Pubdate: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 Source: Oakland Tribune, The (CA) Copyright: 2005 MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers Contact: http://www.oaklandtribune.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/314 Author: Josh Richman, Staff Writer Action: http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=25197&ms=hp Action: http://hinchey.mpp.org/ Action: http://capwiz.com/norml2/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=7309441 Cited: Gonzales v. Raich ( www.angeljustice.org/ ) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Raich (Angel Raich) POT MEASURE A TOUGH SELL IN CONGRESS 2 Area Reps Among Foes of Bill to Keep Feds Off Medical Users' Backs Two greater Bay Area members of Congress seem likely to oppose a legislative amendment that medical marijuana advocates call their next best hope after Monday's U.S. Supreme Court defeat. The amendment by Rep. Maurice Hinchey,D-N.Y., and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach, would forbid the Justice Department from using public money to raid, arrest or prosecute patients and providers in states with medical marijuana laws. It's expected to come up as early as next week, and Oakland's Angel McClary Raich - one of the patients who brought the case decided Monday by the Supreme Court - intends to go to Washington, D.C., to testify for it. The same amendment got 152 votes in 2003 and 148 in 2004, far short of the 218 it needs for passage. But advocates say Monday's ruling - that medical marijuana patients and providers can be federally arrested and prosecuted - might rally more support. Activists at a candlelight vigil outside the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' San Francisco courthouse Tuesday evening urged lawmakers to sign on. Most of the Bay Area delegation already is on board. But Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Atwater, and Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, opposed the amendment twice before. Neither could be reached for comment Tuesday, but any change seems like a long shot "Like most Americans and two-thirds of Congress, Congressman Cardoza does not believe the use of marijuana for 'medicinal' purposes should be legal. He has no plans to change his position on this issue," spokesman Bret Ladine said before last year's vote. "The amendment is an attempt to circumvent existing federal law." Pombo also is on record opposing medical marijuana. Long Shots in the House The Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment isn't the only pending legislation on which medical marijuana proponents are pinning hopes, merely the one with the most support. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., in May re-introduced his "States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act," to move marijuana to a less-restricted status within the Controlled Substances Act and regulate its production, possession and use as medicine. Among this bill's co-sponsors are Barbara Lee, D-Oakland; George Miller, D-Martinez; Pete Stark, D-Fremont; Tom Lantos, D-San Mateo; Lynn Woolsey, D-San Rafael; Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto; and Mike Honda, D-San Jose. But Frank has carried this or similar bills in every session since 1995. Last time, it died without a hearing in a House subcommittee. And it now has 36 co-sponsors compared with 44 last session. Last session also saw a "Truth in Trials Act" to let marijuana defendants plead a medical defense to federal juries. It was inspired by the prosecution of Oakland's Ed Rosenthal, convicted in 2003 of felony marijuana cultivation after a judge barred him from mentioning his medical motive. But this bill's House version - introduced by Rep. Sam Farr, D-Santa Cruz, with 44 cosponsors - also died without a hearing. A Senate version was introduced in November, just weeks before the session's end. It also went nowhere and has not been reintroduced - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake