Pubdate: Mon, 13 Jun 2005
Source: Leader-Telegram (Eau Claire, WI)
Copyright: 2005 Eau Claire Press
Contact: http://www.cvol.net/contacteditor.htm#editorform
Website: http://www.leadertelegram.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/236
Author: Don Huebscher, editor
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Raich (Gonzales v. Raich)

COURT MESSED UP MEDICAL POT RULING

Federal officials say last week's Supreme Court ruling banning
marijuana use by the critically ill to relieve pain doesn't mean the
feds plan to break down the doors of such people's homes and haul them
to jail.

That's good because the federal government, which already spends more
than $1 billion a day more than it collects, can't afford to waste
even more money chasing down sick people who want nothing more than to
free themselves from chronic, severe pain.

Let's look at it from the government's point of view. The "war on
drugs" is a multi-billion-dollar taxpayer-funded effort to stem the
flow of illegal substances, which includes marijuana. Officials say it
would be a nightmare to try to keep track of which marijuana plots are
legal, and thus all marijuana could cross state lines and therefore
falls under the clause that gives the federal government control over
interstate commerce.

Last week's 6-3 Supreme Court ruling simply gives law enforcement
officers the freedom to destroy any pot plants they come across. In
fact, Tom Riley, spokesman for the White House drug policy office,
said federal prisoners convicted of marijuana possession had on
average more than 100 pounds.

But there also are significant states' rights and individual rights
issues at play here. Ten states allow for the gravely ill to grow and
use marijuana for pain relief. This is a legitimate right of the state
to bestow (see amendments 9 and 10 in the U.S. Constitution). If these
rights are abused, then the government has an interest in stepping
in.

But what's so difficult about figuring out whether someone growing a
few pot plants has medical permission to smoke marijuana? It seems as
easy as issuing a handicapped parking sticker to certain drivers.

And if it is a problem, it's a state problem. The fact the federal
government feels inclined to get involved shows how broad its
tentacles have encroached and why we're nearly $7.8 trillion in debt.

With all the real problems facing law enforcement in this country,
whether a dying cancer patient smokes a joint should be far down on
the government's list. Much closer to the top should be securing our
borders, guarding our airports, seaports and nuclear energy
facilities, and doing more to stem the flow of heroin, cocaine and
methamphetamine into our communities.

Maybe the worst thing about last week's ruling is its negative impact
on public support for government in general and law enforcement in
particular. Most people don't see how a person suffering from a brain
tumor smoking dope is a danger to the public. But because it now
technically is a federal crime, the people enforcing the law come off
as the bad guys. And public support is paramount for law enforcement
officials to protect the communities they serve.

It's all so unnecessary. If the court simply had ruled states indeed
have the right to allow very sick people to use marijuana to relieve
pain and been done with it, then the states could pass or not pass
such laws as the people see fit and deal with problems that result.

The Constitution was drawn up to give states broad latitude in
deciding such matters, and every time the federal government gobbles
up more of that authority, we move closer to the kind of society our
founders rebelled against in the first place.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake