[Vision2020] Tom Trail's comments on medical marijuana

Thu Mar 31 15:27:11 PDT 2011

Tom Trail introduced his medical marijuana bill to House committee yesterday with comments below that summarize his legislation.

My thanks to Tom for his support of this sensible plan.

BL

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------       

                         HB 19 MEDICAL MARIJUANA

         (COMMENTS MADE BY REP. TRAIL TO THE HOUSE HEALTH

              AND WELFARE COMMITTEE MARCH 30/2011

MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS—I WANT TO THANK

CHAIRMAN MCGEACHIN FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR REP. LACEY

AND I TO SPEAK TO YOUR COMMITTEE IN AN INFORMATIONAL

PRESENTATION FORMAT.    BOTH OF US WILL SPEAK BRIEFLY TO

THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION, AND THE WITHIN THE CONTEXT

OF THE INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATION FORMAT WE HAVE

INVITED SPECIFIC IDAHO CITIZENS TO TESTIFY. ACCORDING TO

OUR AGREEMENT THERE WILL BE NO OTHER TESTIMONY TAKEN.

WE ARE PROPOSING HB19 AS A MEASURE THAT WOULD MAKE

IDAHO THE 15TH STATE IN THE NATION TO LEGALIZE THE USE OF

MARIJUANA TO HELP PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC ILLNESSES.  THE

MEASURE WOULD ALLOW PATIENTS DIAGNOSED WITH SEVERE

ILLNESSES LIKE CANCER, AIDS, LOU GEHRIG’S DISEASE, AND M.S.

GLAUCOMA AND MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY WITH A DOCTOR’S

RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE ACCESS TO MARIJUANA GROWN

AND DISTRIBUTED THROUGH STATE MONITORED DISPENSARIES.

AS STATED BY CONGRESSMAN AND PHYSICIAN RON PAUL,

WE HOLD TO THE RIGHT OF THE DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP

IN MAKING THE DECISION TO USE MEDICAL MARIJUANA RATHER

THAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

HB 19 INCLUDES ADEQUATE STATE REGULATION OF THE PROGRAM AND SAFEGUARDS TO ENSURE THAT THE PROPOSED MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAM IS NOT ABUSED. CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL NOTES THAT IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE STATE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT MEDICAL MARIJUANA IS LEGALIZED, AND THUS IT BECOMES A STATES RIGHTS ISSUE AS NOTED UNDER THE 10TH AMENDMENT.

(2)

IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT GLEN BECK SUPPORTS THE

LEGALIZATION OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA AS WELL.

THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION WOULD BE THE MOST RESTRICTIVE

MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW IN THE NATION BECAUSE IT WOULD

PERMIT DOCTORS TO PRESCRIBE IT FOR ONLY A SET LIST OF

CHRONIC ILLNESSES.  THE LAW WOULD ALSO FORBIDE PATIENTS

 FROM GROWING THEIR OWN MARIJUANA AND USING IT IN

PUBLIC.  THIS ADVICE WAS PROVIDED BY SHERIFF WAYNE RAUSCH,

FOR PRESIDENT OF THE IDAHO SHERIFF’S ASSOCIATION.   THE

LEGISLATION WOULD ALSO REGULATE THE DRUG UNDER STRICT

CONDITIONS USED TO TRACK THE DISTRIBUTION OF MEDICALLY

PRESCRIBED OPIATES LIKE OXYCONTIN AND MORPHINE.   PATIENTS

WOULD BE LIMITED TO TWO OUNCES OF MARIJUANA PER EVERY

28 DAYS.

I’D LIKE TO MENTION THAT THE STATE’S THAT HAVE HAD THE

MOST SUCCESS WITH THEIR MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAMS HAVE

GONE THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS WHERE ALL OF THE

STAKEHOLDERS HAVE BEEN INVOLVED. THE LEGALIZATION OF

MEDICAL MARIJUANA VIA THE INITIATIVE PROCESSES HAS PRODUCED

MANY PROBLEMS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED BY GOING

THE LEGISLATIVE ROUTE.   MARYLAND IS ONE SUCH STATE. IN 2003

A BIPARTISAN EFFORT LEAD BY ASSEMBLEMAN DON MURPHY-

REPUBLICAN MOVE THEIR BILL TO PASSAGE.   TWO MONTHS AGO

THE MARYLAND ASSEMBLY REAFFIRMED THE DEFENSE OF MEDICAL

MARIJUANA ACT—85% VOTE REPUBLICANS AND 87% DEMOCRATS.

THIS BILL WAS SIGNED BY A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR. I WAS APPROACHED SEVERAL YEARS AGO BY SEVERAL CONSTITUENTS WHO SUFFERED BRAIN CANCER, M.S. AND LOU GERHIG’S DISEASE.   THEY RECEIVED A RECOMMENDATION FROM MY WIFE’S FAMILY DOCTOR 

(3)

IN MOSCOW BUT THEY WENT TO WASHINGTON STATE FOR THEIR LEGAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA.

WE HAVE THE CASE IN ONTARIO WHERE THERE IS A ALTERNATIVE

DISPENSARY.  THE OPERATOR OF THE DISPENSARY REPORTS

THAT WITHIN THE PAST SIX MONTHS MORE THAN (300) IDAHO FAMILIES HAVE MOVE TO THE ONTARIO AREA SO THAT A CRITICAL

ILL MEMBER OF THE FAMILY CAN LEGALLY OBTAIN MEDICAL

MARIJUANA FOR THEIR PAIN.   IF THEY COME BACK INTO IDAHO

THEY ARE SUBJECT TO THE LAWS OF OUR STATE AND LIVE IN

THE SHADOWS OF FEAR.

RESEARCH CARRIED OUT IN CANADA VIA A DOUBLE BLIND

STUDY CLEARLY INDICATES THAT MEDICAL MARIJUANA COMPARED

TO OTHER MEDICATIONS, I. E. OXYCODON, ETC. WAS SUPERIOR

IN REDUCING PAIN.  WE MUST REMEMBER THAT MEDICAL

MARIJUANA WAS LEGAL IN THE U.S. UP THROUGH THE EARLY 70’S

UNTIL DEA DECLARED IT TO BE AN ILLEGAL DRUG. THERE IS CONTROVERSY AND DISAGREEMENT AROUND THE MEDICAL PROFESSION IN IDAHO AND OTHER STATES ABOUT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA.   DR. BOUGHTON, MY

WIFE’S DOCTOR, NOTES THAT SHE HAS HAD SEVERAL PATIENTS

WITH MEDICAL MARIJUANA.   SHE NOTES THAT THERE IS THE OPTION

OF MARICOL WHICH IS LEGAL BUT VERY EXPENSIVE AND DIFFICULT

TO TIRATE TO EFFECT SINCE ONCE THE PATIENT TAKES IT THE EFFECT

ISN’T FELT FOR AWHILE.   SMOKING IS MORE APPROPRIATE FOR

PATIENTS WHO HAVE TROUBLE TAKING ORAL MEDICATIONS.  

MARIJUANA IS PARTICUARLY EFFECTIVE FOR ALLOWING PATIENTS 

TO REDUCE THEIR INTAKE OF OPIATE MEDICATIONS.  ALTHOUGH

THERE MAY BE SOME HEALTH RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH IT, OPIATE

(4)

SIDE EFFECTS OF NAUSEA AND VOMITING AND SOMETIMES LIFE

THREATENING CONSTIPATION IS NOT AMONG THEM.   THE OPTIATE

LIKE OXYCODON, MORPHINE, ETC. ARE TOXIC, EXPENSIVE, AND

TERRIBLY ADDICTIVE AND MANY TIMES MORE EXPENSE MEDICATIONS HAVE TO BE USED TO CURE THE SIDE EFFECTS OF THE OPIATES.

IN MOST STATES BEFORE LEGALIZATION, LAW ENFORCEMENT

HAS OPPOSED LEGALIZATION OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA.  HOWEVER

THE DATA FROM MANY STATES CLEARLY SHOWS FROM LAW

ENFORCEMENT STATISTICS THAT THERE IS NO NEGATIVE IMPACT

TO THE CRIME RATE BECAUSE OF ITS LEGALIZATION.

A RECENT STUDY OF ALL 14 STATES WHERE IT IS LEGAL,

INDICATES THAT WHEN CONSIDERING MIDDEL AND HIGH SCHOOL

STUDENTS THAT MARIJUANA USE ACTUALLY WENT DOWN IN

11 OF THE STATES, FLAT IN TWO STATES, AND IN ONE STATE WENT

UP SLIGHTLY.

THE IDAHO STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OPINION INDICATED

THAT THE PROPOSED IDAHO COMPASSIONATE USE OF MEDICAL

MARIJUANA ACT AS PRESENTED DOES NOT APPEAR TO CONTAIN

ANY PROVISIONS THAT ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR OTHERWISE

ILLEGAL.  THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THE ACT SHOULD

BE ENACTED INTO LAW IS A MATTER OF POLICY.

UNDER THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION,   THE DEPARTMENT

OF HEALTH AND WELFARE WOULD BE IN CHARGE.    A SMALL NUMBER BUT WELL LOCATED DISPENSARIES WOULD BE APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT.  ALL OPERATORS OF THE DISPENSARIES WOULD  GO THROUGH CRIMINAL CHECKS AS WELL AS ALL WORKERS

(5)

PATIENTS OR CARE GIVERS WOULD ALL HAVE TO GO THROUGH

CRIMINAL CHECKS AND NO ONE WITH A DRUG RELATED CHARGE

COULD PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM.

 I TALKED WITH DIRECTOR ARMSTRONG ABOUT THE PROGRAM.

HE INDICATED THAT IF THE LEGISLATION PASSED HE FELT THE

DEPARTMENT COULD CARRY OUT THE MANDATE.   HE ALSO

INDICATED THAT THERE COULD BE SOME SAVINGS IN MEDICAL

COSTS FOR PATIENTS/MEDICAID ETC. UNDER DEPARTMENTAL

PROGRAMS WHEN COMPARING THE COST TO HIGHER PRICED

OPIATES.

 I’VE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET A SURVEY OF THE WAY STATES

HANDLE THE COST OF THE PROGRAM.    THE DETAILS VARY BUT

THE DEPARTMENT THROUGH RULE WOULD SET UP THE FEE

SCHEDULE FOR PATIENTS WITH DOCTOR RECOMMENDATIONS

AND ALSO THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR OPERATORS OF ALTERNATIVE

DISPENSARIES.  THE GOAL WOULD BE COST NEUTRAL

TO RUN THE PROGRAM AND ALSO COVER COSTS RELATED TO

THE IDAHO STATE POLICE.

AGAIN, I THINK AS CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL WOULD PUT

IT—THIS IS A STATE’S RIGHT ISSUE AND AS MANY MEDICAL DOCTORS

INDICATED MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN MANY CASES IS THE ONLY MEDICATION THAT CAN DRAMATICALLY REDUCE PAIN AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE AMONG OUR MOST CRITICALLY ILL.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20110331/665b04d1/attachment-0001.html 