Pubdate: Sun, 05 Oct 2014
Source: Tampa Bay Times (FL)
Copyright: 2014 St. Petersburg Times
Contact: http://www.sptimes.com/letters/
Website: http://www.tampabay.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/419
Page: P2

JUST SAY NO TO AMENDMENTS

Amendment 2 : Medical marijuana

Supporters of a constitutional amendment to allow medical marijuana in
Florida have made a good-faith effort to help people in severe pain.
No one wants to see family members, friends or neighbors suffer. But
this well-intentioned attempt to provide relief is not the way to
address this difficult issue. Amendment 2 is too broad, and voters
should reject it.

Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia have legalized some
form of medical marijuana. Most have approved the drug's use through
legislative statute and have tweaked the measures along the way as
they spotted problems. The Florida Legislature has resisted attempts
to legalize medical marijuana through state law, leaving supporters to
seek relief by amending the Florida Constitution. Personal injury
lawyer John Morgan led the effort to secure the signatures necessary
to get the amendment on the ballot. The Tampa Bay Times' editorial
board supported a Florida Supreme Court decision that found the ballot
language was clear and not misleading, paving the way for voters to
have their say on the Nov. 4 ballot. But while the language is clear,
the substance of the amendment remains problematic.

Amendment 2 would allow doctors to recommend medical marijuana to
patients who have a debilitating disease. Qualifying patients would
receive identification cards from the Department of Health and be
allowed to pick up the recommended dosage from state-regulated
dispensaries. Licensed caregivers would be allowed to administer the
drug to qualifying patients. The health department would regulate the
industry.

First, the amendment plays too fast and loose with the conditions a
patient must have to get a doctor's approval for medical marijuana.
Cancer, glaucoma, HIV or multiple sclerosis are among the eight
diseases that are specifically listed as debilitating diseases that
qualify. But the amendment also allows doctors to recommend marijuana
use for 'other conditions for which a physician believes that the
medical use of marijuana would likely outweigh the potential health
risks for a patient.' That leaves a gaping loophole for even
wellmeaning doctors to exploit. Other states that have legalized
medical marijuana have a closed list of treatable conditions and
require approval by a state agency such as the health department to
make additions.

Second, the amendment fails to set strict limits on caregivers'
qualifications. The amendment only requires that caregivers be 21
years old to obtain and dispense medical marijuana for a qualifying
patient. This opens the door for abuse by caregivers with dishonest
intentions. Finally, the amendment would give civil and criminal
immunity to qualifying patients, caregivers, physicians and marijuana
treatment centers and their employees. There is disagreement in the
legal community about exactly what this means. Supporters say it
simply allows the entities to possess medical marijuana without
penalty and that all parties would still be liable for misuse.
Opponents argue that the amendment provides a broad license to be
above the law.

Opponents have raised other practical issues about medical marijuana,
including zoning concerns related to where patients can smoke it or
the location of dispensaries. Those are legitimate concerns that have
been successfully addressed in other states, usually by tweaking laws
until legislators got it just right. But a constitutional amendment
cannot be changed without another vote by Floridians, and the
Department of Health and state lawmakers may not have enough
discretion to fill in the blanks or make adjustments.

There is a reason why medical marijuana advocates chose to pursue
relief through a constitutional amendment. The Legislature has refused
to act, and there has been no other viable alternative. Still,
legalizing medical marijuana in Florida by state statute rather than
the Constitution remains the smartest approach.

On occasion, the Legislature has demonstrated it can tackle tough
issues. With enough political pressure, lawmakers should be able to
legalize medical marijuana. They took a bold step this spring when
they approved a form of noneuphoric marijuana that is used to treat
children with seizures. Lawmakers should stand up again.

Floridians in pain should be able to use marijuana for medical use,
and the Legislature should figure out how to make it available. But
writing such broad language into the Florida Constitution makes it too
difficult to control the use of medical marijuana and to make
adjustments along the way.

On Amendment 2 on the Nov. 4 ballot, the Tampa Bay Times recommends
voting no .
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt