Tag Archives: LSD
Today we have more news on why AmeriKa is becoming less and less of the great country it once was.
The Supreme Court has such a bone on for reefer that they are changing basic seacrh and siezure laws so that a cop can claim they smelled the odour of pot coming from your residence and kick your door down. If you live in an apartment and the person in the apartment next to you is omitting the smell of burning reefers, then they can kick your door in because ‘it smelled like it was coming from there.’ This is getting bad and they wonder why politicians are getting shot in the head. Laws like this will cause a lot more shootings and I will KILL anybody who forces their way into my home for any reason. I have the firepower and I am getting old, with not too much to lose…this from the ‘hempnews’…
January 19, 2011 – Police smelling marijuana coming from behind an apartment door can enter the home without a warrant if they believe the evidence is being destroyed, some U.S. Supreme Court Justices said on Wednesday.
More than 60 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police couldn’t enter a residence without a warrant just because they smelled burning opium, reports Adam Liptak at The New York Times.
On Wednesday, during the argument of a case about what police were entitled to do upon smelling marijuana outside the door of a Kentucky apartment, two justices were concerned that the Court may be ready to eviscerate the 1948 ruling which stemmed from a Seattle case.
“Aren’t we just simply saying they can just walk in whenever they smell marijuana, whenever they think there’s drugs on the other side?” asked Justice Sonia Sotomayor, considering what a decision against the defendant would tell the police. “Why do even bother giving them a search warrant?”
The old ruling, Johnson v. United States, involved the search of a Seattle hotel room. The smell of drugs could provide probably cause for a warrant, Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote for the majority, but it did not entitle police to enter without one.
“No suspect was fleeing or likely to take flight,” Justice Jackson wrote. “The search was of permanent premises, not of a movable vehicle. No evidence or contraband was threatened with removal or destruction.”
Since the War On Drugs was re-started by President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, the Supreme Court has steadily given police more leeway to search cars, travelers and baggage, reports David Savage at the Los Angeles Times. But the justices have been reluctant to allow searches of homes without a warrant.
In the new case, Kentucky v. King, police in Kentucky were looking for a suspect who had sold cocaine to an informant. They smelled burning marijuana coming from another apartment — where Hollis King and his friends were smoking marijuana — knocked loudly, and announced themselves.
When they heard sounds coming from inside that made them think evidence was being destroyed, they kicked the door in and found marijuana, cocaine, King, two friends, and some cash, but not the original suspect, who was in another apartment.
King was sentenced to 11 years(!) in prison, but the Kentucky Supreme Court overturned his conviction and threw out the evidence, ruling that any risk of drugs’ being destroyed was the result of the decision by police to knock and announce themselves rather than to obtain a warrant. The Kentucky court ruled that officers had entered the apartment illegally and that the evidence they found should not have been considered in court, reports Robert Barnes at The Washington Post.
The key issue is whether an “exigent” or emergency circumstance allows the police to enter a residence without a warrant. Sadly but no longer shockingly, Obama Administration lawyers joined the case on the side of Kentucky’s prosecutors.
The police who broke into the apartment “reasonably believed that there was destruction of evidence occurring inside,” said Ann O’Connell, an assistant to Obama’s Solicitor General.
Prosecutors for Kentucky and the federal government told the justices Wednesday that the Kentucky court had erred. They claimed there had been no violation of the Fourth Amendment, which bars unreasonable searches, because they claimed police had “acted lawfully.”
If the court looks only at the lawfulness of police behavior, Justice Kagan said, that “is going to enable the police to penetrate the home, to search the home, without a warrant, without going to see a magistrate, in a very wide variety of cases.”
All the police would need to say, Justice Kagan said, is that they smelled marijuana and then heard a noise. “Or,” she added, “we think there was some criminal activity going on for whatever reason and we heard noise.”
“How do you prevent your test from essentially eviscerating the warrant requirement in the context of the one place that the Fourth Amendment was most concerned about?” Kagan asked Kentucky Assistant Attorney General Joshua D. Farley, who claimed the police had done nothing that violated the Fourth Amendment.
Justice Sotomayor was even more direct, asking “Aren’t we just doing away with ‘Johnson’?”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked why the police could not simply roam the hallways of apartment buildings, sniffing for pot, knocking whenever they smelled marijuana, then breaking in if they “hear something suspicious.”
“That would be perfectly fine,” Kentucky Assistant Atttorney General Farley replied.
Justice Antonin Scalia revealed some unflattering things about his worldview — which, God help us, seems to be that of a judgmental 10-year-old — as he said he was not troubled by the standard the government lawyers proposed. He said that police can’t go wrong by knocking loudly on the door.
“There are a lot of constraints on law enforcement,” Justice Scalia said, “and the one thing that it has going for it is that criminals are stupid.”
Scalia said that “criminals” often cooperate with police when not legally required to do so. They might open the door and let officers inside — and if not, the police can break in, he said.
“Everything done was perfectly lawful,” Scalia said. “It’s unfair to the criminal? Is that the problem? I really don’t understand the problem.”
Today we ask our Gentle Readers to harken back to those wonderful days when porn was on paper and could be hidden under the mattress. The Golden Age of Porn produced many unique publications, such as the pictured issue of Al Goldstein’s National Screw.
National Screw, like Playboy, was not only rife with lascivious and salacious material but was found to be ‘socially redeeming,’ thanks to essays by contributors such as William S. Burroughs, Allen Ginsberg and other highly-respected literary figures of the time. The upcoming issue of Beatdom takes aim at the same concept, only without showing close-ups of moist, pink labia in between photos of serious authors. With magazines like these, the joke used to be, “I only buy it for the articles.”
Good, old smut has pretty much gone the way of the web, with programmes available which allow a user to insert penis into a device which simulates the sensations of the sex act, while watching a video that is synched-up to the ‘pleasure portal’. Just too weird for us at CFYSA…not only does it take away the fantasy that served as stimulus to ‘yank the carrot’, it masturbates you, too. There are limits to what is good about being a DIY, ‘Do It Yourselfer’.
That said, we are not sure what kids do these days. In the waning decades of the last century, sex was a popular way for men and women to pass time together. A common way to find and engage a partner in sex was to go to the public park system with beer and pot. Sitting on the lawn, near the parkinglot, a hedonistic type could smoke pot, become inebriated and when an attractive member of the opposite gender passed, ask her if ‘you want to party?’ Most often, we sat on the lawn along the lot, inbetween the parked cars and the Ladies rest rooms, in order to catch more traffic.
One bright, sunny day, in the company of an idiot and former acquaintance named Chuck, we sucked down Rolling Rock beers and waited to meet some ‘company’. We were rather drunk that early Spring afternoon and our luck was not with us. Halter tops were a popular article of clothing for women to wear at the time and they were a good thing, in that they allowed a partial view of the breasts of the woman who wore one.
A number of beers into the ‘party,’ Chuck (who is now a red-nosed, fat bastard who cannot even see his toes without a mirror) had a revelation, an inspiration…an original thought! Original thought can be a good thing in the minds of some people. In his mind, the logical conclusion formed that since we, as men, enjoyed the soft, white skin revealed by the halter, then it was only normal that women take just as much pleasure in seeing a bit of scrotum. If they show us theirs, they must want to see ours…this was his logic.
While the display of wrinkly flesh did not yield results, it was worth a try. Your Humble Narrator did not try sunning his scrotum for fear of blistered balls but did record a partial account of the events of that day. And, so, My Confidantes, today we present a poem which takes us back to those Golden Days of the early 1980s…
A Day At The Parkway
Jaws of flocks
of the shocked
as Chuck’s cock flopped
onto the top of the rock.
“Like prunes?” he mocked.
The eyes of the cop
as loose cumdrops slopped,
then dripped down the walls
of his fetid balls.
I read a book
and pretended not to look.
