POT POLITICS

As More States Approve The Use Of Marijuana For Medical Purposes, The White
House Should Pay Heed

Politicians reluctant to follow their better instincts and support the
medicinal use of marijuana have reason to be more confident of their
views as a result of elections last week. In Alaska, Arizona, Nevada,
Oregon and Washington state -- not all exactly strongholds of
liberalism -- voters have expressed their support for the legal use of
pot under such circumstances. The Clinton administration in particular
should reconsider its opposition.

The approval of referendums on Tuesday follows similar election
results in California and Arizona in 1996. Arizona lawmakers later
rescinded that vote.

Support is gaining for using marijuana to treat patients suffering
from cancer, glaucoma, and multiple sclerosis. The leader of the
medical marijuana movement in Arizona says the acceptance of a
constructive use for marijuana is an example of the rejection of what
had been the political status quo. In California, UCLA professor Mark
Kleinman offers this interpretation: "It's no longer possible to
buffalo the American people by screaming drugs and having them run
away.''

Scientific evidence is on the popular side. Cancer patients find that
marijuana helps ward off the nausea associated with chemotherapy,
while glaucoma patients use it to relieve pressure within the eye.
AIDS patients regain their appetites after smoking it.

The problem is that the White House is preoccupied with the politics
of even the limited legal use of pot, to the point where it hardly
addresses the health issue at all. The sentiment of voters is met with
an official reiteration of its position that liberalized state laws
won't alter federal policy. Dr. Barry McCaffrey, the Clinton
administration's drug czar, points to the money the advocates for
medicinal marijuana have amassed. It's true that such forces have
benefited from a $5 million ad campaign financed by billionaire George
Soros. But what moderately successful political movement doesn't have
at least some money behind it?

Worse, there's no basis for the White House contention that the push
for the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes is really a front for
a movement to legalize other drugs. That's an unfair attack on what
are efforts to ease suffering, and nothing more. It's unsettlingly
reminiscent of its contention that free needle distribution encourages
intravenous drug use.

There's nothing inconsistent about being troubled by the reckless use
of marijuana and accepting the benefits of its use under closely
monitored medical conditions.

This page has long advocated such a humane approach in New York state.
Now voters have sent a sober message to politicians in Washington and
in state capitals that shouldn't be automatically rejected.

Checked-by: Patrick Henry