Feature: Minnesota Legislature Passes Medical Marijuana Bill, But Veto Looms
After accepting amendments that significantly narrowed the scope of the medical marijuana legislation before it, the Minnesota legislature passed the bill, SF 97, Monday night. But Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty has vowed to veto the bill, an act which has probably occurred by the time you read these words.
[inline:minnesota-ad.jpg align=left caption="Minneapolis patient Lynn Rubenstein Nicholson, Minnesotans for Compassionate Care ad"]If, as promised, Pawlenty does veto the bill, proponents are not giving up. Instead, they are pondering another shot in the legislature next year, and if Pawlenty remains immune to compromise, they may instead seek a constitutional amendment next year, which would bypass the governor, taking the measure directly to the voters once it passes the legislature again.
The House passed its version of the bill Monday night on a 70-64 vote. The Senate, which had approved its version of the bill last month, accepted the House version, passing it on a 38-28 vote. The vote was largely along party lines, with most Republicans opposing and most Democratic Farm Labor (DFL) members supporting the bill. In neither chamber was the margin of victory large enough to overcome a veto.
The votes came after a day of rancorous debate Monday. Hoping to address law enforcement concerns cited by Pawlenty, the House accepted amendments limiting medical marijuana to terminally ill patients (even excluding cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy) and removing the ability for patients to grow their own plants.
But that wasn't enough for some opponents of the measure. "It is absolutely wrong to refer to this as medical. It is wrong to use the pain and discomfort of sick people to sell this bill," said Rep. Steve Gottwalt (R-St. Cloud).
"The bill will be vetoed no matter what form it leaves here. I'm not willing to give up the war on drugs. If we leave this war more people are going to get sick and die," vowed Rep. Tony Cornish (R-Good Thunder).
If such comments are a normal part of the legislative debate, Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Delano) crossed a line with some of his colleagues. Emmer offered a series of snickering amendments that enraged supporters and led to a heated exchange. One amendment he offered would remove every reference to the words "medical marijuana" and replace it with the word "pot."
[inline:minnesotacapitol.jpg align=right caption="Minnesota State Capitol"]"We are not talking about medicine. We are not talking about marijuana. Let's call it what it is: 'pot,'" Emmer said. "It is a gateway drug and it has very serious and real physical impact. All we are doing here is legalizing marijuana." He added, "Let's not send the kind of message to the children of the state that marijuana is OK."
One of the bill's authors, Rep. Tom Rukavina (DFL-Virginia), reacted angrily. "It might be cute, but the testimony of the families of people who were helped by medical marijuana are very moving," he said, speaking directly to Emmer. "I don't know if you are trying to be cute, but I think your amendment stinks and I would urge members to vote against it."
"You should be ashamed of yourself," said Rep. Thomas Huntley (DFL-Duluth), recalling the struggles his own family members had with cancer.
Even a Republican colleague chastised Emmer. "We have a very serious issue in front of us," said Rep. Mark Buesgens (R-Jordan). "We are talking about the quality of people's lives at the end of their lives, the sickest of the sick," he said. "It's not a matter we should be joking about on the House floor."
Emmer responded angrily to his critics. "I didn't bring this here to be cute, to make a mockery," he shouted. "You are taking a drug that has serious consequences for young people in the country, so before you start mocking me for doing what I think is right, think about that! This is no joke!"
The "pot" motion failed, but on a roll, Emmer then offered two more amendments, one to remove the word "medical" from the bill and one to replace "medical marijuana" with "authorized marijuana." Those two amendments also failed.
Now, the measure is in the hands of Gov. Pawlenty, who has consistently said he shared law enforcement's concerns about rising crime and drug use if the measure passed. At a Tuesday afternoon press conference, he announced that he would veto the bill. Then he added, "I have great empathy for patients."
"What he said about empathy for the sick is just a lie," said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project, whose state affiliate, Minnesotans for Compassionate Care, led the fight for the bill's passage. "You don't show empathy for the sick by throwing them in jail while they're dying."
Overriding a veto isn't a "realistic option," said former Republican state representative Chris DeLaForest, lobbyist for Minnesotans for Compassionate Care. "The votes aren't there."
But the effort will continue next year. "We could come back next session and pass it again and try to address Pawlenty's concerns," said DeLaForest. "I'm always optimistic," he said diplomatically. "The legislature doesn't reconvene until February. There's time to work in the interim."
Pawlenty's refusal to sign onto even the watered down version of the bill that finally passed the legislature suggests his stated reasons for opposing it are questionable, said Mirken. "This bill was narrowed down so drastically that even the flimsiest pretexts that he and law enforcement used have evaporated," he said. "They said it would be rife with abuse, but this bill as passed is limited to terminal patients who would have to get their marijuana from a state-licensed dispensary. A lot of suffering and deserving patients would have been left out, but in regards to a coherent reason to veto this, there is none."
Pawlenty is being talked about as a potential 2012 Republican presidential candidate, Mirken noted. "One can only assume that this veto is about politics," he said. "This is a guy with political ambitions who thinks he needs to stay on the right side of law enforcement to advance his career. It's a shame he is willing to sacrifice patients on the altar of his ambition."
Blocked by a recalcitrant governor, Minnesota medical marijuana proponents are considering an end run around him next year. Under Minnesota law, the legislature can bypass the governor by voting for a constitutional amendment to allow medical marijuana use. If such a measure passes the legislature, it would then go directly to a popular vote. With support for medical marijuana at high levels in Minnesota, proponents believe the measure would pass.
If DeLaForest is optimistic, he's also pragmatic. Noting that Pawlenty has proven immune to even the most tightly drawn legislation, DeLaForest said a constitutional amendment was a possibility. "That would be drafted in bill form and would have to pass the legislature, but the governor is essentially written out of the process," he said. "It goes directly onto the ballot for our next election, and medical marijuana is polling at 64% here."
"We have indications that some of our legislative supporters are willing to go that route," said Mirken. "We would certainly support a constitutional amendment at this point. It's sad that we have to, but if that's what it takes, that's what it takes."
Comments
What a creeped out punk Tom Emmer is
The uber-idiot doesn't know the difference between a killer drug like alcohol and a non-killer drug like cannabis. Why isn't he willing to give up his own use of a killer drug to send the right message to children? Cause he's an utter hypocrite. His contempt for the suffering of pain wrecked patients is too despicable for words. They're just pawns in his loathsome game. Shame on the Minnesota cops for treating desperately ill people as the enemy, Kerlikowske is hallucinating when he says this isn't a war on people.
For the thousandth time, alcohol supremacists, where do you get this crazy idea that you can freely use alcohol while you treat people as criminals for preferring cannabis? That's as crazy as thinking it's ok for the government to discriminate against people because they are not white or not male or not heterosexual. Stop worrying about adults using cannabis and start worrying more about violent crime, much of it alcohol related or cannabis prohibition related.
-newageblues
In reply to What a creeped out punk Tom Emmer is by Anonymous (not verified)
I can't agree more!
I can't agree more!
legalization
I didn' t realize that Minnesota was so conservative. People like Tom Emmer should not exist let alone be in a position of power. Speaking of really sick people, Tom Emmer seems to have a real problem. Obviously, smoking cannabis causes insanity. Regular people smoke and asses like Emmer go nuts. Anyone who thinks cannabis is a gateway drug is an ignorant s.o.b. This guy is beyond mentally challenged.
In reply to legalization by Anonymous (not verified)
legalization
im trying to get a piece ready for the feb second caucus here in minnesota. i want it to legalize maijuana. i have a few different standpoints that i think would stand. i would be willing to take it as far as the supreme court with accusations of endangering americas youth by putting a unharmful plant in the same group as hardcore life threatening drugs. It gives kids and grown people the wrong idea. Tobacco and alcohol kill by the minute, marijauna helps people relax. to relax is to relieve stress yes? stress is a main component for many diseases yes? please write back
best regards
Hold them accountable - donate to their opponents next elextion
And why not give them a piece of your mind?
Representative Tom Emmer (R) District: 19B
301 State Office Building
100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155
651-296-4336 or 800-474-3425
E-mail: [email protected]
Legislative Assistant: Joyce Vogt 651-297-8407
---
Representative Steve Gottwalt (R) District: 15A
231 State Office Building
100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155
651-296-6316 or 800-683-0886
E-mail: [email protected]
Legislative Assistant: Nick Sherlock 651-296-9710
--
Representative Tony Cornish (R) District: 24B
281 State Office Building
100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155
651-296-4240 or 800-704-8525
E-mail: [email protected]
Join my e-mail updates list for announcements.
Legislative Assistant: Judie Hirasawa 651-296-2340
A man with priorities
From April 20: "Rep. Tom Emmer got three amendments on, most notably making DWI records private if an offender does not re-offend for ten years. Emmer had DWIs back in '91 and '81, which the press revealed and now wouldn't know about under this bill."
http://www.tpt.org/aatc/person/tom_emmer
There are Pawlenty of Idiots killing the Republican Party...
