WHEN THE MEANS CLASH WITH THE ENDS

While I was off examining my navel in Indiana, the results of two important
studies that arrived at uncomfortable conclusions were made public.

The first, conducted by the National Academy of Sciences, said flatly that
marijuana eases pain and quells nausea in cancer and AIDS patients and that
there is no clear evidence that smoking it leads to consumption of heroin,
cocaine or other narcotics. The "drug war" commandos are going to have a
tough time ignoring this study since it was commissioned by Barry McCaffrey,
head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, and its findings are
backed by an impressive panel of 35 experts who spent 18 months taking
public testimony and evaluating scientific studies on marijuana.

But authorities already are running away from their own study because its
conclusions don't square with conventional thinking or administration
policy. Instead of accepting the major findings of the report, McCaffrey
chose to emphasize a section stressing that smoking is harmful and some
other means of delivering marijuana to patients needs to be found.
Meanwhile, the federal government continues to fight the states including
California that have legalized medical marijuana. And goodold, hardcore
Orange County recently sent a man to prison for six years for distributing
marijuana to undercover agents posing as seriously ill patients.

This rigid mindset rejects exploring new avenues of attacking the drug
problem like decriminalization of simple possession with a "soft on drugs"
label that is absolutely untrue.

The same rigidity of toughguy thinking holds for reaction to the second
study in which the Justice Policy Institute of San Francisco using
information from the California Criminal Justice Statistics Center and the
state Department of Corrections found no correlation between California's
general drop in crime and the threestrikes sentencing law. The sevenfold
greater use of three strikes in Los Angeles and Sacramento did not produce a
greater decline in crime than in Alameda or San Francisco, which barely used
the law at all. The study further pointed out that more than twothirds of
the 40,000 second and thirdstrike prison inmates in California were
convicted of property crimes or drug offenses, mostly possession and not
violent crimes.

All of this reminds me of a magazine assignment I had some years ago to
track down the results of a lengthy study on pornography, commissioned by
the Nixon administration, that had apparently disappeared. After a good deal
of digging, I discovered why. The report was supposed to find out that porn
was a social evil justifying tough restraints by the government. Instead, a
blueribbon panel of distinguished citizens found that pornography was
generally benign and often provided an outlet for releasing tensions that
might otherwise turn into violence. So the report was buried and finally
released quietly under duress and without presidential approval because it
came up with the wrong answers.

It also reminds me of a recent letter to the Pilot from our Supervisor Tom
Wilson. He turned out to be one jump ahead in the studytrashing business by
ridiculing an upcoming El Toro airport noise study even before the study is
made. This is clearly based on the near certainty that results of the study
won't support Wilson's position on the airport. But wouldn't it be
fascinating to observe his footwork if the study unexpectedly found the
noise level intolerable after all?

Finally, to dispose of some other items I found in the pile of newspapers
that awaited my return to lotus land:

* It was heartening to see that our neighboring Assemblyman Scott Baugh
proved that with determination, staying power and highpowered legal help,
it's possible to get away even with hotwiring an election.

* It was warming to note that given a choice of standing firmly on
constitutional law or grubbing for votes, a group of Orange County pols
mostly Republican went all out for the votes by supporting the protesters in
Little Saigon.

* It was instructive to read the Saturday Commentary page of the Pilot that
was devoted almost entirely to explaining how "liberal thinking" is
responsible for virtually all of the ills our nation is experiencing today.

Bruce Crawford writes that racism is "inherent in liberal thinking" because
we liberals don't believe that "minorities are capable of any sense of
selfidentity." Apparently this is because we feel that people born in an
urban ghetto have a little tougher row to hoe than people born in Beverly
Hills or Newport Beach, and a leg up like decent schools might be helpful.

Gil Ferguson is upset because elitist thinkers have changed the United
States from a "melting pot" to a "salad bowl." Although he explained this at
some length, I'm still struggling with it, especially "the continuing
devaluation and trashing of our religion and culture" as opposed to an
honest and open examination of a wide diversity of ideas that takes us to
those places out of choice and not exhortation.

I may not go away again if this sort of thing is going to happen every time
I leave.

* JOSEPH N. BELL is a Santa Ana Heights resident. His column appears
Thursdays.