LAWMAKER PLANS PUSH TO LEGALIZE MEDICAL MARIJUANA

FAYETTEVILLE -- When California voters approved a law in 1996 to allow its
seriously ill residents to legally purchase, grow and smoke marijuana, many
Americans and medical experts took notice, but few expected states less
liberal than California to follow suit.

But, five years later, nine states and the District of Columbia have
approved similar medical-marijuana laws, and at least a half-dozen states
- -- including Arkansas -- are expected to consider the issue in the next
year or so.

For the first eight states to enact medical-marijuana laws, it was
grass-roots effort that pushed the issue to a public vote on statewide
ballots.

But increasingly -- and especially in more conservative states where
liberal-leaning activist groups lack membership and financial support --
state legislatures and health departments are mulling what some say is the
drug-policy question of the century: Should marijuana be legalized for
people whose health and well-being can benefit from the plant's calming,
pain-relieving and muscle-relaxing effects.

In the Natural State, as efforts by activists to get medical marijuana on
the November ballot have fallen short, a well-known state senator from
Little Rock says he plans to introduce a bill in the next legislative
session to legalize the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

Sen. John Riggs, D-Little Rock, told The Morning News this week that he
thinks state lawmakers, after studying the medical-marijuana issue, will
"recognize the facts and have enough compassion" to legalize the
now-illicit drug for medicinal uses.

Long, Storied History

Scientists and doctors, in both private and government offices, say that
marijuana has proven to be an effective treatment for severe and
intractable pain, nausea, wasting, glaucoma, migraine, multiple sclerosis,
epilepsy, muscle spasms and several other ailments. Until 1937, when it was
criminalized in the U.S., it was prescribed as a leading treatment for over
100 illnesses.

Between 1842 and 1890, the extracts and derivatives of marijuana were the
second- and third-most prescribed medicines in the U.S., with various forms
of it made by Eli Lilly, Parke-Davis, Squibb and other pharmacological giants.

More recently, in the January 1997 issue of the New England Journal of
Medicine, Dr. Jerome Kassirer, the journal's editor, wrote "E authorities
should rescind their prohibition of the medical use of marijuana for
seriously ill patients and allow physicians to decide which patients to
treat."

Medical marijuana has found support even at the federal Drug Enforcement
Administration. After a 1989 hearing on the drug's effects and uses, DEA
Administrative Law Judge Francis L. Young concluded not only that
marijuana's medical usefulness had been adequately demonstrated, but that
the plant had been shown to be "one of the safest therapeutically active
substances known to man." Afterwards, DEA administrators declined to abide
by Young's recommendation that the agency change its policies that disallow
medicinal uses of marijuana.

In 1999, a study funded by the federal government conducted by the National
Institute of Medicine also found legitimate therapeutic uses of marijuana,
and recommended further consideration of its findings by drug-policy
makers. The nation's drug czar at the time, Barry McCaffrey, decided the
risks of smoking marijuana outweighed the drug's benefits and said "the
future of medical marijuana lies in classical pharmacological drug
development."

The federal government has continued its strong opposition to marijuana
being used medicinally in its natural form. In the last three months of
2001, the DEA began cracking down on California physicians, patients and
distribution cooperatives operating under the guidelines of that state's
medical-marijuana law. DEA agents raided two co-ops, a doctors' office and
at least two patients' homes in October alone.

The crackdown followed a U.S. Supreme Court decision last spring that said
medical necessity was not an allowable defense for distributing marijuana
through co-ops like those allowed under California law. That ruling,
however, is not expected to effect other states' medical-marijuana laws, as
most of the laws already enacted avoid allowing distribution through
legalized marijuana co-ops or other groups.

Growing Statewide Support

Riggs noted that some Arkansas residents apparently support the idea as
well, according to a recent University of Arkansas Political Science
Department survey. In responses to the UA's third-annual Arkansas Poll,
two-thirds of the 767 respondents said they support allowing seriously ill
patients to use marijuana for medicinal purposes.

"Watching what other states have done, it seems to be a no-brainer (to pass
this legislation), especially for citizens in pain and those with terminal
diseases," Riggs said. "I don't see any reason why we can't do this for
those people who need medical marijuana."

Riggs, who is chairman of the state Senate's Economic and Tax Policy
Committee among others, acknowledged that medical marijuana is a
controversial issue, especially in more conservative states like Arkansas.
But he says he is hopeful that his legislative counterparts will make "the
right decision."

"I already have heard from several (members of the Senate and House) who at
least are interested in looking closely at this issue," said Riggs, who
added that at least three lawmakers who are leaning toward supporting
medical marijuana are conservative Republicans.

Many Republicans nationwide support medical-marijuana initiatives because
it is fiscally conservative, experts say.

In California, for example, the state has said it is saving at least $100
million a year in law-enforcement costs since legalizing medical marijuana
and since making minor non-medical marijuana offenses misdemeanors instead
of felonies requiring jail time.

The latter change in state law, called "decriminalization" of marijuana,
doesn't make the drug legal but says that offenders caught with small
amounts be issued citations, similar to traffic tickets, or be required to
attend a drug-treatment program instead of serving a jail sentence.

It is the second major marijuana movement that has begun to sweep the
nation, as more state governments begin to revisit the economics of their
drug policies.

Nationwide, the cost of prosecuting marijuana offenses is estimated to be
anywhere from $5 billion to $10 billion a year, according to government and
activist-group studies. In 2000, nearly 750,000 people were arrested for
marijuana offenses, and 88 percent of those arrests were for possessing
small amounts of the drug, the FBI has reported.

At least one of Arkansas' neighbors has already taken action to stop
spending so much money on criminal prosecution of minor drug offenses. Last
year, Louisiana's legislature passed a law ending mandatory prison time for
possession of small quantities of drugs. The act's author, Democrat Charles
Jones of Monroe, said about 43 percent of the state's $600-million-a-year
prison budget goes toward housing drug offenders.

Decriminalizing marijuana is another issue Riggs plans to tackle next
January when the General Assembly convenes, but he notes it's a totally
different ball of wax -- and probably even more controversial -- than
medical marijuana.

'Sinful' Or Sensible.

Riggs fervently believes that the state's doctors should be allowed to
prescribe -- or at the very least discuss -- marijuana for patients who are
critically ill and need the plant to relieve unrelenting pain and nausea.

"Why should we keep suffering people from any kind of medication they
need." he asked. "The only reason I can think of is maybe some people think
it's 'sinful.' That's probably what the governor would think."

Calls to Gov. Mike Huckabee's office inquiring about his opinion of medical
marijuana were not returned.

Regardless, Riggs said the moral-conservative viewpoint doesn't make sense,
especially in light of the fact that no one seems to object to the legal,
pill version of marijuana, Marinol, which has been in use for years.

"I can't envision any logic for opposing medical-marijuana legislation
other than the opinion that you'll go to hell for getting relief from your
pain by smoking marijuana," he said. "But those same people think it's OK
if you get relief from a drug company instead."

In the last General Assembly, a member of Arkansas' House introduced a bill
to allow medical marijuana. But HB 1303, sponsored by Rep. Jim Lendall of
Mabelvale, never reached the House floor.

Medical-marijuana activists hope that Riggs' effort will have better
success; they note Riggs' status as a Senate leader.

Indeed, Riggs has a relatively good record of getting his bills enacted
into law; in the 2001 session, 45 percent of the bills he sponsored were
passed. Lendall's record of success was about 25 percent.

Denele Campbell, a West Fork resident and executive director of the
Northwest Arkansas-based activist group Alliance for Reform of Drug Policy
in Arkansas, said she is more optimistic than ever that with Riggs' backing
and the recent UA poll results, medical marijuana has a "pretty good
chance" of being legalized in Arkansas.

ARDPArk has been working to get enough petition signatures to get the issue
on the November ballot, but so far the group has only 5,000 of the 56,000
signatures required by July 1.

Campbell said the group has had trouble raising money because it's sole
focus is medical marijuana -- and many people are too afraid of possible
retribution from hardline law enforcers to donate money to a group that is
required to publicly list its supporters with the state election commission.

"In Arkansas, everyone is afraid to stick their neck out," Campbell
lamented. "We'd hoped to attract support from some of the major corporate
donors that supported medical marijuana in other states, but now those
donors have moved on to other pet issues."

Let's Talk About Drugs

One change Campbell and her activist counterparts have made to make fund
raising easier is form a second nonprofit organization, called the Drug
Policy Education Group, that focuses on education and spurring dialogue on
how to improve Arkansas' drug policies and reduce the harm that drugs are
causing individuals and their families. DPEG has sponsored several
conferences in central Arkansas on topics such as drug use and abuse among
the state's youth and the effects of the drug war on people with
disabilities. Attendees have ranged from state health officials and
Arkansas Supreme Court justices to municipal judges and family members of
convicted drug offenders.

Because DPEG focuses on a wider range of topics, and because it isn't a
political-campaign group per se, it does not have to publicly register its
donors -- something that has helped the group raise more money in a year
than ARDPark did in two years.

"I'm feeling a lot more positive about our work through DPEG," Campbell
told The Morning News last week. "We can start to get more people to think
about drug-policy reform by talking about other issues besides just medical
marijuana, things like racism in drug policy and the cost-effectiveness of
decriminalizing marijuana."

Campbell and other DPEG organizers plan to ramp up their efforts as Riggs
in the state Senate begins meeting with other legislators to start
developing proposed laws addressing medical marijuana and other drug-policy
issues.

In the meantime, the West Fork resident says she hopes ARDPArk volunteers
are able to continue getting signatures to put the issue on the November
ballot, and she hopes the state's residents realize the importance of the
issue and take action to voice their opinions.

"The thing that's scary is that people either don't recognize they have the
power to make that change, or they just can't seem to get themselves to do
anything about it," Campbell said. "One way or the other, we believe we'll
have a medical-marijuana law on the books in Arkansas in the near future.
This is a long-overdue protection for people who are suffering unnecessary
anxiety or prosecution for the use of a natural herbal substance that helps
them feel better."