Minnesota Governor Thinks Terminally Ill Medical Marijuana Patients Should be Arrested

Last week Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) vetoed a medical marijuana bill that would have protected terminally ill patients - despite the bill passing the Minnesota Senate and House of Representatives

The bill was watered down to help ease concerns that the governor had about the bill. Ultimately, the House decided to narrow it down to only protect those that are terminally ill from being arrested for using marijuana to relieve pain and suffering.

Astonishingly, Pawlenty didn't think that even terminally ill Minnesota citizens should be spared from prosecution for using marijuana.

“While I am sympathetic to those dealing with end-of-life illnesses and accompanying pain, I stand with law enforcement in opposition to this legislation,” Pawlenty said in his veto letter.

Sympathetic? How could you be sympathetic and then decide that dying people should be arrested and even jailed just because law enforcement officials want to arrest them? This is some seriously pathetic stuff here folks. This isn't California's medical marijuana legislation. Again - this bill would have only protected terminally ill people from arrest.

Here is an example of the people that Minnesota law enforcement and Gov. Pawlenty feel should be arrested for using marijuana:

Joni Whiting, whose testimony of finding marijuana for her dying daughter brought tears to many legislators’ eyes, had harsh words for Pawlenty.

“The governor thinks I’m a criminal for allowing my daughter some comfort during the last months of her life,” she said. “I don’t know how he sleeps at night, but I do know I’m not giving up until others in my daughter’s situation are protected.”

The fight isn't over though. SSDP has started new chapters in MN this year and we expect to see even more come September.

“Since the governor has refused to listen to reason or to the overwhelming majority of Minnesotans, we have no choice but to bypass him and take this directly to the people through a constitutional amendment,” said Sen. Steve Murphy, DFL-Red Wing.

MN polls show that over 60% of MN residents supported the bill. Instead of allowing common sense legislation to take place - legislation that would have been the country's most restrictive medical marijuana bill - Pawlenty just made himself look like a heartless, nonsensical demagogue and I don't think it will be too long until we see medical marijuana in MN.

Kerlikowske vs. Walters

While the newest director of the ONDCP, Gil Kerlikowske, isn't likely to be advocating for legalization anytime soon - I think he may be taking us in the right direction - toward actually caring about substance abuse.

"Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country."

For the past 8 years the focus of the ONDCP has been honed on marijuana. And we've most certainly been at war with people that use drugs. Marijuana, then drug czar John Walters would say, is as dangerous as crack. He opposed state medical marijuana laws (again comparing it to "medical crack") and has spoken out against states making marijuana the lowest law enforcement priority. But Kerlikowske is different. In this interview with the Wall Street Journal, Kerlikowske was asked:

What's the number one drug problem?

Well [illegal] prescription drug use is rising and one problem I want to shout about. At the federal level it's easy to look at things nationally but drug issues are different depending on the geography. In some places meth may be far more serious, even though on a national scale it doesn't appear that way. In Appalachia Oxycotin may be far more serious. I want to look at things regionally and in a narrower focus than in a national focus.

Without a doubt, Walters would have answered marijuana to that question. He may have thrown meth in their too but not without claiming that marijuana leads to meth. Kerlikowske doesn't even mention marijuana. He states the truth - prescription drugs and their diversion are a serious problem. He's also smart to look at this regionally rather than create a blanket campaign against a single drug.

Check out this 2003 article from the Seattle Times concerning Seattle's lowest law enforcement priority ballot question. You'll see that Kerlikowske opposed the initiative for an almost sensible reason: Arresting people for possessing marijuana for personal use, says Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske, is not a priority now. Officers aren't now bringing in everyone they see smoking a joint, he said.

Kerlikowske at least promises to take his job more seriously than Walters. He doesn't have to support legalization for me to get behind policies that make sense. Furthermore, I don't think full out legalization is necessary for us to make improvements with treating drug addiction (though it sure would help a lot) because as LEAP's Peter Christ says "Legalizing drugs is not the answer to our drug problem. Legalizing drugs is the answer to our crime problem." The drug problem, unfortunately, isn't going anywhere - its here to stay - legalized drugs or not. But we can stop throwing gas on the fire now.

If Kerlikowske is ready to put our money where his mouth is - we'll see a campaign from the ONDCP that shows needle exchange programs work to reduce disease transmissions and provide places where addicts can go to get help and eventually - off drugs. We'll see funding for law enforcement decrease and treatment funding increase (you'll see here that Obama's budget, while increasing treatment funding, also decreases prevention funding and unfortunately calls for more $$ for law enforcement). Talking dogs and flying aliens warning our kids about pot will be replaced with realistic drug education that focuses on America's real drug problems - not support for a witch-hunt of marijuana users.

Deprioritization is key at this point. We can't focus on marijuana anymore and I think our new drug czar knows this. At least that much leaves me optimistic.

It was Ok When We Smoked It...

Another op-ed about the dangers of marijuana use today compared to the 1970's comes from Diane M. Peebles, a prevention coordinator for the Amador County Behavioral Health Services, Substance Abuse Division in California.

She titles it "Parents are Urged to Learn about Today's Marijuana." Fueling the hypocritical message of do what I say, not what I do.

First, Ms. Peebles claims that the misinformation concerning marijuana is spread only by reformers who want to "desensitize society to [marijuana's] harms and risks." She then goes on to say "Marijuana is not only harmful, but addictive and potentially deadly." If that isn't misinformation than call me Miles Davis.

Speaking of misinformation, Peebles pulls out the old "5 joints a week is like smoking 1 pack of cigarettes a day." With the amount of misinformation spread about this, its a wonder she could even come up with a solid number. I have had health teachers in high-school claim 1 joint was worth 2 packs, and plenty of literature form DARE, the ONDCP, and NIDA also report different numbers of joints equaling packs of butts.

Here's what she doesn't mention. That the largest study on marijuana and lung cancer conducted by Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, found "We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought. Tashkin is not some marijuana loving scientist hell-bent on legalization. Many of his previous studies were used by health and drug enforcement officials in the case against reforming marijuana laws.

Well, Peebles is not done yet. She separates alcohol and tobacco from being drugs like marijuana. As if marijuana has an addiction level anywhere close to that of booze or nicotine.
This might be my favorite part:

"Most adults were teenagers themselves during the 1970s, 80s and 90s, a time when drug experimentation could be dismissed as a rite of passage to adulthood. But times have changed. Marijuana today is 15 to 25 times more potent than the pot smoked 30 or 40 years ago. "

Anyone else smell bullshit? What a hypocrite.
You really have to read this one to believe it friends. Write an op-ed in response if you have the time.