cannabisnews.com: Medical Pot Lights Up D.C. Debate

function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('Medical Pot Lights Up D.C. Debate');
 url=encodeURIComponent('http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/25/thread25496.shtml');
 site = new Array(5);
 site[0]='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[1]='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit.php?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[2]='http://digg.com/submit?topic=political_opinion&media=video&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[3]='http://reddit.com/submit?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[4]='http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump=close&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 window.open(site[num],'sharer','toolbar=0,status=0,width=620,height=500');
 return false;
}












  Medical Pot Lights Up D.C. Debate

Posted by CN Staff on March 17, 2010 at 18:03:16 PT
By Shaun Waterman, The Washington Times 
Source: Washington Times 

Washington, D.C. -- Medical marijuana is coming to the District of Columbia - but still with too many restrictions for some pot advocates.Now that Congress has lifted its decade-old hold on the measure, legislation to implement a 1998 voter-passed referendum is backed by 10 of the citys 13 D.C. Council members and seems sure to pass.
Council committees and city officials are wrestling with an armful of questions about how the law will work in practice - especially the question of where the licensed dispensaries that will sell the drug can be located, and who will be allowed to own and operate them. And opponents are calling for Congress to block the measure, as it can do under long-standing federal powers over D.C. affairs.Marijuana advocates are pushing for changes in the current council proposal, which bans anyone with even a misdemeanor drug conviction from owning or working in a dispensary, and says they must be at least 1,000 feet from any school or youth center.Finding a site that meets that criterion in a dense urban setting like the District is like "looking for a needle in a haystack," said entrepreneur Alan Amsterdam, co-owner of Capitol Hemp - a store in Adams Morgan that sells products made from hemp, a fiber manufactured from the non-psychoactive parts of the cannabis plant.Mr. Amsterdam - a native Washingtonian who in 1998 opened the first American-operated marijuana "coffee shop" in the Netherlands, where pot has been legal for more than 20 years - said he plans to apply for a license to run a dispensary and has been scouting potential sites."Most of the options are going to be in the Northeast, the New York Avenue area," said Mr. Amsterdam, adding that he plans to apply for a license no matter how the law turns out, but he is lobbying for changes in the bill.He said that current proposals for regulating gun shops in the District would mandate that they must be at least 350 feet from any school."That doesn't make any sense. How can you say it's OK to put a shop which sells deadly weapons closer to a school than one which is dispensing medicine?" asked Mr. Amsterdam, who said the same 350-foot rule would significantly increase the number of potential dispensary sites.Council member Phil Mendelson, chairman of the Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary - one of the two panels considering the bill - said he did not buy that comparison."I don't think there is agreement on that issue," he said. He noted it was not yet clear whether patients would be allowed to smoke their marijuana in the dispensaries. The location question "depends on the rules for the dispensaries," Mr. Mendelson said.Mr. Mendelson added it was his "inclination" to retain the ban in the bill on people with misdemeanor drug convictions owning or working in dispensaries - another provision marijuana advocates oppose.Mr. Amsterdam said that people with misdemeanor convictions for violence or fraud are free to set up under the law."That is very troubling ... you are punishing people in the cannabis community," he said, adding, "You need master growers" to cultivate medical-grade pot and that people with that kind of experience have often fallen afoul of the law."I don't follow that argument," responded Mr. Mendelson, adding that the provision was intended "to make sure the criminal element cannot get involved" in supplying medical marijuana. "I don't see why a person with a criminal conviction is the best person for the job" of running a dispensary.Medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access supports a ban only on those with convictions for crimes of violence.Steph Shearer, the group's executive director, says the council members are being "very thoughtful in their approach" to drafting legislation. "They are very aware of the influence that Congress" and other federal organs have in the city, and "they want to make this work."Mr. Mendelson said he had not encountered any opposition to the law as a whole, and said he expects the D.C. Council to pass a final bill with all the details "within two months.""The concern has been about where to draw the lines," he said, noting that the proposed law employs a narrower definition of who can qualify as a medical marijuana patient than many jurisdictions have used.The bill states that, in order to qualify, patients must suffer from a "serious medical condition" that is "chronic or long-lasting," "debilitating," and either causes "intractable pain which does not respond to ordinary medical or surgical measures," or "cannot be effectively treated by any ordinary medical or surgical measure."Any D.C. law would not supersede federal law, which restricts marijuana use and possession without any medical exceptions. This discrepancy already has caused jurisdictional issues in other cities and states that have allowed medical marijuana, but could pose particularly acute difficulties in the District, large parts of which are owned by the federal government and where many federal law-enforcement agencies patrol the streets and sites."D.C. is unique in this respect and faces an issue that no other jurisdiction does," said Mr. Amsterdam, adding that advocates were striving to get lawmakers' attention on the issue.Americans for Safe Access is calling on the council to issue special training materials for police officers about the new law.Opponents of the measure say that however the law is written, it is the thin end of a fat drug-legalization wedge and should not pass."This is not only a stupid and dangerous mistake, but a transparent ploy to legalize a dangerous drug," said John Walters, the Bush administration's drug czar and now executive vice president at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington."Smoked marijuana is not a medicine," he said. "It cannot pass any of the tests we set down for other medical treatments" like double-blind drug-efficacy studies, and "there are no warnings about the known side-effects."He called it "inexcusable" that federal officials had not publicly opposed the D.C. bill. "National officials responsible for the integrity of our drug laws, our legal system [and] our medical regulatory regime have maintained a deafening silence," he said."I hope Congress will stop it," he said.Under the 1973 Home Rule Act, which established the current D.C. government structure, all laws passed by the council are subject to a 30-day congressional review and can be blocked.Source: Washington Times (DC)Author:  Shaun Waterman, The Washington TimesPublished: March 18, 2010Copyright: 2010 The Washington Times, LLC Website: http://www.washtimes.com/Contact: letters washingtontimes.comURL: http://drugsense.org/url/hhuwATaNCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help    
     
     
     
     





Comment #24 posted by FoM on March 18, 2010 at 13:00:53 PT
Sam
If people cannot grow their own like people can brew their own beer then it just won't work. The price won't come down and people who are poor and need the help that medical marijuana would give will lose again. It's very wrong and I do not know why people are embracing it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by Sam Adams on March 18, 2010 at 12:46:55 PT
Washington
We've sunken so low....it's been 12 years since this referendum passed. They talk about needing "legislation" to "implement" the referendum, that is pure lying. The referendum WAS the law-making process.  We're so far from freedom and the media doesn't even care.Look at the political class- the guy compares guns to cannabis and the media is satsified with the response from King Politician - "I don't like that". That's it. The response to logic and rationality and facts is pure arrogance. All validated and propagated by the hollowed-out sham instituations that used to be media outlets.We're in the middle of a big transition and I"ve been wondering what cannabis reform and laws will look like when we come out the other side. Now it's beginning to become crystal clear.The govt and corporations see their future already: cannabis is a heavily regulated medical product - more regulated than any medicine in the history of the US. Corporations are licensed to sell Marlboro-like cannabis cigarettes. "Legalization"Everyone who tries to grow at home or use cannabis that is not government-stamped will be an evil, tax-cheating, bootlegger. That is the solution that will enable the govt. and corporations to make money off it while continuing to allow the law-enforcement industry to crusade and arrests millions. The frightening thing is that it looks like the Peter Lewis/George Soros reform groups like MPP and DPA are starting to embrace this plan as well.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by FoM on March 18, 2010 at 10:46:55 PT
Storm Crow
I am hoping that the Health Care Bill passes even though it is only the beginning and I am keeping my fingers crossed that it happens. Then the Crazy acting Republicans will be put in their place a little and we might be able to get some attention for our issue. Jobs and the economy will take the forefront and cannabis does center into that very well.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Storm Crow on March 18, 2010 at 10:29:48 PT
No double blind studies? 
I have some that date back to 1979! And some are with SMOKED CANNABIS! In fact, I have a couple of pages in my new list on just that- "Smoked Cannabis as Medicine". The URLs are long, so I'm not posting them. If you want to read the studies, you'll have to click my link! Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) as an antiemetic in patients treated with cancer chemotherapy; a double-blind cross-over trial against placebo 
(abst - 1979) Nabilone and metoclopramide in the treatment of nausea and vomiting due to cisplatinum: a double blind study.  (abst - 1986)Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol shows antispastic and analgesic effects in a single case double-blind trial.  (abst - 1990)Efficacy, safety and tolerability of an orally administered cannabis extract in the treatment of spasticity in patients with multiple sclerosis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study.  (full - 2004)Do cannabis-based medicinal extracts have general or specific effects on symptoms in multiple sclerosis? A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study on 160 patients.  (abst - 2004)	Cannabidiol as an antipsychotic. A double-blind, controlled clinical trial on cannabidiol vs. amisulpride in acute schizophrenia.  (abst - 2005)Low dose treatment with the synthetic cannabinoid Nabilone significantly reduces spasticity-related pain : A double-blind placebo-controlled cross-over trial. 
(abst - 2006)Sativex successfully treats neuropathic pain characterised by allodynia: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial  (abst - 2007)Double Blind, Placebo Controlled Trial of Smoked Marijuana on Neuropathic Pain  (full - 2008)For that sneak peek at what is happening with my rapidly growing list of MMJ studies and articles (250 pages of links), you might want to click this link. http://www.greenpassion.org/showthread.php?t=20828I got worried that my old computer might die, and I would lose the data, so I posted it up (somewhat unpolished)as a back-up. The July list ought to be HUGE!And wasn't that recent 98% poll just lovely! I do believe we have won! I think "it's all over but the shoutin'!" Expect Obama to offer legalization, or re-scheduling, to get re-elected. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by dongenero on March 18, 2010 at 09:14:05 PT
Walter's lies
I think the researchers at University of San Diego's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research may differ in opinion regarding the valid double blind studies indicating efficacy.http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/research.htmUndoubtedly, John Walters is out of date by many decades,....centuries?, millennia?By the way John, who says one must smoke cannabis? Again, he may want to visit the above web site for his own edification. Or not, right?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by dongenero on March 18, 2010 at 08:52:05 PT
D.C.
The whining from D.C. officials and politicians is expected I guess. Whining is an art form for these victimized and OUTRAGED politicians of the district.Could Council Member Phil Mendelson be more obtuse? He either has his head in the sand, or some other place too dark to see from, or he has a serious problem with comprehension of pretty simple concepts of comparison and reasoning. I'm sure it is simply willing stupidity. Self imposed ignorance is the name of the game when the game is opposition to cannabis law reform.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by runruff on March 18, 2010 at 08:38:04 PT
DEA Administrative Law Judge...
...Francis L. Young was not Quoted!None of the studies commissioned by state and federal governments were quoted.10,000 years of medical history, ignored!AMA and American College of Physicians were not quoted!300 years of medical use in USA, not noted!Usurping of individual rights and protected privileges not mentioned!They make it obvious!http://www.druglibrary.org/olsen/medical/young/young.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by runruff on March 18, 2010 at 07:08:20 PT
Mr. Kincaid
Said Obama had been a puffer and a snorter.Didn't say Bush was a puffer and a snorted and a hypocrite!Didn't say Judy Davis said her mother Nancy Reagan was addicted to Valium most of her life?Nancy's favorite charity? I thought Nancy's favorite charity was herself?I'll bet that charity pays it's spokesperson a lot more money than she would otherwise make in a typing pool someplace? What are her qualifications as a spokesperson on this subject? Is she a doctor, a botanist, an herbalist or just someone who agrees with the Kincaids of the world or is getting a good salary with the benefit of fake credentials who is supported by a charity that is connected to the upper echelons of Washington society i.e. the corporate money coffers!People like Kincaid try way to hard for my intelligent brain. I can see right through his mono-thesis!Kincaid, Johnny Pee, Calvina Fay, ET AL you are all going down in flames, better stock up on some pharmaceutical pain killers before the crash!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by FoM on March 18, 2010 at 07:01:56 PT
Hope
Hopefully because of the Internet censorship won't have the impact that it did before this marvelous communication tool.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by Hope on March 18, 2010 at 06:46:06 PT
The rewriting history is being done by a
government board of education committee... overloaded with super neo con republicans. Ten to five as a matter of fact.It's not a done deal yet. But even if they succeed in getting the changes they want, it won't effect the whole nation's textbooks as it might have once, before the age of digital printing.The media doesn't try very hard to even appear to be non partisan in the matters of government.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by Hope on March 18, 2010 at 06:38:46 PT
Oh yes...
And "I hope Congress will stop it," has a "dig" at the President quality to it, no doubt.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by FoM on March 18, 2010 at 06:32:08 PT
More From The Drug Warriors
Obama is AWOL in the Drug Wars By Cliff KincaidMarch 18, 2010URL: http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/ckincaid/2010/ck_03181.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by runruff on March 18, 2010 at 06:23:10 PT
The Surpreme Court Jesters!
We have a long history of Supreme Court Jesters in this country, these clowns are nothing new!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by runruff on March 18, 2010 at 06:20:22 PT
""Smoked marijuana is not a medicine," h
Maybe not but it sure is a lot of fun!64 years and still puffin' strong!My doctor said I now have another 20 years left if I continue to do what I am doing. What am I doing?Puffing strong!"Smoked marijuana is not a medicine," he said. [no but it is killing Johnny Pee!]lol
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by FoM on March 18, 2010 at 06:16:17 PT
Hope
I agree. I watched The Daily Show last night and people in Texas are helping write school text books. They are writing important parts of history out of the textbooks. They are trying to teach children the history they want not what is important to the whole USA. I get more and more confused everyday. The fact that the Supreme Court sided with allowing Corporations to be equal with people for lack of a better way of saying it blows my mind. Then to have that one Justice speak about it to students at a University just goes beyond what is right. I really enjoyed watching Obama's speech in Ohio and I wanted to make sure that CNN was showing it not just MSNBC and they were. Then I went to Fox and they didn't have it on. I sure hope people do checks like I do to see how some of the media is censoring very important issues. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by runruff on March 18, 2010 at 06:11:56 PT
Johnny Pee Speaks!
His words droll with controlled desperation.His wishes are that history does not portray him the way he really is, a has been "useful idiot" of an idiot!Legalization is in our future and ol' Johnny Pee will be mollified. I wonder if he is evil enough to know the destruction and death he has caused and is praying for more of the same. It reaches a point where I begin to think that not even the idiot of an idiot cannot see the upside down results of his failed policies? In his case I see it in his eyes, his mother changed his wet pants until he could tie his own tie! Now, everything is an affront to his fragile manhood.His and the federal courts policies have stolen 10,000 years of youth from this country. 10,000 years of humans live and time that could have been spent productively farming hemp or green medicine for suffering people. But NOOO, instead they locked up the intelligent, the educated, the productive, the youth of out country in the name of corporate profits!Yes Johnny Pee You are getting your earned rewards with your soft [stink tank] job. Why don't you and the rest of your stink tank buddies try to figure your way out of this: legalization is coming!I think I'll have a little fun, just put some bleachers out in the sun, out on Highway 61!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndm58RunNUs&feature=related
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by Hope on March 18, 2010 at 06:03:23 PT
Walters
That's pretty obvious... what with the "Inexcusable" rhetoric. Personally, I, and quite a few other citizens of this country find his brand of wild-eyed, big, huge, pervasive, purposely terrifying, meant to intimidate the citizens of this country and the world, his ingloriously expensive, (in both loss of life, quality of life, and resources), "Big Tent Show" of prohibitionism extraordinarily "inexcusable".Inexcusable.Completely.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by FoM on March 18, 2010 at 05:34:31 PT
Hope
It also is a big dig at the Obama Administration.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by Hope on March 18, 2010 at 05:19:54 PT
With John
it might be the money, but probably more the hypocritical, puritanical 'I must inflict my idea of moralistic behavior on everyone else... because I'm somehow superior to most people', sort of thing.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by FoM on March 18, 2010 at 05:07:53 PT
Hope
I have never seen people from a currently out of power Party be so pushy. I always remembered what Montel Williams said. He said follow the money.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Hope on March 18, 2010 at 04:45:14 PT
John 
must trying to keep his busybody credentials up to date.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on March 18, 2010 at 04:36:37 PT
John Walters
He isn't the drug czar anymore. Why was he there?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Hope on March 18, 2010 at 04:10:52 PT
Old prohibition regulars getting to add
their two cents worth, I see. Good ol' John Walters... being his usual, not nearly as "good" as he think he is, self.""This is not only a stupid and dangerous mistake, but a transparent ploy to legalize a dangerous drug," said John Walters, the Bush administration's drug czar and now executive vice president at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington."Smoked marijuana is not a medicine," he said. "It cannot pass any of the tests we set down for other medical treatments" like double-blind drug-efficacy studies, and "there are no warnings about the known side-effects."He called it "inexcusable" that federal officials had not publicly opposed the D.C. bill. "National officials responsible for the integrity of our drug laws, our legal system [and] our medical regulatory regime have maintained a deafening silence," he said."I hope Congress will stop it," he said."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on March 17, 2010 at 19:16:10 PT
Washington D.C.
 Let's get it done this time.
[ Post Comment ]




  Post Comment