|
THANK A VET! MAKE A DONATION TODAY |
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
IT'S IN THE BREAKING NEWS SIDEBAR Thanks |
|
Posted on 10/12/2003 6:21:23 AM PDT by Wolfie
Marijuana Group Targets Vermont Legislators
Montpelier — A national group pushing a bill to legalize marijuana for medical purposes plans to target Vermont legislators next year who oppose or don’t actively support the measure.
The Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington, D.C., group that advocates decriminalizing marijuana both for medical and recreational use, is advertising for a state-wide political coordinator to help organize its efforts here.
“What we’ve seen in Vermont, as well as some other states where we’ve been working in the Legislature, is that our problem is not with public opinion,” said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. “Polls nationally show about 80 percent of people support allowing people who are seriously ill to use medical marijuana without fear of arrest. ... So our problem is a disconnect between public opinion and what’s happening in the Legislature.”
A bill legalizing medical marijuana easily passed the Democrat-controlled Vermont Senate this year on a 22-7 vote, but has languished in the House, which is under Republican control.
The bill, modeled closely after the one that passed the Vermont House last year with tri-partisan support, requires a doctor’s certification that the patient suffers from one of several specified conditions or from such diseases as AIDS and cancer.
Patients would be registered with the state Health Department; those who were rejected could appeal to a panel of three doctors appointed by the Medical Practice Board.
In addition, a person could register to be a patient’s caregiver, and the Health Department would keep the records confidential unless police needed to verify the information.
Medical marijuana users would be allowed to use the drug only at home. They or their caregivers could also grow medical marijuana in a locked indoor facility and carry it in a locked container — an effort to allay police fears about mistaken arrests.
But Republican Gov. James Douglas opposes the measure, and the bill’s prospects in the House are uncertain. It’s a reversal from 2002, when majority Republicans in the House joined Democrats and Progressives to pass the bill, only to see it blocked in the Democratic Senate.
At the time the move was viewed as a political favor for then-Gov. Howard Dean, who was courting gay groups in the early stages of his presidential run. Dean opposed legalizing medical marijuana, but AIDS activists — a key constituency in the gay community — were critical of his stance. Being forced to veto such a bill would have made Dean unpopular with them.
That dynamic — political expedience on the issue — is one of the reasons the Marijuana Policy Project is looking to influence elections, Mirken said, primarily by educating voters about what’s going on in Montpelier.
A poll commissioned by MPP in 2002 showed that 51 percent of Vermonters “strongly supported” a medical marijuana bill, with another 24 percent “somewhat supported” the measure and 22 percent opposed.
“I think the equation has been, because our side has not been particularly well organized politically, that senators didn’t see a real downside to doing the governor’s bidding last year,” Mirken said.
“This is going to make it clear there is a downside, that their constituents are going to know exactly what they did ... and if that makes some of these legislators nervous, that’s a healthy thing.”
The group is offering the statewide coordinator a yearly salary of $50,000 to $70,000, including health insurance and an optional retirement plan. The plan is to target 15 legislative races next fall, with an eye toward future elections as well.
“By targeting 15 districts in 2004, the MPP Political Fund intends to send the message that any legislator who opposes marijuana policy reform could be targeted for defeat in 2006,” the group’s Web site said.
The effort is non-partisan: Any politician who favors medical marijuana would be supported while opponents would be targeted, regardless of political affiliation.
The Vermont coordinator would also build a political organization including voter registration efforts, candidate recruitment, fund-raising and political donations. The MPP has a separate political action committee, but Mirken declined to say how much the group might be willing to spend on Vermont elections.
“You can take the fact that we’re hiring a full-time person at the salary level you saw as an indication of how serious we are about this,” he said. “We will put in a level of resources that’s necessary.”
It’s not the first time the group has been active in state races, but Vermont will be an “experiment” in intervention at a statewide level, Mirken said.
In 2002, the group spent about $4,000 on state campaigns in Maryland, including $1,000 on radio ads against state Sen. Tim Ferguson, who opposed the medical marijuana bill there. Another $6,000 in member contributions was generated, and after Ferguson was defeated in a primary the bill was signed into law this year.
Mirken didn’t claim credit for the victory.
“It was not a huge effort, but we did a little,” he said. “Nothing on the scale of what we’re looking at doing there (in Vermont).”
Professor James Gimpel, of the University of Maryland’s Department of Government, doubted MPP had much influence in the 2002 elections there.
“It was negligible,” he said. “It was not on the radar screen.”
Middlebury College political science professor Eric Davis questioned whether the group could do much better here.
“My view on this is that a single-issue organization like this, that wants to target ... incumbents who have voted the wrong way and attempt to defeat them, the likelihood they’ll be able to have a significant impact on the makeup of the Legislature is small,” he said.
“Most voters are not single-issue voters ... and this isn’t an issue that rises to the level of salience of health care, education financing or civil unions,” Davis said. “It’s not an issue that’s going to have widespread impact across the state, and it’s unlikely to mobilize intense political participation.”
Mirken said the group had no plans to target statewide officeholders at present, but hoped that the current organizing effort would “educate” officials like Douglas by its success.
The governor’s press secretary, Jason Gibbs, said his boss “welcomes the debate.”
“Vermont has had a long history of thoughtful and determined consideration of all public policy issues,” Gibbs said. “The short-term impact of an organization like this is questionable. We believe, frankly, that their efforts and their resources would be better spent at the federal level to address the concerns of the Food and Drug Administration. Without a decision from the FDA and a change in federal law, any effort they make at the state level is fruitless.”
Officials at the state’s three major parties had varying views on the Marijuana Policy Project’s plans.
“It’s an issue candidates will deal with on a individual basis,” said James Barnett, chairman of the Vermont Republican Party, whose candidates are most likely to face opposition from the MPP.
“As a party, we have great concern over the influence of illegal drugs in Vermont,” he said. “While we have great compassion for those suffering from diseases, we also recognize that (decriminalizing) illegal drugs could open up a Pandora’s box, with many negative consequences.”
“All of our candidates support that bill,” said Chris Pearson, executive director of the Vermont Progressive Party. “I think it’s fair to say the reason it passed the House two years ago was the hard work of one Progressive representative, David Zuckerman (P-Burlington).”
Pearson added, “I think it’s fair to say we would look for help from anybody who is working on issues we care about. Medical marijuana is not on the top of our list, but it’s an important commonsense issue.”
Jonathan Copans, executive director of the Vermont Democratic Party, said it appeared the group’s activities would largely end up targeting Republicans for defeat.
“From that, you could infer it will be beneficial (to Democrats),” he said. “But I think it’s easy to overplay the impact. There are plenty of other people who work on those types of issues.”
Mirken said he understood that Vermont’s two-year terms may make some politicians more anxious about voting for medical marijuana, but said the project hoped to educate them, as well, about public attitudes.
“It appears to us as if a lot of politicians have not left the 1980s, when there was real political danger in appearing ‘soft on drugs,’” he said. “The assumption is still if you take a stand on medical marijuana it’s politically dangerous. That’s not the case.”
|
THANK A VET! MAKE A DONATION TODAY |
|
|
|
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
IT'S IN THE BREAKING NEWS SIDEBAR Thanks |
|
No, the problem is a disconnect between public opinion and the truth about smoking marijuana for medical reasons. The fact that no medical organization supports smoking marijuana for medical reasons. The fact that smoking marijuana may cause more harm than good.
The ultimate goal of the MPP is legalization, and they'll use any means, including public sentiment for the sick and dying, to achieve it.
"... the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), which receives significant funding from Soros through the Drug Policy Foundation (DPF). The DPF has received $15 million from Soros in recent years, and it recently merged with the Lindesmith Center, a major project of Soros' tax-exempt Open Society Institute (OSI) in New York City. The new entity, the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), is run by Soros employee, Dr. Ethan Nadelmann. Soros, who runs offshore hedge funds, has poured at least $25 million into various narcotics decriminalization and outright legalization efforts over the past five years ..."
Executive Intelligence Review, September 20, 2002
This way, it could be playing in the backgound while you go on and on. And on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.