Nevada ballot questions far from resolved

Nevadans have voted nearly 3-to-1 to ensure that gay marriages are banned in the state - starting a political battle that will continue until at least 2002.

Question 2 was one of three statewide questions Tuesday that dealt with issues that won't go away any time soon - gay marriage, medical marijuana and economic diversification.

Question 2's proposed constitutional amendment must be approved again by voters in 2002 before taking effect.

During the campaign, critics of Question 2 suggested it was raised specifically to get conservative voters to the polls. UNLV political science professor Ted Jelen said it also may have a mobilizing effect among liberals in the months leading up to its reconsideration in 2002.

''Question 2 really may be the spark that lights the kindling in the gay community, because they weren't organized this time,'' Jelen said.

Liz Moore of Equal Rights Nevada, which opposed the measure, said that for the next two years her organization will focus on community education and fund-raising.

Equal Rights raised roughly $30,000 to oppose the measure; proponents - the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage - raised nearly $1.5 million.

''The big issue is education,'' Moore said. ''People are surprisingly not very familiar with gay issues here. And we just want to encourage a community conversation about it. We are encouraging people to stand up and say they support (gay rights) even in circles where it is not yet socially acceptable to do so.''

Riding on his conservative ideological victory, Coalition President Richard Ziser said he'll turn his attention toward opposing other gay-rights issues, such as gay couples' spousal insurance benefits.

''We'll be active in the upcoming legislative session,'' Ziser said. ''There's some anticipation that the other side may introduce legislation on a number of things.''

If Question 2's effect is to polarize Nevada voters, Question 9's may be to agitate the Legislature - which is now charged with setting up a distribution method for marijuana. The issue is both one of drug ethics and states' rights. Marijuana would be used for pain relief for certain ailments such as cancer or HIV-AIDS.

The medical marijuana initiative passed with 65.4 percent of the statewide vote. Some 59 percent of voters had already approved the question in 1998, which means the constitution will be amended to allow the use and possession of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

The 2001 Legislature must pass laws to regulate the distribution of the drug by physicians. Some proponents of the idea are suggesting setting up a pilot program - possibly at the University of Nevada, Reno Medical School - to initiate distribution.

''It's up to the Legislature, but we're just happy it passed. The lawmakers will have to go with the will of the people now,'' said Dan Hart, a supporter of the initiative.

But the medical community is still divided on the issue.

''This ballot measure was strictly emotionalism and an entire waste of time,'' said Dr. Arnold Wax, a Las Vegas oncologist. ''It's an issue of state's rights and federalism. The federal government has shut down efforts to prescribe it in other states, it will do the same thing here.''

The only one of the three statewide initiatives to fail was Question 1 - a measure that proposed to change the constitution to allow the state to invest in corporations that would promote economic diversification.

Question 1 was crafted by the 1999 Legislature and would have allowed investments only when the state can expect a ''reasonable'' rate of return, and two-thirds of the Senate and Assembly, as well as the governor, approved it.

But, Jelen said, ''a lot of people saw it as free-market socialism. They called it 'welfare for the rich' and voted it down.''