Results Are Out: Marijuana Initiative Passes
Hill Republicans, Who Blocked D.C. Vote Tally,
Vow Measure Won't Become Law
By Bill Miller and Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, September 21, 1999; Page A01
District voters overwhelmingly approved a measure last fall
to legalize the medical use of marijuana, according to
results
released yesterday, but congressional Republicans again
vowed that the initiative would not become law.
Congress had forbidden city officials to even count the
votes until a federal judge intervened last week; the
results
released yesterday showed that the initiative was approved
69 percent to 31 percent. Since 1996, similar measures have
been approved in six states and are in effect in four of
them.
Initiative 59 would change D.C. drug laws to permit the
possession, use, cultivation and distribution of marijuana
if
recommended by a physician for serious illness. Advocates
contend that marijuana can alleviate symptoms of AIDS,
cancer and other illnesses, but opponents maintain that
patients have other alternatives and that legalizing drugs
sets
a dangerous precedent.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), chairman of the House
Government Oversight subcommittee on the District, said
that Congress is "determined" to reject the legislation,
adding that it is so broadly drafted that it would hamper
enforcement of any anti-marijuana laws in the city.
"If Fairfax County voted to allow medical use of marijuana,
the state wouldn't let us, would it? That's the analogy I
hear
from members," said Davis, who opposes the measure.
D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) kept up his
long-standing support of the initiative, saying, "I call
upon
Congress to respect the will of the electorate of the
District
of Columbia who have decided on this measure."
For two straight years, members of Congress have
endorsed riders to the D.C. appropriations bill barring
marijuana legalization, a move that U.S. District Judge
Richard W. Roberts last week ruled did not extend to
sealing the referendum results.
In September 1998, the full House voted 310 to 93 in favor
of a nonbinding resolution opposing marijuana legalization
for medicinal use. One referendum supporter, Rep. James
P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), warned that D.C. voters probably
would "be deprived of the right to exercise their own
judgment."
"Most of the members are rightfully reticent to override a
democratic referendum, but they're also afraid that . . .
they
will be subjected to 30-second ads claiming they voted to
legalize drugs," said Moran, senior Democrat on the House
Appropriations subcommittee on the District.
The subcommittee chairman, Rep. Ernest J. Istook Jr.
(R-Okla.), provided an idea of what's in store in the
initiative
battle when he said the vote results threatened "to reignite
the national ridicule of D.C. that erupted" when then-Mayor
Marion Barry was arrested for cocaine possession in a sting
operation.
Although D.C. voters cast their ballots on the issue Nov. 3,
the results had remained secret because of a congressional
amendment last year that forbade the District to spend
money on any initiative that would loosen laws governing
marijuana use. On Friday, Roberts cleared the way for the
tallies to be announced and certified by the D.C. Board of
Elections and Ethics.
Medicinal marijuana laws already are in effect in Alaska,
California, Oregon and Washington state. The only
legislature that tried to overturn a result, the Arizona
body,
was rebuffed when citizens passed a referendum a second
time, although the measure did not remove criminal
penalties.
The results of the D.C. vote showed 75,536 D.C. residents
in favor and 34,621 opposed. Supporters commanded 69
percent of the vote, the largest percentage recorded in any
medical marijuana initiative in the country. It passed in
every
precinct.
The matter will be sent to Congress, which has 30 working
days to either allow the new law to be enacted or to
override
it. Because of the city's unique status, the District's home
rule charter makes Congress the ultimate authority on local
laws.
"Yes, this is a victory, but there's a lot of work to do,"
acknowledged Wayne Turner, an AIDS activist who led the
initiative campaign.
Turner was among a crowd of initiative supporters who
gathered at the election board's office yesterday to get the
news. He stood beside a computer as officials pushed a
button that printed out the results and looked over as Alice
P. Miller, the election board's executive director, gave him
a
thumbs up.
Turner and his partner, Steve Michael, had launched the
initiative campaign in December 1996, working to generate
enough signatures to get it on the ballot. Michael, who had
AIDS, died in May 1998, and Turner vowed to continue the
campaign without him. Turner and his friends brought
Michael's ashes with them to election headquarters
yesterday. "We wanted Steve to be here," Turner said.
The 30-day window in Congress isn't the only obstacle.
Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.), who pushed through the
amendment thwarting initiative supporters last year, came up
with a new version that has passed in the House and Senate.
Attached to the D.C. appropriations bill, the new
amendment prohibits the District from spending any money
to enact any law that would legalize any drugs or reduce
penalties. Under current law, possession of marijuana is a
misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a
$1,000 fine.
"Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, and it would
send a terrible message to America's young people to allow
those laws to be openly flouted in the same city where they
were passed," Barr said.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), who opposed both
Barr amendments, issued a statement praising last week's
court decision, saying it "vindicated democratic
self-government."
Although the White House has threatened to veto the D.C.
appropriations package and its amendments, the Clinton
administration has not embraced the medical use of
marijuana.
National Drug Policy Director Barry R. McCaffrey reiterated
his opposition yesterday, saying the initiative "flies in
the
face" of findings issued this year by the National Academy
of Sciences' Institute of Medicine. The report detected
"little
future [for] or benefit from smoked marijuana as a medically
approved medication."
Davis also directed a volley at the White House, saying,
"It's
hard for the president to veto a D.C. appropriations bill
because we won't allow legalized marijuana use in the
District. That's just a tough sell."
Istook took a tougher position: "If there is a veto, it'll
show
that Bill Clinton is as soft on drugs as he is on Puerto
Rican
terrorists."
The American Civil Liberties Union, which joined with the
D.C. government to wage the recent court challenge, said it
was studying options. Mary Jane DeFrank, executive
director of the ACLU of the National Capital Area, said
Congress should not make the District "a political
plaything"
when people who are suffering from disease could get help.
"Congress ought not to take any action at all," she said.
Key Dates in Medical Marijuana Dispute
Dec. 5, 1996: Activists announce plans to push for an
initiative on the D.C. ballot that would legalize the use of
marijuana for medical reasons.
Dec. 8, 1997: The initiative fails when supporters are
unable
to muster enough signatures.
July 1998: Backers submit 32,000 signatures to the D.C.
Board of Elections and Ethics.
Aug. 6, 1998: Elections officials say the issue cannot
appear
on the ballot because of a dispute involving the validity of
thousands of signatures. The initiative's proponents
challenge the ruling in D.C. Superior Court.
Sept. 3, 1998: D.C. Superior Court Judge Ellen Segal
Huvelle says elections officials erred in rejecting
thousands
of signatures. Officials announce that Initiative 59 will be
on
the Nov. 3 ballot.
Oct. 21, 1998: Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.) attaches an
amendment to the fiscal 1999 D.C. appropriations bill. The
so-called Barr amendment would prohibit the District from
spending money on any initiative that would legalize or
reduce the penalties for users of marijuana. The measure
passes along with the D.C. spending bill. As a result,
elections officials say they cannot release or certify the
results of the Initiative 59 vote.
Oct. 30, 1998: The initiative's supporters join with the
American Civil Liberties Union and file suit in U.S.
District
Court.
Nov. 3, 1998: D.C. residents vote on Initiative 59. The
outcome remains a secret; meanwhile, voters in five states
pass similar initiatives.
Nov. 6, 1998: The D.C. government seeks to overturn the
Barr amendment.
Dec. 17, 1998: U.S. District Judge Richard W. Roberts
hears more than two hours of legal arguments on the issue,
with the Justice Department arguing the case for Congress.
July 29, 1999: Barr proposes an amendment to the fiscal
2000 D.C. appropriations bill to prohibit the District from
using any money to legalize or reduce the penalty for the
possession, use or distribution of marijuana and other
drugs. The House passes the bill, and Barr declares that the
medical marijuana law will not take effect no matter how
D.C. residents had voted.
Sept. 16, 1999: The Senate passes the D.C. appropriations
bill, containing Barr's amendment. The White House
threatens to veto the package.
Sept. 17, 1999: Roberts rules that the vote count can be
released and certified. Barr says the results are
irrelevant, but
initiative supporters celebrate what they called "Day 319 of
Democracy Held Hostage."
Sept. 20, 1999: D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics releases
the vote total, showing the initiative passed by an
overwhelming margin. Both sides begin girding for more
battles in Congress.
Copyright 1999 The Washington Post Company
F U C K
THE
` P O S T E R
B A N
post the constitution on a pole near you !
Hill Republicans, Who Blocked D.C. Vote Tally,
Vow Measure Won't Become Law
By Bill Miller and Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, September 21, 1999; Page A01
District voters overwhelmingly approved a measure last fall
to legalize the medical use of marijuana, according to
results
released yesterday, but congressional Republicans again
vowed that the initiative would not become law.
Congress had forbidden city officials to even count the
votes until a federal judge intervened last week; the
results
released yesterday showed that the initiative was approved
69 percent to 31 percent. Since 1996, similar measures have
been approved in six states and are in effect in four of
them.
Initiative 59 would change D.C. drug laws to permit the
possession, use, cultivation and distribution of marijuana
if
recommended by a physician for serious illness. Advocates
contend that marijuana can alleviate symptoms of AIDS,
cancer and other illnesses, but opponents maintain that
patients have other alternatives and that legalizing drugs
sets
a dangerous precedent.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), chairman of the House
Government Oversight subcommittee on the District, said
that Congress is "determined" to reject the legislation,
adding that it is so broadly drafted that it would hamper
enforcement of any anti-marijuana laws in the city.
"If Fairfax County voted to allow medical use of marijuana,
the state wouldn't let us, would it? That's the analogy I
hear
from members," said Davis, who opposes the measure.
D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) kept up his
long-standing support of the initiative, saying, "I call
upon
Congress to respect the will of the electorate of the
District
of Columbia who have decided on this measure."
For two straight years, members of Congress have
endorsed riders to the D.C. appropriations bill barring
marijuana legalization, a move that U.S. District Judge
Richard W. Roberts last week ruled did not extend to
sealing the referendum results.
In September 1998, the full House voted 310 to 93 in favor
of a nonbinding resolution opposing marijuana legalization
for medicinal use. One referendum supporter, Rep. James
P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), warned that D.C. voters probably
would "be deprived of the right to exercise their own
judgment."
"Most of the members are rightfully reticent to override a
democratic referendum, but they're also afraid that . . .
they
will be subjected to 30-second ads claiming they voted to
legalize drugs," said Moran, senior Democrat on the House
Appropriations subcommittee on the District.
The subcommittee chairman, Rep. Ernest J. Istook Jr.
(R-Okla.), provided an idea of what's in store in the
initiative
battle when he said the vote results threatened "to reignite
the national ridicule of D.C. that erupted" when then-Mayor
Marion Barry was arrested for cocaine possession in a sting
operation.
Although D.C. voters cast their ballots on the issue Nov. 3,
the results had remained secret because of a congressional
amendment last year that forbade the District to spend
money on any initiative that would loosen laws governing
marijuana use. On Friday, Roberts cleared the way for the
tallies to be announced and certified by the D.C. Board of
Elections and Ethics.
Medicinal marijuana laws already are in effect in Alaska,
California, Oregon and Washington state. The only
legislature that tried to overturn a result, the Arizona
body,
was rebuffed when citizens passed a referendum a second
time, although the measure did not remove criminal
penalties.
The results of the D.C. vote showed 75,536 D.C. residents
in favor and 34,621 opposed. Supporters commanded 69
percent of the vote, the largest percentage recorded in any
medical marijuana initiative in the country. It passed in
every
precinct.
The matter will be sent to Congress, which has 30 working
days to either allow the new law to be enacted or to
override
it. Because of the city's unique status, the District's home
rule charter makes Congress the ultimate authority on local
laws.
"Yes, this is a victory, but there's a lot of work to do,"
acknowledged Wayne Turner, an AIDS activist who led the
initiative campaign.
Turner was among a crowd of initiative supporters who
gathered at the election board's office yesterday to get the
news. He stood beside a computer as officials pushed a
button that printed out the results and looked over as Alice
P. Miller, the election board's executive director, gave him
a
thumbs up.
Turner and his partner, Steve Michael, had launched the
initiative campaign in December 1996, working to generate
enough signatures to get it on the ballot. Michael, who had
AIDS, died in May 1998, and Turner vowed to continue the
campaign without him. Turner and his friends brought
Michael's ashes with them to election headquarters
yesterday. "We wanted Steve to be here," Turner said.
The 30-day window in Congress isn't the only obstacle.
Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.), who pushed through the
amendment thwarting initiative supporters last year, came up
with a new version that has passed in the House and Senate.
Attached to the D.C. appropriations bill, the new
amendment prohibits the District from spending any money
to enact any law that would legalize any drugs or reduce
penalties. Under current law, possession of marijuana is a
misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a
$1,000 fine.
"Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, and it would
send a terrible message to America's young people to allow
those laws to be openly flouted in the same city where they
were passed," Barr said.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), who opposed both
Barr amendments, issued a statement praising last week's
court decision, saying it "vindicated democratic
self-government."
Although the White House has threatened to veto the D.C.
appropriations package and its amendments, the Clinton
administration has not embraced the medical use of
marijuana.
National Drug Policy Director Barry R. McCaffrey reiterated
his opposition yesterday, saying the initiative "flies in
the
face" of findings issued this year by the National Academy
of Sciences' Institute of Medicine. The report detected
"little
future [for] or benefit from smoked marijuana as a medically
approved medication."
Davis also directed a volley at the White House, saying,
"It's
hard for the president to veto a D.C. appropriations bill
because we won't allow legalized marijuana use in the
District. That's just a tough sell."
Istook took a tougher position: "If there is a veto, it'll
show
that Bill Clinton is as soft on drugs as he is on Puerto
Rican
terrorists."
The American Civil Liberties Union, which joined with the
D.C. government to wage the recent court challenge, said it
was studying options. Mary Jane DeFrank, executive
director of the ACLU of the National Capital Area, said
Congress should not make the District "a political
plaything"
when people who are suffering from disease could get help.
"Congress ought not to take any action at all," she said.
Key Dates in Medical Marijuana Dispute
Dec. 5, 1996: Activists announce plans to push for an
initiative on the D.C. ballot that would legalize the use of
marijuana for medical reasons.
Dec. 8, 1997: The initiative fails when supporters are
unable
to muster enough signatures.
July 1998: Backers submit 32,000 signatures to the D.C.
Board of Elections and Ethics.
Aug. 6, 1998: Elections officials say the issue cannot
appear
on the ballot because of a dispute involving the validity of
thousands of signatures. The initiative's proponents
challenge the ruling in D.C. Superior Court.
Sept. 3, 1998: D.C. Superior Court Judge Ellen Segal
Huvelle says elections officials erred in rejecting
thousands
of signatures. Officials announce that Initiative 59 will be
on
the Nov. 3 ballot.
Oct. 21, 1998: Rep. Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.) attaches an
amendment to the fiscal 1999 D.C. appropriations bill. The
so-called Barr amendment would prohibit the District from
spending money on any initiative that would legalize or
reduce the penalties for users of marijuana. The measure
passes along with the D.C. spending bill. As a result,
elections officials say they cannot release or certify the
results of the Initiative 59 vote.
Oct. 30, 1998: The initiative's supporters join with the
American Civil Liberties Union and file suit in U.S.
District
Court.
Nov. 3, 1998: D.C. residents vote on Initiative 59. The
outcome remains a secret; meanwhile, voters in five states
pass similar initiatives.
Nov. 6, 1998: The D.C. government seeks to overturn the
Barr amendment.
Dec. 17, 1998: U.S. District Judge Richard W. Roberts
hears more than two hours of legal arguments on the issue,
with the Justice Department arguing the case for Congress.
July 29, 1999: Barr proposes an amendment to the fiscal
2000 D.C. appropriations bill to prohibit the District from
using any money to legalize or reduce the penalty for the
possession, use or distribution of marijuana and other
drugs. The House passes the bill, and Barr declares that the
medical marijuana law will not take effect no matter how
D.C. residents had voted.
Sept. 16, 1999: The Senate passes the D.C. appropriations
bill, containing Barr's amendment. The White House
threatens to veto the package.
Sept. 17, 1999: Roberts rules that the vote count can be
released and certified. Barr says the results are
irrelevant, but
initiative supporters celebrate what they called "Day 319 of
Democracy Held Hostage."
Sept. 20, 1999: D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics releases
the vote total, showing the initiative passed by an
overwhelming margin. Both sides begin girding for more
battles in Congress.
Copyright 1999 The Washington Post Company
F U C K
THE
` P O S T E R
B A N
post the constitution on a pole near you !
