Pubdate: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 Source: Herald, The (SC) Copyright: 2004 The Herald Contact: http://www.heraldonline.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/369 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization) REGULATE MEDICAL MARIJUANA The case before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the validity of state laws governing the medical use of marijuana is more about federal authority to regulate interstate commerce than the use of pot to alleviate pain. And it is appropriate that the feds win this case. Nonetheless, this whole legal battle would be unnecessary if the federal government had responded in a reasonable way to the grass-roots (excuse the pun) movement to find a way to allow seriously ill patients to use marijuana as a palliative. Instead, the Justice Department, fueled by John Ashcroft's missionary zeal, has gone out of its way to challenge state laws allowing the use of medical marijuana, charging that such laws encourage drug abuse. Currently, 11 states have laws on the books that permit the legal use of marijuana -- with a doctor's consent -- to relieve pain resulting from cancer, AIDS and other wasting diseases. Many of the patients who use marijuana are terminal, including one of the plaintiffs in the case before the Supreme Court, Angel Raich of Oakland, Calif., who suffers from an inoperable brain tumor. She tried dozens of prescription medicines before turning to pot. A wealth of research and patient testimony confirms that marijuana serves a medical purpose that other drugs can't. The efforts by states to find a way to allow patients to use marijuana legally reflects the consensus that it has real medical value. But the federal government has stubbornly refused to recognize the medicinal role marijuana can play. Instead, the Ashcroft Justice Department has done its best to deny patients access to the drug. In strictly legal terms, the federal government is on solid ground in this case. The hodgepodge of state laws governing the medical use of marijuana demand federal oversight. To uphold the right of states to govern the disbursement of an otherwise illegal drug threatens federal authority over interstate commerce. And that authority is the crucial foundation for government regulation of civil rights laws, environmental protection, labor laws and more. The obvious solution, however, would for the Food and Drug Administration to designate marijuana for medical use and regulate it as it does so many other more dangerous and addictive drugs. States then would be free to enact sensible laws to regulate medical marijuana using federal guidelines. More likely, the feds, fearing that they would appear to be sanctioning the recreational use of marijuana, will simply continue to dismantle state laws allowing its medical use. And in so doing, they will deny relief to thousands of people who might benefit from this drug. Even if justices rule against plaintiffs in this case, we hope the ruling will contain language that encourages the government to look past hidebound attitudes toward marijuana and recognize its proven medical value. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin