BACKERS EXPECT SOME CHANGES BUT IT'S A BIG TASK

LOS ANGELES - The political landscape for Proposition 215, California's
medical marijuana initiative, was ideal.

With bipartisan support the California Legislature had twice passed a bill
exempting qualified patients from prosecution for using marijuana. Both
times, it was vetoed by then-Gov. Pete Wilson. "That's the ideal scenario
for going to the ballot with a proposition," said Bill Zimmerman, who heads
Americans for Medical Rights, a group spearheading the charge for medical
marijuana. "The people seemed to want it, their representatives had passed
it and only the governor was blocking it."

But the proposition, drafted by a coalition that included a retired Orange
County nurse and a convicted San Francisco pot dealer, needed more than good
will. Less than two months before their deadline, the drafters were broke
with little chance of collecting the 500,000 signatures needed to make the
November 1996 ballot.

Then a group of wealthy donors, among them Cleveland insurance tycoon Peter
Lewis, hired Zimmerman, a veteran California political consultant. With a
seven-figure budget, Zimmerman paid signature-gatherers to get 215 on the
ballot, then ran a campaign emphasizing the plight of terminally ill AIDS
and cancer patients. On Election Day, despite fierce opposition from the
Clinton administration, Proposition 215 got a 56% "yes" vote.

On the same day, Arizona voters passed a drug policy proposition that, among
other things, exempted medical marijuana users from criminal sanctions.

Last November, similar initiatives passed in Oregon, Washington, Nevada and
Alaska. Arizonans voted to reaffirm their 1996 vote, overturning changes
imposed by the state legislature.

(Voters also cast ballots on medical marijuana in Colorado and the District
of Columbia. The Colorado vote was not counted because of a dispute over the
validity of petitions that arose after the ballots were printed. Congress
declined to appropriate funds to count ballots in the District of Columbia,
an indication of how vehement opposition to medical marijuana is on Capitol
Hill. Exit polls indicated both propositions would have passed.)

In the glow of last November, Zimmerman talked of opening new fronts in
2000, including Ohio. His deputy, Dave Fratello, said a win in Ohio would
show "mainstream" acceptance of medical pot.

But now Zimmerman is scaling back. A vote in Maine is set for this fall;
next year, voters will speak again in Colorado, where the secretary of state
now says the 1998 petitions were valid, and Nevada, where a referendum must
be approved in two consecutive elections. Aside from those three contests,
Zimmerman said, he'll wait to see if Washington softens its stand.

"There are some signs of change," he said, noting the recent announcement
that the federal government will consider more medical marijuana research
proposals.

But the only way to move federal authorities is by keeping the pressure on
through state initiatives, argues Chuck Thomas, communications director for
the Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington-based lobby that favors medical
marijuana.

John Hartman, president of the National Organization for the Reform of
Marijuana Laws' North Coast (Greater Cleveland) chapter, agrees, but said
there is little current discussion of such a push in Ohio. An initiative
campaign is expensive, he noted, and unless Americans for Medical Rights is
willing to bankroll it, prospects are slim.

"I think we could win," Hartman said. "But it's a pretty big task."

Besides, in the aftermath of Proposition 215's passage, Ohio newspapers
noted that the legislature here had included a medical marijuana defense in
a 1995 crime bill. Many legislators howled that they didn't know that; when
they returned to work in early 1997, they quickly repealed it.