Pot Backers Lose Prop. 300 Suit
by Mike McCloy

August 05, 1998 - Arizona Republic - Opinions@pni.com

Promoters of medical marijuana have lost a court fight over notifying people that their vote against Proposition 300 could legalize some other drugs as well, including heroin, LSD and PCP.

The challenge to the Arizona Legislative Council ended when the state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Council's official analysis of Proposition 300 is accurate.

The analysis, in a publicity pamphlet for the Nov. 30 general election, was attacked in a lawsuit by a group called The People Have Spoken. The group, then known as Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform, won passage of Proposition 200 in 1996.

The Legislative Council's analysis in the publicity pamphlet for the 1996 election mentioned only legalizing marijuana for prescription purposes and did not inform the voters that other Schedule I drugs such as LSD, heroin and PCP could be legalized.

The Legislature amended the initiative last year to halt the legalization of Schedule I drugs for medical use in Arizona unless Congress or federal agencies approve marijuana as medicine. The People Have Spoken responded with Proposition 300, a referendum on the Legislature's changes.

The secretary of state began printing 1.3 million pamphlets on the ballot issues Wednesday. By law, they contain analyses of the issues by the Legislative Council.

The Council's analysis of Proposition 300 was rejected last week by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Joseph Howe. By referring to heroin, LSD and PCP, the Council was attempting to advocate for passage of its limits on legalizing drugs in the referendum, the judge said.

Howe recommended that all Schedule I drugs should be listed as part of the legalization attempt, not just the ones commonly associated with serious abuse. Or, the judge suggested, no analysis of Proposition 300 should be included in the publicity pamphlet.

A Supreme Court panel disagreed with the judge. Mention of heroin, LSD and PCP does not misrepresent House Bill 2518, the subject of the referendum, the court said.

Naming only the three street drugs "can be regarded as an attempt to provide appropriate and necessary information to the voting public," according to the Supreme Court order upholding the Council's analysis.

Sam Vagenas, spokesman for The People Have Spoken, said he was disappointed that the Supreme Court did not limit the Legislature's power to change an initiative by the voters and then interpret the matter in an official publicity pamphlet for a referendum on those changes.

"The same politicians, when they gut an initiative, are able to write the language that's most beneficial to them," Vagenas said. "The voters know what they were voting on in 1996. They will see through this ruse and vote "no' on Proposition 300."

The only ruse was in 1996 when Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform said they wanted to legalize marijuana for the sick and dying, Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley said. He favors Proposition 300 and opposes the attempt to legalize marijuana or any other street drug.

"Once again, they tried to hide the ball," Romley said. "The Supreme Court saw right through it."

The publicity pamphlets will be available at primary-election polling places on Sept. 8. The information also is posted at http://www.sosaz.com, the secretary of state's Web site.

back

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings are made available without profit for research and educational purposes.