BLOOMBERG, END POT LAW HYPOCRISY

When Michael Bloomberg was running for mayor, a reporter asked him if he
had ever smoked pot. "You bet I did," he replied, "and I enjoyed it."

Candidates are asked a million questions, and most of their answers are
forgotten, but we all know this bit of campaign Q&A because the National
Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws Foundation or NORML, a
Washington-based pro-legalization group, is running Michael Bloomberg's
words in splashy print ads. The mayor now regrets his answer in New York
Magazine, but the damage is done. His face in the pro-pot ad - "It's NORML
to smoke pot" - may loom like Big Brother's in 1984, but the quote is
knowing and hip.

Times change. When Ronald Reagan nominated Judge Douglas Ginsburg to the
U.S. Supreme Court and it turned out he had smoked marijuana in his youth,
his nomination was incinerated. In 1992, Gov. Bill Clinton, running for
president, admitted that he had smoked pot, but still felt it prudent to
claim that he had never inhaled. But by the last presidential election
cycle, it was part of the public record that Vice President Al Gore had
smoked pot as a young man. Michael Bloomberg simply swelled a trend.

But the times also do not change. Marijuana continues to be illegal; and
while the charmed circle of the prosperous and well-connected who can smoke
with impunity may have expanded a bit, those who are outside the circle are
still liable for arrest and prosecution if they are caught. (In 2000, the
New York Police Department arrested 50,000 people for small amounts of
marijuana possession.)

When I was in a good East Coast college in the '70s, I too was in that
charmed circle, and I smoked maybe 10 times. Unlike Bill Clinton, I
inhaled. Unlike Michael Bloomberg, I didn't really enjoy it, which is why I
have never smoked it for pleasure since. (Ten years ago I smoked marijuana
to relieve the nausea that is a side effect of chemotherapy, but that
certainly wasn't pleasant.) Yet many of my college friends smoked a lot
more than I did, and none of them ever considered the possibility that he
might be arrested, so long as he was reasonably cautious. Their calculation
of the risk was correct. Casual and not-so-casual users behaved discreetly,
and did not run for office prematurely. Like Michael Bloomberg, they passed
through their drug days legally unscathed.

Capricious enforcement is a major argument against the marijuana laws.
Arbitrariness breeds disrespect. It also sends a perverse signal about
society's seriousness: If we really thought pot was the demon weed, would
we let our elites experiment with it without concern? Wouldn't we strain
every nerve to keep their hands clean? Yet we don't.

Mayor Bloomberg needs to do more than disavow his campaign talk now. He
should reflect on the justice of laws that still prohibit what he clearly
felt no compunction about doing.

Of course, the mayor of New York has to be mindful of the possible
quality-of-life effects of pot smoking. Mayor Rudolph Giuliani directed the
cops to crack down on "minor" offenses such as public smoking and low-level
dealing. Seemingly overnight, the bleary-eyed wraiths murmuring "Smokes"
disappeared from city parks, and those parks became proper habitats for the
bourgeoisie and the aspiring working class who are the city's backbone.

But quality-of-life crimes also include acts that are otherwise legal when
done in private. Alcohol prohibition was lifted almost 70 years ago. Yet in
New York City (and most other places) you may not be publicly drunk, and
you may not chug liquor on the streets or the park-benches, even if you
pack your bottle in a brown paper bag (the ruse of winos in pre-Giuliani
times). Standards of public behavior differ from standards for what we may
do in private. Good order can and should be maintained, even if pot were to
be decriminalized.

Politicians must also consider the example they set. Though I am in favor
of decriminalization, I think pot smoking is a bad habit to indulge. I
don't find pot-heads funny, and I have known heavy users who have suffered
in their lines of work. Similar cautions might be lodged about alcohol,
however. Politicians rightly feel embarrassed if they are caught drunk.
Which is worse-to set an example for the mature use of a sometimes
pernicious drug, or to boast about breaking the law, and only feel
embarrassed when reformers call you on it?

Richard Brookhiser, a senior editor at The National Review, is the author
of "America's First Dynasty: The Adamses, 1735-1918."