SMOKE A JOINT, LOSE YOUR LICENCE

Little-Known U.S. Penalty: Federal Funding For Highways Tied To Drug
Enforcement

Pot smokers in the United States stand to lose more than their freedom if
they get caught by police. They also face the loss of their driver's
licences under federal legislation that ties state highway funding to tough
drug enforcement.

"Most people only find out about the law when they watch their licence
disappear," says Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National
Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), a pro-legalization
group. "They have no idea this can happen even in a state where [pot laws]
have generally been decriminalized."

The War on Drugs was extended to motor vehicles in the early 1990s, when
U.S. legislators added an amendment to a transportation appropriations
bill. The amendment said any state hoping to get federal highway funding
would have to pass legislation stripping drug offenders of their driver's
licences for at least six months. These suspensions applied even if the
offence did not occur in a car. Under the amendment, states that did not
want to go this route would have to pass "opt-out" resolutions opposing the
law.

Alcohol abusers do not face the same penalties; Americans who commit liquor
offences usually only lose their licences if they are arrested while
driving drunk.

While it affects all drug crimes, the amendment became known as the "Smoke
a Joint, Lose Your Licence" law by virtue of the fact that pot is the most
popular illicit substance in the United States. By the time it came into
force on Oct. 1, 1994, a total of 21 states and territories, such as Puerto
Rico, had passed licence-suspension legislation, while 31 states had chosen
to opt out.

The "Smoke a Joint, Lose Your Licence" battle proved especially bitter in
California, a populous state with a pro-car ethos. In 1994, state lawmakers
passed a licence-suspension bill, despite opposition from NORML, the
American Civil Liberties Union, the California Labor Federation and the
Teamsters Union. Civil libertarians said the punishment did not fit the
crime, while labour leaders worried about the ability of their members to
get to work.

In the face of such criticism, California's licence law was allowed to
expire in 1999 and has not been revived since. During the time it was in
effect, the California Department of Motor Vehicles recorded up to 100,000
licence suspensions a year.

While the U.S. government does not keep track of such statistics, the
number of licence suspensions remains high. In 2000, nearly 740,000
Americans were arrested for cannabis violations. Mr. St. Pierre estimates
that between 20,000 and 50,000 of those arrested lost their licences.

For its part, Ottawa has chosen not to introduce similar legislation.

"As far as I am aware, there isn't a similar law in Canada," says Bob Mann,
a senior scientist with the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH)
and an expert on impaired-driving issues.

Canadians who use marijuana can lose their licences, but only if they are
arrested and found to be impaired while operating a motor vehicle, he says.

Even then, there is some question as to exactly how impaired stoned drivers
really are.

In March, 2002, New Scientist magazine reported on an experiment conducted
by the Transport Research Laboratory in Berkshire, England. Staffers
supplied 15 volunteers with alcohol and marijuana, then used driving
simulators to test the volunteers' level of impairment. The study found
that drivers high on marijuana tended to be more cautious and in control
than drivers who had been drinking.

This experiment matches others conducted in Holland, Canada, Australia and
the United States. The studies have generally found that cannabis does not
interfere with driving skills as much as alcohol.