cannabisnews.com: Legalizing Marijuana: Nevada's Smoke Signal 





Legalizing Marijuana: Nevada's Smoke Signal 
Posted by CN Staff on September 22, 2002 at 08:06:41 PT
By Steve Kanigher 
Source: Las Vegas Sun 
The national spotlight will be on Nevadans when they go to the polls in November to determine whether they wish to legalize marijuana, something no other state has done.Question 9, a proposed constitutional amendment, would make it legal for individuals 21 and older to possess up to 3 ounces of the controversial substance -- enough to make 80 to 255 marijuana cigarettes, depending on whom you believe -- for use in their residences.
The statewide initiative would also direct the Nevada Legislature to establish ways to grow, sell and tax marijuana and set penalties for individuals who violate the law.Because it takes passage in two consecutive general elections to amend the state constitution, the initiative must pass both in November and in 2004 to take effect on Jan. 1, 2005.The initiative is being financed by the Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington pro-marijuana lobby whose main backer is billionaire auto insurance executive Peter Lewis of Cleveland. The project sent one of its directors with political campaign experience to Nevada to coordinate the effort to get Question 9 on the ballot.Its proponents argue that marijuana is no more harmful than alcohol or other legal products and that legalization would allow law enforcement to concentrate on other crimes.But a less organized coalition of opponents that includes law enforcement agencies and an anti-drunken driving group says marijuana is a harmful "gateway drug." The opponents, Nevadans Against Legalizing Marijuana, fear legalization will lead to more drug dependency and crime, including driving under the influence. More specifically, they believe that Question 9 would:* Legalize hashish, which they say is far more potent than marijuana.* Eliminate existing laws that deal with motorists caught driving under the influence of marijuana.* Discriminate against users of medical marijuana, who are already protected by state law.* Be difficult to enforce because possession would be legal in most public places.* Do nothing to eliminate illicit sales to children.If Question 9 passes, the Legislature could decide either to have the state grow the plant or have private contractors do it under state supervision. Sales would then be accomplished through stores licensed with the state and taxes similar to those for cigarettes would apply to marijuana.But a major hurdle to implementation is that federal law prohibits the cultivation, possession or sale of marijuana. The nation's drug czar, John Walters, is scheduled to make an Oct. 10 appearance in Las Vegas to speak against Question 9."Marijuana is riskier than people think, especially for kids," Walters said in a prepared statement last week. "Smoking marijuana can lead to significant health and behavior problems for youth -- disrupting families and jeopardizing our children's futures. The risks associated with marijuana have been trivialized and our kids are getting the wrong message."Proponents will keep an eye on how the federal government reacts if voters in San Francisco approve a measure in November that would allow that city to be first to grow marijuana for medicinal purposes.Proponents have been successful in recent years at getting the government to relax federal sentencing guidelines for marijuana-related crimes. Backed by wealthy businessmen, legalization proponents have also gained a toehold in nine states -- including Nevada -- that have legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes. And they have been successful in convincing many states -- including Nevada -- to reduce penalties for possession.Current Nevada law, passed last year, makes possession of less than 1 ounce of marijuana a misdemeanor subject to a $600 fine or mandatory drug treatment, and possession of an ounce or greater a felony. Question 9 proponents say the most relaxed marijuana laws in the country are in Ohio, where an individual can possess up to 3 1/2 ounces and face only a $100 fine.Lewis, chairman of Progressive Corp., the nation's fourth largest auto insurer, represents the common thread between Nevada's successful medical marijuana initiative and the drive to pass Question 9. He was a major financial backer of Americans for Medical Rights, the Santa Monica, Calif., organization that sponsored Nevada's medical marijuana initiative. And Question 9 proponents say that Lewis is the largest contributor to the Marijuana Policy Project.Lewis, who declined an interview request, has donated millions of dollars to universities and museums. He also has financed efforts by the American Civil Liberties Union to litigate against drug laws. The Wall Street Journal reported last year that Lewis was arrested in New Zealand in 2000 for possession of marijuana and hashish, but was released after making a donation to a local drug rehabilitation center.He told the newspaper that he became involved in efforts to change marijuana laws because, "I have seen it for quite a while as pure patriotism to try to change a policy that is sillier than Prohibition."The successful 1998 campaign to approve medical marijuana in Nevada was coordinated by Las Vegas political consultant Dan Hart. His arguments won out over Washington politicians who suggested that medical marijuana efforts would be the first step toward legalization of illicit drugs.Four years later, Nevada has become the initial battleground in efforts to legalize marijuana possession for all adults. But Hart is not involved in the Question 9 effort and said he is neutral on that initiative."This is a different issue because what we were talking about before was to have patients with catastrophic illnesses have something to relieve their symptoms," Hart said. "Three ounces would seem to be an awful lot of marijuana. But from what I understand there is a belief that we spend far too much money on drug prosecution in this country and that we could use a lot of that money on treatment or prevention."Hart said he was not surprised that the measure made Nevada's ballot given the success of the medical marijuana initiative."The people of Nevada are fiercely independent and don't like people to tell them what to do," Hart said.University of Nevada, Las Vegas political science Chairman Ted Jelen echoed that sentiment, noting that the talk on campus about Question 9 has to do with the libertarian notion that marijuana use should be a private issue."It would seem to me that it would have at least a fighting chance of passing by virtue of the state's libertarian streak," Jelen said. "It has no better than a chance."Gov. Kenny Guinn has not taken a position on Question 9 because "he's interested in seeing what the will of the people is," spokesman Greg Bortolin said. But Democratic gubernatorial foe Joe Neal, a state senator from North Las Vegas, said he opposed Question 9 because he has concerns about the hallucinogenic effects of marijuana's tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC."I just don't feel that we know enough about that and the addiction rate could be tremendous," Neal said. "I'm concerned about the THC levels and the other chemicals in marijuana that we hardly know anything about. I am told marijuana has about 40 chemical properties."Local business organizations, including Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce and Nevada Development Authority, have not taken a stand on Question 9. The chamber's government affairs committee discussed the initiative, but decided to take no position, according to Virginia Valentine, the chamber's senior vice president of government affairs."They didn't look at this as an image issue but more from the standpoint of how it would affect employee health care," Valentine said. "It's also hard to know whether this will reduce the cost of law enforcement or the judiciary."But Somer Hollingsworth, president of Nevada Development Authority, which recruits businesses, expressed concern that the marijuana initiative would set back local efforts to distance Las Vegas from its "Sin City" image.The authority has said that businesses looking to move to Nevada often inquire about the effect of controversial issues in this state. Hollingsworth said he has not yet fielded any inquiries about Question 9, but believes that that could change if the initiative passes."If we pass the most liberal marijuana laws in the country, I don't think it's going to help our recruiting at all," Hollingsworth said. "We pretty much have gotten past the image of Las Vegas as 'Sin City.' This may take us back and reinforce the complaint of it being a city of sin."To launch its campaign the Marijuana Policy Project directed Austin, Texas, native Billy Rogers to set up shop in Nevada in May under the moniker Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement. Rogers, who comes complete with drawl and cowboy boots, is a veteran Democratic political operative who was campaign manager for Gary Mauro, the candidate defeated by then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush in 1998 to retain his office.The irony is that Rogers said he hasn't smoked marijuana in several years."I don't like it," Rogers said. "When I was growing up I had a lot of friends who were arrested and they went through ordeals."But Rogers, the project's director of state policies, is passionate in his belief that adults ought to be able to smoke marijuana privately. He opened an office at 3201 W. Sahara Ave. and in a mere 40 days coordinated a petition drive that gathered 110,000 signatures statewide -- including 67,000 in Clark County -- to put Question 9 on the ballot.Through last month, the Marijuana Policy Project -- which says it has 8,000 individual contributors, including 300 Nevadans -- had pumped $575,000 into the Nevada campaign, much of which was spent to pay the petition gatherers. More money is expected to come to finance additional television advertisements.Rogers said his organization chose Nevada because of the Legislature's decision last year to reduce possession of less than 1 ounce of marijuana from a felony to a misdemeanor. That made Nevada the most recent state in the nation to reduce marijuana penalties, he said."The Nevada Legislature is the only one in a decade that has passed that type of legislation," Rogers said. "We can all count on the Legislature to act responsibly. They are a conservative Legislature. We can count on them to set up a system for the regulation, taxation and distribution of marijuana."Rogers hired as a consultant Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas. She sponsored last year's bill that reduced penalties for possession of marijuana. The bill also implemented the regulations for medical marijuana use."If there wasn't an appetite for this, then why did 110,000 Nevadans sign a petition in 40 days?" Giunchigliani said. "That's phenomenal. Most Nevadans are independent and don't think that the government should be involved in the privacy of their homes."But Question 9 foes, including the Clark County district attorney's office, Metro Police and the head of an anti-drunken driving organization, say that "Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement" is an insult since neither Rogers nor other executives with the Marijuana Policy Project have a law enforcement background.Metro narcotics Detective Todd Raybuck said the initiative would threaten public safety if implemented."We could see more traffic problems and increased drug use and increases in violent behavior associated with drug use," Raybuck said. "Under this initiative, if marijuana becomes legal, employers will not be able to discriminate against those employees who use it. If your test comes back positive for marijuana, employers can't refuse to hire you for only that reason. We're talking about school bus drivers. They could smoke before they drive the bus."I'm also insulted that virtually all the money supporting this movement is from non-Nevadans. Billy Rogers is a carpetbagger. As far as I know Billy Rogers and the others at the Marijuana Policy Project have no law enforcement background, so they don't know what responsible law enforcement is."The opponents last month organized their own group, Nevadans Against Legalizing Marijuana, though they've only been able to scrape together enough money to print fliers with the title, "Don't be fooled by Question 9." Chief Deputy District Attorney Gary Booker, head of the vehicular crimes unit, is pictured holding three plastic bags filled with marijuana. Above the photo is the proclamation that amount is equivalent to 255 marijuana cigarettes."This has public safety disaster written all over it," Booker said of Question 9. "We're at risk for a couple reasons. We have a 24-hour town so we always have teenagers with minimal or no supervision. It's also the nature of our town to attract people who are a little excessive and compulsive. They are predisposed to having a chemical dependency."Rogers scoffed at the "scare tactics" used by opponents, accusing them of constantly increasing the number of marijuana cigarettes that can be produced by 3 ounces. He said law enforcement opponents previously estimated that 3 ounces would yield 90 to 120 cigarettes.His own office calculated that 3 ounces was equivalent to 80 cigarettes, or four packs."They can't get their story straight," Rogers said of opponents. "They're trying to scare people and ultimately it won't work. All this initiative does is allow responsible adults to possess three ounces in the privacy of their home or under the care of a doctor."As for the carpetbagger tag, Rogers said: "If that were true, 110,000 Nevadans wouldn't have welcomed us with open arms and signed the petition to put it on the ballot. Ultimately Nevadans will make the decision whether it passes."But STOP DUI Executive Director Sandy Heverly of Las Vegas, an advocate for tougher laws against motorists who drive under the influence, said she feared that the more marijuana is available "the more it will be used and abused.""We honestly believe that this initiative will lead to more death and destruction on our roadways," Heverly said. "This is crossing the line into the victims' arena. If marijuana isn't harmful, why stop at legalizing 3 ounces? Why not 100 pounds or more?"Question 9 foes say the initiative is vaguely worded and full of gaping legal holes. But Giunchigliani said she is not concerned about the way the initiative is worded, saying those problems can be worked out by the Legislature."If something is vague and not clear, we in the Legislature have the authority and a responsibility to fix it," she said. "When you amend the state Constitution you're specific about the intent, but the actual implementation is our responsibility."Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV)Author: Steve Kanigher Published: September 22, 2002Copyright: 2002 Las Vegas Sun, Inc.Contact: letters lasvegassun.comWebsite: http://www.lasvegassun.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:NRLEhttp://www.nrle.org/Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Drug Czar Plans Nevada Visit To Fight Pot Questionhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14162.shtmlDrug Czar To Lobby in Nevada http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14161.shtmlGoing to Pot: Nevada Plan to Legalize Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14104.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #4 posted by legalizeit on September 22, 2002 at 22:35:17 PT
