POT STATISTICS USED TO DEFEND BOTH SIDES

It's not often when people on both sides of an issue use the same
statistics to make their points. Both opponents and proponents of a
ballot measure to legalize marijuana, however, cite some of the same
figures in arguing whether voters should approve or defeat the measure
Tuesday.

Opponents of Ballot Measure No. 2 have rallied against marijuana
legalization by pointing to statistics such as one-fourth of Alaska
students reporting in a 2003 survey that they had used marijuana at
least once in the last 30 days.

The response by initiative supporters: Thanks for making our case that
current marijuana criminalization efforts don't work.

Four years after rejecting a more liberal marijuana legalization
proposal 59 percent to 41 percent, voters will be asked Tuesday
whether all civil and criminal penalties for marijuana use,
distribution and possession should be removed from state law and if
the state should be able to regulate the drug like alcohol or tobacco.

Backers of the measure argue that a change in Alaska's marijuana
policy is needed because the current laws are ineffective in efforts
like curbing pot use among youth and lead to harmful side effects such
as allowing drug dealers to control the marijuana trade.

If marijuana was regulated like alcohol or tobacco, they say, adults
could receive their pot from legal sources, children would have less
access to the drug on the street and law enforcement would have more
time to pursue more pressing problems.

"The bottom line from my point of view is that what we're doing right
now is not working," said Ken Jacobus, an Anchorage attorney involved
in the legalization effort. "The war on drugs, we've been fighting the
war on drugs since President Nixon and look where it's gotten us."

Opponents, however, argue that legalizing marijuana would create more
access to a drug that has devastating effects on society. They say
marijuana, particularly the potent variety grown in Alaska, increases
crime, causes harmful health effects and leads to more substance abuse
problems.

It's counterintuitive to presume that legalizing a drug will lead to
less use, said Matthew Fagnani, chair of Alaskans Against the
Legalization of Marijuana and Hemp. Rather, he said, legalization will
send a message to society that it's OK to use marijuana.

"If this initiative passes, I think what you're going to find is
marijuana use is going to increase," Fagnani said.

Increased use, he said, will bring a host of problems that will cost
employers and society.

Employers will have to take extra precautions to ensure a safe
workplace, authorities will have to worry about the potential for
stoned drivers on roads, military personnel will have ready access to
marijuana right outside base and law enforcement will be faced with
dangerous situations caused by people under the influence of pot,
Fagnani said.

Fagnani and other opponents said they also worry that legalized
marijuana will decrease economic development in Alaska by making the
state a less attractive location for military and prompting federal
authorities to cut highway funding because of safety concerns.

They point to the state's decision to decrease its legal blood-alcohol
level limit for driving from 0.10 to 0.08 in light of highway funding
concerns as evidence that authorities will cut funding because of
safety issues.

"It will impact Alaska in a negative way," Fagnani said.

Jacobus and proponents of Ballot Measure No. 2 characterize the
federal funding and military arguments as scare tactics.

"Public funding will pass or fail based on politics and, in the case
of Alaska, how long Ted Stevens stays in office," Jacobus said.

Legalization proponents also take issue with the argument that the
ballot measure will hurt economic development, said Kelly Drew, an
associate professor at the University of Alaska Fairbanks Institute of
Arctic Biology and a backer of the initiative.

Drew said that, if anything, legalized marijuana will enhance the
state's economic options. As an example, she cited potential uses for
the hemp strain of the marijuana plant such as clothing, food and energy.

"It's so vilified in the country it's hard to imagine, but it has a
lot of viable applications far beyond the drug and the hallucinogenic
effects," Drew said.

Jacobus said he doesn't buy the argument that legalized marijuana will
curb tourism in Alaska, a point that Gov. Frank Murkowski argued
during a recent speech at the Alaska Travel Industry Association's
conference in Fairbanks.

"We have a city here named Tok," Jacobus said. "Alaska could be a
marijuana destination like Holland if it chose to be."

Jacobus said Ballot Measure No. 2 supporters are encouraged by the
results of the 2000 measure, a more radical legalization proposal that
included provisions of amnesty and restitution for people convicted of
marijuana crimes.

Despite a poorly developed initiative and a campaign run from an
Anchorage office with a replica of a giant marijuana leaf over the
front entrance, the measure still received more than 40 percent of the
vote, he said.

But this year's measure has been greeted with plenty of formal
opposition. Locally, the Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly and the
Fairbanks and North Pole city councils have all passed resolutions
denouncing the initiative.

When asked about the measure in public forums and surveys, nearly
every Interior candidate for the state Legislature has spoken against
it.

Scott Burns, the deputy director of the White House Office of National
Drug Control Policy, has visited Fairbanks to lobby against the
proposal and the Greater Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce has actively
campaigned against the initiative.

During his appearance on Oct. 14, Burns characterized the initiative
as a measure funded mostly by the Washington, D.C.,-based Marijuana
Policy Project in an effort for drug legalization proponents to get a
foothold in at least one state.

"Being the first in the country to do this could have all kinds of
repercussions," Burns said.

If the measure passes, both supporters and critics predict, it will
lead to a showdown between federal and state authorities because
federal law prohibits possession of any amount of marijuana.

Because of court cases tracing back to 1975, current Alaska law allows
adults to possess as much as 4 ounces of marijuana for personal use in
their home. Medical marijuana was approved by Alaska voters in 1998.