Where I Stand—Brian Greenspun: High court snuffs pot

Tuesday, May 15, 2001 | 9:41 a.m.

Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun.

IS THE COUNTRY going to pot?

Obviously not, if you listen to what the Supreme Court of the United States said in a unanimous decision this week. By an 8-0 vote, the justices ruled that federal law does not allow an exception, even for medical purposes, to the ban on the distribution of marijuana.

Unlike the 5-4 practically unintelligible decision the high court issued in the Bush v. Gore case, this one was unanimous and not given to much second guessing. The justices were clear: as long as Congress wants to prohibit the use of marijuana on a countrywide basis, no state legislature and no amount of citizen initiatives can make the illegal, legal. So that leaves the issue squarely up to Congress to give meaning to the will of the people.

And from where I stand way out here in independent-minded Nevada, that should happen sometime real soon. Right? Don't hold your breath.

I am not a big proponent of the medical use of marijuana, although I supported this state's initiative to allow doctors to dispense the drug for patients who couldn't get relief from more conventional sources. My view was that people who are in pain should be entitled to relief from whatever source as long as there is some proper supervision. In this case, the marijuana would be prescribed by a doctor, which pretty much tells the story. The rest of us have no part in the equation. After all, what goes on between a doctor and his patient is supposed to be sacrosanct, as is the treatment supposed to be respected by others in society.

So that leaves the fix to this dilemma in the hands of the Congress, which means that help should be on the way very soon. After all, if the House and Senate, led by Speaker Dennis Hastert and Vice President Dick Cheney, stand for anything, it is the concept that government works best that is closest to the people. In this case, the people have spoken loudly and very clearly at the state and local levels. They have voted consistently in many areas of the country to allow for the use of marijuana to help those who have medical conditions that can be helped by such use.

Given that the people have spoken through the ballot boxes and through representative government, it should follow without much discussion that the U.S. Congress -- hellbent on returning the power to the people in their cities and neighborhoods -- will change the federal law in a way that respects their will.

That's what they should do up there on Capitol Hill. The betting windows are now open and the odds are very long. *

Speaking of odds. The stories out of Washington are placing the blame on big money for the apparent loss of steam that seems to have either derailed or slowed down significantly the effort by the NCAA to ban betting on college sports in Nevada. The financial clout of Nevada's gaming industry is being given credit for standing in the way of success for Sen. John McCain and his colleagues' effort to rid the world of the scourge of gambling.

That's hogwash. Does the money that the industry contributes to the campaign coffers of various legislators open a few doors? Yes. Do the lobbyists who know the facts and who can tell them cogently to senators listening on the run have a leg up on those who sit at home and just wish for things to happen? Yes. Is there anything wrong with that picture? No!

What may be happening in Washington is that after a year or two of one side having its way with the media and the minds of the political animals who live and work there, the facts are beginning to carry the day. It is still far too early to tell what the outcome will be, but it seems clear to me that people are starting to pay attention to the facts about illegal gambling and they are realizing that what the NCAA wants to do to Nevada could be the single worst thing that can be done to stop illegal bookmaking on college campuses and in cities across the country.

This is one time that Nevadans should thank their stars that fundraising is legal and that lobbying is not a lost art. And all that should mean that there is a common-sensical middle ground to the idea of removing big money from the political landscape.

Oh, by the way, if you think that Nevadans had to step up big time with the dollars to get the attention of the political class on this one, just wait until you see the greenbacks fly when it comes time for the fight over the high-level nuclear waste dump.

As far as I am concerned, what President George W. Bush does to or for Nevada on the Yucca Mountain issue will be the defining moment in the life to come of Las Vegas, Nevada. What we do from now on regarding political fundraising and political support for one person or the other must and should be determined by what those people are going to do for the Silver State on this one overriding issue.

This is one of those times when the old western saying, "you are either with me or agin me," should carry the day. Anyone want to bet -- legally, of course -- that Nevada's money will still flow to those who are agin us?

We are very shortsighted in this state. I wonder if medicinal marijuana will help.