NALM
("Nevadans Against Legalizing Marijuana") ... sounds like "Nam"... just a coincidence?The parallels between this and alcohol prohibition are stunning. I can just imagine the arguments when Prohib. was in the process of being repealed... "But if we legalize beer we will have to legalize whiskey, which is far more potent than beer!" Joe Neal, a state senator from North Las Vegas, said he opposed Question 9 because he has concerns about the hallucinogenic effects of ... THC. "I just don't feel that we know enough about that and the addiction rate could be tremendous," Neal said. "I'm concerned about the THC levels and the other chemicals in marijuana that we hardly know anything about. I am told marijuana has about 40 chemical properties." He's a blabber just like most of the other Drug Warriors. He just says something to make the sound bite and it's painfully obvious that he knows nothing about what he is talking about. Of course, he has not read the government study on cannabis, which refutes most of what he mindlessly blabbed. If marijuana isn't harmful, why stop at legalizing 3 ounces? Why not 100 pounds or more?" Good point! But, what would the average schmo do with 100 pounds? What is the shelf life of cannabis?It will be interesting to see what happens when the WartHog travels to Nevada to spew his crap. I imagine he will have a lot of unwanted company!!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by idbsne1 on September 22, 2002 at 15:12:40 PT
Morons....
Do you see the way these prohibitionists speak?Raybuck, you are an idiot. Responsible law enforcement, my ass.
"Under this initiative, if marijuana becomes legal, employers will not be able to discriminate against those employees who use it."You see, to this guy DISCRIMINATION is OK. Moron. They could drink before they get on the bus, too. Or take prescription pills. Then there are politicians spouting out data that they don't even know about...."I'm concerned about the THC levels and the other chemicals in marijuana that we hardly know anything about."Let's get this straight....YOU prohibitionists are the ONLY ones who "don't know anything about" cannabis. We know the truth.And I am SOOOO sick and tired of seeing the word "fear" used by these ignorant asses. We "fear" this, We "fear" that."IGNORANCE AND PREJUDICE, AND FEAR WALK HAND IN HAND" - 'Witch Hunt', RushAlways.idbsne1
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Sam Adams on September 22, 2002 at 09:19:52 PT
not that bad
This article and the one in the Review really encourage me! This is the paper that's AGAINST the initiative, but I think we've already made progress with them. They print all the lies of the antis, but give just as much space to our side. I would be comfortable that an open-minded person could read this article and make a fair choice.I think the anti-fed arguments hit a nerve with the Sun. At the beginning of the campaign their gut reaction was "legalize marijuana? What? no way". But as the weeks go by and they see the shenanigans of the antis - with police groups retracting popular endorsements, the endless parade of dysfunctional federal bureaucrats coming to NV - they're seeing the typical signs of bad government that they're against on other conservative issues.  You can just see them scratching their heads, thinking "hmmm, wait a sec, what's going on here? Walters & Hutchinson are worse that the Dept of Interior, BLM, EPA, and NRC all rolled together!"One more thing - isn't it interesting that Peter Lewis derives his fortune directly from auto insurance, and he's the main backer behind MJ legalization. That should negate any BS from the cops about increasing DUI. Insurance actuaries know damn well that MJ does not increase accidents or Lewis wouldn't touch this issue with a 10 foot pole.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo MD on September 22, 2002 at 08:44:53 PT:
Ahem
"* Legalize hashish, which they say is far more potent than marijuana."It can be, but is by no means always more potent. Properly made, hashish can be much "purer" and more potent than cannabis. That is an advantage, however, since less need be smoked (or vaporized) to produce the desired effect, whether that be "recreational" or medicinal. We will have a nice article on hashish by Mila Jansen, the Dutch inventor of the Pollinator and Ice-O-Lator machines, in the next issue of Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics."* Discriminate against users of medical marijuana, who are already protected by state law."My cynicism does not permit me to conceive that this prohibitionist group gives a flying fig newton about whether clinical cannabis users suffer discrimination. Isn't that special?The remainder of the article conveys mightily the pervasive ignorance and reefer madness that persists out there. It is a sad commentary that less than 1% of our politicians really know a thing about this health-giving herb.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment