Pubdate: Wed, 31 Oct 2012
Source: Arkansas Times (Little Rock, AR)
Copyright: 2012 Arkansas Times Inc.
Contact:  http://www.arktimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/583
Author: Doug Smith

MARIJUANA FIGHT WILL CONTINUE NO MATTER HOW THE VOTE GOES ARK.

Even if Arkansas voters should approve of Issue 5, the Medical 
Marijuana Act, in the Nov. 6 election, therapeutic weed won't be 
accessible soon. "Issue 5 is not a get-out-of-jail-free card," says 
Jerry Cox, who heads the Family Council, a coalition of 
fundamentalist churches who oppose marijuana in the same way they 
oppose abortion and gay marriage. Regardless of Issue 5, possession 
of marijuana for any purpose will still be illegal under federal law. 
(Though that hasn't stopped 17 other states from legalizing medical 
marijuana, with varying results. Medical marijuana is legal also, 
through congressional action, in the District of Columbia. Arkansas, 
generally considered a backward sort of state, would experience a 
change of image should it become the first Southern state to approve 
medical marijuana.)

Issue 5 was placed on the ballot by initiative, which is to say by 
regular people, not by the state legislature. Almost certainly, there 
would be legislative attacks on a voter-approved Issue 5, prompted by 
the Family Council and other opponents.

Supporters of the act say the measure is self-enabling and that 
legislative action to implement it is neither necessary nor 
permissible. But the legislature still has authority to amend the 
substance of the proposal, perhaps drastically, although a two-thirds 
vote would be needed to amend, and a two-thirds vote is usually hard 
to achieve. Legislators seem overwhelmingly opposed to Issue 5, at 
least publicly, but many of them will be reluctant to override a vote 
of the people. (They may be less reluctant if Republicans gain a 
legislative majority in the Nov. 6 election. Republican legislators 
tend toward the reckless.) In any case, there are ways the 
legislature can make it difficult for legalization to go smoothly, 
and legislators would be urged to do so by the Family Council and 
perhaps the Chamber of Commerce, two strong lobby groups. The Chamber 
is opposed to Issue 5, and the Chamber usually gets what it wants 
from the legislature, but nullification of a voter-approved act might 
not be a high legislative priority for the group. The Chamber has 
fingers in many pies.

Whatever the legislature might do with Issue 5, its approval by 
voters would reveal a huge gap between the people and the officials 
who are supposed to represent them. Even a close vote against 
marijuana would expose a legislature badly out of step with constituents.

Chris Kell, campaign strategist for Issue 5, professes to believe 
that if the act is approved by the voters, it will take effect more 
or less unhampered by the legislature, but he could hardly say 
anything else at this pre-election point. Why borrow trouble? "I hope 
the legislators listen to their constituents," he says. "You'd think 
elected officials would listen." Many a reformer has found otherwise.

Gov. Mike Beebe has said he'll vote against Issue 5, and members of 
his administration, including a state "drug czar," are openly 
campaigning against the act on state time, using taxpayers' dollars, 
a commitment to keep ill citizens suffering that is questionable if 
not, as Kell claims, outright illegal. But Beebe, a moderate Democrat 
- - the only kind of moderate these days - isn't the sort to crusade 
against an act once the people have approved it.

The Obama administration's attorney general, Eric Holder, has said in 
effect that enforcement of the federal law against medical marijuana 
is not a high priority with the Justice Department at the moment. But 
it'll be a high priority if Holder is replaced by a Republican 
attorney general in January. States' rights will count for little 
then in states that have approved medical marijuana. When Asa 
Hutchinson, an Arkansas Republican, was the federal drug czar, under 
the second President Bush, he was relentless in cutting off cancer 
patients from their prescribed pain relief. Another possibility, one 
that could tip in the patients' favor, is that the federal Drug 
Enforcement Administration could reclassify marijuana so that doctors 
could legally prescribe it, and pharmacies legally fill those 
prescriptions. The DEA has so far refused to do that; its refusal is 
being appealed in federal court.

Regardless of how this year's medical-marijuana election comes out, 
there'll be another. If marijuana opponents lose this time, they'll 
arrange a rematch, either by initiative or legislative collusion. The 
Family Council opposes Issue 5 on religious grounds. The Chamber of 
Commerce argues, more or less, that legalizing medical marijuana 
would increase the use of marijuana generally, and that workers under 
the influence of marijuana might come to work and cause accidents, 
slowing production and exposing employers to lawsuits. If medical 
marijuana becomes legal, the chamber will likely demand legislation 
limiting or eliminating employers' liability in marijuana-related accidents.

If they lose this year, medical-marijuana supporters will try again 
at some point, too. Time is on their side, younger voters more 
willing to accept medical marijuana than their elders. And not even 
the Family Council and the Chamber of Commerce can stop time's 
inexorable march. The Family Council might call on a higher power, 
but some think He's on the other side.

Hard feelings will continue. When Cox looked on at a pro-Issue 5 
rally at the Capitol, and was interviewed by reporters afterward, one 
of the Issue 5 supporters stood nearby delivering unpleasantries, 
including, "You're a coward!" Cox gave no sign he heard. He may be 
the most hated man in Arkansas, and seems to thrive on it. To a 
reporter who asked what the Family Council would do if Issue 5 is 
approved, he said "I don't think it's going to be approved," and 
scurried away on his rounds. He stays busy.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom