Friends,

Just in case you missed it, there were two outstanding columns in the Sunday, May 20, 2001, edition of the Democrat Gazette. Read them at the following links: 

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n901.a07.html 

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n902.a06.html 

The Supreme Court decision has had a significant good effect on our Arkansas campaign. We have been inundated with calls from the media. 

In Northwest Arkansas, CBS affiliate Channel 5 interviewed me for the Monday night newscast as did ABC affiliate Channel 29/40. 

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reporter Daniel Yee telephoned and interviewed me for nearly an hour in preparation for his front-page story that ran Tuesday.

I sent a press release, with copies to all of you, to all daily and weekly newspapers, all radio stations, and all television stations in the state. As yet, I do not have any feedback of what might appear in print. 

When I arrived home from work Tuesday at 5 pm, there were two messages for me. One was for a live interview with Little Rock public radio station. The other was for a live interview on KARN, which had been conducting a call in show on medical marijuana from 3 to 6 pm Tuesday. I called them back and was on the phone for nearly an hour, discussing the issue first with "Big Dave" and then with other callers. It was a prime drive-home time for a favorite Little Rock radio station, and no doubt our listening audience was in the tens of thousands. 

Also, Little Rock Channel 4 did a story -- two of our Little Rock Executive Committee members, Wilandra Dean and Delbert Lewis, were on camera -- click here to read the transcript. A BIG THANKS for these two putting together an important press event at the last minute!

I'm currently writing what I hope will be a guest column in the Dem-zette.

Please don't miss this opportunity to write letters to the editors of any newspapers in your area. This is a great chance for us to get our message out!

PS: Dan Shapiro has a tremendous article in Salon magazine on the Supreme Court ruling. There's also a new piece in that same publication by Dan Forbes. Click here to read the Shapiro piece and click here to read Dan Forbes' article.  

Denele
May 16, 2001

Supreme Court Decision Not A Problem to Arkansas Campaign -- May 14, 2001

Ruling on a California case involving de facto marijuana pharmacies, the Supreme Court today ruled that manufacture and distribution of marijuana will not be allowed even in cases of medical necessity.

"This has little impact on our effort in Arkansas," stated Denele Campbell, Executive Director of the Alliance for Reform of Drug Policy in Arkansas, Inc. "Our proposed law did not allow distribution. The concurring opinion written by Justice John Paul Stephens and joined by Justices David Souter and Ruth Ann Ginsburg, pointed out that the decision did not eliminate the medical necessity defense for seriously ill patients who need marijuana as medicine, but only in cases of distribution and cultivation."

"We know this is a complex issue," Ms. Campbell stated Monday afternoon in an interview at her home near Fayetteville. "What people need to understand is that the citizens and lawmakers of each state have the right to make state laws that differ from federal laws. States' rights remain an important part of the federal Constitution. In the nine states that have passed medical marijuana laws so far, patients will still be able to possess and grow marijuana for private use." 

"That's what our law proposes for Arkansas - that individuals with debilitating medical conditions (and their caregivers if they need any) would apply for identification cards at their local health department office. If their medical records check out, the health department would issue the cards. The cardholders would then be protected from arrest if they followed the provisions of our proposed law. 

"Under our law, qualified patients and/or their caregivers would be able to grow up to twenty seedlings or six mature plants, or possess up to six pounds immediately following a harvest for a year's supply. These amounts were decided based on the amounts of marijuana that are distributed by the federal government to eight patients who remain in a discontinued compassionate-use program. These eight patients receive 300 pre-rolled marijuana cigarettes each month from the federal marijuana farm in Mississippi." 

"Marijuana allowed for a patient's medical use could not be distributed to anyone else, under our law," continued Ms. Campbell. "Even another cardholder could not share. So for this reason, our proposed law does not conflict with the federal law against distribution." 

"I spoke with the U. S. Attorney's office in Little Rock this morning, just to clarify the line between state prosecution and federal prosecution. Generally, the federal government is focused on the big players and large quantities of drugs, including marijuana. Federal prosecutors are not going to suddenly change their policies and start going after small-time federal marijuana law offenders who are growing  or possessing so-called 'personal amounts'.

"Personal use amounts of marijuana may be as many as ten plants in someone's backyard garden or quantities of prepared marijuana. If the State of Arkansas has passed a law like our proposed law which protects sick and dying people from prosecution for these amounts, it would be an extremely unusual situation for federal prosecutors to go after the case," said Ms. Campbell. "Of course, if the cardholder is abusing his or her privileges under the state's medical marijuana law and is in fact distributing marijuana or participating in some criminal conspiracy to distribute drugs, they would be subject to prosecution, not only by federal agents, but  under existing Arkansas law. 

"The Supreme Court decision in fact has a very narrow application, pertaining to the buyer's cooperatives that were operating in California," Ms. Campbell continued. "We're sorry the Court has ruled in this manner - many patients depended on the cooperatives as a safe place to obtain a reliable supply of clean marijuana at a reasonable price. Now that the Court has ruled against the cooperatives, people who are sick and disabled will have to resort to the streets and the black market to obtain marijuana, exposing themselves to the criminal element and obtaining marijuana of questionable quality. 

"We would hope that this ruling provides a strong incentive for citizens to lobby their federal lawmakers to change marijuana out of Schedule I category, which is defined as having no medical value. Even morphine and cocaine, potentially much more dangerous than marijuana, are in Schedule II, which is defined as having limited medical and research value. Doctors can prescribe Schedule II drugs, but not Schedule I drugs. 

"Ultimately, the issue of a person using a naturally occurring substance when it helps them get well or relieves pain or eases suffering should be a matter of personal choice. In our opinion, and certainly in the opinion of many of the medical marijuana patients who currently risk arrest in Arkansas, the government doesn't have any business interfering in this decision. The government may have some role in assuring purity of a substance meant for human ingestion, but beyond that, we believe the government oversteps its authority in prohibiting marijuana for medical use.

"Patients are routinely prescribed drugs which can cause severe side effects and death. Annually, prescription drugs cause approximately 100,000 deaths per year, taken as directed. There has never been a death attributed to marijuana - it is a non-toxic substance. 

"But in this case, the Supreme Court made its ruling based on current federal law. What people may forget is that federal law allowed medical use of marijuana up until 1937. It was routinely prescribed for over 100 ailments. Laws can change, and we hope the federal law changes soon. In the meantime, we will continue to gather signatures in the hopes of placing our proposed law before the state's  voters in November 2002.