Saturday, 29 January 2000
http://www.azstarnet.com/public/dnews/0129N09.html
By Inger Sandal
The Arizona Daily Star
A proposal to overhaul Arizona's drug laws looks good at first
glance, but voters should study the fine print, local police and
prosecutors say.
Supporters of the ballot initiative say there is nothing tricky
about the measure and that opponents represent the ``old guard''
in the fight against drugs.
The measure is called the Drug Medicalization, Prevention and
Control Act of 2000.
``It's deceptive and it's real purpose is to legalize drugs,''
Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said this week.
``The voting public is being conned by a handful of people who
are throwing millions of dollars into the state of Arizona under
the pretext of legalizing marijuana.''
The initiative would also divert millions of dollars in forfeiture
assets from law enforcement, Dupnik added.
This week he and Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall presented
their concerns to newspaper editorial boards.
Initiative supporters say they aren't surprised by the early lobbying.
``These are basically the soldiers in our failed War on Drugs,''
said Sam Vagenas, who directs the initiative campaign for The
People Have Spoken committee.
``We want to find a new way of fighting drug abuse. This is the
old guard - it shouldn't be surprising they oppose these kinds
of changes,'' he said.
Vagenas said the measure would ensure patients have access to
marijuana for medical use, while also changing laws to provide
treatment instead of incarceration for non-violent drug users.
Both sides agree the measure seems headed to the November ballot
- supporters started circulating petitions in late October and
have collected about a third of the 101,762 valid signatures needed
by July 6.
The initiative is backed by the same people who successfully sponsored
Proposition 200 four years ago. Voters sided then with allowing
the use of marijuana, LSD, heroin, angel dust and other drugs
to treat diseases and pain if prescribed by a doctor.
Law amended
The Legislature amended the law a year later to eliminate all
but marijuana from the list of drugs, and bar its use for medical
reasons until it receives U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval.
Arizona voters backed marijuana's medicalization again in a 1998
referendum, but patients still lack legal access.
An independent poll of 450 registered voters in Maricopa County
conducted after supporters launched the new initiative drive in
October showed 70 percent support.
``The public has been quite consistent on these marijuana reform
issues for quite some time. There seems to be a very broad belief
that medical issues of marijuana should be legalized - in fact
they voted on it twice,'' said Earl de Berge, research director
of the Behavior Research Center in Phoenix.
De Berge found varying support for five major elements of the
measure:
* Requiring forfeited drug money and properties to be used for
drug prevention and treatment and anti-gang programs.
* Mandating harsher punishments for serious drug offenders.
* Creating a state network to control the distribution of medical
marijuana for patients.
* Reducing the penalty for simple possession from jail time to
a $500 fine.
* Eliminating minimum sentences for non-violent marijuana offenders.
The initiative, however, would actually repeal minimum mandatory
sentences in all drug offenses. ``It's very misleading,'' said
Deputy Pima County Attorney Tom Rankin, who supervises asset forfeitures.
Changes in sentencings
``Whether you're just a possessor who may go to drug court
or you're a kilo dealer of cocaine, now there's not going to be
any minimum mandatory sentences,'' Rankin said.
And he called the initiative's offer to increase the maximum drug
sentences by 20 percent mere window dressing. Judges rarely impose
substantially aggravated sentences in drug offenses, he said.
Rankin said the initiative is complex. But he said supporters
``are hiding behind the medical marijuana and they're being deceptive
about what other terms are in there.''
Dupnik agreed. ``If all the initiative did was make marijuana
available to doctors for legitimate medical purposes, I would
be among the chief supporters,'' Dupnik said.
Josh Burner of Mesa said he wants the initiative to pass so he
can stop buying marijuana off the street.
``I'm the only person in Arizona with two prescriptions for medical
marijuana written by Arizona physicians,'' said Burner, who was
diagnosed in August 1995 with cancer of the throat, soft palate
and tongue.
He said his surgeon and his primary doctor wrote him prescriptions,
unaware they couldn't legally be filled.
Oral surgery and heavy doses of radiation had taken away Burner's
saliva, taste and appetite, and caused him to drop 30 pounds.
A little marijuana - either eaten with a bran muffin or smoked
in his corncob pipe - has helped him regain his weight, he said.
Burner, who appeared in television commercials for earlier initiatives,
gets emotional when he talks about other cancer patients being
denied.
Maintain a registry
The current initiative would require the Arizona Attorney General's
Office to provide marijuana to patients and to maintain a registry
of eligible patients. The office has taken no position on the
initiative.
The measure would also relax the procedures needed to receive
marijuana, changes that Burner called necessary to protect doctors
from federal prosecution.
The initiative only requires one doctor to discuss the possible
health risks of marijuana with a patient, and to advise the patient
in writing how it might benefit his or her condition. A doctor
would no longer have to document the case with scientific research
or evidence.
Supporters say the initiative emphasizes treatment for drug offenders
rather than incarceration.
But Dupnik said it would actually take a toll on court-ordered
drug programs that are effective because people either comply
or go to jail. ``When you take the hammer away they are no better
than any other treatment program,'' he said.
Dupnik said the initiative also ``almost makes it impossible to
enforce possession laws of any kind.''
It would prevent anyone from being locked up on first- and second-time
drug possession cases, and mandates probation with no incarceration
consequences for those who don't comply.
The initiative also would prohibit the state from using felony
drug paraphernalia charges to put first- and second-time offenders
behind bars.
It would limit the sanction for possession of 2 ounces of marijuana
or less and associated drug paraphernalia to a fine of up to $500.
``We don't believe people should have to go to jail just for possessing
marijuana,'' Vagenas said.
All drug offenders in prison who weren't involved in selling drugs
would be immediately eligible for parole or parole review.
Party lines crossed
Vagenas, a former deputy under ex-Secretary of State Richard
Mahoney, said the initiative's supporters cross party lines.
He said the measure appeals to conservatives who say incarcerating
drug users wastes money and that prison space should be freed
up for ``real criminals.''
The committee's chairman is John Norton, a deputy secretary of
agriculture under President Ronald Reagan, and its treasurer is
Marvin Cohen, head of the Civil Aeronautics Board when Jimmy Carter
was president.
Other backers include John Sperling, founder of the University
of Phoenix, and New York financier George Soros.
Vagenas said there are similar initiatives in California and Massachusetts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------