BLOWING SMOKE ON ISSUE OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA

WASHINGTON -- Until now, I have admired Al Gore's candor on the
marijuana question.

After all, he is the first presidential candidate to admit not only
that he smoked marijuana but also that he inhaled it.

His boss, President Clinton, confessed during his 1992 campaign to
smoking the wicked weed in his youth, but insisted that he "didn't
inhale." That's like saying you subscribe to Playboy for the articles.
Maybe he enjoyed that distinctive marijuana smell, which is sort of
like burning socks.

On the Republican side, Texas Governor George W. Bush simply has
avoided talking about anything naughty he might have done in the first
three decades or so of his life. That is his right. Besides, no one
can accuse you of lying if you don't say anything at all.

No, it is not the candidates' private lives from decades past, but
their public positions at present that should concern us now.

Bush and his running mate Dick Cheney have tried to avoid saying much
on the issue, except that they "support states' rights" but also will
"vigorously enforce" federal laws. That's a prudent, pragmatic
position in the midst of a stormy and divisive political issue. That's
also called having it both ways.

Gore, too, tries to have it both ways, although at different times.
When he was asked by a young MTV audience member last week whether he
supported the legalization of marijuana for medicinal use, the vice
president responded that he did not. Current research, he said, does
not show marijuana to be any more effective at relieving the pain and
misery of cancer patients and others than less controversial methods.

I wondered what research he had been reading. A 1999 Institute of
Medicine report commissioned by the Clinton-Gore administration, for
example, found marijuana to be effective enough to be recommended for
short-term use of up to six months by some seriously ill patients.

More than six months posed health risks, not because of the active
ingredients, known as cannabinoids, but because of the respiratory
damage smoking anything can cause.

Gore's response sounded all the more amazing when compared to his
position during the primaries. When he was running against Bill
Bradley and appealing to Democrats, he sounded a lot more open to the
idea of letting doctors prescribe marijuana.

In a televised forum in Derry, N.H., last December. Gore poignantly
recalled how his late sister's doctor prescribed marijuana for her
before she died of cancer in 1984. She refused to take it, he said,
but, "If it had worked for her, then I think she should have had the
ability to get her pain relieved that way."

"I do not favor legalizing marijuana," he said, according to
Associated Press reports. "But where you have sufficient controls, I
think doctors ought to have that option."

Right on. And he was not alone. So far, Alaska, Washington state,
Oregon, Arizona, Nevada, Maine and the District of Columbia have
passed voter initiatives to allow patients in need to have the choice
that was offered to Al Gore's sister.

Hawaii's legislature passed such a law and its governor signed it in
April. Colorado votes on a similar measure in November and supporters
say its chances look good. None of the state ballot efforts for
medicinal marijuana has failed, so far.

But the Clinton administration stands fast in its anti-marijuana
position. After Gore's statement, White House spokesman Joe Lockhart
maintained that, "We don't have conclusive scientific evidence that
marijuana provides a therapeutic benefit that exceeds currently
prescribed drugs."

And, presto! By May, the White House position became Al Gore's
position, too. Answering a student in Cudahy, Calif., on May 11, Gore
said he sees "no reliable evidence" that medical marijuana is an
effective pain reliever.

Yes, it is interesting to see how quickly reliability can fade in the
midst of an election campaign -- right along with candor.

Or maybe there's some truth, after all, to the rumors about early
marijuana use causing late-life memory loss.