DRUG INITIATIVES

Question: Where do you stand on the two ballot propositions relating to
drugs? Provisions of Proposition 203 include decriminalizing possession of
small amounts of marijuana, making it a civil offense, and requiring the
Department of Public Safety to distribute free marijuana for medical use.
Proposition 302 expands a judge's ability to imprison drug offenders who
now face only probation, including those who refuse treatment.

REPUBLICAN

Matt Salmon of Mesa, business consultant, former U.S. congressman

I oppose Proposition 203 for the simple reason that I have no desire to see
the Department of Public Safety forced to distribute marijuana to anyone.
Regardless of your opinions about marijuana for medical use - remember that
Proposition 203 doesn't require a prescription to qualify for "medical use"
- - Proposition 203 goes too far and should be defeated.

On the other hand, I support Proposition 302 because it closes a
significant loophole in Arizona's drug laws. Currently, some drug offenders
will not face jail time even if they violate their probation or refuse to
enter treatment. Proposition 302 will give courts and prosecutors the tools
needed to force drug users into treatment and to complete their probation.
Proposition 302 is a common-sense measure that deserves Arizona's support.
Proposition 203 is anything but.

INDEPENDENT

Richard Mahoney of Phoenix, professor emeritus-

international studies, former Arizona secretary of state

I support Proposition 203. To end the drug war - and its bankrupting costs
- - we should take careful steps toward a more realistic and cost- effective
policy. I oppose Proposition 302, which undermines what Arizonans have
twice voted in favor of. I chaired the Voter Protection Alliance in 1998 to
stop the governor and Legislature from gutting propositions. We were
successful.

DEMOCRAT

Janet Napolitano of Phoenix, state attorney general

I plan to vote "no" on both propositions. The fundamental mission of the
Department of Public Safety is to ensure the safety of our highways and
communities, not to dispense narcotics. Although I empathize with cancer
victims and favor ways to ease their pain, it is not in the state's
interest to either legalize marijuana or use scarce state resources to
distribute it. I think Proposition 302 is well- intended, but I believe we
should let the 1996 law approved by Arizona voters play its course before
tinkering with new laws. Our focus should remain on rehabilitating
small-time marijuana users, vigorously prosecuting big-time drug dealers
and aggressively attacking methamphetamines. As U.S. attorney and Arizona
attorney general, I have prosecuted meth dealers for nine years, and I know
that meth is more devastating to our state than any other drug.

LIBERTARIAN

Barry Hess of Phoenix, small-business owner

Proposition 203: No, no, no a thousand times, no! I read it. What appears
to be a "de-criminalization-sorta" proposition, actually foists more
worthless bureaucracy on taxpayers, skewers medical information privacy,
allows bureaucrats to make medical pronouncements, turns DPS into a "free"
pharmacy, the federal government into an agricultural monopoly and opens
the door to government control of health care.

While I do not advocate the use of drugs, I do know that your body is your
body, and nobody can tell you what you can or can't do to it or what you
can or can't put into it. Why can't it just say, "The People revoke, repeal
and rescind all laws, statutes and regulations regarding the prohibition of
marijuana and associated paraphernalia, order released all previous
non-violent offenders convicted under these laws, and apologize for our
stupidity"?

Proposition 302: Ditto. Visit www.HessforGovernor.Org