(Ed. note: The police candidly say that their
highest priority is to defeat the medical marijuana bill.
This is no Prop. 215. It is highly restrictive.
What does that tell us about the nature of marijuana prohibition and the forces behind it?
By the way, for The Oregonian, this is remarkably straightforward reporting.)The
Oregonian
See
The Portland
Oregonian Escalates Its Propaganda Campaign Against Medical Marijuana Initiative
and
How The
Oregonian Cribs Its Editorials from DEA Handouts
letters@news.oregonian.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/
March 22, 1998
By Gail Kinsey Hill
Note: The article has sidebar included before the main article text, and two photos,
one of Paul Loney, attorney of OCTA, the other of Rick Bayer, M.D. of AMR.
MARIJUANA INITIIATIVES GROW LIKE WEEDS
MARIJUANA AND THE BALLOT
In the months ahead, Oregon voters might be asked to sign as many as five initiative
petitions involving marijuana, and they already face one referendum on the subject in the
Nov. 3 election.
REFERENDUM
This measure was approved by the 1997 Legislature but hasnt
gone into effect because it was sent to the ballot through the referendum process:
*RECRIMINALIZATION: Asks voters whether they want to make possession of less than an
ounce of marijuana a Class C misdemeanor, with a maximum sentence of 30 days in jail and a
$1,000 fine, and allow a six-month suspension of driving privileges of first-time
offenders who dont complete diversion. Chief petitioners: Michael E. Rose and Todd
D. Olson, Portland.
INITIATIVES
Constitutional amendments need 97,681 approved signatures to qualify for the ballot;
statutory proposals need 73,261. The secretary of state has approved these petitions for
circulation:
*STATE-CONTROLLED SALES: Would permit the sale of marijuana to adults through state
liquor stores and replace marijuana laws except DUII. Would have the OLCC license
marijuana cultivation by qualified people, buy the crop, and sell it at cost to pharmacies
and medical researchers and for profit to qualified adults. Statutory. Chief petitioners:
Paul Loney and Douglas P. Stanford, Portland (campaign will pay people to gather
signatures).
*ADULT POSSESSION: Would allow the state to regulate but not prohibit adult possession
and cultivation of controlled substances. Would require repeal of criminal laws
inconsistent with the measure. Would release some inmates or parolees for conduct made
legal by the measure. Constitutional amendment. Chief petitioners: Floyd F. Landrath,
Portland; Arthur H. Livermore Sr., Arch Cape (will not pay people to gather signatures).
*PRIVATE USE: Would permit people 21 and older to manufacture, possess and consume
cannabis, including marijuana, in private. Would not affect laws prohibiting delivery of
marijuana. Constitutional amendment. Chief petitioner: Carla B. Newbree, Eugene (will not
pay people to gather signatures).
PROPOSALS
These proposals have not been approved:
PRESCRIPTIONS: Would make it legal for medical practitioners to prescribe or provide
any herbs, seed-bearing plants and marijuana. Constitutional amendment. Chief petitioner:
Stephen M. Sedlacko, Eugene (will not pay petitioners).
*MEDICAL USE: Would allow limited exceptions to laws that prohibit engaging or
assisting in medical use of marijuana. Would require that use be necessary to mitigate
symptoms or effects of debilitating medical conditions. Statutory. Chief petitioner:
Richard Bayer, Portland (will pay people to gather signatures)
This initiative season, Oregonians might decide to inhale.
They certainly will have the opportunity. Petitioners will be pushing as many as five
marijuana-related initiatives in the coming months. Three are in circulation. Two more are
on the way.
Not in recent history - if ever - has Oregon seen such a potluck
of marijuana measures. And not since 1986 has a marijuana initiative qualified for the
ballot.
"There are a lot of people in the nation who think Oregon is a hot spot as far as
legalization is concerned," said Darin Campbell, a spokesman for the Oregon
Association Chiefs of Police, which opposes loosening of drug laws.
The association has set up a campaign committee, Oregonians
Against Dangerous Drugs, to battle the initiatives.
Sponsors of the initiatives are optimistic about qualifying their proposals for the
Nov. 3 ballot. Signatures must be submitted to the secretary of state by July 2.
Why the effervescence? Sponsors say people have become less patient with ineffective
drug laws and more understanding of marijuanas possible benefits.
"I think the public is becoming more aware," said Floyd Landrath, a Portland
resident who is the director of the American Anti-Prohibition League. "Theyre
paying more attention to drug-related issues."
Landrath is the chief petitioner of what might be the most
sweeping of the initiatives. His proposal would amend the state constitution to allow
adults to possess and cultivate controlled substances. The measure would apply to drugs
such as heroin and cocaine, not just marijuana.
"We want to reform all drug laws," Landrath said. "We dont believe
prohibition works. The marijuana movement is only a half-step."
Two years ago, Landrath worked on an initiative that dealt exclusively with marijuana.
The proposal, sponsored by Portland political activist D. Paul Stanford, would have
allowed the sale of marijuana through state liquor stores.
Stanford has been trying since the mid-1980s to put a marijuana
initiative on the ballot. He was the petition coordinator of the 1986 measure that would
have allowed adults to grow and possess marijuana for personal use. It was overwhelmingly
defeated.
Since 1992, Stanford has been pushing the liquor-store version, a statutory, not
constitutional change. He claims he has gathered 20,000 of the 73,261 signatures needed.
Stanford said that as more people try marijuana, more understand the need for reform.
"They realize that to keep it illegal just isnt logical," he said.
Initiatives arent Stanfords only political venue. A Democrat, he is running
for the Oregon House seat being vacated by Rep. George Eighmey, D-Portland.
Stanford plans to pay people to gather signatures, an increasingly common enterprise.
Landrath said he will rely on volunteers. "Were going to plug away as best
we can," he said. "We dont have a lot of financial resources to
drop."
Neither does Stephen Sedlacko, a driving force behind two other
marijuana-related initiatives. He is the sponsor of one that would make it legal for
doctors to prescribe marijuana and other seed-bearing plants, and he is the petition
coordinator for one that would allow the private use of marijuana.
"For us, its a question of individual choice," said Sedlacko, who lives
in Eugene.
Perhaps the initiative most likely to reach the ballot is one not
in circulation. Filed March 3 by Portland doctor Rick Bayer, it would allow patients with
certain illnesses, such as glaucoma, cancer and AIDS, to use marijuana with a
doctors approval.
Bayer is allied with Americans for Medical Rights, the Santa Monica, Calif., group that
backed the medical marijuana initiative approved by California voters in 1996. The group,
which counts international financier George Soros among its benefactors, has promised the
Oregon campaign money and expertise, Bayer said.
"Im really not for the legalization of
marijuana," Bayer said. "Im for prescriptive access to marijuana."
Bayer said he doesnt approve of the more expansive initiatives, such as the one
that would allow sales in liquor stores. "I really dont want to see marijuana
to become the next Budweiser."
Campbell said a survey by the police chiefs association found that among drug-related
proposals filed, the medical marijuana initiative is most likely
to make the ballot.
"Well do everything we can to kill it" if it qualifies for the ballot,
he said.
Oregonians Against Dangerous Drugs will raise money to promote a referendum to increase
penalties for possession of marijuana. The 1997 Legislature passed the so-called
"recriminalization" bill, but opponents gathered enough signatures to put it on
the ballot.
Campbell wants the referendum to pass but wants even more to stamp out the marijuana
initiatives. If one passes, "it sets back on our agenda for tougher drug laws,"
he said.