All of this does nothing for the sick and dying in DC, but it does help the over all medical marijuana movement, and even anti-prohibition in general. It has even moved the Washington Post in our direction.)
See
Major Defection! The Washington Post Sort Of Comes Out For Medical Marijuana For DC...
Sort Of...
and links

From The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com

D.C. Budget Caught in Hill Standoff
Top Republicans Say Drug Issues Block Approval
By Stephen C. Fehr
Washington Post Staff Writer

September 30, 1999

Republican congressional leaders vowed yesterday to hold up final approval of the District's budget for fiscal 2000 unless Democrats and D.C. officials agree to prohibit the legalization of marijuana for medical uses.

A day after President Clinton vetoed the city's $4.7 billion budget because it included GOP "riders" to outlaw medical marijuana and a needle-exchange program aimed at slowing the spread of HIV and AIDS among drug addicts, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) accused the president of supporting a "left-wing social agenda."
See
The Hastert Files:
New Speaker Of the House Hailed As "Moderate" Is Extreme Prohibitionist -- 4 Articles

It was a clear sign that this year's debate over the D.C. budget--initially coated in warm feelings as Congress embraced a new, reform-minded mayor and a D.C. Council that was pushing a big tax cut--now has degenerated into an ideological standoff between Capitol Hill Republicans and the White House.

Caught in the middle is the D.C. government, which likely will begin the fiscal year tomorrow without having its budget approved by Congress, as is required. The city has been granted temporary funding relief from Congress while the haggling over the budget continues, but D.C. officials say some programs could be affected if the budget debate isn't settled within a few weeks.

Yesterday, Republicans not only sought to make a political statement about D.C. proposals that they said would encourage drug use, but they also rejected complaints from officials in the heavily Democratic city that Congress should not trample home rule, the city's right to make its own decisions.

That theme was continued at a House hearing yesterday, during which Republicans invited law enforcement officials to testify that increasing the availability of marijuana would encourage more use of the leaf.

(Marijuananews note: "The leaf?" They must have it confused with tobacco.)

Democrats, meanwhile, tried to turn the debate away from drugs and toward the idea that congressional Republicans, so conscious of states' rights on other matters, should allow the District's government and residents to decide what's best for the city.

D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D), in a telephone conversation yesterday morning, told Lott that he believed that home rule--not drug policy--was the issue. Other D.C. officials noted that Clinton opposes medical marijuana but vetoed the D.C. budget because congressional Republicans simply had overrun the city's wishes.

See
Even The Prohibitionist Wall Street Journal Notes The Irony
Of Clinton’s Alliance With Barr Against Medical Marijuana In D.C.
"Mischaracterizing as drug-induced the veto of a president, who has appointed the toughest drug czar in history and himself has long opposed medical marijuana, is not credible," said Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.). "The people I represent resent the conversion of their self-governing rights into a drug issue."

For all the posturing, informal talks began yesterday between the White House and lawmakers in both parties to try to reach a compromise on a spending plan for the city. Congress has approved a resolution keeping money flowing to the city at this year's levels starting tomorrow. The final, permanent city budget could be part of a separate bill or thrown in as part of a catch-all appropriations plan next month.

Some Republicans are cautioning Clinton and D.C. officials that some of their pet programs--such as expanding college tuition benefits for D.C. students--could be cut if the GOP-controlled Congress takes a second look at the District's budget.

Calling the veto "a terrible mistake," Lott asked, "What happens when the District of Columbia is a loser because of this?"

But Norton and administration officials dismissed that as an empty threat.

"I'm absolutely unmoved by the scare tactic," Norton said. "The District can't lose money unless the president gives it up."

Clinton will not propose any cuts, said Linda Ricci, spokeswoman for the White House budget office. If Republicans are worried about the fate of the D.C. budget in an omnibus appropriations bill, Ricci said, Congress could always send the president a separate D.C. budget bill with the anti-drug riders stripped out.

"The way to make sure the funding levels stay the same is to send a free-standing bill," Ricci said.

"We will not retreat on the drug issue," Hutchison said.

Hutchison's House counterpart, Rep. Ernest J. Istook Jr. (R-Okla.), said he's in no rush to move on the D.C. budget, adding that he wants the president and the Democrats to "sit in the mess they created."
See
"If you say it's okay for D.C. to legalize marijuana, then what's next?
Legalizing cocaine? Or heroin? Or perhaps rape and murder?"
-- The Appalling People Who Govern Us Continue To Block Medical Marijuana In D.C.

"I don't think anyone feels a sense of urgency," he said.

Ricci responded: "Procrastination and delay are not encouraging signs. We think D.C. deserves better."

Staff writer Michael H. Cottman contributed to this report.