Marijuana.com

Lothar121

Marijuana Group's Survey Says Voters Oppose Supervisors' Lawsuit
Gig Conaughton | The North County Times | 01/10/2006

Most county voters support California's 9-year-old medical marijuana law and oppose San Diego County supervisors' plan to sue to overturn it, according to a survey released Monday. In addition, the survey said most respondents would vote to replace the supervisors over the issue.

The $15,000 telephone survey of 500 randomly selected county voters ---- 100 from each of the county's five districts ---- was commissioned by the Marijuana Policy Project, a national nonprofit group that wants to decriminalize all marijuana use.

County supervisors immediately suggested the survey was politically motivated by a pro-marijuana organization, and repeated that federal law still considers marijuana an illegal drug without medical benefit, and should take precedence over California's law.

"What do they say? 'Figures lie and liars figure?'" said Supervisor Pam Slater-Price, who has served as the board's chairwoman for the last year. "My first reaction is they've asked more people who support marijuana use."

Marijuana Policy Project officials, meanwhile, said the survey was an objective and valid sampling of the county's 1.379 million registered voters. They also said the group was considering mounting an initiative drive in San Diego County to ask voters to impose term limits on county supervisors. Sixty-two percent of respondents said they'd vote to replace their supervisors if they knew they supported overturning the medical marijuana law.

"The message is very clear," project spokesman Bruce Merkin said, "the voters don't want the board of supervisors to pursue this (lawsuit). They're comfortable with Proposition 215 (California's medical marijuana law). And they feel that rather than conducting a war on patients, the board should be defending the patients there are in the county."

Supervisors announced in December that they planned to sue the state to overturn Prop. 215, California's "Compassionate Use Act."

The law, passed in 1996, said "seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes" when recommended by a doctor.

San Diego County supervisors ---- who have steadfastly called the law a "bad" one that could increase marijuana abuse ---- voted in November to defy a separate state law that ordered the county to create an identification card and registration program for medical marijuana users.

In December, the board voted unanimously in closed session to sue to overturn Prop. 215 itself, on the basis that it should be pre-empted by federal law.

Slater-Price and the other supervisors said they could not in good conscience support Prop. 215 because federal drug enforcement agents could still arrest and prosecute California residents regardless of the state's law.

"I feel derelict in my duty to tell you it's OK, to do something when you could then go out and be arrested," Slater-Price said.

In fact, federal agents raided 13 San Diego-area marijuana dispensaries Dec. 12, including two in North County, and seized large quantities of the drug, computers and records in one of the largest crackdowns of its kind in the state.

Federal officials said the dispensaries were "fronts" for distributing the drug.

Marijuana advocacy groups called the raids outrageous, cowardly acts of an administration out of touch with voters.

The Marijuana Policy Project's survey, released Monday, reported:

- 67 percent of respondents supported Prop. 215.

- 70 percent said the county should follow state law and create the identification card program.

- 78 percent of respondents said supervisors "should not be wasting taxpayer money suing the state to try to overturn California's medical marijuana law."

However, some of those numbers could be misleading.

Sal Vescera, an analyst with the opinion and research firm that conducted the survey ---- Seattle-based Evans McDonough Company ---- said the survey had a 4.38 percent margin of error, meaning the real percentages could swing by that margin in either direction.

In addition, the overall percentages of support were combinations of strong and mild support.

For example, of the 67 percent who reported supporting Prop. 215, only 44 percent "strongly" supported the law. Another 23 percent "somewhat" supported the law, yielding the 67 percent overall support.

Likewise, 50 percent strongly agreed that supervisors should create the identification card program; while 20 percent "somewhat agreed."

However, 62 percent said supervisors "should not be wasting taxpayer money suing the state to overturn California's medical marijuana law. Sixteen percent "somewhat agreed."

Contact staff writer Gig Conaughton at (760) 739-6696 or gconaughton@nctimes.com.

__________________

Donate. Write. Make a difference.. Posting Guidelines | Marijuana Policy Project | NORML | DPA | Drug WarRant | Media Awareness Project

 

fight4rights

I don't understand why politicians want to appear tough on drugs when their constituents don't want to be that way.

This idea is stupid for more than just the obvious reason that medical marijuana is what Californians wanted. If this lawsuit goes through and actually succeeds it will undermine states who try to oppose the federal government. I think it is much better to give power to local governments because they can represent what local people want better. Clearly medical marijuana has garnished an amount of support from the United States citizens. If the federal government won't recognize that, then we have to go to the states first.

Why would these officials want to sabotage a different, perhaps better way for democracy to work?

__________________
"Those who do no harm to others should not be harmed by others..." Ethan Nadelmann
"Revolution is not a right, it is an obligation." John Locke
"Do SOMETHING besides argue emotions against the law, because it simply isn't a rational way to affect any type of change whatsoever. No offense intended, but your opinion on things is a moot point unless you take actions to change the law, rather than ramble about how unfair or injust it is." troublemaker_42
"'Just say no' to drugs, except those marketed by big pharmaceutical companies." Ignorant Politicians

Dennis

I think in California, the people have a right to have a recall election and in this case the County Supervisors should be booted out of office immediately.

Buzzby

It is kind of weird, isn't it? High level politicians do what they believe will get them reelected. The county supervisors may honest people who have bought into the DEA/NIDA/ONDCP propaganda. A lot of conservative people believe that allowing people to use marijuana would be the end of civilization. I can see where some of the excesses of the drug subculture could lead them to believe that.


Because they believe that they know better than the people who elected them? Because they believe that marijuana is a dangerous drug? Because they "don't want to send the wrong message to The Children?

__________________

Cassius

It costs thirty bucks to call somebody? I don't get it.

__________________

{ Cassius, Your Humble Narrator }
{ Posting Guidelines | Erowid Drug Information Resource | instantfilehosting.com }

 

TheNewGuy

They have to hire people to make the calls, and the people get paid every hour, so yeah, pretty much. After the call is made, the person who made the call had to write some stuff down, type a report, call someone, etc.

__________________
"Anyway, no drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power." ~P.J. O'Rourke