Pubdate: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 Source: Chicago Tribune (IL) Copyright: 1998 Chicago Tribune Company Contact: http://www.chicagotribune.com/ Author: Naftali Bendavid FEDERAL OFFICIALS REACT MORE MILDLY THAN IN PAST TO PASSAGE OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA INITIATIVES WASHINGTON -- In the face of medical marijuana initiatives that sailed through in five states Tuesday, federal authorities seem to be backing off the fire-and-brimstone rhetoric they used to attack similar measures two years ago. Although they are still debating how to respond, federal officials said Wednesday they have never prosecuted minor marijuana possession and probably will not start now, although several states no longer can prosecute it under certain circumstances. Federal drug officials reacted so mildly in part because they are skeptical that physicians will recommend marijuana to their patients in large numbers. ``I think the doctors have been scared by the science,'' said Jim McDonough, strategy director for federal drug czar Barry McCaffrey. ``They are not willing to put their name on marijuana and say, `This is medicine.' If something happened, they would be so liable it would make your head spin.'' This is a far cry from the federal government's stern warnings of just a week ago, and from its fierce reaction in 1996 when California and Arizona passed medical marijuana initiatives. At that time, top administration officials, including Attorney General Janet Reno and Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala, condemned the measures and announced a crackdown against doctors who recommended marijuana. A court temporarily blocked authorities from going forward with the crackdown, and a lawsuit is pending over the matter. No big lawsuits are planned this year, at least so far, and no sweeping enforcement actions are expected against doctors or patients. That could change if members of Congress begin pressuring the administration to take action, and it is not yet clear if that will happen. ``It is virtually impossible for me to give you the coordinated, `This is what the federal government is going to do,''' McDonough said. The approval of laws in a total of seven states, covering a fifth of the population, that directly contradict federal drug laws creates a novel situation. Voters in Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Nevada and Colorado, as well as the District of Columbia, passed the referendums Tuesday, joining California and Arizona. In the District of Columbia and Colorado, exit polls showed voter approval, but the actual results were withheld pending legal challenges. The situation is even murkier because the measures protect certain patients who buy marijuana, but selling the drug remains illegal. Under the initiatives, a patient can get certified that he has one of five diseases -- AIDS, cancer, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis or epilepsy -- and that he or she would benefit from marijuana. If so, the state must issue the patient a card authorizing him to possess and use marijuana. ``If the federal government wants to intervene and block enforcement of these initiatives, they will have to sue and take legal action against the states,'' said Bill Zimmerman, director of Americans for Medical Rights, which coordinated several of the initiatives. ``It remains to be seen what the federal government will do.'' In three of the jurisdictions that approved medical marijuana measures, they will not take immediate effect. Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., inserted a measure in a large federal spending bill forbidding the District of Columbia from spending any money on its initiative, and his action has been challenged in court. In Colorado, a dispute over the validity of petition signatures is also in court. In Nevada, the state constitution requires voters to pass any amendment twice, so the marijuana initiative there will not be final until 2000. - --- Checked-by: Patrick Henry