Important note: Information in this article was accurate in 1999. The state of the art may have changed since the publication date.
The Los Angeles Times - Monday, August 16, 1999
Davis' veto wouldn't settle a thing. California would still be stuck with a vague law impossible to put into effect. What Davis ought to do is work with Vasconcellos to tighten the bill's description of legal uses of marijuana and make it more palatable to moderates including himself. A real solution will require a change in federal drug laws, but a well-crafted bill would help state law enforcement officials as they try to decide what to allow.
Washington's all-out ban on the medical use of marijuana is needlessly stringent. While most experts agree that marijuana can alleviate pain and nausea in patients suffering from life-threatening diseases like AIDS and cancer, federal law still classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, meaning a substance without medicinal value. Drugs arguably more dangerous, like morphine and cocaine, by contrast may be prescribed as Schedule 2 drugs. Two revisions to the Vasconcellos measure are key:
* Tighten wording. The bill is almost as irresponsibly open-ended as Proposition 215, legalizing the use of pot not only for AIDS and cancer but for many lesser conditions. Proposition 215 was sold to voters as a way of helping people cope with grave illnesses; that's how it should be implemented.
* Limit scope. Most Californians who supported Proposition 215 no doubt assumed that seriously ill people who smoke marijuana would do so discreetly. But Vasconcellos' bill wrongly seeks to permit public smoking of medicinal marijuana just about everywhere cigarettes can be legally smoked.
The debate over Proposition 215 has officials in Sacramento and Washington in a standoff. Federal drug czar Barry McCaffrey has derided the initiative as "a Cheech and Chong show" that approves of drug use. Vasconcellos has snapped back that "the federal government is so hysterical and unresponsive on this issue that I am not going to let them dictate policy."
Davis, rather than pull out his veto pen, should work with the Legislature. A carefully monitored, tightly limited implementation of Proposition 215 would be the best first step.
990816
LT990801
Copyright © 1999 - Los Angeles Times. All rights reserved. Reproduced with permission. Reproduction of this article (other than one copy for personal reference) must be cleared through the Los Angeles Times, Permissions, Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA 90053. http://www.latimes.com.
AEGiS is a 501(c)3, not-for-profit, tax-exempt, educational corporation. AEGiS is made possible through unrestricted funding from Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, Elton John AIDS Foundation, the National Library of Medicine, Pacific Life Foundation and donations from users like you.
Always watch for outdated information. This article first appeared in 1999. This material is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between you and your doctor.
AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.
Copyright ©1980, 1999. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .