Pubdate: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 Source: Denver Post (CO) Copyright: 2000 The Denver Post Contact: 1560 Broadway, Denver, CO 80202 Fax: (303) 820.1502 Website: http://www.denverpost.com/ Forum: http://www.denverpost.com/voice/voice.htm Author: Al Knight HERE'S A CHANCE TO SAY NO July 16, 2000 - Six states already permit the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes and many predict Colorado will join the group. A constitutional amendment allowing physicians to recommend the use of smoked marijuana is on the state's November ballot and early opinion polls show 3-to-1 support for it. The argument for it has superficial appeal. Why not let those who are seriously ill use the drug if a doctor says it may relieve pain, nausea or other discomfort? Indeed that argument is so appealing it nearly handcuffed opposition groups in the places it has been debated proving once again that the simple argument beats one that is more complex. Thankfully the Colorado opposition, which includes a number of highly respected medical groups, has developed an appealing counter-argument and thinks it can raise enough money to publicize it. A good argument, and money to circulate it, remain the two indispensable requirements for a successful opposition campaign. The Colorado campaign against the medical marijuana initiative is being run by Coloradans Against Legalizing Marijuana and its members include a number of highly respected medical figures, including Dr. Joel Karlin, former head of the Colorado Medical Society. The theme of the opposition is "mad medicine, bad law." CALM will argue: - - There are better and safer drugs that contain the same chemical (THC) found in smoked marijuana. These drugs have advantages. Most importantly, the dosage is accurate whereas street marijuana can vary greatly in strength and purity. Secondly, the patient need not either grow the drug personally or purchase it in the illegal marketplace, as provided under the Colorado measure. - - Out-of-state money will figure prominently in the proponents' campaign. Early reports confirm this and add credence to the charge that the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes is simply the tip of an iceberg, the larger goal being to legalize it generally. - - Groups organized to represent the very patients who supposedly will most benefit from medical marijuana oppose the initiative. CALM will run ads announcing the support of the American Medical Association and Colorado Medical Society, among others. - - Depending on how courts interpret the Colorado initiative, employers might be required to let some employees work under the influence of marijuana. This point may seem exaggerated. What it refers to is a provision in the initiative that says that nothing in the act "shall require any employer to accommodate the medical use of marijuana in any work place." The reason this is not entirely reassuring is that federal law normally trumps state law and it is not inconceivable that an employee, acting under the Americans With Disabilities Act, would claim the right to smoke marijuana while at work. - - Because there are other and safer ways to approach the medical problems, the medical marijuana initiative should be viewed as what it is, a part of a larger plan to legalize its use. These will not necessarily be winning arguments in the face of a really well-financed campaign featuring television ads of appealing patients pleading for the mere opportunity to smoke marijuana for medical reasons. The opponents know they can't win if they appear to be unconcerned about these patients and their condition. That is why they will often repeat the fact that the National Institutes of Health has reviewed this issue and reported that crude marijuana adds nothing to currently available medicine and in fact may increase the risk to patients. In the end, however, the winning argument may be the simple desire to avoid a conflicted public policy that criminalizes marijuana in some settings, permits it in others. Some supporters of medical marijuana would eagerly resolve this conflict by legalizing the drug. The better course is the one CALM has charted, which is to avoid exceptions, especially where, as here, they fail on both medical and legal grounds. - --- MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager