TOWARD A MORE MELLOW MARIJUANA LAW

Now that the high court has upheld a federal law against medical
marijuana, let's change the law.

MONDAY'S Supreme Court ruling that federal law does, indeed, bar
marijuana distribution even for medical purposes merely upholds the
statute as written. Advocates of a more humane drug policy should take
their appeal to the court of popular opinion.

Congress should rewrite the law.

Granted, hard scientific evidence is lacking that marijuana works
better than other, legal drugs to ease the pain and nausea caused by
certain illnesses. Evidence one way or the other is scant, though, due
to a dearth of studies - which, not coincidentally, the federal
government must approve.

Advocates for the medical use of marijuana say, for example, that it
is particularly helpful in relieving the pain and increasing the
appetite of people with AIDS. The first federally approved studies to
test the claim did not get under way until April.

In the absence of data, the public is left with anecdotes.
Testimonials are not reliable science. But when a 35-year-old mother
of two who has an inoperable brain tumor says only marijuana
alleviates her symptoms and keeps her alive, compassionate people listen.

Patients with multiple sclerosis, AIDS and various types of cancer say
marijuana relieves their suffering better than alternatives. Whether
the effect is psychological or physiological doesn't seem all that
important.

Voters agree in eight states where they have passed medical marijuana
initiatives. Polls show a growing acceptance nationwide of the drug's
use by the sick and dying.

Politicians, fearful of appearing soft on drugs, are resistant. They
need to look at this issue anew. Opponents of easing the law have
argued that it would give momentum to a movement to legalize drugs and
would increase recreational pot-smoking. Yet neither happened in the
state of Washington after voters passed a medical marijuana initiative
in 1998.

Congress should be tough on drugs, but not on patients.