POT PLAN A SMOKE SCREEN, FOES SAY

But Backers Say Medical Use Can Ease Suffering

Supporters of a new ballot measure hope voters will once again back the
concept of marijuana for medical uses.

But opponents say the measure is legally contradictory and that those same
supporters are misleading voters about marijuana's health risks.

Approval from voters for Proposition 203, which includes about nine pages
worth of proposed changes to Arizona law, would:

* Decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana.

* Allow the medicinal use of marijuana with an ID card and a doctor's
recommendation.

* Require the Arizona Department of Public Safety to distribute up to 2
free ounces of marijuana for medical use to people with registration cards
from the state Department of Health Services.

* Increase maximum sentencing for people convicted committing a violent
crime while under the influence of a controlled substance, while ending the
minimum mandatory sentence or fine for any conviction of certain drug offenses.

The measure, which is opposed by an alliance of Arizona's county attorneys,
sheriffs and pharmacists, also came under fire from the nation's "drug
czar," John Walters, who visited Pima and Maricopa counties to espouse the
dangers of marijuana. He said teens seek drug treatment for marijuana abuse
more than for any other drug.

Dr. Jeffrey Singer, a Phoenix physician, is joined by at least six other
Phoenix doctors as well as a former Maricopa County Superior Court judge in
supporting the measure.

State voters already have twice supported medical marijuana.

Supporters say Proposition 203 is an extension of a medical marijuana
measure approved by 65 percent of Arizona voters in 1996. It allowed
doctors to prescribe otherwise illegal drugs and let patients possess them
without fear of being arrested for violating state law. In 1998, about 57
percent of voters opted to keep the 1996 measure in place.

Supporters of Proposition 203 say doctors in Arizona have not been
prescribing marijuana because of a warning by then-U.S. Attorney General
Janet Reno shortly after the election. Reno said the Drug Enforcement
Administration would review the records of doctors who prescribed illegal
drugs to determine whether their prescription- writing privileges should be
revoked.

Marijuana was used as a treatment for migraine headaches in the 1920s.
Canada's highest court has approved of making marijuana available to
patients, while Britain decriminalized marijuana in May.

"We're talking about joining the rest of the world," Singer said.

Singer said it's clear that marijuana is not addictive and that it has a
host of medicinal uses. Patients who suffer from cancer and AIDS, for
example, can waste away from a loss of appetite and nausea. Medical
marijuana helps them to eat and keep down food, he said.

The Arizona Pharmacy Association and the Arizona Society of Health System
Pharmacists, on the other hand, say there is "no proven medical benefits or
advantage from the smoking of marijuana," according to a written statement.

Medical marijuana advocates say the drug can be consumed in other ways,
such as being mixed with food. Still, pharmacists say that Marinol, a
synthetic form of a naturally occurring component of marijuana, is
available to patients and provides the same benefits in fighting nausea and
promoting weight gain.

But even if the measure passes, talking about a distribution system is a
moot point.

According to federal law, it's illegal for anyone to distribute a
controlled substance, including marijuana, without a doctor's prescription.
DPS would actually be breaking federal law by following state laws,
opponents say.

"You cannot enforce a law under state statutes because then you'd be
breaking federal law," said Pati Urias, a spokeswoman for the Arizona
Attorney General's Office. "If you were to pass a state law, obviously
that's illegal. You couldn't enforce something like that."

Authors of the measure argue that because the marijuana would be grown or
produced, seized and redistributed all within state boundaries, it would
not be subject to federal laws.

And while 2 ounces might not seem like much, it can produce up to 200
cigarettes, said Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall, a Democrat.

"If we decriminalize that much marijuana, we're telling our young people
that it's all right to use drugs," LaWall said.

Furthermore, the proposition would allow for parents to give teen- agers
legal permission to use marijuana. There's no law that allows parents to do
that with tobacco.

"It's a terrible proposition," LaWall said.

But even if DPS were willing to consider distribution, it might first have
to spend millions of dollars in testing the drugs that it does seize, said
Sgt. Mike Bonin, a DPS spokesman.

"It would have to be screened, because if that marijuana is tainted with
something, it puts us in a liability stance. That would cost quite a good
dollar," he said.

Former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods, a Republican, said he supports
Proposition 203 because he feels the war on drugs is a failed effort.

"We've spent billions of dollars in this country over the decades and
locked up hundreds of thousands of primarily poor people whose main problem
is they're addicted to drugs. The problem is as bad as ever. I don't think
there's been a awful lot of progress that we can point to," Woods said. "I
just think it's time to stop wasting everybody's time and money."

The proposition has also fueled a longtime debate over whether marijuana
provides any medical benefits at all.

DPS wouldn't be able to get a single plant from the National Institute on
Drug Abuse, said Steve Gust, a spokesman. The institute maintains a
marijuana farm for medical research purposes only.

Marijuana distributed to Arizona residents would not be for research, Gust
said. "It would be medical treatment. It would fall outside the legal uses
for which this farm has been established."

Mike Murphy, an Arizona Department of Health Services spokesman, said the
department has taken no stance on the proposition.

"I assume we would carry out whatever the law is," Murphy said. "I think
the short answer is that we will jump off that bridge when we get to it. We
intend to follow whatever the law dictates."

An analysis by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee projects that state
prison costs will drop. It estimates the cost of a patient registry will
cost $165,000, while revenues collected from fees to offset those costs
will be $55,000.

Supporters say lowered prison costs will save the state millions of
dollars. But opponents say the costs of setting up a statewide registry and
distribution system will cost millions. Neither side can put a firm price
on setup of a distribution system.

(SIDEBAR)

Pro and con

Prop. 203: Medical marijuana

* PRO: Alleviates suffering from severe medical conditions by making
marijuana available to patients within Arizona, saves the state millions in
prison and court costs by decriminalizing some drug offenses, and
encourages drug-abuse treatment in place of "ineffective" drug laws

* CON: Requires the Arizona Department of Public Safety to distribute
marijuana and may cost millions to test and distribute, allows first- time
drug offenders to avoid time behind bars and prohibits the state from
seizing drug-related assets unless the owner is convicted of the drug
crimes that generated those assets