Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 11:31:23 -0600 To: [iowanor m l] at [commonlink.com] From: "Carl E. Olsen" <[c--l] at [mail.commonlink.com]> Subject: Votes on Medical Marijuana Stirring Debate New York Times, November 17, 1996 Votes on Medical Marijuana Are Stirring Debate By CHRISTOPHER S. WREN [26kB gif attached with caption: "On the day after California passed a referendum letting people use marijuana on the recommendation of a doctor, Scott Imler of the Los Angeles Cannabis Buyers Club, left, sold the drug to Jim Stone, who has AIDS."] By approving initiatives to permit the use of marijuana for medical purposes, California and Arizona voters have touched off a nationwide battle between Americans who want to hold the line against illegal drugs and those who think it is time to challenge other longstanding prohibitions against drug use. Passions are fierce on both sides and the votes have stirred a dialogue about drugs and the potential, or risk, of broader policy changes. The initiatives are probably the first time since the repeal of Prohibition that the public has approved a pullback in the war on drugs, said Ethan Nadelmann, director of the Lindesmith Center, a policy institute in New York that promotes more tolerant drug policies. "It was made clear that the public was ahead of the politicians on this," said Nadelmann, who was a strategist for the referendum campaigns. "The public is increasingly cynical and jaundiced about drug war politicking." But opponents are striking back. Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America brought 1,000 leaders of its local chapters to Washington last week and discussed how to prevent initiatives on the medical use of marijuana from reaching the ballot in other states. Organizers of the California referendum have promised to get such measures on other ballots. On Friday, the director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Barry R. McCaffrey, declared that the referendums in California and Arizona are now a national concern. "Just when the nation is trying its hardest to educate teen-agers not to use psychoactive drugs," McCaffrey said, "now they are being told that marijuana and other drugs are good, they are medicine. The conflict in messages is extremely harmful." Proponents portrayed the referendums as acts of compassion meant to help the chronically or terminally ill by letting them use an illegal drug to ease pain, relieve nausea from cancer treatment, or otherwise alleviate their condition. "I lost my lover, Jonathan West, from AIDS at 29, and I dedicated myself to the suffering that he endured," said Dennis Peron, the originator of Proposition 215, as the California initiative was called. Critics contend that in passing the referendums on Nov. 5 by votes of nearly 56 percent to 44 percent in California and 65 percent to 35 percent in Arizona, voters were tricked into approving measures that pave the way for broader use of marijuana. "The California proposition was a wolf dressed in sheep's clothing," said James E. Copple, the president of Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America. "They're using the AIDS victims and terminally ill as props to promote the use of marijuana." Copple said many members of his group had found themselves in an awkward position because of their sympathy for people with AIDS. "It's a brilliant diversionary tactic," Copple said, "but we're going to oppose it, punch through it." Coalition members visited their representatives on Capitol Hill on Thursday while prosecutors and law-enforcement officials from California and Arizona met in McCaffrey's office to seek guidance from him, Thomas A. Constantine, the director of the Drug Enforcement Administration, and officials from the departments of Justice, Education and Health and Human Services. "I think we recognize what the implications are," Constantine said later. "We don't yet know what are the solutions." He said federal officials would work with legal advisers on a strategy. But he said, "Anyone who thinks for one second that we're making a step backward on the application of federal law would be making a very big mistake." Richard M. Romley, the district attorney of Maricopa County, Ariz., who met with McCaffrey, said, "The biggest question is the conflict that may exist with federal laws" banning the use of illegal drugs. And, he said, he expressed fear that someone whose marijuana had been confiscated could sue, claiming he had been deprived of medication. The referendums' successes have encouraged those who want to broaden the debate about illegal drugs. At a meeting in New York City on Thursday night, Joycelyn Elders, the former surgeon general, was applauded when she said, "I think that we can really legalize marijuana, make marijuana legal." Peron, who lives in San Francisco, contended that since stress relief is a medical purpose, too, any adult who uses marijuana does so for medical reasons. "I believe all marijuana use is medical -- except for kids," Peron said. But Nadelmann said legalizing marijuana was not an immediate goal of the initiatives' promoters, because a survey showed that half of those who voted in favor of the California referendum did so because they supported marijuana's availability for medical uses and not its outright legalization. A Gallup Poll taken late last year found that 85 percent of respondents opposed the legalization of illicit drugs. "The next step is toward arguing for a more rational drug policy," Nadelmann said. This included making hypodermic needles available to stop the spread of AIDS among addicts sharing needles, increasing access to methadone, the heroin substitute, and reversing mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenders. The referendum in Arizona went further than California's. It stipulates that any prohibited drug, not just marijuana, may be prescribed with the concurrence of two doctors. And it provides that people charged for the first time with possession of illegal drugs be given probation and treatment, not sent to jail. California's referendum says people need only the recommendation of a doctor to use marijuana, but it does not not let doctors prescribe it. It sets no minimum age for the patient. Its backers deny that the vague wording invites abuse. "The first thing this doesn't do is create some sort of supply system," said Dave Fratello, communications director of the California referendum campaign. "It gives a specific defense to a small group of people that is subject to scrutiny in court. That is why we feel it can't be easily abused." But opponents argue that the wrong signals have been sent. "What you've got now is an enormously high-risk social experiment, which I'm concerned is going to be detrimental to our drug prevention efforts in California," said Andrew M. Mecca, director of the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Marc Burgat, the legislative director of Calpartners, a California substance abuse coalition based in Sacramento, said some adolescents assume they can smoke marijuana now without getting punished. "The word that we hear in Sacramento schools from kids is, 'Gee, now I can grow it legally, and get doctors to prescribe it,' " Burgat said. And some adults, Burgat said, could try to use the measure as a legal defense if they tested positive for marijuana at work or were pulled over for driving while intoxicated. "They can say, 'My doctor told me I needed to use this.' " he said. In the first few days after the vote, a toll-free information line in California attracted more than 1,000 calls about how the law will apply to medicinal marijuana. "We have people calling and saying, 'Where do I get it?' " Fratello said. Peron said people with illnesses were forming clubs and designating someone to grow marijuana. But the next stage of the debate over the medical use of marijuana seems destined to be the courts, since both sides vowing litigation to buttress their cases. *********************************************************************** * Carl E. Olsen * [c--l] at [mail.commonlink.com] * * Post Office Box 4091 * NORML News archived at: * * Des Moines, Iowa 50333 * http://www.commonlink.com/~olsen/ * * (515) 262-6957 voice & fax * [Carl E Olsen] at [commonlink.com] * ***********************************************************************