INITIATIVE QUALIFIES

And Mr. Heller makes sure it gets done right.

After months of petition-passing in 13 of Nevada's 17 counties, activists
seeking to place a medical marijuana question on Nevada's November ballot
were told they had fallen short by just 43 signatures, in Nye and Lyon
counties.

Representatives of Americans for Medical Rights appealed to Secretary of
State Dean Heller, asking for a review of hundreds of signatures which had
been disallowed due to illegibility, or for lack of addresses or dates, or
because it was unclear the signers had been registered voters at the time
they signed.

Some signatures, the petitioners argued, had even gone uncounted through a
simple mathematical error. Mr. Heller dug in. A mathematical error was
indeed discovered, and 30 signatures resultantly added to the count in Nye
County.

Then, the secretary cited a 1994 ruling which called for county officials
to credit another 400 signatures which were missing dates or addresses, so
long as they could be determined to be those of legitimate, registered voters.

In Lyon County, a slim 25 signatures, previously rejected, were validated
upon instructions from Mr. Heller, bringing that county's total to 1,000 --
18 more than legally required. In Nye County, as it turned out,
petition-passers had exceeded their required quota -- by a mere 15.

The proposal that patients suffering cancer, glaucoma, AIDS, and other ills
shall be allowed to use marijuana for medical purposes upon the advice of a
physician will now be on Nevada's November ballot.

Because an amendment to the Nevada Constitution is proposed, however,
voters would also have to approve the initiative a second time, in the year
2000, for it to become law.

Said Mr. Heller: "In this entire process, from its inception to its
conclusion, two principles stand without question: The first is the right
to petition. The second is that the end result be valid."

It requires no pre-judgment of the merits of the proposal to make sure the
citizens are guaranteed their say. And it is certainly in everyone's
interest that careful attention be paid to the legal requirements at each
step in the process -- so neither side can cry "foul" at a later date,
after vast resources have been spent on a public debate. From all
appearances, Mr. Heller has done the job for which he was elected, and done
it with considerable diligence. Now, as he says, "Let the debate begin."

Checked-by: Mike Gogulski