MARIJUANA, AGAIN?

Alaskans learned this week that they will
once again be asked to vote on the state's curious, and perhaps
still-developing, relationship with marijuana. This latest initiative,
which followed a contentious path through the lieutenant governor's
office and the court system, would decriminalize marijuana possession
for people age 21 and over.

It is the third ballot measure regarding marijuana use following the
1990 initiative that recriminalized the drug. Prior to that measure's
easy passage, people over age 18 could possess less than 4 ounces of
marijuana in their home or in some other private place.

Alaskans should not want a return to those days.

The new initiative's proponents, who expect to begin an advertising
campaign, will likely make the argument that theirs is a friendly
plan. Theirs would allow all hemp products to be regulated like
alcohol and tobacco, would allow laws to be set prohibiting
marijuana-intoxicated people from operating vehicles and heavy
equipment, would allow marijuana's use to be banned from public
places, and would not overrule laws barring its use by, or sale to,
minors.

None of that changes the fact that they will be putting people in
jeopardy--even with laws that might be enacted to prevent such risk.

Alaskans may have had that in mind in 2000, when they last voted on a
marijuana measure. In that vote, they overwhelmingly rejected an
initiative that sought to legalize the use of marijuana by people age
18 and over, grant amnesty for those who had been convicted of a
marijuana crime, and create--of all things--a panel to consider
restitution for those people who had been convicted.

Yet voters have also indicated that their sentiments on marijuana are
not absolute. In 1998, voters by a substantial margin approved a
measure allowing the use of marijuana by people suffering from certain
debilitating medical conditions, provided a doctor agrees.

The ballot measure coming before voters in November, however, has no
such element of compassion. Rather, it is a measure based solely on
the pursuit of private pleasure without regard to the costs and risks
that society might incur.

The sponsors of the initiative conclude their proposed legislation for
enactment of the measure, should it be passed, with this statement:

"It is hereby declared that the subject matter of this initiative
involves in the highest degree the economic, social, environmental and
moral well-being and the safety of the citizens of Alaska and the state."

Their very words, however, tell exactly why this ballot measure is so
wrong for Alaska.