the present legis-
lative proposals, shows that hospital treatment by itself does not suc-
ceed in preventing relapse after discharge or in achieving our real goal
of effective functioning in the community, without the need of nar-
cotic drugs. Our prisoner patients generally achieve what the hospital
staff considers maximum hospital benefits; one trouble with them is
that under long sentences, without parole, they become so institu-
tionalized that they lack the psychological resources for successful
living after they are released. Our voluntary patients run to the op-
posite extreme; over the years about three-fourths of them have left
against medical advice. Both prisoners and voluntary patients laock
the posthospital supervision and help that they need for t transition
to suc l life in a normal society.
Relapse rates as a measure of success are confusing because they
rest on different definLions and different circumstances A study of
patients resin in Kentucky and discharged from our Lexington
Hospital showed a narcotic readdiction rate of only 27 percent but
some discharges became addicted to barbiturates or alcohol; 41 percent
of total abstained from any use of narcotcs, barbiturates, or alcohol.
Followup studies of Lexington ex-patients liv n New York City
show narcotic readdiction rates over 90 percent.We do not think that
any of these figures spell succe, but they do confirm the need for post-
hospital treatment and supervision to prevent relapse after maximum
hospital benefits have been Obtained.
This, of course, is true in successful treatment of many diseases but
aftercare has been conspicuously lacking in our treatment of narcotic
addicts S. 2152 would supply this crucial missing link.
Question 2 in the letter to me asks what additional facilities and
services we will require to carry but the provisions of S. 2152.
Our program planning-it terms of l6gistic -is still in proes but
some basic indications can be given. The Public Health Service can
be ready for the institutional phase of the treatment program when-
66-ee8--4&---lS5
266 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1960
ever the legislation becomes effective and the first patients come up for
commitment to the Surgeon General.
We estimate an average of about I year of institutional treatment
for civilly committed patients before their release to aftercare. Dur-
ing that year we would develop final plans, with our own facilities
and services and those for which we could make arrangements with
State and local , public and private agencies, to make the aftercare
program operational by the time the first patients would be ready for
it. hen we would develop the services and facilities for the after.-
care program to keep pace with the additional patients completing
theirhospital treatment and being released for aftercare.
The proposed program will not add one person to the total addict
population we would serve.
Senator Dow. Excuse me, what do you mean by that I
Dr. STzWART. We now serve at our hospitals, the population who
are convicted of Federal crimes and who are also narcotic addicts.
Senator Dow. I see.
Dr. STEwAuT. That population would not change.
Senator Dow. I see.
Dr. Srwmawr. However, there will be changes in the method of deal-
ing with them which will require a reallocation of resources and the
development of new resources. Our hope and expectation is that Fed-
eral and State and local, public and private, agencies already bur-
dened with the problem of narcotic addiction will be able to accom-
plish their purpose much more efficiently with the new program.
Question 3 iii the letter to me asks for medical opinion as to the
extent to which crimes of addicts can be viewed as products of their
addiction.
I have commented on this generally before and Dr. Yolles is pre-
pared to answer the question more directly later.
Question 4 in both letters asks whether the eligibility conditions of
S. 2152 are too restrictive.
If I were answering this solely in terms of the individual's suita-
bility for treatment and chances of rehabilitation, I would say "Yes."
From this point of view, two previous nonviolent felony convictions
(for example for forging checks) would not call for exclusion.. Two
previous civil commitments for narcotic addiction might be a favor-
able indication for a third attempt; addicts have shown some evidence
of "aging out" of their susceptibility to drug abuse and repeated efforts
at treatment may have an increasing chance of success. But the eligi-
bility conditions in S. 2162 are base on considerations of law enforce-
ment, as well as chances of rehabilitation, and from that point of view
I must defer to the Attorney General and the Treasury Department.
The exclusion of addicts who are primarily traffickers seems to me
sound from both points of view. I would add that even those addicts
excluded from these proposed programs, whatever the reason, should
not be denied proper medical treatment for their addiction. The
Public Health Service is also responsible for the medical care of in-
mates of the Federal prison system, and both the Public Health Serv-
ice and the Bureau of Prisons would want all Federal offenders given
proper medical care The exclusions in S. 2152 are only from the
proposed special programs.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 19 6 267
2
Question 5 in the letter to me asks whether there is any merit in in-
cluding eligible offenders who have violated Federal laws other than
the narcotic laws.
I think I have answered this with an emphatic "Yes" and I believe
the sponsors of other bills would agree with the administration bill
in this respect.
Question 6 in the letter to me (question 2 in the letter to Secretary
Gardner) asks about the advisabilit of wider use of probation and
parole services in the treatment of addicts.
I can answer this only from the point of view of treatment, not law
enforcement. From my point of view, the use of probation turns on
the need of some institutional treatment (in custody) before release
to the community. For most addicts I believe this is necessary al-
though I would not say so in all cases. In cases where an adequate
program of treatment can be assured, including any necessary institu-
tional treatment and aftercare, probtion seems to me a useful legal
instrument as an alternative to imprisonment. But in appropriate
cases, where addiction rather than criminality is the essence of the
problem, it seems to me that civil commitment is preferable to prosecu-
tion followed by probation.
It provides a more consistent treatment approach and avoids the
serious stigma of a criminal conviction.
Parole, after an optimum period of institutional treatment and
custody, is important both as an incentive to the individual and as a
means of supervision and assistance after he is released to the com-
munity. Our physicians at Lexington and Fort Worth feel that long
sentences and ineligibility for parole seriously handicap efforts at
rehabilitation by destroying the prisoner's motivation. A recent
check of prisoner addicts at Forth Worth showed that 49 percent of
them had sentences of 5 years or longer and were ineligible for parole.
On the other hand, New York State has made an encouraging dem-
onstration of the usefulness of parole in adjusting addict-offenders
to community life and helping them to become fully rehabilitated at
a cost, in dollars, of about one-eighth of the cost of custody in a cor-
rectional institution; the difference in human cost is incalculable.
Again, however, in appropriate cases the commitment for treatment
provided in S. 2152 seems to me a better method than imprisonment
followed by parole.
Question fin the letter to me (question I in the letter to Secretary
Gardner) asks for an opinion on the advisibility of retaining manda-
tory minimum sentences in the Federal narcotic laws as opposed to
/vin judges discretion in distinguishing between violators who
snoreMor have "reatment procedures and criminal sellers who should
have long penal sentences. . 1.
I support the extent of judicial discretion provided by S. 2152 in
selecting addicts for treatment under either title I or title I. There
are other considerations as well, and insofar as they relate to law
enforcement I would have to defer to the agencies concerned there-
with.
Question 8 in the letter to me (question 5 in the letter to Secretary
Gardner) asks whether many abusers of dangerous drugs other than
narcotics would need treatment similar to that required by narcotic
addicts, with similar treatment facilities.
268 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 190
Total Fisclfer
support
CAIUFORNIA
Alway house for narcotic offenders (Gels) May 1, 1962, to Apr. 31, 1966,
Institute for Study of Crime and Delinquency, Saramento --------------- $186. 436 ()
CONNCTICUTI
Narcotic addiction service center (Slawson) Jan. 1, 1962, to May 31,1967, Nar-
cotic Addiction Service Center of Southwestern Fairfield City, Stamford.. 381,167 $82,966
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
A continuum of services for narcotic addicts (Maddux) Jan. 1,196, to Dec. 31,
190, U.S. PHS Hospital, Fort Worth ...................................... 19,456 6,15
Mental health
projects.. a 317 61 341 7 342 11 50 11 o
S p l: ................ ....... .......... 1 100 1 100 1 100
Total
........ 317 1 6 442 12 000 11 700
STATE DISTRIBUTION
Sate" Number of Amount luo~al
ALABAMA
Experimental drug abuse (Deneau), Suutbern Research Institute Dinning-
bam ----------------------------------------------------------- Sw .i0 8, 760
CA.UIO N (3)
LOU~iIANA
Txl ofnarcotic
-1- L-Ann
analges iIn the animal body (Hug), University o1
Arbor .................................................... 11,4"
Band metabolism of mecaline in pet (MLAughln) Unl-
vwslty of Michigan, Ann Arbor ........................................... S300 3,500
S. footnote at end ot table
6 a6 a2 19
282 THE NARCOTIC RECHABILITATION' ACT OF 1966
MINNZSOA
Mental disease In primitive society (Levy) (RC DA), Portland State College,
Portland................ - ............................................... 17,33
]POREIGN
Marihuana constitunts (Mechoulam), Welumann Institute of Science,
ReovotIsel r.8,880
........................................................ 19,820
Num- Amount Num- Amount Num- Amount Num- Amount Num. Amount
ber be be be be _
Reulslrp t 1. W4
0 19 7M2 22 9go t 1,1W 1,00
STATE DISTRIBUTION
Total Fi*7ear
support
CALIUONIA (2)
Num. Amount Num- Amount Nuin 4 Amount Num- Amount Num. Amount
bet bw bw bw bw
Felowhi$ ........
- 3 13 2 12 6 as 6 55 a 50
Traigrants.... 2 26 2 34 6 28 7 300
TOtal........51 88 41 46 Fi f 281 121 313 18 85
STATE DISTRIBUTION
Senator JAvrrs. Also would you bring us abreast of the facts and
figu on these oomwunity mntal health applications so we have
that.
Dr. S1z'wur. Certain.
(The material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 49," and is as
folows:)
ExumriT No. 49
COMM0u11Tr MEUTAL HEFAT CX1ITER5
At the end of the first full year of operation 22 million Americans will be
served by Community Health Centers supported in part by $57 million in Federal
construction and staffing grants under PL 88-164. Grants have been made for
construction and/or staffing of 128 new Community Mental Health Centers in 42
States, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, since the first grant was made
last August. Construction grants totalling $42 million were made to 92 centers,
and staffing grants to pay the initial cost of professional and technical personnel
were made to 53 centers for a total of $15.4 million. Some centers received both
construction and staffing grants.
The grant program spanned the continent with a grant to the newest State,
Hawaii, and one to Lewiston, Maine in the far Northeast. Urban areas such as
New York City, where a few square blocks constitute the service area, received
assistance as did many rural areas, where one center may serve several counties.
But in all cases the services are not more than a short trip away from any resi-:
dent in the service area
Senator JAvITS. Now lastly, I notice -thatyou do deal with this new
dramatic question of LSD in your testimony, and what we ought to do
about that.
Now, at page 17, in response to question 8, you say that-what you
really do is come out against our e to expand this bill to include
others who may be subject to using LSD or glue sniffers or these
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 285
other-amphetamines or barbiturates to excess. The LSD thing, of
course, is very sensational right now.
Now, we have called attention to the fact, and it is very dear, that
LSD like other similar drugs, is subject to control by the Pure Food
and irug Administration, under the Drug Abuse Control Act which
Senator Dodd was himself the principal author of which we passed
out of my committee, Labor andPublic Welfare, ana which took effect
in 1965, except-and this is the point of my question to you--except
for the exemption which is contained in section 511(d) (c) which says,
"For the personal use of himself or of a member of his household.'
That is an exemption..
Of course, LSD, regardless of how a person gets his hands on it,
assuming the Pure Food and Drug, if we give them more administra-
tors, and so forth, can deal with production, and so on, reasonably,
there will still be plenty around.
Now, do I gather that you are against at this time doing the same
thing with those LSD users and the glue sniffers and others who you
say, interestingly enough, may be worse off than even the narotics
addict? That is what your testimony says, that you are against in-
cluding those among.the proper subjects or patients of this new medi-
cal approach in S. 2152 which would cover personal possession which
is exempted from the Drug Abuse Control At.
Senaior DODD. Senator Javits has raised a very important, point.
Dr. STwAr. Let me answer in two parts First, the exemption
there is because, like certain of the drugs that are covered in the
Abuse Act, people would have these or their own personal use in
household[.
Senator JAvrrs. The exemptions are very general, too general.
Dr. ST~w~rr. LSD would not be in anybody's possession or any.
body's household legally now because it is an exprimental dru.
Only for legitimate experiments can it be shipped interstate.
far as including all these various other forms of drug abuse, ranging
all the way from glue sniffing to LSD, for example, within the context
of the treatment program that is being designed here for narcotics
addiction, I think the reason I say that this should not be done is
that, first, we don't as yet have the definition of a problem, medical
and professional definition for these other types of drug abuse, that
we have in narcotics addiction.
Senator Dom Doctor, I think under my bill, if s person has LSD
in his possession for his own use, it is not illegal.
Dr. Sizwm-. I am talking about the Kefauver-Harris amend-
ments of 1962, which would affect LSD now because it is a new drug.
It is not a drug that is on the market. It wouldn'tbe there It would
have to be gotten somewhere.
Senator JAvrrs. Well, I know, but the Kefauver amendments do not,
I think, make it a crime. Somehow he is in possession of it And
under Senator Dodd's Drug Abuse Control Act, now law, we exempted
his personally having possess.
Now, don't you th1ik it would be a good idea-I certainly feel that
way-that we should now define specifically something like hallucino-
genic drugs, LSD, and prohibit by law the personal possession of those,
that this is a loophole f
286 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Dr. STzwAR. Well, I don't really think I can give you a time
estimate.
Senator KEwrFD of Massachusetts. Did you have any conversation
prior to appearing before the committee?
Dr. STewart. Yes. I talked to the Commissioner of Food and
Drum about the Drug Abuse Act and what it could possibly do in this,
but I did not talk to him about how long he thought it would take
to wmplish these things. That is why I feel ie I need to ask
him because he is the one responsible for it and he will be one who
has to deliver in this period of time that I say.
Senator KENNzD of Massachusetts. What steps are you going to
take in your department in the meantime while you are waiting for
his response which, the best you can tell now, is completely-we can't
tell how long a term. It might be another year or 2 years.
Dr. STEWAlRT. Well, I think we can ask him.
Senator KYx1.Nrzn of Massachusetts. What is your operation going
to do in the meantime nowI
Dr. STEWART. Well, my responsibility in the Public Health Service
as related to LSD is first, whether it has any potential as an effective
instrumer t in therapy, or in experiments, and, second in understand-
ing the basic undergo emotional or attitudinal problems, that lead
to the use of LSD or any other drug that is abused.
We are trying to find out to what extent this is actually happening
on university campuses, what is around this, what is behind it. It
is involved in the whole study of the mental health of the people.
Senator Km -r of Massahusetts. Well, powerful
obviously your sugges-
tions and recommendations are gog to have
the, as the result of these particular studies w
Dr. SCertainly.
Senator Km yr of Mawsahusetts. Can you give us any idea how
long it will take to make an effective evaluation as to whether this can
be uiiized for effective therapy and experimentation I
Dr. Srzwa. That is sort of judging on whether scientific results
will arrive 3 months from now or 6 months from now. I thinj this is
terribly difficult to say. We plan to implement some studies on col-
lege campus This is on use patterns, the why, some of the other
things. t is more a definition of the problem study. We plan to
implement these this fall, so it will be maybe a year or two before we
have any answers.
Senator DODD. May I interrupt?
Senator Kmw z of Masmschusetts Yes.
Senator DoDo. I want to point something out that pertains to your
line of questioning. There is no legitimate production of LSD in this
country.
Dr. STzwArr. That is right.
Senator Dow Well, doesn't this gve you great concern' I mean
the drug that we hear about from the law enforcement people and
people who deal with this type of problem every day, they say it is
gro ing by the hour, it is a terrible thing that the users of it are
doing dreadful thing. So I start with the first premise, it is il-
legitimate to produce it in this country.
Dr. STzwArr. This is correct.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF -196 6 295
Senator DoDD. There is somewhere we could start, isn't there I Start
to do somethingI
Dr. STWmART. I think, as I understand it, it can be used for experi-
mental purposes under the general guidance of-
Senator DwD. Yes.
Dr. STEWART (continuing). The manufacturer.
Senator DODD. Switzerland, I think.
Dr. STEWART. Yes. Sandoz in Switzerland which has stopped
manufacturing, and there is some supply for legitimate experiments.
Senator DoDD. That is all.
Dr. STEWART. But the illegitimate manufacture of the substance
as I understand would be subject to the Drug Abuse Act, and I think
the Commissioner of Food and Drug can tell you more than I can.
Senator KNzNmY of M assachusetts Just on that,-tha is very
worthwhile-just on that point, we have received a good deal of evi-
dence th-t this drug can be produced almost at home or under very
crude circumstances, as I understand it. It doesn't have to be made in
a detailed kind of laboratory as made in Switzerland, but it can be
generated under rather ordinary kinds of circumstances. Is that your
understanding?
Dr. STEWART. It is my understanding that it is a manufacturing
process that is not unduly complex. But on the other hand, it is a litter
more complicated than the average junior high school student chem-
istry set, for example. I talked to Dr. Goddaid about this and he has
had his chemists looking into this manufacturing process, and I don't
know what they have come up with.
Senator Kzzmmy of Massachusetts. Well, now, you see, this runs to
the fundamental theme of the point that concerns me, Doctor, and that
is that if it is relatively easy to reduce, even recognizing the
legislation, control of traffic,production, interstate commerce, probably
the most effective way is the fact of possession, and that that should
be made illegal.
Now, I am completely-we can wait a period of time until Food and
Drug have made their recommendations, and I hope, Mr. Chairman,
that we would send~a letter to the Commissioner of Food and Drug
requesting the information, the time that he thinks will be necessary
on that question, and that that be made a part of the record.
Senator Doo. Dr. Goddard will be a witness Monday.
Senator KENNznY of Massacusetts. Fine. But it is.because of
the fact it is relatively easy to roduce, to possess, and is odorless,
tasteless, all these other factors, t it does seem to put an additional
sense of urgency and responsibility on us. So I appreciate your
appealrance. I know your deep concern. I for one am not completely
satisfied that this committee should not act in the sense of mnkina
OSsession itself illegal, and I certaily welcome the opportunity
ning what the Food and Drug Administaion feels alout ths but
it asmatter which I know you are cncerned about. We are,and I
think that it still is really an open question as far as I am concerned.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator DODD. Thank you, Senator Kenned y.
There have been several references to the drug bill, as I call it, which
you will remember states that no person other than persons described,
09 6 NARCOTIC RHABELITATION ACT OF 1908
THE
66-668--66----20
OQQ
QuJ 74 ,NARCOTIC Ai, aILIT&TIO ACT OF 19 0
And could you answer this. Projecting on into these last 3 years,
the fact that you are spending perhaps a million and a half-I am not
interested in the exact figurebut just an estimate-can I ask you what
percent of that would be utilized or that you feel could be effectively
spent in the sole determination whether this drug is dangerous for
general distribution and possession I Is it possible to do a study on
that I
Dr. Yout s. Well I am sure studies could be done which will give
us some factors on the total question. I do not know that you could
do a study which would pinpoint the answer to that specific question.
I am sure that we are going to be supporting studies which will aid in
that, the production of an answer to your question.
Senator Kimmyr of a usetts. Well, you are doing some of
that now.
Dr. YoLLEs. Yes.
Senator Dow). I believe, Doctor you already said that you are con-
vinced that it is a dangerous drug.
Dr. YoLLw. Yes. It is a dangerous drug. But how dangerous
Senator KziN~mmr of Massachusetts. Now, is it possible to give to
that kind of study-you know it should be programed, designed. Is
it possible to spend additional funds to male tht determination ?
Dr. YowLa. Senator, it already had the highest priority before all
of the publicity.
-SenatorKuimmm of Massachusetts I am sure you had it before the
publicity because your Department would be. worried about that in
any event. o
Dr. YoLas. We have been studying this, of course, but in view of
the recent publicity and the fact that we have been aware of its use an
college campuses, we have been giving this a very high prilrity.
Senator K&WXm t of Masach And what d or'ddk--ob-
viusly you are
think would to have
gonpaod
be t11 a oiauig
of time stud-,be neesry
which iould you
do giv
,fhat to
us a premy well documented answer as to the danger of general
distribution 1
Dr. Youim. Senator, I have to hide behind the fact that I cannot
predict what can come out of research or when it will come out, whether
itwill be tomorrow, 2 weeks, 3 months, or 2 yeams There i no real
way. of knowing.
approach more closely, perhaps, but there is no real way of
knowing. I could not really stick my neck out, so to speak, and venture
a guess.
Senator KUNwDY of Machusetts Well, we are certainly hope-
ful at least I am, that you will continue with that sense of priority
which you have outlined here and that you will keep this committee
fully informed as tOthe' progress of these experments and these
studies which are taking pla - and I hope that you will make every
effort to at,least give an aditional seasef priority to thos questiL
In the meantime, we are going to, I am sure, be receiving testimony
from other doctors, law enforcement people and we have-this has
been extremely convincing from people who have being deeply inter-
ed. in this problem, andI just certainly hope that the Publie Health
officials of our country-that we can rely on them That is who I
would like to rely on and who I do ely on and am heavily influenced
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1906 301
by. I just hope that we are going to be able to look to them in the
future as we have in the past as being the ones that provide the real
leadership in this field and not be left in the background.
Thank you very much.
Senator DODD. Thank you, Senator Kennedy.
I am sure both Dr. Stewart and Dr. Yolles would agree, I think
they will anyway, under the Drug Abuse Act, the manufacture of
LS, or for that matter, any other drug, the illegal manufacture of it
is a misdemeanor. I do not know that you are aware of that, but that
is true under the act.
It occurred to me, Senator Kennedy, that one of the things we cer-
tainly could do is make the illegal manufacture of LSD in this country
a fefon5.
Last week-maybe you wee here-Captain Trembly of the Los
Angeles Police Department testified that one backyard chemist pro-
ducd something like a million capsules of LSD which would be
enough to-o not know-inundate a city, I suppose.
I wonder i you would ought to consider king
sUch a productions an illegal production,felony rather than a
misdemeanor.
i Dr. Siw~r. ell, I think som ing should be about illegal
production b am no lawyer. o now.- Fel sounds worse
than misde anor but I d not
Senator DD. ]aw I rnh w to w te law from men who
are speci in. t r fields, I ke su on u:r
a .d itts i out of
his min hi is frigh to a , whi drives a an out
of his ind by mere f hatit readily affable
without severe rs usetof I toer
think is one the to up-toa rather-
Well, hope , und d, Ste
art we to t enot Wea t "
grwAt used about it a as an 0 tat
authority, Dr o asw1 d, roaey psee
ind your 0oy ou ori.
We we going e Dr. Godd hre Monday
and he wpyill p by tell us more"ab ut theo F IE z~e .s
Ofit. -wetakyu.
Dr. S=w rT Wou
Senator KrmirofWWrA to peow tha
both of . g
gnou en for appearing bare. J thin -At iavey helpful
and I WIl say40atyour responses ae very hqlpful.,
Senator DoDi. Our nexb witness is kir. Wiliam.A. Frosoh"
Dr.,Froach, I am glad to welcome ypui here t isM ring. I want to
state for 4he record tat you are presently a psychiatrist at Bellevue
Hospital, New York. Since 1961 you have bee4 asociated with the
University Eospialand the veterans hospital, aiso in Now Yorix.
.or the pa,8yeat you haveben an Wsructor at the
University Schoolof Medicne wher-.yow-e an assistant Noew York
professor,
and you have been assistant dean.
302 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1968
occur in people who had taken the drug a number of times and wh:
were then in a situation which provoked anxiety.
Case 3.-One such man hafnmultiple exposures to hallucinogenic
drugs after lie became involved in experiments with them during col-
lege. Despite the fact that he apparently had not used these agel t,
for the previous year, he experienced the recommunicable "onne&e
and suchness" that he had experienced after LSD. Ie described it as
"what you realize before you realize that there are other things in the
world whose range is as profound as or more profound than your
own." lie continued to experience repeated visual hallucinations a nd
catatonic episodes similar to those described while he was taking LSD.
He was brought to the Bellevue Hospital by acquaintances who no-
ticed he was wandering vacantly and aimlessy at work and was rela-
tively uncommunicative. After 1 month in the hospital, he remained
sick. A followup 1 year later indicates that he is again hospitalized
for psychiatric reasons.
Case 4-Similarly another man in his late twenties came to the ad-
mitting office in a state of panic, although he had not taken any drug
in approximately 2 months. He was beginning to reexperience some
of the illusoryr phenomena, perceptual distortions, and the feeling of
union with things around him that had previously occurred only under
the influence of LSD. In addition, his wife had told him that he was
begining to "talk crazy," and he became frightened at this. Al-
though he had felt the urge to seek help and self-understanding for
6 years before lie came to the hospital, he had never sought psychiatric
care. He had tried marihuaii, , tyu t, tnd fuly ground morning
glory seeds. Most of his 15 experiences with LSD had been pleasur-
able although lie had also had two panic reactions, neither of which had
led to hospital admission. On these occasions he thought that he
was losing control and that his whole body was disappearing. At the
time of admission he was concerned lest LSD had some permanent
effect upon him. He wished reassurance so that he could take it again.
His symptoms have subsided but tend to reappear in anxiety-provok-
inisituations, and this is now a year after his last taking the drug.
Extended psychosis-Three of the eleven patients who developed
extended psychoses were felt not to have been psychotic prior to in-
gestion of LSD. They had, however, had serious personality dis-
turbances. They had experimented widely with other drugs and con-
sidered the recent experience to be more vivid and of greater personal
significance than anything they had ever previously known. Each
anticipated greater self-understanding as an aftermath of the LSD
ingestion and, indeed did have profound although unfortunate per-
sonality alterations afterward. In the course of their experience they
sought for perceptions and ideas that would be tangible evidence that
their hopes had materialized. In the isolation of the drug state they
believed that they had achieved a resolution of their problems Any
feeling of terror that might have been present was rapidly replaced
by a feeling of ecstasy as they felt they had achieved a new self.
As the effects of the drug wore off, these three patients were faced
with the problem of returning to the real world and accommodating
a vague, new self-image, achieved under the influence of the drug, to
reality. Conflict arose as they began to interact with other people and
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196 305
lad to become reconciled to the fact that their new understanding was
not readily grasped or responded to by others. Rather than give up
their new found, and we feel fictional sense of self, the psychotic pa-
tients strove to maintain their sense oi uniqueness and withdrew from
the world.
Case 5--A 28-year-old man was admitted to the hospital after he
stood uncertain whether to plunge an upraised knife into his friend's
back. His wife reported that he had been acting strangely since taking
LSD approximately 3 weeks before admission. He was indecisive and
often mute and shunned contact with her. On admission, he appeared
to be preoccupied with auditory hallucinations of "God's voice" and
thought he had achieved a condition of "all mind." On transfer to
another hospital 1 month after admission there was minimal improve-
ment, and several months later we heard he was still having consider-
able psychiatric difficulties.
The popularity of LSD among the lay public has grown rapidly be-
cause of the belief that it expands consciousness and alters personality
for the better. Many, although an unknown number of high school
and college students apparently take the drug for "kicks" and this is
the expr&sed motivation of most of our patient& Others appear to
experiment with it in the hope of achieving help. Most often these
people have taken hypnotics, timulants, and rarely opiates before turn-
ing to LSD. As its popularit and availability increases, it is likely
that people will turn to it before other drugs since LSD is believe
to offer relief with understanding, making it possible to achieve a sus-
tained state of improvement.
Immediate prognosis for the cute panic reactions is good but there
isas yet no lon g-range followup residts. The patients in the other
two groups, prolonged psychotic reactions and reappearance of symp-
toms, showed some impairment of performance at the time of our
last contact with them. In the patients we extensively examined there
was no evidence of personality change for the better, despite sometimes
their subjective impression of improvement. It is always difficult to
validate subjective impressions of improvement especially where there
arp no controls and virtually all subjects are .y aware of the
effects they are supposed to achieve. -bjectively the patients did not
appear to be doing-so well as they claimed. For example, several who
were psychotic following LSD still spoke of its b cial effects
There was no objective evidence of increased productivity, improve-
meat in school work or better interpersonal relations s uent to
multiple ingestion o LSD in this group. Nor did anxiety and ten-
sion appear to decrease, or self-eseem, increa's Although some pa-
tients felt that they had attained valuable feelings as a result of their
drug experience, these were incommunicable. There did not seem to
be any new thoughts which could not have been revealed without the
drug.
On the more negative side, several people reported incre"ig anx-
iety with recurrences over which they had no control. The fear of be-
coming pschotic
preoccupie plagued others,
with unwelcome particularly
thoughts which theywhen theymight
thought becamebe
the habine of psychosis Judgment appeared to be impaired,
careers retired because of diffuseness of purpose and lack of effort.
For example, a woman who had previously bee a productive artist
rim THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
had taken LSD in an effort to help her color in her painting. She
stopped painting because it seemed too easy, she said.
A final danger of the use of LSD in our sample was the rationalized
purpose of self-help which enabled some people to avoid seeking more
constructive ways of dealing with their problems, until their life situa-
tion became such as to make meaningful change very difficult.
Let me insert a word of caution in interpreting these results. Un-
fortunately, these are not experimental nor well controlled, but repre-
sent naturalistic observations of patients. As a result, we have no
very good data as to what these patients were like before they took the
drug. These changes that we observed may represent the natural
course of an ongoig psychotic process. However, LSD appears to
us to be implicated for several reasons: (1) We have reasonable evi-
dence that they actually took the drug (2) it seems to have played at
the very least a precipitating role in tleir admission to the hospital;
and (3) it appears certainly to have colored their ongoing psychiatric
difficulties
Our continuing evaluation of the results of taking LSD bears out
our early impression that it is a potentially dangerous drug. The dan-
ger of adverse reactions does not seem to be limited to people who take
the drug without supervision. Occasional psychotic reactions have also
occurred when the individual is carefully selected and a controlled en-
vironment made available during drug use. Dr. Timothy Leary in-
dicated-and I quote now from a policy statement of the medical So-
ciety of heCou New York-that: II
Even in his hands with careful selection of individuals for LSD administra-
tAon, and a controlled environment during drug use, occasional case of acute
psychotic reaction occurred, soe necmitatn hospitaliation for weeks.
Because of our great uncertain reading the number of people
using this drug, itis difficult to know how great the danger of an
adverse reaction is. Data preented in the bo, "Utopiates"-by Blum
suggests that the psyches rate inCalifornia isat least 2 percent of
those people who-take the drug, and perhaps as high as 4 percent.
. Although the use of LSD appears clearly to be impicate d these
reactions which I have described, the exact nature of the relationship
remain, as yet, unexplored, and further controlled research is es-
sential. Carefully plained and controlled, each research appears both
safe and of potential benefit, despite the ft that there sas yet no
established terapeutic uses for the drug. I might again note that the
problems I have described appear primarily to:be askated with self-
administration of the drug in unControlled
With regard to the question of Federal control ,itis my undertand-
ing now that both LSD and some of its precursors, some of the things
wKich are needed in order to manufacture it, are now included as dan-
gerous drugs under the Dangerous Drug Control Act, and I believe
this is an appropriate classification.
Senator DODD. If I might interrupt you, for violating that law, the
punishment is that imp for a misdemeanor. Would you agree
that certainly in the case of LSD, it ought to be made a felony?
.Dr. Fnosmc. I am not sure I think the problem is always with a
drug like this of driving it underground which-that is, the cure may
pose-may be worse than the illness.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 307
Senator Dow. It is underground already.
Dr. FaoscH. Well-
Senator DODD. There is no legitimate production of it.
Dr. FROSCH. Well, it is my impression that there is kind of an
underground. I do not feel from what I have heard, talking to peo-
ple who have taken the drug, that it is at this point greatly involved
with the criminal element. It is not being manufactured by crimi-
nals and supplied by them, and so on. This seems to be much more an
amateur organization.
Senator DOwD. Let me a*sure you, Doctor, that if the market goes
up it will not be long before they get into it.
br. F sCH. Welf, I think the other question is: Is the market going
up I I think over the last year or two it very clearly has. But it was
not until recently that some of the more negative aspects of taking this
drug have had any publicity. Certainly the hearings of this committee
have given it some.
I have spoken at a number of colleges, and so on.
So I do not think we know at this point whether it is going to in-
crease in use.
I think also the danger-there was considerable discussion a moment
or so ago about possession--the danger of making it too illegal is that
it may inspire rebellion and may actually lead to an increased use I
do not know whether this would really be true. Certainly the laws
governing possession have not been terribly effective in controlling the
use of marihuana. This is an old law certainly in New York.
Senator DODD. I am sor I interrupted you. Go ahead.
Dr. FitosoH. Well, actually, I think I have said the rest of my state-.
ment as a result of the questions.
Senator DoDD. Well, it is a very good statement. I am very inter-
ested in your testimony because, as you pointed out, you see this from
day to day. We understood that you are not conducting experiments
in this particular area but you certainly have an unusual vantag point
from which to observe the effect of the drug on a considerable number
of
1 V~wn Yes.
Senator Dow. And what we are trying to find out is, should we
write some legislation which will more strictly control the production
of the drug and the possession of it. I take it from your testimony
that-let me ask you some questions. I will not detain you long.
First of all, is this an addictive drug? d y log
Dr. Fnoscu. When we use the term "addiction," we usually are
referring to certain physical changes which occur primarily when you
stop taking the druq-the so-called withdrawal. Now, it is very clear
that if you take this drug continuously, you do develop a tolerance
to it. That s in order to get the desired effect, you have to take
more of it. And we have seen a few people who have been taking
icreasing doses over relatively short periods i order to get such
an effect. II
I think also that perhaps some of these people may become habit-
uated to it. That is, at moments of stress or crisis or whatever, they
may turn to it as a way of.handling their feelings.,
308 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
view, and I speak only for myself, is that science may find that this
drug, carefully controlled, properly administered, may help in certain
areas. What I am worried about is this bootlegging of it and this un-
controlled use of it and the damage which this or any other dangerous
drug can do to individuals. Would you agree with thatI
Dr. FRoscH. Absolutely.
Senator Dow. Would you agree that the private use of LSD should
be prohibited I By private use I mean the use of this drug obtained
from an illegal producer and taken without scientific advice or control
or prescription or whatever one would say in this respect?
Dr. FRoscH. I think certainly it is an inadvisable use of the drug and
one that I would discourage. Think the problem is whether prohibit-
ing it is more likely to produce the effects that you wish or not, and that
is something I really do not feel competent to-
Senator DoDD. I know. You said that earlier. I do not argue with
you. I just wanted to know what your view is.
It is a very easy drug to manufacture, Doctor, is it not?
Dr. FRoscin. Well, certainly much easier than most of the other
compounds in medical use. Ido not remember whether it was Dr.
Stewart or Dr. Yolles who said it, but it is not quite as easy as the
newspapers picture. I do not think it is something you can do in a
high school laboratory in 15 minutes while the instructor is not there,
but it can be done in home laboratories, certainly.
Senator DoDD. It is reasonably easy to produce.
Dr. Fioso. Yes.
Senator DODD. By the way, as you know, besides its possible use
in curing addictions to alcohol or narcotics, what other interest would
scientists have in experimenting with this drug?
Dr. FRoscH. WelI, I think in many ways, from my personal view,
it is the other research possibilities for this drug that seem more
promising. Any drug which is active in such small amounts must
have a very speific mode of action in the brain, and so may provide
a clue as to certain important aspects of brain function both in health
and in disease, and it is a compound which is related to certain com-
pounds which are naturally present in the brain, and this is true of
mescaline which produces essentially the same effect. And there have
been similar compounds described in certain psychotic patients.
Senator DODD. I take it that it is interesting chemically apart
from-it is hard for me to talk in these terms because I am not scien-
tifically trained, but it is interesting chemically in relation to the
usual compounds found in the central nervous system? Would that
be fairly accurate I
Dr. Fioscm Yes. That is, serotonin is a part of the chemistry of
the brain and is closely related to this.
Senator DODD. Well, I find your testimony very helpful, because I
find it more easy to understand.
Dr. FRoscE. Thank you.
Senator Dow1. We are grateful to you and this will help our com-
mittee as we study this pi-oblem which I am sure you will agree is a
problem.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILrrTAON ACT OF 1966 311
Dr. FRoscH. Absolutely.
Senator DODD. For the life of me I cannot understand people who
want to brush it off and not take it seriously.
Well, thank you for coming down.
Dr. FROSCH. Thank you.
Senator DODD. We will adjourn these hearings until Monday morn-
ing at 10:30.
(Whereupon, at 1:10 p.m., the subcommittee recessed to reconvene
at 10:30 a.m., on Monday, May 23, 1966.)
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
point ofgood copy rather than Irom the standpoint of good public
As I've stated before, I have no desire to impede legitimate, n_'cal
researah,.on LSD in any way. To the contrary, it should most defi-
nitely continue and be accelerated., But, until our competent medical
research teams have secured all the information on the drug's benehto
and dangers, and until medical science has reahed its final verdict,
the indiriminate, unsupervised, flagrant use of LSD should not be
allowed. Its possession should be unlawful. Every possible safe-
guard for the welfare and protection of our people shold e written
into law.
So, Mr. Chairman, if we are to err in our judgment, let it be on the
side of safety. Let medical science continue its research, reach its
final verdict but until they do, let us not permit private citizens to
play with LSD. It is far too dangerous and destructive and it needs
all the immediate controls and restrictions that can be provided.
I thank the committee for giving me this opportunity to testify and
I hope that I have been helpful. I will make ayailab, to the con.
mittee, at its discretion, all of my sources of information, to be used
as the committee wishes. I will not ask to put them in the record be-
cause I am sure, that the committee will recve much more detailed
information than I have given. I
Senator Dov. Thank you, Senator Murphy, you have been very
helpful, and your statement will be most benetkial to the committee.
The respect in which you are held in. the Senate and by the members of
this committee makes your statement and your views to us very strong
and I assure you they will receive urgent consideration,
I am well aware, as all of the members o. this committee are, that,
this problem is a very acute one in California.
Senator MUiwHY. Yes.
Senator DODD. And there are others, as I have pointed out, who are
very interested in your testimony and we are grateful that you took the
time to come here and give us die benefit of your knowledge.
According to the information concerning LSD that, you have ob-
tained in California, do you think that it is considered in California
the most dangerous of the drugs that are abused, particularly by the,
young people in our society i , ", . ,
Senator Muiujar. There is a feeling that it may be theimost dan-
gerous. There are several reasons. First of all, because of the avail-
ability of the drug, and secondly, because of the reaction, which I am
told-I am not an expert in these matters, but my inforiuants tell me--,
that the reaction or the "charge," as they say, is much higher than that
received from marihuana, and, of course, as we know-from experience
marihuana leads to all sorts of things, and our crime rate across the
country increases each year, and it is almost directly attributable to the
spread of the use of narcotics&
Senator Dow. You know this committee is mostly, concerned with
the effect on young people,
Senator 31uwf .-Y es.
Senator Dowo. I am always wondering and asking, as are other,
members of the subcommittee, what, would be the mcst effective wayto
IIa
318 THIE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OfE 1908.
encourage young people to stay away from the use of LSD and, indeed,
from allof these dangerous drugs. I am thinking of college students
and teenagers.
Would you care to comment on this I Of course, the legislation we
have under consideration is one way we know, but do you have any
other ideas?
Senator MuPPHY. I am one that haa great confidence in our young
people. I know that from time to timo we hear of a certain minority
of the young people that " into problems. I have great confidence
in them. I think the best thing that could happen would be a complete
program of education, so that they may know the real horror and the
real devastating destruction that may be the result of this.
Now, as a matter of record, just 2 weeks ago there was a party of
some young people in the area in which I live, and somebody unknown
decided it wouldbe kind of funny to put some LSD in the punch, and
the results were just absolutely shocking and frightening. Now things
might happen under the circumstances that would completely change
the lives of some of these young men and young ladies, and here,
through no fault of their own, the effect of this terrible drug might be
imposed upon them, because it can be done this way.
I think that I have enough confidence in the young people that if
there were a concentrated educational program set up, and the glamour
was taken away from this--now we all know thac over the years from
time to time there are things that young people pick up for "kicks." I
imagine we all did. I guess I did when I was a young mnn. I took
part, a very leading part, in one of the freshmen riots at Yale Univer-
sity when I was there, and not through any rebellious nat ure, but be-
cause it was spring and we thought that something real active should
take place. We have had the time when the young people in the col-
leges were swallowing live goldfish.
Senator DoDD. You are speaking of my generation.
Senator MURPHY. I think maybe they ought to go back to that. But
these are things that result from publicity, from glamorization of Lhese
thins and I think that the media could be very helpful in this matter,
and I think that a system of complete education of the evil involved
the dangers involved, would probably be the most effective solution, ih
addition to what can be done by your committee.
Senator DoDD. Senator, I think that seems to be the best way that we
can change the present situation. Are there any particular steps, Sen-
ator Murphy, that you think should be taken to prevent the smuggling
of LSD from Mexico into California?
Senator MURPHY. Well, as I say in my remarks, I think that the
Treasury Department ought to exert all pressure to encourage immedi-
ate enactment of S. 3183, which would prescribe criminal penalties for
illegal importation of depressant and stimulant drugs, and Senate
Joint Resolution 154, which requests the President to set up a coopera-
tive committee with Mexico, because our southern border is so long
that this is very inviting to the illegal elements that w&ant to take ad-
vantage of this. I think the passage of these two bills would be most.
helpful. 4
Senator DoDD. Yes. I am grateful for your support of that resolu-
tion having to do with setting up of that joint committee. I feel that
such a measure is greatly needed and long overdue.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 319
3
1. This case concerns a 6 year old boy who accidentally ingested an LSD
treated sugar cube left by his father on a bookcase in their home. Initially,
the child imagined that the room was turning around and cried continuously.
He then appeared to be in pain but could not inake conscious contact with his
parents. He was taken to a hospital in a state of "terror" and given a tran-
quilizer which calmed him. He slept through the night and in the morning was
diagnosed as normal and released to his parents.
2. In this case, a 5 year old boy ingested a sugar cube treated with 300 mcgs.
of LSD. He obtained the cube, which belonged to his father, from a kitchen
cabinet in his home. The boy soon began to act peculiarly and when his parents
realized what had happened, they rushed him to a hospital. He was admitted
in a coma-like state of exhaustion and immediately given a stomach lavage.
Administration of barbiturates and Thorazine caused the child to respond, but
upon regaining conscionsess, he began to hallucinate. He appeared to be in a
state of extreme terror and cringed from "green animals" he saw coming after
him. Additional Thorazine was administered and the child went to sleep. He
suffered from mild hallucinations the next morning but these receded and no
residual effects were evident.
3. Here a 14 month old boy ingested a sugar cube treated with 500 megs. of
LSD. The cube was one of five foil wrapped cubes found by the boys 3% year
old brother in the family refrigerator. The parents found the child unstable,
laughing without reason and In general, "acting queer." He became aware of his
own shadow and was terrified of it. His mother administered a 'A grain of
phenobarbital which caused him to vomit. He was then rushed to a hospital
where his mood changed to one of laughter and finding normal occurrences highly
amusing. His gait was unsteady and he could not hold his head upright. He
was given no medication but was constantly checked while he slept through the
night. The next day he was diagnosed as normal with no untoward effects.
4. This case involves a teenage girl who is an admitted user of an hallucino.
genic drug, N.N. dimethyltriptamine. After she started using the drug, her scho-
lastic average declined from good grades to a level where she was dropped from
school because of low grades. Her case was uncovered when she was arrested
for shoplifting and an hallucinogenic drug was found in her possession.
5. Here, a 20 year old University coed was admitted to the University hospital
in a state of disassociation after ingesting five packets (approximately 250 seeds)
of Morning Glory Seeds. She alternately wept and was silly and then became
tense and anxious and feared she was losing her mind. This condition lasted for
6 hours before her fears subsided. After 4 days of observation she was released
as normal.
6.This is the case of a male University student who ingested three packages
of Morning Glory Seeds. He remained hallucinogenic and psychotic for five days.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 323
On the fifth day. he attempted suicide by slashing his wrists. He remained In
the hospital undergoing treatment for 2% months and was then released.
7. This case involves a 17 year old boy who was Ingesting Morning Glory Seeds.
He and his friends ordered seeds through the mail from an out of state firm.
They ground the seeds in a pepper mill to reduce them to a "tobacco" which they
smoked.
K. This case Involves 13 youths who were arrested by local authorities on nar-
cotie charges. In addition to marijuana, the police found DMT, liquid MD and
LS D treated sugar cubes in po2setxion of these individuals. The DMT, LSD and
cubes were turned over to FDA by the local police because they have no law
covering Hallucinogenic drugs. The college student who was the leader of the
arrested group stated that the DMT had been manufactured by University stu-
dents. From the number of individuals involved in this case, it appears that a
serious social problem exists. Apparently this group was involved in the Illegal
n manufacturing and distribution of hallucinogenic drugs.
