LEGALIZING POT FOR MEDICAL USE A LARGELY OVERLOOKED BALLOT INITIATIVE

With Nevadans focused on high-profile races for governor and Congress a
statewide ballot initiative to legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes
isn't generating much smoke.

The initiative, which will appear as Question 9 on the Nov. 3 general
election ballot, is actually drawing more attention from outside the state.

Nevadans for Medical Rights, author of the initiative, has received all its
financial support from a like-minded California organization. The most
vocal opponents have been a group of senators, none from Nevada, who called
a press conference against the initiative in Washington, D.C.

That Nevadans aren't talking much about this issue doesn't bother Dan Hart.
As Las Vegas spokesman for the initiative's sponsor, Hart is content with
internal polls that are "very encouraging."

"It's seen, by and large, as a noncontroversial issue," Hart said. "Ours is
more a word of mouth campaign. This is an issue of individual rights, and
this is a state where individual rights are prized."

The Nevada Attorney General's Office opposes the initiative but hasn't been
outspoken on its position.

"A main issue is the fact it can never be implemented because federal law
will prevent the sale of marijuana in any event," said assistant attorney
general Brooke Nielsen. "That's a complete hurdle to implementation."

The Nevada State Medical Association also opposes the initiative,
preferring instead to support clinical research to determine whether
marijuana does have health benefits. The association doesn't believe that
science should be legislated.

Larry Matheis, executive director of the association, noted that heroin was
legally prescribed earlier this century but was replaced by far less lethal
medication.

"Right now there is evidence that marijuana can be used for some things but
in each case there is a better alternative available," Matheis said.

Matheis said doctors already may prescribe Marinol, which contains THC, the
same active ingredient found in marijuana. He said ophthalmologists use the
drug to relieve eye pressure in some patients. The drug is also used to
help stimulate appetites.

But Dr. Jerry Cade, co-founder of the AIDS unit at University Medical
Center, and a supporter of the ballot measure, said many of his patients
believe the plant works better than Marinol. He estimated that 10 to 20
percent of his AIDS patients have admitted to him that they use the plant
to stimulate weight gain, and that it works in most cases.

Cade said several other local physicians who treat either AIDS or cancer
patients, both of whom suffer from nausea, supported marijuana for
medicinal purposes.

"At least anecdotally smoking marijuana seems to help a good number of my
patients," Cade said. "They have gained weight. With the HIV disease,
that's the enemy to us, weight loss."

Although the Nevada Secretary of State's Office noted in its neutral
summation of Question 9 that "most law enforcement agencies" oppose the
initiative, some of the state's major crime-fighting organizations actually
have taken no position. These include the Las Vegas Police Protective
Association, which represents Metro officers, the Nevada Conference of
Police and Sheriffs, and the Nevada District Attorney's Association.

Ben Graham, legislative liaison for the district attorney's association,
said the group's only concern is that if the initiative becomes law, "we
would have to assure there are safeguards to make sure there are no
abuses."

The Nevada initiative, similar to the Proposition 215 ballot measure
approved in California in 1996 by 56 percent of the vote, would allow
possession of marijuana to treat a variety of ailments. These include
cancer, AIDS, glaucoma, epilepsy and other seizures, persistent nausea and
multiple sclerosis.

Adult users must get permission from their physicians. Minors would require
a diagnosis and written authorization from their physicians, along with
parental consent and parental control of the plant. The initiative also
would establish a confidential registry of users that would be available
only to law enforcement officials, and authorize appropriate methods to
supply eligible patients.

Hart noted that supplying the marijuana to the patient is the major legal
sticking point. Since federal law prohibits physicians from prescribing
marijuana, Hart said he is hopeful that either that ban will be lifted or
the state agrees to operate its own supply network.

In California, the plant is sold through marijuana clubs. California
Attorney General Dan Lungren, the Republican candidate for governor in that
state, attracted national headlines in 1996 when he ordered the raid and
closure of the Cannabis Buyers' Club in San Francisco.

