WHY QUESTION 9 IS BAD FOR NEVADA

On Nov. 5, you will have an opportunity to vote on ballot Question 9, which
is an initiative relating to "allow the use and possession of three ounces
or less of marijuana by persons aged 21 years or older, to require the
Legislature to provide or maintain penalties for using, distributing,
selling or possessing marijuana under certain circumstances, and to provide
a system of regulation for cultivation, taxation, sale and distribution of
marijuana."

If passed by the voters, this initiative would amend our state's
constitution and Nevada would be the first state in the America to pass the
legalization of marijuana. However, uniquely enough, it would be in direct
violation of federal and international drug treaties and our state will be
subject to sanctions and the risk of federal prosecution.

Setting aside the legal issues, our state will suffer far-reaching and
negative impacts and public safety will be threatened.

The members of the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association and the Nevada
District Attorney's Association unanimously voted "against" supporting this
initiative and they are now attempting to educate the voters that the
passage of this law would lead to increased drug usage with the anticipation
of increased criminal activity.

The following are just a few reasons why this initiative must be defeated:

- -- Marijuana is a "gateway drug." It is a proven fact that kids who smoke
marijuana are 85 times more likely to use cocaine than non-marijuana
smokers. In Washoe County, 84 percent of individuals referred to Drug Court
started with marijuana.

- -- According to U.S. Drug Enforcement Director Asa Hutchinson, 225,000
Americans entered substance abuse treatment primarily for marijuana
dependence in 1999.

- -- Health insurance, liability insurance, and lawsuits against employers
will increase significantly as results of accidents, injuries, and death
attributed to marijuana use by employees. Drug using employees have a 300
percent higher medical cost than non-users.

- -- In Southern Nevada, 41.2 percent of those arrested for domestic violence
tested positive for marijuana; 31.8 percent of those arrested for violent
crimes tested positive for marijuana and 34.4 percent of those arrested for
property crimes tested positive for marijuana

- -- According to the Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, marijuana
causes long term effects to include a) harmful effects to respiratory
systems (similar to the same breathing problems that tobacco users
experience, including bronchitis and emphysema), b) cancer: marijuana
contains more cancer-causing agents than found in tobacco smoke, c)
reproductive system: marijuana can effect male and female hormones, diminish
or extinguish sexual pleasure, and cause a temporary loss in fertility and
cause irregular menstrual cycles for women, and d) immune system: THC can
damage the cells and tissues that help guard against disease

- -- Since this initiative would also change Nevada's driving under the
influence laws, drivers would be permitted to drive under the influence of
marijuana as long as they were not "driving dangerously." Currently, there
is no way to determine the "level of intoxication" from marijuana use as
there is with alcohol.

You may be asking yourself who is behind this initiative? According to the
Nevada Secretary of State's Office, $575,000.00 was contributed to the
Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement from the Marijuana Policy Project
in Washington, D.C. Nevadans contributed only $275.

MPP is supporting the legalization of marijuana in other states also,
including Arizona, California, and Washington and has spent almost $20
million on their efforts nationwide. Billionaire George Soros, and two
millionaires, John Sperling of Phoenix and Peter Lewis of Cleveland, have
made substantial donations to support this ill-conceived initiative.
Obviously, this is not a Nevada "grass roots" campaign.

This initiative should not be confused with the passing of a Nevada law in
2001 allowing individuals to use marijuana for medical reasons. In some of
the publicized literature produced by MPP, they allude to the medical
benefits of marijuana in an effort to gain support and confuse voters.

I encourage you to vote "no" on Question 9. By voting "no," we send a strong
and clear message to our youth that we support law enforcement's effort to
provide a drug free and safe environment in our community.