9. This ca* concerns the arrest by the local police narcotic squad of a 20 year
old female and 5 males, all in their early 20's or younger. The police found in
their possession % ounce of Oplum, 2 ounces of Marijuana and a loaded 32 caliber
automatic. In addition they found 225 LSD treated sugar cubes, 33 DMT cap-
sules, 5 vials of DMT powder and 2 ounces of liquid DMT. The latter drugs
were turned over to FDA because the state law did not cover hallucinogenic.
From the amount of drugs involved it appears that this group dealt In the large
scale retailing of narcotics and hallucinogens.
10. This case involves a young married couple who were peddling hallucino-
genic drugs including LSD and DMT. Their activities were learned of through
an Informant of the local police narcotic squad. Because of lack of jurisdiction
over hallucinogenic drugs, the local authorities felt that use of this informant
would be more advantageously handled by FDA. The informant introduced one
of our agents to this couple and he purchased hallucinogenics and amphetamines
from them.
11. This case was reported by the Poison Control Center of New York City. It
Involves a 28 year old male who had previously used LSD. This individual
stated that after heavy drinking he Ingested a sugar cube treated with an esti-
mated 500 mcgs. of LSD. After taking the cube, he began hallucinating and
suffered from an increasing fear of death. He had difficulty in dialing friends'
telephone numbers but finally managed to reach them. They took him to a hos-
pital where he was given an injection of Thorazine plus a prescription for Thora.
zine. He remained at the hospital a short period of time, soon felt better, and
was able to leave.
12. This case was reported by the Poison Control Center of New York City. It
concerns an 18 year ol female who took LSD for the first time in the form of a
treated 'A cube of sugar which she obtained at a "social club." She stated that
she thought she would die unless she kept moving and that she believed she was
In a funeral parlor. She also said that she felt she was "outside of herself." The
girls' mother brought her to a hospital where she was observed for 2 hours and
then released in her mother's care.
13. This case Involves a 22 year old female who took LSD for the first time. It
was reported by a hospital's psychiatric department where the girl had been ad-
mitted. The girl, who is a sophomore in college, stated that she had been under
psychiatric care for 5 years. She said that while at a party, an unknown Individ.
ual gave her an LSD capsule which she swallowed as she was about to leave the
party to go home. She said her home was a short subway ride from where the
party was being held; however, the last thing she remembered was entering a
subway car. Her next contact with reality occurred while she was in the hospital
Psychiatric ward.
14. Among cases treated at a neuropsychiatric institute in a six month period
were 29 involving the use of LSD and other related drugs by juveniles and young
adults. 17 examples are summarized below and the other 12 were of similar
nature.
A. This Is the case of a 22 year old female admitted in a state of acute anxiety.
She stated that she had used LSD and "became frightened with serious unreal
thoughts beating in my brain." She described her first LSD experience as similar
U a Rorschach test. She was temporarily released from the institute care; how-
ever, she returned after several months claiming to have been using many drugs
Including Seconal, Tuinal, Librium and Valium.
324, THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT 'OF, 1948,
*B. This iA the case of a 8& year old married male who visited the Institute be-
cause of depression. He admitted using marijuana, yellow Jackets (pentobarbital
sodium) and amphetamines for some time. - He stated that be had rcetly taken
LSD and had thereafter oontempiatet suicide, however, be was unable to go'
,hro'-gh with this plan. -, * :,...
' .
C. This is the case of a 20 year old male diagnosed as having a dissociative
reaction secondary to LSD Ingestion and a schisoid personality. He reported
taking 800-400 ncgs. of LSD for "kicks" and 4 weeks later suffered the feeling.
of depersonalization and paranoia. He said he was fired from his job 2 days after
taking the LSD because of being argumentative.
D. This is the case of a 19 year old male diagnosed as having a sociopathic
personality. He reported taking 350 mega of LSD 6 to 8 times in 2 moutw.. He
stated that the experience "washed his ego, raised his IQ 50 points and that he
can do anything he wishes now." He added that he is unable to drive an auto-
mobile because he is concentrating on too many things at once.
E. This Is the case of a 20 year old female diagnosed as having an acute brain
syndrome secondary to LSD ingestion. She was admitted to toe.institute on the
complaint, "I am afraid." She reported taking LSD several times and having
very unpleasant experiences including visual hallucinations, I.e., seeing her
mothers face in her food and on her desk. The institute's tests revealed 4 "classic
paranoid chilsophrenie picture." The girl has also used and has been arrested
for selling marijuana. - , ,,
F. This 18 year old male was diagnosed as having suffered a dissociative psy-
chotic reaction oendary to LSD ingestion. He reported taking LSD twice and
suffering uncontrollable thoughts and believed that he would not be himself again.
He also believed that people were plotting against him. He took LSD on the
advice of friends that it "would take care of his problems." He said that his ex-
perience with LSD was "quite frightening." He also stated that he has taken
marijuana. The institute commented that "his rebelliousness along with para-
noid, aesthetic and introspective tendencies are probably contributed to by his
taking LSD.*
G. This 21 year old male reported that he had ustd LSD numerous times in the
year prior to his admission. He said that his dosages were between 100 and 1500
mcgs and that he also used Peyote, psilocybin, DMT and mescaline. He stated
that he felt "all flipped out because of the acid" and that he attempted suicide by
taking seconal capsules. He reported taking 150 mugs of Thorazine a day to keep
from "freaking out" because his anxiety was becoming uncontrollable.
H. This is the case of a 20 year old female diagnosed as possessing a socio-
pathic personality. She entered the institute complaining "I want to be put away
so I won't have to see any of my friends." She stated that she had recently taken
LSD and now contemplated suicide.
I. This is the case of an 18 year old male "beatnik singer" who voluntarily
entered the clinic seeking withdrawal from amphetamines and other drugs, i.e.
marijuana, heroin and seconal. He reported taking LSD several times and having
"great" experiences. However, he now claims to experience audatory halucina-
tions such as hearing the voice of his mother saying that "he was no good." ne
was discharged from the institute because of complete disregard of regulations
and causing several disruptions in the ward.
J. This 23 year old male reported visual hallucinations after the ingestion of
LSD. In addition, he claimed to hear voices accusing him of being a homo-
sexual The Institute described the above as a paranoid type schisopiwenic reac-
tion.
K. This 20 year old male was diagnosed as experiencing an adolescence para-
noid adjustment reaction secondary to L13D ingestion. He stated that le
took LSD about 8 or 9 times to gain an understanding of himself. But that
on the 6th time It gave him a frightening experience as though people would
hurt him or were controlling his mind. He suffered the residual effects of the
LSD ingestion after receiving his selective service induction notice, which was
immediately prior to his admission Into the Institute. He refused to follow the
hospital
L. Thisrules and was subsequently discharged.
24 year old male was diagnosed as having a schizoid personality
with possible LSD psyvhosds. H&had taken LSD one month prior to his admis-
sion and repeated that it gave him the feeling of havinge his body disconeeted.!
At the time of his admission, he stated that he had feelings of IrresponAiblUty
and felt that he was goingcrazy. . . 1. ,
THE NARCOTIC RL1 NATION ,4*(Y OV 100t8
known as the Kurista Society. This society advocates free love and the use
of drugs for "kicka" After her Initiation, she was supplied with LD by a
wealthy, young married couple who also supplied the Kurista Society. After
several months of this activity she ran away from home and while under the
influence of LSD engaged in promis-uous sexual activities for several days In
a motel with the married couple and a University proftbsor. Her mother had
her undergo psychoanalysis, but this failed and she soon dropped out of school.
She was then committed to a mental institution from which she escaped one
month later. She went to Greenwich Village to obtain LSD, but was un-
successful. She did manage to obtain five amphetamine tablets, which she took.
That same night she engaged In further promiscuous sexual activities, due to
which her mother believes her to be pregnant. She returned to her home the
next morning and while still under the influence of amphetamines, indicted
several cuts on her mother's arms and hands while attempting to stab her.
She was then returned to the mental institUrtion. When interviewed at the
institution, she stated that she enjoyed her LSD experiences and lans to cvn-
tinue taking the drug upon her release from the hospital.
The previously mentioned girlfriend is the daughter of a psychologist who
stores amphetamines, among other drugs, in the attic of their home. The girl-
friend steals amphetamines from this supply and distributes them among her
friends.
The married couple mentioned above Is wealthy and supplies members of the
Kurista Society with narcotics, barbiturates, amphetamines and hallucinogenic
They have a record of arrest for possession of narcotics and were given sus-
pended sentences and probation. It is reported that they purchased a ranch
near Las Vegas to establish a colony for advocates of free love and drug use.
They were recently picked up for violation of parole, for leaving the state with-
out permission, and both have been committed to mental hospitals for obser-
ration.
19. This case was reported by a probation officer. It concerns an 18 year old
boy who was arrested for attempted sexual misconduct with minors while under
the influence of LSD. The boy stated he purchased an LSD pill from an un-
known person who claimed that taking the pill would enable him to see through
walls. He ingested the pill and began to hallucinate. He said he thought the
world was coming to an end, and that a friend was going to kill him. He began
talking to another friend who he imagined was there. He said he was driving
a car and bad to Otop because he felt he couldn't go any further. He then came
upon the two 10 year old girls who he imagined had the faces of his friends.
le said that he thought they were trying to kill him and that he attempted to
prevent them from doing so: however, witnesses' reports indicate that he at-
tempted to sexually assault the two children.
The boy had no previous criminal record, nor a history of sexual deviation.
Apparently, this unfortunate incident was brought about by the use of LSD.
Dr. OowAm). We are not prepared to say that these bizarre and
often p4hetic cases are representative. We do not have sufficient data
to deUtmiie how often such cases occur. Nor do we havi statistical
evidence concerning how many people are experimenting illegally with
LSD. - There are indications that the illegl use of the drug is expand-
ing, particularly around educational institutions. Because of my con-
cern about this particular aspect of the problem, I sent a letter to offi-
cials at morethan 2,000 colleges and universities on April 5, 1966,
warning them of the gravity of the situation. If you wish, Mr. Chair-
man, I have here a copy of the letter and its attachments which could
be placed in the record. I I
Senator Dowu. Yes, .think that would be a good thing to do, and
we will place it in the record,. -.. ,
(The letter and attachments referred to were marked "Exhibit
No. 53,",and aro as followss:,
/
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 27
Eixaurr No. 53
DarAwmv r or ILAwj, EDUCATIOn, AND WLrZE,
POW ANgD Dauo ADMINISTRATION,
Waahngtas%D.C., Apr1 5, 1966.
DAn AxnwiseTaxsn : During the past year a marked increase in the illegal
use of hallucinogenic and stimulant drugs throughout the nation, particularly
around educational institutions, has been reported. Both students and members
of the faculty are being secretly approached to engage in hallucinogenic "experi-
ences." There Is direct evidence of widespread availability of a number of drugs
which have profound effects on the mental processes. I wish to alert all educa-
tional administrators to the gravity of the situation and to enlist their assistance
in combatting an insidious and dangerous activity.
We are faced with a most hazardous situation. Unless strong concerted action
is taken, an untold number of our students may suffer permanent mental and
physical injury." Any instances of the illegal use or possession of these drugs
or sleep-delaying drugs, such as the amphetamines, should be reported at once
to the Food and Drug Administration district office. You may wish to institute
other appropriate measures, such as an inspection program, laboratory super-
vision, or special counseling.
The Food and Drug Administration, in Washington and in its district offices,
is ready to cooperate with you to the fullest extent. Feel free to send us any
questions you may have and any information which will aid in eliminating the
illegal use of hallucinogenic and stimulant drugs.
Sincerely yours,
JAUX& L. GooARD, M.D.,
Comm onsi~ of Food and Drugs.
IALUCINOGiNIC Dauos
The most common hallucinogenic drugs in illegal use are:
LSD-25
Psilocybia
Mescaline
LSD-85
This is the hallucinogenic drug of prime importance.
LSD-25 stands for d-lysergle acid dlethylamide tartrate.
It Is dangerous in exceedingly small amounts. As little as 100 micrograms Can
produce UociWahSoa lting for hour# or days. One grapm oo d provide
10,000 dose.
It is found in illegal channels in tablets, ampoules, and, frequently, in sugar
cubes saturated with the drug.
P#iloebi%
An extract from a Mexican mushroom.
Mescaline
An extract from Peyote, a small species of cactus.
All three drugs produce essentially the same effects--Halucinations, serious
mental changes, psychotic manifestations, nervous breakdowns, and suicidal
tendencies.
There are three sources of these drugs for illegal use:
Some are smuggled into the country.
Some are diverted from supplies for lawful purposes.
But a significant amount, particularly of L4D-25 in illegal use, Is synthe-
sized illicitly, using chemicals which can freely be bought from the chemical
industry. Most of the LSD-25 in illegal use Is produced by small synthesiz-
Ing operations whi.h require a small amount of laboratory equipment. FDA
has had reports that this has been done in college chemistry laboratories.
028 THKI NARCOTIC REHABIbITATION. ACT OF 1.60
700
* ... rot..
I At NC IA
- inse" m w
30 TfId NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT, OF 1960
Dr.omaiw. No, sir, I do not believe that that would be tie case.
Senator IODD. So there wasn't any new evidence I
Dr. GoDmw. No.
Senator )ow. Or any dramatic developments that prompted this
letter? For example, your action last week placing the ingredients
of LSD under what I call the 1965 amendment, there wasn't anything
really dramatic or new which led to this?
Dr. GoDARD. No, this was a very carefully studied action which
had been reviewed and recommended by the Committee that advises
us on this problem. The May 6 letter was simply part of the entire
approach to getting at the problems of LSD.
Senator DomD. Yes; I want to make it clear that I am commending
you.
Dr. GODDARD I understand.
Senator Dom I am not criticizing you.
Dr. G Aw. I understand.
Senator DoDD. But in looking back on this whole struggle to get
these amendments through, as I referred to it earlier, it puzzles me
that somebody did not do something earlier. I remember Senator
Yarborough, of Texas, issued a report on the 1965 amendments which
contained a warning regarding the abuse and the dangerous effce.s of
LS7D, but nobody did anything about it, and that was in 1965, I think.
Perhaps I should not be plaguing you with those questions, but it is
someuiing that the committee is interested in. We were talking about
it. The Members of the Senate were speaking about it and you came
along and you did not seem to get anywhere.
How many illegitimate sources manufacturing LSD have become
known to your administrator I
Dr. GoDDamw. Six, I believe, are known to us, and actions have been
taken against several of these Two of the persons responsible are
fugitives from justice at the present time.
In one case there was no count returned, one was given 17 years
and is now on appeal, and other was given 9 month.
Senator Domn Would you mind telling us where they *are located
geographically.
340. TU NAMCOTC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1968
certainly an informative one, one that we shall give great weight and
consideration to.
With respect to MSD, what do you consider the most effective ways
of preventing further increase of the problemI For e p1 do you
on I for eliminating the porv the network of supply,
%e users
and soplans
have
Dr. GODDAR. I think first of all we need x, vigorous, widespread
program of education.
Senator Dow. I know that.
Dr. GQDDARD. This should be carried out in cooperation with the
university officials, and we think also going right into the senior class
in high school.
We feel that perhaps the time to ingrain these attitudes or instill
these attitudes toward-misuse of drugs, to prevent the misuse of drugs
is before the person gets out from wider the parental restraints an
is still in his senior year.
Secondly, we feel that the application of the existing authorities
under the drug abuse control amendments, striking primarily at those
who manufacture illicitly and who peddle or sell illicitly. As you
know, we can get them on possession under these circumstances. As I
have mentioned, and there are what we believe are adequate penalties.
Each time a seller or manufacturer is arrested and confined, then
we have perhaps stopped the distribution to another thousand students
or another thousand persons. We think this should be our primary
target working with State and local officials.
Senator DODD. The point I am trying to get at is this-really the
production of ISD now is illegaL
Dr. GODDARD. Yes.
Senator DoDD. As oposed to the production cf barbiturates and
amphetamine pills." There has been a lot of talk about this. Some
people say this may mean that professional criminls will move in,
" usually
syndicates and so on. Users, according Ito. what we hear, are
nondelinquents.
Everybody enis to fairly well agree on that. College students
are some o those whom we have*been talking about. Al of these
factors hive serious implications for enforcement priorities, it seems
to me.
Do you not agree I
Dr. GoDDARD.-1 agree, and I would comment that we know that
professional criminal elements have entered into the distribution of
amphetamines, barbiturates, and these other d, gs-
1. t :
Senator DODD. Yes.
Dr. GODDA.RD. That are now under control, but we have not wit-
neKsed this so far with LSD?
Senator DomD. You have not I
Dr. GODDARD. That is correct.
Senator DoDD. Experts have told us that thousands of the users,
as I say, are what you and I,I think, Senator Kennedy and all' f
us would agree are usually intelligent, as I have described them, non-
delinquents, and they do not hesitate to use this LSD because the
stigma of criminal behavior is not yet attached; is not related to the
use of the drug. we know too that a large number of these young
TH ZfAR9%,q1Ic 4BIW~Iw
API9N -AT PF 18"
jam for pram, ingestion for ingetion, LSD is fai more dangerous
t heroin so they have said. And so they have asked for much
stiffer penf.aties for pospeuion. We do not know, st 'lest 1 do not,
are they right or aft they wrong I wonder if any of you would/pve
us your advice on that w g I an o o o
Dr. Goooim. I would have to disagree with mY colleagues in their
opinion that heroin is lem-dangeous than LSD. Heiin, as you
hOWnw o hr~yaddyiti
Sefimator ob YO.• . .
Dr.Gmsn And the long-teim results of addiction hav been very
dmpintig with resp&* to our ability to oure then individuals.
although p sing properties of being dan rous, paticu-
lmrly foe those who may be prepsichotio, and thus-tipped over into an
overt psychosis, apparently hi been used by, many who have not
experience this type of long-term problem, and so on balance I
would have to clasmify heroin as being more dangerous than the LSD
compound.-
Seaor Dow. I do not know and would like to know, if you can
tell me, am I right in my understanding that crimes of heroin addicts
are usually no4violent.
. Dr. (qowAW. That is correct. It is my understanding that most
drug addict, commit crimm of the nature of shoplifting, breaking
and entering.
Senator MM. Yes.
Dr. GowARD Purse catching or prostitution to gain money to
maintain their habit. It is a very expensive habit indeed It may be
$75 to$100aday.
Senator Do;. I know, but from what we have heard anyway, there
are periods when the users of LSD are violent.
7I D'i, GMDM. This may vary greatly.' We find some people go into
what we term a catatonic stupor under theiinfluences of.D. These
may be prepsychotic individuals. Some experience mild euphoria.
The. entire gamut up to violence has been report, and this, of course,
is the lack of our understanding why these differepes- occur, which
indicates clearly the need for greater research as to its effects on the
central nervous -stem. But you do hav*'the whole spectrum of
changeoin persondity involved.
Senator DoD. Do you have information concerning the personality
makeup of individuals who are vulnerable to drug abuse, particularly
'toLSD I "" '' " ' , - -,
Dr:.OeGoAm. I cannot provide you with any personality profile,
sir,: because it is believed that everyone is susceptible, from what we
would term normal individuals to those who are indeed psychotic. It
has been mentioned by some in this field that one ol the to'ost suscep-
tible persons who seek out LSD may be tbe persoft who is in that pre-
psychotic state, recognizing he or she has some psychological, psychi-
atric problem, looks for what might be an easy way out, an easy curs,
and these are the people that seem' most often to be tipped over -into
freak psychosis and require extensive hospitalization.' But apart from
that, it would be difficult to characterize the userq of LSD.
Senator DODD. Perhaps after you bave had, more time you can
appear again and I think you will be able to give us more information'.
Dr. "DAM. Yes.
zN4O9TAC~ -1~G~
qfar
. oanat9r, DQw. Jjow lopg dq,ypu think it will t#~e before you Ihave,
tMs sort of accurateinformatiQo-so 4ht you wil.lUs able to"sy
Dr. GODDAmD. If you mean pn.gextent.of 4 role othink '
itwould take about ISmonths define the 1n of the problem
on a national basis As I mentioned, the preliinary studies are M.
derway pw to validate the testing instruments w would be Una:
early this fall, when students return to the campua. In addition_
community studies will beginlater ti"year.
Senator Dow. About 12 months I
Dr. Go)m4 TYes,air, now a ter ro '
Senator Dow. Do you have evidence now that tledrug cap result.
in prolonged mental illness I
Dri, Gwn.D.w. Reports from the scientific literature are at some
variance on, this, and I just point out that psychiatrists feel that the
drug itself may only act to precipitate a latent mental illness that was
pient before t1 .drug was taken. There is no general agreement that
taking the drug by "normal" persons over a period of tine would cause
metal illness.
Senator Dow. Tell me again how long a period of time has LSD
been an investigative research drug under the Federal Food, Drug,
and.Cometo ActA t ?I - ,
Dr. Gvowmu. Since 1953, but the research in other countries strted,
in1943.
Senator Dow. As a layman that seems to me like a long time; am
I right about that I .f I
Dr. GoiDARi. I would agree, sir. I think it is readily apparent
that this drug today, a lll these years of research, has not proven
to be of value in any clinical illness. There are some vions
that it pmay be of value in the treatment of lcoholism, but M are.
extremely preliminary in nature'. Also pehps in schizophreia.
B5ut the length of time which this drug has been under study, and the.
complexity of it, I think clearly indicates a great deal more research,
will have to be carried out before it can, if ever, be approved for more
widespread usage.
Senator DoD6. Is there any explanat on to-a layman as to why you.
have not arrived at some more precise conclusLon over this period
thelast10yesr| !:, ' .'t . '.
Dr. GODDMa One of the problems has been the lack of's good thera-.
peutic agent which can minxic but not actually reproduce all the
symptoms of LSD. Just recently such an agent was developed. It is.
dipropyltryptamine, DTP and this is a drug which will reproduce
many of the symptoms of LSD but not actually produce all the mental
changes, and so it can be used, in a controlled study. This may be of
greater value in assessing the effectiveness in treatment of such condi-
tions as lcoholisi, because then the doubla-blind procedure can be,
used, 'id neither the patient nor the investlg~tor would know which
drug is being received- d so we can remove the biaeffect of the'
inveigator's firm belief, inthe value of the drug. Ti is a problem,
that has confounded.much of the remearch 'p to now.
Senator Dom. I want to give Senator K an opporuity to
ask questions, but many witness and I think members of this sub-
conmmitt. feel that it advisable to act witout .urtherdelay any-'
"apVIn~M f~eote~enet tp g xbc~ut the most~
6" 6-66--23
Fl. T-101 34&
TE0NiNACOftiC RU&BJTATION AM? OF 1966
effective controls we can over the black market production anyway,
but also the sale and ion of this drug.
Don't you think thit is advisable nowl
Dr. Gb We think that is what we are doing under the Drug
wan.
Abuse Control Amendments, and as rapidly as we can train and put
into the field these agents whom we have employed and expand our
rograM and develop our educational activities- we feelthat we will
Lve the tools
sinfiat available to us and ca reportbac to you in thefuture
progress.
Senator Domo. I am glad to hear you say that. It seem to mak
sense to me.
Senator Kennedy.
Senator Karmy of Massachusetta Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Goddard, I want to first of all express what an admirer I am
of yours. I think that you have certainly dispatched your respondi-
bility in this responsible position generally in the highest traditions,
and I feel that you have brought certaina capacity, an understand-
and an experience to the-Food and Drug Ad ration which
makes all of us extremely fortunate to have you in that position.
Dr. GoDoamn. Thank you, sir.
Senator Kwmmr Of Massachusetts. And I think you have also
demonstrated a sensitivity about this problem, which is admirable.
Most of the questions that I have have been asked by the chairman,
Senator Dodd.
Senator Doz. I didn't mean topr ptyou.
Senator Kwuioy of Massachusetts. I would, with your indulgence
and with the indulgence of #he committee, like to move for appioxi-
mately 15 seconds into a different subject but a matter which is of
great importance and interest to me. I will utilize this opportunity
because 1Ido not have this opportunity very often, and that is to ask
you about fish protein concentrate, which is a matter of great interest.
We have hada chance to talk previously about it.
Dr. GODDmW. Yes.
Senator KzxNrN of Massachusetts. It is a matter which has been
held in your administration. not in yours, particularly.
Dr. GowAw.m I understan L
Senator KzNmmy of Massachusetts. But by the adminiration for
particularperiod of time. It is matter ofgreat interest to us not
oZy in New'England, but to all of us who believe in the benefits of
fish protein concentrates in meeting the problems for malnutrition
and food deprivation around the world. I wonder if just for a few
seconds you could comment on that?
Dr. GODDAm. Yes. Of course I too shareyour view that this holds
great potential in terms of meeting our worldwide protein deficiency
problem. It is not the only answer, of course, but it is one I think that
can in the near future become available to us.
We have under consideration at the present time two petitions.
These are both being evaluated. We have had some technical prob-
lems that are in the process-of resolution. I can assure you, sir, that
as rapidly as these are resolved, we will publish a notice in the Federal
Register of what our intent is. * 11 .
Senator Kimwrir of Massachusetts I think yqu noticed that the
Senate committee, the Commerce Committee, has been holding hear-
TE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT &W1966 4
847
insabout building these plants in various parts of the country, a
the Senate will be consider it. I feel if we are gong to have action
in this session, the expeditious consideration of thi which I know
you are givmn, woul extremely helpful, if we are goig to see
this resolved without delay.
Dr. Goonawu. We have made this a high priority item, sir.
Senator Kzmuur of Masachusetts. Than you. I would just like
to ask you first of all, in this program which you have outlined to the
committee, whether you feel first of all you have got a sufficient num-
ber of qualified people and personnel in your Department and sufficient
resources in order to c through what you have outlined as a suf.
ficient program or whether the Congress should consider additional
help and assistance.
hDr. GoDDAR,. Of course, one always wishes that he had 800 trained
people yesterday. We do feel, however, that the recruitment program
hasbeen extremely successful It is rare that when you offer a Fed-
eral position that you have a ratio of 9 applicants for 1 person to be
selected, and we indeed enjoyed this very favorable ratio so we felt
that our basic recruiting program not only worked well but gave us
atigative
good choice of people, college graduates, persons with former inves-
experience.
'Now we are trying to build as rapidly and yet as soundly as possible
for a good program, and at this time I ee little merit in a crash
activity, but rather I would like to assureyou that in 6 to 8 months
if we sow signs of needing additional staff, the Secetry will, I am
sure, be integrate in coming forward with that recommendation.
Senator KzENmY of M sachusetts. You are satisfied that you have,
at least presently, the manpower, the resources, to carry through what
you outlined as your program 1
Dr.
feel weGowvm.
can makeBetween this fiscal year and their upcoming one, we
a significant start on this pro m and really make
a dent in the manuwu and illicit distribution.
Senator KAM~M Of usetts. One of the aspects of your
program, which is something that has been increasingly evident to this
committee, is the importance of an educational program I am won-
dering this. Obviously there would probably be a coordinating activ-
ity between your Department and various other departments of the
Federal Government in develop ping educational prgraim ke you
satisfied that this int cy interaction is taki place, first of all I
Dr. GowANm Yes, I am; and I must say as h person pushing
some of it, the reception has been very favorable. I cited the example
of Dr. James Fox, who holds a post of Division Chief within the Food
and Drug Administration in the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control, and
also is the Acting Chief of the Center at NIMH, as one example of the
kind of cooperation we are ga inig.
Second, NIMH has agreed to carry out a dual review of research
proposals involving LSIX The Office of Education, I know, will stand
ready to assist us in the preparation of curriculum content for material
if we move in the direction of high schools. The university world has
been extremely cooperative, although they are a non-Federal group.
•They have met with Mr. Finlator, and they are drawing up a pro.
gram Whiclwe think will help educate the youth of the Nation not
2"8 38
TH NAROOYI'C_ ,nA3fON ,C. O1 1960
only on LSD, sir, but the othea drugs that are abused quite widely, the
.mnphtaminou,. Wrturae, and tranquilis.
.W4ethink i is importamt that we have a ba c program here, be.
caws in trms of magnitude, them others exceed the magnitude of
abuse of LSD.
Senator Kwmui of Massachusetts. Now is the experience of the
Food and Drug Admini-ation when it hai embarked on a kind-of
educational comprehensive program on which you are embarked now
that you can reaV successfully meet the obectives of such an effort?
Dr.
i .i &a Sir, the Foo and, Drug Administratioa--I had to
consult Mr. Goodrich because of his longtime association--has never
embarked o a program of this magnitude before, so I could not. be
responsive.
Senator Kwwwn of Massachusetts. So this is really-
Dr. GonoAiD. A first.
Senator Kzrizuz of Massachusetts. A new and untried but ambi.
tious program I
Dr. GOdDARD. Yes.
We feel very fortunate. We have an excellent Assistant Comn ius-
sioner for Education who came to us from the Office of Education, Mr.
Ted Cron.
I know that he is working on this along witI Mr. Finlator and his
staff. . ,
4
Senator Kzzwrx of Massachusetts. You, wrote, I believe, on
April 5 to the various educational institutions around the country. I
am wondering what kind of responmw you, received from them.
Could you review that briefly
Dr., Gmwvm. We received an excellent response from this letter
from university presidents and college presidents. In some instances
they requ specific assistant ..
*Mr. Finlator is attempting to provide materiials to them, and this
led directly to the formation of an advisory group that met elth Mr.
Finlaor this Sunday morning, to discuss what additional elemts
Would be desirable in an educational activity aimed Lthe students in
the colleges and universities. I would say they hate responded well.
- They.are aware of the problems that exia on their own campuses,
andthat it is indeed a national problem., We have their eazl Now we
have to provide them with theaammunition.
Senator KvoiTinr of Massachuwtt You mentioned earlier, in
rospns to a question by Senator Doddt that it will prhaps take you
12 months, that you could make an estimate As.o the magnitudbrof
the problem.' I think those are the words which you used.
Dr. GODARD. That is oorreCt-
Siz,,:-v KzEmNZY of Massachusetts I am wondering whether you
could r,e us an estimation of time that it would take to determine
i]hther i1,'s program of education as well as the practical policing
bf the ir.Mfacturing and peddling of the illicit traffic of these drugs
ineffective. . .
Dr. GOovoRD. It .Always, as you well know, sir, difficult, to- aoen
the *mpact of educational programs, whether there will be a quick
iakeor delayed re.ponse, ,
I have 'beeiL involved in
,, ost, of my. professional -cAreer in
mtohi
public health work, because that is what much of public health is
about.
J
-THIE NARCOTIC -U43UAIO .ACT' 01P 1000
With the level of iteree that now exio, I am Aso .om aW tbat
we will have
response by educabional
to them the end of the next academia
acXitie& year,.hex.June
That would mgnifiant
1967
approxim#,fty a year from now, in other words. We intend to uo a4t
thenmedia.
Senator K"M)Y of Massachustts It is not related to the aasue#
yearchowever, visit I . .
Dr. GovoAmu. No, no, but the students an, Most. redil avAilabip
during the auemic. year if. you are t"a abouat.,tfob mvewty
students.
beSenator ll fo rce ,of Massachusetts
unde rf uKmxmmy, , I imagine
,:yuw
:.,,piram
,,,...' wquld:I
Dr. GeOVau. Yes.
Senator Kz xior of Mass a huett. I expect by $eptember, or by
the summer school perhaps.;
Dt . GOMRs", Yes '
Our experience with patients who have ingested LSD has focused
on PSychiatric complications of LSD usage. We have never given
LSD in either the medical-experimental or the psychiatric-therapeutic
situation. We have carefully scrutinized the records of all patients
seen at the Neuropsychiatric Ir :titute at UCLA since September 1,
1965. Approximatly one-half of the hospitalized LSD patients have
been treated on a ward directly under our care. Weekly group therapy
sessions with hospitalized LSD patients were utilized to explore the
personality structure, motivations, and attitudes of th LSD patient&
We have also interviewed many high school students, college stu-
dents, and other groups who used LSD. Part of our research has
consisted of going into the community to observe the various users
of LMD.
There is no question that the number of people using LSD is increas-
ing rapidly. Prior to September 1965, approximately one LSD case
was seen every other month in the psychiatric emergency room of the
UCLA. Medical Center. Between September 195, and April 1986,
from 5 to 15 cases per month were seen for a total of 70 patients.
In April of 1968, despite active attempts to discourage persons with
ISD problems from coming to the hospital, 16 patients were seen.
There were many additional telephone calls from persons in trouble
from LSD. So far in May there has been no decer~as in the number of
cases seen.
Acute effects of the drug which seemed to bring patient into the
emergency room were hallucinations, anxiety severe depression, and
confusion. We have also seen persistent psychoses and severe suicide
attempts after using the drug. 7Diminihed interest in working and in
living a productive life and an increase in philosophical speculations
about LSD and its possible eects on the world is A frequent effect of
the drug.
'There is also often a recurrene of some of the acute symptoms
months after the ingestion 6f LSD without further use of the drug.
LSD seems to provide more primitive defenses aga'mst the nozm8.
anxiety and depression that most people face in our socety.We might t
speculate that people who have a great deal of diffi6ulty tolerating the
anxiety and stress of everydy living are provided, in a snse, with a
psychotic defense by LSD. They hope to experience an estrangement
rm reality with the drug that prevents them from having to ex-
tprience any anxiety or depression. Many LSD users seem to reject
the concept of working within an or i society. -
Many people who use LSD and undergo this change of attitude
afterward are not seen by psychiatrists.
10would like to depart from.thi statement for a moment and rea4
to you some. rest. fron a study-that Dr.Fishr and Ihave done
which is now in press d djwill be published i
inortly
e Journo of
the American Midical Associat6.
Senator DODD. Go right ahead.
Dr. Uxmrmazwm They have to do with these 70 patients that.we
evaluated at qur medical, center. The 70 patients in our,study repme-
sented. 12 percent of thi total of 606, syciatric patients seen at th*:
psychiatric emergency. room of UCLA during a7- ta period4 b&:
tween September of 1965 and April 1 of 196 Seventy-fiy, pprqeni
were male and the median age was 21, ranging from 16 to 88. Eighty
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 355
percent were single, 6 percent divorced and 3 percent each marriage-
separated or widowed.
All but four were from the Greater Los Angeles area, the largest
number, 20 percent, from the city proper.
As for their occupation, 24 of the 70 were unemployed; 16 were
students, high school, college, other schools; 3 were musicians and
artists; 10 were businessmen; 8 were housewives, and 1 was a dope
pusher. There was no data for the reining 13.
Twenty-seven percent of this group were diagnosed psychptic, 21
percent neurotic, 18 percent character disorders, 10 percent addicts,
and 12 percent each for miscellaneous use diagnoses and multiple
diagnoses.
Aventy-five percent of those receiving multiple diagnoses were di-
agnosed psychotic, bringing the total for all psychotic reactions to 36
percent.
In the period of morethan 6 weeks prior to being seen, 36 percent o
the patients had used marihuana, 11 percent had isd ampetamines
and 6 percent had used heroin and biaiturates.
I have the times that the drug was used. Sixteen of the seventy took
the drug within a week of being seen, 26 from I to 6 weeks prior to
being seen, 20 over 6 weeks prior to being seen. And the data for the
number of tines that LSD was taken, 20 had only taken it once, 6 had
taken it from I to 5 times, 7 from.5 to 10 times, 30 over 10 times, un-
known 7. One patient had taken it more than 60 times.
Other drugs taken within 6 weeks of the time the were seen in-
cluded mariliuana, 20 percent of the patients; tranqu 6 percent,
and amphetamines, 6 percent. Forty-seven percent had taken no
drugswther than the SD.
Np10 percent of the group had been hospitalized previously
psychiatrically, 1 percent for alcoholism, 9 percent for other reasons.
None had previous admission for drug problems. Twenty-seven perf
cent had previous psychiatric outpatient care., Eighteen percent had
no history of psychiatric inpatient or outpatient care, and there were
no data available for 45 percent.
,Twenty-four percent had parental separation or divorce for over
6 months before the age of 18. There was a history of jail terms. fer
crimes for two patients. Three had histories of delinquency, and five
had been on probation for other offenses for a total of 14 percent of the
$Ample.
. Hallucinations were the most common presenting smtom, fol-
lowed danxety and confusion.
, depression, m .
The 70 patients reported- here' experienced serious side reactions
fo i LSDingeston, the largest such group ported to date.
Other side eftects have been reported 'in the, psychiatric' litekat in'.
usually as individual case histories or as anecdotal accounts. ' 7?
, Our sample differs from others in that all patients obtained the drnx
from illicit sources. None took it in either the medical rsa2
or the psychiatric-therapeutic setting."
Our sample contains no persons of the professional class in con-
trast to the finding of others thAt LSD seems mainly to be u'ed by
f wi0nals intellectuals, or other' "ddle-class people
Hir W do we know .tha the' presentmg symptoms ral the
renlt of LSD and not &,e to some other cause, with the recentJSD
ingestion just a coincidence I
-356 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
using LSD. She succumbed to this pressure and started using it, and
decided to drop out of school and become sort of like a hermit, draw
unempkgyment and attempt to find meaningful ways of living a great
life. She was unable to determine exactly what the great life was,
but was quite convinced that it would not be found in school or in
working.
I will continue now with our prepared statement.
Senator Dow. Go right ahead.
Dr. FUHzR. A chronic effect that we have observed among many
LSD users is a significant degree of subjective or perceptual distortion.
A group of LSD patients that we studied fairly intensively over several
months were convinced that they could "pick up vibrations" from other
people, that they could tell by gross inspection alone if someone else
had ever used LSD, and that they had a keen awareness of music and
art. Nevertheless, when objective means were made to determine their
alleged sensory awareness, it was seen that, far from being more keen
and selective, they were much less able to discriminate and their powers
of observation seem to have been limited by LSD. Thus, there was a
strong feeling of subjective improvement in many areas on the part of
these LSD users, concomitant with an objective loss of function.
It is impossible to determine who will ave severe reactions to LSD
on the basis of the mental health of the user. We have seen extremely
unstable individuals use the drug with apparently very little difficulty.
On the other hand, people with emotional difficulties have had serious
reactions to LSD. However, we have also seen individuals who seem
to have been in good mental health who have become quite disturbed,
and have suffered severe changes in their functioning following the
use of LSD. Included in this latter group have been psychiatrists, psy-
chiatric residents, psychoanalysts, and persons screened by personality
tests.
There are some clinical examples here. One was a girl who had had
some problems. After taking LSD at a teenage nightclub, she became
convinced that everyone's face was changing and that her own face was
melting. In an attempt to abort what she thought was her own melting
away, she severely cut every flexor tendon in her left hand. She was
transferred to a medical facility, which, being unable to treat her
because of her severe confusion and agitation, sent her to our facility
where she remained an inpatient, and I might add, she remained
acutely suicidal for about a month and a half.'
We also have seen a patient who used LSD twice. After using it,
he became quite disorganized, did not know who he was, and stare
wandering around until his parents brought him to our treatment fa-
cility. le remained confused, disoriented, unable to function on the
outside for well over 2 months.
Another instance is a gentleman who seemed to have very few
psyhiatric problems. He was sort of curious and had heard that
quite a few students were using LSD in an effort to learn something
about themselves. Consequently, he took one dose of LSD. After
taking the one dose of LSD, for approximately 8 days he was con-
vinced that he was going crazy. He felt he was un le to turn off
thoughts in his mind. lMe felt that he was unable to screen out sounds
and visual perceptions that were coming in from the surroundings.
,TKZ NARCOTIC REHABIUTATION ACT OF 1960 009
He went to see a psychiatrist who, by using medion, was able to
restore him to what seemed to be his noinma level of functioning. 1
However, approximately 2 months later when this same patient was
faced With some stress in his everyday work, rather than reacting in a
way that we might think to be normal, like getting anxious,getting
little
starteddepressed, talking symtms
having paranoid things over,
andhe startedthatallucinating.
thought people. who weree
with him were out to hurt him some way. Consequently, he was ad-
mitted to our treatment facility.
Senator DODD. How old an individual was he, Doctor I
Dr. FIsmz. Twenty-two.
Another disturbing aspect of LSD usage i the miionary quality
that many of its users seem to possess. Most people who have used
LSD are so affected by the drug that it becomes impossible for them
to be objective when discussing its effects There is a great deal of
proselytizing and insistence on the part of users that other people must
share the same kind of subjective awareness that an individual using
LSD experiences.
We have no doubt that this is a sincere conviction on the part of
many LSD users, since in our research we have seen mothers who have
given LSD to their children, brothers who have encouraged their sis-
ters to take LSD, and many people who have selected their closest
friends and used every means possible to convince them that they too
should share in the world of the psychedelic.
I would like to pause to give you another example of this type of
missionary quality.
We admitted to our facility a 24-year-old mother. She was ad-
mitted along with her 23-month-old daughter. The reason: She had
been giving doses of LSD to her daughter, feeling that it would make
her a better person when she grew to adulthood.
I also know of individual insnces in which patients, after being
discharged from the hospital, were encouraged by members of their
family to continue using LSD.
One patient who called our facility sounded frankly psychotic and
was asked to come in for treatment. However, members of his peer
group told him that the only way you could ever beat a bad trip with
LSD was to double the dosage, so consequently he doubled the dosage
and still remained confused. At this time we further insisted that
he come into the hospital.
However his friends persisted and told him that what he should
do now is double that dosage. That was the last we heard of him.
There are several instances of individuals who have devoted a great
deal of their energies to buying LSD and literally passing it out free
among the population at hand in an attempt to 4'save the world."
Some LSD users have said with great fervor that if the leaders of
the various countries would only take LSD, peace would be established
forever.
J might pause. Some instances of these have been various individ-
uals who have wandered around the beach, who have gone into the
various areas of Los Angles spending most of their available re-
sources to buy LSD, and they would stop people on the street and tell
them that they felt it was their duty to inform them that they could
,360 THU NARCOTIC RETABfITaTION ACT OF 19 6
66-"8--6---24
THI NARCOTIC RIIHABU-TAIMON ACT OF 19066
advisability of giving the world's leaders LSD so that they would lcve and not
hate. At last contact he had not decided whether to pursue his law studies or
to continue with LSD full time. We have observed this degree of subjective dis-
tortlou among many LSD users. A group of them whom we studied fairly inten-
sively over several months were convinced they could "pick up vibrations" from
other people, that they could tell if someone else had used LSD by casual inspee-
tion, that they had a keen awarenein o music and art. Nevertheless, objective
tests showed that their ability to discriminate was below normal, and their their
powers of observation had been actually decreased by LSD.
At various community dances which we attended, the young girls were in their
"psychedelic slacks" and the teenage boys wore long hair and sunglasses. They
moved beneath undulating lights in bright "psychedelic" colors. At such gather-
ings the drug seemed to replace personal contact and to substitute for the drives
of sex and aggression. We watched seven or eight sailors dancing with one girl
on the floor. There was little male-female awareness or physical contact; each
was In his own fantasy world.
The criteria for mental health, according to Freud, are the ability to work
and to love, and LSD users seem to deteriorate in those very areas. We have
already mentioned the numerous individuals we have studied who have either
lost their jobs or lost the incentive to work after using LSD. The ability to love,
that is to have psychic ntimacy with another person, seems also to be decreased
by LSD. In contradiction to the claim that the drug helps one to get closer
to people, we note that users become more introspective and invested in them-
selves. The extreme results are autism and psychosis.
Advocates of LSD have maintained that proper screening techniques would
enable one to predict individual reactions to LSD and to eliminate those who
would have "bad trips." Our experience at UCLA indicates that such predl-
tious are extremely unreliable. We know of patients who, though carefully
screened for research purposes, suffered severe LSD reactions, with dramatic
alterations of their value systems, resulting in a diminished level of functioning.
On the other hand, we have come across members of the community whom we
would have judged fairly unstable but who showed little or no change after using
LSD.
The number of high school students and teen-agers who take the drug is In-
creasing rapidly. Most adolescents are struggling with feelings of aggression
and sexuality, along with their need to establish an identity. LSD can seem a
"magic" solution to such problems. It offers a ready-made identity with fellow
users and the introspective experience helps to deny the feelings of both aggres-
sion and sexuality. Their conversation becomes "acid head" talk. Bad "trips"
are "freak." Every stranger is "the man" (police) and to talk to one would be
to "cop-out" (squeal). Suspicion to the point of paranoia is common. The ado-
lescent is frequently overwhelmed by the LSD experience, with the result that
the search for Identity becomes a florid psychotic nightmare. There is perhaps
no period of life more loaded with conflict, and one might therefore expect that
adolescents who took LSD would experience severe complications, including
panic states, prolonged psychosis and severe depressions.
Another disturbing aspect of LSD usage is the missionary seal It seems to in-
duce In many of Its users. We have no doubt that the enthusiasm is sincere,
since we have come upon cases of mothers who have given LSD to their children,
brothers who have encouraged their sisters to take It, and many individuals who
have selected their closest friends and used every means possible to convince
them that they too should share In the world of psychedelia. In several in-
stances, individuals have devoted a great deal of their energies to buying LSD
and passing it out free among the population in an attempt to "save the world."
The right environment for taking LSD (often alluded to by acid heads as
necessary for a good trip) means having a "sitter" to guide you through the
LSD state. However, neither a favorable environment nor a guide guarantees a
pleasant or meaningful experience. If the trip goes bad, and LA3D users are
brought to a medical facility In the acute phase, tranquilizers and barbiturates
will help most of them, but not all. Many of our hospitalized patients have re-
mained in the hospital for more than a month.
Until more is known about LSD and its short- and long-term effects, It must
be considered a very dangerous drug. Unfortunately, the ready market for and
easy manufacture of the drug have resulted in an almost unlimited black market
supply, and the buyers are often the very people who have the most to lose from
THU NARCOTIC RZ OATJON
ACT OF 196 6 .363
its use. We certainly hope that LSD research will be continued, but we appeal
to those who loudly proclaim that "everyone" should take LSD to remember the
highly subjective response to the drug. We have known the most ardent en-
thusiasts to become the most eloquent opponents-often after just one bad
experience.
The controversy continues to rage, some investigators maintaining that side
effects are frequent, others stating that the potential gains far outweigh possible
side effects. We are worried by what we have seen. California and other states
are now considering legislation to supplement existing federal legislation;
Sandos Laboratories, the principal legitimate source, has discontinued menu-
future The future of LSD remains controversial and uncertain.
Senator Dow. I want to thank both of you men for your testimony.
As I said when I introduced you, we feel you are highly qualified
to advise this committee on this very grave problem.
I have a few questions that I would like to ask. I do not want to
detain you but I- would like to get your advice and opinion on some
matters that [have] occurred to me.
Doctor, I want to be sure I understood you correctly. You say
that a mother gave her young child LSD I
Dr. FisHaR. That is right.
Senator DODD. How old was the child !
Dr. FisHwi The child was about 23 months old and it was during
a medical examination that it was determined that.something smed
to be bothering the child, and further questioning produced the fact
that the mother, who uses LSD herself, had been giving this to her
daughter.
Senator I)oDD. She gave it to this 23-month-old child I
Dr. Fxsimn. Twenty-three months old.
Senator DODD. I have here some containers which come from your
State by the way, California. They contain LSD in different forms.
Have you seen these forms!
I call them forms, I do not know what you call them. Are you
familiar with these Is this the sort of thing that is used?
I)r. Fisma. Yes.
Senator DODD. The liquid !
Dr. FisiliE. The blue liquid is something that we see frequently.
Senator DoD. Capsules, this looks like sugar cubes. Is this the
common method?
Dr. Fism. Also a clear liquid.
Senator DODD. This is a colored liquid.
Dr. FIsHER. It can also be put in a colorless liquid.
Senator DODD. ColorlessI
Dr. FIsHEa. Just by mixing it with water to dilute it.
Senator DODD. Was it one of these that this mother gave her child!
Dr. Fmsumm. I do not know exactly in what preparation. I believe
it was mixed in a clear liquid and given as with water. That is the
way I believe that was given. The other way-well, there are several
other ways--another way that many high school students are using
it is to put it on an envelope and then address the envelope for a
friend. Then they can be going about their everyday work, and by
licking the envelope could have taken enough LSD for any kind of a
safari we have mentioned.
Senator DoDD. Yes; we have heard about that form.
364 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 19006
Dr. Uxmwa mra. I presume you have also heard about the method
of soaking a suit of clothing in LSD, or a part of a suit of clothing
and then sucking on this. This has been done.
Senator DODD. No; I do not think we have heard about that.
Dr. FISwnm. One interesting case history that we have concerned a
young woman who used to bake it into brownies, also.
Senator DoDD. I have always liked brownies but from now on I do
not know whether I will have any.
Could you describe for us the difference between the more typical
drug addict and the group of persons who are likely to take LSD
Dr. FISHE. Yes. I have not had a great deal of experience with
drug addicts. However, the ones that I-have seen tend to have crimi-
nal records, tend to have been in trouble with the police before, have
engaged in a great deal of antisocial activit
Now, many times these ..me people use LSD, but there are other
groups who use LSD that are more in line with college students who
are interested in finding out something or having a new experience,
high school students, younger people in general who are not what we
would call hard core antisocial drug addicts.
The other thing is that many drug addicts will tell their friends and
tell people close to them that the worst thing they could do is get
hooked on heroin or hooked on any of the drugs that they are on-un-
like people who use LSD who many times feel a need to convince their
friends or to convince their fan* ies that they should use LSD. I
think this is the primary thing?
Senator DODD. What do you consider a normal dose ? Has this been
asertained?
Dr. UNGERIEZ E. Well, many people can get an effect from LSD on
100 micrograms. However, the dosages of 150 to 200 all the way up
to 500 are commonly employed.
Now we have seen people who take 2,000 micrograms and take it
frequently, and have quite bad effects from it. We do not believe, how-
ever, that the proportion of 'bad effects is necessarily dosage related.
You can have a very bad effect from a small dosage, and you can get
away perhaps with much more.
Senator DDD. I am first trying to establish if you know what would
be an average or normal dose and what would be an overdose, or can
you tell us that?
Dr. UNOEILEIDF. Of course th3 problem with this is that these peo-
ple all take the black market stuff, and they do not really know what
they are getting. They do not know whether it is pure or impure,
whether it is LSD or something very similar, and they certainly do
not know how many micrograms. They talk as though they do, but
even they will admit that from some dealers the precision by which
they can tell the amount is very poor.
Senator DeeD. This puts this drug in a rather unique category, does
it not?
Am I rih.At about that I
I think it is rather well known what the normal dosge say of heroin
is or any other addictive drugs and dangerous drugs, but as far as I
have been able to learn, nobody seems to be able to fix a normal dosage
or an overdosage. Is this correct?
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 365
Dr. Fnsia. The only thing that I have read, and this seems to be
borne out clinically, is that it seems that at least 100 micrograms are
needed for an LSD experience.
Senator DoDD. Can you predict the effects LSD will have on an
individually Is that possible
Dr. Uoiamoiwz.x No, I would say most emphatically not. Any
given individual, we do not know how they will react.
Dr. Fisher has mentioned that some apparently very stable persons,
including members of our own profession, have had very difficult and
very bad experiences. Others who look very unstable, one would
expect a bad experience, have not seemed to have any.
Senator DoDD. We have gone into this over and over again and you
have told us as well that this is particularly attractive to young peo-
ple at universities and on campuses and so on.
Do you have any idea what it is that makes this drug attractive to
this particular segment of our society I
Dr. Fxsux. A lot of young peple in high school and college are
sort of experimenting around with ways of finding out about them.
selves, trying to find out who they are, what they want to do. A lot of
them want experiences. They are, you might say, looking for kicks
the same way that maybe formerly alcohol-and things like this were
used.
Senator DoD. Several witnesses have said kicks, but it does not
seem to me a saisfactory explanation. I am sure it is part of it, but
it has troubled me.
Is there something more involved?
Dr. FisHzR. There is something else. I think that pressure is some-
times utilized. That is, that there are groups-I have mentioned the
missionary quality-sometimes groups of young people feel that the
have found the answer with LSD, and so they tell their ohorts "look.
They can promise them better grades, they andcan you
promise
knowthem
howgreater
yon
life, and by putting this kind of pressure,
people are susceptible to group pressure, this encourages I think the
use of LSD in this segment.
Senator DODD. Lt me ask you this: In your opinion, how wide-
spread is the use of this drug in your area, in your community?
Dr. UGERL EIn. We think it is extremely widespread and the more
People who have learned of our interest in it, the more calls we got
telling us not only of the individual people who are tkigi it, but of
the widespread use throughout the area, and particularly lately in
hAgh schools.
Teachers apparently are advocating this, or some teachers. Others
are not. And[students are taking it at a high school level, 15, 16,
and 17.
Senator Dowo. Do you actually know of schoolteachers who are ad-
vocating the use of ths drugI
Dr. Uxhrozmr. This is what we hear from those who call in and
talk to us. We have not talked to any schoolteachers wh6 have ad-,
volated thiar
Senator Dow. Would you consilerit sdvisbleor 'prudent to c-on
tact a schoolteacher or a school authority if you heard of a schoolft
teacher advising a student to use thi drug
366 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Tnz DA K us or L8D
~ANALYdI5 OF S3VR MONTHH' ZIIRWMC IN A UNIjVU=IY HKOWITWL' PSOHIMATSW
(By J. Thomu Ungerlelder, MD, Duke D. Fisher, MD, and Marleile Fuller)
The symptoms, diagnostic categories, and general characteristics of patients In
70 caeu of adverse reactions to lymec acid diethylamide tartrate (LSD) are
varied. Psychiatric side effects ranged from depressive reaction to psychotic
states. In all cases, LSD Ingesticm occurred separately and apart from medical-
370 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1986
1965: t#ismte am
September
October
- .. .--------------
, 5
------------ .-----
November _---.12
196
December -- - --- ---- - --- -- S
January .. ... 9
February ----------------------------- 9
M arch - --- - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - --- - - -- -- 15
Total -----half
Approximately - of- - to the NPI were .placed
-------
the patients admitted ..- - on 7-.
0a
ward under the care of the physicia-authors. The NPI is an acute treatment
center, where wards are open and admissions are voluntary. There are four adult
wards of 24 beds each, with both male and female patients of all diagnostic cate.
gories admitted to all wards. . . iI
In addition, the inpatients from all four wards, with their psychiatrists' per-
mission, were seen by the authors once each week in an open-ended group for a
period of several montb. The primary purpose was to acquaint us with the LSD
reactions these patients had experienced as well as with the patients themselves
as LSD users. Only a part of the observations derived from this group studx
will be presented here. . -
Unemployed .......... -- - 24
Professional ------- ------------- 0
Student: .
"UhA
Hig hl ,-......---------
. . . ---
--- ---
+Other schools_._+
-..... _. ..... . .. - . .. .- 1
Artist (musicians and artists) .... -- ------- 8
Business .....-.------- 10
Housewife ..---
Other" --------. -- - - - --- - -- ----- - -1 -...
- ........... 8
No data d - ....---.... ------
.... .-- 18
To ---.----- --- .- 70
I Thisatient was a dope pushw.
DIAGNOSIS
-In the period of more than six weeks prior to their being seen, 25 (34%) of
the patients had used marijuana, 8 (11%) had used amphetamineM and 4 (6%)
each had used heroin and baribturatea. Table 4 shows when 18D was last
taken prior to the psychiatric evaluation, and the number of tioes the drug was
Ingested.' One patient -had taken it more than 0 times and one, more than 20.
Other drugs taken within six weeks of the evaluation included marijuana
(14 [20%] of the patients), tranquilizers (4 [6%]),and amphetamines (4 [t$%]).
Thirty-three (47%) had taken no drugs other than the L8A, and six (9%) had
taken a combination of drugs during this six-week period.
TAUSNuber
T 16-DrugXistory of 70 usrs of W~DNmbr@ of
Time LSD last taken: Pot""
Within I week ------------------------------------------ 16
1 to 6 weeks ago --------- ---------------------- 26
More than 6 weeks ago ----------..-- ++
................. 20
No data .-------.. ---- .8
Total ..... 70
Number of times took LSD:
1 -------- ---- 20
5 to ---....
2 to I0
5__.
More than 10-
" _---..
----------------------------
.. . _- ...
- ...W-- -
-. . . -...
__-
.8
6
so_
IpasZNT ILLJIM96
Presenting.ymptom.-Some patients presented with more than one symptom;
hallucinations (20, 29%) were the most common presenting symptom, followed
by anxiety (17, 24%), depression (15, 21%), and confusion (14, 20%) (Table 5).
Inpatients v8 Outpatienft.-Only one major difference between the inpatient
and outpatient groups Is apparent. Nine of the 17 females (more than 50%), but
only 16 of 37 (30%) of the males, were admitted to the hospital. The data were
more detailed for the Inpatients, who received more intensive study over a longer
time. Twenty-five of the 70 patients required psychiatric hospitalization. Nine-
teen of these have now been discharged, and 12 of them (63%) required hospital-
ization of more than one month. One patient was hospitalized for almost five
months and another for three months Five of the six patients still hospitalized
have already been in the hospital more than one month. Therefore, 17 (68%)
of the patients required more than one month of hospitalization.
TA= &-Presentingsymptom ooW"U I
Hallucination ------------------------------- 20
Anxiety -------------------------- 17
Depression ------------------------------------------------- 15
Suicide attempt ------------------------ 5
Suicidal ----------------------------------- 5
Paranoid -------------------------------------------------- 10
Confused -------------------- ------------ ---------- 14
Total ---------------...
The number of patients seeking help did not diminish at all after the Feb. 1,
1966, deadline when the new Federal Drug Abuse Control Amendments
1 went
Into effect. In fact, the largest number of patients seen In any month was In
March 19M
How do we know that the presenting symptoms really are caused by LSD and
not due to some other cause with the recent LSD Ingestion just a coincidence?
We cannot prove a causal relationship, but we can say several things. First, the
symptoms of anxiety, depression, suspiciousness, and hallucinations are among
those commonly reported after experimental administration of LSD. Second, the
patients themselves usually attributed the symptoms to the LSD, particularly
when they had had previous experience therewith. A typical comment was, "It
was like this before on LSD but I got over It-I can't now-this is a freak trip."
LSD is largely gone from the brain at about the same time the mental effects
begin," so that delayed reactions must be explained, perhaps on the basis of some
triggering chain of events set off by the LSD Itself. Symptoms which first began
following LSD ingestion may recur months later in their original intensity, with
no further LSD ingestion."
How do we know that those persons who react adversely to LSD are not
already emotionally disturbed? Although few of our samples had police records,
26 (37%) had histories of previous psychiatric cate, and 23 (33%) were un-
employed, although we do not know whether the patients stopped working be-
fore or after taking LSD. One former disk jockey in the sample said that he
had lost his employment after using LSD and had no ambition to start work
again. A law student, not in the sample, told us that LSD (taken in a medical.
experimental situation after screening by psychological testing) had opened
up new vistas to him. He had "a perspective of the whole world now" and
his legal studies were very dull and uninteresting by comparison. This abandon-
ment of ambition, reduction In goal-striving, and inability to perceive one's own
work performance accurately after taking LSD, has also been documented.'
How do we know that persons taking LSD in a relaxed, friendly environment
with an experienced gulss or "sitter" will have serious side effects? We have
no statistical data to answer this, but our impression (from our weekly group
sessious) Is that bad experiences were common with or without sitters and with
or without "the right environment." This does not minimize the Importance
of suggestion in the LSD experience. Psychedelic trips are being taken with-
out LSD or other drugs' but a group given LSD experimentally, expecting hal.
lucinations and psychosis, experienced essentially nothing more than a sense of
relaxation.'
7"he seriousness of these side effects is documented by successful suicides,
serious suicide attempts, prolonged psychoses, and even a homicide. " , N Al-
though reversibility of side effects, including psychosis) with chlorpromazine -
and prompt medical treatment may prevent serious complications, this is not
necessarily true, and will be dealt with in a future communication. In fact,
one author maintains that orally administered chlorpromazine, unlike that ad-
ministered parenterally, makes the LSD condition worse.* However, one case
exemplifies our concern.
SAMPLE CASM REPORT
Chlorpromazine--Thorain.
TrTifluoperazine hydrochlorlde-Steazbwe Hydrockloridf.
Senator DODD. We will adjourn this hearing until next Wednesday.
(Whereupon, at 1:20 pan., the committee adjourned, to reconvene
Wednesday, May 25,1966.)
1
5u ra.
66-68--6----25
378 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
And now, if I may, just a word about the so-called "British system"
wherein narcotic drug addicts are furnished their requirements by
physicians on prescription. A recent report by the Interdepartmental
Committee on Drug Addiction headed by Lord Brain M.A., D.M.,
F.R.C.P. (chairman) revealed that teenage addiction had increased
40 percent since 1960. In my opinion, this proves conclusively that
this is the wrong road for us to take.
. Now for the answer to some of the questions concerning addiction
per se. It has been said that "addiction is a disease" Gentlemen, if it
is a disease,tuberculosis,
it is one ofleprosy,
the mostand
contagious diseases
Smallpox, diphthera can be known to man.
relatively com-
pared to drug addiction. In over 20 years of questioning drug ad-
dicts--criminal type--I have never asked the question, "How did you
become an addicts" that it did not get the same answers, "Through
association with other addicts," "I was turned on b a friend," or "A
friend had some heroin and I wanted to try it.'
I have heard it said that the narcotic laws are a "miserable failure."
"We must change our methods." Let us examine these statement& To
look in retrospect to 1914 when the Harrison Narcotic Act was passed
by Congress, a very loose survey revealed that out of 105 million
people, 1 in 400 was addicted to narcotics and the situation was
getting progressively worse every day. Now let us compare that
figure with the situation today. The most recent figure available to
me is as of December 31, 1964. There were 55,000 active addicts re-
corded by the U.S. Bureau of Narcotics out of a population of ap-
proximately 200 million people; quite a success story I would say.
The narcotic laws are the most successful laws passed by Congress for
the control of any commodity.
Now for some important news to those of us who are concerned
with drug addiction and the control of other dangerous drugs, such as
hallucinogenics. On April 17, 1965, the so-called Neo-American
Church was founded by Arthur Kleps who dubbed himself Patriarch
of the East and Chief Boo Hoo. This church was founded at Morning
Glory Lodge, Cranberry Lake, upstate New York. It was continued
at this location until early October 1965, at which time it was moved to
1331 SW., 92d Avenue, Miami, Fla. Shortly after the arrival of
Chief Boo Hoo Kleps, a young man living in upstate New York re-
fused to serve in the, armed services because he was a member of
the Neo-American Church and based" on his religion was a consci-
entious objector. This information' was passed on to the FBI in
Miami and after an interview with the Chief Boo Hoo Kleps by
an agent, his findings reference to drug use were passed on to me.
Accompanied by an agent from the U.S. Food and Drug Administra-
tion, I proceed to 1831 SW., 92d AvenueN Miami, and interviewed
Chief Boo Hoo Kleps.. He spoke freely in reference to the formation of
his church estimating his followers to be 200., Re further stated that,
"The psychedelic stibstances, such. as LSD, mescaline, peyote, can-
nabis (marihuana) and psylocybin, are the true hosts of the church-
not drugs, they are sacramental foods-manifestations of the Grace of
God, of the infinite imainnation of the self, and therefore belong to
everyone"- The above listed drugs would be used instead of the
traditional bread and wine of the Christian religion. The initiation
THE NARCOTIC REHAB!LITATION ACT OF 196,0 381
fee would be $6,50 which would include oe plastic peyote button and
15 real ones. Shortly after my interview, Mr. Kleps appeared as a
guest on several radio programs and a story in a local newspaper de-
scribed his church and doctrine. This, of course, created much in-
terest among the college students and young misfits, beatniks, and so
forth.
My Department has kept a tight surveillance on this church and
there has been no marihuana distributed; however, LSD has been used
to some extent, but State law does not cover this drug at this time.
The price of LSD for 100 micrograms on a cube of sugar is $6, when
available. Mr. Kleps has succeeded in starting segments of this
church in most college cities in Florida: Tampa, Gainesville, Talla-
hassee, and so forth. At last report he claimed 600 members. At the
present time he is at his bunmmer retreat. at Morning Glory .odge
Cranberry Lake, N.Y. The church is still i operation in Miami under
the direction of Chief Boo Hoo Richard Byrd a University of Miami
student, correction, a college studenL I don't believe he is at the Un i -
versity of Miami, even though I have said so here. Their last meet-
n was held on Friday night, May 20, 1966, on Monza Avenue, Coral
Gables, in Richard Byrs apartment 14 members were present.
Without the active leadership of the Chief Boo Hoo Arthur Kler!A
the interest in the church seems to be waning.
In conclusion, I would like to present a quotation from a speech de-
livered by the Honorable Henry L Giordaano, Com i*sone. of the
U.S. Bureau of Narcotics, at the conference of the International Nar-,
cotic Enforcement Officers Association held in Miami on September 28,
1965:
These are the challenges we face and this Is where our responsibilities will le.
It only remains then for us to Lueet the challenges and accept the responaiblitles.
Let other groups or other countries seek the role of the appeasers, I am con-
vinced they will someday learn that it is no more applicable to the war on nar-
cotic addiction than it Is In international polUtics.
I thank you very kindly for your attention.
Senator JAVmTs. Thank you, Mr. Belier. Would you mind
answering a few questions I
Mr. BEWKTamI I would be happy to, sir.
Senator Jzvrms First, I am sure you are aware that Mr. Kleps is
here as a witness.
Mr. ByLTL.TRLB I am very cognizant of that fact, sir; yes, sir.
Senator Jzvrrs. Now could you tell us whether LSD is a problem
on Florida college campuses as far as you knowI
Mr. BELINGERaz. Yes, sir; LSD is a problem on Florida campuses.
Senator JAvris. Would you say that its use is widespread among
students
Mr. BELL Now. I wouldn't consider it widespread percentagewise,
sir; but even one user in my opinion is too many.
Senator JAvMS. Would ou have any estimate in the order of mg-
nitude as to the use of LSD by students, in Florida?,
Mr. BuaNom. I would not hazard a guess because it would only
be a guess and I don't think that would lie a fair approximation.
Seiator JAvrmh How about the Miami area
Mr. BzLwoE In the Miami area we have I would say .naybe200
persons who have tried LSD, who perhaps would be considered as
users of the drug.
382 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
For the pas 4 years'he has been the director of Harlem's Haven Clinic.
Dr. Baiid is a member.of the Academy of Medicine, the New York
State Medical Society, Narcotic Control Board the Lord Brs Com-
mittee, and the London Academy of Forensic Scie S.ce .
Dr. Baird, we welcome your testimony very much. We apprAte
your appearing as a fellow New Yorker.
Will you be good enough, i you possibly can do it, tp let us inr
duce your statement into th record.
Without objection, that will be done.
Could we ask you to summarize it. We hope, you can keep your
preftatation within about 10 minutes; we will not hold you to it
strictly, because we have three witnesses and we have to conclude by
noon.
STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT BAIRD, D C R, HARIEX HAVEN
CLINIC
Dr. BAm). All right, Senator.
(Prepared statement of Dr. Baird follows:
STATZM.NT PMBABZ By RORXRT WLUIAM Bmw, M.D., DimmToB or HAvW
CLrc, Ncw YoRr., N.Y.
As a practicing physician in Harlem for fifteen yeam I have observed nar-
cotics addiction and drug abuse from the street level as well as from the clinical
leveL I have learned the hard way from hundreds upon hundreds of addicts
at the HiAVEN clinic (Help Addicts, Voluntarily End Narcotics) which I con-
duct. From these individuals I have learned painfully the story of addiction,
how heroin, marijuana, LSD, cough medicine, airplane glue, barbiturates, and
amphetamines find their way to the homes of the wealthy and poor, and the
countless ways to beat the authorities, deceive their parents and con physicians.
After having seen a nine-year old youngster on narcotics, I realized that as a
physician, I should make a concerted effort in my area to come up with some
program to help eradicate some of the problems.
Out of this has come the H.A.V.E.N. clinic which means "Help Addicts Vol-
untarily End Narqtics". The clinic operate, from 10:00 p.m. to 4:00 am.and.
when necessary on Saud ays and Sundays. ' We have a little higher success,
rate than normal because the motivations with many of the addicts are greater.
They voluntarily seek aid and they want to give up the habit, not only want
to but have to give It up. I have realized that the small facilities I have are not
sufficient and have initiated a campaign to see If funds can be raised for a nar-
cotics hospital in New York with out-patlent clinics throughout the five boroughs
which would operate free and on a 24 hour basis.
The opinions I will give this morning are those which have been arrived at
through sheer experience, which is the best teacher and most indelible of all
Gentlemen, we have seen a tremendous rise of drug addiction and drug abuse
in the past eight months in New York City, which I have never seen the likes of
such acceleration before. One can blame this on many factors.
1. The marked do nothing attitude and apathy of the publc itn generaL Only
will they act if there Is something bizarre or something radical, or It strikes at
home on an intimate basis
2. The i#VuepWe of a minority of misguided college proteesor. who epewv i4-
isformatlon of the harmnewwaen of LSD, and marijuana.
One will pick up the newspaper as recently as Saturday, May 21, in the Long
Island Press where a college professor stated "Marijuana Is less harmful to the
organism than Alcohol." And quoting professor Isador Chein of New York
University in saying that "Marijuana does not necessarily lead to addiction."
This Dr. Victor Gloscia is an assistant sociology professor at Adelphi Uni-
versity. When professors such as these two are teaching at universities and giv-
ing forth such Information, It Is no wonder that college students are confused
as they look to their teachers as being learned and knowing what the problem Is.
388 THE NARCOTIC REHABDaTATION ACT 0.F 1986
It Is the same when college professors at Harvard say LSD i not dangerous
time and time again. It is this type of miserable propaganda that has been
foisted upon the youth of our country oomidned with the over-permisiveneea a4
over-fdulgeam bV the parete of such students, compounded by the ignorance
of not knowing what knowledge their children are receiving. I cannot under-
stand bow an Adelphi professor of sociology Will come out with a public state-
ment that many Senators and many doctors, ministers and theology students
use LSD to their betterment. Also that marijuana should be smoked by parents
so that they will understand and that there are no ill effects to marijuana.
The thing that is more perplexing is that this man serves as a consult,,ut to
President Johnson's Commission on Law Enforcement and Ju*tlce. Doesn't he
know that possession of marijuana is in direct violation of the law?
I will do everything in my power as a Doctor to make sure this man does not
remain on the campus if he persists giving this type of propaganda which
perpetuates further hedonistic and self-gratification complexes to the alienation
of the individual student in his own functioning in society.
& Catholic Parochial School.... Rise of Drug Abuse.
A new disturbing situation in drug abuse and narcotic addiction has been the
recent use and rise In our Catholic high schools and universities here in the East.
After having given many lectures on the various campuses, the very liberal atti-
tude of some of the faculty toward marijuana and LSD and even heroin has been
responsible for this. The over liberalization of many of these schools which were
once beachheads of discipline have now become eroded with decreased respect
for authority. This lack of discipline has caused a breakdown with the experi-
menting and use of various dangerous drugs.
I know the Catholic Church in New York will again reassert their positive
and firm but compassionate discipline not only to those students but also to others
In both high school and college.
4. Public school indolence. This was shockingly pointed out to me by West-
chester officials when a students' editorial board came out for the legalization of
marijuana. I believe that this Dobbs Ferry High School principal and higher
officials and school board sanctioned this because they did not want to interfere
with freedom of the press There is a certain limit to freedom of the press vs
responsible press particularly with our young people who need dynamic and firm
leadership. Many of these young people are employing ill psychology upon older
people to see how much they can get away with. If this is totally unbridled,
it can lead to devastating results.
5. Another disturbing feature which I note about marijuana addiction is the
stand taken by the New York Medlcal Society in which they said that possession
of marijuana should be considered a misdemeanor and not a felony and that New
York State should take the lead In reducing posession of marijuana from a felony
to a misdemeanor. It is this type of poor advice by so many well intended but
completely un-informed physicians that has caused a tremendous Increase of the
use of marijuana on high school and college campuses. Every time an attempt
to present the facts that marijuana is dangerous and that ninety eight per cent
of heroin addicts had been marijuana smokers. You get a couple of youngsters
to rebuff you with the remark that doctors themselves don't consider It dangerous.
If they did, why decrease the penalty for possession. However, many of these
doctors have never ever worked with drug addicts.
. A disturbing feature which gave more sanction to the use of LSD was the
non-committal attitude of the Surgeon General, Dr. William Stewart and also
Dr. Stanley Yollee, Director of National Institute of Mental Health. This has
practically given permission for college students who want to experiment with
it; that It is alright since these two men by not advocating legislative approaches
or warning of its daners, Just by their title are adding impetus to the use of
LSD.
7. The talk last week of public officials who said that heroin or marijuana do
not cause crimes of violence. I would like some of these people to work with
addicts in Harlem.
& Literature from so-called experts is Incorrect and I quote from one recent
book called "Drug Addiction" published by Thomas Books in 1962:
(1) "It is extremely doubtful whether any mentally healthy woman ever
would go Into prostitution in order to support an addiction habit". (pg. 10)
(My own feeling, what normal woman would go into drug addiction?)
(2) "The reason marijuana has so little proven crime-producing effect in the
United States as compared with alcohol is simply this: 70,000;000 ot our people
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196 387
are alcohol drinkers, 5,000,000 are definite Alooholics and only 5,000 are marijuana
users". (pg. 24)
(In Harlem alone, in a square mile there are easily that amount)
(3) "A critical review of all the evidence strongly suggests that the impact
of drug addiction on major crimes Is so slight that It i imperceptible In statistics".
(p. 3 4 )
(One seriously can't accept this.)
The author of the book is Lawrence Kolb, M.D. Assistant Surgeon General
(Retired), United States Public Health Service, National Institute of Mental
Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
It is with the combined reasons above that we are now rapidly seeing the
increase of drug abuse and drug addiction.
Gentlemen I plead with you that something must be done now; otherwise we
will be deluged with a problem of drug abuse that will spread throughout the
countryside and ruin this Nation.
My experience with LSD usera, which to me means Let's sell Decadency or
Let's Start Degeneration, has been that the cases I have seen have many things
in common:
(1) Hedonistic with marked gratification complex.
(2) Extremely insecure people:
(a) Psychologically unaware of mental inadequacies
(b) Extremely hypercritical of their own physical shortcomings and
project this hostility sometimes overtly, wears glasses, very thin, aesthetic
and asthenlc, receding jaw, long large nose, very short.
(c) Latent homosexual or overt homosexual conflict.
(3) Young Sophist college intellectual or self-taught poeudo Intellectual. Col-
lege students who are training for art, music and literature.
(4) The college marijuana graduate who wants to expand his consciousness.
Heroin addicts particularly do not like to use it.
(5) Escapists from stark reality of world of education, economics and social
business. A few sad stories of this dangerous drug which must be under strict
control by medical profession and only inresearch.
L.5.D. XPL
Xi=C
Pt. I. A 8&year-old doctor of medicine who took LSD on several occasions
vomited at first. Then the vomitus became pink billows of cloud drifting by and
were so beautiful. The toilet in which he was vomiting became a throne of
inlaid mother of pearl. In another episode he had, he cried when In the room
where he was he saw dust streaming through a window on a sunbeam only to go
to waste and to be stepped upon by people. He took varying doses of 400 to 1500
megm which he sometimes took intravenously.
He thought he was finding the secrets of the universe.
He had another experience where he thought he was in a dark room and the
cement floor became soft and he lost sensation of touch. Another time he at-
tempted to take his pulse and the hairs that were around his wristwatch became
snakes. This man comes from a family where his father was an M.D. This
young doctor had a brilliant future ahead of him. He now gave up his practice.
He does not want to watch TV or listen to radio or read newspapers. Remains
secluded-wants to sleep all day and come to our clinic at night. He does not
want to see the sun. He does not even want to do any kind of work.
Pt. II. Another pathetic story was an alleged three-year art student at N.Y.U.
who took LSD with the aid of a married girlfriend and while under this Influence
realized how profoundly philosophical and sagacious he was. He had no further
need to remain In school because he knew more than his teachers with the remit
he dropped out This man and girlfriend were absolutely filthy, a 22-23-year-old
couple. He had long, unkempt hair and scraggly beard, dirty fingers, and shoes
and pants filthy. When I confronted him with this, he philosophically said It
meant nothing. However, my own God-given olfactory nerve was working over-
time and I sensed what was in the air. His mother told me his apartment with
girlfriend was a hovel of absolute filth.
Pt. IIL A college professor asked me to go to an upstate college and talk about
the dangers of LSD because one of the students a Phi Beta Kappa youngster In
his third year had taken It and now had total amnesia and did not know who
he was.
8THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Pt. IV. Another 25-year-old female who took a trip screamed in terror for
eight to ten hours. Half of her face was a skeleton and the other half, a
bedraggled old woman.
Pt. V. An 18-year-old boy from Miami who had seven tripe said he wanted to
commit suicide and took 12 miltowns because when on LSD he wanted to become
a priest and when drug wore off the reality of not wanting to be a priest was
too much for him. Death or life meant nothing to him. The same youngster
bad another boy with him who wanted to take off his clothes and walk around
nude showing the innocence of his body to the world.
The people I have seen after taking this dangerous drug, either in cube form,
spitball form, drop form or on a wafer, or the latest, impregnating the paper
around the marijuana cigarette with LSD, suffer from...
1. Physical work is absolutely an abhorrence and motivation to work seems
to be destroyed. They want to sit down and read and expound philosophy and
commune with the beauties of nature (sometimes rather difficult on an empty
stomach). They know a lot about Zen Buddhism and other religions except the
religion of actually going out and producing a good day's work. They can talk
a good day's work. They are lazy.
2. Marked depression seems to be par for a great number of them and suicide
attempts are common.
3. More loss of reality with LSD-becomes more of a recluse (interesting fea-
ture is those who advocate this want to expand their reality) and yet the,,
set up such artificialities as strobe lights, music, peculiar paint patterns on
walls. Are they not escaping reality before the start or must they delude them-
selves. If so, then why take LSD when you have already started to take a trip.
4. Loss of tactile sensation--feeling becomes confused and so-called percep-
tions are now deceptions.
5. Sexuality is repressed and probably this is one beneficial effect The terror
that would arise from some faulty expansion of the mind would be devastating.
6. Inner peace-wonderful pseudonym for laziness and apathy except for more
verbalizations and less work.
7. Illusion of time conception-may think they have been on a trip for several
hours when it actually would be nine to ten hours.
& Marked compulsiveness and impulsiveness.
9. Marked swings of personality from euphoria to homicide.
I believe some of these experiences warrant very close medical supervision of
this dangerous drug. Possession of one cube or 100 mcgm unless in a hospital
by responsible doctors should be considered a felony. This would hel) minimize
the growing illicit trafficking and manufacturing. Sentence should be a period
of five to ten years. Manufacturing and selling the drugs would be fifty years
and twenty-five years for surreptitiously drugging someone. LSD should not
however be lost to research but the guards should be extremely stringent so
that it does not fall into the hands of those who are not prepared to handle the
consequences. It should at least be investigated intensively. However, I am
sure many of the beneficial claims are groundless as the results in many cases
are the efforts of a good psycho-therapist or doctor.
MABZJUANA
Marijuana has to be placed in its proper place as a dangerous depressant with
hallucinogenic properties. It should be realized that it has properties that are
potentially dangerous to everyone. Too often it is said it is less dangerous than
alcohol but this is not true--so called narcotic experts notwithstanding. The
fact we have six and one-half million alcoholics where three billion dollars is
spent on them because of broken families--no work-no taxes-no family super-
vision does not make me happy and Is a non-sequitur. A large percentage of these
alcoholics will have confused psychologically Impoverished youngsters who later
on may go to drugs because of no discipline at home.
Marijuana is:
1. unpredictable in reaction--can't tell what one cigarette will do but gen-
erally have a good indication of what one ounce of alcohol will accomplish.
2. Marked swings of euphoria to paranoia on one cigarette-unlike alcohol.
& No warning signs with marijuana of physiological changes but with alcohol
definite changes of per onality and bodily function. (Before an individual would
drive a car the overt signs are manifest to a group but not so with marijuana.)
T_ NARCOTIC RE-HABILITATION ACT OF 1986 389
4. Deleterious effects of alcohol occur only after constant and prolonged alco-
holism of ten to fifteen years duration. Marijuana Is swift and quick, several
weeks to months
5. Self-contentment with alcohol-no need to explore new psychic limitations
but not so with marijuana. Ninety-eight per cent of heroin addicts started with
marijuana and simply had to get a better and more bizarre reaction with the
resultant experimentation with other drugs.
8 Depression from marijuana Is present In the majority of cases after the
reaction of euphoria wears off.
7. Alteration of distance perception on marihuana from one or two cigarettes
unlike that from one or two shots of alcohol. This can result In auto accidents
and I am sure many accidents which are blamed on alcohol are the result of
marihuana which officials are not sophisticated enough to be on the alert.
& Marked alteration of perception with increased deception. Marihuana
smoker deliberately hopes to get reaction he anticipates because of fixation in his
mind.
There are many other reasons that one could go on but I think these will suffice
for this time. Do not lessen the penalty for possession of marihuana and re-
duce It from a felony to a misdemeanor. One would work directly for the syndi-
cate because the hoodlums would tell the youngster possession is only a mis-
demeanor and is in the same category as littering the street. It Is only doctors,
social service workers and other professionals who have never worked with
addicts who arrive at such erroneous bits of logic.
AMIALIC 0LUE 1RUlZNG
Many thousands of nine to twelve year old adolescents are sniffing this dan-
gerous hydrocarbon; a polysterene and toluol derivative. This substance If
inhaled in large quantity gives many toxic reactions. 1. Central nervous system
hallucinations; 2. liver damage, hepatitis and jaundice; & kidney damage, uri-
nation of blood; 4. bone marrow depression with anemia and easy Infection; 5.
lung disease.
I have been working with a commercial chemist In trying to develop a new glue
to be used by children in building their model airplanes and boats, the present
ones that are being used have a very toxic solvent which allows children to have
hallucinations and to launch them on an addictive pathway. We have never nar-
rowed the phase down to 8 different types of glue which If successful will help
eradicate this early phase of drug addiction.
1. Use an odor contaminant with foul smelling such as a mercaptan which If
inhaled repeatedly would cause nausea and vomiting.
2. Use of a dye In the glue which if the child pours onto handkerchief or hand
the dye would leave a tell-tale stain about mouth or nostrils or hands, This
would wash out In about a week. This would allow a better chance at psycho-
therapy.
& The use of a water base glue which would evaporate rapidly would be the
best leaving a tough rubber like skin very much like the water base rubber
paints. I think In several weeks we will have this formula completed. I hope
with some thoughtful and considerate persuasion some of these manufacturers
will employ or substitute this form of slue.
COUGH XIODIN DDTIONS
cause it would be so irritating to the stomach. "They could not tolerate It",
he said. Of course not, Youngsters in New York City can't tolerate four
ounces! ! ! We have a group of creatures here that don't have a stomach, but
they can somehow manage to anatomically swallow 22 bottles of medicine6 I
haven't found out from this physician In the Mid-West what this organ is that
can hold this amount. We have these people who are addicted to this much
so that we would like to outlaw all these cough preparations and I think the drug
houses should cooperate with us In this situation; otherwise they will develop
a black mark by not selling over-the-counter codeine preparation unless accom-
panied by a doctor's prescription. This should be a Federal statute.
ADMINISTRATION'S PLANS
The program which the administration has proposed is a step in the right di-
rection and is a good one. However, I, as a physician, would feel happier if
compulsory hospitalization were made.
1. The individual who cannot do it on an ambulatory basis after six or eight
months should be hospitalized for his own benefit to protect himself from his
,own shortconings.
2. Reduce the spread since this is an infective disease, and each addict is
responsible for turning on from three to six new devotees during his addiction.
3. The sorrow of a family and infliction of psychologic trauma to other young-
sters and members of the family.
It is true the first week or two in a hospital the addict might resent therapists
and does not want to give it up, but each one of these individuals has a yield-
ing point where he can be amenable to motivation. One never gives up in try-
ing to reclaim these sick individuals. Too often we hear the argument about
violation of constitutional rights. I wonder what happens to the logic of this
argument when we isolate individuals with smallpox or meningitis or an indi-
vidual who would like to get married who has syphilis or gonorrhea. I think
drug abuse and drug addiction is a communicable disease far more dangerous
than bacterial or viral diseases, because we are not only dealing with the physio-
logical but the psychological as well. When five hundred to eight hundred indi-
viduals die each year in New York City from an overdose or anywhere from
six to eight hundred newborn children who are born addicted and must be
detoxified, this is a dangerous disease. If fifty to sixty patients would die from
smallpox or meningitis in New York City it would amount to a holocaust.
OUR GOALS AND AIMS
(1) To procure a hospital in which to place drug addicts for a period of de-
toxification using other drugs rather than narcotics except in a few recalcitrant
cases, and to have ambulatory narcotics clinics not using narcotics for with-
drawal.
(2) After the period of detoxification in the hospital, to get the cooperation
of unions, school systems, etc. To help teach and train these boys and girls for
some vocation such as plasterers, carpenters, clerks, etc. (practical application
of Job interest)
(3) After this period of training (six to eight months) during which time
they are still at this hospital but in an informal set-up. They would then be
allowed an afternoon or evening a week out, then to return to the hospital at
night, gradually giving them more and more liberties after they have proven
themselves.
(4) If this period of one day a week has been successful, allow them a week-
end at home so that temptation could be overcome and transition made easier.
(5) During this time, if training has been successful or if they already have
a vocation, we would then procure a Job for them! At the end of the day they
would return to the Haven center to sleep. The Idea would be to gradually get
them to have confidence in themselves and be able to withstand the temptation
of the community.
(6) The clinic is to be established on a 24-hour basis open at night so that if
an addict should suddenly develop a compulsive craving or desire to return to
the use of narcotics, he could talk It over with someone and in this way hell) to
get over the rough period. This will not be a 9-5 clinic. Addicts do not take
drugs or develop problems on a 9-5 basis!
(7) To disseminate the problem of narcotics and its ramifications to all con-
cerned: Public Schools, Churches, Philanthropic organizations, Parent groulps
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1900 391
etc. By competent lecturers to all dangers. TIis has been lacking miserably.
The public must be alerted.
(8) To further research in the field of drugs and the causes for taking them,
and short and long term end results of them.
(9) To employ hospital personnel who ae dynamic and driving and whose
appearance and demeanor are smart, bright and alert so that the addict can
look up to these people as leaders and make some identification. Too many in•
this field now are sloven, non-articulate and inspire nothing but chain and
hopelessness.
(10) Because of the magnitude of the narcotics problem with its social
economic and legal implications, discussions ot possible programs directed toward
cooperative solutions with other agencies have been omitted, but subsequent
brochures will define these projects concerning summer camps, community social
groups, restoring licenses, reclaiming endemic narcotics areas, etc.
O0NTZ&MPLATED LWISL&TION
(11) Make illegal any cough medicine preparations containing codeine or any
derivatives of opium unless prescribed by a doctor.
(12) Impose economic sanctions on countries to whom we give foreign aid
(Green Stuff) and who in turn then send us Illicit exports of heroin (White
Stuff). They would then make an attempt to maintain better narcotics traffic
control.
113) Legislation to the effect that all diplomatic personnel have baggage in-
spected by dual inspectors (Country of his origin or his embassy plus our custom
officers).
(14) Levy a fine against the mode of transportation (Ship, Plane) in which the
narcotics come, as well as a fine against unions who vouch for said individuaL
This would further more thorough screening of all personnel by employers and
unions.
(15) Inspection for possible heroin addiction of all personnel, (Commercial or
armed services) coming in and out of our country. There has been a rise of this
in the past 5-6 years with returning G.I.'s I have seen. They get narcotics in
Japan, Korea, France, Germany, Morocco, Greece.
(16) Unannounced physical examination of all elementary high school and
college students in September, January, and June of each year to check for early
addiction by inspecting arms and other sites, such as vaouth, nose, and fingers.
This would allow us to be ahead for psycho-therapy by 3-4 years. I dare say in
New York there must be about 1,000 taking heroin and easily 2,000-2,500 taking
barbiturates and cough medicine, many thousands in high school smoking
marijuana.
(17) A part of hygiene courses from the 3rd grade on should incorporate the
explanation of the advanced reactions of glue sniffing, heroin, goofball, and
pep pills, to let the youngsters actually know how very sick they can get on
these medications, including the possibility of death. .(Never make it bizarre
or glamorous but factual and sobering.)
(18) Revocation of the licenses of pharmacists who sell narcotics, cough prep-
aratlons, derivatives of opium and oth, : synthetic addicting drugs, barbiturates
and amphetamines without a prescription. The penalty should be the same for
the professional heroin pusher--0 years
(19) The penalty for the non-addict pusher should be 50 years without pro-
bation or parole. As a safeguard against those who would plead that they are
addicts, urine analysis and blood tests should be given with careful observation
for withdrawal symptoms over a period of ten days.
(20) The Illicit manufacturer of barbiturates, amphetamines, cough prepara-
tions which have been flooding the black market, should be classified in the same
category as the professional drug pushers, and further, receive a 50 year sentence.
All pills should have a lot number, manufacturer's name and code so to trace it
back for Illicit trafficking.
(21) Redemption of various licenses for former drug addicts who are drug
free for one year or more (Cabaret, Drivers, Barbers, licenses etc.)
(22) Revocation of driver's license of known narcotics addicts who are actively
using drugs.
(23) Stiff penalties for any merchant who sells airplane glue to a child.
(24) Development of M.D. narcotic specialists with probationary commitment
powers. After addict on ambulatory has failed to give up drugs. Should It be
392 T NARCOTIC REIHAB ATION ACT OF 1966
necessary for some people who want their rights protected a board of 8 narcotic
doctor's who have worked with the addict should then have the authority to have
him committed.
(25) Commitment to an institution of any drug addict-by a family member.
(26) Possession of LSD or marijuana must always be considered a felony.
A lesser penalty would promote Incrased sales and increased use.
I believe that f some of these proposals were adopted In conjunction with the
Administration's proposals, we would be able to attack this problem far more
effectively. We must weigh the credentials extremely critically of narcotic ex-
perts. "Never hao to mucA been written or spoken about by so maen who know
so ltte bout asubject o big as drgeddoio" II
Dr. BA RD. I think as a refacing remark I have been working with
drug addicts in Harlem for 15 years and Y think I can speak with a
certain amount of experience.
Right now I am completely baffled by this tremendous increase of the
problem of drug addiction which has been rising rather rapidly in
New York City in the past 8 to 9 months, and there are many reasons
for this.
No. 1 is that we are now seeing the influence of a minority of mis-
guided college professors who are spewing this-
Senator JAviTs. Dr. Baird, will you excuse me one minute? I have
been guilty of an error. I read Dr. Berger's description to you. You
are the director of the Haven Clinic in Harlem, which I know very
well. Dr. Berger is associated with the Medical Society.
May the record be corrected accordingly.
Proceed, Doctor.
Dr. BAiD. A minority of the college professors have been spew-
ing this poor propaganda upon the college campuses that there is noth-
ing wrong with maiihuana and LSD. 'It was just recently we had a
professor from Adelphi University who stated that marihuana does
not necessarily lead to addiction. it is this type of propaganda when
foisted upon the children at our colleges an high sools which is
causing more and more of a problem of drug iddiction. And he
came out with another remark. I would like toiknow which Senators
they are He said, "Many Senators, doctors, ministers, and theology
students and thousands of others use LSD lor their betterment." "I
would like to know the doctors and Senators who use the LSD for
their own improvement.
Also, he came out with another remark.
Senator JAvrr I can assure you, Dr. Baird, that I have not seen
any evidences of hallucination of Senators.
Dr. BA Pi. I will tell you, Senator, why this is very important to
me, because this man is a consultant to President Johnson's Commis-
sion on Law Enforcement and Justice. I think a man in that high a
plane should be extremely discreet in any remarks he makes.
Another remark he made was that the parents ought to smoke
marihuana and find out that there are no ill effects or there is nothing
deleterious about it. So you can well realize that if we have these
types of men on our college campuses, and as you well know, New York
ty has some of the leading colleges in the world, we have one of
them which is a leading bastion for the liberalization of narcotics, it is
not too far from the Greenwich Village area, perhaps the air from
there is contaminated and it reaches some of these Professors.
Another interesting feature that I have seen which we have to be
concerned with is the increased amount of drug abuse and the recent
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT O. 1966 ,393
use of drugs in our Catholic high schools and Catholic universities in
New York. This is of market importance because this is something
that until recently has not been noticed, and we theorized that the
reason for this was that there is far more discipline in these insti-
tutions. However, now we are getting more liberalization in some of
these schools, with the result that this breakdown of discipline has
caused many of these youngsters to start to indulge in drugs.
Another situation which-has occurred in New York has been that
which was pointed out to me by Mr. Ed McHaleon, the county execu-
tive of Westchester, that Dobbs Ferry students came out with an edi-
torial for the legalization of marihuana and the school officials and the
school board went right ahead with this and said that this was freedom
of the press.
We have to realize how much is responsible press, especially to young
people.
There is another disturbing feature which again promotes the use
of these drugs which is my own New York Medical Society, of which
I am amember of the public relations in which they said that the pos-
session of marihuana should be considered a misdemeanor and not a
felony and that New York State should take the lead in reducing the
possession of marihuana from a felony to a misdemeanor.
It is this type of poor advice of so many well-intentioned but poor
physicians that has caused an increase in consumption of marihuana
in high school and college campuses.
When you go to these campuses and try to tell them that 98 percent
of the heroin addicts started with marihuana, their cliche is you have
doctors in New York City who want to reduce the penalty from a
felony to a misdemeanor, so consequently, Doctor, this cannot be a very
dangerous drug.
However it is amazing that some of these doctors who come out
extolling de harmlessness of marihuana have. never even ,worke#
with a drug addict, and I think this committee and many other commit-
tees that have to do with formulating program for the country should
really weigh the credentials of these people very carefully# because a
chap can be a chairman of a narcotics committee, but if he has never
treated any drug addicts but done a voluminous amount of reading,
that is a completely different thing. It is like reading how to be a
Senator but never having had the experience, they are two different
things.
A disturbing feature also was made recently when I went to one of
the college campuses when they quoted to me Surgeon General Dr.
William Stewart, and Dr. Stanley Yolles, Director of the National
Institutes of Mental Health, when I put LSD down as a dangerous
drig and the youngsters, these college students, said, "You are in no
position to criticize this because you have the Federal Government
saying that there is no need at this time to develop legislation for this
drug because it has not been proved conclusively thltit is dangerous.",
Well, of course in my experience I have seen some of the sad effects.
Just recently I read a book which was pointed out to me. It was
written by a p aDr. Lawrence Kolb, wh is the Assistant Surgeon
General and also director of the U.S. Public Health Service, who came
in with three articles, three quotations, and I think this ought to be out
66-66S-6----26
394 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
for public release to show you why we have such a difficult time in try.
ing to contain this problem of drug addiction.
No. 1. He stated:
It in extremely doubtful whether any mentally healthy woman ever would go
Into prostitution In order to support an addiction habit.
No. 1, that is highly erroneous. rirst of all, what normal woman
would go into the habit of takingdrugs I
So immediately you have the premise, that is incorrect. That is the
simplest way for a woman to maintain her habit anyway is to indulge
in prostitution.
Two. The reason marihuana has so little proven crime-producing effect in
the United States as compared with alcohol Is simply that 70 million people drink
alcohol, 5 million are definite alcholics, and only 5,000 marihuana smokers In the
United Statem
Now this is an absurd remark. You and I know, Senator, you are
from New York, that in 1 square mile in Harlem you have over 5,000
marihuana smokers.
And the third remark was:
A critical review of all the evidence strongly suggests that the impact of drug
addiction on major crimes is so slight that it is imperceptible in statistics.
There could not be anything more erroneous than this fallacious bit
of erudite wisdom that has been extended into this book.
I plead with you that this problem of drug addiction and narcotics
addiction is spreading rapidly more and more every day.
Now we are concerned with the increased consumption of LSD,
which to me does not mean just lysergic acid. It stands for a nasty
little word, "Let's sell decadency or let's start degeneration."
The individuals that I have seen on this have been chaps that, No. 1,
are very hedonistic with a marked gratification complex; two, ex-
tremely insecure people. One, they are psychologically unaware of
their own mental inadequacies. No. 2, they are extremely h Percriti-
cal of their own physical shortcomings and project their hostilities
sometimes overtly, and these are generally people who have many of
these things in common.
Now I know we all wear glasses, but some of these people suffer
from severe strabismus; they are extremely thin, very asthenic type,
have receding jaw, large pugnacious nose, or they might be short, but
their own physical defectsbokher them.
Then you have latent homosexual or overt homosexual conflict.
Then you have a group of the young college intellect or the F., f-
taught pseudointellect, and these are mostly students who are bei:zg
trained for the arts, music, and literature who will take LSD.
Then you have the college marihuana graduate. He is the chap
who goes to college and thinks there is nothing wrong with mari-
huana, and then afer having been on this hallucinogemc marihuana
wants to increase his consciousness and then he starts to take LSD.
And then the last group you have are escapists from the stark
world of reality of education, economics, and social business.
I would like to just give you a few sad stories of this LSD, this
great drug which I think can be great if it is used under very careful
limitations by physicians and only by physicians.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196 6 395
I had a 38-year-old doctor of medicine who took LSD on several
occasions. He vomited the first experience, and as he vomited his
vomit became beautiful pink billows of clouds that just went drifting
by very aimlessly. In front of the bathroom in which he was vomit-
ing into the toilet, this was transcended, was changed into a beautiful
inlaid mother-of-pearl throne. That man took anywhere from 400
to 1,500 micrograms of LSD, which he took intravenously, or some-
times orally.
Another time he said he cried because he saw the dust which was
oing on the sunbeam was alighting upon the floor and was going to
completely wasted when out of this was beauty of the world.
He had another experience that when he was in a dark room with
a cement floor that the floor became very soft. Another time while
on a trip, that means he had indulged in taking this LSD, he wanted
to take his pulse for scientific reasons, and then he noticed the hairs
that he had on his wrist, which were around the wristwatch became
serpents and started to move all around the clock.
This boy has a wonderful background. His father was a doctor,
and he had a brilliant future ahead of him. He took this LSD. He
quit practice, does not have any desire to practice. He does not even
watch TV, listen to the radio or read the newspapers. He remains
completely secluded, wants to sleep all day and he just comes to our
clinic at night. He does not want to see the sun. He does not want
to indulge in any kind of work.
Another situation, we had a third-year college student at New York
University who took LSD with the aid of his married girl friend
who was a prostitute, and while under this influence he realized how
profoundly sagacious and philosophic he was and he found out he
id not have to go to college any more because he had a great awaken-
ing that he knew more than his college teachers, so he dropped out
of school.
This chap presented himself to me, one of the worst I have ever
seen, completely unkempt, long hair, a scraggly beard, dirty fingers,
and filthy clothes. When I confronted him with this, why he was
so filthy, he said this philosophically meant nothing. However the
air was rather polluted by his own filth. And his mother told me
that when she had gone over to his apartment, that that was actually
a hovel of filth.
A third case we had was a college professor from an upstate
college talking to the students about LSD. It seemed that they had
a Phi Beta Kappa boy who had gone on a trip down to the village,
had taken LSD, taken it back to his college, and after he had taken
this one cube suffered from total amnesia and now has been 5 months
in an institution and has no recollection of who he is or where he was.
Then we had a 25-year-old woman who took LSD for 8 to 10 hours
she was screaming unmanageably because, as she looked in the mirror,
half of her face was that of a bedraggled old woman and the other
half was that of a skeleton.
An 18-year-old boy who I just saw from Miami who took seven
trips and he wanted to commit suicide on one of the trips because on
the LSD he wanted to become a priest, and when he came down off
the drug he realized the reality that he could not become a priest be-
396 THE NARCOTIC RZHABIITATXON ACT OF 1966
gates Its persecution (and I use this word advisedly) to the states so that the
physician who would care for an addict risks forfeiture of his license.
The wording of Supreme Court decisions such as Lnder vs. the U.S. of 1924
permits the physician to treat addicts, but In the last 40 years this knowledge has
yet to reach the police at either of our 8 political sub-divisions, national, state or
municipal.
1I. In the absence ot cure for the addict, we must try to rehabilitate him.
Since practically every one recognizes him as sick, every barrier between him and
the physician must be removed.
1. Registration of addicts must not be imposed unless it is widely publicized
that such information is medical and statistical and not for punitive purpose.
The addict who visits a physician will be reported. Such documents reach the
police and the addict may be apprehended. He knows this. Therefore, when he
does become motivated to seek cure, he is reluctant to consult the one person
who might help him. his physician.
2. He must be exposed to the largest number of physicians and paramedical
services in as many hospitals as possible. At present he is treated for the most
part in jails where he is out of the main current of medical thought.
S. Treatment also takes place in two Federal Hospitals for addicts where he is
likewise isolated from society and from medical personnel except the few
dedicated physicians who work at these hospitals.
4. In New York City's Metropolitan Hospital he is placed in a locked ward
with a police guard. We do not treat other patients in this manner.
To perpetuate this unhappy state of affairs by the construction of similar
facilities would be a repetition of a policy which now fails well over 90% of the
time. Personnel to staff such institutions do not exist. Instead we should permit
any physician to treat addicts in existing hospitals.
D. ADVANTAGES
A. Costs less-detoxification of the addict can be accomplished in 1 to 2 weeks.
Further therapy can be carried on in out patient. clinics, which are les expensive.
Present Federal Hospitalization take* 5 months.
B. It brings the addict back into society. He no longer feels isolated and
abhored for he is a patient among other sick people. It will expose the greatest
number o physicians to this problem so many may gain experience and skill.
Some will certainly accept the challenge of this disease and may produce better
methods of mausgement. Only 5 of 6 physicians h New York City are now
Interested in addition. We need hundreds or even t ,usands to cope with the
many potential patients.
C. Let the addict quickly graduate frem the hospital o a halfway house-like
Daytope Lodge This institution Is often suctcesful aid costs about $7.50 per
patient per day vs. $50 or more In a hospital and are a third the cost of Jail.
D. Some can bypass this step and be placed under the care of private physicians
as out patients.
This Is a relapsing disease. Relapse Is the rule not the exception In our
present paucity of knowledge. When this occurs he must be rehospitalized
wit! aut rancor or criticism and the process repeated. This may have to be done
10 or more times, but one day he will be properly motivated and then cured.
In some instances It may not be possible to rehabilitate him without drugs.
Such situations are frequent in medicine where we can only control and not cure.
Examples: diabetes, and heart disease. The heart patient must always take
his digitalis, the diabetic his insulin. Many nervous patients can cope with their
environment only with a crutch. This may be the therapist or some form of
medication. Even drugs like Methadone or other narcotics may occasionally be
necessary.
In the case of the Narcotic addict if this medication were to be lo worth of
aspirin every one would be elated. If it is 500 worth of Methadone the fuli fury
of our police state is unleashed. This is unrealistic.
Hospitalization and out patient care should be paid for by the government. At
present those of us who have struggled with this problem have done so as a labor
of love. Adequate remuneration may solve the fantastic shortages of competent
personnel.
The principals here summarized have been successfully used in several corn*
tries. They are not untried experiments!
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 403
What wowd enOktmed kegll.on 0cornpVeAt
1. Empty jails.
2.Learn magnitude of problem.
& Reduce proselytizing.
4.Reduce crime.
5.Reduce deaths of addicts from impure drugs.
6.Find a cure which can be extrapolated to the much larger problems of
bwoking, alcohol, obesity, etc.
7. Destroy the Black Market by underselling it.
TRlt 0ILL. S. 2152
TrrLE U
Page 12, Line 21, #5: The benefits of the act should not be denied any re-
cidivistic addict, since as time goes on he is more likely to recover--this point
has been made previously and need not be repeated here.
Page 14, Line 6: "Approved by the Attorney General for treatment". Isn't
this the problem of the Surgeon General ? It is a purely medical decision which
has been made previously and need not be repeated here.
TrrLE I
Page 18, Line 25: Addicts to be committed to "Hospitals of the Service es-
pecially equipped for the accomodatlon of such patients". This type of insti.
404 THM NARCOTIC RHNLATION ACT OF 196,
tution fails to bring the addict back into society. He is isolated from the rest
of us by reason of his addiction. His associates are other addicts and pushers.
The rest of society are the "Squares" upon whom he preys in order to secure
the price of a "fix". Society likewise abhors the addict. To rehabilitate such
people they must be brought among non-addicted individuals. He cannot make'
an appropriate relationship with a physician who is also his Jailer. There Is a
"we-they" relationship. It does not really permit any rapport whatsoever!
Therefore the Surgeon General should place such patients In general hospitals
where they can be treated like any other sick perso. They then begin to see
themselves not as pariahs, but as patients. Gradually they learn to adopt this
new role.
The period of hospitalization need not be long. 2-3 weeks Is usually plenty.
The after care is the important part of the management of such patients after
he returns to the community and environment which nurtures the addiction in
the first place. Since there are not offices of the Public Health Service every-
where the medical aspects of this task will have to fall on local practitioners.
Parole Functions may continue as described In the "act".
Such confinements to general wards has another salutory feature. The
medical practitioner in such institutions will become conversant with addictive
diseases. Their competence, now practically non-existent, becomes a tremendous
asset.
Likewise some of these may attempt research into this challenging field. At
present only a handful of physicians in the entire United states puss any
skill or interest in Narcotic Addiction. Any new techniques can be quickly uti-
lised in the management of the many other even larger addictive problems such
as alcoholism, smoking, obesity, barbituates and amphetamines.
Dr. BRoxER. Thank you, Senator.
I would like to thank the committee for their interest in this subject,
one which has fascinated me for well over 20 years.
I would also like to thank you personally, Senator Javits, for your
cooperation in trying to solve some of these problems for the medical
societies. I will allude to these a little later.
If you gentlemen are to legislate in this field, it would seem absolutely
necessary that all the facts on narcotics be at your disposal, and I would
like to explore some of these with you.
At the moment there is no known cure for anyaddiction. This does
not mean that we should not try to find one. ut our efforts to cure
narcotic addiction or alcoholism or smoking or even obesity have been
a dismal failure.
We have heard today some of my colleagues who are disiuh n
their areas refer to more treatment centers, and I wou question
whether there is much point in forcing people into hospitals for treat-
ment which at the moment is nonexistent.
The second fact which may be useful to you is that time works on our
side on the addiction problem. Particularly this is true in narcotic
addiction. Cures are frequent after the age of 80 and extremely rare
before that. Reference to such statistics as are available will prove this
point.
The greatest number of addicts are always 25 plus or minus five.
This was true 25 years ago just as it is now, but where are all those
addicts that were the great bulk of the addicted population a genera-
tion ago I
They certainly are not all dead. What has happened to them I
They have reached enough emotional maturity that they no longer
require drugs. They have gotten through the turmoil of adolescence.
Therefore there is little point in increasing the penalty for a narcotic
addict because he has relapsed frequently. Relapse is part of this
THE NAROOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 405
disease. It is as much a part of it as coughing is a part of pneumonia.
And we must expect that our patients will relapse while they are young
because of our paucity of knowledge, not because of any fault of their
own. And as they get older our opportunities to cure them even now
ai better and better.
A third fact which I think is not debatable is that present methods
of control have made narcotics inordinately expensive. Since the ad.
dict has no source for these drugs, he must obtain them through the
black market at highly inflated prices, so that it is not unusual-for a
New York addict to spend $30 to buy 30 cents worth of narcotics, were
he able to purchase them in some legal fashion. Since he becomes
addicted as a child for the most part, he has never developed the skill
which he can use that will help him to pay for drugs, and therefore he
becomes quickly enmeshed in a life of crime.
Four, present laws have spawned organized crime and made fan-
tastic profits for it, and should the due process of law occasionally
eliminate one of these purveyors of narcotics, he is bound to be replaced
rapidly because the profits are inore than one could actually believe.
A $10 investment in crude opium in Syria, after being properly
processed, diluted and sold on the streets of New York, might yield
$10,000.
Finally, and again as one of the facts that we I think all accept in
this area is that jails and jaillike hospitals--and I assure you the
addict does not distinguish between these types of institutions--have
never cured an addict.
The relapse rate from our finest hospitals and dedicated people at
Lexington and Fort Worth exceeds 95 percent. The cost to the com-
munity is about $5,000 per patient. With a 96-percent relapse rate,
this means $100,000 per patient. This is a fantastically expensive type
of therapy which yields very, very little in results.
Now I am not an apologist for any particular method of treat-
ment. In fact I am actively engaged in tre projects at the present
moment.
I would like, however, to see dozens of projects in this are& At
the moment research has been limited, and I will come to this again
later, so that too few physicians are working on what everyone now
recognizes as an illness
Now then, our objectives if we are to combine the skills of the phy-
sician, law enforcement officer and the attorney, and all others inter-
ested in addiction, should be to rehabilitate the addict without drugs
if thiis poss bl_, and if not, we must try to make him a useful mem-
ber of societ: with some form of drug therapy. We should at least
make some effod, to make him harmless to the rest of society. We
should try to save the unaddicted population the fantastic cost of $d-
diction.
The addict does not pay for his drugs except in rare instances. Few
of them earn the price of it. Therefore, he must prey on the rest of
society in order to support this expensive habit.
A couple of years ago several of us served on a committee for the
then mayor of New York, Mr. Wagner, to determine the cost of addic-
tion inthat one city, and even though we need several actuarial devices
to come to a conclusion about this, we came to practically the same
406 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
answer, and that is that every man, woman and child in New York
City was spending $650 a year on addiction.
Many might immediately
magnitude. This would be object that
two and athey
halfdothousand
not pay taxes of that
dollars for a
family of four. And it does not appear in taxes.
What happens is that materials are stolen to such a large extent
in order to support habits that the remaining materials on the entre-
preneur's shelves, on the merchant's shelves, must be increased in price
so that the gentleman can stay in business.
A small 5- and 10-cent store in my own community has a loss rate
of $13,000 a month of pilfered goods. These are relatively cheap
items and yet this amount of material is stolen in that storo each
month. Obviously not all of this goes into narcotics, but some of it
does.
We should try to clear our courts of these noncriminals, At the
moment they are terribly congested with them. And we must try to
empty our jails of patients remembering that there was a period in
our history when we jailed the lepers and the tuberculous and the
cancerous.
We must try to prevent crimes against the person of our nonaddicted
population. We are a democracy, thank heaven. The vast majority
of our people are nonaddicted, and yet they are paying the price for
our present methods of management. It is upon them that the addict
proys.
W should try to prevent the sickening and death of addicts from
impure drugs. In my own city this amounts to about 1 death per
day, 360 last year, individuals that we know died of impure drugs,
overdoses, contaminated materials, because the pusher of drugs wilg
dilute the material with anything that he has at hand.
We have had several references this morning to the magnitude of
this problem, and I would state unequivocally that we have no idea
in the world of what the magnitude of this problem is. We must
learn this, so that we can build some method of management which
fits the problem as it now exists.
. We should make every effort to reinduce the addict back into our
society. At the moment he is completely isolated from it and in-
sulated from it. He lives in a world of fellow addicts and pushers, and
somewhere on the periphery of his world there are the rest of us, the
squares, whom he uses only as a source of funds for his next fix, for
his next dose of drugs.
These individuals upon whom he preys may be his own family
early in the game until they tire of him. I have seen drug addicts
induce addiction into their own children, their wives, their husbands,
their. pirents in an effort to support their own habits.
When we bring these people into a general. hospital and attempt to
treat them there for the first time in their lives they may find them-
selves associating with individuals who arre nonaddicted. This is usu-
ally a salutary experience..
The proselytizing that these individuals do, introducing adolescents
into addiction, is a main source of difficulty, and it occurs primarily
because this is the easiest way to support the habit. If you fixidan
individual who i 4.ot aildicted and you can induce him to become ad-;
dicted, then his fids will help you to buy your drugs.
THE NARCOTIC REHABIITATION ACT OF 1966 407
We should certainly continue every effort to prosecute importers,
manufacturers, dealers,and pushers in drugs.
How can we realize these objectives I
In the absence of a finite cure, we must first attempt to create a
climate for unimpeded research into this disease.
Gentlemen, if there were a disease that appeared on our horizon
that affected 100 people, the full resources and power of the United
States would be called to bear. Some of you remember what hap-
pened a few years ago when one case of smallpox was found in the
city of New York. The entire city was revaccinated, using the skills
of all the people who possessed them in the city to help. Yet here is
a disease affecting thousands and thousands of people, and on which
the research is negligible.
The reason that this has come about is that it is neither ethical,
dignified, or even legal to attempt re-search in this area.
We must remove the fetters which now impede the proper study and
investigation of this disorder. It might intelet you to know that as
a practicing licensed physician, this is the only disease which I may
not treat, and it is not a particularly dangerous disease. It does not
kill people very much, and yet while my license permits me to treat
cancer and heart disease and brain tumors and things of this magni-
tude, I am not permitted to treat this disease.
The U.S. Department of Justice must define the exact relationship
of the physician to the addict. This is an area in which you, Senator
Javitshave helped me no end in your letters to the Attorney Generm),
and yet we still do not have the final answer from Mr. Katebach's
office as to exactly what the place of the physician is in this area.
This needs to be defined expertly, because at the moment the physi-
cian fears to enter into this area because he may be harassed by various
officials, he may be forced to spend time testifying in court, he may
even have to forfeit his license. This has practically brought to a
halt research in this area.
It would seem that the wording of the Supreme Court decisions,
certainly the last one in Linder v. United State8 would permit the
physician to treat the addict. However, this information does not
seem yet to have arrived in the hands of our police officers even though
this decision was made some 40 years ago. And yet the exact wording,
asI recall it, said that any physician may treat anything that is i-
cident to addiction. I
At the present moment the physician fears very much to move into
this area. And likewise, the addict fears to enter into the office of a
physician, because he must be registered. In New York State this re-
quires five copies of a form to be filled out, one of which gets in the
hands of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, a police organization which
will then apprehend this individual.
The addict knows this. Therefore, he fears, even when well-moti-
vated, to come to a physician for help.
He must not be sequestered in small institutions or large institu-
tions where only addicts are treated. I have had more tljan a modicum
of experience with our Federal and city and State hospitals for. the
care of narcotic addicts. In these institutions the addict continues to
be sequestered from the rest of society, and what we really must do
with him is to try to bring him back among us. He still feels as though
408 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT O 1906
a6 of 26
410 Tax NX COTIC M LHB STATION ACT OF 1900
meant has the fight to interfe in our raliouS practice an that the
present perseoution of our coreligionists is not niy oonstitutional
illegal but a crude. and mvage repremion ot our basic and inalienable
rightsas human beings. I I,_
r'be leader of the psychedelic religious movement in the United
States is Dr. Timothy Leary. We regard him with the samn speoi
loyv, and respect as was resrved by the early Christians for Jesus,
by the Moslems for Mohamnud, or the Buddhists farwGetw&. I am
merly the head of one of severui psychedelia churches.
The psychedelic churches x to promote and dfend the peyohedl-
iereligion, a religion which sees in the trscendental expience pro-
dued by th sacred substances the key to understading life and au-
proving the condition of man on earth.
We have been in existence a year-I am speaking of the church-
and have 5W member. Perhaps if the growth of the peyote religion
and the N9tve Anmerican Church is any guide we will have 540,W
members in a few year Perhaps the psychedelic people will find
some other church morm to their liking. It is not importuat. What
is important isthat the religion, as distinguished from the church, is
spreading at a fantastic rate, and the Government, inthe case of Dr.
Leary, and the repression in general, has Iu itself in the posi'don of
attempting to destroy oy force a genuine indigenous religious move-
ment. I see no moral difference whatever between putting our reli-
gious leader in prison for 30 years and the incarceration of a rabbi
in a concentration camp by the Gestapo of Nazi Germany, Perhaps
Hitter was less hypocritical. If he operated the way our religious
enemies operate inthis country, he would not have mentioned Judaism
at all in the laws designed to oppress the Jews; instead, he would have
(a) made ceremonial wine illegal on the grounds that it was a narotio
intoxicant given to minors; and (b)made the nonpayment of so-called
wine tax result in enormous coafiscatory fines and 80 ears in Buchen-
wald or Treblinka.
The history of Treblinka, by the way, constitutes a perfect example
of how the psychedelic people of the United States will not respond
to persecution and imprisonment. The Jews, inthat instance co-
operated completely in their own destruction. We have no intentions
or cooperating. I
On the day the prison doors close behind Tim Leary; if these ill-
considered laws of religious suppression are upheld by the courts, this
country will face religious civUl war. Any restraint we have shown
heretofore in the d nation opsyhedeliL will be ended. We can,
without difficulty, render most o the prisons in tka United States
inoperative if it comes to open conflict Open conflict will most oev-
tainly result if the courts uphold these laws against us, if our men
are imprisoned, our wives sterilized, our children consigned to unlovw
ing institutions and so-called refomatories' and I would most car-
tainly advise my people to use LSD to fight 6 esk, to make lifekimp-
sible.,for the prisn administrator, rather tkan resort to actual ino-
Ien(* But I will never ask them to pamively eubmit to suchou ka.
.. The pohios of the United States, wlered by their superior to funo-
,.,
,tion as teloris*t as destroyers of happy and Ms fmiMliesr
e
A&i tolb laft alon* to pra~tis their rligim &a:theymf4,)o havmm
TM! NABR C L"H*NWATION AM OF 19 417
to make a moral choice, just as did the police of Germany when Hitler
tok over. ,Thomwho remain would do well to regard thm lv Sa
military rather tham a civil foreL If I seen to emxgprat I direct your
attention to aso m yesterday moming's paper out a woman Who
was ordered "terilize beae a tit of wmaihuas
wu found in a
room when she waspresent. This was n California I believe I Dar*
mmnally will never forget si in on the aseigniatl binrg mt
Sing " watching a paw of armed robbers and grand larcmi at go
by *ith 8.or e-y ar ces, only to be followed by a poor weak 1N
Puerto Rican with an IQ of 8 or so who had been sentenced to 17
yYOMiOn.
ersbeatumAt
three
the or
timfour sticks of natihumsi had been found in his
I was under the common illusion thAt mari-
Kuana was a dangerous drug, but I was still shocked. Now I know
marihuana is a mild psychedelio and I am no longer shocked, I am
numb. I have men so much cruel injustice it semus conmonplace.
The Food and Drug Administration has seen fit to attempt to estab-
lish one psychedelic church as legal, the Native American Church of
the Indians, on the grounds of historical longevity, leaving the rest of
us open to the kind of punishment visited on Dr. Leary. This is a oon-
stitutional outrage, of couru, and I would like to submit my full reply
to the FDA letter announcing this attempt at the unique establishment
of a religion in the United States for the committee's study. However,
I me in this exemption, unconstitutional though it may be, some
grounds for hope that the people responsible may come to their senses.
Apparetly thorn in control of the itrumantslitis of coernive power
in the United States have no difficulty in recognizing that a psychedelic
religion is a psycldelic religion when that religion is safely eapsu-
lated in a rcial minority group living outside the mainstream of
American life. All that is required then is that we should follow the
Indian example and make ourselves as peculiar as possible. Perhaps
the Governnwnt would allow us to live unmolested on reservations. We
would be willing to discuss this, if it would prevent open conflict. Poe
sibly the Government would negotiate a treaty with aow. foreign
power which would grant us religious sanctuary inreturn for receiving
to its shores the larie numbers of scientists, technicians, teachers, doe
tore, and intellectuals of all kinds who constitute a large proportion of
our members. Most of us love this country dearly. It would break my
heart to think of never seeing the Adirondack Mountains again. But
we must think of our children, and we could always hope that some
day the Government of our beloved country would return to that fierce
defense of human ri hts, to that spirit of freedom and tolerance under
which it was found, and we odd come back.
Bui there will either be so, kind of acommodation or them will
be conflieL We are not drug addicts. We ar not criminal& W are
fre men and we will react tO persecution the way free man have always
reacted topreecution. I need be surprised by all this. To
* Tle s no reason why anyone
understand our emotions and our attitudes is only necewary to imagine
how ,jawould reaa if we wet in the majority and paied laws mak-
,enatom Busczm. Thank you,Mr.,Kls I have a few quWtimo
+p
418 TE: NARCOTIC, REKAIiLVATION ACT OF 124S
We do not have any rituals. I am not iyayg that we do not de, olop
them. There are some thing that a already in the proee of develop.
meat. Theuse of the technqwe I described in the case of the dis-
cotheques, the light machines, certain kinds of music, this kind of thing
can be used to heighten your experience, and even to produce it in e
case without the ue of psychedelic substLace.
Senator Bftnm. You Mid not infrequently but it does have a
harmful effect Being on the Indian Comiitte -
Mr. Kuus Yes, Sir.
Senator Bumwci (continuing). I have learned that this peyote does
have an ill-producing effect. It causes vonitin.
. Mr. KlAus. I know. I have tried it, and Ihave had the same ex.
perience.
Senator BumRcx. Does this drug which your church uses have the
same effect V
Mr.KLan. No. Very, very rarely people will suffer some discom.
fort during the early stages of an LSD experience, but that is a
chological conversion of anxiety in the physical form. Peyote does,
however, routinely produce intestinal upset and this isa very negative
way of going into the experience, throwing up. I do not know how the
Indians manage to do it. Somehow they have overcome the nausea.
Senator Bumicx. You think that the experiences that the member
have makes them compatible with society, makes them eligible for pur.
suits that the nonmers follow i
Mr. Kjizs. SometIhe. yes and sometimes no. We have members in
almost every walk of life. We have people who are successfully pur-
suing almost any career you can name.
On the otherr hand some people who are of religious temperament
perhaps to begin with, there are degrees of true religiosity in our
church just aq there are in other churc44es. I would say Tim is more
religious than I am perhaps. Them people, tlw people who are ex-
tre mely religious, may want to withdraw from ordinary life for a
petriod of time. I personally see nothing wrong with that. It is ac.
cepted in other traditions, the monasteries any so on. Why not in
this V
Senator Bvmwcx. If you will permit personal question, do you
patiityurl ina these ceremonies, thea use of this drug !
Mr. Kilam Yes, sir.
Senator Buancz. And part of your answer is based upon your own
personal experinoe.
Mr. Kias Yes, sir.
Senator Buazuox. I have heard it said that. thues drugs produce a
"color
Mr.television
K .Itact"
ma do that. It depends o6 the individual. There
are a lot of people who have had many, many paye i experiences
and have never really had that kind of a vsiwn They come back with
the same mesages when they are all through. This is very sa
Other people will have extremely oiorful and brilliant detailed three
dimensial movie kind of i I have had bothA I -have be=a in
both situations. . 'I,
-Se or BumwQa. I wndr if you would also tell us whether .this
t nlth
1-S NARCOTIC RUJABJLITATION ACT VT 190642 421
Mr. Kim No The church actuaRy is more in the tradition of the
mystery religions of ancient Greece. The key experience i n the
weekly meeting as it is in the Christian tradson. The key exper-
ence is the bi% transcendental experience that come to you maybe
once or twice in a lifetime. But we center around t& Th metiAgs
are secondary. Now at the meetings perhaps a very tiny amount of
L.SD, 5 or 10 irgron, will be ditributed, just to i the
feel, of communion to produce some of the effect& Or marihuam
may smoked for that matter. None of this is laid down in our
regulations. It is up to the individuals.
Senator BumwicW. When this substance is distributed you say to the
members, who pays for it ! How i it acquired I
Mr. Yzs. Well, it is easily available. Thut is all I can really say.
To discuss the details of the economics of the matter probably would
not be proper for me.
Senator BuRDLcL Does it op-- it. like a farm cooperative, which
I am acquainted with !
Mr.K xn. Well, I would my this. That it is not at all like the
heroin world. The people in the psychedelic world are kind and
loving people. It is almost like automatic affection. Oh, of course
there are exceptions, but it is not this sick, greedy, vicious world of
the addicts. Vothing could be more dissimilar.
Senator Buywiox The committee knows that it is acquired. We do
not know how it is acquired but it is paid for, is that right I
Mr. KLY.re. That is right, sir.
Senator BuRDicL. And you cannot enlighten us any further.
Mr. KzL-s I really cannot.
Senator Buaic. But whether it is given to these members of the
church or whether they buy it themselves, they do participate a a
group in this.
Mr. KL- Yes, sir.
Senator Buumcx. You mentioned marihuana. Is that brought into
the religious services, too I
Mr. KLz Occasionally. We regard marihuana as being a very
mild psychedelic. It is very similar to a very tiny, tiny amount of
LSD. The effects are almost identicaL One of the best things about
marihuana is that it is very easy to oontrol the amount ingeted be-
cause you are smoking it. If you take something orally, you are
leaving it more to chance. When you are smoking, there is very good
control. I consider marihuana to be a com pletely benign substance.
Senator BtPicnz. You see no harmful effect&
Mr. Kiaws. None at all.
Senator BumcK. Have you read or heard the testimony given
before this committee I
Mr. KLzs. I have.
Senator BVRmcK. And you dispute that !
Mr. Kuis. Completely.
Senator Bu)wcK. The results and findings I
Mr. Kuws. Yes, sir.
Senator BmwxcK. Is it. your intention to continue to personally
experiment with and to advocate the use of LSD by the others !
Kuim' Yes, sr.
Mr.
422 22
TI'NARCOTIC RMBILITATION ACT OF 1 066
66-4" -- M----28
I
Ia, j~ .&,
* I.
II A .
I l
* £
a.
*a
0 ,I I
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF I6
%7 AJ,
Y M" 14, Me0
U.S. SZN A ..
SnOwA SUBWxmnrzuOlt NAIcIrzCS
or THz Comxrrr f oN Tffr Jub)CLir,
am.
Iuw olm I I: _ _
Sm *a %wa am"
dom
em orp- IM - -I
11100
1 4mim wmmnoe
Mese
& tm- sianatf
Gmmmfre
&I
I
* 10,0 maem mmfeaps
*3* flm a odwet
ftP amm ae .W"
-low
0 Some-~ - amomi.em
I.
asmanm
a mf mmum
4= ftso wo asm
I
~',i---
T- -
I . I m I
-- .
ir
1I 1
-
1 - f - I
-I
480 %W&-XAROO)T1C SWAIATION ACT O 1i961
Exua No. 56
e"I:mI No. w
ACTIVE NARCOTIC ADDICTS
IN THE UNITED STATES
Ell"
IowI
cm " .......
60I
OW-9
432 220 WMOARW UEAMIATIOX- AM Or I *$@
Dkzxn No. 00
tM NARCOTIC ASUMMON ACT OP 1966 "a
azxnw Ift. a
43' TM NkBQ1C. R?4"I4 TIQN ACTP OF 1960
Soltiocre, "d
ie Thmqeafet)
1H NAROD= X X .OP 160 4M5
qvvrnJI ia as
Meaco"
Total White ... J Toaso%
Wits
1,489Addicts
75.5%
ppS4JSP ~ I)S ",. I
...
.....
.. . ...... .....
Negro
S482 Addicts
Jpow#* Itites 24.4%
,: 419 OR¢
'OT."dica , V.
v 2%
of Narcotics
Bureau
eaferal
r
AOTIVE'NARCOTM-ADMOS REPORTED
N y TH TAT FvS
PMITAD
,AS --OF DECEMBER 34 -19"
Total Active Addicts 579199
All 01her
396 Addicts
Total While 0.7%
27$321 A441106
9 6%
Ae 00
0000,0000e . .. . . 'OF
0 010 0 0 e., . . . . 0 01 0 pf,
1000ppooo
0110011 It 0 010 IfIOA. oljo.
, " 4,0
e J. A 0 t #1,* . I * 00
1101.ep AAI
N ^0 0 1
02 09 4 62III:
Mite 000000
10 .10
01:1
X z IwAO.O
III AIIA4 IOA
. . ..
I. . . . . . .
438 I'NARWWW M4UAAOATW AOM- OW' 1 M*
]Dzziu No. P
11,000
10,000
- - - -V
9,000
8,000 - - - ~ - - - -
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
195 57 59 SI 6 65
1,11 NARVCkTIC. JiEABUITATJON AO OP 1001' 430
Uumnr.N ir
so
STO
SO
60
SO
40
30
to
0
194,0 O
ft$"I4, VGA*$1
"bo w* O L
i.1t
I'
40 U31 NAWRP1UC4,~ H-WAM~WIQ A"./ 11 "
State 910
wmaw--O - - - - - -- - - - 11
......... O imam1
.89184
pow . can -
1U other white
Ngro .90482
All other
Aveot addicts (am t D& 4 1M):
I K K
27
106
17 STT
Total under 21
Ono Mom
21 to 8L0-- - 54.
Over 40-. dwwft-4mm
KAI* 47,061n
10o1i8
Heroin
Morphine GM
opium-------
Dilaudid ____
Demeroi 020
Amidon (DolophaLn) ------
087
108
Narz-18,760 of the addicts included In the table were originally reported
during the years 190840, and have reoane active during the subsequent alyear
period (914)
THE NAROTIC XCHARILLTATION ACT Or," 1090 441
ExitD No.0a
TAm..s .- 4Bstidst* d on new wam
s W ddoe reported so thChPedw
Boresu oI NercoS frou & iSS dark A* eaoodar ne~r8
1061-65
to...........................
148 113 162M
toe ...........................
18. -6 51 87 16 M
20 ..... . %Vv-
q-* ..-......-......
1 M42 US6l 37) ,5
Toal under 21.
on
,,m i bi -
m....m,
.....
-~
21%03 .......................
31 60860
O to 40
4 ......................
..................... .49 1.443
835
mak...Q....................... 1,14 6 1.,, is
10 1, t?0
7,6NO
Female ......................... 1.106 1, 157 o
H e ..........................
r u l 6,417 514
Oim..........................
AlWphlm ....................... 177
34
218
0
16
%102SO 1
Diadid ........................ 106 110
141
Donerol ............... N 126
27 17
14 174
Amidon
le o&WO (Dolph ~
............in.. N 1) 12
67 173 125 in
lifot... .... S 75 Is 167
ASo~
OU .... .............. 6 36 13 3I1
442 Tz NARCOTIC RrMABLITAlION ACT OF 1966
Euiumi No, TO
TAin& L-40iee wsvote addite rocorded by Owe Podeu Buw*s of NWotim
" ofDo&. 511965,d bp at"@
Alabama 166 1Nebr aska................ iT
ALa si Neva da 40
Arlaona IN5 New Hampsbk 4
Arkansas 46 New
O8S New Mexlco Jerey 1,7 62
Caltornia -- 484
Colorado 826 Noew York 29, 510
Connecticut Norti ,Carolina . . 456
Delaware 81 ,Norti SDakota
District of 0olumbda 1.116 Ohio 47.
florida 881
an Oklak
Georgia. . .. 79 Or% n ----- 10
Hawaii
Idaho -- Ilvanla
52 Penn •Island 1.461
----- 5 Rho& . 3
Illinois 7,80 South Carolina 50
Indiana .. _ 480 South Dakota 10
Iowa----------
Kansas 15 Tenne 107
84 Texas
Louimsi- -- 8 Utah
Mains, Vern O2t 2
6 VirgfiLie 170
Maryland - - 984 Wash ington 168
Massachusetts 4m6 West Virgina .- -- 10
MlchLn .....- it,700 Wiseo ian -------
Wyom
Mississippi 54
Missouri Grand tptal -,- .
Montana 34-
THB NACOnC R3ABILMATION AM OF 10 443
wnm No. 71
TAM~L 4.-NOP "w@@4@ 6400" reportd t a Pod..I Iwm of Nerveow
dwng the 08jem yW* IMj-E5
1911 I= 1I 153W
Allb ------------------------------------ -
laM - 44 1 3 1
Alska.............................................. ........ ....
Ariwca ---- ------ -- -- ------- - - - so531
A 'a2 ................. .......................... 2 It
c am ........................................... 1., 0 902 I 1
Cooorodo ............................................ O 71 Is 3
o alckt ......................................... so 143 54 1t4
Elwaaa.. ......................................... 17 1 1 & 2
ptgtrto C4 c1mblu ..................I.............. 1 127 Is W I1
r 1idd.............................................. 20 20 is 71 is
ofgrg ............................................. 14 6 6 10 18
Hw .............................................. 2 1 .....
Ida _o........................................-... 3 ... .I
Wools,.,..............................-..-.....-. m mH o
Inda .. ..... ................................... 81,,o*
10 . ............................................ ... 2 4 t ... . .
Ems .............................................. It 1 S I
g~enum.ky ........................................... 17 7 Is is 0
10uta ............... ........................ 48 a 26 ai
M aine ............................................... .......... I 4 .. .
Maryland ........................................... I sl l ll
m1i4
ManahumWi ...................................... 48 96 do 3
Michtesn ............................................ I 18 0 W
ISO
Minne,4ota ........................................... 12 3ll 18 as
Mlimlipp. ......................................... 6 39 11 6
.Mimu ............................................ Ile 48 39 0M
Moctum ............................................ 9 9 1 1 1
Nebmak ........................................... 6 ......... 9 1 .........
Nevad ............................................ 4 I 1 3 H1
New IIlamemhlis.............. ................... .......... ..........
I
Now Jerse .......................................... 306 ..... 2t Wio iii
Now Mezte......................................... 5 76 106 86 1,i ?
North C"I .i~ ...................................... & 22 1 ..........
worth Dakoml ....................... ............... .......... I .........
Ohio ................................................ asl a um 48
Oklahma ........................... 14 36 19 I1
Iv =======...........................
173 3
...... i i
............................................. 1 i2 3 14 1&
Rhoe Iand................................
.... ......
.. Is A
south Carlina .................... I)9 1 Is 4
south Ddroma ....................... ...... ...... 1
Tawl .............................................." 2m 274 in 110) is
Uta ................................................ .......... ......... 2 1 4
Ver .l~ .... . ...
.. ilmiilalllt
.. .... il ..
ll ..
l l .l ..
ltl
. ..
l .
t l l .....*.
.......... . ll I
VI s ............................................. 42 is a1 W7 W
Washington ......................................... S1 a4 xI 11 6
wedmaw ..................................... ......
vt, abb mm. 2
w120008 .................................... 36 1
is......
W) lad .... .......................... .... Ip am . . ...... I-
-
ExSuz No. 72
Ts&in &-Aot9ff maood 44oa in the UxU". ite* as ci Doc. S1. 1564 .64
Dee. J10 194 by 8*68.
Do.. 819366
t .. . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . . .
AAia-bat...m..............
w108 .. . ... . . .
141 .......... o..
11mids . . .abo
................
. .. 0........0..... .... .......... . ... 70
39
Indl......... 444
as 13 ....
o...oo..
Iowaa.......................................
.....................................
.an 26 5
Zamn...................................... 30 70
134
-.. . , ........
Mask ....Ftcy.....................................
.. ..... 198 G .. o.......o 1
Ma
1"W ryland
......................................
ms.......- .'..222"2.2.."... "..... e2
210
machuah ................... ............ 46 o..o........
.................................. 1,.53 18
... sta
..... ......... 14 74
. .................
. ............ 6 14. 1S
i .............................. 41 20
N evwba.a 3 440
43.
ot.w NothCaohm.................
... ....... .........
....... 418
4
N ow .4................................
, 106 347
Now .............. 6 ....... O...1.
N eYor .................................
w 008 82.
4OO.
North CugUna .............................. 7 33.
North Dakow. . . .......... 4 307
Ohio ............................ 442 101.
so 4 44.
OklahMa ............................... 02 8 N
Oregon... . -........ 118 1,.71 2 3
oe lvah .......... ..................... .U
23,1 ...... oe...e1
Bout ............
a................. 45 10. 8.
Soutb DakoUa. ...... ~*....6
-....... 10.
TvauaL .. .......... ............. 104 of481
1.2 in
yhUhu.........................
1..................... ............. 1m N1.. O............
80
Virginia.. . ........ IS I 10
Waablaston ........................ 21
West Vl ...... .... ~..~.&7... - 0....... .
Wisconsa ..... ................ in6
Wyedm ................ ......... ......... S
IIIIJ
22 I.
Albam ....... -. ................. ,,,,.. ... ... ...
Alska .........................................
............
.... *-... !1 .** , U1 ..... *...*....
Ark mtf ..................................... 601 1,032
cawr ,L ............................. it.
Colorado- ....................... .
4
Ckilcucut.................................. 186 .. .... . ... ...•e** **.•....
o..,*o
...... ........................... 2 ....... .... * .* --.
i trict o Cumbi................... ,"1
130 I .. .... . .4..
eorllda ..................................... 78 o.............
00riaw ............... ........ 1 18
a
I
Hawal ......................................... 1
J ............ ...................... .....*.. 20
£uiluoAiL.............w......W...... 6A2
22
.........
oo.. e
IodlaL ............................ so 81
Iow.................
o..........
.. ..... 6
Kansay.
.. ...... ..... ....... o a 0 ..............
10tcky.................................... 18
18
Maine .......................................
aryaiA.................................
l chwslM
............... ... .......... .o•.... . .. i
michig. ...................................... I 74
UMaiim ...................................... .............. 11
36
MoulaNAm
................................... ...
.. ... .
Naesak ........ .. .......
as 1
NOlAda ...................................... 26
Newvam.................................. ............. l
Now Jamru............................... 1
Now Jmeze.....................
NewvMe" ...................................
.1.
74
N1 am
New York ............................. 106
North carollus ................................ .................
is
o..............
oth Deo............ ..........
Ohio..*.................9...
Okiaha............ ......... *.... 1 . 1 .
.................-...... 141 ...... 10o*..
.
fennsylvanla ......... ............ .. .•a
.0-. 0......,oe~
.
lapland
.................................. 4
Soth
s *ein ................................ 2
fth DadcL.............-............... 7
110
Tea... ...... ......... I
liU ..................
Vo .................................
mia 17' I
Sd...ni........................ 11
Wiacan...o.............
y
West ......
in .................................. 181
W ini.................................. 1
OnQDS
....... .. ..... . owwa~
on"
iowstaj
W40I .on I
"a
AAR T4= NA RorIC RIZAB TAON AM OF 1066
Zxzn No. 74
TsAla 7.-New xwvoo ddkte reported to $A* Fedor5 Bwe. of Newvoto bV
ree, J6-5
It"0 low ION 04 1919
low ISO Is Is" ISO
ToW wtlwu ................. 8778 8.10 &46 4 ,H2 8,4 &3A 8847 53 8.187
Mexican ........ 42 802 40
M 72 8 4W 300 2.7 361
PUWt.Ria 728 788 710 V2 748 ma 700 -0 1.434 944
All hwwbt 2,8 1.9On 2,476 1,768 8168, %116 2,4077 2,64t 8, ,9
%86
M - 1 1
Nwo.................. 83.6 4, 4,021 8, 8,X, & .O 8, ,72 2,1
..U..................... 147 a a 71 4
AA,,a me. s
458 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT O 1906
biturates, et cetera, then of course these figures that I have are not
related to that.
Senator JAVITS. Now, you say that marihuana is not an addictive
drug; is that right I
Mr. GioRDAro. Right.
Senator JAvrrs. And you do not class it that way.
Mr. GOuw o. No.
Senator JAvrrs. Do you have any estimate of what crime is caused
by marihuana users I
Mr. Giomamo. The percentage of crime ?
Senator JAvrre. Yes.
Mr. GxoaDao. No; I do not.
Senator JAVrre. Would you rate it in any way or equate it with the
crime caused by users of narcotics ?
Mr. GIoumawo. I am sure that there is some relationship. We do
know that marihuana has led to violent types of crimes.
Senator JAvrrs. Violence?
Mr. GIORDANO. Violence, yes. In fact, I have here a paper that you
wish to introduce in the record, on marihuana.
Senator Javrrs. Could we have that, Commissioner ?
Mr. GixoiNO. Yes.
Senator JAvrrs. That would be very helpful to us.
Mr. GIORDoo. Yes.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 75," and is as
follows:)
Exlamr No. 75
WRAT If 8o BAD ADOUT MARIBUARA?
The toxie effects produced by marihuana seem limited exclusively to the
higher nerve centers. 'It produces first, a more or lees feeling o well being;
usually a happy Jovial mood; and an increased feeling of physical strength,
power, and exhaltatlon. This Is accompanied by a stimulation of imagination
followed by a delirious state or hallucinations. Accompanying this delirium
Is a remarkable loss In spatial and time relations; persons and things In the
environment look small and time Is interminable. If the dose is sufficient, the
delirious state merges Into a general motor weakness fatigue, drowsiness and
sleep. The effect depends on the mood of the individual-what he Is looking
for. It alters the individual's perception, and Increased dosage causes haluci-
nations. It has psychological effects and a definite psychological dependence
occur--the user becoming dependent upon a desire to re-experience the effects.
It Is a crutch.
Much of the confusion regarding the effects produced by marihuana has been
due to quibbling over whether marihuana Is "addicting" or only "habituating".
I think the situation will be clarified somewhat by the recommendation of the
WHO Expert Committee on Dependence-Producing Drugs, which proposes to re-
place both terms by the word "dependence". This word Is defined as a state
arising from repeated administration of a drug on a pWriodlc or continual basis.
Its characteristics will vary with the agent involved avD- this will be made clear
by designating the particular type of drug dependence in each case, such as
"drug dependence of the morphine type", "drug dependence of the cocaine type".
and "drug dependence of the cannabis type". By making this disUncton, the
consensus of the world experts Is that the use of marihuana does produce "drug
dependence". It is probable, according to most authorities that marihuana Is
somewhere between alcohol and morphine in its dependence qualities-that is.
the end result of the dependence depends to a larger extent on the personality
involved than on any physolog call addicting properties of the drug.
Psychiatrists tuli us that chronic marihuana users present an extremely com-
plex picture in which the use of the drug is but one aspecL There are many
reasons why a person begins to use marihuana. such as lack of social ties and
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 459
warm relationships, the need for a feeling of superiority, delinquency and anti-
social behavior, and feelings of depressions. However, In our young hedonistic
society today, there seems to be one formula which fairly well expresses the
cause of the increased use of marihuana-that is: The world is a source of
hostility and suffering, to be met, on the one hand. with an unending earch for
sensual pleasure, and on the other hand. with aggression, especially toward
authority figures (such as the marihuana regimes of control) and with neurotic
repetition of situations leading to punishment.
This Subcommltte has heard that marihuana is not harmful; that usa of It
does not lead to crime or other antisocial behavior; and that smoking marl-
huana Is no more harmful than taking a drink before dinner. It Istoo bad that
the advocates of liberalization of marihuana controls have not had an oppor-
tunity to visit some of the oriental countries where the use of marihuana has
been acceptable. It would not be possible to decry the dangerous aspects of
marihuana after examining regions where there are found large numbers of
serious chronic cases of stupefied wretches, incapable of working, who are a
danger and a burden to their society because of marihuana use. We are seeing
a period where some aggressive adolescents at odds with the conventional norms
of our society are seeking to assert themselves by fulfilling a perverted freedom
of expression. However, not by any means, have all the authorities gone along
with the claims In some quarters that the worst thing about marihuana is the
law against it. Experts have said that "marihuana has a worse effect than
heroin"; that It is a "danger drug, more intoxicating than alcohol, and the
abusive use of It more likely to lead to insanity": and that "marihuana has
been responsible for numerous and varied major crimes".
The unpredictable nature of marihuana's effect is one of Its greatest dangers.
In fact, the medical professional has no use for the drug as a medicine. A few
decades ago, iarihuana appeared in the U. S. Pharmacopeia as a source of drug
used in American medical practice. It will not be found In current editions of
that work. Also, In 1". the WHO relprted that the use of marihuana as a
medicine is virtually obsolete, and that its continued use was no longer justified.
Unlike narvotie addicts, marihuana users show no feelings of remorse-no
tense of doing something which is unacceptable. They are indifferent to opinion
about their actions, and they frequently try to persuade others to try marihuana.
In that respect, the marihuana user is an even more active proselytizer than
the narcotic addict. The marihuana user is unaffected by social disapproval or
the deprivations which affect the behavior of normal persons. He is affected
chiefly by the prospect of obtaining marihuana for his transportation into an-
other world and to get someone else to Join him.
Prom my studies and experience, ose theme en'erge--that marihuana is
capable of inducing acts of violence, even murder. The arug frees th. uncon-
scious tendencies of the individual user, the result being reflected In frequent
quarrels, fights and asault.%
In Colorado, a man under the influence of marihuana attempted to kill his
wife, but killed her grandmother instead, and then committed suicide.
In Baltimore. Maryland, a 25-year-old Puerto Rican charged with criminally
assaulting a ten-year-old girl, entered a plea of not guilty on grounds of temporary
Insanity caused by smoking marihuana. He was subsequently found guilty
and sentenced to death by hanging.
In Seattle. Washington, a service station operator muired his wife and com-
mitred suicide. A search of his clothes at the morgue uncovered twelve mari-
huana cigarettes.
In Portland, Oregon, a 16-year-old high school girl was found semieonscious
and savagely beaten near a downtown street. Her assailant admitted smoking
marihuana Just prior to the attack.
In Cincinnati, Ohio, police apprehended three men in the act of committing an
armed robbery of a grocery store. Subsequent interrogation linked them with
four other robberies.
After the police discovered an ounce of marihuana on one of the defendants,
they obtained admissions from all three that they had been using marihuana for
two years and they had made a practice of smoking marihuana Immediately prior
to their robberies.
In Albuquerque, N.M.. police officers were called to Investigate a disturbance at
a rooming house. As they entered the house two gunmen opened fire. killing one
of the officers and critically wounding the other,- One gunman was killd at the
460 MR ARfC EJ AT1ON ACT O 1908
scene, but the other escaped, only to be captured two days later near an Indian
Pueblo south of town. A quantity of marihuana was later found in a house which
had been rented by one of the gunmen who later confessed that he and his d*-
ceased companion had been smoking marihuana prior to the shooting.
In Now York City, a marihuana trafficker received a suspended sentence fol-
lowing conviction of alleged sale of mrlhuana to an undercover agent. He had
admitted habitually smoking marihuana. Two weeks later, he kled another man
during the course of a holdup attempt He later pleaded guilty to second degree
murder.
In Camden, N.J, four Puerto Ricans were charged with the murder of a lunch-
room operator during a holdup. One of the defendants confessed that the group
had primed themselves with marihuana prior to the crime.
In Augusta, Georgia, an exhibitionist admitted that smoking rearibum pre-
Vipitated his Indecent exposure to young gils.
",ems case histories could be continued ad Infinitum In needless repetition.
cs, i the latest and most disturbing reports came from missionaries seeing the
rebel hold territory of the Congo. They reported that man of the tribesmen
Involved in the senseless murders of civilians were under the influence of enaJs
which is another term for marihuana. (Even Patrice Lumumba was known to.
authorities as an habitual user of marihuana and this was believed to have con-
tributed to his Irrational behavior.) Just a year ago, a fanatic group on the
north shore of Jamaica known as Rastafarans engaged In a series of brutal
murders and rioting. The authorities on the island reported the widespread use
of marihuana by this group as contributing to their brutal acts.
Senator JAvrS Now, Commissioner, what about this new LSD
drug f Are you aware of any connection between the use of LSD and
criime?
Mr. GloiDAxo. No; I am not. I am aware of the connection be-
tween use of marihuana and LSD. In most of the areas we are in-
volved in, marihuana
amphetamines, barbiturates, and LSD.we find the same people using the
investigations
Senator JAvfL. Is this a kind of new fashioa among these drug
users, to go over to LSD I
Mr. GiowA,o.There seems to be a sort of "spree" use of drugs,.
Icomplicated moving from
of narcotics
mentioned our one to In
problems. thethe past, Of
other. course,
when this did
an addict
not have narcotics, he suffered; but now, they just move into these.
other areas and are able to tide themselves over.
As I mentioned, when they had a panic in New York, during this
period of time they move into these other drugs. Whe heroin was
back they were back aain on heroin.
OF course, this would tend to defeat some of the commitment pro-
cedures in New York, where in the past they wold appear at the hoe-
pital to be withdrawn, but when they have these other drugs to sub-
ititute, they don't appear there.
Senator" JAvrrs. Incidentally, what were the periods of these two
pauicsf Couldyougiveuathosel Oristhemsonethingsof&ecurity
nature about them I
Mr. G oIDANO. No; I don't have the exact times, but I can furnish.
this to the committee later.
Senator JAvrrs. Well, in what years were theyI
Mr. Gzoimwo. Within the past year, I would say.
Senator JAvrns. Two panics within a 1-year period t
Mr. Gxoiwsio. Yes.
Senator JAVriS. Do you think we ought to set criminal penalties for-
the use of LSD I
Mr. Giomwmio. For the useI
THE NARCOTIC REHABLITATION ACT O? 106 461
Senator JAvrr. YeL
Mr. GxomFm o. No; I don't think you should set penalties for the
Senator JAVrrs. Do you think we ought to set criminal penalties for
the sale or distribution of LSD I
Mr. Gioiwo. I certainly do.
Senator JAvrs, Do you think"we know enough about it now to war-
rant it I
Mr. GzomwAo. Yes, air; I do.
Senator JAvrIr. And could we take that as the administration's po-
sition, or is that your personal opinionIt
Mr. GioAowo. This is my prsonal view, because as I indicated,
this is the responsibility of the Food and Drug Administration. I am
sure that they have appeared here, and what I am giving you now in
this area is strictly my personal view. I will confine my Official com-
ments, shall we say, to the narcotic field.
Senator JAVITs. Now, in the narcotic field, of course, possession
itself is a crime.
Mr. GIoRDANo. Possession is a crime, yes.
Senator JAvrrs. In the case of LSD, even under the Pure Food and
Drug Act, session is not a crime. Do you think we ought to
change that Your personal opinion.
Mr. GIonRANo. My personal view? I would say yes, that if you
are going to attempt at all to control it, you would need to have a
possession type of offense. It may be that it should be at the State
level rather than the Federal level.
Senator JAvrrS. Incidentally, at the State level have you found
any material diminution in your area of responsibility attributable
to new laws in New York and California for civil commitment ?
Have you seen any change in the picture because of those new laws?
Mr. GIoRDANO. Well, I have seen a change in California.
Senator JAvrs. They have been there longer, of course.
Mr. GIORDANO. Yes.
New York has had problems which I think have been corrected
there with the recent legislation this past year. But California, in
their most recent report, showed a 22-percent reduction in the hard
narcotic arrests this past year.
Senator JAVrS. Is that measurable in the activities of your
department I
Mr. Gioa Axo. Well, I think it is measurable not only in our de-
partment, but with the State and local people.
Senator JAvrrs. The important thing is, can you see an impact in
the reduction of effort required by your department, in California?
Mr. Gio=Ayo. A reduction of effort?
Senator JAvrrs. Well, how is it manifested to you ? I mean, what
is the effect upon your bureau of this California civil commitment
lawII
Mr. GOimAwo. Well as I indicated, there were fewer cases being
made in California. It the State level, it went down 22 percent.
A g portion of our effort in California is directed toward
working inMexico, which of course does not affect only California,
it affects the whole southwest area, and our men in Los Angeles and
in San Diego are operating in Mexico with Mexican authorities.
462 THS NARCOTIC RZCHAS132ATION ACT OF 1966
Senator JAviTS. You mentioned that your activity has not been
too much affected by the change. But apparently the State enforce-
ment problems have been materially reduced; is that correct#
Mr. GioRDaNo. I would say that is correct; yes, sir.
Senator JAviTS. Now, Commissioner, I have just a few more
questions.
You mentioned some big-shot names, like Genovese and Ormento,
and others. I am not asking you for names; we are not seeking to
penetrate security. But are there any real rings operatng in this
country in narcotics, in New York or in Chicago or in California?
Is there still a big organized underworld crime activity in the nar.
cotics traffic
Mr. Gxozv wo. We still have some of the organizations in narcotic
traffic. Most of them have moved out of this area, primarily because
of the type of e ty mped on these individuals There are still
some of them that, notwithstanding the fact that they were told to
get out, did not get out. But I would say certainly that the orga-
nized groups apparently are not as heavily involved in the narcotic
traffic as they were in the past.
Senator JAvrrs. That is, the organized underworld groups.
Mr. GoiwAro. Yes.
Senator JAviTs. But they are still in it.
Mr. GIORDANO. Yes.
Senator JAvrrs. There are still some in it.
Mr. GioRio. Right.
Senator JAvITs. Do you wish to identify any city as having the
very dubious distinction of harboring this type of organization?
Mr. GIORWANO. Well, if the Senator wishes, yes. New York.
Senator JAViTS. You think New York is an important center?
Mr. GIORDANo. Yes, I do.
Senator JAiTrS. Could you tell us who told these fellows to get
out? You said they were told to get out.
Mr. GOBDANo. I think this has been mentioned before in the past,
that these various groups got together and told their members to
stay out of the narcotic traffic.
Senator JAvrrs. I am a member of the committee which investi-
gated. Valachi, and I gather that implicit in what you say is that you
thin there is a good deal to the Valachi thesis of an-
Mr. GIOmANo. Yes, I do.
Senator JAViTs (continuing). Organized underworld hierarchy in
crime.
Mr. GioDAN o. Yes.
Senator JAvrris. And that they were told to get out of the narcotics
business.
Mr. GIORDANO. Yes.
Senator JAvrrs. I might say parenthetically that I am not a bit
sensitive about New YorNc. On the contrary, Iwould like to tear the
cover off the ball, and let's get at it. I think this is helpful, not
harmful. I am not anxious to sweep it under the rug at all Iti
too devastating to our city and its crime rat.
Mr. GioRPAvo. I know you were on the committee that I appeared
before, the McClellan committee-
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196 6 463
Senator JAVITS. Ye&
Mr. GIoRDANo (continuing). When this was all discussed, when
the various families were named, and it is all part of the record, that
this would be just redundant here, I think.
Senator JAvrz. Yes, it would be redundant. But I am interested
and I think my colleagues would be interested in the fact that you
do feel that thece is a fundamental element of validity to this
Valachi thesis which we heard so much about.
Mr. GIoRDANo. Yes, I do.
Senator JAVriS. Now, lastly-and I thank you, Mr. Chairman,
for indulging me--I notice
to turnthat
to that, say tat page 20 of your state-
you sir
ment--woulidyou like
In reference to the bill of Senator Kennedy and myself, you men-
tioned that you think it would be unwise to remove the mandatory
penalty feature, even for first offenders.
Mr. GioRWAxo. I do.
Senator JAvrrs. And for the reasons that you gave us.
Mr. GioRDANo. Yes, sir.
Senator JAVITS. Now, does not the idea of rehabilitating these
first offenders prevail in your mind over a stiff mandatory sentence
for a first offender I
Mr. GIORDANO. Well, as I say, I think if it is a first offense for
possession, parole and suspended sentence are available.
Senator JAVITS. Yes, I realize that.
Mr. GIORDANO. And currently the Department of Justice policy
in the handling of the individual is that unless they are a smuggler
or one of the major traffickers, they are charged with the lesser
offense.
So I would certainly say I think it would be a setback to remove
the mandatory penaltie&
Senator JAvrrs. Now, what about the age bracket? I think that
Senator Kennedy and I-and that is not Senator Edward Kennedy,
it is Senator Robert Kennedy-were thinking about the younger
offender. Would you not make a distinction as to age ?
Mr. GIORDANO. Well, the younger offender at the present time has
the benefit up to 21.
Senator JAvrrs. We thought about 26.
Mr. GIoRDANo. Well, this is in the administration bill.
However, as I pointed out, I think it would have to be used with
restraint-and this is at the Federal level that I am talking about.
Senator JAvrTs. I understand.
Mr. GioWAxo. Many of our most important traffickers fall in that
22-to-26 group, and if it were just applied without restraint, I
think it would not help our situation at all.
Senator JAVITS. You would not object, however, to allowing that
mandatory penalty to be removed ? After all, if you did not remove
it at all, you could not even use it with restraint, for those up to 26
years of age.
Mr. GORDANo. I think actually, the mandatory penalty is not
removed, but they are given an opportunity, in lieu of that, with
the youth authority. That is what is in the administration proposal.
Senator JAVMrS. And you would be for that?
AAA TH NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Senator BuaimC. Thank you. You have been very helpful and
cooperative, and the committee wants to think you.
Mr. GZoiwANo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Buimoz. The next witness will be Dr. Robert Baird. Dr.
Baird has worked with narcotic addicts in Harlem for over 15 years.
For the past 4 years, he has been the director of Harlem's Uaven
Clinic. He has testified before this subcommittee on May 25, and in
his statements made reference to drug use among certain segments of
our Armed Forces.
I have asked Dr. Baird to prepare testimony on the extent of his
knowledge of this problem, trying to describe it as he sees it, from the
point of view of a physician working in New York City.
I think his information is indicative of a very real problem which
has long been recognized by this subcommittee and the military serve
ices; that is, the pr-oblem of weeding out serious delinquents and mis.
fits at the recruitig and induction level.
The easy availability of narcotics near overseas bases adds another
dimension to this problem. Certain young people who may be dis-
posed to drug use, who have not done so because of the restrictions in
this country, may fall easy prey to addiction in parts of the world
where heroines as ey to get as coffee.
Dr. Baird's testimony will be augmented by Defense Department
witnesses at a later date
The Department is presently conducting a thorough survey of the
narcotics and drug problem in the various services in all parts of the
world.
The subcommittee has been aware of the drug problem in the armed
services for several years. We have in our files alarming cases, which
include the following:
In January of 1185; 178 airmen were rounded up at a major
Strategic Air Command installation for the use of marihuala. The
base had a total of 5,500 personneL This means that over 3 percent
of the manpower of the base was eliminated in just one raid.
In. Noveiaber of 1985, 33 American servicemen were arrested in
Frankfurt. Twent -four were Army personnel, and nine were Air
Force personnel. They were involved in a marihuams ring that flour-
ished in the GI bars and hangouts.
In recent months there have been 18 men discharge from the Navy
facilities at Norf.1k, Va, for narcotics, and f discharges are
pending.
Indiecember 1965, an Army officer was arrested with over 200
pounds of heroin which he had brought into this country from Europe.
I;i Usy of 1986 a soldier stationed miSt LoWs, .o., w..
to 8 years in prison for the sale of dilaudid, an opm derivative.
This cae supports my stateent of the ned for more safewuads
in th* induc4oa and recruitment of military person#e This soldier's
offense Qccurred while he wa still a civilian.
The question arises How does an individual faced with a felony
conviction for the sale of narcotics get into the Army in the firit
place?
These are some of the areas we would like to hear from you about,
Dr. Baird.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1986 473
TATEXENT OF DR. ROBERT W. BAIRD, DICOR, HAVEN CLINIC,
NEW YORK CITY; ACCOMPANIED BY AN EX-MN IDENTI-
FD AS "FRANK" FOR PURPOSE OF ANONYMITY
Dr. BAiIW. Thank you very much, Senator Burdick.
I have come this morning to alert this body and to give some sug-
gested constructive thoughts.
In my 10 years of working in Harlem with drug addicts, there have
been certain predictions I have made which have become realities.
1. 1 prediced. 5 yearsagoin New York City that there would be a
rise in addiction in suburbia, and was called an alarmist. This has
come to bear in Long Island, Port Chester, Westchester, Connecticut,
and the environs of iew Jersey.
2. I predicted an increase in the consumption of drugs and addic-
tion in private colleges. This has been borne out by the increase of
addiction in New York Long Island, Midwest, and Southern colleges,
and also in the Far West. I was told by two college deans that the
parents would be the first to know if their college son or daughter was
on drugs. They also said, "What student would try to cop heroin or
marihuana 1"
8. Recently I have warned Catholic educators of the recent use and
rise of addiction in Catholic high schools and colleges, particularly in
New York City. This comes from me as a doctor pleading, to try to
awaken mine of the legislators and the people in education to the
fact that there is a problem in our parochial schools, and among the
young intellectual set.
Ofcourse, another point has come to bear recently. I think you
have seen this in the past week in the New York Times. I went to
England to testify before the British Medical Association. I told
them they had a tremendous problem of drug addiction, and repeated
what I have told our uninformed in New York and America, that
land does not have the answer to drug addiction.
There has been a tremendous increase of drug addiction among the
youngsters there. Just to give you one example: While I was over
in England, I observed in one pharmacy a lesbian picking up 400 pills
of heroin one day. Three days later she got another 300 tablets of
heroin, followed up by another 800 in 8 days. So, within a week, this
woman had obtained 1,200 tablets of heroin, which is equivalent in the
American market to about 2,400 bags of heroin. I ask you. If tlat's
control, England can keep it.
The important point that I am trying to make this morning is that
Iarmed
am concerned "lout the inwiw aujwanL of addiction of boy8 in the
services. There is a small percentage of man who are dropouts,
with 8 years or less of high school, who are getting drugs in thearned
services, and who have either experimented with drugs before enter-
ing the service or are psychologically extremely susceptible to the,
suggestion of others to take drugs.
T have come across servicemen in every branch-the Army, the Navr,
the Air Force, and the Marines-who have gotten narcotics, mar-
huana, barbiturates and amphetamines, known as oof-balls and
pep pills, in every place from their own home station, training
grounds, and town-to overseas, in France, Italy, Germany, Greece,
Sweden, Korea, and Vietnam.
474 THE NARCOTIC RE HABILITATION ACT OF 1968
Another young lad served time in the service in North Africa, where
he said he got strong hashish from French Morocco while being sta-
tioned at the Ben Guerra Air Force Base. He said that for 42 cents
he could buy a bag of hashish which was extremely powerful, and
could roll it up in an American cigarette to avoid detection.
In fact, one day while on guard duty at night, he smoked hashish
he remembers leaning up against a tree, but
is aboutsothe
tis became
and lastthat
high thing he remembers, because he had pulled the
tour for about 8 hours, and the next thing he remembers was, it was
morning. He did not ever see the moon change position or the dawn
ome up.
[e was introduced to the confectionery of hashish known as "keef,"
and ate it. In Africa and Arabia, there is a way of preparing the
hashish, mixing it up with honey, and making it a food, so that the
young people will eat it, or the older folks wouldeat it.
During this time he said, whatever he would conjure up under the
influence of hashish would become true. He told one instance with
an almost humorous note. He was thinking of lire engines in New
York during this hallucinatory period under hashish, ad he saw them
racing down the lone, dried-up road in this small African town.
In his outfit at this particular time, three other fellows in his hut
were on it, and in another hut, four other people. One of them got
arrested for possession of drugs, and was sent to Fort Leavenworth
for 5 years. Now, the possession of drugs in the armed services has
apparently a little bit of a different connotation. He was not only
sent to Fort Leavenworth, but got a general discharge for being un-
adjustable to service life.
Another story concerned one of the Navy men who got high on
heroin while in Istanbul. Under the influence of drugs, he threw
some of the guns overboard. He received a dishonorable discharge.
Here are some suggestions that we have:
Why are many o these young servicemen able to get away with
their problem I
1. Many of the doctors themselves are recent graduates from med-
just finished training, are not
andyoung familiar with
ical dschools,drug have
o Ihat means that our own examining phy-
sicians in the armed services have to be trained to check these boys
and IrIsout.. • , . '"
are far cheaper and are readily available to serviceen.
'."Drugs
8. It is apparently easy to con a corpsman out of dexedrine and
barbiturates because one cannot lose weight or go to sleep, since a
corpsman is just a chap who has had an extended training mifirst aid.
Then, you have a second black market going, which our own armed
services are subsidizing.
4. They always have three meals a day and a guaranteed roof over
,their heads, and do not have to spend money on these incidentals.
. 5. They have also learned how to con officials by masking their drug
habit by drinking, so that the naive doctor and company commander
attribute their bizarre attitude to the undue influence of alcohol They
triedto dothistoiesomany times in the beg&nin, and I was just
,taken through the hoops. If they were on pot or heroin or goof bals or
pep pills, they would drink a glass of beer before they came into the
oflce, so that when they would walk in under the influence of drugs,
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196 6 479
they would say, "Hi, Doc. You've got me wrong. I'm not strung out.
I've just been drinking four or five glasses of beer" in the beginning 1
would go for the story, till finally it dawned on me that beer they
didn't have to drink that frequently. So we haveto be aware of the
boy who drinks alcohol in the services.
8. Moot of our armed services training facilities are located in big
cities or on the outskirts of big cities where drug addiction is rampant:
New York City, New Jersey,New Orleans, San Diego,San Francisco.
7. The young 17- and 18-yearold recruit is considered totally adult
and is accepted as one, but he is still in the process of maturing, and
needs more guided supervision.
8. Little suspicion-by armed service personnel and police that they
are drug addicts. I I .
9. Present Army induction physicals are not thorough enough to
detect the user, audndot followed up with blood and urine samples.
I would advocate the following:
1. Periodic checkups, physical exams every 3 to 4 months if possible,
or at least every 6 months, in endemic areas where drugs are available:
Japan, Vietnam, Hong Kong, et cetera. I know the medical officers
are very busy, but let's train our orpsmep 4 that they will check out
arms and legs or a bizarre gait of an individual so that we have this on
his record and this boy would be under surveillance.
2. More careful policing and checking up on liberties where men are
stationed near large cities.I
3. I believe that no 17-to-19-year-old youngster who is a drout
should be shipped overseas until he has completed 2 years stateside, so
that stern discipline and a certain maturation have been attained.
SOur pewnt schooling system should start at the age of 4%,and
students should go to school al year round, except in addition to their
standing vacation, allow them to have a vacation one week after July
4 and toen go to school in the second week of July to the last week in
August, This would do away with the summer recess.
Take the situation in New York City, where our boys have so much
free time between July and September, and let them get an education,
so that we might be able to step up our educational program, so that by
the time the boy is 12 years old, he has fininshed his elementary educa-
tion, in 3 more year he is through high school, or by the time he is16,
so that he has A least had the benefit of graduating frem high school,
or has been subjeote to the influence of education. I
because souie, in fact many,of the drug addicts I have seen cannot
even write the simple word "horse." They have be going to school,
to the kth and 10th grade, and this is just pathetic. The teacher lust
puts them in the back of the )om and says. thy are incorrigible
youngsters, and nothing can be dope about them.
It is this free time that the youngsters have in the ummerwhich
causes so mueh trouble for. them, when they are boundless dynamos
of unharnessed energies.
*As a physician., I am asking these ques~.ons:
I am extremely interested to find out what is the relationship of the
tdkdict in the service to ultimate dibposition.- Ishe sent toa hp= W
1or trestawx, and is this liability know4 upon diharge,sotiat a
followup caa be maintained so thvathis,boy.1es not Wfect otheat :
480 TH NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
The reason why this was, because of the communications that was
involved I did get chewed out for it, because if it wasn't for the Amer-
ican adviser, my squadron commander would never have found out,
my CO, about the thing. But the sergeant major called me in, and
from our squadron, the plane captain was the only one to tell us to
open fire
In Vietnam, I don't know how it is now, but I know that it was
very, very easy for a person just to walk in or from a little kid on the
street to buy benzedrine.
Senator B UTRrciE. Were you in total command of this helicopter at
that time?
"FAzNK." No, I was a machinegunner and 4 crew chief. See, the
crew chief sits in the doorway, and lie is like sort of a plane captain for
the building, any people that come in there or supplies that go out.
Senator Bumoir . How often did you use these drugs, these bar-
biturates?
"FRANK." As many times as I could. Sometimes three times, may-
be three times a week, four times a week, depending upon the avail-
ability of the barbiturate itself.
Senator Buwicix. Would you give us a general idea of how wide-
spread the use of these drugs is in the services I
"FwaKx." Well, sir, like Dr. Baird said in his presentation, each
person, like he made a prediction about how many people were in the
service as addicts. I knew of 12 addicts, myself. And as far as the
way it was being used, I mean with the seconals and the barbiturate.
it was like a common practice to get high on these, you know. I would
say it would be privates, Pfc.'s, lance corporals; not your more re-
sponsible men, such as NCO's, your staff NCO's, your officers, or any-
thing like that.
But for the younger people, with all, I'd "y, the idle time on their
hands, like on Sunday-sometimes we wouldn't work then, and I'm
talking about being aord ship, now because in Vietnam we never
knew what day it was; we wor ed 7 days a week. But aboard ship
in the Philippines, it would be common practice to smuggle some back
and get high at night, or something like that.
It's like some way to release yourself, you know. It's a false-I
can't explain it.
Dr. B~sD. He is trying to make a point also, Senator, may I say for
the record, that when he knew 12 addicts, these addicts are to be con-
sidered completely, totally different from the barbiturate and dexe-
drine users. These were 12 heroin addicts that he knew personally in
the service. This is the heavyweight drug user versus the drug abuse,
the barbiturates and dexedrine, which are so readily available to the
youngsters in the service.
Of course, we are completely forgetting one very important thing,
and that is the corpsmen who use the morphine for anything.
Senator BunwcK. Looking back at it now, do you think you were
in full possession of your faculties when you were in the helicopter
and out over the front lines? .
"FPuNK." Not every mission. Like I say, I flew pretty close to 125
missions in Vietnam as a crew chief, andId say a good perctage of
these times I was under the influence of barbiturates. I guess every-
THE NARCOTIC REHAB13JTATION ACT OF 1966 483
body gets scared, but there's a false sense of security through these
drugs.
Dr. BAmm Do you think your physical condition or mental condi-
tion might have affected the lives of your buddies there I
"FPANK." Yes, sir. I strongly do believe that, sir.
Senator Bu~iicx. What happened to the 12 friends who were
addicted I
"FimNa." I don't know. When you get out of the service, you lose
track. I saw one of them when my wife had a baby and we had to
take her to Philadelphia Children's Hospital. I ran across one in
Philadelphia that was a drug addict, and I called him up just to see
how he was. But I wasn't an addict at the time. I was just fooling
around with barbiturates. I didn't get on it until almost a year ago,
heroin.
But the thing I'd like to relate, on a liberty port like Hong Kong,
the military police told us before we went in there that in the district
where the real lower classes lived-not being prejudiced or anything,
but in the lower classes of the Chinese district, you could buy anything
illegal. And it was a Navy corpsman was the one that introduced me
to heroin. It was the same person that brought the ounce of heroin
to me. But he was the one that gave me my initial shot of heroin.
The reason why it was so strong is because it had maybe an 8-to-1
count on it.
But in a liberty port like that, especially Hong Kong, where you
could buy anything illegal, I think they should make a stronger clamp-
down on the ships and, instead of just looking at the guys belongings,
to roll up their sleeves, too. Because I know as an addict, I was a very
sneaky person. Right now, I'm going on my eighth day of being
clean, and I think Ifve got it made.
Senator BuixcK. Are you under Dr. Baird's care right now I
"FR".." Yes, I am.
Senator BuiwIcx Did you get 0 medical discharge I
"FANK1" No, sir. I got an honorable discharge.
Senator JAvrrs. Mr. Chairman, one question I
Senator BueDxc. Yes.
Senator JAvrrs. I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the subcom-
mittee ought to send this testimony to the Department of Defense, and,
that we ought to have a report back from them as to what precautions
they take m these matters, what concept they have of conditions in
these areas where these matters apparently are developing, based upon
this testimony.
I don't think we can come to assumptions, but I do think that we
have a right to ask the Defense Department to give us a report. And
I would hope, Mr. Chairman, that the report plus the testimony might
then reveal to us what, if anything, needs to be done about it.,
Senator BuunIcx I think this same thing should be done.
Senator JAvrr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Buxmwc. Do you have anything else to add I
"FLANx." No, sir.
Senator BURPICK. Do ou have any questions?
Senator JAvrrs. No, Ithink that the main thing we ought to do,
Mr. Chairman, is to get to the bottom of this; anI think that that
484 THR NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT Of 1968
is the way to do it. Let us find out what the authorities have to say
about it.
I know Dr. Baird, and of course I know his work at the Haven
Clinic. He how been in to ne me. Of course, hare is evidence, direct
evidence, of his handiwork. We can only hope to encourage you,
Frank--,-
"FRANK." Thank you very much, sir.
Senator JAvrrs. And that it works. This is a very special privilege,
to appear before a Senate subcommittee.
"Fmz." Well, without Dr. Baird, I wouldn't be here.
Senator JAvYIS. Well, don't let us down, and don't let Dr. Baird
down. You have been paid a great honor, and I know you will live
up to it.
"FRANx." Thank you, Senator.
Senator Bumnicx. The staff would like to ask a few questions.
M r. PmrIAN. Frank, we have discussed this with the Department
of Defense, the problem of heroin, und we were assured that the
problem was, to their knowledge, miniscule, to use their word, because
of the so-called morning inspections.
You got an honorable discharge. How would you prevent your
superiors from detecting that you were an addict I
"FRANK." Well, the morning inspections--everybody drinks, you
know, the soldiers. The best way that we could cover up ourselves,
especially a barbiturate user, because of the dizziness and all that, your
weaving, was to cover it up with alcohol.
The morning inspection only consisted of belt buckles, whether the
uniform was clean, whether you needed a haircut, whether you were
shaven. It never was anything, any checking into the eyes or any.
thing like that there.
When I was stationed in Camp Lejeune, drug addiction was the
most prevalent there, I think because the fellows on the weekends had
idle time, they're off weekends, if they didn't have a duty section and
I myself-and my wife will verify Zis-used to go up to New York
City every single weekend, ezcept in the Cuban conflict that we had,
and I used to take an average of five fellows up with me, for $5, one-
way trip, or $10, round trip, take them to the port authority and let
them go their separate ways, go see their girl friends or whatever they
wanted to do.
But I knew of a couple of fellows that were actually copping stuff
and bringing it back. -Like I said, I had this part-time job in a gas
station, andi used to by pot from a guy who brought it right down
to us from Elizabeth, N er i a b
Mr. PlEzm. Haveyou ever received any brefing, military briefings
on narcotic addiction 1
"FRANL" To my knowledge; no, sir. I don't remember any movie,
even. We always had movies on like venereal disease, things like. that
there, but I don't ever remember having a lecture or even a movie on
drug addiction in the service.
Like Dr. Baird said, a person !7years old is assumed to be a man.
But I was 17, too.
Mr. Pzaux. Just for the record, you did obtain your first heroin
in Hong KongI
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1986 485
"FMAx." Yes,ir.
Mr. Praux. And then you subsequently used it for how long I
"FANK." Well, I had a habit for 7 months, the past 7 months, and
for the 5 months before that, I just dabbled around, getting oe every
other day, something like that, maybe once a day, until I got a habit.
Mr. PxATux. Did you ever relate any of this material or information
to your wife, in correspondence or whatever t
"FaANK." Yes, sir. Last night we tried, but our baby was sick. We
were trying to find a letter that I had written to her about opium,
smoking opium in Hong Kong and in Vietnam, tom And wherever
there's opium, there's heroin, you can bet your bottom dollar on that.
Mr. PWUAN. Did you use drugs before your military service I
"FRANK." No, sir.
Mr. P=uN. Now, based on your experience where were the drugs
mot available I In other words, what are" I Were they available on
the base, near the base, or-
"FaANK." I myself was a guilty party, because I was heavy, and I
used to go to sick bay, and I think I did ittwice, I asked the corpsman
if I could see the doctor and tell him that I was obese and I was trying
to loe weight, because my company commander was after me, you
know, about gaining weight.
He in turn would give me 80 capsules for 80 days, of dexamyl; and
if you take six or seven dexamyls and a glass of beer, you can get
pretty high on that.
Mr. PEWAN. Did you take drugs with other servicemen-
"FAzNL." Yes.
Mr. PuzN.Or by yourself I
"F AN." I was with other people. In the Philippines, in Subio
Bay, especially, itwas a pretty common practice for the fellows to buy
the red.devils " they call them, the seconals, sleeping tablets, and take
two of them with a glass of beer, and you would get high. You didn't
have to drink any beer the rest of the night.
And I remember one instance, how dangerous it is. I had taken
2 and I fell asleep from it for 2days on a weekend. A day and a half
I slept.
M. Fuamm. Apparently, then, once you became a user, you had no
difficulty, no matter where yon were, m obtaining a supply.
"FRANK." I wasn't a user. I was an abuser of the drug, excuse
me. I'd just like to make that distinction. But as far as heroin, I
didn't start on heroin until I got back in the States.
But if I had never had that shot of heroin in Hong Kong, I don't
believe I would have went back to it.
Mr. Pwux.Dr. Baird, have any of the addicts that you have
treated that were in the military service ever been detected-whileoin
uniform I
Dr. BArw. No. This is a very sad situation, and 4. is grossly
overlooked in 9 out of 10 times1 before going into the service and ii
coming out of the service. It just seems to stem from sheer ignor-
ance on the part of the physicians.
When we go to medical school, there is no definite training in this
situation wit the result that if you get a boy out of the service who
is hooked, then you have got the moral responsibility of who is going
to take care of this kid when he gets out.
486 THE NARCOTIC REHABLIWTATIO ACT OF 19066
thing that you say that can persuade us, we are not going to be dis-
suaded by your bearded image or preconception or anything else. I
know my colleagues and I can assure you of that. Go right ahead.
We may not agree with you, but you are a witness and you will be
treated with every consideration.
Mr. Gisiamw. Yes. Since I wish to speak personally I want to
speak about my own inside feelings, because that is in a sense what
we will be discussing.
I am 40 years old now, a poet, this year with the status of Guggen-
heim Foundation fellow, [grad uated from Columbia College, curi-
ously enough, and had a practice cAireer in Market Research before I
went to writing full time. When I was 22 1 had a crucial experience--
what is called a visionary experience, or "esthetic" experience--with-
out drugs-that deepened my life. William James' classic American
book "Varieties of Religious Experience" describes similar happenings
to people's consciousness. What happened to me amazed me--the
whole universe seemed to wake up arive and full of intelligence and
feeling. It was like a definite break in ordinary consciousness, lasted
intermittently a week; then disappeared and left me vowing one
thing-never to forget what I'd seen.
Bow maybe thatraoean't seem imprtan, surely it's "subjective."
But remember we are not machines, impersonal "objective" figures.
We are subject, person most of all we are feeling-we are alive, and
this aliveness that we all know in ourselves is just that feeling of indi-
vidual, unique, sensitive person. And this Nation was made to be
an association of such persons, and our democracy was framed to be
a social structue where maximum development of individual person
was to be encouraged.
I am taking the word from our prophet, Walt Whitman. This is
the tradition of the Founding Fathers, this is the true myth of Amer-
ic,this is the prophecy of our most loved thinkers-Thoreau, Emer-
i,, and Whitman. That each man is a great universe in himself;
thkwe great value of America that we c freedom.
XAW, * V 20th century we have entered into a sort of science fiction
isnaPage: massive overpopulation on the planet, the possibility of
war and death,as in Buck Rogers, like a Biblical apocalypse,
a netwok of electronic intercommunication which reaches and condi-
tions our thoughts and feelings to each other, spaceships which leave
earth, loss of our natural green surroundings i concrete cities filled
with smoke, accelerating technology homogenzing our characters and
experience. All this is inevitable, especialfysince presumably we have
come to value material extensions of ourself, anddon't want to give
those up.
We all know and complain about the drawbacks; a feeling of being
caught in a bureaucratic machine which is not built to serve some of
our deepest personal feelings. A machine which closes down on our
senses, reduces our language and thoughts to uniformity, reduces our
sources of inspiration andfaot to fewer and fewer channels--as TV
does-and monopolizes our attention with secondhand imagery-
packaged news and we are having it packaged now, and entertain.
ment hours a day-and doesn't really satisfy our deeper needs for
conimwiication with each other--heaIthy personal adventure in en-
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 489
vironment where we have living contact with each other in the flesh,
the human universe we are built to enjoy and grow in.
Maybe you have already known about experiments with infant chil.
dren's absolute need for contact with living bodies.. If babies are
totally isolated from human touch, warmth, contact, caress4, phyhyla
cal love, various studies have shown that they turn idiot or die. They
have no life to turn to, react to, relate to. Human contact is built into
our nature as a material need as strong as food, it is not an esthetic
desire, it is not a fancy idea it is an absolute fact of our existence, we
can't survive without it. And this gives us an idea of what we all
need, even all of us in this room grown up. We can't treat each other
cvily as objects, categories of citizen, role players, big names, small
names, objects of research or legislation-we can't treat each other as
things lacking feeling, lacking sympathy. Our humanity would
atrophy, cripple and die--want to die. lBecause life without feeling
is just more '"thIg,"more inhuman universe. There is certainly one
thing we can all agree on, we all want to feel good, we don't want to
feel bad basically.
Wlat I am trying to do is articulate the common body of feeling
that we all have together in this room and I hope you will not reject
my feelings of wanting mutual friendline and communication iiae
now-scared as my feelings are to make themselves known to you.
I had just begun to explain a visim that I once had, and immedi-
ately feared your dismissal of the idea of someone cowng up in Con-
gres and saying, "I had a vision 20 years ago," something so personal
and nonobjective I want to explain why thai very personal thing has
a place here now.
The LSD experience is also a personal experience, that can be li.
tened to with sympathy. Then we can make up our mind how to act
on it, how far it feek all right to go along with it, how far it feels bad
to go along. Please follow my presentation as long as it feels all right
to After
you. having had abort of vision, as I called it, I later took sm
peyote, the Indian cactus, *inmy house in Paterson, in the pmneOf
my famil. They didn't know the changed state of mind -1 was in-
I wat the i with new eyes-a fmly argument became extraor-
dinarily sad, it seemed that they were as lost, or isolated as I was,
from the depth of my strangeness, watching them. I feund that
speaking to them tendery plesed them, and drew us closer. Most
of the day I spent in the ba=yard watching the cherry tree in bloom,
and writing down my observations of the blue sky as seen through
changed eym-that day the openness of the sky semd oddly like what
itwas-a giant place in which I was on a planet. So this an area
of consciousness that psychedelic drugs bring to awareness.
Now, this kind of feeling is natural to us, but because of stereotypes
of habit and business and overactivity and political anxiety we have
been conditioned to put these feelings off. How deeply these feel.
ings had been buried in me is measured by the fact that the first vision
I had, and the peyote vision, felt so strange and familiar as if from
another lifetime, that I thought they were, like, eternal--like the
myths of all religions, like the graceful appearance of divine presence
as if a god suddenly made himself in my old weekly New York unl-
6o-oig-----32
490 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 198
verse. So that I used the word "vision" when it might be better to say
I had come back to myself.
Where did I come back from I A world of thoughts, mental fan-
tasies, schemes, words in my head political or artistic concept*-
mostly a world where language It-l, or thoughts about reality re-
placed my looking out on the actual place I was in and ho peopIe there
with me, with all our feelings to h. A world where, for instance,
you can look at death on television and not feel much or see much,
on afamiliar image like a movie.
t peyote a few times again. It is nauseating and difficult for me
to hold itdown, and there is always a thrill of fear at returning to a
larger, more detailed world than the normal mind-a world where I
became conscious of being ga brain and intestines and mysterious sen.
nations called Allen Ginsberg, a lonely heart also, a world at war with
itself, with unresolved conflict and fear leading to massacre between
nations and neighboring races, a world which has police states, and my
own Nation engaged in war as well.
In 1955 I wrote a poen describing this, a text which is now taught
in many universities--a central part of the poem called "Howl" was
written while I was in a state of consciousness altered, or elarged, if
you will accept that by peyote . I have the poem here and will leave it
with the committee if it wishe&
The second part of the poem "Howl" was written under the influence
of devote in San Franciaoo.
In succeeding years I experimented with mescalin not often, once
in a while, once every few years. In 1959 1 took LSD twice under
controlled experimental circumstances at Stanford University. I
wrote a single poem on each drug, while still high, trying to articulate
the insights that appeared. I tried to keep tick anmake public
oommunicable record of those moments--and continued in South Amer-
ica where I had the opportunity of living for a month and working
with a curandero, that is an herb doctor, who used a psychedelic vine
ayahusca, the Latin name is Banimo.ropsiacaapi, in weekly meetings
with members of his community. , I I. # I
* Use of this drug has been common for centuries all over the Amazon
area, and appropriate tradition for institutionalizing the experience
and integrating it into community life have been worked out so that
that there is nimum anxiety and little incidence of stress break-
down caused by, sudden changes of feelings of the self. This is pos-
sible in some cultures, with the psy hedelic 'mind-manifsting " drugs.
Peaceful tribes, savage tribes, the headhunters, use it as well as the
Chauma , aclm, peaceful, i. ul
o:
.One effect I experience in Peru I would like to explain, for what
it is worth in your consideration. ,Yrom childhood I had been mainly
shut off from relationAhipa with women--possibly due to the fact that
my own mother, was, from my early childhood onin a state of great
suffering, frightening to me, and had finally died in a mental hospital
In a trance state I experienced in the curandero's hut a very poignant
memory of ny mother s self and how much I had lost in my di.m4Ace
from her, and my distance Irom other later friendly girls-for I had
denied most of my feeling to them, out of old fear. Xnd this teaful
knowledge that had come up while my mind was opened through the
THE NARCOTIC REEABUATION ACT OF 1 491
466
native vine's effect did make some change--toward greater trust and
closeless with all women thereafter. The-human universe became more
complete for me--my own feelings more oomplete-aud that is 4
value which I hope you all understand and approve.
I also ha Ad "trips"-sensations of fear, much like the feeling in
niglamares--mainly tie realization that one day I was goiag to ie
and was not ready to give myself up. Later I traveled to India and
sought out respectable-Yogis and holy men and brought my fears to
them, and was reassured by their attitude of tenderness to the living
community, and their attitude toward visionas-"If you see something
,on't d in to it; if you see something beautiful, don't cling
to it." So said Dodjoim Rimpoche a head of the N'yingmapa sect ot
Tibetan Buddhism, a celebrated group which practices inteasive vis-
ionary meditation. "Your own hert is your teacher" one Swami, the
famous Shivanmada, advised.
I had not taken LSD for several years by now, and no longer wanted
to pursue self-realiza ion through drug mcans but rather through
trust in my own heart's feelings. By !65 I felt secure enough from
death anxety and last fall went to a secluded place on te Pacific
Ocean coast to see what I would feel with LSD again,
I was sympathetic to the Berkeley Vietnam Day march students,
who were preparing for their demonstrations at, that time, and there
was great anxiety in the air. lhere was a great deal of hostility, to-
the Nation was not as underasding or sympathetic to Political
dissent that season as it is now. We were all confused, the Oakland
police, the marchers, the Nation itself-many angry marchas blamed
the President for the situation we were in n southeiA tAia [ did, too.
The day I took LSD was the same day that President JoX4son went
into the operating room for his gall bladder illness. As I ,walked i '
the forest inderin what my feelings toward him were,,and what
I would have to say in Berkeley next week-the awesome p taco I was
in impressed me with its old tree and ocean cliff majsty. Man tiny
jeweld violet flowers along the path of a living brook that looked
like' Blake's illustration for a canal ia' grassy Eden; huge Pacifio
watery shore.
I saw a friend dancing long haired before giant green waves, wide
cliffs of titanic nature tat Wordsworth described in his poetry, and
a great yellow sun veiled withagging avvr th planet's ocean
horizon.
Armies at war on the other sideofile plane t. Berkeley's Vietnam
protesters sadly preparing mani festoes for our narch toward Oakland
police and He s Angels, "adtls Ires4dent in the valley of the
shadow-himself experiencing what fear or grief I
I realized that more vile words for me would send out negative
vibrations into, the xtmosphe ore tred anued agait hw
j poor,
flesh and soul on trial. So X knelt on thl sand su rrund by
of green kelp washed up by.a storm, and p rayedforPresidet John
son's tranquil health. Certainly more public hostility Wou04 not hel
him or me or anyone come through to some less rigi4 ad more, flexible
awareness of ourselves or Vietnam. .,
On the second Vietnam Day march that November the public image
of a violent clash between students and Hell's Angles escalated m
492 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Deqpte th she was placed on the critical list She was kept under close ob.
servation by pedlatricianh and neurologists to test her rexes an all her
tactiou before she was released' 4 Ke daky explained that cases of aci-
dental poisoning of children ar not ru at the hospital • * Ca od-flavored
children's aspirin is one of the bigg st dangers, said Dr. Acls 0 * 0 "We have
had several deaths a year in this community from children's aspirin."
I think that th quotations speak for themselves as to how all of
us were imprinted with a death feark and through the use of an inac-
curate langug in dealing with a deplorable situation that the girl had
had LSD a %cidentally and was suffering from a sense of consciousness
that needed care tnderness, reassurance, understanding, not the
hysteria with which it was treated.
The key thing with LSD is that a hostile environment precipitates
psychosis. A friendly environment cuts down the anxiety and cuts
down the psychosis. So we have now to deal with statistics on break-
down through the use of LSD, which is crucial, because in reading
earlier statements to this committee, Mr. Taunenbamn's statement I
come across language like this:
One of the most common recurrent reactions to LSD is the psychotic break-
down.
There is no evidence that all users of LSD become temporarily Insane.
The reason I am quoting that is to put these generalizations in the
language used here in relaton to the actual statistical information
that we do have so far.
One of the main causes of medical worry and legislative worry, par-
ticularly in New York State where legislation was taken without even
any kind of hearings on the actual scientific or sociological implica-
tions of LSD or the actual facts of the situation, the New York legis-
lation which was taken without any hearin rs if you can imagine, oile
of the main causes of medical worry have =en the reports issued on
Bellevue LSD "psychosis" via the New York County Medical Society's
report of May 5, 1966, and auxiliary papers detailing a few case
histories in the New England Journal of Medicine.
New York County Medical Society report:
Seventy-five people in 12 months admitted to Bellevue with "acute
psychoses induced by LSD." Most "recovered within a week. Five
remained in mental hospitals a longer time."
I would like to comment on the presuppositions of the language used
and on the statistics.
As some schooLi of psychiatry are aware, a "flip out" (here termed
acute psychosis) may be a basically positive experience if rightly
handled. This mens there is a breakthrough of new awareness,
temporary social disorientation as a result, and an "p-leveled" reor-
ienta.tion to slightly richer awareness with more variable flexible social
role-play'ng as a result. Some of the hospitalized may qualify for
this description. I have spoken to a few of those who were in belle-
vue. and who did feel positive about the whole experience.
Any laws witch-hunting use of LSD will have the inevitable result
of increasing the number of mareiind "psychows" attributable to US.
The social anxiety caused by illegalization will enter the environmen-
tal setting and influence LSD experimenters to greater traumatic dis-
orientation than normal under LSD influence. The answer to mar-
ginal dansrers of experimentation would be for Bellevue or some other
place to serve its purpom) as a temporary comfortable reassuring haven
THE NARCOTIC REHBILITAnAON ACT OF 1960 495
where people with LSD-consiousness anxiety could come to be pro-
tected and encouraged to healthy reintegration of their sell-awarenem.
and not labeled "psVchotic."
There are no real figures on LSD taking, it might be anywhere from
1,000 to 10,000 in 12 months in New York City according to Dr. Donald
l. Louria of the New York Medical Sociey,p rgbably a great deal
more. Above figures average perhaps one brmdown in a thousand
users; it is a speculative, uncontrolled survey by New York County
Medical Society. The incidence of semipermanent breakdown may be
lower than liquor drinking, auto driving, and marriage, much less war
making, or any business activity where a healthy amount of strem is
encountered.
2. Here are ilome more authoritative statements on LSD breakdown;
Cohen, Sidnwy, M.D.: "The Beyond Within," Atheneum, New York,
1964, pages 210-211 says:
Major or prolonged psychological complications were almost never described
in the group of experimental subjects who had been selected for their freedom
from mental disturbances * 0 * When patients were given theae drugs for ther-
apeutic purposes, however, the untoward reactions were somewhat more frequent.
Prolonged psychotic states occurred in 1 out of every 50 individuals. Thete
breakdowns happened to individuals who were already emotionally Ill: some had
sustained schizophrenic breaks in the past.
Digest of Cohen's giant survey in R. E. 0. Masters and Jean Houston
book, called "Varieties of Psychedelic Experience," Hold, New York,
19(6, note 23, page 319 says:
Cohen, S., Lysergic Acid Diethelmyde: Side effects and complications, Journal
of Nervous and Mental Disorders, 180:30, 1960. Cohen's report Is based on 5,000
LSD and mescaline subjects who received the drugs 25,000 times, LSD dosages.
In other words, some of them have high dosages, that are mythologically reputed
to be absolutely damaging, though they are not actually. Among experimental
subjects there were no suicide attempts and psychotic reactions lasting longer
than 48 hours were met with in only 0.8/1000 of the caes. In patients under-
going therapy the rates were, attempted suicide, 1.2/1000, completed sukiide:
0.4/1000; psychotic reaction over 48 hours: 1.8/1000.
Then we have another statement which I saw in the New Republic
magazine, May 14, 1966, by one who I presume is authoritative. He
works for the investigational drug branch of the Food and Drug
Administration, Dr. Lec Ochota, M.D., D.S.C.:
The suicide rate (in Investigational group) has been reported as 0.1 percent. a
remarkably low rate considering that LSD has been usually given to the rather
severely ill patients Including chronic alcoholics, neurotics, psychopaths, drug
addUcts, et cetera.
lEven after reviewing 1,000 medical publications, surveying all of the literature
and there is an immense mass of literature already accumulated, the author was
unable to confirm reports that a psychosis can develop in a hitherto mentally
healthy individual several months after his last LSD Intake.
Questions then I propose to the committee for its thought and for
research by the Government: What is the suicide rate anonj the men-
tally ill who don't try LSDI What is the suicide rate of Lue ,a~e~
population# Does LSD significantly affect these rates in fact I
Or may it possibly turn out, and I have no idea, this is something
I think we could begin thinking about, is it possible that the suicide
rate for mentally iF people who have taken LSD is lower than the
suicide rates, for mentally ill people who hav not taken LSD I
496 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1986
Senator Bumcx. Would your answer be the same for high school
students. I IA
Mr. .GA~ o. I think really yes aotuallyf yes, I.think so., .
Senator BuwxcK.. How far dwn in age--.K
Mr. GINamm. The reason I say so is that a comparable experience
for the American Indians is division cassed among the Indians and
that begins. after puberty at 15, and that. is- when children do begin
searching for the meaning of life. In a sense inAmerica, our high
school students are smothered in television and over protectedfr6m
direct,.expeience. There has been a tendency ang y ounger kids
to search out LSD. I don't think it is necessarily frightul.or danger-
ous. It could ' dangerous if we react dangerously to it. If we find
the means t protect their ne4&ned be no danger. But
it is very har to eis, let the gh sc because it
kids get it,
scares everybody. e problem is not to scare e bod
Senator B How many or nizatioau do know of: that
center,their vities around the o P1,
Mr% GIN W Iell, *a . tor. raia~--~xoh
LeAr s g up-the u ation h don Ot dous
work wi LSD* t has.a i e us amut
I - f- he written , them. n ex
bi riment3
wit b Iand
filled, t tI
ta rMv e vel t fin ial that's lafs
tobee &luated, Thi e.... .,, ,:- ,4
Mr. e s'N Am n otner. is a kind f inter-
esting
thev. e is
em-.re n. Ilo aspect ita
I Ildjoin
Io J, in ht'itv
case
d ins a be questio the. v-
m ifit t t comeup yidp grounds
of freedom. ,.)
ther. a 't manyrmi orgizM " oe l is e organiza-
P
tionrth Ueece " oul tAk O anorganiza
tionfmIng wthbesto argani*ion which is that
i04
all of the ace Medwal men who have W i~noe with LSD
and with Di
D h ha.e gotten. together I ties already,
•.ou know., The last w belevel or at,AmitiyvilleLong
the.
apie o The Chaiman
"Fou
was Dr. Hauold Abrsmson of Ne.wYorrk who is - ivr considemble
figure, the head of some hospital or other; who, has hd an,,enormous
amount: of experiencewith LSD: and psyckoth-apy., It ,wasa vonter-
.e an.iaterniatieaam ,oonerilce at, experts, and they, had peopl
,from, Qwhoslovakia, from, England, from Z 1, aid from the
I'miitediStates.
These were the people, atong,the people to illustrate t ax the
people we might turn to for advice , with sme kind ofi confidome tht
they do know something about it.
500 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
dosage the frequency of its use, its effect and so on, on anyone but
yoursef I
Mr. GINSBERG. Except for the reading or the fact that I might cite
the Pharmacology of Therapeutics, which puts peyote and LSD to-
gether in the same class and says their effects are similar.
Senator JAvrrs. Do you consider yourself qualified to give a medical
opinion which will determine the fate of my 16i/-year-old sonI
Mr. GINSBERG. No, I am not pharmacologically qualified to give a
judgment like that.
Senator JAvrrs. Of course, you are not, and that is the important
point that must be made to those who will listen to you.
Mr. GixNsaRG. Yes. Well, I would suggest-
Senator JAvrrs. No inhibition about listening to you. That is their
business. We have a right to demand that they understand what they
are listening to.
Mr. GINSBERG. Yes
Senator JAvrrs. That is all I am trying to develop.
Now also, Mr. Ginsberg, one point would like to emphasize to
you as a lawyer is that you don't have to answer any of our questions
which might in your judgment, and you have an absolute constitu-
tional right to that, incriminate you. I notice you said something
about being set up for a jail sentence. If there were anything like
that, I would never forgive myself if I asked you any questions which
led you into an admission without this injunction, so please have that
in mind. You can claim your constitutional privilege at any time.
Now I notice that you do say in your statement at page 10--
Any laws witch-hunting use of LSD will have the Inevitable result of increas-
Ing the number of marginal "psychoses" attributable to LSD. The social anxiety
caused by illegalization will enter the environmental setting and influence LrSD
experimenters to greater traumatic disorientation than normal under LAD
influence.
Do I take 'that to mean that you favor, before widespread, use-.
that is why I asked the question I did-the necessary experimentationI
Mr. GxNsBFG. Yes. I had in that sentence meant self-experimenta-
tions, sir.
Senator JAVITS. Self-experimentations?
Mr. GINsBRG. In that sentence I had meant that. I wonder if I
have spoken clearly on this subject of the anxiety in the environment
causing traumatic damage.
Senator JAvrrs. You have spoken very clearly, Mr. Ginsberg, in
terms of your personal experience. The only thing that I am trying
to do is to qualify you.
Mr. GxNsBmuo. Yes.
Senator JAvrrs. Either pro or con as to whether that is more than
personal experience.
Mr. GwsRG. I have citations from Dr. Cohen and from many other
reports to indicate that.
Senator JAvrrs. To such extent as you have made them they. are
here. But the thing that I am anxious to make clear is that you are
not testifying and you couldn't testify as an expert o' this subject.
Mr. GINEsRG. May I read then into the record, there are some
things from Dr. Cohen about that concerning the circumstances under
which you take LSD. , 1
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 507
Senator JAvrrs. You made a quote here from Dr. Cohen. We have
it in your testimony. You can put that in the record, sir.
Mr. GiNsmo. Yes, I will put this in the record then.
(The references referred to follow:)
DA&zoms or OvzRooimoTLLK LSD Ust
(Masters & Houston, Varieties of Psychedelic Experience, Holt, NY 66)
Page 318, rote 1
CF Hyde, I W. "Psychological and Social Determinants of Drug Action" in
Sarwer-Foner, G. J. The Dynamics of Psychiatric Drug Therapy. Charles C.
Thomas, Springfield, Ill., 19W0, page 297, as regards the importance of "situa-
tional determinants." Reporting on sessions In which the subjects were stu-
dents, nurses, attendants, and physicians, he found that impexonal, hostile,
investigative attitudes on the part of others led to devaluative distortions and
hostile responses in the subjects. Flexibility, familiarity, acceptance, and pres-
ence of others with common culture ameliorated the LSD reaction, while rigidity,
unfamiliarity, nonacceptance and absence of others with common culture poten-
tiate the (psychotic) reaction.
Pages 58-: re met-Beatnik fringes of the Drug Movemeist
"Yet, and totally committed as we are to the position that sessions must be
adequately guided, we find it impossible to say on the basis of our many Inter-
views and other studies of the Drug Movement that casualties have occurred
among its members with a frequency as great as that among participants in
many programs directed by medical and other scientific personnel. What this
means Is only that in the case of the latter nonsupportive (including inquisitorial)
experimenter attitudes wedded to a psychotomimetic expectancy have proved to
be even more damaging than the most haphazard drug use occurring in a basi.
cally friendly and supportive setting."
Page 136
"One of the more clear cut lessons taught us by scientific psychedelic drug re-
search to date is that the hospital and other clinical settings should be avoided
a hospital setting gives rise to ali sorts of traditional fears of Ilies, death,
and the mysterious and threatening practices of doctors. science, the labora-
tory--these are alien and menacing areas for many persons. When, moreover,
the setting Is drab and antiseptic, and when the authority figures are coldly
clinical, then anxiety is greatly Increased and the subject's experience becomes
,
even more disturbing And distasteful."
(Ohew Sidney: MD, tAe bevond withiat, tteewm0 New York 1964 page 84
"If LSD Is given under disinterested laboratory conditions while Impersonal
assistants attach electrodes, take blood samples and perform a number of other
pussling tasks, and If the subject gets the impression that he will be temporarily
mad and observers provide neither support nor reasurrance, a psychotic state
Is bound to occur. On the other hand, If the situation is a more relaxed an#l
agreeable one, etc."
Senator JAvrrs. Now you have no idea, have you, as to the dosage
which is being taken by the hundreds of thousands you say are using
thisdrugI
Mr. (WIsn~am. No. Apparently I hear from people and from read-
ing it is anywhere from 75 to 800 micrograms.
Senator JAvris. And or the fruenc7 of its use I
Mr. Grismm. No. That varies consld.eraly.
Senator JAvrrs. Or the physical conditions of the users. For ex-
ample, some people are very allergic to antibiotic drugs and so on.
Mr. Gmsum. Yes.
Senator JAvrrs. You have no idea on that in this area have you
Mr. GINa . No.
508 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1960
Senator JAvrrS. Now do you have any particular advocacy that the
use of these drugs makes people generally more creative I Maybe it
makes you more creative, but is there any evidence that it makes people
generally more creative ?
Mr. GINsmRG. There are some studies by a University of California
psychologist, Frank Barren, and I think there are other studies which
indicate that there is some increase in creativity and problem solving,
yes.
Senator JAvrrs. These gentlemen have this opinion, is that rightly
Mr. GiwsBmzo. Well, they are scientific gentlemen whose work is
regarded as reasonable.
Senator JAvrrs. Do you know anything about how many made LSD,
whether any of it is being made by chemistry students in labs or any-
thing like that I
Mr. GNSBERO. No; I have no information on that.
Senator JAvrrs. So you have no idea whatever as to the sources of
this drug for the hundreds of thousands who are using it.
Mr. GiNsBERo. Yes; I have avoided contact with sources.
Senator JAvrrs. Have you at any time urged its use upon those
listening to you.
Mr. GINwSBERo. Occasionally, where there was somebody I thought
the use of it made sense. I haven't urged it very forcefully. I thik
basically the best policy is don't stop anybody from taking LSD, and
don't force anybody to take LSD. I have also occasionally urged
against its use.
Senator JAvrrs. But all of this is without-
Mr. GiiN5BEG. In context.
Senator JAvrm. You admit without scientific background in in-
dividual cases I
Mr. GmsiSBRG. I have had to use my commonsense from experience.
Senator JAvrrs. Your commonsense.' OK, that is all.
Senator Buiwmm. Mr. Ginsberg, what do you suggest that we do
about young people who go on these in the language that has been
used here "bad trips" or-bad experiences What do we do about
these people?
Mr. GLNBBER. One thing I saw in a midwestern college recently; it
was a college where there was considerable use of LSD, and everybody
in the college town knew about it, had sort of accepted it as part of
the social circumstances, and so'they had formed a kind of human
community of self-help. If somebody was having a "bad trip,"
rushed out onto the campus in an obviously disturbed way, his friends
would simply take him in, take care of him, hold his hand, calm him
down, reassure him. I think what we need actually is the possibility
of openness about the "trip,"openness on the subject.
Senator Bmwricx. Would you describe the effects ? What happens
as a "bad trip" I II
Mr. GINSBERG. Oh, you might rush out and say "the Kingdom of the
Lord is at hand," or rush out babbling, or go around giggling, .or go
into the oceanside and start praying and attract attention by%?bLarre
behavior--bizarre not necessarily evil, behavior; simply unusual be-
havior, sometimes in speech.
Senator BuRIcx Do you think that is good?
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 509
Mr. GINsI um. I don't think it is as bad; no more bizarre than the
Beatles say, in their playing. I don't think it is necessarily as bad
as we in our culture have a tendency to react automatically to any
unusual behavior. This tendency is not necessarily a good thing for
US.
Senator BuRmiCK. If we don't have some laws if we don't have some
understanding, if we don't have some scientific findings, what is going
to happen to the hundreds of young people that have these experiences
throughout the landI
Mr. GiNSBERo. I am suggesting that there are more scientific find-
ings already available tha-n have been made use of that we need more
scientific findings, but that has been shut off by the Government for the
moment. And I suggest that we organize a much larger program of
scientific research.
Senator BuRDIcx. I think that is all the questions I have. Thank
you.
.Mr.GINSBERG. Yes; thank you, sir.
Senator BURDICK. We will recess until tomorrow at 10:30.
(Whereupon, at 3:15 p.m., the committee recessed until 10:30 am.,
Wednesday, June 15,1966.)
NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT
U.S. SENATE,
SPCIAL SuBoxxrrm oNw NAucrcs,
COMXMrrI ON THE JUDICIARY,
Washington,D.C.
The subcommittee (composed of Senators Dodd, Tydings, Burdick,
Bayh, Hart, Kennedy of Massachusette Hruska, Javits, and Fong)
met pursuant to recess, at 10:30 a.m., in room 318, Old Senate Office
Building, Senator Quentin N. Burdick presiding
Present: Senators Burdick (presiding) and Kennedy of Massa-
chusetts
Also present: Carl L. Perian, staff director; William C. Mooney, Jr.,
chief investigator Bernard Tannenbaum, special counsel; and Peter
Freivalds, research director; Lou Beck, special counsel; and Eugene
W. Gleason, editorial director.
Senator BURDICK. Our next witness is Larry Alan Bear, who was
from 1960 to 1963 the medical-legal consultant to the Justice Depart-
ment in Puerto Rico. He has taught law and legal medicine at the
University of Puerto Rico Law School and assisted in writing nar-
cotics legislation for the Puerto Rican government.
In 1963 and 1964 he was a consultant to President Kennedy's Ad-
visory Committee on Narcotics and Drug Abuse and in late 1964
wrote a book on legal medicine entitled, "Law, Medicine, Science, and
Justic&"
STATEMENT OF LARRY ALAN BEAR, IGAL COUNSEL TO THE
OFFICE OF NARCOTICS COORDINATOR OF NEW YORK CITY
Mr. Bwt. Thank you, Senator.
It is a great pleasure for me to be able to present my views on S. 2152
to this committee, and I wish to express my appreciation to all the
members of the committee for inviting me to do so.
My actual position at this time is that of legal counsel to the Office
of Narcotics Coordinator of New York City. The narcotics coordi-
nator is Dr. Efrem Ramirez, and I am here today as his spokesman,
and in that capacity as a representative of the city of New York. As
you all know, we in New York City do have a narcotics problem.
By way of background on the Office of the Narcotics Coordinator of
New York City, and the coordinator himself, let me say that Dr.
Ramirez is a psychiatrist who, for 5 years prior to his recent appoint-
ment as narcotics coordinator by Mayor John V. Lindsay, was respon -
sible for the development and implementation of a comprehensive
prevention, treatmenti and rehabilitation program for narcotics ad.
511
512A4 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Iq
Ifoulm 1
Phase Ia, Ib, III and IV, which are carried out entirely in the community ail
]perfectly within the basic criteria of funding under
sOTitle I.
•Phase Ic Is medical detoxification which is the responsibility of the available,
or specially constructed medical facilities.
Phase I1 (Intensive residential treatment) fals within the realm either of
'specially designed phychiatrie therapeutic environment wards, or a self-help
sheltered community residential treatmet prora such as Daytop Village, or
,intensive mtistnent programs developed in prison, penal farms or commitment
f&(ilitiS4 . ' ... :
Phase Ia,(C3ommunity Clinics) ii described fully in Setiton I.-A, Phase lb
(Day-Night Oat's Centers) In
and Phase IV (A"tion section
III (Re-Jintry) in 8eetion
Sectionz I-B, Phase%V. o-owe"
III,
Dr'il adl41cton s-a: sick way o Life, and the addict is a.sick IndliduaL is
Z
all likelihood, he IIpychopathic and his addiction is merely a handle, a sign
that he Is in need of help. Unless the basic personality defect is corrected,it
514 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
will only find some other form of symptomatic expression. Once the illnes is
treated, however, the ex-addict can emerge as a self-sufllcent, productive exam-
pie to the addict population yet to be reached. Giving him recognition as a
potential community worker specialized in drug addiction will serve as a door
for his reentry, providing jobs for hundreds, and maybe thousands, of ex-addlcts
for a period of 1-2 years before going on to other types of work In the community.
The addict's Intellectual ability has been found to be above average in most
case. If such a person is freed from his limitations to cope with reality, he
will assume a role of constructive leadership In his community.
During the course ot a year, It is generally assumed that one addict Is.responsi-
ble for the spread of addiction to four or five others. One ex-addlet working In
a community can be responsible for the withdrawal from addiction of 30 to 40
others during the same time. This is the most practical approach to widespread
prevention of addiction and has been proved effective In the Puerto Rico
experience.
The "If I can do it, so can you" statement of the ex-addict works the other way
as well 0* * "If he can do it, so can I."
A comprehensive program of treatment would mean an effective communlea-
tion between the addict society, the higher level of detoxified addicts, and the
still higher level of the pre-rehabilitated and rehabilitated addicts. Once the
addict reached a certain plateau in his own development, he would turn to help
those further behind him. This serves as an incentive to those yet to reach
his level, and reinforces in his own mind the reality of his progress.
A comprehensive program would mean more than addicts facing addicts
because there Is a point where professional help Is needed that would be beyond
the ability of someone not trained in the technical and complex field of the
human mind. Community organizers who deal with all forms of social disorders
would be needed to reach the user who has not acknowledged his addiction, or
who is not yet addicted. Teachers, both for educational rehabilitation and those
working in schools in areas of greater incidence of addiction and who can reach
youngsters to either prevent them from experimenting with drugs, or to recognize
those already using and refer them to agencies for help. Since addiction is
spreading from the depressed areas to the more well-to-do suburban areas
surrounding our cities, there would be a need to reach educators in many areas.
The role of the medical profession, including doctors, psychiatric nurses,
psychologists and psychiatrists Is obvious. These people help the addict through
the period of detoxification and its accompanying physical discomfort and are
directly involved and responsible for psychotherapy in group and individual
treatment.
Penal authorities and probation officers who also come in contact with the
addict could augment their roles to deal more effectively with the addict prison
population for the benefit of the addicts and the prison. All branches of the law
from enforcement to correction, including lawyers and Judges, and all other
representatives of society who deal with the addict must be placed in positions
where they can most effectively discharge their responsibilities. Much of the
frustrated pessimism of the professionals in the field of addiction comes from
the fact that they are misplaced and that there Is no rational division of labor
in this complex field. ,
Once an addict is committed to his own rehabilitation, he needs professional
help to find a cure for the basic personality disorder underlying his addiction.
The professionals, trained to provide these services, must be helped by the
Community Orientation Clinics and Day-Night Care Centers in the pre-admisslon
preparation of the addict to become a responsible, responsive, treatable patient
Only then can the professional be effective.
This quality of Initial responsibility Is achieved by the utilization of meetings
of fuctiosna peer group*. This concept Is crucial to the system as a whole. Much
work with addicts in the past has failed because the programs were so small that
men of different stages of development were mixed together. Those who were
more advanced became restless and more resentful than necessary under the
continuing lack of understanding and development on the part of those not
seriously and productively committed to the program as they were. This emo-
tional parity has proven to be Identifiable by specific fundamental criteria; it has
also been a tremendous help In the development of morale since the patients are
able to watch their own progress, subjectively felt, actually marked out objec-
tively in a ladder on a bulletin board. Most of all, the principle of parity has
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 16o 515
been helpful within the group themselves, to make possible the maximum amount
of growth fir each individual participating.
The atruoture and oonoept ol comprehenavetwee
The most important aspect of this plan is the establishment of a strong and
lasting structure, capable of survival without dependence on any one individual,
or group of individuals. It is not a structure which can be abbreviated. All
the components are needed because of the multiple handicaps which a hard core
addict presents. There must be comprehensiveness at each phase: orientation
in a Community Clinic, reduction of physical habit and further clarification of
orientation in the Day-Night Care Centers, physical and mental detoxifleation
in the Detoxification Ward, intensive therapy in the residential treatment
facility, vocational training and strengthening of socialization capacity in the
Halfway House. The addict is such an emotional "basket case" that all work
would be of little help unless the entire program can be put into effect.
Certification
From the point of view of the average addict, Involvement in a long-term
rehabilitation program Is untenable unless he can be confident that the efforts
demanded from him will be realistically rewarded by social and vocational
acceptance on equal terms with his non-addict fellow citizens. The imperative
need for the definition of uniform, official criteria for the certification of a
successful treatment and re-entry process thus becomes clearly apparent. The
Narcotics Coordinator, in close consultation with every institution responsible
for the treatment and re-entry of drug addicts will define the basic criteria for
certification.
Basic guidelines tested at the Addiction Research Center of the Common-
wealth of Puerto Rico will be utilized as a starting point for the development
of certification criteria in New York.
1. Certification of successful re-entry will be a result of consensual agree-
ment among those Individuals, professionals and non-professionals, who, as a
result of their close relationship with the candidate during the re-entry period,
have a personal knowledge of part of the individual's total functioning. This
will provide a more nearly integral evaluation of the candidate than is possible
by any single evaluator.
2. The process of evaluation for certification shall cover at least the following
five areas:
(1) Psychological testing and evaluation;
(2) Social function;
(3) Vocational capabilities;
(4) Psychiatric evaluation;
(5) Adherence to prevailing moral and ethical values
3. Certification shall not be considered as an absolute affirmation of cure.
Rather It will be considered as permanent until proven otherwise, A, close
post-certification follow-up is necessary to evaluate and refine the whole process.
4. Certification will be extended by the Narcotics Coordinator pursuing rec-
ommendation by the appropriate institution. However, to maintain the uni-
formity of the procedure, the recommendation will be reviewed by the Rehabili-
tation Advisory Board. This Board, created for this specific purpose and
chaired by the Narcotics Coordinator, will be composed of leading representa-
tives of the treatment and rehabilitation programs and will be responsible for
continuously evaluating such programs
5. Once certified, the certificate holder will be able to count upon the official
backing of the City and State of New York in his efforts to achieve a respectable.
productive place in our society.
6. Any certification can be re-evaluated and If necessary revoked by the
Rehabilitation Advisory Board. The Board shall establish the adequate proce-
dures for such action.
Mr. BwR. Thank you. We believe and this is the most important
tenet of our philosophy, I believe. *e believe that narcotic addicts
can be rehabilitated.
Therefore we heartily approve of the central concept of S. 2152,
that addicted individuals who are charged with, or convIcte4 of, viola-
tions of Federal law, should be given the opportunity to be treated,
rehabilitated, and returned to meidngful life in society.
516 THE NARCOTIC RiAAILIT0TION ACT OF 1968
however, insofar as it fails to provide within the context of the bill any
financial assistance to States and municipalities which are endeavoring
to achieve a truly comprehensive global coordinated approach to the
addict-rehabilitation problems, and through them to private orgaiza-
tions working within such programs, it is an incomplete bill wich, in
the end, cannot accomplish its stated goals.
If I may answer any questions of the conunittee, I will be happy to
do so.
Senator Buiwicj. Thank you Mr. Bear.
You are, you say, a bit puzzled by the definition of the word "addict"
in section 101, part 1 and part 21
Mr. BE.. Yes.
Senator Buiwicm. Do you have any recommended language to sub-
stitute for it?
Mr. BzAR. Yes, sir. I would suggest-of course, I realize that
defining addicts is a terrible problem. Governor Rockefeller called
a conference to work out the New York narcotics law a few weeks ago
and we had a group of experts discussing the definition for narcotic
addicts. We came out with some 30 or 40 definitions and that was
only because we stopped after 5 minutes to--
Senator BURDICK. Do you have one to d; rect to me nowI
Mr. BEAR. But I do have one. The New York statute, the present
1966 law, defines a narcotics addict for the purposes of the aw as
being one who is "dependent upon" and then lists the drugs which we
wish to include within the law.
Now, in New York, that, of course, is only opium, heroin and mor-
phine or ts derivatives. One might, of course, include other things,
MD or marihuana and so forth. But the definition is a narcotics
addict is one who is dependent upon the following drugs. That, it
seenis to me, avoids a great many problems.
Senator BumicK. What in your opinion is the extent or the scope
of the narcotics problem in New York City?
Mr. BLU. Well, of course, there has been a lot of talk in terms of
statistics, the number of addicts we have in New York. The official
figure, and when I say official I mean the Federal Bureau and some of
our local statistics, would put the addict populati-%n in New York
at some 30,000 people. I am not, of course, certain that this is so and
I would tend to think that that is a very low figure. If I were pressed,
I am afraid I could not give you a specific figure beyond that. I do
not think that we have the figures. I think this is one of the great
problems, not only in New York City but throughout the United States.
It would seem to me that one of the basic sets of facts we could
Pxpec to have in any fight against narcotics addiction would be the
number of addicts we have, the distribution within certain levels of
society and so forth, and we do not have these statistics as well as we
would like, in New York or anywhere else.
It is a very complex problem. Doctors are not too happy about
reporting as fully as we would like them to. They feel tis affects
the doctor-patient relationship in working with the addict. There
are all kinds of problems, Senator. I do not know how many addicts
we have. Thirty thousand is a semiodicial figure. I can only say
for the record that we certainly have at least that many.
I THE NARCOTIC. REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Mr. BEA. Yes, my feeling would be that the Bureau figures are
low, probably because the reporting system that they have is simply
not as good as it might be.
Senator BuRmDci. What facilities and services are now available for
treatment of addicts, New York or elsewhereI
Mr. BEAR. Well, in New York City, we have in effect two basic kinds
of facilities--city facilities such as metropolitan hospital and private
facilities, most of which are supported in part by city funds.
Now, these facilities range all the way from inpatient services such
as in metropolitan hospitals within the city to halfway houses in the
communities such as would be exemplified by Exodus House in New
York.
Then there are even operations that depend for their existence on
single individuals, such as Dr. Baird who was here, I think, testify-
ingbefore this committee yesterday.
Senator Buwcx. Are you familiar with Lexington and Fort
Worth?
Mr. BER. With Lexington somewhat; yes, sir.
Senator Buiwwc. Do many addicts go there voluntarily from New
York?
Mr. Bja. Well, we have had a great many addicts in our New York
programs who have been in Lexington at one time or another. My
feeluig is that there is less of this now. We have more New York
addicts seeking treatment in New York, those who seek it at all be-
cause of the recent publicity of the new coordinator's office and facili-
ties available.
Incidentally, we have facilities in New York City now ranging from
in-community preventive services all the N% ay through in-prison treat-
ment programs, including one at Ryker's Island, which is relatively
new. We have a great many prisoners in treatment there because
we believe the treatment in the prison setting is as good as any, and
in some cases better than most, for treatment.
The problem, of course, Senator, is and this is one of the things
I mentioned in my statement, the problem is you can have a plan, you
can have a concept, and you can work at it 20 hours a day, but you
have to have some funds also. We estimate that the cost of treat-
ment for an addict, I mean full services, taking a proximately 20
months, comes to some $3,000 per addict per year. If we want to en-
gage hypothetically 30,000 addicts in New York at $3,000, per year,
we are talking about $90 million a year. The city simply can t afford,
nor can the State, to pay all of that, though this certainly must be
counted on to pay their share.
The first reaction you get is, $90 million a year is a ridiculous figure.
As a matter of fact, it is cheap because if you take the single aadict
and start to total up what it costs to support him in the community
for a year, in terms of his hustling syndrome, in terms of his conning
syndrome, what he steals, what he defrauds, how much it 6osts to
keep him in prison, and then add to that the fact that addicts are
recidivists, wclhi means that if it takes 20 months to treat an addict,
rehabilitate hin, it costs you $5,000 to do so, under our figures.
520 THE NARCOTIC REHABLITATION ACT OF 1966
Any given addict in 20 months steals close to that amount of money,
unless you have him in prison where he can't steal, and then you have
to pay for that too. Onoe he is out, it is just a matter of time until
his ateali gets him back in. It seems to me that $6,000 for addict
rehabilitation is a low figure. It may be a low figure, but it is a lot of
moey and we need halp.
Senator BURDICK. In your statement, where you say you think it
can be cured, it is very refreshing because the recidivist rate as shown
by Lexington and other places does not spell that out.
Mr. Birz. You are right, Senator. If I might, however, state with
regard to the Addiction Research Center in San Juan, P.R.,
wiich is some 5 years old now and which was run by Dr. Ramirez
until his recent appointment, i I can refer to that, we have had in
that program 124 addicts who have completed treatment and have
been out, off treatment, in the community for a minimum of I year
and a maximum of 3 years I am using these 124 now. There are
many others involved in the program at one level or another. Of
these 124, most of them are out, as I say, over a year and some who
are close to 3, 94.4 percent have not become readdicted.
Now, these are follow-up patients, Senator. By that I mean that
these patients are given urine testing, thin film chromatography, any-
where from once a week to once a month, depending upon how long
they have been out. So their word alone is not sufficient. A combina-
tion of factors is utilized to measure them. (a) What are they doing
in the community F Are they working; are they going to school
And (b), ar they urine-free! On that basis, which may not be a
perfect one, but is a pretty good one, 5.6 percent have become read-
dicted. Of those 5.6 percent, all are back in treatment again with
the exception of two whlo have disappeared, are gone. We think that
is a pretty good record.
Senator BURDICK. What facilities are there for aftercare I
Mr. BUR. In Puerto Rico?
Senator BunDICK. No, in New York.
Mr. BEAR. Well, we have, at the present time, Exodus House, which
is one of the projects maintaining aftercare facilities. There is a pro-
bation department, a parole department, rather, service. We do not
have enough service. We are attempting through the narcotics coordi-
nator's office t. get tether with the people from the office of parole,
with the youth boa, with everyone of the city agencies in order to
involve them in this process of followup becuse we believe very
strongly that there are accepted steps in any rehabilitation process.
The first is to motivate the addict into treatment.
By the way, I do not think I can emphasize this enough. You may
get an addict to choose treatment over incarceration, but that does not
motivate him necessarily to be rehabilitated. That is a very important
distinction. Once he has been motivated, you have to apply a treat-
menit process That is not sufficient, either, to put him back in the
community.
After the treatment process is complete there has to be a reentry
process. This is the halfway house. This is the followup. Admit-
tedly, we have not enough going in New York City. So private agen-
cies and some city agencies are doing some work. But this is our job
THI NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1986 521
2
in the narcotics coordinator's office, to increase these aftercare facili-
ties. In order to increase them, the city has to put up some money
and it is willing to do so. The State ha to put up some money and
we are after that. But the Federal Government has to help, also.
Senator BuRmc. Knowing the budget of the city of New York, do
you think they can do the job alone without Federal help I
Mr. B&AR. r e answer is so easy, I am ashamed to give it. Not a
chance in the world, Senator. There is just no chance at all that we
can do this job. We have the concept. We think we have been able
to demonstrate that it is possible within this concept to do some-
thing with addicts, but we have not the funds. We need some hel.
Tiat does not mean we are not willing to put up the money. e
are willig to do so and we will, but we will need Federal help; no
question about it.
Senator BumwicK. One of the problems I found at Lexington was
an addict who came there voluntarily did not stay there long enough.
We did not have civil commitment at that time. Do you think civil
commitment will be another aid I
Mr. BEAR. Well, I would that that civil commitment under the
proposed Federal statute would be more helpful than it was under New
York State's Metcalf-Volker Act, for example, because the addict had
an easy time coming out in New York in the sense that he could very
often plead guilty to a misdemeanor, take a very light sentence, and 60
days in the cit * Hs a lot better than 2 or 8 years in treatment.
Of course, the Federal penalties are higher, generally speaking. So
I think the answer to your question is that the statute would be help-
ful in getting people into the treatment setup. I do not think it
will necessarily beihelpful at all in producing agood result in those
people-that is, in rehabilitating them, because 1 think that depends
entirely upon the program.
As I said in the first place, I think the statute is fine in that it rec-
ognizes the need for treatment and that it sets up a staging for it,
and that is good. Whether that is going to mean anything at all
depends upon the substantive treatment itself, because you do not
motivate the addict by giving him that choice, except perhaps to moti-
vate him to go to this place and look around and see what is going
to happen to it. The fact that you call the police, he is in the hos-
pital, does not mean very much unless he is motivated to rehabilita-
tion otherwise. That is something I cannot speak too much about. I
am not a doctor.
Senator BumrcDi. Concern has been expressed about restrictions on
eligibility of title 101 in that persons convicted of such crimes as bur.
gIary and housebreaking would not be eligible for special handling.
What is your comment on that?
Mr. BE a. r think it is a question of making a value judgment on
some of it. There is no question in my mind that somebody who has
been guilty of a capital crime-murder--should not be eligible for this;
no question about it. But when you get to housebreaking, burglary,
I hive serious question. These are common addict crimes, although I
must admit that they do on ocasion lead to violence, and this i deplor-
able. I just wonder whether or not you are not cutting out a sub-
stantial portion of the people who need help.
66-488--4-----3
522 THU NA.RCOYTIC REHABILITATION ACT QF 1966
Mr. BrAD. Well, I cannot answer that as well asyou would like.
Senator KRuwY of Massachiuett&I Well, just in general way.
Why would they be admitted I Were they in meed of serimu care
ZMr .. Ye. they wen hallucinating No, 1.:, Some of them were
screaming. We did get two in from one o7 the umversities in the city,
at Bellevue, -just a couple of weeks ago. One of those people was lit-
#rally screaming when brought in, just halluci ,' having, os-
tensibly, visions ihat were terrifying, frightening. This person needed
helpbecausehe simply could not operate, could not stared on the street,
could not walk, could not do anything. He was just screaming in fear
and panio--that kind of thing.
What we are doing in the office of the narcotics coordinator now is
setting up a medicalteam which will. screen patients admits to all
the psychiatric services in New York hospitals-New York City, that
is-within 24 hours postadmission. That is, patients with suspected
LSD dean g ent. This means alerting hospitals to the problem and
to the necessity for alerting us. Our purpose will be to make a psy-
chiatric diagnosis on these patients to see if they have an L.SD psy-
chosis, if they are psychotic without LSD, if they are psychoneurot-
ic--to de e, in other words, the perOnalt structure of the
patient and the effect of the drugs on the patient. These patients will
be followed up to check on relapses after leai the hospital to see
what happens to them, to see what the elect of this drug is, overall.
We want to understand this phenomenon better. Thus we can deal
with it better.
But at the present time, as I say, we cannot give you the kind of
*ati.tcswe would like.
Senator Kvmoi of Massachusetts. Well, I appreciate the fact that
you have no specifics, but I do-you have been working in this field
for how many years?
Mr. BzAn. Since about 1960. You are talking about narcotics
generally I *
Senator KEzNzD- of Massachusetts. That is right. And you have
been in New York City for how long?
Mr. Bz~a. I have only been in New York City for the past year or
so, and part of that time was spent working at Columbia.
Senator Kaniwir of Massachusetts. Based on your experience,
granted you have not the advantage of specifics, but could you now,
from your conversations with those who are working intimately in the
field, give us at least your own judgment, and this would be a plrk4
sonal Judgment. . But I would certainly, consider it valuable in, the
sense that it is based upon a considerable background and interest and
study inthe field of narcotics. ,Could 'you givo us your awn jv.=ent
as to the nature and extent of whether this is a rwing problem in
New York, the extent of its use, what is the availability of this drug
you feel that when you survive the kind of restrictions which have
recently been applied for the general distribution of this, whether it is
liable to drive LSD traffickers underground, so to speak? What has
been your general experience in this as far as underground I Can you
comment I
Mr. BEAR. It seems to me they are underground now. If you are
asking whether I think that a similar regime applies to LSD that is
applied to opium, heroin, and so forth, whether that would tend to
drive them underground, the only answer I can give you is that prob-
lems like this tend to increase seriously no matter what you do, and I
think that putting adequate restrictions on the drug, while at the saw..
time allowing for legitimate uses, would not tend to make it a greater
problem, would not tend to make it a serious--
Senator KFiDr of Massachusetts. We allagre with that, but the
problem is whether it is at the present time, based upon your ex-
perience in these other drug areas, whether you think that there is a
possibility that not only it will go underground, but perhaps it will be
organized and syndicated.
Mr. BEAR. Oh, no.
Senator KENNEy of Massachusetts. You could not make a specu-
latiou on that?
Mr. BzAR. Yes, my speculation would be that it would not.
Senator KENNEY of Massachusett. Then let us go back.
Mr. BEAR. To 'the extent of heroin and morphine and so forth?
Senator Kzzzmm of Massachusetts. Well, why not? What do you
base that on V"
Mr. B". Because I am--agin, not being a medical man, it seems
to me you are talking about a drug with entirely different properties.
I think perhaps the drug with entirely different addiction potential
and with entirely different international context. When you talk
about narcotic drugs and underground problems with drugs, you are
talking about Syria and Turkey and Coimiunist China. You are
talking about an international problem of tremendous scope. I do
not think we will get involved in that with LSD. Again, I could be
wrong, but I do not think this is the kind of problem you are talking
about. This is a speculation, r grant you.
Incidentally, Senator, may I say this, just to get it on the record
with regard to your comments as to educational programs, you are
absolutely right; we should in New York, be doing a good deal more
of this and we intend to. i can only say that considering the age of
our existence, which is a couple of months so far, and the narcotic
problem, the extent of it, we have been pretty much hung up with that.
This is not to get by what you say, but this is our major hangup. We
have at least 80,000 addicts to deal with, 45 city agencies working in
the area, and we want to square that away to get to this problem,
which is terribly important,?do not deny that.
Senator BUmt=cK. Mr.Bear i am going to ask you about four or five
questions that are within your nowledge.
Mr. Br .I will be happy to answer.
Senator Btmzcx. -Do you know whether peroft involved vwith
LSDhavehadprioreriminalecords•
'Mr.BzA) Do I kiiw whether persons involved hi the use of it-'
500 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
been in operation for only a period of a few yeas, reports that about.
30 percent of the initial 300 male patients released on parole -had not
returned to drugs, nor encountered other difficulty.
S. 2152 will gi vethe judge more latitude in sentencing and com-
mitting selected narcotics addicts who have violated Federal statutes.
With this provision, more addicts will be able to participate in a
program that should be more effective in rehabilitation. The bill will
also give the staff of the institution to -which the addict is committed
more discretion in determining time for release. This should be
helpful in the rehabilitation efforts and lead to better utilization of
staff time and institutional facilities.
Aftercare programs, which are considered essential,. will also be
established and will be helpful to the addicted individual in making
the transition from institutional care to community living. The super
vising agent, whether a probation officer or a social worker, will be
helping the individual with enough authority to have respect and
strength enough to help the addict in exerting self-ontrol and self-
discipline until such time as the addict can exert this,control himself.
This will go a long way in assisting the individual in leading a life
free fromdrugs and to become a useful, productive citizen.
We say that an individual becomes addicted when he loses the power
of self-control over a drug and abuses the drug to such an extent that
he suffers, or society suffers, or they both suffer. If you accept this
definition, then you must alsp accept the proposition that control for
the individual must be exerted from the outside, until such ;ime as
the addict is ready to be given the, opportunity to once agahI eaert
this self-control.
Probation is a way of providing some control. The judge may
sentence the individual and then suspend the sentence and p1aeI th
addict on probation with the provision that he enters an institution!
and remains there for a period of time determined by the professional
staff. When the staff feels that he is ready to be released and par-
ticipate in an aftercare program, he is discharged from the institution.
The individual must then demonstrate his abilty to partic ipate in an
aftercare program, and after he has received maximum benefits he
is thea ready for release from his probation. The probationary ele-
ment is a very strong motivating factor in helping the addict partici-
pate in the program.
Parole is also an exceedingly strong motivating factor in
the individual in exerting control over his compulsive urge to use
narcotics in times of stress. Individuals on parole and probation do
much better that addicts released without supervision, and I see
aftercare as an essential part of the total rehabilitation program.
The more conventional forms of psychotherapy must be modified in
the treatment of the narcotics addict. In many addicts psychother-
apy has not proven to be effective. An experienced therapist should
be able to determine, after examination, Whether or not the patient
would benefit from psychotherapy. In general. a more direct aUi,
thoritarian, approach with emphasis on setting of linWitsond less emv
phasis onInsjht has 'proven to be nwre' effective, ,Psychotherapy,
phetermand Uo r up, only one facet
program and not pfic&able fo;U a*p'atient& It souldbe prescribed
THE NARCOTIC REHABRUJATION ACT OF 196# 533
Only when indicated and based m a sound diagnosis after a thorough
an complete medical examination.;;'
There are about 250 patients in the Lexington Hospital under man-
datory sentence and not eligible for parole. These patients, regard-
less of how well motivated. they may be or how much progress they
make, cannot be released until the termination of their sentence. By
denying them the opportunity for parole they are deprived of one
of the greatest motivating factors for participation in the program
and for making an effort to help themselves. These patients become
despondent, dejected, depressed, and have little incentive to help
themselves in any way. Their outlook for the future is very dismal
and they present a real management problem in an institution de-
signed for rehabilitation where morale is so important. The staff
has nothing to say as to when such patients will be released, regard.
less of any progress that may be made, or when might be the more
appropriate time for release to permit the individual a greater oppor-
tunity for rehabilitation. The mandatory sentence does not provide
the judge with sufficient latitude in sentencing selected addicts. S.
2152 gives the judge more discretion in committing individuals to a
treatment program, but with the established criteria many addicted
individuals would not be eligible. Some addicts who have committed
two felonies might still be very suitable for a commitment procedure
rather than a sentence to prison. Other addicts charged with so.
called crimes of violence might still be committed to such a program.
It would seem desirable to give the judge. more latitude in selecting
patients for commitment. I realize that there are many considera-
tions in preparing a bill but from a medical viewp6Mt I would not
feel that an individual should be denied commitment, because he had
been civilly Committed on two o ons_ Drug addiction is recog-
nized as a chronic recurrent condition and an individual should not
be denied treatment because of a recurrence. ," ., -
The medical record librarian at the Lezington hospital reviewed 100
prisoner-patients admitted to the hospital aind fouxd that 75 pe at
would meet the criteria established in S. 2162. At the Fort Worth
Hospital it was found that 65 percent of the patients admitted to that
hospital: would meet the same requirements., It would seem that
70 percent of the prisoner-addicts now being :admitted to thi. two
hospitals might be elgible for commitment under the bill and about
80 percent would not satisfy the requirments.
Itis very difficult, if not impossible, to distinsh between sellers
and nonsellers in the so-called "street addict&" Chein ha. inted out
that most youthful addicts started their use of heroin by being given
a shot by a friend. Once addicted, drugs, however, become the most
important thing in the life of the addict, and in the culture where they
live most of them will resort to selling drugs on a small scale to support
their habit. This type of selling does not have the same connottioM
as the big-time operator who usually is not addicted and may be reap-
ing an enormous profit by his illegal traffic i.. narcotic drugs., I am
told by the.Bureau of Narcotics that. about 60 percent of the arrests
for violation of the, narcotic laws ae by nonaddicted individuals
The ybuthUl, addict, who becomes desperate and, must raise a rather
large sum of money to make a contact not infrequently.;reorts to push,,
ing drugs to support his habit.
rQA
VWX THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
were trying to find themselves by studying Zen Buddhism, and trj Log
toprawtice Za-Zen. '.M itationcan be difficult in our noisy culture.
Since that time,'a wide interest in oriental philosophy--Taoism,
Buddhism, Hinduism, and even the occult science--has taken root.
It is not surprisig that intellectually stimulated people should try
psychedelic chemicals as a natural outgrowth of this spiritual hunger.
Psychedelic substances (whether LSD, mescaline, psilocybin, peyote,
yage, the trypamines, morning gloryseeds, or any number of others)
are changing our culture, not only directly, but indirectly. Some
examples of indirect influences of psychedelic drugs are kinetics and
the light-sound-motion media now becoming popular in discotheque
In New York a group called USCO is showing a new brand of psy-
chedelic-multimedia art in the Riverside Museum. Op a t, kinetic
sculptur, and some entirely new concepts in writing and painting are
emerging
the
out of our artistic subculture which is very familiar with
ThIe problem,experience.
psyceedelic ,i:of how .
as I we it,isnot' one to make' hasty. anti-
...
Mr. Bow&uT. For the last, maybe a month. I just turned the corner.
Senator Buiwicx. How did you before that timeI
Mr. Bowmrr. We just started 8 months ago.
Senator BuRDicK. The thing that -bothersme is that you want free-
dom to do these things, but you do not seem to put much weight on
the productive capacity of youth.
Mr. BowAA. The productive capacity?
Senator BuWi)mi Yes.
Mr. BowA r. I do not understand you.
Senator BumicL What do you do for society ? What do you do for
the community ?
Mr. BowAJrr. I think it produces a very productive situation, it can
produce a very productive--
Senator Bumic. You are 26 years old.
Mr. BowART. Twenty-seven.
Senator Bumicm And you have only supported yourself recently I
Mr. BowArr. Oh, no; you misunderstood me.
Senator BuIWIc. I beg your pardon.
Mr. Bowma. I have supported myself all my life, but I have not
supported myself on the newspaper until recently. Before that, I
worked at everything from carpentry to sign painter.
Senator BuRDICK. -Do you have a profession?
Mr. BowArr. Well I am an artist. I paint, primarily.
Senator BURDICK. io you sell your works?
Mr. BOWART. Yes, I do.
Senator BURDICK. Enough to support yourself?
Mr. BowAirr. I only know two artists that do.
Senator BuiDIC. Well you have used the word "bad trip." Do
you know anybody who has had a bad trip?
Mr. Bowma. Yes, sir; I have experienced recently two bad trips.
Senator BuRDicK. Can you describe what a bad trip is?
Mr. Bow~ja. Mostly it is panic reaction. In the first case, it, was
panic reaction. In the second case, it was a young lady. Somebody
gave her LSD. She showed up at the office. I did not know she had
LSD. We have an icon, which is a half-opened eye. Somehow or
other she began to relate to this eye. So y found out that she
had taken LSD, so we talked to her and we took her to the park and we
got her out of the hostile environment of trucks and the streets, et
cetera. She began to calm down, so we, you know, like bid her adieu
and she walked off. We didn't know her before and we haven't seen
herBut
again.
we did hear that she was in Bellevue.
Apparently, she was in
Bellevue many times before she took LSD and now she is fm Bellevue
again. It remains to be seen whether she is permanently going to stay
m Bellevue or whether this will be a c s. Often LSD hs pro-
duced a catharsis which very often people with mental imbalance can
develop from it.
The second is a cas of a 45-year-old mai who was desperate to try
it. He was a foreigner. Somehow or other he got hold of it and went
up to Niagara Fal s and took LSD. This produced terrible panic re-
action; in him. This man was involved in the civil rights movement
and suddenly realized that he had all kinds of' racially prejudices and
TH NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT 01 1900 553
blocked them out apparently. This is what he told us later. He spent
one night in jail, it cost him $80 for disturbing the peace. They put
the handcuffs on him, the police. He broke the handou ff in some
strange exhibition of strength, though he was not violent. He told
the police he loved them.
Senator Bvmic. That was quite a reaction, was it not, to break
the handcuffs I
Mr. Bower. Yes. Well1 he is quite a stout man.
Senator Bumcx. This is the type of experience you recommends
Mr. BowART. No, sir; I do not. In both sitlatio. s, anyone who
knew anything about LSD would not have given it to either one of
the indiiiduals You should never give it to anyone or advise anyone
to take it who has had any history of mental illness, nor should you
give it to anyone who is desperate to take it. I think that you must
be properly motivated before you take it. That is the key thing.
Senator BuW)ic. I would asume that you are not for this legisla-
tion?
Mr. Bowmar. Well sir, I do not know what kind of legislation you
could set up. The big danger is that, like I said, you run the risk of
bringing in the Mafia elements, the high-risk takers, by placing high
risks on these things.
Right now, I think that LSD, in my experience, is distributed
through a network of amateurs and friends, people who have taken
it andenjoy it and do not see why they should not be able to take it
in private by themselves under calm and controlled conditions.
If you make strong legislation against the sale or possession of LSD
I think these people will probably stop selling it or making it, but I
do not think they will stop taking it because I think it means a little
too
might.much to them. I do not think they will stop taking it. They
But one thing is certain, that people who do run the high risks have
something to gain. Right now there does not seem to be any profit
motive in this thing. I think you could put very good profit motive in
it for the already existing narcotics syndicates if you did place high
penalties on it and make it scarce. Because if 1 million people have
taken it already, the market is already there.
Senator Buim.K. Is there any one of you three who have had any-
medical background and are competent to speak on-medical things,
Miss BAwrm. What do you mean I
Senator BumicK. Are you doctor I
Miss Bsuinm. No, I am not a doctor, but I started doing research oa
L4S1 in1959.
Senator BuimiL You have 4ot had courses in medicine of any
kind
Mi BAwnTA No, but in high school and tings I srted joking it;
up and I went to medical libraries.
Mr. Bow-A. th.
It is not a mec thing.
Senator AujDi. Miss Babit, testiied as follows:
I know that LSD is a dangerous drug, that used unwisely, it can cause people
to kill themselves and wind up in emergency hospitals In panic reaction.
You are not medical people. Do you not think this committee has
some responsibility to look into this question and do something about
it?
66-668--06----36
b554 5TE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF' 1986'
decides this is the way to do it, do you think that is truly valid, also I
Senator BUmwDcI. I am just saying we do not know how dangerous
it can be.
Miss SHMWOOD. I wanted to ask you, what do you mean by unwar-
ranted use of LSD, or are you trying to find out !
Senator BURDcIK. We are trying to find out. I think there must
have been some unwarranted use that all three of you have testified to.
There must have been some unwarranted use when people go on these
bad trips.
Miss SHERwoOD. Does this kind of control mean only for use in hos-
pitals for sick people and for therapy!
Senator Buwrcx. Well, we are goii to determine that.
Miss Sma woow. I see.
Mr. PAuz;r. Mr. Bowart, did we understand you correctly to say
that you probably know a thousand people Using LSDI.
Mr. BowAirr. Yes, sir.
Mr. PEAN. Could you describe them for us,generally, the types of
people they are !
KPIA 6TR N4 AIC L AUIJ4ATION ACT, Q0 1 04
4,.. , (•
1: . ., l
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
TUZODAY, TULY 19, 1986
U.S. SENATE,
SPZCUL SU COXM'UMZ ON NiaxoDcs
OF TH CoXM Z ON E JUDICIARY,
Wauhingtoi, D.C.
The subcommittee (composed of Senators Dodd, Tydings, Burdick,
Bayh, Hart, Kennedy of Massachusetts , Hruska, Javits and Fong)
met pursuant to recess, at 10:15 am., in room 318, Old senate Office
Building, Senator Thomas J. Dodd (chairman of the subcommittee)
presiding.
Present: Senators Dodd and Burdick.
Also present: Carl L. ierianstaff director; William C. Mooney,
Jr., chief investigator; Peter Freivalds, research director; Bernard
Tanmenbaum, special counsel; Lou Beck, special counsel, and Eugene
Gleason, editorial director.
Senator Dow. I will call the hearing to order.
The first witness is the Honorable Robert McClory, Member of
Congress for the 12th District of the State of Illinois.
Congressman McClory has a very distinguished background which
I will not go into detail about, but he certainly has had- wide experi-
ence in legislative matters, both in the State of Illinois, and in the
Ws are glad you are here this morning and glad to hear from you.
STATEMENT OF RON. ROBERT cCLOWRY, ME3ER OF 0OR ,
12TH DISTRICT, STATE OF InLOIS
Mr. McCLonY. Thank you verymuch, Mr. Chairman.
I am pleased to have this opportunity to make a statement to the
committee in support of S. 2152 and the corresponding House bill,
H.R. 9167, which passed the House on July 1, 166, the Narcotic Ad-
dict Rehabilitation Act of 1966.
I am in full agreement with H.R. 9167 as it passed the House of Rep-
resentatives. t is in that form that I am testifying before this sub-
committee today.
Certainly, the need to provide hospitalization and supervisory treat-
ment of narcotic addicts appears to be recognized by all, including
those most intimately acquainted with the enforcement of the laws
against traffickers in narcotics.
I had the privilege of serving on the House subcommittee which
heard the witnesses and considered the other evidence in support of
569
66663- -61
570 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACM OF 1966
this measure. The subcommittee favored all but two aspects of this
bill; namely, (a) those portions of titles I and II which made civil
commitment (in lieu of criminal penalties) available to sellers of
narcotics, and (b) that part of title ILl which would permit nonaddict
offenders to be eligible for treatment under the Youth Corrections
Act-if they happened to be between the ages of 22 and 26.
Those provisions, which were deleted by the House subcommittee,
were restored by the full Judiciary Committee of the House at the
time the bill was considered in executive session there. However, later,
on the House floor, these provisions with the exception of that part
of title II were rejected on a motion to recommit by a vote of 198
to 168. I believe that this is the only recommittal motion which has
been acted upon favorably in this session of the 89th Congress.
Immediately thereafter the measure as amended by the recommittal
motion passed the House by the decisive margin of 867 to 1.
My main purpose in asking to appear before you is to urge you not
to restore those parts of HR.916T which the House reed. I do
not believe they belong in this bill.
Addressing myselffirst to title II, let me point out that the pro-
visions deleted b the House do not refer to narcotic addicts who are
covered in titles i and II. Any person regardless of ae, is entitled
to the benefits of civil commitment under those titles. aTere should
be no confusion about this, although there was some confusion in the
debates in the House. Title III is not necessary in order to provide
civil commitment to narcotic addicts who are alsoyoung adults (be-
tween the ages of 22 and 26). The sole purpose of that part of title
II, which the House deleted, was to permit nonaddict offenders;
tht is, persons charged with selling, importing, smuggling, et cetera,
of narcotic drugs to receive the benefits of the Federal Youth Cor-
rections Act.
The act permits the U.S. district court to grant noncriminal penal-
ties in criminal cases to youths 21 years of age and under. The pro-
visions were extended to include young adult offenders (pemons 22 to
26) in 1958. However the Congres-at that time-specifically re-
fused to extend the soit penalties of the Youth Corrections Act to
those charged with violations of the Federal narcotics laws.
As can be seen, this part of H.R. 9167 has no connection with the
subject of the rehabilitation of narcotic addicts. It relates instead to
the subject of meting out soft penalties- that is, probation, commit-
ment to a farm or camp, et cetera, to ofenders who are perhaps the
most elusive and vicious criminals in the country today.
The Bureau of Narcotics did not ask for this change in the law.
According to the Bureau's 1964 report, 46.7 percent of the more than
55,000 known narcotic addicts are 30 years of age or under. Of the
10,000 new eaw4 reported in 10611 more than 7O percent were under
80 years of age. This record would indicate that a very high percen-
tage, 50 percent or more, of the narcotic offenses are comintd by
persons under 26 years of age. Certainly a peddler or smuggler of
narcotics is as guilty of.a serious crime whether he be 25 or 65--and
should be subject to the same penalties.
Let me turn now to title I and the definition of "eligible individuals."
As the measure was introduced in the House authority for civil
commitment under titles I and II was not available to "An individual
TM NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OP 19 57-1
56
charged with selling a narcotic drug, unless the court"-this part was
omitted from the bill, deleted from the bill, and it is also in the Senate
bill on pages 8 and 12, I believe--"determines that such was for the
primary purpose of enabling the individual to obtain a narcotic drug
which he requires for his personal use because of his addiction to such
drug.
That is the part of the definition of an eligible individual under the
civil commitment provisions.
The subcommittee rejected this provision on the grounds that a per-
son who sells narcotic drugs is part of the corrupting network oper-
ating in many of our large cities. These peddlers of narcotics, for
whatever reason, are contaminating others--particularly our youth-
and they should suffer the penalties the Congress provided in the Boggs
Act of 1951 and the Boggs-Daniel Act of 1956. These earlier enact-
ments of the Congress provide mandatory minimum penalties for those
peddling narcotics-particularly second and third-time offenders and
those selling narcotics to minors. I
To make any and all such persons eligible for civil commitment-
particularly before trial--could provide the exact escape route which
the narcotic traffickers desire and which the Congress sought to bar
in the 1951 and 1956 enactments.
It was argued in the House that simply granting this authority to
a U.S. district court judge would not mean that sellers of narcotics
would necessarily be accorded civil commitment. That decision would
rest with the discretion of the district court judge. The same argument
might be made against the imposition of mandatory minimum sen-
tences. However, experience has shown that mandatory minimum sen-
tences were necessary in order to discourage sellers of narcotics from
carrying on their illicit business.
In Illinois, for instance, where I had some part in the enactment
of statutes to provide for mandatory minimum sentences in narcotics
cases, the number of new narcotics cases dropped from 981 in 1961
to 504 in 1965-almost a 50-percent decrease. Following enactment
of the Boggs-Daniel Act in 1956, the number of new Federal narcotic
addict cases dropped from more than 9,000 in 1956 to less than 6,000
in 1959. While there have been subsequent increases, this can be
accounted for by other causes. In any event, the effect of the Boggs
Act., which provided stiffer Federal penalties, has been to reduce the
ratio of narcotics addicts to our total population.
The seller of narcotics--even though he sells solely to procure funds
to buy more narcotic drugs for himself-is obviously contributing to
the overall narcotics problem. As the statistics I have cited idic(ate,
the chances are very good that he is corrupting a young person.
Under the bill, a narcotic addict char; with a crime of violence
is specifically inoliible to reccivc civil commitment. In my opinion
the seller of narcotics-particularly one who seeks civil commitment
before trial in accordance with title I-should not receive any such
preferential consideration. Many .of the same dangers inherent in
indeterminate sentences are present also in provisions for civil com-
mitment before trial as authorized in title I.
lThe situation may be different following a trial ia conviction--
aJthough I would ha~ve preferred, 1; exclude, tha'selles of acts
572 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
have already been made and the salutary effects which have already
*been produced by the mandatory minimum sentences.
Senator BuurncK. Well, you know, we as lawyers, have long rec-
ognized that the young offender does sometimes fit into a different
category than the hard-core, hard-line trafficker and that seems to be
the dispute between the sections now under consideration, whether
or not o give a different treatment to a young offender for an oc-
casional offense.
Mr. McCLoRY. Well, we are talking about two different things now,
Senator, and with regard to the youthful offender, we are not talking
about a narcotic addict. Title HI does not relate to narcotic addict
offenders. It relates to nonaddict offenders. And to give a person who
is guilty of a narcotics offense, a smuggler or an importer or seller, who
is not an addict, the benefit of the Youth Corrections Act because he
happens to be between the ages of 22 and 26, 1 think it would be a gross
miscarriage of justice and a great mistake on the part of the Congress.
I think that is much more serious than the other part of the bill, the
other amendment which the House adopted, because under civil com-
mitment in titles I and II narcotic addicts of all ages are entitled to
civil commitment. There is no distinction. So title III is not neces-
sarily an order to provide persons between the ages of 22 and 26 the
benefits of civil commitment. The only purse of title III is to per-
mit nonaddict offenders to get the soft penalties of the Youth Correc-
tions Act which I do not see, how under any logic, they should be
entitled to. Certainly, a 25-year old or older person who is smuggling
narcotics, or a dealer in narcotics is entitled to no more consideration
than a person 65. And I think actually these young offenders are the
most serious menace we have because they are the ones who are traf-
ficking among the young people.
Senator BuRDIcK. But you see no distinction between the young man
22, perhaps in his first or second offense in selling, as between a man
.65 who made a life-time business of it?
Wr. McCLowr. Who is a nonaddict f I see no distinction whatever.
Senator Bumwicx. Thank you.
Senator DoDD. Congressman, you are, I am sure, aware that the Fed-
eral prison officials who have testified at these hearings, I think almost
unanimously opposed the mandatory sentence, because they feel that
after a man has spent a number of years in a penal institution further
incarceration will tend to, or rather will be detrimental rather than
beneficial to his chances of rehabilitation.
What do you think about that ?
Mr. McCaRy. I do not agree with you, Mr. Chairman. .1 think that
the prison officials and the law enforcement agencies are in pretty much
agreement that the mandatory minimum sentences have had a very
beneficial effect. I think the recommendation for dispensing with the
mandatory minimum sentence emanates from the President's Advisory
Commission on Narcotic and Drug Abuse, which was filed in Novem-
ber 1963, and in which they state quite bluntly, on page 40 of the re-
port, 'Te Bureau of Narcotics maintains that the present severe
penalties act aS a powerful deterrent. The Commirsion does not
agre.".
The Commission disgree with the Bureau of Narcotics, which is
the agency charged with the enforcement of our narcotics laws. Thus,
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1.96 6 575
I think that this desire to do away with the mandatory minimum sen-
tences is recommended by an agency that is not charged with the busi-
ness of enforcing the narcotics laws. And I think it would be unfortu-
nate for us to accept that kind of advice in lieu of the advice of the
Bureau of Narcotics.
Senator DODD. Well, there is no point in arguing about it, but a little
later this morning we will hear from Mr. James Bennett, who was for
years the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Perhaps he can
clear up that question.
When you propose that all sellers be eliminated from the civil com-
mitment provisions of H.R. 9617, are you aware that 95 percent, I
believe it is, or something like 95 percent of the prosecutions for nar-
cotic law violations in Federal courts involve sellers? Were you aware
of that statistic?
Mr. McCLoRY. I was not-
Senator DODD. I think that is an accurate statement.
Mr. MCCLORY. I was impressed by the fact that this law was to be
directed primarily at the narcotic addict who was guilty of some
nonviolent, Federal offense, who because of his narcotics, his desire
for narcotics, for instance, was guilty of some offense which resulted
in producing funds for him which did not involve any armed robbery,
or anything of that nature.
Senator DODD. Well, we have testimony from Mr. Giordano to the
effect that 95 percent were sellers. It is in the record, and I call it to
your attention.
From your testimony, I get the impression-and perhaps I misun-
derstand you-that you are committed to the view or to the impor-
tance of the offense, rather than the individual offender. Am I right
or wrong about that?
Mr. McCLoy. No. I am primarily, I would say interested in re-
ducing the amount of narcotic addiction and the traffcking in narcotic
drugs. And I think that a combination of stiff mandatory penalties
against sellers, or traffickers, in narcotic drugs, plus a program of civil
commitment or medical and hospital rehabilitation of a noncriminal
narcotic addict, is extremely important. I want to emphasize that I
support the program of civil commitment with the exceptions that I
have mentioned.
Senator DoDw. Yes. I take it that a re that the proposed
treatment program under this bill would be effected.
Mr. McCLoRY. Well, I hope that it would be effected. At least, I
think it should be given a chance, yes.
Senator DoDD. And do you not think it should be applied to as many
individuals as can profit from it?
Mr. McCWRr. Well, I think all the noncriminal elements, but I
think that a person who is-for instance, a large number of narcotic
addicts were charged with crimes before they ever became narcotic
addicts, and I would question whether or not a person who is inclined
to commit crime, whether he is addicted or not, should be accorded
benefits under the civil commitments provision.
Senator Dow. Well, again we get into a statistical argument, but
I think the testimony before this committee was that a high percent-
age of these cases involved persons who have not been convicted of
what we will describe as other crimes, major crimes.
576 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Senator Dow. Did I understand you to say the only place you know
where there was an increase was in the State of New York I
Mr. McCwRY. I say that that is the prinUMT place
Senator DoDD. According to the Federal Bu4reau of Narcotics, that
is the one area where there is a decrease.
Mr. Pmus. Just for the record, the charts submitted by Commis-
sioner Giordano indicate that there were 6,580 new addicts reported
in New York City in 1964, and 2,662 in 1965, which amounted to a de-
crease of 3,918 addicts for that particular city.
Senator Dow. I think everywhere else it showed an increase, did
it notI
Mr. PEuAN. In many other areas of the country, yes. They made
up for the decrease in that area.
Mr. McCLo Y. Well I do not have the 1965 figures, I might say.
They were not available to me at the time of our hearing. You may
have received some figures since then, but of the 10,000 new addicts
in 1964, almost 6,000 were in the State of New York. The number
rose from a total of 23,470 to 29,063 of the total active narcotic addicts.
Now, that is more than half the total throughout the Nation. And one
cause of that is the great increase in Puerto Rican population in the
city of New York, and that ought to be considered and studied, and
not the failure of minimum mandatory sentences. And I hope that
the committee will require some explanation of that subject before
Adopting a program which, as I say, is experimental, hopefully bene-
ficial, but extremely dangerous, it seems to me, if we would abandon
the salutary, the very grat benefit that has been derived from the
deterrent of mandatory minimum sentences.
Senator DoDD. Well, thank you very much for your testimony, Mr,
AicClory.
Mr. James V. Bennett.
9lad to see you again, Mr. Bennett.
BTATEX~E~0~TOF 3AX V. KET, CHA IRKAN, SEMTION ON
CRIMINAL LAW, AME AN BAR ASSOCIATION
Mr. BExzNrT. Good morning, Senator.
Senator DODD. It is not necessary to introduce you before this sub-
ommittee. You have certainly had a distinguished career as Director
)f the Federal Bureau of Prisons, with wide experience in this field,
ind we are glad to hear you again this morning.
Mr. BENrwr. Thank you, Senator. It is a pleasure, indeed, to be
isere this morning to discuss this bill pending before your committee.
I appear here on this occasion however, not as the director of the
Federal Prison Bureau, where i served for some 27 years, but as
the chairman of the section on criminal law of the American Bar
Association, who have considered this bill and whose views, I hope, I
man adequately represent.
I am here in support generally of H.R. 9167-the narcotic addict
rehabilitation bill, but as it was recommended by the House Com-
mittee on the Judiciary.
The amendments made on the floor of the House weaken the bill to
the point that it becomes almost meaningless, Senator Dodd and
THE NARCOTIC REHABITATION ACT 0F 1066 581
8
The Task Force on Corrections, which you established late in December, 1965,
is hereby submitting its report. The Task Force has focused on the functions
and operations of the New York City Department of Correction, as you re-
quested. From our first meeting, however, it became evident that our study and
recommendations must encompass more than that Department and must in-
clude consideration of related departments and services. The task of developing
more effective methods of reducing the heavy burden of crime calls for study in
depth of all agencies wuncekned with that problem, aud ,equiies mwue hfoiual-
tion than is now readily available. Some of the essential information can be
assembled by the usual methods of collecting statistics and other data; some
can be obtained only by research.
We have been guided by the following assumptions in our study:
1. That effective and practical measures to reduce the burden of crime as
well as the conscience of the citizens of New York City demand decent, fair and
constructive treatment for all those persons who are charged with or convicted
of some violation of the law.
2. That there Is pressing need for more effective programs to provide maximum
guidance and help for those committed to the care and custody of the various
agencies of the City.
. That the City's correctional services dealing with adult offenders-pro-
bation, institutions and parole-are not separate and distinct in basic purpose
from the law enforcement agencies: police, prosecutors' offices and courts. All
are parts of the same process, the administration of criminal Justice. The com-
plete coordination of all these agencies and services Is essential to accomplish-
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1986 583
ment of their common aim: protection of society by the prevention, control and
treatment of crime.
4. That a study of the correctional services must, therefore, involve consid-
eration of their relationships to each other and to the law enforcement agencies.
For example, the chronic overcrowding of the City's institutions for detained
and sentenced offenders can be substantially relieved by greater use of proba-
tion and parole, and by acceleration of the various steps In the procedures from
arrest to conviction and disposition.
The dimensions of the problem reviewed, the limited staff available, and the
time factor dictated that this Task Force should concern itself mainly with
recommendations dealing with principles rather than with more profound studies
of organization and operations. Accordingly, you will find within this report
recommendations for further studies where the Task Force felt they were
Indicated.
The Task Force concerned itself with five basic areas: 1) organization and
management; .) inter-relationship of courts and other law enforcement agencies
with the Department of Correction; 3) overcrowding of institutions; 4) drug
addiction and alcoholism; and 5) House of Detention for Women.
Particular emphasis was placed upon the House of Detention for Women
because of its critical situation. Detailed recommendations concerning other
facilities of the Department were not made, solely because time did not permit
adequate study of the entire departmental complex.
SOME PRELI MINARY OBSERVATIONS
We wish to emphasize that many of the short-comings in New York City's
correctional program we have noted are the result of a long history of uncoordi-
nated approaches and expediencies which cannot be pin-pointed as the fault
of a single administration. Legal restrictions, budgetary handicaps, and the
unpredictably large increase in crime and addiction have resulted in large
workloads and recurring critical situations which have made impossible needed
attention to fundamental reforms of the kind we suggest.
In submitting our recommendations, therefore, we wish to acknowledge our
appreciation of the cooperation shown by all the agencies of government with
which we have come in contact, and particularly by the Honorable Anna M.
Kross, Commissioner of the Department of Correction and her stIff.
The Task Force is mindful of the accomplishments of Commissioner Kross
who plans to retire shortly after a long career of devoted service to this City.
In her twelve year administration of the Correction Department, she has made
every effort to have the Department live up to its name and fully measure up
to its responsibilities as a crime control and rehabilitative organization. In these
twelve years, she has transformed the agency from one whose chief emphasis
was on custodial problems to one stressing rehabilitation as well as safekeeping.
While budgetary and legal restrictions have not permitted her to go as far
as she would want, giant steps forward have been taken to improve the quality
of care and treatment of persons committed to her charge.
ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
New oommiasioier
We interviewed twenty-one candidates for the post of Commissioner of the
Department of C)rrection. Some were referred to us by persons knowledge-
able in the field and we ourselves sought others. We canvassed experienced com-
missioners and wardens in New York and other States. The candidates inter-
viewed included some of the present headquarters and institutional staff mem-
bers. Following our interviews, we ,ubmif.ted our recommendations to you on
March 10, 1966.
We have refrained from being overly specific In recommendations regarding
organization. The Task Force did not wish to Impose upon the new Commis-
sioner a single method of structuring the agency. There are many ways to
organize the central office and institutions of a correction agency. Hov-ever,
we feel that certain steps should be taken regardless of the organization which
finally evolves for the Department of Correction.
Deputy commiaainere and other exempt position
The Department of Correction now has four exempt positions--two Deputy
Commissioners, a Secretary of Department, and a Special Investigator. The
roles of these four positions should be redefined. At present, the salaries of the
584 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
66-668--66----38
586 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1986
the mission of the Department and would carry recommendations for continu.
ance or expansion for these activities on the one hand, or for curtailment or
abandonment on the other. Such an Intensive study would certainly be of im-
measurable assistance to a new Commissioner who must determine where the
maximum value per budget dollar lies.
Recommendation.-The Commissioner should be permitted to use outside re-
sources to perform a thoroughgoing study of the departmental headquarters and
institutions, including a cost effectiveness analysis of all departmental activities.
INTERIIATIONSHIP OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION TO COURTS AND
OTHER AGENCIES
Interagency cooperation
The cooperation among the many agencies whose functions interplay in the
administration of criminal justice should be a continuing planned program. It
should not be left to haphazard or ad hoe efforts, admirable as they are and often
animated by a world of good will. Key officials should meet with reasonable fre-
quency and not under the pressure of crisis, for the purposes of discussing policy
Issues and relationships among the component parts of the total administration of
criminal justice in the City. This group should include the Deputy Mayor-City
Administrator, the Correction Commissioner, the Police Commissioner, an Ad-
ministrative Judge of one of the Supreme Courts, the Administrative Judge of
the Criminal Court, one of the Ditrict Attorneys, the Chairman of the Parole
Commission, the Director of the Office of Probation, and one of the Chief Proba-
tion Officers of the Supreme Courts. This group should include in appropriate
situations, the Commissioners of Health, Hospitals, Mental Health Services and
Welfare. This need not be a statutory body, but should be created by agreement
among the Mayor, the Courts, and the District Attorneys. The Deputy Mayor-
City Administrator would act as Chairman and provide staff services for the
organization.
These officials could also meet with the key officers of the bar assRociatlons,
the Attorney-in-Chief of the Legal Aid Society, other interested official and
community agencies, and representative citizens.
Recommendation.-Steps should be taken to create an instrumentality or
council for the purposes of promoting cooperation and coordination among the
agencies whose functions are interwoven with the administration of criminal
justice.
The Task Force was unable to undertake the thorough study required to docu-
ment the extent to which the physical capacity and program needs of the Depart-
ment of Correction are influenced by the staffing, training, and practices of the
continuum of agencies ranging from law enforcement, prosecutors, courts and
probation to parole. Such a study would show how understaffing and delays due
to overload in any one of these agencies result in population increases and pro-
gram changes in Department of Correction institutions. The findings from such
a study should enable an accurate projection of future capacity, staffing and
program needs of the Department of Correction and should relate these projec-
tions quite specifically to the staffing and program needs of the related depart-
ments and agencies.
The study also should point up the need for and the values to be gained from a
central statistical reporting system wherein an accurate accounting of the New
York City crime problem and the disposition of individual cases would become
indispensable to planning and administration for all agencies concerned with
law enforcement and the administration of Justice.