And pawlenty is supposed to be the new poster child of the republican party? Good luck with that!
The conservative icon/idol ronald reagan said it best: “If you analyze it, I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.â€
And pawlenty is no libertarian - and therefore doomed - like other ugly republicans such as senator lindsey graham who believes: “We're not going to build [the Republican Party] around libertarian ideasâ€. WTF... Goodbye Constitution, Goodbye Personal Responsibility, Goodbye Choice, Goodbye Reason, Hello Amerika!
WOW, abandon the best thing about the conservative party and you'll have conservative suicide - LOL - I can't wait to watch these idiots get slaughtered again next election cycle!
Replace "alcoholic" with "drug addict"... for starters
Heres an amendment for that idiot emmers to consider: remove every reference to the words "alcohol" & "alcoholic" and replace it with the words "drug" and "drug addict"!
And why stop there if we're gonna be honest about the world they live in: Lets replace the word "faith" and "faithful" with "fool" and "foolish".
Everytime one of these idiots opens their mouths it reminds me of mormons speaking in tongues - incomprehensible bullshit transmitted by the aliens from the unseen mothership.
If these people can't control the made-up shit that passes through their lips how can we trust them with reality?
Stop asking terrorists posing as law makers/enforcers
to change the law. Start flooding the State Dept.and Pentagon with demands to engage all branches of the United States Military to remove all prohibition terrorists who have hijacked the government. Veterans all over the world are doing this 24/7; you all should too. Remember it is the prohibition terrorists who start all the fraudulent preemptive wars and fund them in part by secretly trafficking illegal drugs,weapons and people,such as the case against Oliver North,Dick Cheney, and other MKULTRA/Paperclip operatives and rogue C.I.A. agents, with the double standards in punishment heaped on their grunts, Freeway Ricky Ross, Mark Phillips and Cathy O'Brien. We the people have the right to demand a war against people who use terror and fraud such as wars against people and drugs pushed as blatant dictatorial double standards,so observe and engage that right tell your family and friends and people serving in the military who think the same. Its going to take the demand for and application of United States Military force to remove these prohibition terrorists and since they fund terrorist dictatorships like with Saddam,Saudi Arabia,and many more, It is totally possible. Everyone start bombarding the powers that be with enough demands for the tyrants to be removed just like any other terrorist,serial murderer must be removed. We cant just sit silent and let the prohibition terrorists have control over the military and only continuous bombardment of e-mail,phone,etc. to the point of clogging up communication will get anything done as they just keep using their fraudulent authority to keep attacking. So get this done people!
Appalling
Dear Representative Emmer,
Reading about your latest cloddish exploit, I can't help but recall the story of a (justifiably) much more prominent conservative who was forced to reconsider his views on medical marijuana, for very personal reasons:
http://spectator.org/archives/2006/03/29/lyn-nofziger-an-appreciation/print
I'm aware that you have been forced to watch members of your own family suffer from chronic illness. Perhaps cannabis could have helped some of them; perhaps it could not. Yet to deny that it has brought relief to some who suffer, when nothing else could, is an act of willful and callous ignorance.
Your own actions over the years suggest that you have plenty of sympathy for alcohol abusers, but none for anyone who ingests cannabis -- a far less toxic and less deadly substance by any rational standard -- for any reason. This is what is typically known as "cognitive dissonance," though to employ the word "cognitive" with respect to a person such as yourself is to give you more credit than you deserve.
Sincerely yours,
Ethan Straffin
Palo Alto, CA
"it's not about medicine, they just want to get high"
They always say, "medical marijuana is just a front to try to legalize recreational marijuana". What they don't realize is, it's not that it's a front, it's that it's the necessary first step. The most extreme, most absurd, and most heartless manifestation of this stupid prohibition is not allowing patients who actually need it medically to have access to it. Obviously, as awareness of the stupidity of the law spreads, the first thing the public comes to realize is that medical use of marijuana cannot be considered a criminal act. Later, yes, they will also realize that prohibition of recreational use is also unjust. But it's not like we're trying to fool people into legalizing medical marijuana so that then we can legalize recreational marijuana, it's just that it's the most natural sequence of events.
Medical Marijuana-Pawlenty
We are SO Sick & Tired of our elected Politicians playing personal Physician! That the day WILL come to Pass when The Powers-That-Be (and/or their Significant Other FAMILY MEMBERS, MAYBE EVEN A CHILD) suffers from some Unrepairable malady, say like: 5 Unsuccessful Back Surgeries, (or the like)-Pushes them completely out of employment, Turns their life completely up-side-down, they won't be able to eat right, poop right, or pro-create right-(Which most lawmakers live for) maybe they Live 7 Years or more on Oxycontin, Percocet and Oh-So-Many other Physically addicting Drug-Company wares, Only to realize that the Non-Habit-Forming Herb, Cannabis, (Naturally Grown-Not Chemically invented) would have been equal or more efficient than the Opiates and the other so-called meds that the REAL PUSHERS/DRUG DEALERS Cram down our Collective Throats-along with all the G-Damn side-effects. It's only a matter of time, then maybe, just maybe, we'll be able to "VETO" their Convalescence and medical care by voting for their challengers-Maybe even their Medical Insurance ceases. Take Note Pols, It WILL Happen, and None too soon, in My most Humble Opinion! Gee, and I NEVER wish Doom on ANYONE, EVER! From Mr. Fish in the Back-40 - Thanks for the FERTILE Soil!
Re: Appalling
Mr. Emmer's response, and mine.
--
Ethan:
I gather you disagree with my feelings about marijuana. Of course, I'm not sure why you feel the need to make the disagreement personal. Certainly, you have the right to be as righteous as you want - Obviously, I am not a cannabis fan - that being said, it appears that you either don't misunderstand my position or you didn't take time to listen and understand . . . if the later, might I suggest you are qualified to write for the paper. For your information, my complaint (regardless of my feelings about the drug) was -quite simply- if legislators are going to legalize dope, then we should say so. If we are going to treat it as "medicine" then we should treat it like a medicine . . . prescription, dosage, control distribution through pharmacists, etc. Don't tell me it's medicine when we are simply legalizing the use.
--
Tom:
Thank you for the response. It's more than I expected, and I do appreciate it.
Perhaps I'm not far enough along in my recovery from the one drug that has truly damaged me -- that'd be alcohol -- to be nice about this, but I don't know any other way than to make it personal. You've made it personal yourself with respect to a small minority of your constituents who have less power than you. You mocked their pain on the floor the other day. There is simply no way around it.
As an independent voter, I believe that government should be there to assist as needed, and otherwise to stay out of the way. You're not staying out of the way. You're claiming to be smarter than doctors who believe that cannabis is the best option for their patients. You've granted yourself an honorary medical license, and it's incredibly arrogant of you -- possibly even more arrogant than those (spit) liberals. If you're looking for a reason that your party is increasingly ineffective among swing voters, you need look no further than the mirror.
Legalize and regulate? Of course we should, and there are many ways in which we might do so that might even make our children safer, but you won't be there to speak in favor. I'd wager that you haven't even been following the efforts to do just what you're suggesting. From what I can tell, you're a big-government "conservative" who speaks up for "state's rights" except when your colleagues attempt to point out that placing cannabis in Schedule I makes a mockery of the entire Controlled Substances Act.
The kids don't buy it for a moment. All you're telling them is that, while there's a clear and fairly workable distinction between minors and adults with respect to alcohol, smoking a joint is off limits for everybody -- and therefore, in the real world in which those few remaining rational conservatives live, for nobody. They'll keep smoking out, and you'll continue to point the police in their direction as opposed to, let's say, the direction of those poor persecuted drunk drivers.
(Like you, at least twice, yes? Like me, too. Pleased to meet you. I'd gladly take myself off the streets before I'd introduce legislation to cover up the wrong I've done, like some people we both know.)
It shouldn't have taken the federal Institute of Medicine to point out that prohibition is primarily what makes cannabis a "gateway drug." Even when it did, you weren't listening. In the meantime, you're waging a culture war against a minority of your own constituents who find relief that they couldn't find anywhere else, in the form of a God-given plant. Charming.
On your own personal bright side, you're getting precisely the drug crisis that you're asking for, and what's a politician without a cause? It's a cold silver lining from where I sit, and the Serenity Prayer isn't helping all that much.
Ethan
--
"If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
Medicinal Marijuana
If all of you would stop voting for the "Incumbent Party" then maybe we couold get a reasonable "Law" passed"' instead eaveryone keeps voeting in candinates who claim to be compasonate to the whoes off thoes us who have legitimate terminal Illnessess, most of them do not! I have M.S. and I know people who thinck because they have a drug addiction, they are know entitelled to the same exemptiontions that we are, they are, not? This is complicating the issue. Currently, as aan example "Nancy Pelossie & Barrney Frank'" both claim to be for legalizing canibis, they acctually only vote according to what "the Drug Pacts" tell them to do! Remember that the candinates that you least expect to be on you side, are acctually the ones that will be? Most of you caserrated Saraha Pallin, the gov of a state thate has verry liberal cannibis laws (7 oz) and Mitt Romney, a Mormon who takes thew "Bile" litterally accordiung to some people tried to make it easyer to obtain & who's whife used "Medical Marijuana" for her cancer treatment. (John Edwards forbade his wife from using it durring treatment"... People all this info is available on the intrnet, "USE IIT?"
