Pubdate: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 Source: Standard-Times (MA) Copyright: 1999 The Standard-Times Contact: 25 Elm Street, New Bedford, MA 02740 Website: http://www.s-t.com/ Forum: http://www.s-t.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi?actionintro Author: Marianne Means Note: The author is a columnist for the Hearst Newspapers. She can be reached by e-mail at CONGRESS AT COMPLETE LOSS TO ABSORB MARIJUANA VOTE WASHINGTON - Why are we not surprised? Referendum results illicitly suppressed by Congress for a year and only now made public by court order show that the District of Columbia voted overwhelmingly last fall to legalize the use of marijuana to ease the suffering of seriously ill patients. It wasn't even close. The measure passed by 69 percent to 31 percent. Every precinct in the nation's capital, from pricey Georgetown to rundown Anacostia, went for it. The outcome is what conservative Republicans had feared. That is why they refused to authorize funds to count the ballots, arrogantly keeping the electorate in the dark. Congress loves to push the nation's capital around, dictating what its local officials can and cannot do. Congress is free to do that because it has legislative and financial authority over the city, although our worthy solons clearly exceeded their power by denying us, the D.C. voters, the results of a democratic election. A federal judge ruled that Congress violated our First Amendment right to express an opinion because no one was allowed to hear it. Congressional oversight was okay with most of us when Marion Barry, convicted of possessing cocaine, was mayor. He was a major embarrassment nobody could trust. But the city currently has as its mayor Anthony Williams, a hard-working, honest bureaucrat who is rapidly restoring administrative order and even filling the city's infamous potholes. Yet Congress still thinks it knows what is best for Washington. To heck with the voters. Capitol Hill Republicans reacted angrily to the referendum, promising to block any administrative move to decriminalize pot for medical purposes. Current D.C. law makes possession of marijuana a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. Getting caught is not going to ruin your life. But you won't like it. The pioneering concept embraced by D.C. voters is highly controversial. A year ago, the House approved by 310 to 93 a nonbinding resolution opposing legalization of marijuana for medicinal use, deliberately preempting the then-silent election outcome. However sympathetic members may have been to the agonies of the seriously ill, they were more interested in guarding against opponents who might accuse them of being soft on all drugs, including cocaine. The Clinton White House stands with Congress on this. Politics is politics. Voters in six states have approved similar legalization measures in the last three years, permitting the possession, use, cultivation and distribution of pot if recommended by a doctor for a serious illness. Advocates are convinced that marijuana can make life better for patients who have AIDS, cancer and other devastating illnesses, and there is anecdotal evidence to support their theory. Its usefulness is still largely unproved. Yet how can it ever be proved or disproved unless there is a widespread lifting of the criminal restrictions that prevent ill people who are not hopheads from trying it? Inevitable doubts arise about control. Will marijuana really be limited to medicinal purposes or will half the population suddenly invent headaches that sucker some doctor into prescribing a legal high? Such ambiguities do not bother the leaders of the GOP majority in Congress. Deep in their conservative bones, they automatically reject the whole idea. They cannot override legal referendums in the states. After all, they keep lecturing us about the importance of handing federal power over to the states. But they can stick it to the District of Columbia, a colony that has been denied self-government. And they intend to do so. Immediately, Rep. Thomas Davis III, R-Va., chairman of the House committee that runs the city, said Congress was "determined" to block the measure. Mayor Williams, who supported the referendum, was not happy. But he controls no votes in Virginia or anywhere else. The odds are that Congress will again substitute its judgment for that of the capital's voters. It's an old story. But at least we stirred the pot. (Get it?) Maybe next time. - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D