Source: Orange County Register (CA) Contact: http://www.ocregister.com/ Pubdate: 17 Sep 1998 A NONSENSE RESOLUTION Casually and with virtually no debate, U.S.representatives rejected the idea that marijuana might have medicinal application for patients who seek relief. It is a position that ignores evidence both anecdotal and factual. It borders on the inhumane. House Joint Resolution 117, passed 310-93 Wednesday, with no public hearings, is not a new law. It's simply a "sense of the Congress" resolution to the effect that Congress believes marijuana to be dangerous and addictive, and that Congress is unequivocally opposed to the legalization of marijuana for medical use. It also directs the U.S. attorney general to prepare reports on how much marijuana has been eradicated through federal efforts in recent years and the annual number of arrests and prosecutions for federal marijuana offenses. In essence, the House stuck its finger in the eye of California and Arizona voters, who recently passed initiatives to make marijuana available to patients with the recommendation of licensed physicians. Even more important, it told thousands of patients and their doctors - who believe that marijuana can alleviate their conditions, often with less serious and dangerous side-effects than "standard" prescription medications - - that Congress is pleased to see them continue to suffer or to obtain relief only at the price of becoming criminals. Perhaps it should be called the "Congress has no sense" resolution. Even more distressing is the fact that most of the orange County delegation voted for this resolution. Reps. Dana Rohrabacher and Loretta Sanchez vote. But Reps. Chris Cox, Jay Kim and Ron Packard, all of whom should know better, landed on the "yea" side. The stated intention of this resolution was to chide California and Arizona voters and to weigh in on medical-marijuana initiative races in Alaska, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and possibly the District of Columbia. The message? A Congress filled with lawyers should have a veto power when patients and doctors are considering the medicinal use of a plant about which the Chief Administrative Law Judge of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration reported that "there are simply no credible medical records to suggest that consuming marijuana has caused a single death." The old joke is that if 'pro" is the opposite of "con," then Congress must be the opposite of progress. Sadly, Congress sometimes makes the quip seem more truth than joke. - --- Checked-by: Pat Dolan