Issue Number Eight of Beatdom is near completion. This is the sex issue. To the left is the cover of the journal you need to purchase.
Your Humble Narrator will have a few bits of work published in it, as in the past few issues. Everybody loves sex and everybody loves Beatdom so make sure to order a copy from Amazon.com or directly from www.Beatdom.com , where back issues and free downloads of past issues are available.
There will be more to come later about this exciting issue. This is one of those ‘be there or be square’ deals, so don’t miss the boat. Be the first one on your block to have a copy. Make the neighbors jealous and read it on your porch!
Readers, Speeders and Bottomfeeders, welcome All to another day in the Land of the Blog. Today, we are fortunate in that we do not have to think of a subject for the blog. It arrived by post yesterday, courtesy of Academy Award Nominated Director Jerry Aronson. It is the new release, rather the new incarnation, of his 2006 documentary, The Life and Times of Allen Ginsberg, now released on DVD as a director’s cut with newly updated, unseen footage. It is an excellent package!
We are psyched!
Mr. Aronson spent over 25 years collecting and creating 120 hours of film on Mr. Ginsberg, which was distilled into this great flick. It begins 60 years ago with the forming of the firmament of the Beat movement/era of writing, following the Beats from the last century to the influence still wielded by their words in this, still new, 21st Century. Writing that was sort of like thinking of the mission statement of Beatdom, the international Beat journal, published by David S. Wills, who was kind enough to introduce me to Mr. Aronson.
Along with the biographical and historical material, the film is chockful of treats, like Ginsberg reading selected poems, the film record of Bob Dylan and Ginsberg’s famed visit to the grave of Jack Kerouac, Ginsberg interacting with Neal Cassady and William S. Burroughs, the making of the music video The Ballad of the Skeletons and many other wonderful features.
The exclusive interviews are one part we especially look forward to…interviews with Joan Baez, Beck, Bono, William Burroughs, Johnny Depp, Philip Glass, Abbie Hoffman, Jack Johnson, Ken Kesy, Timothy Leary, Paul McCartney (?), Thurston Moore, Yoko Ono, Ed Sanders, Patti Smith, Hunter S. Thompson and more!!! That is enough to make anybody want to go out and buy it right there.
The work of Allen Ginsberg is especially important in today’s shadowy, spy world of Amerika. His investigations into the drug trafficking by the CIA under the auspices of our own government should have woken more people up back when he was doing his research but it is especially important today, that we keep an eye on the creeps (as opposed to the CREEP of Nixon) who are sabotaging the integrity of our very way of life through dirty tricks and nasty treatment of good people.
This film should be of important interest to anyone who considers themself to be an activist or is involved in trying to change some archaic laws which are hobbling this country into last place on the list of free countries. Those who are trying to legalize marijuana should learn a lesson from the Poet, as well as gain insight into just how screwed up the government has gotten our collective states of affairs.
Howl, the seminal work he is best known for, opened a crack, a schism in the the collective consciousness which led to repeal of laws barring publications dealing with sex, drugs and other fun, but sordid, topics. If not for Howl, Naked Lunch by William S. Burroughs and the trials of Lenny Bruce, we would not enjoy things we have today, things which we do not always consider when thinking about freedom of speech…like the burdgeoning comedy scene of the past four decades and current truthtellers like Lewis Black, Sarah Silverman, the late George Carlin and anybody else, from Lisa Simpson to Tony Soprano, who never would have seen the light of day before theesse draconian laws were changed.
As draconian as the pot laws are today, free speech was even a bigger hurdle and the bravery and selflessness of the Americans who fought for that right, against their own government, deserves a monument just as large as the one which celebrates our ’taking’ of Iwo Jima.
This is a must-see for anybody who is interested in poetics, history and getting the heavy foot of Uncle Sam off of our backs!!!
Go buy it on Amazon!
No funny pics today, kiddos, just hard news…or lack of it…please find below, Gentle Readers, the text of the Federal Register. It has not been updated since 11/24/2010, which means that all K2, Spice and JWH products are fully legal in those states which have not been so shortsighted as to ban them.
