cannabisnews.com: Durbin Supportive of Medical Marijuana





Durbin Supportive of Medical Marijuana
Posted by CN Staff on September 06, 2007 at 17:11:24 PT
By Dennis Conrad, The Associated Press 
Source: Associated Press
Washington, DC -- Sen. Dick Durbin said Thursday federal law should change to allow for the use of medical marijuana when prescribed by a physician.The Illinois Democrat spoke at a constituent breakfast in response to a question from a Pinckneyville, Ill., woman who suffers from multiple sclerosis.
Durbin said people with "pain issues" look for relief in every direction, including different chemicals, drugs and prescriptions."Why would we exclude the chemical in marijuana simply because some people abuse it for recreational purposes, or whatever?" he asked. "That makes no sense at all."Durbin, who is the Senate's second-highest ranking Democrat, said in an interview with The Associated Press afterward that he has no plans to offer legislation to change federal law."I've got an interest in it but I haven't been really focused on it," he said.In 2004 Durbin introduced and was the unsuccessful sponsor of a measure intended to allow federal juries to be told when a defendant facing federal marijuana charges was in compliance with state medical-marijuana laws. Critics said it would have led to juries refusing to convict in federal cases involving medical marijuana.Durbin said at the Capitol Hill breakfast that medical problems such as glaucoma may be dealt with by a chemical in marijuana that brings about immediate relief."I just can't turn my back on it and say, 'Well, because it says marijuana on the label, we shouldn't use it,'" he said. "If the doctor believes it's right for a person, then I think it should be prescribed - legally."Durbin said in the AP interview that a person prescribed to have marijuana for an appropriate medical purpose should not be viewed the same as "somebody hiding behind the bleachers smoking a reefer."In Illinois, lawmakers approved the use of medical marijuana in 1978 but left authorization to the state's Public Health Department, which has never taken action.Efforts in the Illinois General Assembly to pass measures requiring a marijuana treatment option for people who can't get relief from traditional drugs have failed in recent years.At the start of this year, 11 states allowed the use of medicinal marijuana, with more considering to make the move, according to reform advocates.Source: Associated Press (Wire)Author: Dennis Conrad, The Associated Press Published: September 6, 2007 Copyright: 2007 Associated Press CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #24 posted by FoM on September 07, 2007 at 08:40:10 PT
dongenero
Thank you. I agree with you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by dongenero on September 07, 2007 at 08:15:36 PT
Durbin
Durbin has been a really good, longtime Democratic Senator for Illinois. It is also fun to have him in office, as he drives the conservatives nuts, all the while doing a really great job and to date, a clean job.He did support disclosure of medical marijuana laws to juries in cannabis cases. The guy is sensible, reasonable, liberal and seems to be out to represent the people. How many politicians can you feel that way about?I agree some of his comments about reefers were goofy. I don't think Durbin is going to jump out and say legalize recreational cannabis and then have the rabid Illinois conservatives take his head off. I do feel that he will work the mechanizations of the system to always push for the smart directions on social, environmental, ethical and humanitarian issues.Down the line, I believe he could be among the better allies this cause could have in Congress. It could help to send his office positive feedback about this position. Put him on task, he's up to it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by FoM on September 07, 2007 at 08:15:25 PT
Hope
I hope I'm right too. I have never followed politics and didn't like Clinton before he was elected or after. The only President I ever liked and I was young was JFK. I was also keenly aware of Bobby Kennedy and would have voted for him but he was assassinated. I voted for Reagan because he wanted less government inteference in people's lives or something close to that. I voted for Kerry because he was better then Bush. This morning this has been running around in my head.A house divided against itself cannot stand. We have had a split government for a long time. That means that it is harder to change anything since they fight all the time. The fighting prevents any quality change. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Had Enough on September 07, 2007 at 08:06:43 PT
Millionaire U.S. Rep. Wins Lottery Again
Millionaire U.S. Rep. Wins Lottery AgainSep 7, 8:25 AM (ET)MILWAUKEE (AP) - U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, already a millionaire and heir to the Kimberly-Clark fortune, is on a lucky streak. The Republican hit it big in 1997 with a $250,000 jackpot in the District of Columbia lottery. Then, last spring, he won $1,000 prize in the Wisconsin lottery, and he won another $1,000 in that lottery last week. "I got lucky," Sensenbrenner said. Sensenbrenner, 64, was born into a family that helped build Kimberly-Clark Corp. (KMB), maker of Kleenex tissue and Scott paper towels, and he recently reported a net worth of about $11.6 million. He said he spends about $10 a week on lottery tickets.more…http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070907/D8RGK7700.html********************Isn’t this guy a drug warrior???Hhhmmm. Hemp farming might cut into the napkin profits maybe???
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by Hope on September 07, 2007 at 08:02:49 PT
Thanks, BGreen, for the info.
FoM, I hope you are having one of your inspired "gut-feelings" about the Democrats. I really do. You have a quiet wisdom and faith that I appreciate. After Bill Clinton...I can't seem to allow myself to have any confidence in any of them. I really thought he might, at least, "represent" us about cannabis prohibition. I'm still disappointed about that.I hope you're right.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by FoM on September 07, 2007 at 06:49:34 PT
Mayan Comment #15
Thank you for saying that about Senator Durbin.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by mayan on September 07, 2007 at 03:40:01 PT
UK Hemp
Hemp crops to become common, despite cannabis junkie confusion: 
http://tinyurl.com/2za2ex
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by whig on September 07, 2007 at 02:23:51 PT
afterburner
Is there any reason we can't make 2008 another Summer of Legalization? Summer of Safer Recreation?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by BGreen on September 06, 2007 at 23:42:33 PT
Roll call voter results for Hinchey-Rohrabacher
For the House of Representatives for Hinchey-Rohrabacher bill:http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll733.xmlYou'll see my cowardly non-representative voted "no."The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by mayan on September 06, 2007 at 23:34:58 PT
Durbin
He can't be all bad. I believe he voted against John Walters as drug czar. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by afterburner on September 06, 2007 at 22:50:32 PT
'hiding behind the bleachers'
{
Durbin said in the AP interview that a person prescribed to have marijuana for an appropriate medical purpose should not be viewed the same as "somebody hiding behind the bleachers smoking a reefer."
}They only hide because of Prohibition. "No more need to smoke and hide when you know you're takin' a legal ride." -Legalize It by Peter Tosh ("Good for the flu, good for the asthma, good for tuberculosis...")"There being no law against muta then, we used to roll our cigarettes right out in the open and light up like you would on a Camel or a Chesterfield. To us a muggle wasn't any more dangerous or habit-forming than those other great American vices, the five-cent coke and the ice cream cone, only it gave you more kicks for your money."- Milton "Mezz" Mezzrow, Really the Blues, 1946We didn't hide during the Summer of Legalization. We walked free in the sun and made new friends and allies.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by Hope on September 06, 2007 at 22:18:55 PT
Ok!
Thanks, Dankhank! I'm sleepy. That's my excuse. I'm sleepy!Goodnight.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by Hope on September 06, 2007 at 22:17:46 PT
Thanks, Dankhank.
I tried that and I tried Hinchey-Rohrabacher Durbin for the search. Nothing. Well... a lot of somethings...but none that I found, telling how he voted. Surely, though, if he would sponsor the kind of bill he did, he would have voted Yes on Hinchey and Hinchey-Rohrabacher.Giving it up for the night, though. Nobody from Illinois that can remember?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Dankhank on September 06, 2007 at 22:15:48 PT
senators
don't vote on hinchey ...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by BGreen on September 06, 2007 at 21:59:21 PT
What it proves to me
The very people who hold our freedoms and our cannabis plant hostage, the very people who are making the decisions about life and death, know less about the cannabis plant than any poster we have here at CNews.com.Even our perceived "supporters" haven't bothered to learn enough about cannabis to even be able to speak intelligently about the subject.Why, oh why, are we controlled by those who know less than we do?The Reverend Bud Green 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by Dankhank on September 06, 2007 at 21:57:08 PT
H/R vote tally
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=Hinchey-Rohrabacher+tally&spell=1try this ...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by Hope on September 06, 2007 at 21:44:30 PT
This effort of Durbin's is appreciated.
"In 2004 Durbin introduced and was the unsuccessful sponsor of a measure intended to allow federal juries to be told when a defendant facing federal marijuana charges was in compliance with state medical-marijuana laws." That would have been good and I appreciate, very much, his introducing and sponsoring it."Critics said it would have led to juries refusing to convict in federal cases involving medical marijuana." Well, duh? What do they think the measure was about? It was to offer protection to those who were acting legally under the state laws.I'm like most of you guys with the wiggle words he was using in some of the comments he made. "A chemical"...we know what that's about. But this didn't sound so hedgy, ""I just can't turn my back on it and say, 'Well, because it says marijuana on the label, we shouldn't use it,'" he said. "If the doctor believes it's right for a person, then I think it should be prescribed - legally."Durbin said in the AP interview that a person prescribed to have marijuana for an appropriate medical purpose should not be viewed the same as "somebody hiding behind the bleachers smoking a reefer.""Anyone know his record on Hinchey and Hinchey-Rohrbacher right off hand? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by BGreen on September 06, 2007 at 21:10:43 PT
Exactly, whig
These politicians know how to make people think they're saying something they really aren't. Now, when people bring up Durbin's support for "marijuana" in the next election, Durbin will stand up and say he never supported "marijuana," he was in support of the FDA approved synthetic pill.Those words were chosen carefully to fool people. You'd never talk about "THE" chemical in "marijuana" if you knew even one thing about the cannabinoid profile of the cannabis plant.Also, nobody who is really in favor of cannabis EVER speaks about the plant in any other way than as a whole-plant herb or the completely natural collection of the resin glands known as hashish.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by whig on September 06, 2007 at 20:59:53 PT
I dunno
It's not negative. Okay.It's alright.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by whig on September 06, 2007 at 20:56:07 PT
Brushoff
That was not support.He kept talking about a chemical.He's not supportive of medical cannabis.Yeah, we know synthetic THC can be prescribed and it isn't good.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on September 06, 2007 at 18:23:56 PT
Video: Should Medical Marijuana Be Legalized?
Reported by Eric ScheinerThursday, Sep 6, 2007 WILKES-BARRE-- About a dozen states have legalized medicinal marijuana use in the U-S and some organizations want Pennsylvania to be next. Since 1937 the drug has been illegal in America, but before then it was widely used as a pain killer. Some say it should be allowed for those in pain once again, calling it an effective drug that has limited side effects and is difficult to overdose on. Opponents of the measure say it's a gateway drug, that would lead to abuse and addiction of other substances. They say marijuana should remain illegal and that marijuana's most active ingredient THC, is already available in the prescription drug Marinol.WYOU Interactive discusses the issue with Edward Pane of Serento Gardens Alcoholism and Drug Services, Carl Romenelli of the Green Party, and Derek Rosenzweig of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.Copyright: 2007 Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc.Video: http://pahomepage.com/content/fulltext/?cid=20450
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on September 06, 2007 at 17:36:00 PT
mayan
Now wouldn't be the time but when the Democrats win and get more in the House and Senate then it won't just get introduced but it will get done. I really believe what I'm saying. There's a time for every season.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by mayan on September 06, 2007 at 17:31:15 PT
Lip Service
"Durbin, who is the Senate's second-highest ranking Democrat, said in an interview with The Associated Press afterward that he has no plans to offer legislation to change federal law."Talk is cheap. It is very late in the game and we need action, NOW!!!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on September 06, 2007 at 17:14:10 PT
Sen. Dick Durbin 
Thank you. 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment