Pubdate: Sun, 19 Oct 2014
Source: Tampa Tribune (FL)
Copyright: 2014 The Tribune Co.
Contact: http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-letters/submit/
Website: http://tbo.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/446
Author: Jerome R. Stockfisch, Tribune staff
Page: A1

AMENDMENT 2 FIGHT GETS INTO RHETORICAL WEEDS

Those For And Against Ballot Initiative Are Busy Parsing Its Language

TAMPA -On Nov. 4, voters will determine whether Florida becomes the 
24th state and the first in the South to approve a comprehensive 
medical marijuana program.

After failing to get the state Legislature to place the measure on 
the ballot, advocates for medical pot took to the streets, exceeding 
the 683,000 petition signatures needed to put the issue to voters 
and, if approved, write it into the Florida Constitution.

Early polls suggested strong voter support for medical marijuana - 
beyond the 60 percent required for passage - but the numbers have 
dwindled and the campaign has grown more polarized. Each side has a 
deep-pocketed donor keeping television ads and news releases cycling 
through the election.

The issue is cast as a compassionate way to treat pain and suffering 
by one side, and by the other, as the opening of a Pandora's box that 
cannot be controlled.

Advocates and opponents are parsing the language of the brief ballot 
summary that voters will see before coloring in the circle for 'yes' 
or 'no.' Here is a review of what's behind those five sentences.

'Allows the medical use of marijuana for individuals with 
debilitating diseases as determined by a licensed Florida physician.' 
A key argument when the Florida Supreme Court contemplated the ballot 
proposal - the court reviews every constitutional amendment to ensure 
it covers a single subject and that the language is not misleading - 
was the contention that this first sentence is a ruse to permit much wider use.

In the full text of the amendment, spelling out in 1,600 words what 
would become Article X, Section 29 of the state constitution, a 
debilitating medical condition is defined as a series of diseases 
including cancer, positive HIV status, multiple sclerosis 'or any 
other conditions for which a physician believes that the medical use 
of marijuana would likely outweigh the potential health risks for a patient.'

Ken Bell, a former state Supreme Court justice and opponent of 
Amendment 2, has a problem with that.

'When you look at the definition, it doesn't talk about debilitating 
diseases, it says 'debilitating medical condition.' That's confusing 
to the voter. When I think of a debilitating disease, I think of the 
ones that are listed. There's a difference between a debilitating 
disease and a condition. I might have a sore shoulder due to 
arthritis. I may have a headache or some other condition that's not a 
disease.' Proponents insist the ballot summary is clear and 
straightforward, trotting out a decisive endorsement: The state 
Supreme Court ruled in January that the ballot title and summary 
'accurately convey to voters the chief purpose of the proposed 
amendment.' 'The Supreme Court has ruled on this issue,' said Ben 
Pollara, campaign manager for United for Care, the pro-Amendment 2 
group. 'It's pretty plainly in black and white in their ruling.' The 
issue passed Supreme Court muster by a contentious 4-3 vote.

'Despite what the title and summary convey to voters, minor aches and 
pains, stress, insomnia or fear of an upcoming flight could qualify 
for the medical use of marijuana under the text of the amendment,' 
Justice Ricky Polston wrote in a dissent.

As to the prospect of 'pot doctors' recommending marijuana for a sore 
shoulder, stress or insomnia, John Morgan, the 'For the People' trial 
lawyer financially backing Amendment 2, said there are bad actors in 
every profession.

'Whenever you put money into anything, you're going to have crooks,' 
he recently told members of the Tampa Rotary Club. 'There's crooked 
lawyers; there's crooked cops; there's crooked doctors. ... I trust 
doctors. If you don't trust your doctor, vote against this.' 'Allows 
caregivers to assist patients' medical use of marijuana.' Opponents 
of Amendment 2 find troubling a lack of specifics about who may 
assist patients in using marijuana. The full text of the summary 
defines a personal caregiver as someone at least 21 who has agreed to 
help, and it adds some other restrictions.

