Jon Stewart has been voted the most influential man of 2010 by the online magazine AskMen.com.
More than half a million readers took part in the poll, which had its results announced Tuesday.
Stewart, born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz, is the host of the satirical news program “The Daily Show.” He beat out Microsoft founder Bill Gates and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, who finished second and third. President Obama came in 21st.
“Stewart’s show was once dubbed the ‘fake news,’ but these days it’s become our youths’ most trusted source of information and its host the most trusted man in America,” the magazine said in introducing its winner.
“While the U.S. wages war in the Middle East, Jon Stewart has been fighting his own brand of war in the vicious battleground of cable television, leading the charge of personalities and ideals against the behemoth, ultra-right American news media. Stewart may host his ever-popular ‘The Daily Show’ from behind a desk, but make no mistake: He’s on the front lines, and it’s getting ugly.”
Stewart made the news recently after CNN anchorman Rick Sanchez called him a bigot and suggested that Jews control the media. Sanchez was fired.
Stewart is scheduled to hold “The Rally to Restore Sanity” this weekend in Washington, D.C. A crowd of at least 100,000 is expected.
Chivas USA faced off against hometown rival the LA Galaxy during Golazo Israel, a night to honor the Jewish state at Home Depot Center, sponsored by the Consulate General of Israel in Los Angeles and Chivas USA. Before the start of the Oct. 3 soccer game, Consul General Jacob Dayan presented team captains Jonathan Bornstein (Chivas USA) and Landon Donovan (LA Galaxy) with the Israeli emblem, a sign of goodwill and friendship. The Galaxy beat Chivas 2-1.
Sunflower Dancers, an Israeli dance ensemble, performs to the sound of “Havah Nagilah” during the halftime show.
Consul General Jacob Dayan greets Chivas USA captain Jonathan Bornstein and LA Galaxy captain Landon Donovan. Photos by Peter Halmagy.
Dayan meets LA Galaxy midfielder David Beckham.
Croatian President Ivo Josipovic delivered the keynote address at the Sept. 26 opening of “Croatian Righteous Among the Nations,” an exhibition at Hillel at UCLA that tells the story of brave Croatian citizens who, living under the Nazi puppet Ustasha regime, resisted fascist oppression and risked their lives to save Jews from persecution and murder. The exhibition, which runs through Dec. 10, is co-sponsored by the American Jewish Committee and the Croatian government.
From left: Ilija Zelalic, consul general of Croatia in Los Angeles; professor David N. Myers, UCLA history department chair and UCLA Center for Jewish Studies co-director; Seth Brysk, American Jewish Committee regional director; Croatian President Ivo Josipovic; Gene Block, UCLA chancellor; and Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, Hillel at UCLA executive director. Photo by Morris Kagan
Michael Forman, an American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science board member, hosted a Sept. 15 dinner at The Regency Club for David Baltimore, director of The Baltimore Laboratory at Caltech and a member of the Weizmann Institute’s Board of Governors. Baltimore, a Nobel laureate, discussed the future impact of biomedical research in the 21st century.
From left: David Soleymani, Don Schwarz, Dennis Weiss, John Schwartz, Vera Schwartz, Barry Rosenbloom, David Baltimore, Tom Ryloff, Ilene Nathan and Jeff Nathan. Photo by Bill Aron
Please send high-resolution photos and a press release with caption information to {encode=”circuit@jewishjournal.com” title=”circuit@jewishjournal.com”}.
In David Mamet’s article “How Not to Be a Stranger in a Strange Land” (Oct. 8), he wrote: “My favorite poet was a Jewish man from Krakow, Rudolph Klepsteen. He wrote under the name of Rudyard Kipling.”
I am curious as to where he got this information. According to Wikipedia, Rudyard Kipling was born in Bombay. Having grown up in India under British rule, I was always under the impression that he was British.
Dawn Swift via e-mail
Editor’s note: Mamet was being facetious.
Loyalty Oath Controversy
Israel’s proposed Loyalty Oath is wrong and dangerous for all the same reasons that loyalty oaths in the United States during the McCarthy era were wrong and dangerous (“A Debate on Israel’s Loyalty Oath,” Oct. 22).
In 1952, concurring in the unanimous Supreme Court opinion in Wieman v. Updegraff, striking down a loyalty oath, Justice Hugo Black wrote that “[h]istory indicates that individual liberty is intermittently subjected to extraordinary perils. Even countries dedicated to government by the people are not free from such cyclical dangers. The first years of our Republic marked such a period. Enforcement of the Alien and Sedition Laws by zealous patriots who feared ideas made it highly dangerous for people to think, speak, or write critically about government, its agents, or its policies, either foreign or domestic. Our constitutional liberties survived the ordeal of this regrettable period because there were influential men and powerful organized groups bold enough to champion the undiluted right of individuals to publish and argue for their beliefs however unorthodox or loathsome.”
Justice Black condemned the Oklahoma loyalty oath as “but one manifestation of a national network of laws aimed at coercing and controlling the minds of men.” Loyalty oaths “are notorious tools of tyranny. When used to shackle the mind, they are, or at least they should be, unspeakably odious to a free people.
“Our own free society should never forget that laws which stigmatize and penalize thought and speech of the unorthodox have a way of reaching, ensnaring and silencing many more people than at first intended. We must have freedom of speech for all or we will, in the long run, have it for none but the cringing and the craven.”
If the Israeli government truly aspires to democracy, not tyranny, it will reject the Loyalty Oath as “unspeakably odious to a free people.”
Stephen Rohde Los Angeles
David Suissa defends the proposed loyalty oath by arguing that Israeli Arabs shouldn’t complain because their lives would be so much worse in other Middle Eastern countries (“Why the Loyalty Oath Is a Good Deal,” Oct. 22). However, he does not present any arguments as to why the oath is a good idea. In my view, such a requirement can only serve to exclude and marginalize one group of citizens. It would be as if the United States demanded that Native Americans and Mexican Americans, who, like the Arabs, were militarily defeated and had their territories annexed, be forced now to recite some special formula of allegiance not required of others. Ethnic minorities have repeatedly sacrificed for America by fighting our enemies, just as Israeli Arabs serve in the IDF; that is their loyalty oath. No democratic nation can legitimately command the support of its citizens without guaranteeing them equal treatment in return.
Peter L. Reich Professor of Law, Whittier Law School Costa Mesa
Leaning to the Left
After reading the Oct. 15 edition of The Jewish Journal, I’m left with no doubts. The Journal has now become an official organ of the left wing of the Democratic Party and rarely a magazine about Jewish affairs. From the ridiculous cover, including a quote from Marty Kaplan, who is as far left as left can go, to Ron Kampeas’ piece warning Jewish officials about a possible scary GOP victory, thereby scaring Jews into voting Democrat, to Raphael Sonenshein’s piece vilifying and demonizing Republicans, it knows no bounds in its Democrat agenda.
Has The Journal not figured out that more Jewish voters are turning away from the Democrats because they see what they are doing to the country? Two years of Democrat rule and the country is passing along billions in debt to our children, allowing voter intimidation, destroying our health care system, and cutting Medicare benefits by $500 billion. This administration is undermining the State of Israel, lukewarm against terrorism, not protecting our borders and interior against illegal immigration, and assaulting an American state, Arizona, that is trying to do the job that the federal government has failed to do. Let’s concentrate on “never again” instead of Democrat propaganda.
Suzanne Patrusky via e-mail
JewishJournal.com welcomes letters from all readers. Letters should be no more than 200 words and must include a valid name, address and phone number. Letters sent via e-mail must not contain attachments. We reserve the right to edit all letters. Mail: The Jewish Journal, Letters, 3580 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1510, Los Angeles, CA 90010; e-mail: {encode=”letters@jewishjournal.com” title=”letters@jewishjournal.com”}; or fax: (213) 368-1684.
(BOOKS) The World Champion of the World, actor-comedian Judah Friedlander, signs copies of his instructional and inspirational karate book, “How to Beat Up Anybody.” Sporting a signature trucker hat, oversize glasses, unkempt hair and sideburns, Friedlander is best known as writer Frank Rossitano on “30 Rock.” Thu. 7:30 p.m. Free. Barnes & Noble, 189 The Grove Drive, Los Angeles. (323) 525-0270. judahfriedlander.com.
(DISCUSSION) Israeli Consul General Jacob Dayan, alternative energy proponent Daryl Temkin and pro-Israel advocate Roberta Seid discuss “Confronting Israel Delegitimization,” from the Gaza Flotilla incident to last month’s Time magazine cover story. The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America sponsors the event. Thu. 7:30-10 p.m. $15 (advance), $20 (door). Luxe Sunset Boulevard Hotel, 11461 Sunset Blvd., Los Angeles. (310) 855-9606. camera.org.
(DISCUSSION) Howard Roseman (“Father of the Bride”), Laura Bickford (“Che,” “Traffic”), Suzanne De Passe (Steven Spielberg’s upcoming Martin Luther King Jr. project) and Lawrence Gordon (“Watchmen,” “Boogie Nights”) swap stories and examine the past, present and future of the business during “Producers on Producing.” Thu. 7-9:30 p.m. $25. American Jewish University-Gindi Auditorium, 15600 Mulholland Drive, Los Angeles. (310) 440-1548. ajula.edu.
SAT | OCT 30
(BOOKS) The San Gabriel and Pomona valleys’ 12th annual Jewish Book Festival opens tonight with Sheryll Bellman discussing her travelogue and recipe book, “America’s Great Delis: Recipes & Traditions From Coast to Coast,” at Temple Beth Israel. Other scheduled appearances include Annie Korzen (“Bargain Junkie: Living the Good Life on the Cheap”), Nov. 3, Temple Beth Israel; Rabbi Naomi Levy (“Hope Will Find You”), Nov. 4, Temple Ami Shalom; Robert K. Tanenbaum (“Betrayed”), Nov. 7, Beth Shalom of Whittier; and Jake Ehrenreich (“A Jew Grows in Brooklyn”), Nov. 20, Pasadena Jewish Temple & Center. Sheryll Bellman: Sat. 7:30 p.m. $18 (advance), $20 (door). Temple Beth Israel, 3033 N. Towne Ave., Pomona. Through Nov. 30. Various times, locations and prices for other appearances. (626) 445-0810. jewishsgpv.org.
SUN | OCT 31
(MUSIC) Shir Ba’Ir (Song in the City), an a cappella group that includes precantorial students and composers, sings traditional and original Jewish-themed music. Sun. 2 p.m. $12. Coffee Gallery Backstage, 2029 N. Lake Ave., Altadena. (626) 794-2424. coffeegallery.com.
(MITZVAH) L.A. Cancer Challenge 2010, a 5/10k run/walk, benefits the Hirshberg Foundation for Pancreatic Cancer Research. Halloween fun for racers and supporters includes a pumpkin pancake breakfast, costume contest and kids fair. Sun. 7:30 a.m. (10k), 9 a.m. (5k). $15-$75. Veterans Administration Grounds, Eisenhower Gate (off San Vicente Boulevard), 11310 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles. (310) 473-5121. lacancerchallenge.com.
MON | NOV 1
(EDUCATION) Explore what Judaism says about a proper diet and table manners, the zodiac and maximizing your love potential at Jewlosophy , where other workshops will include heroines in the Torah, an Israel history crash course and an in-depth look at kosher fundamentals. Mon. 7 p.m. Free (registration required). Nessah Synagogue, 142 S. Rexford Drive, Los Angeles. (310) 273-2400. jewlosophy.com.
TUE | NOV 2
(BOOKS) Novelist Nicole Krauss (“Great House”) appears in conversation with Michael Silverblatt, host of KCRW’s “Bookworm.” Tue. 7 p.m. Free. Central Library, Mark Taper Auditorium, 630 W. Fifth St., downtown. (213) 228-7500. lfla.org.
WED | NOV 3
(DISCUSSION) Four leaders share how their groups have organized community and promoted visibility and understanding for LGBTQ Orthodox Jews in Israel. During A Wider Bridge’s Israeli, Orthodox and Gay, Asaf Lebovitz (Havruta), Bracha Koren-Haftke (Bat Kol), Eyal Liebermann (Shoval) and Zehorit Sorek (The Pride Minyan) discuss the successes and the challenges of forging new ground in Israeli society. Wed. 7 p.m. Free. Temple Beth Am, 1039 S. La Cienega Blvd., Los Angeles. awiderbridge.org.
THU | NOV 4
(FILM) AFI Fest 2010 screens nearly 100 features and shorts, including “Casino Jack,” featuring Kevin Spacey in the role of jailed Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff; “Black Swan,” director Darren Aronofsky’s psychological thriller starring Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis; Israeli director Eran Riklis’ “The Human Resources Manager”; and “Precious Life,” a documentary about a Palestinian boy who needs a bone marrow transplant and the Israeli and Palestinian doctors who treat him. Thu. Through Nov. 11. Free. Various times and locations. (866) 234-3378. afi.com.
(MUSIC) Grammy-nominated Jewish rapper Drake brings his top-selling Light Dreams and Nightmares Tour to the Southland. His first studio album, “Thank Me Later,” debuted No. 1 on the Billboard 200 in June and was certified platinum one month later. Thu. 8:15 p.m. $57.35-$83.20. Gibson Amphitheatre at Universal CityWalk, 100 Universal City Plaza, Universal City. livenation.com.
FRI | NOV 5
(SHABBAT) Temple Emanuel of Beverly Hills hosts Synaplex, featuring Columbia University journalism professor Todd Gitlin discussing his book “The Chosen Peoples: America, Israel and the Ordeals of Divine Election”; a musical Shabbat Unplugged service; Shabbat Uncorked, an opportunity for young professionals to mingle; a family dinner; youth mitzvah projects; Tot Shabbat; and babysitting. Fri. 6-9:30 p.m. Free. Temple Emanuel of Beverly Hills, 8844 Burton Way, Beverly Hills. (310) 288-3737, ext. 235. tebh.org.
Marijuana is everywhere. Smokers come from every walk of life — from the college student to the cancer patient, from the wealthy older couple to the heroin addict who started out just smoking weed.
Jews care about this issue because Jews, like every other group, can be found among those who use, who dispense, who grow, and also those who disdain this all-pervasive drug. In fact, the halachah of pot is not entirely clear.
The Talmud states that the law of the land is the law. But when it comes to pot, what does that mean? State and federal rules on marijuana are rapidly changing. California has legalized medical use and decriminalized recreational possession of small amounts, but many smokers still rely on the black market. And marijuana remains completely illegal under federal law, although enforcement is inconsistent. Now, Californians face Proposition 19 on the Nov. 2 ballot, a measure that would allow possession, purchase and taxation of marijuana for adult recreational use.
The Jewish perspective on pot is ambivalent, and observant Jews could plausibly take either side of Proposition 19, according to Rabbi Elliot Dorff, a professor of ethics and Jewish law and rector at the American Jewish University. On one hand, Judaism “is very insistent on responsibility for our actions,” Dorff said, meaning that becoming extremely intoxicated on any substance is forbidden. Any drug that harms the body is also forbidden because “in the Jewish tradition, God owns our bodies, and we have a fiduciary relationship to take care of [ourselves],” Dorff said.
On the other hand, marijuana may be more akin to alcohol — a drug that observant Jews may take in moderation — rather than tobacco, which the Jewish tradition frowns upon as dangerous and highly addictive, Dorff said. Where marijuana falls on that sliding scale is an “empirical question,” he added, and the answer may affect how Jews vote on Proposition 19. Schools, synagogues, drug control experts and law enforcement all have a role to play in providing that answer and determining the boundary between the law and making a responsible individual choice. Cities Rule
The most distinguishing feature of Proposition 19 is how much authority it delegates to cities. Possession of up to 1 ounce would be legal statewide, but California already has made possession of that amount an infraction on par with a speeding ticket. The real meat of Proposition 19 is that cities would become free to make their own rules on regulating and taxing the commercial sale of marijuana to adults over the age of 21.
“I think they’re trying to make sure cities can opt out, like with liquor stores [or] medical marijuana dispensaries,” said Kyle Kazan, a former Torrance police officer and member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), which supports the measure. “You can zone it away.”
Story continues after the jump.
Opponents, however, see the delegation of authority to cities as a “legal nightmare,” which has become one of the catch phrases of the No on 19 campaign. “You’re going to have 550 different versions of this law, city by city,” said Rodney Jones, chief of the Fontana Police Department and a Proposition 19 opponent. County sheriffs will have a particular problem, Jones said, because they cross city lines and will be responsible for enforcing small differences in rules on marijuana.
But Kazan said police already handle similar complexity in enforcing various city ordinances on the sale of liquor. And if the initiative had set a single rule for marijuana sales statewide, supporters worry that “the other side would say, ‘How dare they have a one-size-fits-all solution?’ ” said Hanna Liebman Dershowitz, an attorney and member of the legal committee of Yes on 19.
The Case for Talking to Kids
Even if only a few cities authorize sales, both sides agree that Proposition 19 almost certainly would increase overall use of marijuana in California. It would be more widely available in stores than it is on the black market now, and it would not be stigmatized as illegal. And unless governments levy huge taxes, it would also likely be much cheaper. The real debate is whether the inevitable increase in use will be more harmful than the status quo.
Drug war veterans have long argued that marijuana physically damages the brain and other organs, but the data on that are inconclusive. “ ‘Reefer Madness’ isn’t true,” said Keith Humphreys, a professor of psychiatry at Stanford University School of Medicine and former senior policy adviser at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy under President Obama. “The [idea that] everyone who picks up a joint has their life ruined is absurd,” he said.
But that doesn’t mean marijuana is harmless, Humphreys said. “I don’t deny that some people use marijuana and they’re fine, but if a million people pick up regular marijuana use, probably at least 10 to 20 percent will have significantly adverse experiences in life, maybe do badly in school, maybe get in a car accident.” Legal marijuana would be particularly harmful to high school students who are already on the verge of flunking out, he said.
Nobody knows exactly how much usage will increase, but Humphreys predicts the state could add anywhere from 1 million to 3 million new smokers. Vulnerable groups, such as teens and the poor, are particularly likely to smoke more, he said, because they have less disposable income and will be more attracted by the lower price.
Jason Ablin, head of school at Milken Community High School, has worked with high-school students for 20 years, but he’s not convinced that the status quo of criminalization is an effective deterrent, either.
“I think if kids are going to use drugs and alcohol, they’re going to find ways to acquire them — they do it with alcohol already,” Ablin said. “We have a lot of double standards with marijuana use. The association with marijuana is counter-culture, so that becomes a lot more damning than, say, alcohol,” he said.
For Dershowitz, that association is patently unfair. “As we look inward [following] Yom Kippur and the New Year, we also need to look outward to reflect on our actions as a society,” she said. Dershowitz is particularly troubled by the social and legal stigmas that follow a young person who is busted by law enforcement for marijuana, even now that the penalties have been reduced. “We should abhor a system that erases other people’s chances to turn toward the good simply because they’ve chosen an action that we singled out for disdain.”
Instead of focusing on heavy-handed scare tactics and criminalization, Ablin prefers to engage kids in a broader public policy discussion about the way society treats drugs in general. “Because I work in schools, I have a lot more confidence in kids to critically think through problems,” Ablin said. “You’re not getting anywhere with kids by talking at them. [You’ll do] much better work by listening to them.”
In a way, medical marijuana dispensary owner Matthew Cohen is just another small businessman.
For the past five years, he has been working diligently to grow his shop, The Natural Way of L.A., located on Pico just east of Fairfax. Cohen claims to carry the best-quality product in the world, which he says is very important to his clients, many of whom are fellow Jews with discerning taste.
“Jews know good pot,” Cohen said.
Cohen’s shop is one of nine dispensaries active within a mile and a half of the intersection of Pico and Robertson as of press time this week. Like all dispensaries, Natural Way is a nonprofit, and in that highly competitive market, it hasn’t made money yet. Cohen, 43, says that he will “lose less than ever” in 2010, partly thanks to a new ordinance that put some of his competitors out of business.
Cohen relies on quality to distinguish his shop, but he has tried to cater to his fellow Jews, too. He used to carry kosher marijuana-impregnated “edibles,” and although he says he has “many obviously Jewish patients,” he hasn’t carried that product line in awhile. “It did nothing for us,” Cohen said — although the kosher-for-Passover chocolate-covered matzah made with weed was a hit (no pun intended), as were the marijuana macaroons. “They were labeled pareve,” Cohen said. “I’m not sure which rabbi was in charge of that.”
But he insists quality product is of the foremost importance. “The Dutch have been playing catch-up for the past five or six years,” Cohen says with considerable salesmanship bravado, and thanks to his years of growing experience, Cohen’s pot sells out before the next batch is ready to harvest. He believes that he has helped make Los Angeles into the new Amsterdam: “For 10 days every month, we have the finest pot in L.A.,” Cohen said of the product he grows, “which means we have the finest pot in California, the finest pot in the United States, and I can promise you, the finest pot in the world.”
Cohen is a fast-talker, an engaging storyteller and a user of his own medicine — taking marijuana to treat the chronic pain he has suffered from since 2001. Before opening Natural Way of L.A. in 2005, he held a few different jobs, including running a network of veterinary hospitals, working as a radio sportscaster and as Major League Soccer’s first vice president of sales. He later headed the sales staff for the LA Galaxy soccer team.
Wearing mesh shorts and black high-top Nikes when this reporter came to meet with him, Cohen clearly has left the executive suite behind, although his sales patter is still polished and convincing, especially when he talks about the people who grow his pot. Cohen estimates that he’s set up grow rooms for 120 to 130 people in the past two years.
Marijuana buds ready to be sold. Photo by Dan Kacvinski.
“You can get your first harvest from that room in 90 days,” Cohen said. “We set you up with the Cadillac of systems — lights, an airflow system, the works — and it will grow diamond-quality pot.” Cohen charges $5,500 to set up a 144-square-foot grow room, which can produce three or four harvests of 4 pounds each. Cohen buys back quality bud for $3,000 a pound. Even though grossing $36,000 a year out of a spare bedroom sounds great, Cohen takes care to explain that growing pot is hard — but rewarding — work. “You’re gonna feel really good,” Cohen said, “like a real farmer — even though you’re sitting in Century City.”
Cohen estimates that 45 percent of what he sells is grown locally, either in people’s homes or on site at the dispensary, and he’d like to raise that figure to 80 to 90 percent, especially in light of the Los Angeles City Council ordinance that went into effect June 7. That ordinance, which forced three-quarters of the city’s marijuana dispensaries to close, also outlined regulations for the remaining dispensaries, including a requirement that they grow their product on site. “Every real dispensary should be adding lights as fast as they can,” Cohen said, referring to the high-powered lights used in indoor grow rooms, “because the ordinance makes clear for the very first time that we have to grow 100 percent of our medicine.”
What Cohen calls a “real dispensary” — one that grows its own marijuana — has been the exception rather than the rule. He estimates there are between 50 and 80 “real quality dispensaries” in the city growing their own pot. The rest — at one point, there were as many as 600 across the city, by some estimates — don’t grow any of their own stuff. “None of the Russian-owned dispensaries, the Armenian-owned, the Israeli-owned — they don’t grow any of their own pot,” Cohen said. “They’re buying their pot from vendors.”
The ordinance dictated that every dispensary that opened in Los Angeles after November 2007 — some 437 shops — had to close, and by now many already have shut their doors. At one point, 15 dispensaries were located in the Pico-Robertson area. Six appear to have closed, most of them in the past four months, since the ordinance went into effect. Of the nine that remain, only Natural Way of L.A. has been declared eligible to stay open. Many dispensaries are contesting the ordinance in court.
Cohen chalks up his continued legal status to having good lawyers who could comply with the “dirty little tricks in the ordinance,” and to the fact that Natural Way is, with 3,000 active patients, smaller than many other shops. Cohen stayed small because he has never sold to what he calls “the fastest-growing group of patients,” namely, 18- to 21-year-olds.
One reason Cohen doesn’t sell to patients under 21? “I’m a dad,” he said. (His daughter is 8.)
The City Council ordinance is, in practical terms, far more important for the future of marijuana in Los Angeles than the much more widely discussed Proposition 19, the ballot measure that would legalize marijuana for recreational use. Nevertheless, Cohen, who’s a bit of a pot policy wonk, has a lot to say about the proposition.
“I am going to be happy and disappointed whichever way it goes,” Cohen said. “And what I mean is, if it’s voted in — and right now it’s polling ahead, I’m very surprised — if it passes, there is the huge, huge bounce that the entire marijuana issue gets. Legalization, medicalization, everything about marijuana would get shoved right to the forefront, nationwide.”
Cohen plans to vote against the measure because he believes access to medical marijuana will be restricted rather than improved as a result of Proposition 19. “The right thing for marijuana users, both medical and nonmedical,” Cohen said, “is for this to not pass.”
But, Cohen added, “The right thing to push forward marijuana legal reform is for this to pass, because it’s going to push forward the cause across the country.”
Allison Margolin, 33, is speaking rapidly and interchangeably into two phones. Scribbling notes with her right hand and gesturing with her left, she punctuates points by emphatically tapping her 3-inch-stiletto-heeled boot on the floor.
It’s 10 a.m., and Margolin, dressedin skintight leopard-print pants, a striped T-shirt and oversize glasses, is working from home. The nanny for her 2-year-old daughter is off this week, which means the single mom is on child-care duty.
Two assistants help manage her calls. And as Los Angeles’ self-proclaimed “Dopest Attorney” — arguably one of the most recognizable local faces for criminal defense in marijuana cases — her phone lines are hardly ever quiet.
The Cultivation of a Dope Attorney
Born and raised in Southern California, Margolin comes by her specialization honestly; her father is attorney Bruce Margolin, who has been defending marijuana cases for more than 40 years. The elder Margolin also serves as the director of the Los Angeles chapter of theNational Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), and his client list has included such famous drug-dabblers as Timothy Leary.
Growing up in Beverly Hills, Allison Margolin attended Temple Emanuel Academy Day School and Beverly Hills High School before heading East for Columbia University and then Harvard Law School. As an undergraduate, she edited the school newspaper and committed herself to studying. “Since I was 8 years old,” she said, “I’ve been very disciplined.”
After graduating law school and moving back to Los Angeles, Margolin worked with her father briefly before being given a case by a friend of her mother’s — also a criminal defense attorney — and in 2004, she opened a private practice operating out of the Flynt Building.
That same year, Margolin began to market herself. She took out ads in local alternative papers, describing herself as “L.A.’s Dopest Attorney,” some of which featured her wearing dark sunglasses or fishnet stockings.
The ads didn’t necessarily help her drum up business, she said, but they did make her a quasi-celebrity: “They kind of got me well-known … and led to other press.”
Margolin remained in her Wilshire Boulevard office for six years, growing her client list and her reputation. This month, she packed it up and moved a few blocks north, to partner with her father.
Inside the Margolin Operation
The office that Allison and Bruce Margolin share with three other attorneys is in a small building, just south of the Sunset Strip. In the waiting room, a large coffee table is stacked with magazines — including High Times and SPIN, as well as “The Margolin Guide” to state and federal marijuana laws, an instructional booklet written by Bruce Margolin.
Zach Lodmer, 30, walks into the waiting room with a big grin. As one of the firm’s newer associates, he’s adjusting to the transition of working as a criminal defense attorney after having been a prosecutor for two years — a switch that he calls part of “an epiphany.”
Working with the Margolins is, Lodmer said, “a trip.” But Allison’s frenetic personal style belies what he calls an “absolutely amazing” courtroom technique.
“I’ve seen nearly 120 closing arguments [in my career],” he said. “She was the best I’ve ever seen in my entire life.”
Of about 12 cases that Margolin has argued in court, only two have resulted in sentences that were worse than what the district attorney originally offered. One was a client charged with identity theft, and the other was a DUI case, in which her client received community service in addition to standard DUI fines and penalties.
Margolin estimates that 60 to 70 percent of her cases are marijuana-related, and this fall, her area of expertise has become particularly topical. As an outspoken advocate of Proposition 19, which would legalize growth and possession of small amounts of marijuana, Margolin — who rattles off historical facts about prohibition and drug law as effortlessly as if she were reading the ingredients on a cereal box — has participated in several debates about the subject and has more scheduled leading up to the Nov. 2 vote.
She has yet to be impressed with the opposition’s arguments.
“This [one] guy said one of the health risks of marijuana is obesity,” she said incredulously, leaning forward and peering over the rim of her glasses, “because people get the munchies.” Family Comes First
While her professional life has taken off, there’s no question that the central force in Margolin’s life is her family.
Back at her apartment, her 85-year-old grandmother — a Holocaust survivor — has stopped by for a visit. After letting herself in and promptly requesting a change in lighting, she sits down at the kitchen table to play with the baby and watch her granddaughter in action.
“I don’t know how she does it,” she says of Margolin’s deft juggling of work and family.
But the young attorney shows no signs of slowing down and, in fact, seems to thrive on the constant buzz of energy that surrounds her. After fielding a call from a worried client, Margolin hands off the phone before moving on to another task.
Taking the receiver from his boss, her assistant speaks calmly: “99 percent of the time,” he reassures the caller, “when she says that it will be OK, it is.”
Doctors who write recommendations for medical marijuana have developed an unfortunate reputation. Ask any Angeleno how easy it is to get the drug and you’ll likely hear about storefront practitioners who pointedly ask clients about “back pain.” Wink, wink.
It’s a notion, however, that masks the reality that any physician in California — from the highest-paid Beverly Hills doctor on down — could approve the use of the drug for his or her patients under state law.
But the health risks and medicinal properties of marijuana are still being studied, and until the drug makes its way through standard channels of scientific research, writing recommendations for it is a risk many providers don’t want to take.
Marijuana is classified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a Schedule I substance, meaning that it is defined by federal law as having “no currently accepted medical use” and has a “high potential for abuse.” Other Schedule I substances include heroin and LSD.
It’s a classification with which many medical experts disagree.
The National Institutes of Health and the American College of Physicians believe that marijuana should be further studied as a federally approved drug. And some doctors say the classification doesn’t line up with what is already known.
“I think it doesn’t match the scientific evidence at this time,” said Dr. Igor Grant, a professor and the executive vice chair of the department of psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego, School of Medicine. “There certainly are good indications that [marijuana] may be useful in some things.”
Grant is also the director of the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR) at the University of California, San Diego, which was established in 2000 to study the potential medical benefits of marijuana as well as the inherent risks. The center conducted some of the first significant clinical trials of marijuana since the early 1990s.
In a report released this year by the center highlighting the results of 10 years of research, experts found hope in the drug’s potential.
“One of the most promising is the treatment of what’s called painful peripheral neuropathy,” said Grant. “People suffer burning, tingling, painful sensations in their feet and hands and arms related to diseases like AIDS, diabetes and spinal cord injuries.”
While treatments for these symptoms exist, including anti-depressants and anti-epileptic medication, Grant said, they don’t always work, and some patients report negative side effects.
Larry David tackles medical marijuana on an episode of “Curb.” Story continues after the jump.
Marijuana also holds promise in treating painful muscle spasms associated with diseases like multiple sclerosis, he said.
“[Muscle spasms] can affect people’s ability to walk and write and do activities of daily life,” said Grant. “It’s another area where marijuana may be useful.”
But, like any other drug — legal or not — marijuana isn’t without risks.
“Everything we ingest has some risks,” said Dr. Itai Danovitch, who serves as the director of addiction psychiatry services in the department of psychiatry and behavioral neurosciences at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. “The question is, how do the risks appear for each person?”
Current research suggests that about 8 to 10 percent of people who use the drug will develop an addiction. Danovitch also points to research reporting that the use of marijuana might be a trigger for mental health disorders.
“For people who have underlying risk of things like schizophrenia,” he said, “it appears to unmask that in 1 to 2 percent of the population.”
The acute side effects of marijuana — those that take place at the time the drug is used — are fairly commonly known. They include feeling decreased tension, feeling sedated and possibly hungry. For some users, they include feeling more anxious and even paranoid.
The longer-term effects are less clear, although experts agree that there’s little evidence of a lasting negative impact on the brain. And while marijuana smoke can be irritating to the lungs, it has never been proven to cause lung cancer.
Until the risks and benefits of marijuana are fully understood, though, it’s unlikely that doctors practicing in large medical or academic institutions will be willing to incur the risk of writing a recommendation for patients.
First of all, Danovitch said, marijuana isn’t stocked in most hospitals formularies, which serve as pharmacies to patients.
“Marijuana is definitely not in Cedars’ formulary,” he said.
There are also currently no state or federally regulated growers, aside from some used for federal research, which means that doctors have no way of knowing for certain what they are prescribing.
Additionally, Grant said, there is no uniform way to administer marijuana.
“Smoking is not a route of administration that’s going to be acceptable for some patients, and not in a lot of settings,” he said. “In hospitals, for instance, you have oxygen tanks, or [in] homes with young children, where you may be worried about secondhand smoke.”
And of course, there’s always the question of the feds.
“It’s not legal under federal law for doctors to prescribe or recommend marijuana,” said Joel Hay, a professor of pharmaceutical economics and policy at the University of Southern California, “so a lot are very leery about doing that — I would argue, the more reputable ones.”
Hay added that doctors practicing out of academic institutions would put their institution at risk by prescribing a federally illegal drug.
“Any doctor that works at an academic medical center like USC or UCLA wouldn’t do this,” he said, “because they would jeopardize all federal funding that institution receives.”
But medical marijuana advocates — activists and researchers alike — believe in the promise of the drug — that, eventually, it has the potential to reach the mainstream as a legitimate way of treating illness and disease.
“From a medical standpoint,” said Grant, “what I would favor is much more serious research on marijuana itself, with much larger clinical trials, and then looking to how the benefits can be delivered ultimately in a different way.”
The latest ruckus to rile the Jewish world is the Loyalty Oath, put forward by Foreign Minister
Avigdor Lieberman, supported by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and passed into law by the Knesset on Oct. 10.
The law first required every non-Jew wishing to become a citizen of Israel to pledge loyalty to “the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.” After a firestorm of criticism, the backers of the law, including Netanyahu, proposed a change in the wording so that all new citizens, including Jewish ones, would have to take the oath.
That hardly quieted critics, who still see the law as a not-so-subtle effort to marginalize Arabs, who make up 20 percent of Israel’s population, and to root out Arab Israeli members of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, who are among the state’s most vociferous critics.
The left has been up in arms over the loyalty law, but so, too, have many center and right voices as well.
“Israel’s image as a democratic country is of vital importance to it,” wrote Yehuda Ben Meir, a member of the right-wing National Religious Party. “An amendment to the Basic Law on the Knesset that keeps the Arabs out will be very harmful to this image and will do unimaginable damage to the state. It is to be hoped the prime minister will come to his senses before it is too late.”
Some of us would argue that the law would not just damage the image of the state, but the state itself. Loyalty oaths undermine democracy by marginalizing or, in effect, outlawing dissent. Plus, they don’t work. A study of President Harry S. Truman’s loyalty oath program in 1947 found that — surprise! — people lie.
So, not surprisingly, American Jews have been the most vociferous opponents of loyalty oaths, which they see as an attack on minority rights and free speech.
But — here’s my suggestion — maybe it’s time that, on this one issue, we American Jews should bend our own rules. I say, don’t make Israeli Arabs take the Loyalty Oath, make American Jews take it.
That’s right: Every American Jew and especially every American Jewish organization should pledge their support to Israel as a democratic and Jewish state.
Here’s a sample oath I worked up: “I pledge to do everything in my power to help the State of Israel achieve its stated ideal of being a democratic state of the Jewish people.”
What would happen were we to take that oath, and actually live by it? As I see it, there would be five immediate, beneficial changes to the looping rhetoric that passes for debate in the Jewish community:
1. American Jewish groups couldn’t stand by in obsequious acceptance as Israel follows policies that could make a peaceful solution to the Palestinian conflict less and less likely.
“The outline of the possible solution is clear,” Dov Weisglass, the hawkish former adviser to Ariel Sharon wrote in an August op-ed for Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel’s largest-circulation newspaper, “the establishment of a Palestinian state, the evacuation of most of Judea and Samaria with some territorial swaps, devising a joint control arrangement in Jerusalem based on demographic principles, and the resettling of the Palestinian refugees within the borders of the Palestinian state. The present government, like any other government, will be unsuccessful in substantially altering this outline. The sooner it makes the painful decisions necessary for its implementation, the sooner Palestinian suspicions will evaporate and chances will grow for a successful outcome to talks.”
2. American Jews who consistently oppose efforts to negotiate a two-state solution would have to put forward their own realistic alternative to avoid the demographic certainty of an Arab majority should Israel retain control of the West Bank.
3. American Jews would not get away by answering No. 2 with, “Who knows, we’ll figure that out when the time comes.”
4. Liberal American Jews would be forced to really think through and come to grips with the idea that Israel can indeed be both Jewish and democratic. Underlying the American left’s unease with Israel is a gut-level rejection of this idea, and it is time those of us from the left, right and center who believe and understand it engage the doubters in an honest and open dialogue.
5. American Jews who support the law now would have to actually confront Israeli governments when their policies collided with the preservation of Israel as a democracy. Gone would be the excuse, “It’s not ours to criticize.” Gone would be the hiding behind willful ignorance; gone would be the inclination to either romanticize or demonize. The oath would demand American Jews speak out and act to defend the ideals upon which Israel was founded, and upon which its future depends.
