MARIJUANA VOTE RESULTS KEPT SECRET

Voters made their choices, machines counted ballots, but the results
of the District's medical marijuana initiative must remain secret to
comply with rules passed by Congress, the D.C. Board of Elections and
Ethics decided.

To avoid crossing Congress, election workers used white-out to hide
the results on computer printouts, said Kenneth McGhie, elections
board general counsel.

Tabulated yeas and nays on Initiative 59 cannot be announced, the
board concluded, because Congress barred the District from spending
money to carry out any ballot initiative that would legalize drugs or
reduce penalties for their use, possession or sale.

The fate of Initiative 59, which would permit patients to use
marijuana with a doctor's recommendation, now rests in U.S. District
Court, where supporters are demanding that the vote be honored. Until
the ruling is made no hearing is scheduled - the elections board will
take no further steps.

"The board will comply with the order of the court at the appropriate
time," elections board Chairman Benjamin Wilson said in a statement.
"Ever mindful of its primary role of insuring a fair and honest
election, the board is reluctant to enter into a political dispute
with Congress. However, the board must have direction from the court."

Supporters of the ballot measure were angered by the congressional
move.

James Millner, spokesman for the Whitman-Walker Clinic, which helped
sponsor the ballot initiative, called congressional action an "assault
on democracy." He said, "It's Congress looking at a group of people -
citizens of the District of Columbia - and saying, 'Your vote doesn't
matter.' People who oppose this initiative also should be angry about
this."

At a Northeast Washington precinct on East Capitol Street, 10 of 12
voters said they voted in favor of the initiative.

Retired federal employee Rosetta Hamm, 66, said, "I'm against drugs,
period, but if it helps the sick and the ill, I'm for it, especially
for those with HIV."

Margaret Loewinger sees the matter in personal terms. "I've seen death
and dying too closely. I've watched my dad suffer from cancer," said
Loewinger, 51, who works at the Kennedy Center and the Library of
Congress. She said she was in favor of "anything that can be done to
improve the quality of life. I'm not concerned that it's going to
confuse our policemen's jobs."

David Vaughan, a 28-year-old federal government analyst who opposes
the measure, said, "I don't want to go down that slippery slope of
allowing illegal drugs to be legal."

Activists gathered 17,000 signatures to get the measure on the
District ballot, only to learn last month that Congress would rather
the measure die. U.S. Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.), a former
prosecutor, sponsored the amendment to the D.C. appropriations bill
prohibiting the District from spending money on such an initiative.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit in U.S. District Court
on Friday, asking Judge Richard Roberts to prevent Congress from
voiding the election results. The lawsuit asks the court to order the
city elections board to certify the results, allowing Initiative 59 to
become law if it passes.

Initiative 59 is designed to help residents of the city afflicted with
diseases such as AIDS, cancer and glaucoma. It would permit people to
use, cultivate and distribute marijuana if "recommended" by a doctor.

A doctor's prescription would not be required.

The measure also would require the city to provide for the "safe and
affordable" distribution of the drug to Medicaid patients and other
impoverished residents on a doctor's recommendation.

Marijuana possession is a crime in the District, punishable by a
sentence as long as six months in jail and a fine of $1,000. Last
year, D.C. courts recorded 313 convictions on marijuana-related
charges, including 231 for possession. In 1996, there were 216
convictions. In 1995, there were 140.

Custodian Mohammad Adil, 50, voted in favor of Initiative 59, not the
least because marijuana "comes from the ground. It probably has
medicinal purposes."

Checked-by: Rich O'Grady