Faced with strong state-level opposition -- and unprecedented lobbying by the nation's drug czar -- the nation's most-watched drug-reform initiatives went down to defeat on Election Day.

In their boldest challenge to date to current drug policy, reformers got a measure on the Nevada ballot that called for legalizing small amounts of marijuana for personal use. But state voters on Tuesday defeated the measure by a wide margin.

Emboldened by their success in states like California, reformers pushed for other states to adopt measures that require courts to give drug offenders a chance at treatment before incarceration. But reformers' recent winning streak on such referenda came to an abrupt end in Ohio, where Issue 1 was defeated by a 2-to-1 margin.

Issue 1 was opposed by the state's drug courts and most of the political establishment, led by first lady and anti-drug activist Hope Taft. John Walters, head of the federal Office of National Drug Control Policy, also traveled several times to the state to urge voters to reject the referendum.

In Arizona, a similar treatment-over-prison initiative also was defeated, despite the fact that state voters had previously supported drug reform (in fact, the item on the 2002 ballot was titled "The People Have Spoken.") This time, Proposition 203 was disapproved by 57 percent of the voters.

"These failed initiatives represent the high water mark of the drug-legalization movement," said Walters. "Common sense has prevailed, and from now on, the tide turns our way -- the way of dedicated Americans working to protect their children and their communities from the dangers of drugs."

But reformers tried to put a positive spin on the results. "These initiatives may have been ahead of their time, but similar initiatives will sweep the country soon enough, as support grows for removing marijuana from criminal laws," said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance.

Bill Zimmerman, executive director of Campaign for New Drug Policies, added, "Drug-policy reform is moving towards the mainstream. If you consider the hundreds of thousands of people who signed petitions to put these measures on the ballots, and the thousands more who voted for them, we are clearly witnessing a growing public sentiment against our failed and expensive drug policies."

Jury nullification -- another pet issue of drug-war critics -- was on the ballot in South Dakota. Constitutional Amendment A would have allowed jurors to consider defendants' arguments that the laws they are charged under are invalid. But state voters rejected the proposal by a nearly 4-1 margin.

South Dakota residents also turned back a bid by reformers to legalize the cultivation of hemp -- a genetic close cousin of marijuana -- for industrial use.

The day was not a total loss for drug-law reformers, however. Washington, D.C. voters overwhelmingly approved Initiative 62, another plan to put drug offenders into treatment rather than prison. Like any local legislation passed in the nation's capital, however, Initiative 62 is subject to Congressional scrutiny. Congress usually finds a way to block D.C. laws it doesn't like, and that almost certainly will be the case with the House and Senate both controlled by the Republican party.

Also, San Francisco voters approved a plan for distributing medical marijuana to residents. Measure S passed by a 62-37 percent margin, despite -- or perhaps because of -- an ongoing federal crackdown on California's compassionate-use clubs.

San Franciscans also OK'd a plan to cut cash payments to the city's homeless residents in exchange for more investments in social-services programs such as alcohol and drug treatment. Supporters of the "Care Not Cash" initiative said it would prevent homeless addicts from using the money for alcohol or other drugs and make the city less of a magnet for homeless people from elsewhere in the country. Opponents said it was just a plan to drive the homeless out of town.

Tobacco Taxes Get Mixed Reviews

Florida's hospitality industry fought hard against a proposal to ban smoking in most public spaces. But the tobacco industry declined to join the fight, and yesterday the initiative was approved by 70 percent of state voters. The measure will end smoking in most workplaces, including bars and restaurants.

In Arizona, 71 percent of residents approved a plan to raise the state's tobacco tax from 58 cents to $1.18 per pack, and use the revenues to pay for healthcare and tobacco-cessation programs.

But voters were fickle: In Missouri, Proposition A -- which would have increased the tobacco tax from 17 cents to 72 cents for much the same purpose -- was rejected by a 51-49 percent margin. Most opposition to the Missouri tax hike came from rural voters.

State legislatures nationally have been roundly criticized for raiding their shares of the 1998 nationwide tobacco settlement to pay for non-tobacco-related programs and to plug budget gaps. In Montana and Michigan, voters took the issue into their own hands, pushing measures telling lawmakers how to spend the tobacco money.

Again, however, results were mixed. Montanans approved Initiative 146 by a 65-35 margin, mandating that the tobacco money be spent on healthcare and smoking cessation. But a similar plan in Michigan (Proposal 4, actually a proposed constitutional amendment) was defeated by a 66-33 percent margin, despite strong backing from groups like the American Lung Association.