Campaign

BUSH LEADS AN EFFORT TO DEFEAT INITIATIVES FOR SOFTER DRUG LAWS

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- The 2000 election revealed an America of two culturally
distinct territories: the liberal "blue" states on the East and West coasts
that backed Al Gore, and the conservative "red" states of the heartland
that favored President Bush.

Yet the White House now is scrambling to prevent four of those "red" states
from softening laws on illegal drugs . Voters in Ohio, Arizona, Nevada and
South Dakota -- all states Mr. Bush carried two years ago -- go to the
polls Tuesday to decide ballot initiatives that would have the effect of
weakening antidrug laws.

While Mr. Bush -- who pledged to usher in a "responsibility era" --
barnstorms the country boosting Republican candidates for Congress, the
White House has dispatched senior administration officials to rally support
against the initiatives. These emissaries fret that wealthy backers of
drug-policy changes -- such as billionaire investor George Soros -- may be
winning the upper hand.

"They are using a big-bucks megaphone to undermine our efforts," says Mr.
Bush's drug-policy adviser, John Walters, campaigning against the Ohio
initiative at a drug-treatment facility here. He and Drug Enforcement
Agency Director Asa Hutchinson are spearheading administration opposition
to the initiatives.

The Ohio measure, like a similar one on the ballot in the liberal enclave
of Washington, D.C., would require treatment instead of incarceration for
nonviolent drug offenders. The Arizona initiative would legalize limited
use of marijuana for purposes of medical treatment. Nevada's would
decriminalize possession of marijuana in amounts of three ounces or less
for those 21 and older.

South Dakota voters will decide on two drug-policy initiatives, both all
but ignored in the din surrounding competitive races there for governor and
the U.S. House and Senate. One measure would make legal the cultivation,
possession or sale of hemp, says the Initiative and Referendum Institute,
which tracks state-ballot measures. Hemp comes from the same plant as
marijuana. The other initiative, which is of special interest to proponents
of ending the U.S. war on drugs , would allow defendants to contest the
fairness of antidrug laws even if it is clear they violated such laws.

There is no known polling on the South Dakota measures. Polling elsewhere
suggests that the Ohio initiative is likely to be defeated, the measures in
Arizona and Washington, D.C., are likely to pass, and the Nevada measure is
too close to call.

The issue is somewhat awkward for Mr. Bush, who refused during the 2000
campaign to say whether he ever used illegal drugs . But he decried the
permissive philosophy that developed during the 1960s and advocated a new
ethic of responsibility that teaches young Americans to make "right decisions."

To make their case on this year's ballot measures, Messrs. Walters and
Hutchinson have visited community leaders to rally opposition and lobby
newspaper editorial boards to embrace their view. They have framed their
arguments in economic as well as moral terms. Mr. Walters, for example,
warned corporate leaders in Arizona that legalizing medical marijuana would
harm the business climate.

Proponents of weakening drug laws are running "against the full weight of
the federal government," grouses Bruce Mirken, spokesman for the Marijuana
Policy Project. "They take the opportunity whenever they can to slam on the
initiatives," adds Ethan Nadelmann, who runs the Soros-backed Drug Policy
Alliance.

Mr. Soros and his allies, include fellow billionaires John Sperling and
Peter Lewis, argue that harsh punishments for drug use and possession
haven't slowed the drug trade and have succeeded only in clogging the
courts and prisons with people who need help, not jail time. During the
past six years, they have financed successful efforts to pass 17 of 19
state-level initiatives easing drug laws.

The Bush administration isn't conceding that the voters' decision is the
last word. If any of the state initiatives pass, Mr. Walters vows to work
with local officials to roll them back.

The administration is attempting to do just that in California, one of
eight states that have legalized medical use of marijuana. The 1996
California law conflicts with federal law, and the DEA reasserted its
jurisdiction last year after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that California
marijuana clubs couldn't distribute pot to those with doctors'
prescriptions: Federal agents arrested the operators of a Santa Cruz farm
that had been operating under the supervision and approval of local law
enforcement. The situation remains in legal limbo.

"We're in this for the long haul," vows Mr. Walters. "We're going to fight,
whether we win or lose, in every state that they come into from now on."