Pubdate: Sat, 16 Oct 2010
Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (PA)
Copyright: 2010 PG Publishing Co., Inc.
Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/pm4R4dI4
Website: http://www.post-gazette.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/341
Author: Adam Nagourney, The New York Times
Cited: Proposition 19 http://yeson19.com/
Cited: Drug Policy Alliance http://www.drugpolicy.org/
Referenced: Holder's letter http://mapinc.org/url/vXch8ePJ
Bookmark: http://mapinc.org/find?272 (Proposition 19)
Bookmark: http://mapinc.org/find?258 (Holder, Eric)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?179 (Nadelmann, Ethan)

ON MARIJUANA, CALIFORNIANS MAY IGNORE LEADERS' VIEWS

LOS ANGELES -- The Department of Justice says it intends to prosecute 
marijuana laws in California aggressively even if state voters 
approve an initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot to legalize the drug.

The announcement by Eric H. Holder Jr., the attorney general, was the 
latest reminder of how much of the establishment has lined up against 
the popular initiative: dozens of editorial boards, candidates for 
office, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and other public officials.

Still, despite this opposition -- or perhaps, to some extent, because 
of it -- the measure, Proposition 19, appears to have at least a 
decent chance of winning, so far drawing considerable support in 
polls from a coalition of Democrats, independents, younger voters and 
men as Election Day nears. Should that happen, it could cement a 
cultural shift in California, where medical marijuana has been legal 
since 1996 and where the drug has been celebrated in popular culture 
at least since the 1960s.

But it could also plunge the nation's most populous state into a 
murky and unsettling conflict with the federal government that 
opponents of the proposition said should make California voters wary 
of supporting it.

Washington has generally looked the other way as a growing medical 
marijuana industry has prospered here and in 14 other states and the 
District of Columbia, but Mr. Holder's position -- revealed in a 
letter this week to nine former chiefs of the Drug Enforcement 
Administration that was made public on Friday -- made explicit that 
legalizing marijuana for recreational use would bring a whole new 
level of scrutiny from Washington.

Mr. Holder did not fully spell out the reasons for the decision, but 
he did allude to the reluctance of the federal government to enforce 
drug laws differently in different states. "If passed, this 
legislation will greatly complicate federal drug enforcement efforts 
to the detriment of our citizens," he wrote.

The Los Angeles County sheriff, Lee Baca, who has been one of the 
leading opponents of the measure, quickly embraced the Justice 
Department's stance. He said that the initiative was unconstitutional 
and vowed to continue enforcing marijuana laws, no matter what voters 
do in November.

Supporters of the initiative have portrayed support for it as another 
example in an anti-incumbent year of voters rejecting authority.

"Bring on the establishment," said Chris Lehane, a senior consultant 
to the campaign pushing for passage of the initiative. "This 
campaign, and the energy driving it, is predicated on the common 
understanding that the establishment's prohibition approach has been 
a complete and utter failure, as proven by the point that today it is 
easier for a kid to get access to pot than it is to buy a beer or a cigarette."

But Roger Salazar, a political consultant who has been directing the 
effort to defeat the proposal, said that Mr. Holder's statement 
should reinforce deep concerns about the initiative, including the 
way it was drafted and what he called inflated claims by its backers 
of what legalization might do.

"This is sort of a shot across the bow from the federal government: 
They're saying that, 'If this thing moves the way we think it is, 
we're going to come after you guys,' " he said. "That gives 
California voters one more reason to take a deep breath."

California's becoming the first state to legalize marijuana for 
recreational use would provide a real-life test of theories that 
proponents of legalization have long pressed: That it would provide a 
new stream of revenues for government, cut down on drug-related 
violence and end a modern-day prohibition that effectively turns many 
citizens into lawbreakers.

As it is, no matter what voters or Mr. Holder do, marijuana use in 
California these days appears, for all practical purposes, all but legal.

Mr. Schwarzenegger signed legislation last month that made possession 
of an ounce of marijuana an infraction -- it had previously been a 
misdemeanor -- punishable by a $100 fine. Medical marijuana 
dispensaries are common in many parts of the state, and getting a 
prescription is hardly challenging. Baby boomers who had not smoked 
marijuana since college now speak openly at dinner parties of their 
"medical" experimentation with the drug. The smell of marijuana is 
hardly unusual at outdoor concerts at places like the Hollywood Bowl.

A Field Poll last month found that 50 percent of respondents said 
that marijuana should be legalized; that is up from 13 percent when 
the organization first asked the question in 1969. And 47 percent 
said they had smoked marijuana at least once, compared with 28 
percent when the question was asked in 1975.

"This is the first generation of high school students where a 
majority of their parents have smoked marijuana," said Ethan 
Nadelmann, the executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which 
has been pushing for passage of the initiative.

The presence of the initiative on the ballot has encouraged 
Democrats, who argue it will lead to increased turnout among younger voters.

Notably, none of the major statewide candidates have endorsed the 
measure. But perhaps just as notably, none have made the proposition 
a campaign issue.

The state Republican Party has officially come out against 
Proposition 19 and plans to urge people to vote no, said Ron Nehring, 
the party chairman. He called repeal a "big mistake" and mocked the 
notion that placing the proposition on the ballot would help Democrats.

"We call that their Hail Mary Jane strategy," he said.

John Burton, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, said 
his party had decided to stay neutral on this issue. Asked if he 
supported it, Mr. Burton responded: "I already voted for it. Why not? 
Brings some money into the state. Helps the deficit. Better than 
selling off state buildings to some developer."

Mark Baldassare, president of the Public Policy Institute of 
California, noted that polls showed the measure breaking 50 percent, 
but said that given the history of initiatives in the state, that 
meant its passage was far from assured.

Opposition has come from a number of fronts, ranging from Mr. Baca 
and other law enforcement officials to the Chamber of Commerce, which 
has warned that it would create workplace health issues.

Still, the breadth of supporters of the proposition -- including law 
enforcement officials and major unions, like the Service Employees 
International Union -- signal how mainstream this movement is becoming.

"I think we consume far more dangerous drugs that are legal: 
cigarette smoking, nicotine and alcohol," said Joycelyn Elders, the 
former surgeon general and a supporter of the measure. "I feel they 
cause much more devastating effects physically. We need to lift the 
prohibition on marijuana."

This article originally appeared in The New York Times. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake