MOVE TO PENALIZE PRO-DRUG VIEWS AMOUNTS TO CENSORSHIP

In building his case for liberating Iraq, President Bush told Congress
and the American people, "America will always stand firm for the
non-negotiable demands of human dignity: the rule of law, limits on
the power of the state, respect for women, private property, free
speech, equal justice and religious tolerance."

These principles continue to comfort and motivate both our soldiers
making the ultimate sacrifice for America and the Iraqi people
struggling to build a free society of their own.

Yet, at the very time our soldiers are risking their lives to bring
democracy to Iraq, certain members of Congress are undermining it at
home.

This year, U.S. Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) slipped a provision into
a federal spending bill that takes transportation grants away from any
city that displays ads on its buses and subways from groups advocating
"the legalization or medical use of" marijuana.

The provision is already having a chilling effect on free speech.
Afraid of losing at least $85 million in transportation funding, the
Washington transportation authority rejected an advertisement this
year submitted by a coalition of drug policy reform groups.

The ad shows a group of ordinary people standing behind prison bars
under the headline, "Marijuana Laws Waste Billions of Taxpayer Dollars
to Lock Up Non-Violent Americans."

The goal of the Istook Amendment is to prevent residents from
educating their neighbors on why we need to reform our nation's
marijuana laws.

Of course, it won't be long before other members of Congress try to
censor viewpoints they disagree with. Abortion-rights groups could
lobby Congress to ban anti-abortion ads and vice versa.

This is censorship, plain and simple.

With $3 billion in federal transportation dollars at stake, this is a
serious issue. Courts have generally ruled that public transportation
authorities cannot discriminate against any political viewpoint.

If local and state transit authorities are forced to run drug policy
reform ads, they could lose federal grants. Istook's provision could
end up costing cities in many congressional districts tens of millions
of dollars. That means not only less service, but also fewer jobs.

The same federal spending bill also gave the federal government $145
million in taxpayer money to run ads in support of a war on marijuana,
including ads on buses and subways around the country.

At the same time members of Congress are spending taxpayer money to
promote their view on an issue, they're prohibiting taxpayers from
using their own money to pay for ads offering a different
perspective.

Right now it's marijuana policy; tomorrow it could be tax or gun
policy. Imagine a President Kerry prohibiting ads in support of the
right to keep and bear arms while spending taxpayer money to run ads
in support of gun control. Congress has paved the way.

The free exchange of ideas without government censorship is essential
to the preservation of a free society. There is still a chance,
however, that free speech will prevail in the end.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Wednesday
heard arguments in a case brought by the Drug Policy Alliance and
other groups, challenging the Istook Amendment on free-speech grounds.

Additionally, with enough pressure from voters, Congress could be
persuaded to repeal the Istook provision this year. Our sons and
daughters are dying to promote democracy. Congress needs to stop
undermining it.

Bill Piper is director of national affairs for the Drug Policy
Alliance, an organization that promotes drug policies "grounded in
science, compassion, health and human rights."