If you need a nap halfway through, snooze away. This stuff makes me sleepier than the K2 itself!!!!
[Federal Register: November 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 226)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 71635-71638] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr24no10-45] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration 21 CFR Part 1308 [Docket No. DEA-345N] Schedules of Controlled Substances: Temporary Placement of Five Synthetic Cannabinoids Into Schedule I AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), U.S. Department of Justice. ACTION: Notice of Intent. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Deputy Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is issuing this notice of intent to temporarily place five synthetic cannabinoids into the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) pursuant to the temporary scheduling provisions under 21 U.S.C. 811(h) of the CSA. The substances are 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-018), 1-butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-073), 1-[2-(4- morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-200), 5-(1,1- dimethylheptyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol (CP-47,497), and 5-(1,1-dimethyloctyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol (cannabicyclohexanol; CP-47,497 C8 homologue). This intended action is based on a finding by the DEA Deputy [[Page 71636]] Administrator that the placement of these synthetic cannabinoids into Schedule I of the CSA is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. Finalization of this action will impose criminal sanctions and regulatory controls of Schedule I substances under the CSA on the manufacture, distribution, possession, importation, and exportation of these synthetic cannabinoids. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Sannerud, Ph.D., Chief, Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, VA 22152, telephone (202) 307-7183, fax (202) 353-1263, or e-mail email@example.com. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-473), which was signed into law on October 12, 1984, amended section 201 of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811) to give the Attorney General the authority to temporarily place a substance into Schedule I of the CSA for one year without regard to the requirements of 21 U.S.C. 811(b) if he finds that such action is necessary to avoid imminent hazard to the public safety. The Attorney General may extend the temporary scheduling up to six months. A substance may be temporarily scheduled under the emergency provisions of the CSA if it is not listed in any other schedule under section 202 of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 812) or if there is no exemption or approval in effect under 21 U.S.C. 355 for the substance. The Attorney General has delegated his authority under 21 U.S.C. 811 to the Administrator of DEA (28 CFR 0.100). The Administrator has redelegated this function to the Deputy Administrator, pursuant to 28 CFR, appendix to subpart R, section 12. Section 201(h)(4) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4)) requires the Deputy Administrator to notify the Assistant Secretary for Health, delegate of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, of her intention to temporarily place a substance into Schedule I of the CSA. Comments submitted by the Assistant Secretary for Health in response to this notification, including whether there is an exemption or approval in effect for the substance in question under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, shall be taken into consideration before a final order is published. In making a finding that placing a substance temporarily into Schedule I of the CSA is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety, the Deputy Administrator is required to consider three of the eight factors set forth in section 201(c) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(c)). These factors are as follows: (4) History and current pattern of abuse; (5) The scope, duration and significance of abuse; and (6) What, if any, risk there is to the public health. Synthetic Cannabinoids Synthetic cannabinoids have been developed over the last 30 years for research purposes to investigate the cannabinoid system. No legitimate non-research uses have been identified for these synthetic cannabinoids. They have not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for human consumption. These THC-like synthetic cannabinoids, 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-018), 1-butyl-3-(1- naphthoyl)indole (JWH-073), 1-[2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1- naphthoyl)indole (JWH-200), 5-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3- hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol (CP-47,497), and 5-(1,1-dimethyloctyl)-2- [(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol (cannabicyclohexanol; CP-47,497 C8 homologue), are so termed for their THC-like pharmacological properties. Though they have similar properties to delta-9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) found in marijuana and have been found to be more potent than THC in animal studies. Numerous herbal products have been analyzed and JWH-073, JWH-018, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and cannabicyclohexanol have been identified in varying mixture profiles and amounts spiked on plant material. Factor 4. History and Current Pattern of Abuse The emergence of these synthetic cannabinoids represents a recent phenomenon in the designer drug market. Since the initial identification of JWH-018 in December 2008, many additional synthetic cannabinoids with purported psychotropic effects have been identified in related products. The popularity of these THC-like synthetic cannabinoids has greatly increased in the United States and they are being abused for their psychoactive properties. Primarily found laced on plant material, these synthetic cannabinoids are also being abused alone as self-reported on Internet discussion boards. This abuse has been characterized by both acute and long term public health and safety problems. Even though there is no accepted use for these synthetic cannabinoids, multiple shipments of JWH-018 and JWH-073 have been intercepted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in 2010, with one being in excess of 50 kilograms. Additionally, bulk loads of JWH-018 and JWH-200 have been seized by law enforcement in 2010. In Casper, Wyoming, products seized in a raid, which were laced with synthetic cannabinoids, were found in conjunction with illicit drugs. The products containing these THC-like synthetic cannabinoids are marketed as ``legal'' alternatives to marijuana and are being sold over the Internet and in tobacco and smoke shops, drug paraphernalia shops, and convenience stores. These synthetic cannabinoids alone or spiked on plant material have the potential to be extremely harmful due to their method of manufacture and high pharmacological potency. DEA has been made aware that smoking these synthetic cannabinoids for the purpose of achieving intoxication and experiencing the psychoactive effects is identified as a reason for emergency room visits and calls to poison control centers. As of October 15, 2010, 15 states in the United States, European and Scandinavian countries have controlled one or more of the synthetic cannabinoids DEA is temporarily scheduling here. Factor 5. Scope, Duration and Significance of Abuse According to forensic laboratory reports, the first appearance of these synthetic cannabinoids in the United States occurred in November 2008, when U.S. Customs and Border Protection analyzed ``Spice'' products. From January 2010 through September 2010, the National Forensic Laboratory Information System, a national repository of drug evidence analyses from forensic laboratories across the United States, reported over 500 exhibits relating to these synthetic cannabinoids from various States including Alabama, Arkansas, California, Florida, Hawaii, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. Additionally, the American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) has reported receiving over 1,500 calls as of September 27, 2010, relating to products spiked with these synthetic cannabinoids from 48 states and the District of Columbia. [[Page 71637]] Factor 6. What, if Any, Risk There Is to the Public Health JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and cannabicyclohexanol share pharmacological similarities with the Schedule I substance THC. Health warnings have been issued by numerous state public health departments and poison control centers describing the adverse health effects associated with these synthetic cannabinoids and their related products including agitation, anxiety, vomiting, tachycardia, elevated blood pressure, seizures, hallucinations and non-responsiveness. Case reports describe psychotic episodes, withdrawal, and dependence associated with use of these synthetic cannabinoids, similar to syndromes observed in cannabis abuse. Emergency room physicians have reported admissions connected to the abuse of these synthetic cannabinoids. Additionally, when responding to incidents involving individuals who have reportedly smoked these synthetic cannabinoids, first responders report that these individuals suffer from intense hallucinations. Detailed chemical analysis by DEA and other investigators have found these synthetic cannabinoids spiked on plant material in products marketed to the general public. The risk of adverse health effects is further increased by the fact that similar products vary in the composition and concentration of synthetic cannabinoids(s) spiked on the plant material. Self-reported abuse of these THC-like synthetic cannabinoids alone and spiked on plant material appear on Internet discussion boards. According to self-reports, these substances are cannabis-like (or THC- like) in their psychoactive effects and are more potent than THC in this regard. The most common route of administration of these synthetic cannabinoids is by smoking, using a pipe, water pipe, or rolling the drug-spiked plant material in cigarette papers. The marketing of products that contain one or more of these synthetic cannabinoids is geared towards teens and young adults. Despite disclaimers that the products are not intended for human consumption, retailers promote that routine urinalysis tests will not typically detect the presence of these synthetic cannabinoids. Furthermore, a number of the products and synthetic cannabinoids appear to originate from foreign sources and are manufactured in the absence of quality controls and devoid of regulatory oversight. These products and associated synthetic cannabinoids are readily accessible via the Internet. DEA has considered the three criteria for placing a substance into Schedule I of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 812). The data available and reviewed for JWH-073, JWH-018, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and cannabicyclohexanol indicate that these synthetic cannabinoids each have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and are not safe for use under medical supervision. Based on the above data, the continued uncontrolled manufacture, distribution, importation, exportation, and abuse of JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and cannabicyclohexanol pose an imminent hazard to the public safety. DEA is not aware of any recognized therapeutic uses of these synthetic cannabinoids in the United States. As required by section 201(h)(4) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)), the Deputy Administrator in a letter dated October 6, 2010, notified the Assistant Secretary of Health of the intention to temporarily place five synthetic cannabinoids in Schedule I. In accordance with the provisions of section 201(h) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)) and 28 CFR 0.100, the Deputy Administrator has considered the available data and the three factors required to support a determination to temporarily schedule five synthetic cannabinoids: 1- butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole, 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole, 1-[2-(4- morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole, 5-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-2- [(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol, and 5-(1,1-dimethyloctyl)-2- [(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol in Schedule I of the CSA and finds that placement of these synthetic cannabinoids into Schedule I of the CSA is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. Because the Deputy Administrator finds that it is necessary to temporarily place these synthetic cannabinoids into Schedule I to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety, the final order, if issued, will be effective on the date of publication of the order in the Federal Register. JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497, and cannabicyclohexanol will be subject to the regulatory controls and administrative, civil and criminal sanctions applicable to the manufacture, distribution, possession, importing and exporting of a Schedule I controlled substance under the CSA. Further, it is the intention of the Deputy Administrator to issue such a final order as soon as possible after the expiration of thirty days from the date of publication of this notice and the date that notification was transmitted to the Assistant Secretary for Health. Regulatory Certifications Regulatory Flexibility Act The Deputy Administrator hereby certifies that this rulemaking has been drafted in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), has reviewed this regulation, and by approving it certifies that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action provides a notice of intent to temporarily place 1-butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole, 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole, 1-[2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1- naphthoyl)indole, 5-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3- hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol, and 5-(1,1-dimethyloctyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3- hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol into Schedule I of the CSA. DEA is not aware of any legitimate non-research uses for these synthetic cannabinoids in the United States. Executive Order 12988 This regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 Civil Justice Reform. Executive Order 13132 This rulemaking does not preempt or modify any provision of State law; nor does it impose enforcement responsibilities on any State; nor does it diminish the power of any State to enforce its own laws. Accordingly, this rulemaking does not have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Order 13132. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $126,400,000 or more (adjusting for inflation) in any one year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. Congressional Review Act This rule is not a major rule as defined by 804 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Congressional Review Act). This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on [[Page 71638]] competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign- based companies in domestic and export markets. List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308 Administrative practice and procedure, Drug traffic control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Under the authority vested in the Attorney General by section 201(h) of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 811(h)), and delegated to the Deputy Administrator of the DEA by Department of Justice regulations (28 CFR 0.100, and section 12 of the Appendix to Subpart R), the Deputy Administrator hereby intends to order that 21 CFR part 1308 be amended as follows: PART 1308--SCHEDULES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 1. The authority citation for part 1308 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), unless otherwise noted. 2. Section 1308.11 is amended by adding new paragraphs (g)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) to read as follows: Sec. 1308.11 Schedule I. * * * * * (g) * * * (1) 5-(1,1-Dimethylheptyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol- 7297 (Other names: CP-47,497) (2) 5-(1,1-Dimethyloctyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol- 7298 (Other names: cannabicyclohexanol and CP-47,497 C8 homologue) (3) 1-Butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole-7173 (Other names: JWH-073) (4) 1-[2-(4-Morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole-7200 (Other names: JWH-200) (5) 1-Pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole-7118 (Other names: JWH-018 and AM678) Dated: November 15, 2010. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. 2010-29600 Filed 11-23-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P