Recommendation.-A study of the correctional process In all of its aspects and
Interrelationships is vitally needed for proper planning by all agencies concerned
with law enforcement and the administration of Justice. Such a study should
be launched under the aegis of the inter-agency council
A new arraignment procedure and facility for the criminal court of New York
City
The Department of Correction receives from the courts defendants awaiting
criminal court action, commonly known as detained accused. We are convinced
that the detained accused population can be substantially reduced by improved
and more efficient procedures.
Recommendation.-A new arraignment procedure and facility operating
twenty-four hours a day for the Criminal Court of New York City should be
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 587
developed. A pilot project on this proposal should be developed and tested in
Manhattan. If succesful, as we anticipate, similar procedures and facilities
could then be established in each of the other boroughs.
At present, the detained accused comes into the custody of the Department
of Correction when brought by the arresting officer to the court building for
arraignment in the early part of the day. Many such persons were arrested the
previous day and held in one of the forty odd stationhouse lockups which are
staffed and maintained by the Police Department.
Under the proposed procedure, a detention facility staffed by the Department
of Correction and court personnel, and open seven days a week, twenty-four
hours a day to receive police-arrest cases, would be established. This facility
would contain an arraignment part of the Criminal Court which would be in
session twenty-four hours of the day-instead of the present eight hour day.
Spreading the workload over twenty-four hours would remove the present
"rush hour" pressures and atmosphere. That portion of the time which is now
spent in tL'e stationhouse lockup because court is not in session, could be utilized
to process the defendants' cases for arraignment. Being an integral part of the
court, as the detention pens now are, the facility should also provide space for-
1) Summons Project personnel to determine if the defendant could be given a
summons and release, 2) Legal Aid or private counsel to immediately consult
with the accused, 3) Release on Recognizance personnel of the Office of Proba-
tion to determine eligibility for release, and 4) District Attorney staff to consult
with arresting officers and take charge of the prosecution of the cases and prepa-
ration of the complaints.
This procedure could res. It In savings both in money and in manpower. Oper-
ation of the stationhouse lockup could then be discontinued because there would
be no need for the arresting officer to detain his prisoner in it while awaiting
the opening of court. The Police Department might also utilize the facility to
"book the defendant" and where required, take his photograph. (Presently the
booking Is being done in the precinct of arrest and the photographs are taken
at the central headquarters in each borough, which means that the arresting
officer must stop off at the central headquarters to take the photographs.) Im-
plementation of the new procedure can be seen to have the corollary effect of
police manpower savings.
The proposed arraignment procedure and facility should reduce to a minimum
the number of persons in pre-trial detention by providing suitable facilities and
the necessary time for the services and activities which are designed to release
defendants held while awaiting trial. The plan would also give the District
Attorney and the Legal Aid attorney (or defense counsel) an opportunity to
evaluate their respective positions before arraignment and cooperatively Join
In application for immediate disposition, or perhaps release of the accused with
or without bail.
Finally, there is no doubt that the functioning of these arraignment procedures
could conform to whatever may at any time be the law relating to confessions.
Now o" of probation and court auciliary eevke
Greater and greater responsibilities are being placed on court probation serv-
ices in assisting the courts to process cases. Not only have caseloads increased,
but such services are taking on new areas of responsibility such as the Release on
Recognizance program. To coordinate the planning and extension of these roles
and manage the constantly increasing caseloads more effectively, the probation
services for the Criminal Court, Family Court and Supreme Court should be con-
sidered an entity, rather than as competing services. The City of New York can
ill afford to pay for the time spent by a Supreme Court probation officer investi-
gating a case previously Investigated by a probation officer of the Office of Pro-
bation for the Courts of New York City or vice-versa. Nor can the City afford the
luxury of having personnel of several separate probation agencies traveling to
and from the same detention facilities.
With a single probation agency, consideration could be given to the possibility
of adopting modern computer and data processing methods to enable probation
officers not only to speed up presentence reporting, but also to make predictability
studies enabling the court to Increase the use of probation as a disposition with-
out Increasing the risk to the community. Consideration could also be given to
the assignment of selected cases to investigators whose skills, training and expe-
rience would differ from those of a probation officer. The more important investi-
588 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
gations would be reserved for the more highly skilled probation officers. If such a
position were developed, investigators might be easier to recruit than probation
officers and could be paid on a lower salary scale. Probation officers, however,
should receive higher starting salaries, suitable Increments, and promotional
opportunities to enable New York to compete with other Jurisdictions.
So far as would be consistent with good management, the integrity of each unit
would of course be preserved. The inter-agency group would be most useful in
this connection and assure the development of policies and procedures that would
meet the needs.
Recommendation.-The probation services in New York City should be con-
solidated into one agency with expanded responsibilities.
Sentenced prisoners
Judges of the Supreme Court and Judges of the Criminal Court of the City of
New York commit to the Department of Correction a large number of convicted
defendants, who could have been committed to State facilities. We believe this
practice should be discontinued and that jurisdiction over prisoners serving sen-
tences for over a year should be a responsibility of the State. We urge considera-
tion for withdrawal of the City of New York from these responsibilities so that
the State of New York can properly assume them. If relieved of all such respon-
sibilities, the City of New York could concentrate its resources on the handling of
the detained accused and the sentenced prisoners serving periods of one year or
less. For these short-term prisoners enlarged programs and pre-release services
are vitally needed. This would also make possible large savings by reducing the
maximum custody procedures and facilities now considered necessary.
Recommendation.-All prisoners sentenced for terms of more than one year
should be committed to State facilities. New York City should not avail itself of
the new Penal Law provisions (effective September 1, 1967) which permit a City
Reformatory.
The concept of work release for sentenced prisoners is believed to be deserving
of application in New York City, especially for prisoners serving short sentences.
Its proven success in California, Wisconsin, certain other states and more re-
cently In the Federal System give promise of equal benefits in this community.
Heretofore, legislative limitation has prevented its application In New York City
except in the Family Court.
Recomrmendation.-Enabling legislation for work release programs for sen-
tenced offenders in New York City should be sought at once, and when obtained,
such programs should Immediately be implemented.
Parole
On September 1, 1967, a new Penal Law for the State of New York goes Into
effect. In order that the Correction Law and the Code of Criminal Procedure
may be adapted to the new Penal Law, conforming revisions of these bodies of
law are now under study by The Temporary State Commission on Revision of The
Penal Law and Criminal Code. As yet unknown is the status and composition of
the county or regional conditional release commissions. These have been men-
tioned in the new Penal Law as the agencies that may supervise definite sen-
tence conditional release which is a feature of the new law's sentencing provi-
sions. Except for an optional alternative local reformatory sentence for young
adults local parole (or conditional release) under the new law will be under
conditions considerably at variance with those under which it now operates in
New York City. Decisions as to the future operation of local parole should be
deferred until New York City learns more precisely through the action of the
legislature what is planned in this sphere.
Overcrowding and the detained accused
The Department of Correction receives from the courts, for custody, Individ-
uals falling Into two main categories: 1) defendants awaiting criminal court
action, and 2) defendants confined by the Department to serve a court Imposed
sentence following conviction. The former are known as detained accused and
the latter as sentenced prisoners.
The Department exercises no control over the intake or the length of stay of its
Inmate& Whatever procedures and practices are In force in the Police Depart-
ment, courts, the district attorneys' offices, the probation services and the Parole
Commission affect the volume of the Inmate population of the Department of
Correction.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 589
Primarily, the inmate population and overcrowding problem divides Itself into
two facets: the volume of those coming into the institutions and the length of taY
once in the institution. The problem of overcrowding has to be examined with
respect to those two facets and with particular respect to the detained accused
at differentiated from the sentenced praer.
The detained accused population, in far greater numbers than the sentence
population, can be substantially reduced. Exhibits A and B attached indicate
the weekly census during 1965 of the detained population in the Department of
Cqrrection facilities awaiting action in the Supreme Court and Criminal Court
of New York City. Exhibit B reveals that 1100 to 15W of those accused of
crime in the Criminal Court are held awaiting preliminary examination and
other pre-trial procedures because of inability to furnish baiL In addition, ap-
proximately 500 accused are held awaiting trial in this court. In the Supreme
Court approximately 500 to 600 awat grand Jury action each day, while 700 to 900
await trial. These four categories embrace most of the detained accused in-
mates of the detention institutions. The overall average waiting period for all
detained accused in these four categories is about one month. This overall aver-
age is affected by the much longer time that is taken for the detained accused
being pressed in the Supreme Court.
EarlV release procedures
1. Release on Recognizance-This program is operated by the Office of Proba-
tion of the Courts of New York City. Under this program, Judges are provided
with a relLble indication of whether or not the accused may be released on his
own recognizance pending trial, or in cases where bail is indicated, assistance is
given to the court by providing it with a rational basis on which bail should be
fixed.
Recommemfatin.-'The use of Release on Recognizance in all of the courts
should be encouraged and increased in order to reduce the amount of unnecessary
expensive and discriminatory pre-trial detention.
2. Bail Review-A program approved and funded by the Office of Economic
Opportunity contemplates early and continuing investigation and review of all
detention cases in which bail has not been raised or in which release on recog-
nizance has not been granted. It is believed that in some instances hurried pro-
cedures and inadequate data may have prevented release of detained individuals.
These are the cam which, with added inquiry, might prove to be eligible for
parole or lower ball. This program is to be operated by the Vera Foundation in
close collaboration with the Appellate Division, First Judicial Department, and
for the experimental period will be limited to New York County.
Recommendation.-That the bail review project should be initiated as quickly
as possible.
3. Summons in Lieu of Arrest-This program has been conducted by the
Police Department in collaboration with the Vera Foundation. Initially a modest
program, it has proven its worth, has been somewhat expanded and is now
suggested as warranting employment citywide. Under this program, persons
charged with certain offenses and misdemeanors are given summonses to appear
in court on designated days instead of being detained to await court action. The
savings in correction and police time i considerable and the strains on correc-
tion capacities are eased. It is understood that the Police Department favors
enlarged application of this program.
Recommendation.-The use of mmons in lieu of arrest should be employed
citywide.
4. Centralized Twenty-Four Hour Arraignment-The proposed centralized
twenty-four hour arraignment program, covered elsewhere in this report, will
also serve to reduce unneceary detention and detention cell rquirement& Tis
facility will permit experimentation in the development of a centralized intake
screening service which could establish and test criteria by which many of the
misdemeanant cases could be diverted from the courts and referred to other and
more appropriate sources of service and assistance within the City. This Is ba"d
on the assumption that courts and correctional systems now receive, sentence
and incarcerate many physically, mentally and socially ill persons who are not
primarily criminals and who need the help of other than criminal Justice agencies.
Pot-convict ion processes
Exhibits A and B also indicate that 600 to 700 defendants are in detention
awaiting sentence after conviction in the Supreme Court and approximately 400
in the Crilr A1 Court. These categories are not as numerous nor as readily
590 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1960
The drug addicted population of both detained and sentenced prisoners of the
Department of Correction is considerable. Over 11,000 cases of the detained
accused out of a total of 121,000 for the year 1964, were known to have an involve-
ment with drugs. One tenth of the 33.000 sentenced cases that year were known
to be drug users. These figures are far from revealing the full impact of the
drug problem upon the overcrowding of City correctional institutions, since they
do not bring into account the many individuals against whom the charges are
offenses other than drug Involvement but who are nevertheless users or former
users of drug&
This segment of the prison population comprises a large part of the repeaters
who time and again go through the correctional process as a result of the
physiological and psychological necessity of supporting their habit which leads
them to further conflict with the law. Proper management of the drug user
once he has been apprehended could lead to true rehabilitation; this In turn
would greatly reduce the recidivism that accounts for much of the over-popula-
tion of correctional Institutions.
The Department of Correction is not constituted to give bona fide help to this
unfortunate group. The treatment of drug users is primarily a responsibility
of the medical and allied professions.
Recommendation--The primary recommendation, therefore, is to remove the
treatment of the drug addicted Individual from the conventional correctional
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1968 591
regime and to arrange for his entrance into a medical diagnostlc-treatment
process immediately upon his apprehension by the police. By establishing early
in the processing of the offender who is addicted to drugs a medical diagnosis
which would define the most appropriate treatment program for the individual,
a proper disposition could be made of each case to the facilities or programs
most suited to the needs of the offender. This would Involve aftercare following
treatment and would provide measures directed to social and vocational reha-
bilitation.
After arrest and before sentence, preferably at a central arraignment facility,
the establishment of which has been recommended elsewhere In this report,
there should be a medical unit to provide diagnosis of those drug users who war-
rant special treatment.
Drug users who are considered by the central arraignment diagnosed facility
a requiring medically supervised in-patient and out-patient care, and who fall
under Section 211 of Article 9 of the Mental Hygiene Law, should as soon as
possible be offered such treatment in the institutions operated by the Depart-
ment of Mental Hygiene of the State of New York. Judges at the central arraign-
ment facility should have authority to assign individuals to a local community
mental health facility of the type proposed in the New York City Regional
Mental Health Planning Committee Report of January 1965 or to such other
treatment program or facility as Is available and appropriate.
Drug addicts charged with serious felonies would under this plan stand trial
end when convicted be assigned to an appropriate medical unit for continuing
treatment and rehabilitation.
Since the facilities for treatment of drug users operated by the State Depart-
ment of Mental Hygiene are presently insufficient and the development of the
Community Mental Health Centers to be established in this City will take some
time, the Task Force recommends that special facilities should be designated
for such treatment purposes in selected areas of the City by the Commissioner
of Mental Health Services and by the Commissioner of Hospitals. These special
facilities may be in City hospitals with psychiatric units or voluntary hospitals
which enter into contractual relationship with the City to provide these services.
These facilities would provide the full complex of services appropriate to the
drug user. They should have an emergency in-patient treatment unit as well as
an out-patient department. In addition to full 24 hour In-patient service they
should be geared to offer a day and night hospitalization program backed by
social and vocational rehabilitation programs.
The director of the treatment facility should be given full responsibility
for the medical treatment of the drug user. Legal control for the continuation
In treatment of drug users, whether assigned to in-patient or out-patient status,
should be placed under a court-designated officer attached to the mental health
facility to work under psychiatric supervision.
To effect the transfer and future legal control of the addict the Task Force
is of the opinion that the Mental Hygiene Law should be amended In accordance
with the provisions of Article 5, Sections 72, 76 and 88 so that the addict may
be transferred to either the available state institutions or a local community
mental health center for treatment, his legal supervision 1to fall under the
Mental Health Information Service, expanded as necessary.
Those Individuals who are diagnosed at the central arraignment facility as
psychiatrically ill and who are arraigned for serious crimes should be placed in
a psychiatric facility available to the Department of Correction. A recom-
mendation of the New York City Community Mental Health Board that a 200
bed hospital (160 male, 40 female) be established for this purpose is heartily
endorsed. This unit would include a 20 bed unit for inmate patients undergoing
acute withdrawal symptoms, complications of alcoholism and other acute con-
ditions. The entire unit should preferably be associated with a medical center,
I Since the Task Force was organized, new State legislation hu been enacted which
substantially amends the mental hygiene laws with respect to the care, treatment, and
rehabilitation of narcotics addicts. The law provides a Commission to administer this act
and the Governor has already appointed the Chairman.
In addition, the Mayor has designated within his own office a Narcotics Coordinator for
the City of New York.
The 'Task Force urges that the State and City officials responsible for the control of
narcotics addiction work in close collaboration and include in their planning the recom-
mendations of this report, with particular emphasis on efforts to relieve the New York
City Department of Correction of the task of handling those whose primary problem Is
chronic drug addiction. If the prisoner uses drugs incidentally and is not *eligible for
Inclusion in the State program, the Department of Correction should provide facilities for
treating his drug problem an well as other means for promoting his rehabilitation.
592 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
the quality needed on all levels and'in all categories. This is a task not only for
the Department of Correction but also the Civil Service Commission.
It is not suggested that such an effort should gloss over or distort the inade-
quacies of the institution, but that it present the picture in its entirety and not
in the lurid glare of sensationalism. We believe that an informed public will
take an understanding and constructive attitude toward the House of Detention
and its problems
While awaiting the completion of the new institution, the Department of
Correction must be continuously on the alert to any and all justifiable causes
of criticism in the operation of the present House of Detention for Women. The
City Administration should meanwhile thoroughly explore all suggested avenues
toward making the period of detention an experience that is beneficial to the
inmates.
In doing this, the City authorities should recognize the paramount importance
of reducing the population of the institution. The present House of Detention
has in both its detention and sentenced populations a large number of Inmate
who could be better managed and more hopefully treated in a more appropriate
facility, either City or State. A substantial number of the detained and sentenced
women who come there are really desperately ill persons. Many are drug addicts,
feeding their sickness by their prostitution. Some are alcoholics; some are
psychotics or seriously disturbed persons. Some are eligible for civil commit-
ment to State mental hospitals--others qualify for admission to State hospitals
for mentally ill criminals and should be so treated. Adequate State and City
programs for the hospitalization and outpatient treatment of prostitutes, drug
addicts, and alcoholics should be one that will have a significant impact on the
types of women who now come to the House of Detention.
The prostitutes in particular present a tragic problem, the solution of which
should be sought by an in-depth study concerned not merely with protection of
the public but with medical and social solutions of the problem.
During the deliberations of this Task Force, the Office of Deputy Mayor-
City Administrator entered Into negotiations with New York State to provide
for space for City women prisoners at State facilities on a contract basis in
exchange for accommodations supplied by the City for State parole violators,
Accomplishment of this objective would provide a vital element of relief to the
overcrowded8 conditions that now prevail. This action has our enthusiastic
endorsmet.
Recommenations,.-
L Arrangements should be made for the designation of units of State and
City hospitals to accept by transfer women who are psychotic or seriously dis-
turbed mentally, prostitutes, alcoholics, drug addicts and others who should be
treated in a hospital facility.
2. In order to reduce overcrowding and recidivism, greater use should be made
in appropriate cases of probation as a substitute for institutional commitment,
and of a parole and pre-release program.
& Without waiting for completion of the new inmtItution for women, every
effort should be made in the present House of Detention to expand and improve
the rehabilitative programs now being carried on for sentenced women, and
to make them available to detained women to a greater extent than at present.
4. Vocational training and work with training value, now limited at the
House of Detention In variety and scope, should be improved and extended,
and more ingenuity and thought should be given to making work available
to detained women and reducing the long hours they now spend in monotonous
idlenesa
5. The Department of Health and the Community Mental Health Board should
assign at all times adequate numbers of able and experienced personnel to the
House of Detention, and a bold and innovative approach should be made to
the problems of prostitution, alcoholism and drug addiction.
6. A qualified private or public agency should be engaged to make a definitive
study of the personnel needs of the present House of Detention and a projected
study of the personnel that will be needed when the new institution is opened
for occupancy.
7. To counteract tLe present difficulty in recruiting and retaining qualified
women as correction officers and in other personnel categories, a definite effort
must be made to bring about better understanding by the public of the function
8 Before this report was completed. negotiattons carried on by Deputy Mayor (ostello
with the State Department of Correction resulted in a statement by Governor Rockefeller
giving assurance that women prison9e would be acepted by transer and that whatever
lgislatios is needed to efectuate this arrangement would be' pased without delay.
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 196 "595
The Task Force has been encouraged throughout its deliberations by your
evident determination to modernize and revitalize the correctional system of
the City. Continued research and study of the basic causes of recidivism and
the importance of developing practical projects for demonstrating the feasibility
of changing human behavior cannot be overemphasized. If we can be of service
in this connection, we will be happy to serve to the extent other commitments
permit.
The Task Force wishes to acknowledge especially the contributions of the
Honorable Bernard Botein, Presiding Justice, Appellate Division, First Judicial
Department. His concept of the twenty-four hour arraignment facility is basic
to many of the other improvements and recommendations of the Task Force.
The Task Force finally expresses its gratitude and great appreciation for the
cooperation of Dr. Timothy W. Costello, Deputy Mayor-City Administrator,
and the able and knowledgeable assistance of Mr. Milton Kelsky and Mr. Eugene
Klemens who have worked closely with the Task Force.
Respectfully submitted.
Mary Stevens Baird, Member, Executive Committee, Correctional As-
sociation of New York; Bernard Botein, Presiding Justice, Su-
preme Court Appellate Division, First Judicial Department, State
im of New York; Matilde P. deSilva, Coordinator, Social Service
Program, C of Puerto Rico; Lawrence C. Kolb,
M.D., or, New York Psychiatric Institute; Austin
Ma rmick, Executive Directo , Osborne Association, Inc.;
nnie MacDonald, M.D., Chief, Con ty Psychiatry Division.,
lem Hospital; Richard A. McGee, strator, California
Youth and Adult C ions Agency; lace Mandell, Ph.D.,
Director o esea , S Island Me Health Society.
Inc.; n R ,Direc National Cocil on Crime and
De ey; land L Toim, Director of d stration of
th Courts, t partment, State of. New York;
Jo A. Wa ,Office o*?robatlonf the Courts of
New ~ am V. Benut,~ Retired r, United
IN '30.
596 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
Exuram B
Mr. Bxmrr. That report, without dissent, upholds the idea of the
civil commitment procedure, just as the New York State statute
provides.
As I went through the Tombs and other prisons of New York City,
I questioned many of the addicts being held. On any one day there
are an average of 2,500 men in New York City jails held on narcotic
charges. Many of them freely admit they sold "H," as they call it,
in order to get funds in order to support their own habit.
Our recommendations to Mayor Lindsay were in line with the Cali-
fornia concepts and the broadly similar approaches recently enacted by
the New York State Legislature.
It seems to me it would be a serious mistake for the Federal Govern-
ment to depart from what these States are doing and the concept that
every addict requires medical and psychiatric treatment, even though
he may be charged also with selling. We must get the addict off the
street as soon as possible. If you proceed against him criminally, he
isentitled to a trial, which n almost every case mean a jury trial snce
he has nothing to gain by pleading guilty, as the judge must impose
a mandatory penalty. It now takes at least 10 months to get a jury
case to trial in the large cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles.
Meanwhile, the addict, who can make bail, as many can, is on the street,
infecting others.
And may interject, too, that it is a very difficult job to convict a
narcotic offender in the Federal courts at the present time. The tech-
nicalities with it are almost insuperable. And it is for that reason that
we are getting fewer convictions under the Federal satutes, and it is
THE NARCOTIC REH ABILITATION ACT OF 196 ,597
7
for that reason that so many of them are being diverted to the Stat.
statutes, State provisions, where there are no mandatory penalties and
where pleas can be obtained.
There are adequate safeguards in this bill, Mr. Chairman, as it went
to the House floor to prevent notorious, large sellers from taking ad-
vantage of the civil commitment procedures. The judge must find the
sale "was for the sole purpose of enabling the offender to obtain a
narcotic drug which he requires for his personal use because of his
addiction to such drug." How,I ask, can anything be more precisely
or clearly charged upon the court? The judge must find the sale was
for the sole and only purpose of obtaining drugs for the personal use
of the seller. And judges, with the help of the diagnostic procedures
set out in the bill-these people have to be committed to a diagnosis
first of all to confirm the fact that they are addicts-the arresting
officer's report is available to the judge, and most importantly, the
probation officer's pressentence reports are available to the judge, thus
the judge can make this decision easily and without fear of middng a
The individualized approach so essential to the success of this bill
cannot be achieved by rigid legislative exclusions leaving no discretion
with the sentencing judge or the medical authorities. Title I is an
experimental approach to treating addicts. It contains numerous ex-
clusions and safeguards designed to protect the public so that only
addicts who are good risks for rehabilitation and who make substan-
tial progress under treatment avoid the criminal proce.
Excluding addicts who sell drugs solely to support their addiction
thwarts die basic purpose of title I.
Another amendment made by the House rejects the extension of the
Youth Corrections Act to cover narcotics and marihuana offenders be-
tween 22 and 26 years of age. When Congress enacted legislation ex-
tending the covered of the Youth Corrections Act to include young
adult offenders w in this age group, it required the sentencing judge
to make a finding that the individual would benefit from the treatment
thereunder. It must make that finding. It must be introduced in the
record. "Itrequired that all narcotic and marihuana offenders within
this age group receive a full diagnostic examination and that the court
make its findings in wring before sentencing the individual to treat-
ment as a young adult offender.
Suspension of sentence and probation were expressly prohibited.
May I interpolate here, gentlemen, that there is nothing soft about
the Youth Corrections Act. In almost every instance it is sought to
be avoided by those who are knowledgeable young people. Under the
Youth Corrections Act you can get 20 years, whatever the statute pro-
vides. Theoretically, you can get a life term under the Youth Cor-
rections Act. There is nothing soft about it at all, which I will go
into a little bit later on. ... It
Since the enactment of the section which provides for treatment
under the Youth Act up to the age of 20 years, this section has been
used conservatively by the courts Between 232 and 285 individuals
have been sentenced as young adult offenders each year during the
years 1960 to 1964. During each of fle same yeari, between 28,000
and 29,000 persons were convicted in Federal district courts for viola-
598 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 10686
1952-Act Apr. 8, 1952, ch. 163, 1 4, 60 Stat. 46, added Items 5025 and 5026.
1950--Act Sept. 30, 1950, ch. 1115, 12, 64 Stat. 1085, added chapter.
CRoss RBrswcsM
Young adult offenders, Imposition of sentences pursuant to provisions of this
chapter, see section 4209 of this title.
§ 5005. Youth Correction Division.
There is created within the Board of Parole a Youth Correction Division.
The Attorney General shall from time to time designate members of the Board
of Parole to serve on said Division as the work requires. The Attorney General
shall from time to time designate one of the members of the Division to serve
as Chairman and delegate to him such administrative duties and responsibilities
as may be required to carry out the purposes of this chapter. (Added Sept. 80,
1950, ch. 1115, 1 2, 64 Stat. 1086.)
REM.AL
Section 3(b) of act Sept. 30, 1950, ch. 1115, 64 Stat. 1089, which provided that
the Federal Youth Corretions Act should not affect parole of regular prisoners,
was repealed by act Apr. 8,1962, ch. 163, 13(b), 66 Stat. 46.
§ 5006. Definitions.
As used in this chapter-
(a) "Board" means the Board of Parole;
(b) "Division" means the Youth Correction Division of the Board of Parole;
(c) "Bureau" means the Bureau of Prisons;
(d) "Director" means the Director of the Bureau;
(e) "Youth offender" means a person under the age of twenty-two years at
the time of conviction;
(f) "Committed youth offender" is one committed for treatment hereunder
to the custody of the Attorney General pursuant to section 5010(b) and 5010(c)
of this chapter;
(g) "Treatment" means corrective and preventive guidance and training de-
signed to protect the public by correcting the antisocial tendencies of youth
offenders;
(h) "Conviction" means the judgment on a verdict or finding of guilty, a plea
of guilty, or a plea of nolo conteudere. (Added Sept. 30, 1950, ch. 1115, 12, 64
Stat. 1086.)
15007. Duties of members; meetings.
The Division shall hold stated meetings to consider problerds of treatment and
correction, to consult with, and make recommendations to, the Director with
respect to general treatment and correction policies for committed youth offend-
ers, and to enter orders directing the release of such youth offenders condi-
tionally under supervision and the unconditional discharge of such youth
offenders, and take such further action and enter such other orders as may be
necessary or proper to carry out the purposes of this chapter. (Added Sept.
80, 1950, ch. 1115, 12, 64 Stat. 1086.)
5500. Officers and employees.
The Attorney General shall appoint such supervisory and other officers and
employees as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. United
States probation officers shall perform such duties with respect to youth offenders
on conditional release the Attorney General shall request. (Added Sept. 30,
as 108.)
Stat.
1960, clh 1115, 12, 64
600 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
66--068--66-----9
602 THB NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
1952-Subsee. (a). Act Apr. 8, 1952, provided that nothing In this chapter was
to affect chapter 1, title 24, of the District of Columbia Code.
Subsee. (c). Act Apr. 8, 1952, added subeec. (c).
§5024. Where applicable.
This chapter shall apply in the States of the United States, and to youth of-
fenders convicted In the District of Columbia of offenses under any law of the
United States not applicable exclusively to such District, and to other youth
THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 603
offenders convicted in the District to the extent authorized under section 5025.
(Addedl Sept. 30, 1950, ch. 1115, 12, 64 Stat. 1089, and amended Apr. 8, 1952, ch.
163, 12, 66 Stat. 45; June 25, 1959, Pub. L. 80-70, 117 (a) 73 Stat. 144; July 12,
1960, Pub. L. 8-624, 1 13(b), 74 Stat. 413.)
AMZNDMEZT8
1960-Pub. L. 8 -424 substituted "This chapter shall apply in the States of the
United States" for "This chapter shall apply in the continental United States
Including Alaska."
1959--'Pub. L. 80-70 substituted "including Mla-ska" for "other than Alaska."
1l),'-Act Apr. 8, 1952, made the provisions of the chapter applicable to the
District of Columbia with specifled limitations.
E~rr!TAvu DATE or lk9 AMENDMENT
Section 17(c) of Pub. L. 86-70 provided that: "Subsections (a) and (b) of this
section [amending this section and section 6 of Pub. L. 85-75.2, set out as a note
under section 4208 of this title] shall be effective on July 7, 11)61, or on the date
of the Executive order referred to in actionon 18 of the Act of July 7, 1958 (72
Stat. 339, 350) [set out as a note under section 81A of Title 28], providing for
the admission of the State of Altska into the Union, whichever occurs first."
§ 5025. Applicability to District of Columbia prisoners.
The District of Columbia is authorized either to provide its own facilities and
personnel or to contract with the Director for the treatment and rehabilitation
of committed youth offenders convicted of offenses under any law of the United
States applicable exclusively to the District. Wherever undergoing treatment
such committed youth offenders shall be subject to till the provisions of this chap.
ter as though convicted of offenses not applicable exclusively to the District.
(Added Apr. 8, 1950, ch, 163, 1 3(a), 66 Stat. 40.)
COoss Rwzmwome
Youth offenders convicted In District of Columbla, applicability of chapter to,
see section 5024 of this title.
§ 5026. Parole of other offenders not affected.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as repe.ig or modifying the duties,
power, or authority of the Board of Parole, or of the Board of Parole of the
District of Columbia, with respect to the parole of United States prisoners, or
prisoners convicted in the District of Columbia, respectively, not held to be com-
mitted youth offenders or Juvenile delinquents. (Added Apr. 8, 1952, ch. 163, 1
3(a), 66 Stat 46.)
Mr. Bwi Trrr. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee this bill
as recommended by the House committee is an enli htened piece of
legislation. At. long last it accepts the concept that drug addiction is
a sickness which must be approached constructively, patiently, and
understandingly. Admittedly, it is not a panacea for allthe evils that
flow from drug use by the poverty-stricken, disadvantaged, and emo-
tionally disturbed who, with few exceptions, constitute the drug
population.
It is, however, a long step in the right direction. It is sound in con-
cept, carefully safeguarded by the provisions respecting those who are
elgible for its benefits, and provides major hop that we are on the way
to hobbling the bigtime drug peddler by cutting off his customers.
Senator, I brought a coup e of cases with me. I did not have time
to put them in my statement, but I have a couple of cases that illus-
trate the use, for instance, of this Youth Act which I can put into the
record if you care to have me do so.
Senator DoDD. Yes; we would be glad to have it, Mr. Bennett. Of
course, as usual, you testimony is very enlightening. You heard Con-
AAA THE NARCOTIC REHABHJTATION ACT OF 1966
Mr. Pzmuw. Well the Commission had a great deal to do with the
so-called dangerous Arugs. Do you think the Commission would sup-
port the inclusion of persons who are addicted, using the term in its
broadest sense, under the provisions of the present bill, the bill under
conideration byz this committee, keeping in mind the fact, I believe,
that the Commission identified the so-called multiple drug user, that
is, the heroin addict, whose major drug addiction may have changed
to barbiturates, or what have you.
Mr. MAR&HAx. That is a very good point, Mr. Perian. I am glad
you brought that up. That was in the Commission's philosophy and
in their recommendations, feeling that inasmuch as the pattern of drug
abuse, addiction, drug dependence have so changed thar, it would be
unwise to limit any treatment programs so that the eligibility would
be set upon the basis of the use of cocaine alone or of heroin, only those
drugs that come under the Federal narcotics laws. They felt that inas-
much as thern is an equally severe, if not more significant, problem in
the dangerous drugs, the LSD, meprobromate-type tranquilizer that
they have evidence to indicate is an addicting drug, that, therefore,
any treatment programs should be broadened and liberal enough to
include any type of drug dependence.
Senator D oDD. I am glad to hear you say that. I think you are abso-
lutely right about it. I think we have had some other witness who gave
the uniform answer. I am hopeful that this will take place.
Mr. PE.RAN. One last question. There has been a great deal of testi-
mony related to the exclusionary clauses in the Administration bill.
There has been particular concern, over the property claims, such as
housebreaking and burglary, putting them into the category of crimes
of violence, but excluding the addict, and we know, on the other hand,
that a majority of addicts support their habbit through crimes of this
nature.
Did the Commission have any views in terms of eliminating ad-
dicts from treatment because of the particular type of offense they
committed?
Mr. MARxHA". No, Mr. Perian. The philosophy of the Commission
in their report was most clear on this. I wouldlike to take exception
to Congressman McClory's statement that the Commission's report
was a do-gooder's approach. That was rather strange to hear because
we heard on many occasions that the Commission took too hard a line.
One of the recommendations was for the use of wiretapping in inter-
national cases only involving the illicit traffic of drugs.
Furthermore, they clearly pointed out at the outset the felt that the
addict-offender should be held responsible, but he shouldbe given the
alternative of a treatment and rehabilitation program. And inasmuch
as everyone seems to be in agreement that the addict has to steal to
support his habit, that crimes against property should not exclude him
from being eligible for the treatment program.
Does that answer your question, Mr.Perian f
Mr. PFAN. Yes. That is all I have.
Senator DODD. Well, Mr. Markham, thank you. You have been very
helpful. I think this will conclude our hearings on this particular
legislation. We have heard a great many witnesses and have a lot
of material in the record now.
NARCOTIC REHABILATION ACT O 1966 613
As I said a few minutes ago, I am also hopeful that we will be able
toget a report out soon.
Mr. MARKH . Mr. Chairman, I would like to make one other
point.
As you know, I worked on the White House Conference and in the
Congre&san's statement earlier, he . aid he was not aware of any
opinions by Federal officials against the mandatory minimum sen-
tencing. I would like to refer to the section of the White House Con-
ference Report, to the survey that you chaired and had your committee
prepare which brought in Federal prison officials as well as U.S. attor-
neys and parole officers. If we could possibly put that into the record,
that report, because I feel that it is significant and shows that there is
not a unanimity of opinion among the Federal officials as to the
efficacy of the mandatory minimum sentence.
Senator DODD. I am glad you made that suggestion. It will be
made a part of this record.
(The section of the report referred to above was marked "Exhibit
No. 80," and is as follows:)
ExHIBIT No. 80
The White House Conference on Narcotics Is at once an indication of the
gravity of the narcotic problem in the United States and a symbol of the deter-
mination of the American people and its government to do something about it.
I feel deeply privileged to have been invited to speak before this panel, which is
concerned with the legislative aspects of the problem.
In 1956, as a result of widespread national dissatisfaction with the growth
of narcotic addiction, especially among juveniles, and because of deep frustra-
tion over the apparent failure of existing legislation to deal with the problem, a
new Narcotic Control Act was passed into law. This law contained three major
innovations that were expected to have a tremendous deterrent effect on nar-
cotic racketeers.
First, it removed from the hands of Judges all discretion in the sentencing
of convicted narcotic offenders by providing a mandatory minimum sentence of
5 years for the first offense and 10 years for subsequent offenses, with maximum
penalties of 20 years for the first offense and 40 years for subsequent offenses.
Second, It removed all possibility of parole for narcotic offenders, thus putting
them in a special category in our nation's federal prisons.
Third, it emphasized the concern of Congress over juvenile drug use by pro-
viding up to life imprisonment or even death for adults convicted of selling
narcotics to a juvenile under the age of eighteen.
To demonstrate the severity of this law, it should be pointed out that an illegal
narcotic transaction normally involves several violations of the Act, each of
which could be punishable by a mandatory five-year sentence. Thus, a first
offender could be, and frequently has been, sentenced to 20 or 30 years for a
first offense.
When Congress passed the Narcotic Control Act of 1956 it radically departed
I from the existing trend in state and federal criminal legislation, a trend toward
the individual treatment of convicted offenders with a view to their eventual
rehabilitation. Congress made this departure because it felt that the peddling
of narcotics was so vicious, dangerous and contagious a crime that unusually
severe and rigid methods were necessary and Justified in dealing with it. If
the passage of several years under this Act had been accompanied by a marked
decrease in narcotic crimes, we might say that the law could have Justified
itself. For after all, the primary purpose of law enforcement is the protection
of the public; the care and rehabilitation of criminals, however important, must
be subordinate. But has the law been effective?
We have now had several years of experience under it. Its degree of effective-
ness is a matter of dispute. The 1956 law has proved helpful In the jailing of
several large-scale narcotic racketeers. Yet the growth of drug traffic continues.
614 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
The dispute is heightened by the fact that available information on the spread
of narcotic addiction is completely contradictory. The Federal Bureau of Nar-
cotics tells us that there are 46,798 drug addicts in the entire country. But testi-
money before the Senate Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency by
responsible city and state officials indicates that there may be as many as 50,000
addicts In the City of New York alone, and from 15,000 to 20,000 addicts in the
State of California alone.
Only last week the Executive Director of the New York City Youth Board told
our Subcommittee that 25% of the children studied by the Youth Board are
involved in the use of drugs ranging all the way from heroin to marijuana, pep
pills, goof balls and other varieties. He told of entire neighborhoods where chil-
dren were exposed to narcotic pushing "as part of their daily life." In his
opinion and in the opinion of countless people with whom I have talked, who deal
with this problem on a day-to-day basis, there are more narcotics illegally avail-
able today that ever before.
Therefore, I think it is clear that the severe mandatory sentencing provisions
of existing law have not had the deterrent effect that was hoped for.
There is an overwhelming preponderance of opinion on the part of those who
deal most closely with this Act that these provisions have had a very damaging
effect and should be altered.
The Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency, in a joint project with
the Subcommittee on National Penitentiaries, sent a questionnaire to federal
district judges, federal chief probation officers, federal prison authorities and
United States attorneys inquiring into the effects of the mandatory minimum
sentence provisions, and the elimination of probation and parole in the handling
of narcotic offenders. The answers to this questionnaire, digested and broken
down, are as follows:
Of federal prison wardens, 92% were opposed to the mandatory minimum
sentence provisions; 97% were opposed to the prohibition of probation or
parole;
Of the federal district judges responding to the questionnaire, 73% opposed
the mandatory minimum sentence provisions and 86% opposed the prohibi-
tion of probation or parole;
Of the probation officers who responded, 83% opposed the mandatory mini.
mum sentence provisions and 86% opposed the prohibition of probation or
parole;
Of the United States attorneys who responded, a group which under-
standably is predisposed toward more rigid punitive statutes, 50% opposed
the mandatory minimum sentence provisions and 55% opposed the prohibi-
tion of probation or parole.
The over-all figures for our survey showed that approximately 75% of all
those who responded, people who live with this law from day to day, oppose the
two basic provisions of the Act and seek their modification.
Why? I will give you representative answers.
From James V. Bennett, Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons:
"Prisons, both state and federal, in the years immediately ahead will be faced
inevitably with the problems of narcotic offenders, addict and non-addict alike,
who are weighted down by the hopelessness and the bitter futility of sentences
which seemingly stretch into infinity. What can the Institution offer the man
serving 30, 50, or 80 years with no prospect for parole or hope of mitigation of
his sentence? There is a real danger that, in the effort to contain the problems
which stem from the hopelessness characterizing the attitudes of such men, much
of what has been achieved in the development of constructive programs for all
types of prisoners may be wiped out."
From the United States District Judge, James M. Carter:
"Several years ago at a Ninth Circuit conference there was a unani,,ois vote
against mandatory sentences. The mandatory sentence can work extreme In-
Justice. I was compelled to impose a five-year sentence on a Marine Neteran of
the Korean campaign who was found with three of four marijuana cigarettes.
He had been drinking in TIjuana and was arrested at the border. Obviously,
three or four cigarettes did not make him a peddler and these were not commer-
cial amounts. He had a spotless civilian record and an excellent military career.
He had received a Purple Heart and had been wounded in action and had a wife
THE NALSCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966 615
and children. I held up sentencing 60 days with the defendant's consent, to
attempt to get the United States Attorney to file a tax consent on a smuggling
charge which would not have carried at least five years' sentence. I was
unsuccessful. I sentenced the man to five years in the pententiary without
parole."
From Oliver Gaseb, then United States Attorney for the District of Columbia:
"I am opposed to the philosophy of mandatory minima. Even in narcotic
cases some discretion should be allocated to the Judge. The answer to the elimi-
nation of drug traffic is an ideal difficult of realization. I would recommend long
conditionalsentences with close supervision by parole authorities."
From Eugene F. Dupuy, Chief United States Probation Officer, New Orleans,
Louisiana:
"Existing laws emphasize the punitive aspects in dealing with the illegal drug
traffic. Presumably, the reason for this approach is that strict penalties are
expected to serve as a deterrent and to eliminate or greatly reduce the problem.
Were this premise valid, mandatory minimum sentences for all crimes would be
the solution. I believe that all persons who have worked with offenders know
that such an approach is doomed to failure, for it overlooks the causative factors
of crime. Historically, we know that severe penalties for relatively minor
offenses, such as theft of a loaf of bread, did not deter the hungry from stealing
bread. Similarly, the person with mental or emotional problems who needs
support, will seek that support, irrespective of social or legal consequences."
I believe that the experience of the Narcotic Control Act of 1956 demonstrates
again the fact that mandatory, inflexible, general punishment statutes can never
be a just or even an effective substitute for the individual discretion, within
prescribed limits, of judges, prison officials, probation officers and district attor-
neys who, acting upon personal study of individual cases, can arrive at Justice
far more readily than can a blind and impersonal article of law.
The principal defect in the present law is that it makes no distinction between
major narcotic pushers and narcotic addicts themselves who, in order to pay
for their own drugs, become small-time drug peddlers. Under the present law,
drug addicts are being imprisoned for terms of twenty, forty and sixty years,
and some are being given life imprisonment. This mandatory sentencing, with
no hope for parole, thwarts all efforts to deal sensibly and rationally with
addicts and completely sweeps under the rug the tragic problem which they
represent.
The problem of drug addiction is essentially a medical problem, a psychiatric
problem. It cannot be solved by merciless prison sentences. I believe that the
law should be amended to repeal mandatory minimum penalties and to restore
the possibility of probation and parole for rehabilitated narcotic offenders.
I do not here suggest that the professional criminals at the vortex of narcotic
racketeering be given lenient treatment. Their conscious dedication to profiting
from the calculated destruction of human beings demonstrates that they are
the least likely of all rehabilitative prospects, and must of their very nature be
confronted with the full force of the law. But I do propose that we should
reform the excessively punitive and inhumane treatment now meted out to those
who are essentially the victims of the narcotic racket.
To be sure, the drug addict, while locked up in prison, only to be released at
an old age or by death, does not pose a threat to society as a narcotic peddler.
But this solution is so demonstrably ineffective as a deterrent to narcotic
crimes, wreaks such havoc within the penal system, does such damage to the
individual involved, works such violence to the principles of justice and equity
which should characterize our legal code, constitutes such an affront to reason,
upon which all successful law must be based, involves such an abandonment of
the principle of compassion which must be at the heart of all successful social
advance, presents such a stark contrast with the enlightened trend toward the
rehabilitation of prisoners--that all reasonable observers will eventually agree
that the tragic and manysided toll of blind and rigid Imprisonment procedures
Is too great to pay for the fancied and illusory gain.
I believe that the Congress should rewrite the law and give the courts the
right to distinguish between professional narcotic criminals and narcotic addicts
who are drug peddlers only because of the overwhelming need to finance their
own addiction.
616 THE NARCOTIC REHABILITATION ACT OF 1966
This is today an unpopular cause and those who advance will be subject
to ridicule and abuse by unthinking people. Yet I am certain that the Ameri-
can people, in their honest wisdom, in their mercy, and in their plain good
sense, will support this cause when once they understand it.
This Conference marks a great step toward that goal and I am very proud
and honored to have an opportunity to take part in it and to bring these views
to you.
Mr. MARIw~x. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator DoDD. Thank you very much.
This will adjourn the hearing.
(Whereupon, at 11:55 am., the above subcommittee adjourned.)
0