cannabisnews.com: House Rejects Medical Marijuana Again





House Rejects Medical Marijuana Again
Posted by CN Staff on June 15, 2005 at 16:28:39 PT
By Todd Zwillich, WebMD Medical News
Source: WebMD 
Washington, D.C. -- Lawmakers on Wednesday voted down a measure that would have barred the federal government from prosecuting patients who use marijuana under doctor's orders in states with laws that allow the practice. The House vote comes a week after the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the federal government may still enforce national antidrug laws in the states allowing medical marijuana use. The decision effectively gave Congress the right to decide how to regulate marijuana, regardless of state laws.
But lawmakers voted 161 to 264 against an amendment that would have barred the Department of Justice from spending any money arresting or prosecuting medical marijuana users. The amendment gained 13 more votes than an identical measure last year. Medical marijuana supporters have long argued that smoking marijuana can offer relief to patients suffering from chronic pain or cancer, AIDS/HIV patients with severe weight loss, or nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy. In Washington, the debate has largely focused on whether California, Montana, and eight other states with medical marijuana laws have the right to regulate their own medical practices. "Let's not have a power grab by the federal government at the expense of those poor patients and the right of doctors trying to make these decisions," said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California republican and one of the amendment's chief sponsors. The state has allowed patients to use marijuana under a doctor's supervision since 1996. Medical Marijuana Under Fire Opponents argued that the measure would open the door to legalizing marijuana by legitimizing it as a medicine. Several also warned that allowing states to set medication policy would undermine the Food and Drug Administration, which approves new drugs and monitors their safety. Rep. Mark E. Souder (R-Ind.) attacked claims that marijuana has medicinal use, comparing it to the snake oil sold to unsuspecting consumers in the early 1900s and calling doctors who prescribe it "quacks." Active Ingredient Already in Other Medications Marijuana's active ingredient, THC, is already available in an FDA-approved pill used to treat nausea, Souder said. "You isolate the chemicals inside to treat the disease, you do not smoke pot." "It's seeking to establish a small sliver of marijuana [in federal law]…and eventually be able to legalize this substance," said Rep. Steven King (R-Iowa). Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) told lawmakers that marijuana is less toxic than many narcotic drugs already approved for use by American doctors. "This is not a bill to make marijuana generally available and it is not a bill to put it in baby formula," he said. Wednesday's vote represented its third defeat in as many trips to the House floor in recent years. Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.) tells WebMD that he will continue offering the amendment to appropriations bills in the coming years. State Situation Unclear Despite the measure's rejection and last week's Supreme Court ruling, it remains unclear whether federal drug agencies will now step up raids that so far have been rare. Just 16 medical marijuana growing operations in legalized states have taken place since 1996, according to the Drug Policy Alliance, a group favoring medical marijuana laws. Several states, including Wisconsin, New Mexico, and Alabama, are still considering laws allowing marijuana use by certain patients. It remains unclear whether the Supreme Court's decision will hinder the passage of those bills. The Rhode Island Senate passed a medical marijuana bill on June 7, though New York Senate leaders pulled their support for a bill following last week's ruling, Hinchey said. SOURCES: Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.). Rep. Mark E. Souder (R-Ind.). Rep. Steven King (R-Iowa.). Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.). Reviewed By Brunilda Nazario, MDNote: Amendment Would Have Barred Feds in 10 states.Source: WebMD (US) Author: Todd Zwillich, WebMD Medical News Published: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 Copyright: 2005 WebMD Inc.Contact: news webmd.net Website: http://www.webmd.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Drug Policy Alliancehttp://www.drugpolicy.org/U.S. House Again Defeats Medical Marijuana Usehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20863.shtmlHouse: Medical Marijuana a Federal Casehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20862.shtmlMeasure Aims To Prevent Marijuana Prosecutionhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20858.shtml
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #17 posted by runderwo on June 16, 2005 at 11:02:11 PT
knowhemp
Don't forget the other segment, the people who want prohibition stopped for none of those reasons, but simply because prohibition itself causes more harm than it could ever prevent. And of course there is cross-over between all of those groups.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by FoM on June 15, 2005 at 23:12:06 PT
knowhemp
You make good sense to me. I believe the Cannabis issue is more then one issue. I believe in medical marijuana but I also believe the laws against Cannabis are insane and need to be changed. I also believe we need Hemp for all of it's potential benefits it could offer. I believe strongly that if we don't stand together we will go down together.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by knowhemp on June 15, 2005 at 23:01:31 PT
thinking
you know, those who seek cannabis reform are not all for each other and i think this is working out nicely for the prohibitionists. i'm going to make some generalizations here so bear with me...many of those who want hemp legalized think that they should keep away from the medical issue. and many of those who would like to see medicinal cannabis legal would also like to say that they don't want it legal for casual use (i'm not sure if recreation is the right word here, it's not like swimming or camping). But why can't we all come together on this...yes i want legal hemp so i can help replace trees for paper, (who didn't learn in school about deforestation? It never went away!) or to build homes (foundations, particle board, insulation, paint, wallpaper, etc..) or make plastic or fiberglass-like material like they already do in european auto manufacturing plants. OK? yes, legal hemp, and yes maybe some kid will try to hide his crops in my field but guess what? his plants will get pollinated with my hemp and will be worthless as a drug. And no, as a farmer, i DON'T think that it would be a confusing or bad message to put out there because i also happen to know that cannabis as a drug and a medicine is better than cannabis as an ILLICIT drug being sold on the black market to kids along with other harder and dangerous drugs for money that goes into terrorism, mafia, and corporate stinking multi billion dollar prison complexes! Yes, as a medical marijuana activist, I believe that we can end needless suffering with an ancient plant that has been harvested and refined by humans for millenia. And yes i think that it will most likely usher in the legalization of adult use of marijuana as well even if that isn't my issue, but i happen to know that it's a safe alternative to beer or whippits, and by safe i mean (cite scientific study here), so i believe that casual use is not a problem unless it's illegal. Yes, i'm a casual smoker who doesn't really have a life threatening illness, but thats fine because i'm a productive individual just like many of the greatest thinkers and doers our species has ever produced. I know that what i'm doing is my business, because i'm an adult and it's safer than a big mac. I also happen to know that marijuana is a racist term intended to demonstrate how cannabis is bad because the mexicans use it. (a term coined by harry anslinger, our first drug czar). We need to be a cohesive unit...the facts are there – use them, but don't abuse them.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by knowhemp on June 15, 2005 at 22:22:29 PT
ekim #5
this is an excellent reference, ekim. this a battle against the freedom to live in, explore, make use of, and enjoy the natural world from which we all came. It's an exchange: they take the free, organic solution from us and all thats left is their manufactured sythetic version. The facts don't matter to the liers. They will do whatever it takes, and we need to understand that there is a clear motive behind the disproportionate focus on cannabis. How do you change the mind of a congressman? Are they listening? What are they listening for? Are they concerned with you or the ones you're concerned about? Perhaps they need to know that once this gets going they'll be regarded as heroes. Champions of freedom and justice! Or maybe they just need to know that the lier is lying and THEN they will look at the facts. Or maybe someone really smart needs to be told first so that they can go explain it to the guy who won't buy it from anyone else. The facts are there.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by FoM on June 15, 2005 at 22:17:55 PT
BGreen
I just thought of the very old classic movie A Christmas Carol. The Ghost shows 2 children huddled in his cloak and he called them Ignorance and Hunger. If I remember the Ghost said fear them.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by BGreen on June 15, 2005 at 21:25:19 PT
I thought you would like it
That's why I mentioned it.This country is in deep trouble when these downtrodden and beat up citizens who have nothing else to lose join forces and rise up in anger.It's not going to be pretty.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by FoM on June 15, 2005 at 21:18:26 PT
BGreen
That was one of the best shows I have seen in a long time. They wonder why people sell drugs in the cities when trying to make ends meet is almost totally impossible.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by Hope on June 15, 2005 at 20:15:51 PT
ekim, comment 5
""We cannot understand yet, Mr. Chairman," Woodward protested, "why this bill should have been prepared in secret for two years without any intimation, even to the profession, that it was being prepared." He and the AMA" were quickly denounced by Anslinger and the entire congressional committee, and curtly excused."Sadly, Dr. Woodward, if he came back today, would find that there has still been no truly logical explanation as to why cannabis was made illegal and, even worse, still is.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by FoM on June 15, 2005 at 20:07:21 PT
BGreen
Thanks! We are watching it now and it is good!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by BGreen on June 15, 2005 at 19:20:19 PT
30 Days with Morgan Spurlock on FX
We're watching it now and it's going to be repeated at 11 P.M. eastern time.It's really worth watching.The Reverend Bud Green************************************************************Minimum Wage Debut: People spend a month's time in an environment that is antithetical to their accustomed way of life in this documentary series from "Super Size Me" director Morgan Spurlock. First up: Spurlock and his fiancée try to live on minimum wage in Columbus, Ohio.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by FoM on June 15, 2005 at 18:30:31 PT
Heads Up: Montel on Scarborough Country
 SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY 
Wednesday, 10 p.m. ETTalk show host Montel Williams says the Supreme Court's anti-medical marijuana stand is just plain crazy. Will his argument hold up in Scarborough Country?
 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by mayan on June 15, 2005 at 18:18:22 PT
MURDERERS
Several also warned that allowing states to set medication policy would undermine the Food and Drug Administration, which approves new drugs and monitors their safety.Yeah, better leave it to corrupted FDA and DEA to set medication policy.Marijuana's active ingredient, THC, is already available in an FDA-approved pill used to treat nausea, Souder said. "You isolate the chemicals inside to treat the disease, you do not smoke pot."Wrong. The synthetic version of THC in pill-form is called Marinol. You should know that, Dr. Souder. What, you're not a doctor? Then get out of my medicine cabinet!It's not on the inner party's long term agenda to recognize medical cannabis. Until we bring them down by exposing 9/11 and the DSM they will continue to stifle the truth.THE WAY OUT IS THE WAY IN...HEARINGS ON DOWNING STREET MINUTES MOVED TO U.S. CAPITOL:
http://911citizenswatch.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=567&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition And 'Inside Job':
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/27302.htm9/11: Ten Smoking Guns:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2005/140605tenquestions.htm9/11 - A Lie (Flash animation)
http://www.ericblumrich.com/swf/wtc.swfWhy Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse?
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050615073644262
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by ekim on June 15, 2005 at 18:13:44 PT
chance to educate the public and lawmakers
 Souder sounded off about the FDA someone could have just read this and let the viewers at home see how the first law was passed with lies, just like this one was.http://www.jackherer.com/chapter04.html"Did Anyone Consult the AMA?"However, even within his controlled Committee hearings, many expert witnesses spoke out against the passage of these unusual tax laws. Dr. William G. Woodward, for instance, who was both a physician and an attorney for the American Medical Association, testified on behalf of the AMA. He said, in effect, the entire fabric of federal testimony was tabloid sensationalism! No real testimony had been heard! This law, passed in ignorance, could possibly deny the world a potential medicine, especially now that the medical world was just beginning to find which ingredients in cannabis were active. Woodward told the committee that the only reason the AMA hadn't come out against the marijuana tax law sooner was that marijuana had been described in the press for 20 years as "killer weed from Mexico."The AMA doctors had just realized "two days before" these spring 1937 hearings, that the plant Congress intended to outlaw was known medically as cannabis, the benign substance used in America with perfect safety in scores of illnesses for over one hundred years. "We cannot understand yet, Mr. Chairman," Woodward protested, "why this bill should have been prepared in secret for two years without any intimation, even to the profession, that it was being prepared." He and the AMA" were quickly denounced by Anslinger and the entire congressional committee, and curtly excused.
http://www.rexresearch.com/hhist/hhist3~1.htm#anslinger
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by ekim on June 15, 2005 at 17:43:41 PT
tribes making billions gambling help Lakota Nation
http://www.marijuananews.com/
Full text of Press Release from HIA:Lakota, Once Encouraged by U.S. Government Treaty to Grow Hemp, Fight to Do So Again
Hemp Industry Supports Tribe in 8th Circuit AppealPINE RIDGE, SD -- This week, Vote Hemp and the Hemp Industries Association (HIA) filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, supporting members of the Lakota Nation in their attempt to grow industrial hemp on their land. 
http://www.votehemp.com/legal_cases_WP.html.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on June 15, 2005 at 17:03:22 PT
My Thoughts
Marijuana is the Drug War. I really don't believe there are that many people using hard drugs like Meth or Heroin. Cannabis is an ancient herb and it has been used since recorded time began until now. It is not man made. If the laws were changed on marijuana what would happen to all the police, prosecutors and drug testing companies? So many people would lose money that I believe they fight us because they don't want to lose an income of some sort.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Taylor121 on June 15, 2005 at 16:41:54 PT
Speculation on Congress and Medical Marijuana 
Just writing down some thoughts here, but it is interesting to tune into C-Span every now and then and observe the outright hostile tone that Congress has to certain issues and how they make decisions. You can't help be disappointed by the recent medical marijuana vote, but I can't help but to press on. Look, I am living my life, but let's face it I'm a political junkie with a focus on the drug war, and to narrow it down further the marijuana issue. I do not understand how this is an issue. Perhaps it is worth going back to how marijuana was prohibited. Two sources that I have found super helpful include the history channel's documentary (realplayer required). The other is Pete's explanation over at the Drug WarRant.Now from a certain perspective, the vote was a victory in the sense that we picked up 13 votes from last year's vote on the same amendment. I believe there is a tremendous amount of pressure from GOP leadership to vote no on this issue. There is an overtone in Congress when the word marijuana is uttered, and it shows in their debates. But you can see that Congress's eyes are slowly opening. It is almost as if we have to pry them open. That means the burden is still on us, and now is not the time to give up. This is not a time to drop the ball, this is the time to drive to the basket and I expect all drug reformers to do their part in this battle. I think we should assume that the GOP will remain in power and we will have to change the mind of several of the more moderate GOPers that have offered their support in private. These members of Congress will be the key to change and the key to protecting patients. That is why it is so important that the recent Supreme Court case and Congress's vote does not get us down.I am urging everyone to contact their representative and express either your priase or your thanks for how they voted on the Hinchey Amendment. The fight is far from over.Take Action Now! http://libertyindex.blogspot.com/Send a message to Congress now!
http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/061505hincheyvotes.cfm
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on June 15, 2005 at 16:38:54 PT
ACLU Press Release
ACLU of Alaska Calls on Attorney General to Clarify State’s Commitment to Uphold Medical Marijuana Statute 
 
June 15, 2005http://www.aclu.org/DrugPolicy/DrugPolicy.cfm?ID=18484&c=81
 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment