In an October poll, Gallup found that 44% of the American public now supports the legalization of marijuana. Even more encouraging, support for legalization has been growing at a rate of over one percent a year since 2000. Legalization advocates have their best hopes for short term success in the West where a majority already supports legalization. A referendum on legalization may appear on the ballot in California in 2010, which will likely be aided by the tantalizing possibility of raising billions of dollars in tax money in the cash strapped state. It would seem to be a perfect storm to finally move forward with legalization, but almost no politicians at the federal level are willing to risk voicing support for what they see as a political dead end.

Perhaps the only support marijuana legalization is receiving at the federal level is a bill introduced into the House of Representatives by Representatives Barney Frank (D-MA) and Ron Paul (R-TX). The bill has only nine co-sponsors, three of them from California: Democrats George Miller and Pete Stark and Republican Dana Rohrabacher. It should come as no surprise that both Miller and Stark represent the famously liberal and marijuana friendly Bay Area. The most powerful member of Congress from the Bay Area, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, is noticeably absent. However, this alone should not be taken as indicative of her view on marijuana legalization as it is unusual for the Speaker of the House to co-sponsor legislation.

‘Pelosi has been somewhat supportive of marijuana law reform in the past. She co-sponsored the States’ Right to Medical Marijuana Act that is designed to prevent the federal government from interfering with state laws that allow medical marijuana and earning a pro-drug reform stance from the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). But Pelosi’s support for marijuana law reform seems to stop well short of outright legalization. In this interview with Digg CEO Jay Adelson, Pelosi is asked what stops marijuana from being legalized for both medicinal and recreational purposes. Pelosi spends almost the entirety of her answer explaining her support for medical marijuana and how Congressional Democrats have worked to ensure states have the right to pass medical marijuana laws. She avoids the question of legalization of marijuana for recreational purposes almost entirely by simply saying “I don’t think you’ll see” it. Pelosi is either saying that since legalization is politically difficult she declines to support it or that she is opposed to legalization even in theory. Either way, this will not do.

As Speaker of the House Pelosi is one of the leaders of the Democratic Party; her support for any particular issue can embolden members of the party to take a similar position and potentially swing hundreds of votes in favor of a bill. Furthermore, she still represents the people of San Francisco, and although the October Gallup poll did not reveal city by city numbers, it is a safe assumption that since a majority of Westerners support marijuana legalization, a large majority of San Franciscans do so as well. Clearly, Pelosi would not be risking her seat in Congress by advocating marijuana legalization. But by failing to blaze a trail on this issue, Pelosi is both failing in her role as a leader of her party and representative of the people of San Francisco.

To demonstrate leadership on marijuana legalization, Pelosi need not co-sponsor Frank and Paul’s bill, but she does need to take some action. The easiest course for Pelosi is to express support for a national debate on the issue and encourage California to place the matter before its voters in 2010. If she cannot take even that minimal step, she does not deserve to represent the good people of San Francisco.

By John W. Payne for DROPPELOSI.COM