Consequences of Prohibition
Drug War Issues
Politics & Advocacy
Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani rejected medical marijuana when asked about it at a campaign stop Tuesday, saying its supporters really just want to legalize the weed. The comment was not a major surprise, given the former New York City mayor's previous pronouncements on the subject.
"I believe the effort to try and make marijuana available for medical uses is really a way to legalize it. There's no reason for it," Giuliani said during a town hall-style meeting at New Hampshire Technical Institute. He added that there was no need for it. "You can accomplish everything you want to accomplish with things other than marijuana, probably better. There are pain medications much superior to marijuana," he said.
According to Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana (GSMM), an advocacy group sponsored by the Marijuana Policy Project that seeks to take advantage of New Hampshire's key role in the presidential primary process to get the candidates on the record on medical marijuana, Giuliani has never said anything favorable about medical marijuana. That would put him right beside the other first-tier Republican contenders, among whom only Sen. John McCain has made the most tepid remarks about "states' rights" when asked about the issue. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney simply starts talking about marijuana as a gateway drug when asked about it.
The Democratic field has been much friendlier to medical marijuana, with no candidate rejecting it outright and several going on the record saying they would end federal raids on medical marijuana patients and providers in states where it is legal. Rep. Dennis Kucinich is on the record as strongly supporting medical marijuana, while former Sen. Mike Gravel simply wants to legalize drugs.
In the Republican pack, Rep. Ron Paul is a strong supporter, and, somewhat surprisingly, Rep. Tom Tancredo, mostly known for his anti-illegal immigration stance, has consistently voted for the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment, which would bar the use of federal funds to raid patients and providers.
For a look at all the candidates' positions and pronouncements, visit the GSMM voters' guide pages.
Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.
Comments
Ron Paul is the candidate
Dr. Ron Paul is more than a strong supporter for canabis, he writes bills to end the war on drugs and have canabis legalized. He stands alone and it's time people who want this cruel war on American sick, poor and young end. I see no other choice for president by anyone who has not had their right to vote taken away, and understands America will not change it's course until the war on drugs stops at home. VOTE RON PAUL 08
In reply to Ron Paul is the candidate by Anonymous (not verified)
Ron Paul is the candidate.
Ron Paul has worked with my congressman, Maurice Hinchey on many medical marijuana bills as well as opposiing the fiasco in Iraq.
Giuliani proves he is ignorant again
"I believe the effort to try and make marijuana available for medical uses is really a way to legalize it. There's no reason for it," Giuliani said during a town hall-style meeting at New Hampshire Technical Institute. He added that there was no need for it. "You can accomplish everything you want to accomplish with things other than marijuana, probably better. There are pain medications much superior to marijuana," he said.
Hmm, nevermind the side-effects of these 'superior' drugs. There are practically NO side effects (not even addiction) to medical marijuana, it is completely natural, and can be produced very cheaply. I guess NOW we know why there are those that do not want to see it being used in medicine.
And don't say marijuana causes lung cancer., that's just stupid and uninformed. The most effective use of marijuana is in concentrated tablet form. Scrub that propagandized image of seniors and children smoking the wacky tabacky from your mind.
These people do realize that our government has no problem with putting our children on hard narcotics such as amphetemine, right? Yeah, wonder how many people realize their ADD/ADHD children are taking highly addictive speed. Not only does our government not have a problem with this, they have been creating programs to increase its use on children and threaten the parents with child abuse if they do not allow it.
In reply to Giuliani proves he is ignorant again by Anonymous (not verified)
Highly addictive drugs
I have a little trouble with the phrase, highly addictive drugs. It is used for every type of drug which often cause different forms of dependence. Highly addictive is used for every new "scourge of drugs" the government wants to fight. Either something is addictive or it is not. There are a few other points that might be brought up, as well.
I know of plenty of kids who did better in school , including one college grad, I cared for, while taking medication for his disease. It was an amphetamine. I feel too many people are trying to second guess doctors, all the way around. First, you have to get an equivelant education, to be the judge. It would have cost my patient his college degree, if I just assumed all the meds were bad!!
Causing physical dependence, as found by pain doctors, does not equate with causing "addiction". These people can take their medication as prescribed, yet would have withdrawals, if stopped. That is what methadone maintenance patients are like, as well. They take their medicine daily, and function,most often, as normal participants in our society. But, physical dependence is not present with all medications.
Amphetamines and cocaine, while causing cravings and behavior that goes against social norms, making the person's quality of life much worse, giving him negative consequences, is psychologically addictive. And they are real addicts in every sense. But, it is not a physical dependence. Many pharmaceuticals, available as non-controlled drugs, can also cause physical dependence and withdrawal. But you can't get thrown in jail for having the withdrawal symptoms! Addiction is a, much more, complex issue, than just that.
You, also, must have not heard that one study suggests that people who smoked MJ had a decreased incidence of lung cancer! It has been suggested that it might be due to a cancer fighting component in the plant! Too bad the DEA, so far, has blocked the needed research on it. So, we will not know for many years, whether or not it is effective medicine against cancer! Nothing like government officials and cops making medical research decisions.
Mr Giuliani, was, in fact, very ignorant when he wanted to tout the many other drugs available for treatment, better than MJ. The thing is, it has been seen, in neuropathic pain and multiple sclerosis patients, that the MJ appears to be, in fact, superior. That is not because there have been any scientific studies. The DEA keeps blocking us from finding out if those responses are statistically significant or comparable to the other drugs.
Cost is becoming a major factor also, with a normal Marinol prescription being $300 a month or more. Zofran, for nausea, is sometimes over $1000 a month for terminal cancer patients! I bet they could grow a lot of nausea relief with that type of money! Why is it that if a company takes something like this, that will grow anywhere and turn it in to a big money prescription (the cannabis). I think it is just greed.
Marinol, while being the only pill formulation available, is not the type that most MJ patients use. They have found that vaporizing the stuff eliminates the smoke completely. And, it works better than trying to choke it down as a non-smoker! My guess is that it could also be much cheaper to use, than the Marinol, in the long run.
Sorry I got so wordy.
In reply to Highly addictive drugs by Anonymous (not verified)
zofran vs. marijuana
When my wife was pregnant with our daughter (now nearly 22 months old), she had "hyperemesis gravidarum" (AKA "morning sickness from hell") and could not eat or drink anything without vomiting. It got so bad that she had to be put on intravenous fluids (with a PICC line which is basically a long tube that goes in through the vein, up through the arm and close to the heart, delivering liquids, vitamins and nutrients). During the time she was sick, she was being given a little over 20mg of zofran per day with an automatic pump. For those of you who don't know, that's a $250/day drug habit! The zofran helped somewhat, but she still vomited and had horrible nausea. What *really* got her through the tough spots was taking a few hits of marijuana (at a cost of perhaps $0.25/day). The marijuana was the only thing which allowed her to eat and drink without vomiting and quite possibly saved her life (and the life of our child).
Fast forward 22 months -- our daughter is happy, healthy, and unusually intelligent. I wouldn't advocate drug usage in utero for any mother (and it wasn't a decision we took lightly) but at least in our case, the results were very positive. Considering that my wife was sick for about six months, and using zofran for about four of those months, that's $30,000 down the tubes (vs $25 for marijuana). That's a 1200:1 cost ratio, and in my opinion the marijuana did more for her than the zofran. Your mileage may vary. One anecdotal story does not make a controlled study, but I know for certain that if we decide to have another child and my wife gets sick again, we will be a lot less hesitant about having her smoke a little weed to get through the rough spots.
I'm Not Surprised
Rudy is an authoritarian, plain and simple. He was quoted in a speech saying freedom is not about, well... freedom... it is about people ceding power to elites like him!
America should be ashamed if they elect that man.
AOL Poll Trashes Rudy
Current results from AOL News Poll:
Giuliani Calls Medical Pot Effort a Ploy
http://news.aol.com/elections/story/_a/giuliani-calls-medical-pot-effort-a-ploy/20070710154609990001
Do you agree with Giuliani's views on medical pot?
No 62%
Yes 38%
Total Votes: 10,334
Should medical marijuana be legal?
Yes 76% 8,300
No 24% 2,682
Ken Wolski, RN, MPA
Executive Director
Coalition for Medical Marijuana--New Jersey, Inc.
844 Spruce St.
Trenton, NJ 08648
609.394.2137
www.cmmnj.org
[email protected]
Giuliani is just proving his
Giuliani is just proving his ignorance...good thing Ron Paul has actually read up on things. Ron Paul's a smart guy, and a good Republican choice to vote for, when the time comes...see, not only liberal Dems support medical marijuana.
http://www.marijuanamedicine.com
Add new comment