Re: Appalling
Er...Sarah Palin? Seriously? "I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled,†she states -- but she gets no brownie points from me for that. She's no legalizer, and oh so predictably, it's all because (according to the Politico) she doesn't want to send the wrong message to her children. With Palin, it's still all about "do as I say, not as I do." So she governs a state whose citizens are predominantly more progressive and/or libertarian than she is? Big whoop. At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, so did Hitler.
That's not to say that there aren't Republicans who are to be applauded with respect to drug policy -- including Tom Campbell, who is running for the GOP gubernatorial nomination here in California and would win it if there were any justice in the world.
John Edwards is a jackass. No argument there.
More from my discussion with Mr. Emmer if anybody wants it.
Ethan:
Thanks for the discourse - but you've completely missed (or you have simply chosen to ignore) my point. I mocked no one - while I respect your point of view, I can clearly see you have absolutely no respect for mine. That's too bad - since I think we probably agree more than you know . . . of course, how would you know if your not willing to keep an open mind? You can criticize all you want - I stand by my comments and - as always - I reserve the right to change my mind.
Take care.
--
Tom:
If I've gotten you wrong, I sincerely apologize. I can understand how your floor comments could be taken as a devil's-advocate satire of sorts. That's not necessarily how they read on paper, and if I missed the point, is it not reasonable to suggest that your colleagues may have done the same?
If your point is that, if we're going to legalize and regulate the plant for anyone who can find a licensed doctor who is willing to prescribe it for them, it should be done "through channels" -- well, of course it should. Yet the U.S. Congress, DEA, ONDCP, FDA, and NIDA (the latter of whose authority over where and how the potential medicinal properties of cannabis are even allowed to be researched I find impossible to justify) have all proven intransigent in their own ways, for reasons that have a lot to do with politics and very little to do with public health. Rather than passing the buck, the MMJ states have attempted to open a safety valve and relieve suffering as best they can. So far, the sky hasn't fallen.
Is this a camel's nose under the tent? Possibly. That doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do, and it certainly doesn't mean that there aren't about a zillion legislators who are fully prepared to start whacking that camel with brooms if it gets even so far as the front legs. As it should be. I'm not asking for a revolution, but a little compassion would be nice.
I appreciate your open-mindedness, and I'm sorry if my own has not risen to the challenge this time around.
Ethan
--
"It is our judgment that the war on drugs has failed, that it is diverting intelligent energy away from how to deal with the problem of addiction, that it is wasting our resources, and that it is encouraging civil, judicial, and penal procedures associated with police states. We all agree on movement towards legalization, even though we may differ on just how far." -- the editors of the National Review (including William F. Buckley, Jr.), February 12, 1996
Sarah Palin has nothing to do with Alaska's enlightened law
(relatively) on cannabis. I don't think the legislature does either. My understanding is that the Alaska Supreme Court interpreted their state constitution to guarantee the right to use cannabis in the privacy of your own home and rebuffed efforts by the legislature to get around that ruling, I don't know all the details.
Politicians have been almost all useless since the war on cannabis users started. I really hope reformers will concentrate their efforts on cannabis legalization referendums in the most likely states for success. That's how legalization for medical use got started and I think that's very likely where re-legalization's early victories will come. One thing that will help is that push has really come to shove when it comes to either cutting important government services or raising taxes, and that is going to be an ongoing crisis for quite a while.
What's the big deal about legalizing weed? The really dangerous stuff, alcohol, is already legal, remember?
One Man?
Seriously?
Our best efforts as human beings and doing whats right and being happy comes down to one man called Pawlenty? Paw-lease.
Can't we pass all this stupid vote crap up and vote on this stuff ourselves as citizens of our nation already?
Why do we have to depend on these goofballs to run our show? Cant we pull some kind of doctrine and demand a vote as people of the united states or a State in USA? Whats with all this political crap of 2012, he doesnt stand a chance anyways. Cmon, then that means its all about personal gain in Legislature and that isn't right because its depriving me of my human rights and needs all for nothing. Screw this BS anyways man. Talking about pot makes you stupid. HA. Half those morons out there in the real world are just that anyways, but we all still have to get along. Pass this shit already and get on with it.
Screw this voting crap already and do whats right, I don't get it?
Add new comment