[This also appeared in the Bergen Record, NJ: http://www.bergen.com/]

ARE AMERICANS BECOMING MORE LIBERAL?

(Ann McFeatters covers the White House and national politics for Scripps
Howard News Service. She may be reached by e-mail at mcfeattersa@shns.com)

ON THE CUSP OF THE MILLENNIUM, Americans seem to be getting more liberal,
more prickly, and more determined not to be told what to do or think.

Look at the social issues voters passed last Tuesday. Alaskans, who
generally vote conservatively, decided they want patients suffering from
such diseases as AIDS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, and glaucoma to have the
right to use marijuana legally to control their pain or their symptoms.
Arizonans, also a conservative lot, did the same thing. So did Nevadans,
Washingtonians, and Oregonians.

Despite pleas from the White House drug czar, GOP leaders and former first
lady Barbara Bush that medical use of marijuana would send the wrong signal
in the war against illicit drugs, voters out West refused to listen. They
rebuffed the argument that medical use will promote general use among the
young.

Oregon voters also soundly rejected a move to increase penalties and send
people to jail for possession of less than an ounce of marijuana. In an age
when the nation's prisons are filling up with first-time drug offenders,
could this be the start of a trend?

Campaign finance reform died an ignoble death in Congress, but the issue is
alive in the states. Massachusetts and Arizona voters said public financing
must be provided to serious candidates who can show broad-based support.
Arizona will raise the money from fees on lobbyists, civil fines, and
donations to a clean election fund with tax credits for donors.
Massachusetts will use public funds to enact its measure.

On the extremely emotional issue of abortion, while Republicans in Congress
say they will try again next year to push through a ban on so-called
partial birth abortions, which are done sparsely and late in pregnancy,
voters in Colorado and Washington state rejected such a ban.

Iowans said that no longer will their state's laws say only that all men
are endowed with certain inalienable rights; now women will also be
mentioned. Florida voters said it's time for their laws to say that both
men and women are equal before the law.

In South Carolina, it will no longer be a violation of the state
constitution for blacks and whites to marry.

Despite contentions that Americans are unwilling to take an economic hit
for environmental protection, Montanans said gold mine operators may no
longer use cyanide. South Dakota, trying to reduce hog pollution, put
limits on farming by big corporations.

Florida voters voted to let counties clamp down on unlicensed private gun
dealers who have not been requiring waiting periods or doing background
checks on gun buyers.

And California, home of the famous Proposition 13, which cut property taxes
but also drastically curtailed school spending and spawned the citizen
referendum movement nationwide, voted to spend $9.2 billion to refurbish
schools. South Dakota voters rejected a proposed ban on using property
taxes for education. Improving education was on voters' minds in every state.

But there is also is a trend not to give what could be construed as new or
special privileges to any group.

Voters in Hawaii and Alaska want nothing to do with legalizing marriage
between same-sex partners. Washington voters said they don't want to
discriminate in favor of someone because of race, color, ethnicity,
national origin, or gender. It is not clear whether voters no longer want
affirmative action programs or whether they wanted to take a stand against
discrimination of any kind. The courts will decide.

And voters around the country said that if people want to gamble, it's
their own business. Several states now will make access to gambling more
available.

In refusing to send more Republicans to Congress, Americans rejected in
part the guidance found in millions of voting guides passed out in churches
by Christian Coalition members. And they told pollsters overwhelmingly they
don't like House Speaker Newt Gingrich because they find him strident,
meddlesome, or not very effective.

But loudly and clearly and snappishly, they said they no longer wish to
think about, vote on, hear about, or be distracted by President Clinton's
personal behavior or morals.

Americans, it's clear, have minds of their own. But that's always been true
and, we hope, always will be, whether they become more conservative, more
liberal, or just more pragmatic.

Checked-by: Pat Dolan