Lit_Match

Medical marijuana bill wins final approval in legislature
06-01-07|The Boston Globe|By Stephen Singer

A measure legalizing medicinal marijuana won final legislative approval in the state Senate Friday night, capping a five-year struggle that pitted broader patients' rights against concerns of easier access to an illicit drug.

The bill, which was approved 23-13, now heads to Gov. M. Jodi Rell, who has said she has mixed feelings about the measure. A spokesman said Friday she has not yet made a decision.

The state House of Representatives approved the measure on May 23.

Sen. Andrew McDonald, co-chairman of the General Assembly's Judiciary Committee, steered the bill to Senate approval. The measure has taken a "long odyssey through almost every committee of the legislature," McDonald, D-Stamford, told colleagues.

The legislation would allow residents older than 18 with specific debilitating medical conditions diagnosed by a physician to cultivate and use marijuana to relieve symptoms. Patients with written certification from their physicians would have to register with the Department of Consumer Protection.

The patient and the primary caregiver would be limited to growing no more than four plants, each having a maximum height of four feet, in an indoor, secure facility.

Supporters say the measure would protect people who try to obtain marijuana to help stem the effects of diseases such as cancer and multiple sclerosis.

"Is there anything we would begrudge our brothers and sisters as they face those terrible diseases?" asked Sen. John McKinney, R-Fairfield. "What would I do for someone I love if they were facing the harrowing future of a debilitating disease and it really was up in the air if they'd survive or not?"

Opponents said the legislation undermines anti-drug efforts, particularly in reaching youngsters.

"We'll be sending a mixed message to young people about whether marijuana is good or bad," said Sen. Sam Caligiuri, R-Waterbury. "We're going to undercut our ability to keep children away from this gateway drug."

Sen. William Nickerson, R-Greenwich, told his colleagues that politicians are not experts on whether medical marijuana is safe and effective.

"This politically oriented body should not be the location where this decision is made," he said.

Rell said in March that she has "mixed emotions," citing concerns about the cultivation of marijuana plants, but sympathizing with people in pain.

Buzzby

I wonder. Does Big Pharma sends out a phrase book to the politicians it owns? They all say the same thing, almost word for word.

Why doesn't someone ask them if selling morphine at the pharmacy sends a mixed message to young people about whether morphine is good or bad? It's an exact analogy. Many drugs that are considered to be "drugs of abuse" are legally available with a doctor's prescription.

A friend of mine has a prescription for 150 Vicodin (toxic & addictive) a month due to chronic pain from two hip replacements. If non-toxic, non-addictive marijuana would do as well or better at relieving his pain, wouldn't it be the better choice?

__________________

Migz420

yes yes and yes.

The whole double standard just makes me shake my head. It's not like Big Pharma would lose business, hell they've already got millions and millions addicted to their "prescription" meds

I like the fact that more and more states are discussing the issue though.

__________________