MarijuanaNews.com : Their Liars Beat Our Liars. Freedom Has Nothing to Fear from the Truth, But Much To Fear From Those Who Think That the End Justifies The Means. Analysis By Richard Cowan

Posted November 6, 2002
Analysis By Richard Cowan

As William F. Buckley, Jr. wrote recently, “As
often as not, democracy sucks.”

Yesterday was not the best of days for “drug law reform” in DEAland,
but it should be a valuable learning experience. As you probably know by now,
“reform” initiatives were defeated in two highly publicized ballots.
(NORML’s review of all the related initiative results is below.)

I am glad that I did not have to vote in either Nevada or Arizona
yesterday. I would have had to follow that old tradition of voting with one hand
and holding my nose with the other. In fact, I am really not sure how I would
have voted.

In August, I expressed my concern about the way the Nevada initiative
was being presented, or misrepresented by its backers.

See
I’m
A Legalizer. What Are You? The Nevada Fiasco. Analysis by Richard Cowan

I said, “I am not particularly
optimistic about Question 9. I hope it passes, but if it does not, it will not
be a great loss for the movement. However, the reform movement will be very much
the loser if we do not demand ethical leadership.”

The problems with the Nevada initiative were
also more substantive.

As California Sociologist Michael Males wrote
in the Los Angeles Times on September 15th, “Reform groups like the Marijuana Policy Project now
embrace harsh “war on drugs” ideas they once vehemently opposed. For
example, the Nevada initiative, while entitling adults 21 and older to buy and
possess up to three ounces of marijuana, would constitutionally require the
state legislature to “provide or maintain” criminal penalties for
persons under 21. Maintaining Nevada law means a young person caught with a
single joint would face a $5,000 fine, four years in prison, a felony record and
permanently jeopardized student loans, government benefits and employment.

The executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project, Robert Kampia, has
claimed that his group’s proposed initiative would ‘end the arrest of all
marijuana users.’ Since half of all pot arrestees are under 21, Kampia’s claim
cannot be true.”

Perhaps this is why the “youth vote” for Question 9 failed to materialize.

Moreover, I was so appalled by the level of
deceit in Arizona that I did not even write about it. Once again, backers of
much broader drug law reform used the medical cannabis issue as a front for a
their own agenda. As it happens, I generally agree with their objectives, but
not their methods.

In 1996, at the same time that Californians
passed Prop 215, Arizonans passed Prop 200, which was also billed as a medical
marijuana initiative, but it was actually both much more and much less than
that. It was more than a medical marijuana measure because it would have
authorized the use of any Schedule I drug, heroin, etc., if it was prescribed by
two doctors.

But it was also much less than a medical
marijuana initiative, because federal law does not allow doctors to prescribe
Schedule I drugs, and there would be no place to fill the prescriptions, even if
the doctors broke the federal law. Consequently, no patients had any chance of
getting medical cannabis under that law.
See
Prop
200 Backers Lose In Battle Over Ballot Description In Arizona

and links

Something similar happened again this year.
Prop 203 was billed as a medical marijuana measure because it would
theoretically have provided patients with up to two ounces of marijuana per
month from whatever the narks had stolen from recreational users.

Arguably, that may be better than just having
it destroyed by the police, but it was another dubious solution, because federal
law would have made it unworkable. However, the law also forbade jailing people
for the first two arrests for possession of all drugs, including crack and PCP,
not just marijuana.

See sections D, E, and F
Text of Prop
203

That may be a great idea, but it has nothing
to do with medical marijuana.

On October 30th, John Sperling, the chief financial backer of the
various Arizona initiatives, wrote in the Arizona Republic, “Proposition
203 will finally achieve what Arizona voters approved in 1996 and 1998. The
medical marijuana under the terms of Proposition 203 will come from marijuana
seized by law enforcement agencies, so there will be no need to violate federal
laws triggered by the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

In
the Op-ed that made no mention of any other drugs, he said, “Some of the
other provisions of Proposition 203 include prohibiting incarceration for
marijuana users, mandating that violent drug offenders serve 50 percent longer
sentences, expanding drug treatment and directing drug fines into drug
prevention programs for our youth. All of these build on our success from 1996
in offering an alternative to the War on Drugs.

The
claims made by the Maricopa county attorney, the nation’s drug czar and
political opponents that Proposition 203 is part of a strategy to legalize drugs
are simply untrue - the same lies they told in 1996 and 1998.”

See

http://www.arizonarepublic.com/opinions/articles/1030sperling30.html

One of the liars on the other side that Mr. Sperling has in mind is
Maricopa County prosecutor Rick Romley.

See
Arizona
Republicans Use School Children In “Anti-Drug” Rally
Against “Medical Marijuana” – Or Something

However, this time Romley was telling the truth when he said, “Every state is watching Arizona
because the tide will have turned. People will say: ‘Is it really about
medical marijuana, or is it about drug legalization?’”

So what happened?

How is that recent nationwide polls showed that 34% of all Americans
favor full legalization of cannabis, but the initiative in Nevada, which is more
socially liberal than the average, got just 39% of the vote? And if 80% of
Americans favor medical marijuana, and almost as many oppose jailing smokers,
why did the Arizona initiative get only
43% of the vote?
See

Democracy,
Cannabis and the Drug Czar. Arrests Remain Close to Record Levels. Support for
Medical Cannabis Now Up to 80%. And 34% Favor Full Legalization. We Are Winning,
But The People Are Suffering.

Yes,
of course, the prohibitionists lied, and objecting to this duplicity should have
been the theme of both campaigns. Some of the media would have been very
receptive.
See
If
the Las Vegas Review Journal “Gets It,” Why Don’t The Other Papers?

However,
we could not attack the prohibitionists for lying when our own supposed leaders
were lying to the people.
See
Letter to the Editors of the Seattle Times. Someone Is Lying to You. Supporters
Of Cannabis Prohibition Need to Do A Credibility Check.

Even
worse, we
forfeit our claim to the moral high ground, when we become like the
prohibitionists and think that the end justifies the means. But as it happens,
the deception did not work. It was counterproductive.

Too
clever by half, as the Brits say.

As
a regular reader of MarijuanaNews observed, “This
is a bitter pill. The people we serve are being exploited and betrayed. As if
their burden were not high enough, now they are betrayed by some on our
team…”

We
must take back our movement. Freedom really does not have anything to fear from
the truth.

From
NORML

November
6, 2002
SPECIAL ELECTION 2002 WRAP-UP

Disappointing Results Provide Opportunity For Self Assessment

Washington, DC: Yesterday’s defeat of a trio of marijuana reform
initiatives in Arizona, Nevada and South Dakota mark a temporary setback,
but also offer an opportunity for self assessment, NORML Executive
Director Keith Stroup said today.

All three initiatives targeted separate aspects of marijuana law reform.

* ARIZONA

Arizona’s proposal, which won only 43 percent of the vote, would have
replaced criminal penalties on minor marijuana offenses with a civil fine,
and mandated the state to distribute medical marijuana free to qualified
patients.

* NEVADA

Question 9 in Nevada, which won only 39 percent of the vote, sought to
eliminate all penalties on the possession of three ounces or less of
marijuana, and mandated state officials to implement a system whereby
adults could obtain pot through a legally regulated market.

* SOUTH DAKOTA

South Dakota’s Initiative 1, which gained a reported 38 percent of the
vote (with 769 of 844 precincts counted), sought to establish a
state-licensing system so that farmers could legally grow the
non-psychoactive variety of cannabis known as hemp.

Local marijuana reform initiatives fared much better in yesterday’s
election.

* SAN FRANCISCO

In San Francisco, nearly 7 out of 10 voters approved Proposition S, which
encourages the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to enact legislation
authorizing the cultivation and distribution of medicinal pot by city
officials.

* MASSACHUSETTS

In Massachusetts, voters in 19 State House districts approved non-binding
resolutions instructing their state representative to vote in favor of
making marijuana possession a civil rather than a criminal violation.
Voters in Massachusetts’ 14th Worchester District also endorsed a
non-binding resolution supporting the use of medical marijuana, and voters
in the state’s 2nd Franklin District endorsed a proposal to legalize hemp
cultivation.

Broader statewide drug reform initiatives also yielded disappointing
results.

* OHIO and ARIZONA

An Ohio initiative (Initiative 1) mandating treatment rather than
incarceration for non-violent drug offenders gained only 33 percent of the
vote, and an Arizona proposal (Prop. 302) re-instituting probation and
incarceration for some non-violent drug offenders passed with 69 percent
of the vote.

* WASHINGTON DC

A Washington DC proposal (Initiative 62) mandating alternative sentencing
for some drug offenders did pass overwhelmingly, but must still be
approved by Congress.

NORML Executive Director Keith Stroup said there are many lessons
drug-law reformers can learn from yesterday’s outcome, and stressed the
need for follow-up polling in Arizona and Nevada to better determine why a
majority of citizens voted against these proposals. “Certainly,
the
political climate of this year’s election was decidedly conservative, as
evidence by the gains made by Republicans in both the House and Senate and
the defeat of several other liberal, but non-drug reform initiatives
around the country,” he said.

“Specific to marijuana-law reform, however, it appears clear that
although a majority of the public supports the legalization of medical
marijuana as well as the decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana
for personal use, much of the U.S. public remains skeptical of
broader-reaching proposals - particularly those that mandate the state to
become involved in either the distribution or regulation of pot. Drug
law
reformers also need to do a better job countering some of our opponents
concerns, such as the issue of marijuana and driving as well as the rising
use of marijuana by adolescents, as it is clear that much of the voting
public also shares these anxieties.”

Nevertheless, despite yesterday’s defeats, Stroup’s outlook for the
marijuana law reform movement remains optimistic. “Yesterday’s
losses
represent a temporary setback, but it’s one we know we can and will
overcome. The American public stands solidly against our government’s
policy of arresting and jailing responsible adult marijuana smokers, and
we will continue to make gains on this core issue.”

For more information, please contact Keith Stroup of NORML at (202)
483-5500.