FOES, SUPPORTERS SPAR ON AMENDMENT 44

As election time draws near, the debate concerning a
marijuana amendment on the ballot is heating up.

Drug enforcement officials say Amendment 44, which would legalize
adult possession of less than one ounce of pot, would increase demand
- -- and hence, supply from violent, organized crime units. There are
also health concerns, particularly such as those related to children.

"As a federal executive branch agency, we're not for or against
legislation. My opinion is it's a mistake, but the DEA's opinion is
this would be a very dangerous thing for Coloradans," said Jeffrey
Sweetin, special agent in charge of the Drug Enforcement Agency's
four-state Rocky Mountain Division.

"There's no discussion about where people would get their drugs.
They're going to continue getting their drugs from organized crime."

Locally, the Delta/Montrose Drug Task Force opposes 44 and was in the
process Thursday of preparing a letter to be signed by a number of
chiefs and sheriffs in the 7th Judicial District.

Proponents, however, said inaccurate language in the state's "blue
book" voting guide had created misconceptions about the amendment.

"It stated it (amendment) would make it legal to transfer under one
ounce to people 15 and up," Mason Tvert of Safer Alternative for
Enjoyable Recreation Colorado said Tuesday.

Tvert said that wasn't the case, as the amendment does not affect
existing statutes concerning contributing to the delinquency of a
minor. "It will remain a class-4 felony to give any amount of drugs to
a minor. That's the big discrepancy that's primarily led to all these
issues."

Some of the measure's critics initially claimed that since giving pot
without accepting payment can be defined as possession, adults could
provide marijuana to 15- to 17-year-olds -- language that made it into
the blue book.

SAFER's attempt to have the courts address that language was dismissed
on jurisdictional grounds earlier this month. "They want this to be an
argument about young people, when it's about adults," Tvert said.

The amendment would allow people 21 and older to possess less than one
ounce of marijuana. SAFER said it would remain illegal to use it in
public or to provide it to those under 21 and that the proposal does
not remove criminal penalties for driving under the influence of pot,
or for distributing it.

The amendment would change existing statute to make possession of less
than one ounce by those under 21 a class-2 petty offense, punishable
by a $100 fine. The change would mean the simple possession law only
applies to those under 21, while now it applies to people of any age.

Tvert also said Amendment 44 would not prevent local home rule
governmental entities from enacting their own ordinances concerning
marijuana possession. Instead, it would prevent prosecution for
low-level possession on a state-level charge.

But drug enforcement officials said the amendment sent a message that
would undo years of successful drug-awareness education. "This is a
stepping stone path to legalize drugs at all levels," Sweetin said.
"Ounce possessors of marijuana don't go to jail. Anywhere."

He also questioned the logic of decriminalizing only quantities under
an ounce.

"Why the ounce? If it's so safe, why isn't SAFER trying to legalize it
(pot) at any level?" Sweetin said. "It's a silly law. It's not going
to change anything. ... Even SAFER would admit there would be more
marijuana users in Colorado if they legalize this."

Marijuana possession would remain a violation of federal law
regardless the amendment's fate. Both sides agreed federal agents
would not have the resources to enforce those laws.

Federal agents, Tvert said, would have the power to arrest anyone for
possession, but it would require federal prosecution. "It's not going
to happen," he said. "We will have conflicting laws. We have various
levels of government."

"When we work marijuana, we work in bales of marijuana," Sweetin said.
"Unfortunately, the organizations running meth and heroin into Denver
are the same ones running marijuana."

Tvert said it wasn't necessarily true that all pot ultimately comes
from major dealers. "How is it that a 21-year-old kid growing pot in
Boulder is contributing to any other drugs? If that (organized crime)
is their biggest problem, we need to regulate it."

He contended the initiative's opponents have a financial interest in
keeping all pot illegal and said 50 percent of the nation's drug
budget goes toward fighting marijuana.

Sweetin called the idea that police want the drug to remain illegal so
they can keep their jobs "a ludicrous argument."

"We're not trying to keep ourselves employed. We're working meth,
coke, heroin."