'It doesn't have to be the person providing daily care to the 
patient,' said Bell, the former justice. 'You wonder why they made 
the amendment so broad. I haven't seen a good explanation of that.' 
Pollara, the medical marijuana advocate, notes that the state 
Department of Health, along with the Legislature, must establish 
legislation implementing the constitutional amendment.

'This is another place where our opponents are going to take a 
logical leap to say that no further restrictions will be placed on 
this and the state will implement this law in an irresponsible 
manner,' Pollara said. 'A lot of the potential users of medical 
marijuana are sick and dying and aren't able to take care of 
themselves and rely on a caretaker to do it, whether it's their 
spouse, a close friend, a son or daughter.' 'The Department of Health 
shall register and regulate centers that produce and distribute 
marijuana for medical purposes and shall issue identification cards 
to patients and caregivers.'

In The Spring Legislative session, state lawmakers approved a single 
strain of noneuphoric marijuana called 'Charlotte's web' to treat 
epilepsy and other disorders. After a series of public meetings, the 
Department of Health drew up rules creating five distributorships 
statewide and establishing qualifications for applicants.

Three nurseries already have filed legal challenges. Opponents of 
Amendment 2 say that demonstrates the difficulty the state will have 
in regulating the pot industry.

'There's going to be a lot of jockeying, lobbying for this, lobbying 
for that,' said Madelyn Butler, a Tampa obstetrician-gynecologist and 
a representative of the Florida Medical Association, which opposes 
Amendment 2. 'There's a lot of money tied up in that. A lot of people 
are going to be making a lot of money.' Butler also said it would be 
difficult to establish what a 'dose' might be. Are doctors to 
recommend how many puffs a patient should take, how many joints or 
servings of marijuana they need?

'We don't know how it's going to be written. But that legislation 
allows anybody who represents themselves as a physician to recommend 
medical marijuana, whatever that is.' Pollara again refers to the 
role of the state Department of Health and Legislature in crafting the rules.

'The language says 'register and regulate,' ' he said. 'The only 
universe in which our opponents' claims make any sense is in a 
universe in which you believe that lifelong public servants at the 
Department of Health are going to be criminally negligent in 
regulating this.' 'Applies only to Florida law. Does not authorize 
violations of federal law or any non-medical use, possession or 
production of marijuana.' Bell said the last sentence - stating that 
the amendment 'does not authorize violations of federal law' - is misleading.

'Clearly it does,' he said. It remains a violation of federal law to 
even possess marijuana.

Pollara acknowledged the two sentences were included in the ballot 
language to address 'constitutional politics.' But it also addresses 
nonmedical use.

'A caregiver taking advantage of their caregiver position to sell the 
medical marijuana that they have received legally is breaking the 
law,' he said. 'A doctor negligently issuing recommendations for 
medical marijuana is breaking the law.' That doesn't assuage 
opponents who say the measure opens the door to full-on recreational 
use for the Sunshine State, as was the case in Colorado and Washington.

So far, these are the only two states to take this step among those 
where voters have legalized medical marijuana - a total of 24 states 
concentrated in the Northeast and West, plus the District of Columbia.

Only Florida has a medical marijuana measure on the ballot Nov. 4, 
but voters in Alaska, Oregon and D.C. will decide whether to follow 
Colorado and Washington and legalize recreational marijuana.

'The people that wrote this amendment are smart people,' said Sarah 
Bascom, spokeswoman for Florida's Vote No on 2. 'If they truly wanted 
to write an amendment that did not have loopholes big enough to drive 
a truck through, I believe they would have. The question is, was it 
intentionally written this broadly? It is a full-blown legalization 
of marijuana in Florida. It will not be confined only to those that 
are truly sick.' Morgan, who while stumping for Amendment 2 has 
discussed how marijuana helped his dying father and paralyzed 
brother, dismisses this attack.

'If I wanted to do that, that's what I would have done,' he said. 
'This is an issue of compassion. Plain and simple.'
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom