Clarify Medical Marijuana Law

California has had a governor at loggerheads with the Legislature, a state in conflict with the federal government, local prosecutors at variance with voters’ wishes. Add them up and the state’s policy on marijuana is so confusing as to cry out for clarity.

Two years ago, California voters passed a sloppily worded proposition making it legal in some circumstances to provide marijuana to the ill. But two weeks ago, an Orange County jury convicted Marvin Chavez for selling marijuana. He contended he was providing the drug to the sick. However, the jury did not convict Chavez on all charges, and the verdict did little to provide clear guidelines.

Chavez contended he was providing marijuana as allowed under the terms of Proposition 215, which legalized the medical use of marijuana in California. Orange County prosecutors said Chavez was simply a drug pusher, selling marijuana even though he called the money he received “donations.”

The jury convicted Chavez of three felonies, acquitted him of two others and reduced five felonies to misdemeanors before convicting him on those.

The confusion wrought by Proposition 215 is widespread. Although Orange County has had prosecutions other than Chavez’s, the San Francisco district attorney has declined to file charges in medicinal marijuana cases.

This newspaper opposed Proposition 215 because it was so vague. It allows doctors to prescribe the drug not just for cancer and AIDS but for “any other illness for which marijuana provides relief.”

Headaches? The flu? The law also is vague in defining what constitutes a “physician” who may provide the drug.

Much confusion could have been avoided had Gov. Pete Wilson signed into law a bill that would have provided marijuana to seriously ill patients suffering from AIDS, cancer and multiple sclerosis. Those are much stricter definitions than Proposition 215 contained. But Wilson vetoed the bill twice.

Marijuana is dangerous. It can impair defenses against bacteria and can cause neurological impairment in the long term. But properly controlled, it can reduce pain.

The federal government could help clear matters up.

The Clinton administration has threatened prosecution of doctors who recommend the medical use of marijuana and has threatened to revoke those doctors’ right to prescribe federally monitored drugs. It would be better off heeding the cautious opinions of the medical establishment and making it legal for doctors to prescribe marijuana for medical use.

That would stop prosecutors from making points as anti-drug crusaders because they haul marijuana sellers into court. It would also bring needed clarity to an area where an attempt to make public policy through the proposition process has failed.