cannabisnews.com: National Agendas Color D.C. Marijuana Debate





National Agendas Color D.C. Marijuana Debate
Posted by FoM on October 10, 1999 at 07:23:28 PT
By Spencer S. Hsu, Washington Post Staff Writer
Source: Washington Post
When 65 percent of Arizona's voters passed a referendum in 1996 legalizing the medical use of marijuana, U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) hit the stump. Over the next two years, the freshman senator argued to state lawmakers, Congress and local reporters that undoing the state's drug laws would betray Arizona children and his own law-and-order values.
State legislators sent the measure back to the ballot last November--where voters passed it again. Kyl and other opponents could only console themselves that the margin of approval had narrowed to 57 percent.Now, members of Congress who believe easing state laws on marijuana would subvert the nation's war on drugs have a new target: the District of Columbia's medical marijuana initiative. For them, this is a chance to act on their conviction without riling constituents back home--though some lawmakers seem to be keeping a low profile on the issue.Georgia Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R) and Ohio Sen. George V. Voinovich (R) recently introduced legislation to overturn the D.C. referendum, which won 69 percent of the vote last fall. Although Congress has clear authority to oversee the District, members whose states have passed similar initiatives appear wary of undoing a decision endorsed by their own constituents.Nevada Sens. Harry M. Reid (D) and Richard H. Bryan (D) are hedging questions on the subject. Reid opposed a Nevada initiative passed last fall, but his spokesman, asked how the lawmaker would vote on the D.C. initiative, replied, "I'm not sure it's so simple." A spokesman for Bryan responded, "I'm not sure he's taken a position on that." Nevada voters will face the issue again this fall, since all referendum proposals must be approved twice to become law.Kyl, who faces a reelection bid next fall, said in 1996 that he was "embarrassed" by the Arizona vote, but explained later that he was talking about the margin of defeat, not voters' judgment. His spokesman declined to say how Kyl would vote on the District's initiative, saying, "It sounds like nothing is pressing until the D.C. Council acts."The District's Initiative 59 would change city drug laws to allow the possession, use, cultivation and distribution of marijuana if recommended by a physician for serious illness. Only six states--Alaska, Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon and Washington--have passed similar legislation, and most of their congressional representatives have stayed out of the home-state fray, letting governors and local lawmakers shoulder the debate.If a vote is taken, it could force Democrats and Republicans to choose between standing with the majority of their constituents back home or ignoring similar sentiments by District voters in order to enforce tough drug laws.Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), for example, has opposed California's medical marijuana initiative, calling such measures dangerous and ridden with loopholes. But Feinstein, who also faces a reelection bid in 2000, said she is sensitive to the needs of terminally ill patients and will examine the District's measure before making a decision. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) would not say how he would vote. He released a statement explaining that despite his personal "reservations" about Oregon's medical marijuana law, "the people of my state have spoken, and I intend to honor their will."The House voted 310 to 93 a year ago to approve a non-binding resolution opposing state efforts to allow medical use of marijuana. But Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), who introduced a companion resolution, also has not indicated how he will vote on the D.C. measure, his spokeswoman said.By law, Congress can negate the District initiative within 30 business days, once the D.C. financial control board reviews and forwards it. Congress could also kill the marijuana measure by denying funding."It's a twofold rationale" in Congress for overturning the D.C. initiative, said Marshall Wittman, director of congressional relations for the conservative Heritage Foundation. "There is Congress's clear, constitutional prerogative over issues concerning the District, but also many believe in Congress that the District should serve as a model to the rest of the country."Supporters of medical marijuana laws say the drug can alleviate symptoms of AIDS, cancer and other illnesses. Opponents, including the White House's national drug policy office, cite a lack of conclusive findings about marijuana's efficacy and current research into treatment alternatives.Those who back the D.C. measure decry congressional intervention, claiming "hypocrisy" by members who protest federal intrusion in their home states but interfere elsewhere. "The Republicans, the party of states' rights, are only for states' rights when they agree with what a state or the District of Columbia is doing," said Rep. Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.), who has battled congressional efforts to undo Oregon's law permitting physician-assisted suicide. To Congress, the District is a "sandbox.""They can use it for experiments and indulge in things they might want to do to voters at home, but here they can do with impunity," he said.For now, the congressional fight against the D.C. measure is being led by those whose constituents have not endorsed similar initiatives. And even for past critics of D.C. statehood and management, the issue is touchy.Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), whose district strongly supported California's marijuana referendum, voted against the non-binding resolution opposing medical marijuana. An aide hinted that his vote on the D.C. measure would similarly factor in constituent views."If he's faced with this vote on the House floor," a spokesman said, "he will look very closely at how conservative Orange County voted on the California measure." By Spencer S. HsuWashington Post Staff WriterSunday, October 10, 1999; Page C01 © Copyright 1999 The Washington Post CompanyGOP Budget Would Keep D.C. Limits - 10/09/99http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3214.shtml E-The People: Petition: Making Peace In The Drug War http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3226.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #7 posted by Dankhank on October 11, 1999 at 13:37:48 PT:
Initiave 59 ........