A judge ordered the club reopened after Proposition 215 passed. Later in
1997, San Jose, Calif., became the first city in the nation to treat
marijuana clubs like any other commercial business.

Medical marijuana proponents in Nevada will have at least two years to work
out methods of supplying the plant because ballot initiatives to amend the
state's Constitution must be approved in two consecutive general elections.
Since the initiative is appearing for the first time in November, it will
have to pass both next month and in 2000 to become law. Even then, the
state Legislature will be asked to develop enabling legislation to
implement the law.

Hart is no stranger to Nevada politics, having managed campaigns for Las
Vegas Mayor Jan Laverty Jones and Las Vegas City Councilman Michael
McDonald.

"It's purely and simply an issue of compassion," Hart said of medical
marijuana. "It would allow doctors to use a tool on some patients where it
could be effective.

"I talked to a fellow who was paraplegic from a car accident four or five
years ago. He still gets spasms. He's on barbiturates, but they ate away
his stomach. Marijuana is the only thing that will reduce the spasms, and
it doesn't affect the lining of his stomach."

But Republican Sens. Gordon Smith of Oregon, Jon Kyl of Arizona, Wayne
Allard of Colorado and Frank Murkowski of Alaska urged voters in Nevada and
Washington state as well as their own states to vote against their medical
marijuana initiatives. Arizona approved a medical marijuana initiative in
1996, but that state's legislature nullified the law. The U.S. Justice
Department also has filed a legal challenge to California's law.

The senators, who were joined by former national drug czar William Bennett,
argued that such ballot measures "send the wrong message to youth." They
also argued that marijuana isn't medicine, that the restrictions would be
difficult to enforce, and that it would be the first step toward total
legalization of illicit drugs.

Hart resoundingly disagreed.

"We're not trying to legalize marijuana other than for medicinal purposes,"
he said.

Nevadans for Medical Rights raised $232,733 through mid-August, all of
which was contributed by Americans for Medical Rights of Santa Monica,
Calif. The California group was a major backer of Proposition 215.

Advertising in Nevada on this issue has been virtually nonexistent.
Nevadans for Medical Rights has run only newspaper advertisements
encouraging supporters to call them. Hart said a "couple hundred" people
called, many of whom were using marijuana for medical purposes. The ads
were scheduled to run for only one day last week but were repeated because
of a wrong number in the original ad.

Nevada political candidates, for the most part, have avoided discussing
their views on the issue. It is the type of issue they'll talk about only
if asked to do so.

In the governor's race, Democrat Jones said she favors the initiative.
Republican opponent Kenny Guinn said he is opposed, unless the American
Medical Association voices its support. The national association hasn't
supported such initiatives but favors research to determine whether
marijuana has medicinal uses.

Matheis and Cade agreed, however, that current federal drug policies have
discouraged research. The federal government, with its long-standing war on
drugs, has emphasized law enforcement crackdowns on production and
possession of the plant. The government also has threatened to strip
physicians of their licenses if they have anything to do with the plant.

"Part of the problem is that the federal government has been schizophrenic
in dealing with drug issues," Matheis said. "If there are benefits to
marijuana, we should know that."

About the only controversy generated by the ballot measure in Nevada has
been procedural in nature. Supporters of the initiative in March challenged
a state constitutional amendment that placed a $5,000 limit on
contributions from groups and individuals to a ballot measure.

Proponents argued that the contribution limitation was a constitutional
violation of free speech. U.S. District Judge Philip Pro agreed. He
prohibited the state from penalizing contributors who gave more than
$5,000, effectively nullifying that provision.

There were also doubts that the medical marijuana initiative would even
qualify for the ballot. But a recount of petition signatures in Nye and
Lyon counties indicated that the initiative did qualify. Proponents
gathered 74,466 signatures in 13 of the state's 17 counties, far exceeding
the 46,764 required statewide.

Checked-by: Joel W. Johnson