T
The420Guy
Guest
In 1992, at the behest of a senator from Alabama, Congress ordered the
District to put a death penalty referendum on an upcoming ballot.
In 1998, at the behest of a senator from Georgia, Congress ordered the
District to ignore a public vote on legalization of marijuana for medical
purposes.
Now the District is gearing up for another ballot showdown with Congress
after a U.S. District Court judge ruled last week that the congressional
mandate prohibiting District residents from voting on medical marijuana was
an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech.
Just days after the 52-page ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G.
Sullivan, advocates of medical marijuana, who won 69 percent of the vote in
the 1998 referendum later quashed by Congress, are again raising funds and
mapping strategy to put the issue back on the ballot this November.
Buoyed by local home-rule support and by a national drive to make marijuana
legal for some medical patients, the campaign is shaping up as a defining
test of congressional control over the federal city.
"It's particularly outrageous to be told what you can and can't vote on,"
said D.C. Shadow Senator Paul Strauss (D). "The issue here isn't the topic
of the referendum but the right to free and fair elections. Whatever the
framers of the Constitution had in mind for the District, the abrogation of
free elections just couldn't be part of it."
Robert Kampia, executive director of the Washington-based Marijuana Policy
Project, said congressional opposition had energized his nonprofit
organization.
"It's a big case for marijuana legalization across the country because it's
in a national media market and because it pushes the issue onto the
congressional agenda," Kampia said. "But we get a big spike of D.C.
interest because of the home-rule issues."
Kampia said an e-mail solicitation last weekend, just one day after
Sullivan's ruling, drew donations of $9,000, with more arriving. That money
will go toward a hectic drive to obtain 15,000 signatures needed by June 8
to certify the issue for the November ballot.
"We are reviewing the court's decision and have not yet decided if we will
appeal," said Charles Miller, a Justice department spokesman.
When the 1998 referendum, known as Initiative 59, was set to pass, Rep.
Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.) was the driving force behind a congressional ban
that prohibited counting the ballots for more than a year. Each year since,
Barr has sponsored a rider on the D.C. appropriations bill that forbids the
District from spending money to hold another vote on the subject.
Sullivan ruled that rider unconstitutional last week. Barr shot back that
"the court ignored the constitutional right and responsibility of Congress
to pass laws protecting citizens from dangerous narcotics."
Supporters of the bill say just the opposite -- that marijuana alleviates
chronic pain in some terminal patients and relieves pain associated with
AIDS, cancer or multiple sclerosis. Eight states have legalized use of the
drug for patients whose doctors recommend it for them.
"There's no reason to mislead ourselves because to succeed in this
political climate is going to very, very tough," said Anise Jenkins, whose
group Stand Up for Democracy has been at the forefront of home-rule campaigns.
"But four years ago, this issue passed in all eight wards of the city with
nearly 70 percent of the total vote. This is something D.C. residents want.
The denial of that right highlights the colonial control over the city that
Congress likes to have."
Pubdate: Thu, 04 Apr 2002
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 2002 The Washington Post Company
Contact: letters@washpost.com
Website: Washington Post: Breaking News, World, US, DC News & Analysis
District to put a death penalty referendum on an upcoming ballot.
In 1998, at the behest of a senator from Georgia, Congress ordered the
District to ignore a public vote on legalization of marijuana for medical
purposes.
Now the District is gearing up for another ballot showdown with Congress
after a U.S. District Court judge ruled last week that the congressional
mandate prohibiting District residents from voting on medical marijuana was
an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech.
Just days after the 52-page ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G.
Sullivan, advocates of medical marijuana, who won 69 percent of the vote in
the 1998 referendum later quashed by Congress, are again raising funds and
mapping strategy to put the issue back on the ballot this November.
Buoyed by local home-rule support and by a national drive to make marijuana
legal for some medical patients, the campaign is shaping up as a defining
test of congressional control over the federal city.
"It's particularly outrageous to be told what you can and can't vote on,"
said D.C. Shadow Senator Paul Strauss (D). "The issue here isn't the topic
of the referendum but the right to free and fair elections. Whatever the
framers of the Constitution had in mind for the District, the abrogation of
free elections just couldn't be part of it."
Robert Kampia, executive director of the Washington-based Marijuana Policy
Project, said congressional opposition had energized his nonprofit
organization.
"It's a big case for marijuana legalization across the country because it's
in a national media market and because it pushes the issue onto the
congressional agenda," Kampia said. "But we get a big spike of D.C.
interest because of the home-rule issues."
Kampia said an e-mail solicitation last weekend, just one day after
Sullivan's ruling, drew donations of $9,000, with more arriving. That money
will go toward a hectic drive to obtain 15,000 signatures needed by June 8
to certify the issue for the November ballot.
"We are reviewing the court's decision and have not yet decided if we will
appeal," said Charles Miller, a Justice department spokesman.
When the 1998 referendum, known as Initiative 59, was set to pass, Rep.
Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.) was the driving force behind a congressional ban
that prohibited counting the ballots for more than a year. Each year since,
Barr has sponsored a rider on the D.C. appropriations bill that forbids the
District from spending money to hold another vote on the subject.
Sullivan ruled that rider unconstitutional last week. Barr shot back that
"the court ignored the constitutional right and responsibility of Congress
to pass laws protecting citizens from dangerous narcotics."
Supporters of the bill say just the opposite -- that marijuana alleviates
chronic pain in some terminal patients and relieves pain associated with
AIDS, cancer or multiple sclerosis. Eight states have legalized use of the
drug for patients whose doctors recommend it for them.
"There's no reason to mislead ourselves because to succeed in this
political climate is going to very, very tough," said Anise Jenkins, whose
group Stand Up for Democracy has been at the forefront of home-rule campaigns.
"But four years ago, this issue passed in all eight wards of the city with
nearly 70 percent of the total vote. This is something D.C. residents want.
The denial of that right highlights the colonial control over the city that
Congress likes to have."
Pubdate: Thu, 04 Apr 2002
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 2002 The Washington Post Company
Contact: letters@washpost.com
Website: Washington Post: Breaking News, World, US, DC News & Analysis
