POT BILL THE WRONG MEDICINE FOR CALIFORNIA

One of the nice things about holding all the aces is the power it
gives you-power to impose your will on others, no matter what they think.

That's apparently the plan of State Sen. Mark Leno (D-Marin County),
whose party, since last November's election, controls both houses of
the legislature, the governor's chair and all statewide elective offices.

With that clout behind him, Leno seems intent on overriding the will
of the voters of California, who on Nov. 2 rejected Proposition 19.
That measure would have lifted many of the restrictions on the
workplace use of medical marijuana, and the voters nixed it by a 53.5
to 46.5 margin.

On Jan. 27, Leno introduced SB 129, which is remarkably similar to
Proposition 19. It would prohibit employers from terminating,
disciplining or refusing to hire employees who are qualified patients
legally entitled to possess and use marijuana for medical reasons.

Thus Leno's bill seeks to establish medical marijuana smokers as a
protected class. By doing so it would undermine employers' ability to
provide a safe and drug-free workplace.

It would also enable workers who say they were discriminated against
because they use medical marijuana to sue their employer for damages.
Providing a vehicle to increase California's already excessive
litigiousness is just what our state doesn't need.

Leno's carefully worded bill would not allow medical marijuana users
to actually smoke pot on the job. But it does not stop them from
possessing it at the workplace, and it says nothing about their using
it immediately prior to reporting for work and thus being under its influence.

Under SB 129, even if an employer observed telltale signs of
marijuana use-such as red eyes (which under current law would be
enough to send the employee home or to conduct a drug test)-the
employer must wait to take action until the worker showed clear signs
the marijuana was impairing his or her job performance.

Just as Proposition 19 would have done, SB 129 would put employers in
a tough spot if they have, or wish to obtain, federal contracts or grants.

They'd be in this uncomfortable position because the federal
Drug-Free Workplace Act requires federal contractors and grantees to
maintain a workplace without drugs. This requirement includes having
a policy prohibiting the use and possession of marijuana.

Because this requirement conflicts directly with SB 129, it would
force these employers to choose between complying with SB 129 or
obeying federal law, a classic lose-lose situation.

It's obvious to us that Leno just can't take no for an answer, and is
trying to use the political power Democrats hold in Sacramento to ram
the meat of the voter-rejected Proposition 19 down the throats of the
very electorate that gagged on it last year.

We're alarmed that the influence of the marijuana lobby has reached
this far into our legislature. We hope thoughtful Californians, who
value the rule of law and see the damage such legislation could mean
for our state's already unsettled economy, will demand SB 129's defeat.

After all, isn't the will of the people supposed to rule? Can we
tolerate living in a state where it doesn't?