WEST CHALLENGES EAST IN DRUG WAR

East does not meet West when it comes to America's drug war. California,
Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon and Washington have
legalized medical marijuana. But that doesn't stop federal drug agents from
raiding West Coast medical marijuana clubs.

Skirmishes are erupting on new fronts. Nevada's November ballot will rachet
up the fighting with an initiative to legalize possession of up to three
ounces of marijuana - with or without a prescription.

Then last week, if only to add silliness to the equation, San Francisco
Supervisor Mark Leno proposed a ballot measure to have The Special City
grow medical marijuana.

The timing couldn't have been worse for U.S. drug czar John Walters to
visit the West, but that didn't stop him.

On Thursday, Walters told the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board that
he wasn't happy that some San Franciscans frame his position on medical
marijuana as "bigoted" and without justification.

Medical research, he said, simply doesn't support marijuana as medicine.
Besides, many medical-marijuana advocates are more interested in using
medicinal pot as a back door to legalize drugs - they don't care about the
afflicted.

So who are these people to call Walters cold-hearted? And he's right. On
the pro-medical marijuana side, there are some healthy potheads who
shamelessly hide behind sick people.

And then there are Democratic anti-drug war partisans who charge that
Republicans are hypocrites for saying they advocate states' rights - unless
drugs are involved.

What about a truce - an admission that both sides do care? Most
medical-marijuana advocates care about cancer patients, who believe
marijuana reduces their pain and calms their nausea. Walters cares about
children, who are abused or neglected because their parents' wasted lives
revolve around drugs, not family.

Walters will never be All That He Can Be until he takes on the needless
excesses in the war on drugs. He was asked about the Draconian sentences
that taint the federal criminal justice system. His answer was to go after
"people who believe we should in some cases change laws."

But while he said he believes the public is uninformed, Walters said he did
not inform himself about the specifics of the high-profile case of
Louisiana's Clarence Aaron, a first-time nonviolent drug offender who was
sentenced to life for hooking up two drug operations.

"I think that the damage that drug trafficking does to people is serious
enough that I don't have a problem with that sentence. If I knew all
specifics and I had to be the judge, I might have set something different."

That answer is unacceptable.

In February, Walters said his people were reviewing mandatory minimum
sentences. Now, months later, he's proposing no changes. Meanwhile, he
hasn't gotten to the bottom of one of the system's most notorious cases.

And the Bush administration should indulge the states' views for a change.
Forget about the states' rights hypoc-risy issue. Washington should instead
ask: Which approach works best?

The answer is: People don't know, and different states have different
problems. Good Republicans should understand that letting states experiment
could provide needed answers.

Voters in eight Western states, plus Maine, have told Washington they want
to do things their way. Washington should listen.