Current, Exleaders Blast Drug Initiative I685
`Bad medicine, bad law,' bipartisan group declares

By: Debera Carlton Harrell

Two former governors and two current county executives met yesterday to
blast ballot Initiative 685 as a ``misleading'' attempt to legalize illicit
drugs by exploiting compassion for people with cancer.

The socalled ``medical marijuana'' measure is a fox in sheep's clothing,
the bipartisan group warned at a downtown Seattle press conference.

Joining to criticize the initiative were exgovernors John Spellman, a
Republican, and Albert Rosellini, a Democrat; King County Executive Ron
Sims and King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng. They said they joined forces
out of concern the public is being conned by a measure that purports to
give marijuana relief to people in pain, but wouldlegalize other ``schedule
1'' drugs like heroin, PCP and LSD.

Under I685, schedule II drugs such as cocaine and methamphetamines would
be decriminalized.

If passed, the initiative would also force the state to release from prison
all nonviolent drug offenders.

``All of us want to relieve the pain and suffering of cancer patients, but
this initiative is not about medical marijuana; it is about legalizing
illegal drugs,'' Maleng said. ``This initiative is offensive to all of us
because it hides behind the pain of cancer victims. It is bad law and bad
medicine.''

Gov. Gary Locke and former Gov. Mike Lowry did not attend the press
conference but sent statements opposing I685.

``This allows the use of LSD and other drugs without any demonstration of
medical effectiveness,'' Locke said. ``It's a very dangerous initiative.
I've always been looking at ways to alleviate the pain and suffering of
sick people but this is not it.''

A poll released yesterday indicated that Washington voters are about evenly
split on the question.

A survey of 805 registered voters statewide found 39 percent support I685.
Thirtyseven percent said they planned to vote against the measure and 24
percent were undecided. The poll was conducted in midOctober by
MasonDixon Political/Media Inc. for The SpokesmanReview newspaper and
KHQTV of Spokane. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage
points.

Yesterday's news conference was organized by Kenneth Alhadeff, a
selfdescribed recovering drug addict and chairman of Concerned Citizens
Against Dangerous Drugs. The executives' solidarity was the latest shot at
the initiative, which has also been opposed by the Washington State Medical
Association.

U.S. Senator Slade Gorton has also scheduled a press conference today
where he is expected to oppose the measure.

I685 supporters who could not be reached last night for comment on the
politicians' announcement. But Tacoma physician Rob Killian, a sponsor of
the initiative, said in response to the poll results that people who remain
undecided are likely to vote ``no'' on Nov. 4. ``We're aware that it's
looking tight,'' he said. ``We have a lot of education to do'' before the
election.

Its supporters say the measure would permit medical use of controlled
drugs, and revise penalties for drug possession and drugrelated violent
crimes. It aims to ``give physicians greater authority to deal with disease
and pain'' and put more emphasis on treatment and education for convicted
drug users.

The measure duplicates an Arizona initiative approved by voters but
repealed by the state legislature.

Longtime public officials in Washington were highly critical of I685's
language, its failure to address the distribution and acquisition of drugs,
and what they called the ``secret agenda'' of the megabuck, outofstate
backers of the bill.

If passed, Spellman said, the measure would create a ``Pandora's box'' of
problems for physicians, police, prosecutors, judges and others.

Officials said a major concern is that the measure does not spell out how
ill patients are to obtain newly legal drugs. While I685 says a physician
can ``make a recommendation'' that a patient use a drug, federal laws limit
a physicians' ability to prescribe controlled substances. Opponents say
that means patients would have to buy prescribed drugs ``on the streets''
or steal them.

Supporters agree that ``The drugs wouldn't be dispensed through
prescription and the initiative doesn't specify how controlled substances
would be obtained or distributed.''

Nor does the proposal define who qualifies as ``seriously ill,'' opponents
say.

Yesterday, the current and former leaders said they also oppose the
initiative because it would allow the release of more than 300 prison
inmates, each of whom have been convicted of at least five felonies,
including drug dealing. Maleng took great exception with supporters'
contentions that ``a judge could deny parole by finding an inmate to be a
danger to the public.''

``We have no parole in this state,'' Maleng said. ``A judge's hands are
tied . . . The inmates would be released onto the streets.''