Pubdate: Sun, 01 Mar 2015
Source: Tampa Bay Times (FL)
Copyright: 2015 St. Petersburg Times
Contact: http://www.sptimes.com/letters/
Website: http://www.tampabay.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/419
Note: Named the St. Petersburg Times from 1884-2011.
Author: Stephen Nohlgren
Page: P3

SMOKING OUT A SOLUTION BEFORE '16

Medical Marijuana

MOST FLORIDIANS FAVOR medical marijuana of some kind. A flamboyant 
Orlando lawyer, children with seizures and a presidential election 
have seen to that.

What type of system Florida might adopt - and when - remains a moving target.

Attorney John Morgan's United for Care group has launched another 
constitutional amendment campaign for 2016, after falling just shy 
last year of the 60 percent required for passage. The Legislature, 
which took baby steps last session with non-euphoric pot, will 
consider a more extensive system this year, with Republican lawmakers 
leading the charge. Adding to political pressure is next year's 
general election, where Florida could determine the presidency. 
Political observers say the prospect of a new constitutional 
amendment on that ballot poses a potential double whammy for 
conservative opponents of medical marijuana. Younger, more Democratic 
voters who turn out in presidential years could boost a pot 
amendment's chances of passage. And a new pot amendment that stirs up 
the youth vote could help put a Democrat in the White House.

'How many Republican voters are going to make this the No. 1 or No. 2 
issue, pro or con? Probably not a lot," says Kevin Hill, political 
science professor at Florida International University. 'But for some 
Democratic-leaning voters, sure - younger voters, or people who are 
sick and disabled and we have a lot of those people in Florida." 
Given Florida's typically thin presidential voting margins, 
Republicans may try to head off a new amendment by passing medical 
marijuana legislation this year.

'If they think an amendment is going to come automatically close to 
60 percent," Hill said, 'they will probably do something to keep it 
off the ballot." Susan MacManus, political scientist at the 
University of South Florida, agrees. United for Care's new proposed 
amendment closed 'loopholes' that worried some voters last year, she 
said. That makes passage more likely while a Florida U.S. Senate seat 
and the presidency are up for grabs. An expensive medical marijuana 
fight, she said, 'would just be draining away money from two very 
contentious races that neither party wants to lose." Twenty-three 
states and the District of Columbia now allow marijuana possession 
for medical purposes. Still, the prospect that Florida might endorse 
a full-fledged medical marijuana system represents a remarkable 
political and cultural shift. Republicans dipped their toes in the 
water last session by approving a limited system designed to help 
children with severe epilepsy. It allowed only non-smoked pot with 
low levels of THC. Implementation is still months away.

This session, some Republicans are ready to push further. Sen. Jeff 
Brandes, R-St. Petersburg, has introduced Senate Bill 528, which 
would set up a more traditional medical marijuana system. Patients 
could smoke marijuana and it could contain high levels of THC.

The Brandes bill contains more restrictions than United for Care's 
current proposed amendment. Among other things, it would require 
physicians to have treated patients for at least 90 days before 
certifying them for pot use. It empowers county commissioners to 
establish the number and locations for dispensaries within their jurisdiction.

The amendment includes provisions for debilitating conditions where a 
doctor thinks the benefits of pot outweigh the risks.

The Brandes bill lists specific diseases and conditions. 'This is an 
issue Florida needs to resolve," Brandes said last month. 'I have 
asked the Senate president, House speaker and governor to keep an 
open mind. We all prefer that this be in the statutes rather than the 
Constitution." HB 683, filed by Republican Reps. Greg Steube of 
Sarasota and John Wood of Bradenton, would impose more restrictions. 
Only terminal illnesses and eight specific diseases could qualify a 
patient. The marijuana could not be smoked.

Under both the House and Senate bills, dispensaries would have to 
post a $5 million performance bond, revocable if they break the rules.

The biggest difference in the two bills relates to severe and 
persistent pain. The Senate bill includes it as a qualifying 
diagnosis if the physician attests that the patient has exhausted 
other reasonable treatment options.

The House bill would not allow chronic pain as a qualifying 
diagnosis. This tracks principles recently outlined by the Florida 
Sheriff's Association, which said it could not support legislation 
that included the pain diagnosis.

Chronic pain is the sweet spot - and a potential flaw - of a medical 
marijuana system. Most states include it as a qualifying diagnosis. 
In some, more than 90 percent of patients list it as a reason they 
need pot. The worry is that pain can be easy to fake. Florida's 
sordid history with prescription pill mills remains fresh in the 
minds of people who worry about pot. On the other hand, people with 
chronic pain often respond poorly to prescription painkillers. They 
build up tolerance and can become addicted. Marijuana can be an 
effective substitute, or at least help patients reduce their reliance 
on narcotics. A study published last year in the Journal of the 
American Medical Association reported a 25 percent reduction in 
predicted prescription drug overdoses in medical marijuana states.

United for Care would drop the 2016 amendment drive if legislators 
approve some kind of 'comprehensive' medical marijuana system this 
session, executive director Ben Pollara said. But excluding patients 
with chronic pain is a dealbreaker, he said. 'Too many people would 
not be able to get the help they need." Legislation needs to draw a 
line between medical and recreational use, said Pasco County Sheriff 
Chris Nocco. But beyond that, 'it's imperative we get something 
passed" to head off another amendment vote.

'If we don't find a solution, we are going to end up with something a 
lot of people are going to be unhappy with."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom