DRUG REFORM: US SAYS YES

FOR DECADES, conventional drug policy has been sustained by powerful
myths. One of the most potent of these myths was the widespread belief
that support for drug-policy reform inevitably meant political suicide
at the ballot box. Results in this week's United States mid-term
Congressional elections are further evidence that support for a rigid
"tough on drugs" approach may soon he a political liability. Perhaps
that day has already arrived.

Voters in six western states and the District of Columbia took part in
11 ballots on drug policy. A majority of voters in all 11 ballots
supported drug reform.

In Alaska, 58 per cent of voters supported a proposal to allow the
controlled use of cannabis for patients with cancer, AIDS and other
serious illnesses provided they had a doctor's approval.

In Arizona, 67 per cent of voters rejected a proposal to overturn a
1996 medical marijuana law, 52 per cent rejected an attempt by the
state legislature to dismantle mandatory treatment and education for
first- and second-time drug offenders, while 52 per cent supported a
block on the state Govermuent's authority to veto or amend initiatives

and referendums supported earlier by a majority of voters.

In Colorado, 67 per cent supported an amendment to allow patients with
a debilitating condition to discuss with their doctor the benefits and
side effects of medical use of cannabis. Patients with a doctor's
prescription and written permission from the state health agency would
be immune from prosecution. Authorities attempted unsuccessfully to
stop this vote being tallied.

In Nevada, 59 per cent of voters supported a proposal to allow doctors
to recommend medical use of cannabis to patients with cancer, AIDS and
other debilitating conditions.

In Oregon, 52 per cent supported a ballot to make smoked marijuana
legal for patients with cancer. AIDS and other debilitating conditions
provided this had a doctor's approval. In a second ballot, 67 per cent
rejected a 1997 attempt by the state's legislature to once again make
possession of one ounce of cannabis punishable by a fine of up to
$1000 and 80 days in jail. In the state of Washington, 59 per cent
supported an initiative to remove criminal penalties from the medical
use of cannabis for patients with debilitating diseases if they had
their doctor's approval.

In Washington DC, a majority supported an initiative to permit
possession and use of marijuana, if recommended by a doctor, for
patients with serious illnesses. Because Congress passed recent
legislation prohibiting any federal funding being expended on this
initiative, the results will be tallied but not registered with the
election commission.

The people of the US have spoken and they have spoken clearly. They
are ready to move on from ideological policies which do not work, to
evidence-based policies which are both effective and compassionate.
These results will have a considerable influence on the electoral
politics of illicit drugs in the US. Inevitably, some impact will soon
be felt in Australia.

No-one should be in the least surprised by these results. Clear
majorities supported medical cannabis in California and Arizona in
ballots coinciding with the US elections two years ago. Focus groups
suggested that the results in the 1996 California ballot were
influenced by a duplicitous attempt by authorities to block a
scientific evaluation of the medical use of cannabis.

In Switzerland in September' 1997, 71 per cent of voters in a national
referendum (with majorities in all 26 cantons) rejected a proposal to
stop the prescription of heroin following a successful medical trial.

The 1998 US election results also confirmed what many had long

suspected. While politicians and the media were obsessed with the
politics developing from the investigation of the President, the
people remained focused on issues that really mattered like
employment, health and education.

In Australia, senior police, capital-city mayors, leaders of the
medical and legal professions and influential community members have
recognised that conventional illicit-drug policies, relying heavily on
law enforcement, have failed resoundingly and support a search for
more effective responses. When community members are surveyed about
illicit drugs with questions specifying the penalties attached to
minor possession offences, support for current policies is
unimpressive.

Another of the myths sustaining current policy has been the absurd
notion that the only choice lies between the status quo and
legalisation. But drug-reformers - advocate a third and moderate
approach, rejecting, both the excesses of a war on drugs and a
free-market, legalisation response. Permitting medicinal use of
cannabis for patients with terminal conditions should not be a
difficult or controversial matter to resolve in a compassionate
country like Australia. Yet, medicinal use of cannabis is denied
because of bans on recreational use of the drug.

Illicit drugs continue to be a major issue in Australia. The US
election results indicate that the ground is moving from under the
politicians. Politicians and parties who choose to ignore these
messages will not survive.

Checked-by: Rich O'Grady