Our state is one of few that has something very close to self-government and direct democracy. It is no wonder that it is the birthplace of the Libertarian Party. It isn't just about partisan politics. Coloradoans with concerns about how they are governed tend to get involved. They meet with their neighbors; speak out in public forums; create lobbyist groups; volunteer in their local and state government, and then succeed in changing policies and laws. It can be infuriating or happily successful, but it is always educational.

Political activism is a good thing, because a read of our constitution tells us that We The People are in fact the government.

Few people want to be governed; most want simply to be left alone, but when it becomes clear that our governing bodies have lost touch with the citizens we have a method of strong change: the ballot box.

Colorado peaks the national average for the number of active voters. In 2004, the People wanted change on a national level and there was a huge increase in the number of active voters. That election was preceded and followed by an increase in political activism.

The desire for change is especially clear in our state as our initiative process allows the governed to change the laws without waiting our representatives in the halls of government. Thusly, this year we have a large number of initiatives on the ballot.

There is a good amount of difficulty getting an initiative on the ballot. Few participants in this work are being paid to do it. For them it is a labor of love, or anger. Unfortunately, in the last few weeks before an election, those who may have worked very hard for years to get a proposed change on the ballot end up facing opponents who just noticed this proposal. Often this means that the opponents are ill-prepared to provide voters with reasonable opposing views.

Citizens who want to get an issue to the ballot must present their case to the state government must follow a distinct set of rules. Those who oppose have fewer rules and often distort facts.

Such is now the case with what many of us know to be Ballot Issue #44.

In 1998 an initiative to make marijuana medicine in our state passed. However, the state Supreme Court decided that the number of signatures that petitioners collected weren't enough, so even though it was on the ballot the votes wouldn't count. The opposition organizers attempted to discredit the proponents as drug fiends. The SoS had been documented in many errors in counting petition signatures in the past. The opposition failed at the ballot box. The court overturned the measure, even though the voters had passed it. After all was said and done, more petition canvas errors were found. Hanky panky in the halls of government. Too late.

In 2000 voters passed a medical marijuana issue that amended the state constitution. This made marijuana available as a basic health right to those whose doctors would approve it for them. The measure won, and the opponents continued their attempts to overrule the will of the voters in the courts, and by bringing in federal muscle. The courts have continued to support the will of the voters and the physician-approved use of medical continues in the present. Colorado is the only state of the eleven that have medical use rights as part of its constitution.

In 2001 the state legislature understood that some percentage of the population would be in possession of small amounts of marijuana, and also understood that many patients would like to be able to grow their own to effect the quality of this drug. Quality, not quantity. The constitution now stated how much an approved medical user could grow, which is very small, but the state statutes continued to make possession and cultivation a felony. Putting citizens in jail for possession of something that the constitution allowed created a quandary for the police; courts; corrections; and an immense fiscal burden on the state. Thus the legislature passed a new law that decriminalized for the possession of small amounts. This is Colorado Revised Statute 18-18-406. It's very simple: possession of less than an ounce is no more than a $100 fine and a class two petty offense. There is no incremental penalty and no criminal record.

Now, five years after the creation of this state law, marijuana proponents seek further decriminalize by making possession of less than an ounce legal for adults. At the same time the proposed measure specifically sets an age limitation that does not currently exist in the present law. As with alcohol, we find that adults are age 21 and older.

People of all ages consume both alcohol and marijuana. With alcohol, those under 21 are considered minors and banned from consumption and possession of liquor. With marijuana, everyone is banned. Legality doesn't seem to concern those that marijuana over alcohol, but the legal system finds them to be different and does prosecute them. This is not just a burden on marijuana users, but on all taxpayers.

The opponents of ballot issue 44 have been telling voters that this measure, if passed, will allow children to possess marijuana and to allow adults to give marijuana to those under 21. This is not what the language of the proposal states. It is very clear in setting an age limitation. The opposition is unfazed by the simple truth and has continued to represent a complete falsehood. What the proponents have come to understand is that the opposition was unaware of this state law for the past five years. We understand that they want re-criminalization, not less.

So here's a question: Why haven't those interested in criminal prosecutions of marijuana users lobbied the legislature or brought about their own ballot initiative?
Well they certainly have lobbied the legislature, and were rebuffed. The lawmakers understood the will of the people and followed their constituents' lead. It is far too costly, both financially and in human terms, to jail people for possession of minor amounts of marijuana. The police are burdened with many tasks in public safety. Deferring their resources to what is truly a victimless crime and a matter of personal choice sandbags the police and judicial system.
The opponents haven't gone after a ballot initiative for a number of reasons: First and foremost, their ideals on prohibition are a minority in free-thinking Colorado. Secondly, it is costly to bring about a ballot initiative, and they simply don't have the organizational skills and money to get it done.

With just over a month before we go to the polls, the minority opponents of the measure to legalize small amounts of marijuana are scrambling to come up with ideas to convince voters that 44 is a bad idea. We've heard statistical fabrications; misstatements of the current laws; and insults of proponents as being drug fiends. They've even blamed the lawmakers for the passage of 18-18-406, and have been telling voters that they were misled in passing the medical marijuana initiative back in 2000.

They've brought in the big guns from Washington, who on the taxpayers dime are 'volunteering' to help. Let's not be misled here: The DEA is not helping for free; we are paying the federal government to oppose 44. The opponents don't have to pay a penny for this help, because they've gotten you to pay for it for them.

What is so confounding is that both opponents and proponents appear to have the same goals: keep drugs out of the hand of children. Legalize marijuana for 21 and older, and clarify criminality for those younger.

We trust in the intelligent and freedom loving nature of Colorado voters. Please vote your conscience this November, not someone else's.

Paul Tiger -- Longmont