BILL ANALYSIS
AJR 13
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 8, 2003
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
Dario Frommer, Chair
AJR 13 (Leno) - As Amended: March 27, 2003
SUBJECT : Medical cannabis.
SUMMARY : Urges the President and Congress of the United States
to take specified actions relating to the use of cannabis for
medicinal purposes. Specifically, this bill :
1)Urges the President and Congress to:
a)Enact legislation that secures a state's right to regulate
medical cannabis, allows patients to possess and consume
medical cannabis, and allows individuals deputized by states
and localities to cultivate and distribute medical cannabis;
b)Amend the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act
of 1970 to allow for a medical necessity defense as suggested
by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Oakland
Cannabis Buyers Cooperative (2001) 532 U.S. 483; and
c)Conduct oversight hearings on the use of Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) funds that are being used to harass,
intimidate, and prosecute Californians that use medical
cannabis.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Permits seriously ill patients and their caregivers to use
cannabis for medicinal purposes and protects licensed
physicians from prosecution or harassment by state or local
officials for recommending medical cannabis.
2)Permits the California Marijuana Research Program to be
conducted by the University of California to study the
efficacy and safety of medical marijuana.
3)Under the federal Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and
Control Act of 1970, classifies cannabis as a Schedule I Drug
with no medical use.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
AJR 13
Page 2
COMMENTS :
1)PURPOSE OF THIS RESOLUTION . According to the author, this
resolution is needed to uphold the will of the voters when
they passed Proposition 215 in 1996. The U.S. Department of
Justice and other federal agencies are using taxpayer
resources to arrest, harass, intimidate, and imprison
California citizens who are obeying California law. The
author contends that federal elected officials should remove
the conflict by amending federal statute to allow for a
medical necessity defense and amend federal statute to
recognize states' rights in this area.
2)BACKGROUND . Advocates and many health care providers assert
that marijuana use relieves suffering from serious medical
conditions including cancer, HIV/AIDS, glaucoma, and certain
neuromuscular diseases including multiple sclerosis. These
diseases and their treatments can cause constant pain,
intractable nausea, severe anorexia, and anxiety. Symptomatic
relief is often found through the use of prescription drugs,
including narcotic pain medications, anti-nausea medications,
anti-anxiety medications and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)
purified from marijuana and available as a pill (Marinol).
Some patients report that after having tried several different
prescription medications, they receive adequate relief by
smoking marijuana only.
Because the medicinal use of cannabis in the United States has
been illegal, there is little verifiable evidence of its
effects when used in the management of chronic health
conditions. In 1999, a National Academy of Sciences'
Institute of Medicine (IOM) report concluded that "there are
some limited circumstances in which we recommend smoking
marijuana for medical uses." The IOM report was the result of
two years of research funded by the White House drug policy
office to analyze all existing data regarding the therapeutic
use of marijuana. A Pew Research poll conducted in February,
found that 73% of American adults supported permitting doctors
to prescribe marijuana for their patients.
3)COMPREHENSIVE DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL ACT OF 1970 .
Marijuana is a "Schedule I" drug under the provisions of the
Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970,
because of its high potential for abuse and lack of accepted
AJR 13
Page 3
medical use. Federal law prohibits the prescription,
distribution, or possession of marijuana and other Schedule I
drugs, such as heroin and LSD, and strictly controls Schedule
II drugs like cocaine and methamphetamine.
4)PROPOSITION 215 . California voters passed Proposition 215 in
1996 to exempt from criminal laws, which otherwise prohibit
possession or cultivation of marijuana, patients and
caregivers who possess or cultivate marijuana for medical
treatment. In a federal prosecution challenging Proposition
215 (U.S. v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative), the Supreme
Court held that medical necessity is not a defense to the
Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act.
Interest in the federal government's position on Proposition
215 attracted significant attention earlier this year when Ed
Rosenthal, a California advocate for medical marijuana, was
convicted in federal court of three felony charges in
connection with plants he was cultivating for use by patients
of a San Francisco dispensary. Several news articles and
editorials suggest that Mr. Rosenthal had been unfairly
treated through the prosecution. Jurors in the case were
prohibited from considering evidence related to Proposition
215. Subsequent to the conviction, several jurors reported
that they would have voted differently had they known that Mr.
Rosenthal was cultivating marijuana under provisions of
Proposition 215 and an Oakland medicinal marijuana law.
5)PREVIOUS CALIFORNIA LEGISLATION . Prior to enactment of
Proposition 215, several bills were proposed to facilitate the
medicinal use of marijuana. SB 54 (Vasconcellos) of 1997 and
SB 1887 (Vasconcellos) of 1998 stalled in the Legislature and
SB 848 (Vasconcellos) of 1999 and SB 187 (Vasconcellos) of
2001 were vetoed by the Governor.
6)LETTER FROM THE CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE . In February
2003, 16 California Senators and 34 Assemblymembers signed a
letter urging the United States Senate and House of
Representatives to pass legislation and amend the Controlled
Substances Act as urged in this resolution. Instead of urging
that oversight hearings be conducted on the use of DEA funds,
the letter called for a cut in budget allocations for the DEA,
the U.S. Attorneys' Office, and other branches of the federal
government.
AJR 13
Page 4
7)LAWS AND PROGRAMS IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS . Since 1996, voters
in Alaska, California, Colorado, the District of Columbia,
Maine, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington have passed ballot
initiatives to remove criminal penalties for seriously ill
people who grow or possess medical marijuana. Hawaii enacted a
medical marijuana law via its state legislature in June 2000.
The federal "Compassionate Use" program supplies cannabis for
medicinal use to seven patients nationwide.
8)SUPPORT . Proponents contend that the federal government is
actively harassing and intimidating California patients and
caregivers through prosecution, and the California Legislature
should defend the will of the voters.
9)OPPOSITION . The Committee on Moral Concerns argues that the
harmful effects of marijuana are better documented than the
positive effects, and further study is needed to legitimatize
the claims of medical marijuana proponents.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Americans for Safe Access
Americans for Medical Rights
Drug Policy Alliance Network
Opposition
Committee on Moral Concerns
Analysis Prepared by : Melanie Moreno / HEALTH / (916)
319-2097