During last week's committee hearing, the Pioneer Press's Chris Snowbeck reported that Senate medical marijuana bill author Scott Dibble (DFL-Minneapolis) used the word "alternative treatment centers" rather than "dispensaries" and "medical cannabis" in order to blunt some of the misunderstandings of the purpose of the legislation.
Judging by the talking points against dispensaries (and confusion about the ability of conventional pharmacies to dispense any cannabis-derived medicine) shared by Representative Steve Drazkowski that we shared in Draz throws stones in cannabis fight while dazed and confused about Schedule I drug sales, we can readily understand the thoughtful state senator's insistence on precise language.
And we've found another legislator whose suspicion of the dispensary system (and evocation of pharmacies) underscores the wisdom behind Dibble's caution. Senator Scott Newman (R-Hutchinson) has bad things to say about the distribution system that federal drug laws impose on the delivery of medical cannabis.
In Urdahl 'more open' to medical marijuana, Lithcfield Independent-Review editor Andrew Broman reports:
Both Urdahl and Sen. Scott Newman, R-Hutchinson, cited opposition from law enforcement as one of the reasons they oppose legalizing medical marijuana. Newman said he would want the Minnesota Board of Pharmacy to investigate the merits and drawbacks of medical marijuana before he reconsidered his opposition.
He said he opposes allowing dispensaries, similar to the types used in some western states, for distributing the drug. “I’m not in favor of dispensary system because (legalization advocates) think the ultimate goal is to lead to recreational use,” he said.
Newman said he would be more likely to support legislation that allowed medical patients to take marijuana through methods other than smoking, such as pill form or vapor. “I’ve been told that marijuana can be synthesized,” Newman said.
Call it gateway retail--and never mind the reason that alternative treatment centers or dispensaries are required for the sale of medical cannabis.
Once again, it's time to turn to WCCO TV (aka CBS Minnesota) reporting on the issue in February 2014 in a "Good Question" feature.
In Good Question: Why Can’t Pharmacies Sell Medical Marijuana?, Heather Brown reported:
A Star Tribune Minnesota Poll out Tuesday found that a slight majority – 51 percent — of Minnesotans favor legalizing medical marijuana. Already, 20 other states allow it, but patients must buy it through shops and dispensaries.
So, why can’t pharmacies sell medical marijuana?
“That’s a difficult question,” said Heather Azzi, director of Minnesotans for Compassionate Care, a group that’s been working to legalize medical marijuana in Minnesota for a decade. “The problem is a political one.”
In 1970, Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act, which labeled marijuana as a Schedule I substance.
The Justice Department defines Schedule I drugs as having “no currently accepted medical use and high potential for abuse.” It’s the highest classification for a controlled substance, right alongside heroin. In recent Congressional testimony Michael Botticelli, the deputy director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, indicates that federal opinion might not change anytime soon.
“The Department of Justice’s responsibility to enforce the CSA (Controlled Substances Act) remains unchanged,” Botticelli said before the House Oversight Committee’s Government Operations subpanel on Feb. 4.
All doctors and pharmacists in the U.S. have to be licensed by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
“If a pharmacist or physician were to prescribe or to dispense marijuana, they could lose that registration with the federal government and would no longer be able to prescribe any controlled substance,” Azzi said.
In almost all cases, drugs sold in pharmacies must be FDA approved. Marijuana’s classification as a Schedule I controlled substance prevents significant research from even allowing that to happen. . . .
Read the rest at WCCO.
The Senate Rules and Administration Committee will hear the Dibble bill this afternoon.
Photo: Scott Newman doesn't like dispensaries as he feels they're gateway retail for fullblown recreational pot sales.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via mail (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or paypal:
Comments