cannabisnews.com: Medical Marijuana Still Alive in Montpelier





Medical Marijuana Still Alive in Montpelier
Posted by CN Staff on May 02, 2002 at 13:43:51 PT
By Tracy Schmaler, Vermont Press Bureau 
Source: Rutland Herald 
A bill legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes emerged from what many believed was a certain death Wednesday, when Senate leaders floated a compromise that would provide some legal protections to seriously ill patients who use the drug. The announcement breathed some life into a measure that was believed idle because of staunch opposition from Gov. Howard Dean and a dwindling legislative session. 
That changed Wednesday, when Sen. Richard Sears, D-Bennington, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, told fellow Democrats that he was considering an alternative that would create a so-called affirmative defense for seriously ill patients who use or purchase up to an ounce of the drug. Sears had openly warned supporters of the measure for weeks now, that he would not have the time to take testimony on the bill before the session adjourns. “I would hate to see somebody prosecuted for having a small amount of marijuana who uses it for treating symptoms of cancer, multiple sclerosis or AIDS,” Sears told the Senate Democratic caucus. “I think this (proposal) is something, at least in the interim, that would help. Maybe, at some point we would wind up with the whole bill.” The language Sears and his committee is mulling would provide patients who are suffering from a debilitating disease and get caught with an ounce of marijuana or less, a defense in court if they were to be prosecuted. An affirmative defense does not make it legal. Rather, it would simply arm patients with a defense they could mount before a judge or jury. Advocates of the original bill did not immediately embrace Sears’ suggestion, and announced they would articulate their displeasure with how the Senate has handled the bill at a news conference today. Rep. David Zuckerman, P-Burlington, the chief sponsor of the original bill that passed the House earlier this year, had additional reservations about the compromise. “What this would do is force patients to go to drug dealers,” he said, referring to the lack of any provision in the Senate language allowing patients to grow their own marijuana. Zuckerman also questioned what protections if any, primary caregivers of bed-ridden patients would have under the compromise. The House bill permitted the cultivation and use of marijuana by seriously ill patients as long as they obtained a certificate from their physician. The measure limited the amount a person could possess to 3 ounces of usable marijuana, three mature plants or four immature plants. The bill also established a database of those who obtained permission from their physicians by requiring the doctors to file a copy of the certification with the state Department of Public Safety so police could verify that information. Supporters of that bill worried the Senate compromise included neither requirement. “I’d have to take a hard look at that,” said Rep. Margaret Flory, R-Pittsford, chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee. “I’m not sure I could support something that took the doctors out of the loop.” Sears said he would be amenable to some changes to his proposal, including the possibility of requiring patients to get a doctor’s permission in order to claim an affirmative defense. The discourse took a decidedly political turn Wednesday when Senate leaders discovered Progressive Anthony Pollina, a candidate for lieutenant governor, would be appearing at the conference. “My understanding of this (proposal) is that it would force these people suffering from chronic pain to be hauled before a judge,” Pollina said Wednesday. “That seems a little harsh. ... If you’re going to give them a defense, why not allow them to do it?” In the lieutenant governor’s race with Pollina is Republican Brian Dubie, and the leader of the Senate, President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, D-Windham. Shumlin has publicly supported the use of medicinal marijuana for seriously ill people but is on board with Sears’ compromise. Shumlin announced he would hold his own news conference today, with Sears and Sen. Nancy Chard, D-Windham, chairwoman of the Health and Welfare Committee. Sears’ proposal has made headway with one important opponent — the governor, who reportedly has no objection to the new language, according to his office. Sears said he and other Senate leaders were somewhat frustrated with the advocates’ reaction, particularly from the HIV coalition. “This is a group that the Democratic-controlled Senate has done a great deal for,” he said. “It’s disappointing.” Sears said he is contemplating the new language because his committee does not have the time to take testimony on all of the aspects of the House bill, including the process of cultivating the drug, but there is support for the concept. “It’s better than nothing,” said Sen. James Leddy, D-Chittenden, of the proposal. “I think it’s unfortunate that we apparently don’t have the time to do this. I don’t argue that, I don’t think an issue like this should go to the floor without first going through the committee process.” Sears also said he would be uncomfortable passing out a bill without hearing from law enforcement officials, including the Attorney General’s Office. Attorney General William Sorrell, who was in the State House Wednesday but had not known of the compromise, said his primary concern over any medical marijuana bill centers on the consequences for law enforcement. Sorrell said he would support a measure if the Legislature found that the drug served a medical purpose and provided a mechanism so police officer would not inadvertently break federal law. Sorrell said he worried that those officers who cite or arrest a person and confiscate the drug would be forced to return the pot to the patient under state law. But that is a violation of federal law, he said. The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to take a vote on whether to add the marijuana language to another bill dealing with arrest powers this morning. Source: Rutland Herald (VT)Author: Tracy Schmaler, Vermont Press Bureau Published: May 1, 2002Copyright: 2002 Rutland HeraldContact: info rutlandherald.comWebsite: http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Medical Marijuana Information Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmMedical Marijuana Clears Senate Hurdle http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12646.shtmlSenate Panel Takes Up Medical Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12573.shtmlHouse Passes Medicinal Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12252.shtml 
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #1 posted by PAUL PETERSON on May 02, 2002 at 16:41:30 PT:
Vermont Phoenix Legislation
This proves the strength of the movement, to back away, regroup, reanalyze and return with new enthusiasm. Sears needs serious support right now. Yes, this suggestion on his part for an "affirmative defense" is extremely worthy for the following reasons: 1) Time is too short for full testimony for the better MM law, due to the cultivation, implimentation, regulation, police impact & federal interaction issues, not the least of which is the confiscation of contriband and potential for need to return same (California still has these issues with recalcitrant victorian sheriffs, etc.), 2) The current status quo with various federal appeals cases which will influence the genre in coming months may make any legislative actions commenced now in Vermont (or anywhere) either void, moot, or archaic, depending on how those judges (most notably in San Francisco) decide the DEA cases now pending, 3) Further research findings and reports now in the pike will totally make any legislative efforts obsolete within say, 6 months anyway (in my opinion), 4) These efforts must show some fruition, to further guide the various interstate issues now underway-this movement must make use of the serious efforts and risks undertaken by so many worthy legislators to date in Vermont, especially since there is such a strong push for progress there-REMEMBER NEW MEXICO should be their rallying cry! If some basic progress is not felt in Vermont, perhaps the momentum will be lost in the East-and we can't afford to lose that spirit, epecially since Governor Dean is supportive of this admittedly "compromise" bill for merely an "affirmative defense".Please, all interested parties-lobby the "advocacy groups" involved in that arena to strongly support Mr. Dean in this plan to keep the Phoenix spirit alive and well, and moving forward. THANKS FOR LISTENING. PAUL PETERSON email at paulpeterson Illinois-MMI.org (The Illinois MM Initiative-remember, we in Illinois have had a world class medical marijuana law for 30 years, which has not been used in at least a generation, since that 1984 George Orwell year-You people in Vermont have a group of politicians that are trying hard to do something to move this matter to the fore. In Illinois-even though we have this world class law-the political venue here is so moribund that no one will even talk with me about these things-the mere fact I have used the word "pot" has caused me to lose my license to practice law-THE EXACT LANGUAGE IN THE STATUTE IS NOT AS IMPORTANT AS DEVELOPING A CONSENSUS & MOVEMENT TO MAKE PROGRESS-PLEASE DON'T GET SO HARD SET ON "LANGUAGE" THAT YOU LOSE THE POTENTIAL FOR MOVEMENT TOWARDS THE GOAL).
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment