cannabisnews.com: Medical Pot Bill Advances in Senate





Medical Pot Bill Advances in Senate
Posted by CN Staff on March 12, 2003 at 21:47:15 PT
By David Mace, Vermont Press Bureau 
Source: Times Argus
Montpelier — The Vermont Senate has given preliminary approval to a bill that would allow people with diseases like AIDS and cancer to legally possess and use marijuana, but the measure faces an uncertain future in the House and opposition from Gov. James Douglas. On a bipartisan, 22-7, vote on Wednesday, senators advanced the bill, which is similar to a measure that passed the Republican-controlled House last year, but stalled in the Democratic Senate. 
“This bill … treats very sick people as patients and with compassion, not as criminals,” Health and Welfare Committee Chairman Sen. James Leddy, D-Chittenden, told his colleagues. Earlier, Leddy recalled how he had been approached several years ago by Debbie Ramsdell of Charlotte, a constituent who recounted how she had been forced to buy marijuana illegally for her husband, who was dying of cancer. Leddy said he’s since become an advocate for the change in law, particularly after an extensive study committee — which Ramsdell headed — determined that there were medical benefits from marijuana use. The bill, modeled closely after the one that passed the House last year with tri-partisan support, requires a doctor’s certification that the patient suffers from one of several specified conditions and needs marijuana to relieve symptoms. The Department of Health would determine whether the person was eligible, and patients who were rejected could appeal to a panel of three doctors appointed by the Medical Practice Board. In addition, a person could register to be a patient’s caregiver, and the Health Department would keep the records confidential unless police needed to verify the information. Persons authorized to use medical marijuana couldn’t smoke it in any public place, and could not be under the influence while driving or in other circumstances where they could endanger others. In addition, a registered user or caregiver could also grow medical marijuana in a locked indoor facility and transport it in a locked container, an effort to prevent confusion by police. Since a search warrant would be needed to look in the container or search a home, that would provide time to search the database and determine whether the owner was exempt from prosecution. Though supporters have called the bill the strictest in the country — eight states have such laws —some senators raised the same concerns that have most law enforcement officials opposed to the bill. Sen. Julius Canns, R-Essex-Orleans, pointed out that marijuana would still be illegal under federal law, and worried about the message that it would send about illegal drug use. “In my judgment, the bill as proposed will expose law enforcement officers to legal liability” from persons who have permission to use medical marijuana but whom police unknowingly arrest, said Sen. Vincent Illuzzi, R-Essex-Orleans. He offered an amendment that would codify the ability of prosecutors or a judge to drop marijuana charges against someone who was using it for medical purposes, and pointed out that there apparently has never been an arrest or prosecution of a seriously ill person for marijuana. Illuzzi withdrew the amendment after supporters objected that it would “gut” the bill, but not before expressing disappointment that some supporters of the measure were linked with groups that advocated for the decriminalization of marijuana and were not being candid about that. Sen. Mark Shepard, R-Bennington, offered an amendment that could touch off a debate on abortion rights as well. It would require that minors get parental permission before being allowed access to medical marijuana, closely mirroring a bill requiring parental notification for a minor’s abortion that passed the GOP-controlled House last year but was bottled up by Senate Democrats. Shepard agreed to delay the amendment until a final vote on the bill scheduled for today. He said afterward that his amendment wasn’t intended to make a statement on parental notification for abortion. “A parent has to be involved in most medical situations, and this ought not to be outside of that,” Shepard said. A similar amendment was offered last year during the debate by then-Sen. William Corrow, R-Orange, as a way of sharpening the parties’ differences on the parental notification bill. Shepard characterized the amendment as one aimed at upholding the rights of parents to be in control of their children’s health, but acknowledged there were parallels to the parental notification bill, which he supports. “You can’t just avoid everything because it draws a parallel to something,” he said. “We’re very pleased that the Senate recognizes the needs of seriously ill Vermonters to enable them to live more productive lives,” said Gail Zatz, a lobbyist for the HIV Public Policy Project. But Zatz, who also lobbies for the Vermont chapter of the National Organization for Women, which supports abortion rights, criticized Shepard’s amendment as a “backdoor way into parental notification for abortion.” “It’s unfortunate people are using this bill, which is so important to seriously ill Vermonters, as a step toward restricting abortions,” she said. Source: Times Argus (VT)Author: David Mace, Vermont Press BureauPublished: March 12, 2003Copyright: 2003 Times ArgusContact: info timesargus.comWebsite: http://timesargus.nybor.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Medical Marijuana Information Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmCommittee Backs Medical Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15408.shtmlSenate To Vote on Legalizing Medicinal Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15710.shtmlVermont Study Endorses Medical Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14742.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Post Comment