one addendum to the previous and excellent explanation given by ... Doc-Hawk ........The DC city council has to certify the referendum count and present the document to Congress ...That's when the thirty-day clock starts ticking, during which time Congress has to act or the Initiave WILL go into effect.I don't believe that the council has reported to Congress ... yet ...If I am correct, the thirty-day clock hasn't started, yet ... but should soon ........There is ample time for all to e-mail the participants in this surrealistic, nihilistic dance to inform them of our opinions ...http://www.freeyellow.com/members/hbaca/LINKS.htmle-mail links for all the major players in the dance macabre.Let's get to work ...Peace .........
LINKS
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by Doc-Hawk on October 11, 1999 at 04:51:42 PT:
Map
Hi FoM, I noticed the sign-up and had made the connection. It felt good to see you there....you have been a major newshawk....I just post 'em when I find 'em. Most of mine have been from "libertarian" pubs. (Not too big a circulation...but definitely against the war-on-drugs.)I guess we'll be learning together.Doc (I'd like to stick with my real name though, except when posting.)
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by FoM on October 10, 1999 at 20:23:02 PT:
Thanks Everyone!
Thanks All!Hey Doc I saw you are getting on board with Map as an editor. That's great! I am still learning and Cannabis News and life in general keeps slowing me up with my learning but once I have less interruptions I expect to make it high priority. Maybe we will be able to help each other learn! That would be nice!Peace, FoM!
What's New
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by Doc-Hawk on October 10, 1999 at 18:51:29 PT:
DC Medical Marijuana Referendum
DC Voted and passed it by 69%. Last year, Bob Barr (you gotta love this guy) put a rider in the DC Appropriations bill blocking the voted count, but the measure was still on the ballot. A Judge ordered the release of the vote just last month, saying the rider was not worded properly and even if it was, it would likely be unconstitutional. Now Congress has 30 days to kill it and the President would need to go along with Congress. If they do not kill it, it will become law. Bob Barr stuck a new rider into the latest DC Appropriations bill (it's an annual thing), and Clinton vetoed it. (Clinton had already promised the veto before the medical marijuana thing because he favors needle-exchange if DC wants it, but Congress said no.) The latest version of the appropriations bill will go to Clinton this week with the bans on needle-exchange and medical marijuana still in it. The Republicans plan to crucify him for being soft on drugs if he vetoes it again. He has said that they should send him the bill without the riders and he would sign it. Then they could send the riders as separate bills, and he could sign or veto them as he pleases. That would remove any leverage the Republicans might have, so they do not want to do it that way. There is an article on the latest mess at the link below.
GOP Budget Would Keep DC Limits
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by Ally on October 10, 1999 at 13:17:43 PT
Our precious government
Gosh, this is the second news article I have read when we mention children. I like Kay Lee's attitude about this. She comments often about she does not want her grandchildren to have to go through this WoD's. Why are all these bureaucrats so concerned about the children? The drug prevention programs have miserably failed. Even another article today in the news stated how surveys are unreliable due to the fact that illegal drug use is against the law, and some of the survey partcipants my lie!What I really wanted to say is maybe that person that posted before me stated, if Congress does vote for I-59, and I believe they have and it passed," but the latest one posted today, finally opened my eyes...if congress OKs this, then they almost have to federally..that's the way i'm readingit...any help is appreciated..."Yes, it has been voted on, and it is Bob Barr and Company who keep wanting to challenge the popular vote with other referendums, and bills. Pay very close attention to Congress there is another referendum about Forfeiture rights, S-1701 this amendment to the HR 1658 is restrictive and more binding than the original forfeiture law before the passing of HR1658.Please see link below and read for yourself. The government is going to try to do everything they can to keep marijuana illegal, so they can have an excuse to spend more money on military weapons. As I have stated before, it's not the children. It is somebody in big government that stands a lot to lose if marijuana is legalized.
FEAR
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by FoM on October 10, 1999 at 13:14:32 PT
I'm not sure
I wish I knew. I have such a hard time trying to read between the lines that politicans hide behind. Hopefully someone or more news on the subject will clarify this article! I hope!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by military officer guy on October 10, 1999 at 10:29:04 PT
Initiative 59 ?
does anyone know when Initiative 59 is going to be voted on? I've seen a lot of messages posted about it, but the latest one posted today, finally opened my eyes...if congress OKs this, then they almost have to federally..that's the way i'm reading it...any help is appreciated...
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: