LIFE AFTER ASHCROFT

A courageous federal court judge ruled on Tuesday that Attorney General
John Ashcroft issued an illegal and arrogant directive when he tried to
block Oregon's assisted suicide law.

Oregon legalized physician-assisted suicide in 1997 and since that time
about 70 persons have used the law to end their lives with a doctor's help,
to the ire of Ashcroft and conservative members of Congress.

Last November, Ashcroft announced that he had authorized federal law
enforcement officers to take action against doctors who prescribe lethal
drugs to people who are terminally ill. Only one state, Oregon, allows
doctors to prescribe such drugs in the interest of helping critically ill
patients die on terms that they prefer. President Bush and Ashcroft, both
conservative Republicans, made it plain that they are offended by Oregon's
law. Ashcroft went looking for a way to declare the Oregon law illegal and
came up with a ruse that would make Svengali look like an amateur.

Ashcroft decided he would invalidate Oregon's law by using the federal
Controlled Substances Act. When that law was passed 30 years ago, it had
nothing whatsoever to do with a state's right to regulate medical practice.
The law was aimed at controlling illegal drug trafficking. But in November,
in a maneuver that sounded like the death of justice itself, Ashcroft tried
to use that law to throttle doctors acting within Oregon law.

The Justice Department directive said physician-assisted suicide did not
constitute a legitimate medical purpose and doctors who used controlled
substances for that purpose faced the risk of having their licenses revoked.

Oregon sued the federal government over Ashcroft's directive. Last week,
District Judge Robert Jones, of Oregon, rebuffed Ashcroft, saying in effect
that he was singlehandedly attempting to turn the democratic process on its
head by circumventing the will of Oregon voters.

"The citizens of Oregon, through their democratic initiative process, have
chosen to resolve the moral, legal, ethical debate on physician- assisted
suicide for themselves by voting -not once, but twice - in favor of
Oregon's act," Jones wrote.

The Oregon Death With Dignity Act was passed in 1994 and was overwhelmingly
affirmed three years later, following another legal challenge.

There was nothing mysterious about the will of Oregon's voters. The law
they approved says that terminally ill patients with less than six months
to live can request a lethal dose of drugs. Two doctors must confirm the
diagnosis and agree that the patient is mentally competent.

Ashcroft and his fellow conservatives in Congress are usually the first to
bellow about the federal government's improper use of what they derisively
call "social engineering," and yet in this case they tried to impose their
own brand of social engineering on Oregon voters. Assistant Attorney
General Robert McCallum, sounding not like his right-wing boss but more
like a dewy-eyed liberal, declared:

"A just and caring society should do its best to assist in coping with the
problems that afflict the terminally ill. It should not abandon or assist
in killing them. Doctors should not use controlled substances to assist
suicide."

Pardon us, but is this the same caring government that refuses to pay for
prescription drugs for elderly patients who are not hospitalized? What is
our national policy on the issue of death? Is it one that says it's OK for
the elderly to die if they can't afford prescription drugs, but we'd better
not assist those who are terminally ill and are willing to buy their own
way into eternity?

Do we, as Ashcroft suggests, support life and oppose death, or do we as a
nation do this rather selectively, allowing some to die by neglect and
forcing others to remain alive who prefer to die?

Ashcroft's draconian directive, said Judge Jones, can be traced to an
attempt by Congressional leaders "to get through the administrative door
what they could not get through the congressional door, seeking refuge with
the newly appointed attorney general whose ideology matched their views."

The Justice Department hasn't yet decided whether it will appeal Jones'
decision. Wisdom dictates it not waste more of taxpayers' time and money
trying to usurp the will of Oregon voters.