cannabisnews.com: House Just Says No To Pot as Rx





House Just Says No To Pot as Rx
Posted by CN Staff on May 22, 2003 at 07:36:51 PT
By Tobin A. Coleman, Staff Writer
Source: Greenwich Time 
Hartford -- A move to legalize marijuana for medical use was defeated yesterday in the state House of Representatives, 79-64. Sponsor state Rep. James Abrams, D-Meriden, said the so-called "medical marijuana" bill would have been the most restrictive in the nation."This bill is not an effort to legalize, it is not an effort to decriminalize marijuana," Abrams said at the outset of two and one half hours of debate on the bill. "It is an attempt to keep sick people out of jail."
Abrams has been championing the proposal since a constituent told him four years ago she had to buy marijuana illegally for her son to help relieve his symptoms of nausea from chemotherapy when other drugs didn't work.Proponents said the drug can relieve pain and nausea from chemotherapy, treat glaucoma, slow some of the wasting associated with AIDS and help patients with multiple sclerosis. Abrams designed the legislation after a similar law in place in Hawaii.After the vote, Abrams said he was not surprised by the bill's failure. Earlier attempts had never made it to the floor of the House."I was very happy to get a vote," Abrams said. "I'm a Red Sox fan, so it's always, 'Wait till next year.' "Under the bill's main provision, doctors would have given patients with a debilitating disease a certificate, saying they need marijuana for medical reasons. Doctors would have been required to explore other medicines and deemed them ineffective. Patients, and if necessary their primary care giver, would file the certificate with the state Department of Public Safety.It also would have prohibited law enforcement officers from arresting anyone simply for being present or in the vicinity when marijuana is being used lawfully for medical purposes.Buying marijuana would still have been illegal, but patients and their caregivers could grow it. The question of how seeds could be acquired legally was one that Abrams said he never found a good solution for.Most opponents said that because federal law still makes possession of marijuana illegal, they were uncomfortable passing a law that would fly in the face of the federal law enforcement.As long as the federal prohibition is in place, "I'd have to go out on the corner with little 'Johnny Junkie' to obtain the drug," said state Rep. John Wayne Fox, D-Stamford, who voted against the bill but said people should have access to the drug legally."We have to acknowledge the sympathy we have for people who suffer from these diseases," Fox said.One of the chief and most vocal opponents was state Rep. Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk. Cafero brought up points he raised when the bill was debated in the Judiciary Committee, including his concerns that college students or others could find ways to get around the law and begin sharing marijuana in dorm rooms under the guise of using it for medical reasons.He also asked whether migraine headaches or pain from menstrual cramps could be considered debilitating enough to be prescribed marijuana."The bill as written would have allowed a lot of unintended consequences," Cafero said in an interview.Cafero said he supports sick people being able to get marijuana to ease their suffering, but only if the federal prohibition on using the drug for medical reasons is repealed.Neither the debate nor the final vote fell along party lines. Forty-three Democrats voted against the bill, along with 36 Republicans. Democrats control the House 94-57.Some of the debate was poignant. The House fell silent as state Rep. Penny Bacchiochi, R-Somers, related the story of her late husband who contracted terminal bone cancer. An operation to remove a tumor left him a paraplegic. Chemotherapy made him nauseous."Eventually, after many months of chemotherapy, a courageous doctor took us aside and he told us that my husband needed to try marijuana," Bacchiochi said. "The doctor was convinced that it would help, so some marijuana was obtained. And it was obtained at great legal risk to my family. But it worked. And it worked wonders. And it gave him back a quality of life. . . . I will always remember how my husband suffered. And I will always remember that if a Legislature had passed a bill like this, he would have suffered less."The arguments, however, failed to sway those who opposed the bill."The lower the perception of harm for a drug, the more people use that drug," said Republican state Rep. Antonietta "Toni" Boucher, who represents Wilton and part of Norwalk. "The perception of harm from marijuana has been dropping off since the drive to legalize marijuana for medical use."State Rep. John Hetherington, R-New Canaan, said the bill "seems to be making an end run around the system we have for approving controlled substances."Connecticut did pass a law allowing medical marijuana use in 1981. But because marijuana possession and distribution is against federal law, not a single prescription has been issued in Connecticut, Abrams said. Doctors are afraid they will be brought up on charges, he said.Opponents reminded the House that at a public hearing on the bill, no oncologists, eye doctors or anyone representing hospices or those suffering from multiple sclerosis appeared.Yesterday, proponents did circulate a list of 297 Connecticut physicians who support medical marijuana use.Under the failed bill, patients suffering a debilitating illness, or their caregivers, would have been allowed to possess three mature marijuana plants, four immature plants and up to 3 ounces of the drug. The drug could not be sold or given to anyone else and it could only be consumed in private, for example, in someone's home.People using the drug could still be prosecuted if a law enforcement official believed they had overstepped the bounds of the certificate, or were not actually using the drug to relieve discomfort. But the doctor's certificate could be presented in court with legal standing as a defense. It would be up to a judge or jury to weigh whether the medical need was real. Source: Greenwich Time (CT)Author: Tobin A. Coleman, Staff WriterPublished: May 22, 2003Copyright: 2003 Southern Connecticut Newspapers Inc.Contact: mike.sweeney scni.comWebsite: http://www.greenwichtime.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:A Better Way Foundationhttp://www.abetterwayct.org/Medical Marijuana Information Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmHouse Rejects Plan To Legalize Medical Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16351.shtmlMarijuana Bill Surprises Some With Support http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16253.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #8 posted by billos on May 22, 2003 at 10:13:42 PT
Hartford
Not surprising the bill didn't pass. What I would love to uncover is, how the fedz influence the vote. The fedz would find it hard to convince me this vote, or any other vote on a state level to pass such legislation in vain, wasn't influenced by the DEA. The truth is being censored by the Federal Government. The WoD perpetuates this censorship. Just follow the events concerning the Rosenthal case. They're appalling at best. Anyone for a tea party?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by FoM on May 22, 2003 at 09:56:47 PT
Ehrlich to Sign Medical Marijuana Bill 
Annapolis - A spokesman at the governor's office says Governor Robert Ehrlich will sign a bill today that reduces the penalties for using marijuana for medical purposes. The sponsor of the bill, Baltimore County Delegate Dan Morhaim, says he's pleased by the governor's decision. Morhaim calls it a "prudent step forward" that will help people who are suffering. Morhaim is also an emergency room doctor at Sinai Hospital in Baltimore. Copyright 2003 The Associated Presshttp://www.insidebaltimore.com/news/health/ehrlich-marijuana0522.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on May 22, 2003 at 09:50:45 PT
The Baltimore Sun says he Will Sign It Too!
I can't wait until they do an article and I can get it posted! This is Maryland! This is where the Government Lives! I know it isn't much but it really is for that area of the United States!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Virgil on May 22, 2003 at 09:44:05 PT
Tasmania Greens for MMJ
This is the entire article from http://www.abc.net.au/news/australia/tas/mettas-22may2003-4.htm     Tas Greens support medicinal cannabisThe Tasmanian Greens have supported a New South Wales proposal to allow the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes.The New South Wales Government has proposed the restricted use of cannabis for certain chronic medical cases.Greens MHA Nick McKim says double standards are used by those who argue against the idea."We don't accept the arguments that marijuana is a bad drug, therefore it shouldn't be used for medicinal uses," he said."I mean heroin and opiates are not desirable drugs but the medical profession is quite happy to use them for medical purposes and we don't see there will be any difference with marijuana."If it was well regulated and carefully administered, it should be made available for medicinal purposes." 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on May 22, 2003 at 09:39:10 PT
The Governor WILL Sign The Medical Marijuana Bill
Ehrlich Set To Sign Bills Into LawMay 22, 2003ANNAPOLIS, Md. -- A spokesman at the governor's office said Gov. Robert Ehrlich will sign a bill that reduces the penalties for using marijuana for medical purposes. The sponsor of the bill, Baltimore County Delegate Dan Morhaim, said he's pleased by the governor's decision. http://www.thewbalchannel.com/news/2222076/detail.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by WolfgangWylde on May 22, 2003 at 08:14:36 PT
Whatever our hopes...
...are for a sane and rational marijuana policy (medical or otherwise) will have to rest in a country other than the U.S. Clearly, the fanatics, on both sides of the political aisle, are running the show, and will continue to do so.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Sam Adams on May 22, 2003 at 08:05:54 PT
College students?
You mean college students may start sharing marijuana in dorm rooms? Good Lord!I'd love to write more, but I gotta run to "Johnny Junkie" to pick up a six-pack of Coors for tonight......
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Virgil on May 22, 2003 at 08:04:56 PT
For what it is worth
This is another posting at the nempcity forum from an individual. Kind of makes you think the common Joe is a better informer than the mass media. From http://www.hempcity.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=170&highlight= I will thank him for his "reporting" and tell him of the location of his information at Cnews.While several eminent politicians and researchers recognise the monstrosity of the Finnish drug policies, the majority of the establishment including the leading mass media endorse strict prohibition and harsh punitive action against all drug users. This keeps the separate question of cannabis embedded in the overall drug problem. And that is what they want. They use all kinds of age old made in USA arguments and downright false claims to keep the general population in deep ignorance about the true state of things in the world. The Netherlands is constantly portrayed as a drug hell where the abuse of intoxicants - alcohol is hardly mentioned - is out of hand and the legalised cannabis is paving the way for hard drugs. Admittedly the true statistics also pop up once in a while, but they are publicised in a manner that is hard for ordinary people to understand. When one Green alliance candidate in the recent parliamentary elections openly smoked pot, the whole party was publicly stigmatised in a damaging way. No hemp advocate himself the chairman of the Greens stated: "A sensible discussion about drugs is impossible in Finland." 
Due to heavy taxation alcoholic beverages are rather expensive in Finland. Consequently personal import and smuggling of cheap alcohol from Russia and Estonia represent a large portion of the total consumption here. Estonia is due to join EU very soon, and a real flood of booze over the Gulf of Finland is expected. The new government has declared a harder than ever line against drugs, and possession of small quantities of cannabis leads to heavy fines. Meanwhile they are planning to ease the taxation of alcohol to "combat" the import from Estonia. The main result will be a steeper than ever rise in liquor consumption. Under the umbrella of the sovereign State control of alcohol distribution. Not to mention threats of the State majority owned Altia distillers to move their production to cheap Estonia! 
It cannot be denied that the authorities find themselves between the devil and the deep blue sea. Well meaning people say: "We don't need still another legal intoxicant." But the drugs already are a real problem in Finland, particularly amphetamines. Coupled with alcohol they wreak havoc in traffic and in all kinds of violent criminality. Meanwhile the real potheads keep so quiet that it is impossible to gather any reliable statistics about them. They rarely commit crimes or land in trouble, except the unlucky ones that get caught. The same street pushers sell cannabis and hard drugs with known consequences. Finland being a faraway country, the most common hash is the diluted Moroccan stuff called "crap plate" here. Home growers of course know better. Once in a while a big issue is made of a few hemp plants bust along with a statement that the drug menace is on the rise in this or that backwoods village. It would be really ridiculous if it weren't so depressing. 
Fortunately there is currently a vigorous cannabis discussion going on in various internet forums. Against the intelligent statements found there you have a chance to read some unbelievably stupid and hostile stuff. Recommended links: 
 
 Vriendelijke groeten
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment