We don't need to wait on medical marijuana

January 21, 1998 - Seattle Post-Intelligencer Editorial

Sen. Alex Deccio's reluctance to bring a medical marijuana bill to a vote this session is understandable, but unacceptable. The Yakima Republican, who is chairman of the Senate Health and Long Term Care Committee, should not, however, be mistaken for a heartless obstructionist. It was he who stunned Senate colleagues in 1979 by calling for a study on the medicinal use of marijuana. The cancer death of his 24-year-old daughter four years earlier assured his compassionate stance on the issue.

But now Deccio says it is unlikely that a bill (SB 6271) from Sen. Jeanne Kohl, D-Seattle, will come to a vote in his committee. Deccio's caution is based on the resounding defeat in Nov-ember of Initiative 685, which would have "medicalized" marijuana: ... on the heels of the failed initiative, there's a lot of public education that needs to happen."

The senator is too cautious. We are convinced that the defeat of I-685 is strong evidence that the public is quite well educated on the issue. I-685 was trounced not because it would have allowed medical use of marijuana, but because it would have virtually decriminalized the "medical" use of all Schedule I drugs, including heroin and cocaine.

We believe the vast majority of Washingtonians oppose the prosecution of seriously and terminally ill patients for using marijuana to ease their pain and the wretched side effects of chemotherapy.

Meanwhile, Lt. Gov. Brad Owen raises caution to an art form in saying he would support a plan that allowed controlled scientific research to determine if marijuana is effective in treating those suffering from cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis and acute and chronic pain.

Owen may be guilty of disingenuousness here. His question was asked and answered at least as far back as 1988, when the federal Drug Enforcement Agency commissioned Administrative Law Judge Francis Young to review the medical efficacy of marijuana. Young ruled that m meet Schedule I criteria not belong in the same category as heroin and cocaine. Judge Young wrote that "the evidence in this record clearly shows that marijuana has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very ill people and-doing so with safety under medical supervision. ... " and "it would be arbitrary and capricious to stand between people who need this" and access to marijuana.

The DEA hierarchy arbitrarily and capriciously refused to accept Young's ruling, a refusal Owen apparently wants to perpetuate.

It need not be a complicated issue. We need not embrace the use of notorious hard-core drugs or throw open prison cells, as I-685 would have done. We simply need sensible, clearly written legislation on allowing patients under legitimate, competent medical supervision, to use marijuana to reduce their suffering or, as in the case of glaucoma, improve their condition.

Continuing to make criminals out of citizens simply seeking surcease from their pain - and suffering is unethical. Delaying the necessary legislative change is unnecessary.

back

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings are made available without profit for research and educational purposes.