03/23/2005 01:30 PM Senate HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB74 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 74 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 23, 2005
1:39 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Fred Dyson, Chair
Senator Gary Wilken, Vice Chair
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Lyda Green
Senator Kim Elton
Senator Donny Olson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 74
"An Act making findings relating to marijuana use and
possession; relating to marijuana and misconduct involving a
controlled substance; and providing an effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 74
SHORT TITLE: CRIMES INVOLVING MARIJUANA/OTHER DRUGS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/21/05 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/05 (S) HES, JUD, FIN
03/21/05 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/21/05 (S) Heard & Held
03/21/05 (S) MINUTE(HES)
03/23/05 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
DEAN GUANELI
Department of Law
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 74.
DR. DAVID MURRAY, Special Assistant
White House Office of National Drug Control Policy
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.
Washington DC, 20500
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 74.
DR. FIELDER
Licensed Clinical Psychologist
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 74.
BILL HOGAN, Director
Division of Behavior Health
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110601
Juneau, AK 99801-0601
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 74.
CHRISTY WILLARD, Deputy Director
Division of Behavioral Health
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110601
Juneau, AK 99801-0601
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 74.
BARBARA BRINK, Director
Alaska Public Defender Agency
900 W. 5th Ave.
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2090
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
JIM GARHART
Wasilla, Alaska 99629
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
JOHN FAIRLEIGH
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
LINDA RONAN
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
MAKO HAGGERTY
Homer, Alaska 99603
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
DAVE SWARTHOUT
Homer, Alaska 99603
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
DR. BOB JOHNSON
Kodiak, Alaska 99615
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
FRANK TURNER
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
DIRK NELSON
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 74.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR FRED DYSON called the Senate Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 1:39:12 PM.
Present were Senator Gary Wilken and Chair Fred Dyson.
SB 74-CRIMES INVOLVING MARIJUANA/OTHER DRUGS
1:39:12 PM
CHAIR DYSON announced SB 74 to be up for consideration.
DEAN GUANELI, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Department of
Law, introduced Dr. Murray and Dr. Fielder.
1:40:53 PM
DR. DAVID MURRAY, White House Office of National Drug Control
Policy (ONDCP), stated he earned a PhD from the University of
Chicago and has served on the White House ONDCP for three years
as a special assistant to the director of that office. His area
of expertise is principally scientific, technical, and medical
research in drug related studies that have an analytic focus. He
drew attention to scientific literature that has increased
awareness of the considerable health risks associated with
cannabis consumption. He said the literature, which includes
some of the highest quality medical literature in the world,
shows how pervasive, consequential, and striking the health
consequences of cannabis consumption really is, particularly for
young people.
1:43:16 PM
The literature indicates a general falling of the average age of
marijuana initiation as well as a growing number of cases where
children initiate use as early as 9 to 12 years of age. Children
are particularly susceptible to the effects of marijuana because
many of the cognitive elements of their brains are still
developing.
The literature indicates that the strength of marijuana, as
measured by the content of its psychoactive ingredient, tetra-
hydro-cannibinol (THC), has increased considerably in recent
years. The elevated THC content of modern marijuana makes it,
qualitatively, a different sort of drug than that which was used
in the 1960s and 1970s. Recent literature shows evidence of
strong genetic susceptibilities to marijuana-induced psychotic
episodes among all segments of the population.
The health risks strongly associated with marijuana consumption
are memory and cognitive function impairment, motivational
change, health risks through the inhalation of the smoke itself,
and a serious risk of increasing one's chances of developing
schizophrenia, hallucinations, and other psychotic episodes,
particularly for youth that are inclined to psychotic episodes.
Marijuana is a toxic substance that produces withdrawal and
addiction. More than 60 percent of the need for the treatment of
drug dependency in the United States is attributed to marijuana.
There are currently more people under the age of 18 in treatment
of marijuana abuse than for alcohol abuse.
1:47:25 PM
There are several factors that make Alaska particularly
susceptible to widespread marijuana use these include: a
vulnerable Native population, a general population that is
skewed towards a young, risk-taking demographic, and a rural
population with less access to rehabilitation facilities.
CHAIR DYSON asked the amount of money spent on marijuana.
DR. MURRAY responded the US population spends about 65 billion
on illegal drugs annually and it is estimated that 10-20% of
that is spent on marijuana. He noted many social costs
associated with widespread marijuana use.
1:50:07 PM
SENATOR WILKEN asked Dr. Murray to restate his position and
qualifications.
DR. MURRAY said:
I currently serve as a special assistant to the
director of the ONDCP. My specialty is reviewing
literature, research findings and scientific studies
with regard to drug use and abuse, as well as other
issues that come before us in terms of the findings in
the supply and demand issues of illegal drug use. My
background is a PhD from the University of Chicago. I
was a university professor for a number of years and I
have been in Washington for over a decade looking at
the intersection of science and policy.
CHAIR DYSON thanked Dr. Murray for his efforts and remarked that
he had taken notice of his comments on the particular challenges
facing Alaska.
DR. MURRAY replied he had looked at comparative data, which
shows that Alaska has an unfortunate standing as an area where
there is a high prevalence of the use of many illicit drugs.
1:53:52 PM
DR. FIELDER said:
I am a California-licensed clinical psychologist and I
have been diagnosing and treating individuals with
drug addictions in general, and marijuana addictions
in particular, inpatient and outpatient based, for
about 20 years. For over two years, I was a chief
psychologist at the chemical dependency inpatient
treatment facility at St. Mary's Hospital and Medical
Center in San Francisco. During my ten years on the
staff of the medical center, I also held other
positions such as the director of training and
psychology and outpatient director at the department
of psychiatry.
DR. FIELDER mentioned the medical center is only two blocks away
from the infamous Height-Ashbury district in San Francisco, the
place where marijuana gained much of its popularity and mystique
back in the 1960s and 1970s. He urged the committee not to base
their decisions on the marijuana mythology that has evolved
since the flower era. He said that he has encountered an
increasing body of evidence that shows that marijuana is far
from a benign drug.
1:55:42 PM
DR. FIELDER said marijuana use throughout the United States is
reaching epidemic proportions. Arguments saying that marijuana
is a harmless drug are intellectually dishonest at best and
there are two well-established, easily verifiable facts, which
show this. The first is that a large and growing number of
people are in treatment programs for marijuana use. The second
is that the Marijuana Anonymous organization is rapidly
proliferating throughout The United States and other countries.
Between 1992 and 2002, the admission rate to treatment programs
for marijuana abuse and addiction almost tripled in the United
States. This month the Office of National Drug Control Policy
claimed the increase was due to the increased potency of
marijuana.
Marijuana proponents have examined these numbers and claim that
the increase in the participation in treatment programs could be
caused by any number of reasons including more referrals from
attorneys and the criminal justice system, increased funding for
various programs and more efficient data collection and
processing techniques.
Their interpretation misses the forest for the trees, because
the numbers reveal there are a significant number of people in
this country that have a big enough problem with marijuana to
warrant treatment. It is well known that many people don't seek
treatment and thus the people in treatment could just be a small
representation of the overall number of people affected.
Statistics reveal the overall treatment admissions in Alaska for
marijuana as a primary substance of abuse have risen roughly
600% since 1976. Approximately half of the admissions are youth
between the ages of 12 and 17. Admission records also reveal the
reality that more teens are in treatment for marijuana
dependence than for alcohol and all other drugs combined.
The other telling fact is that there are 29 states and five
countries in additional to the United States that have Marijuana
Anonymous organizations. In Los Angeles alone there are 27
chapters serving individuals with marijuana abuse and addiction
problems. Marijuana Anonymous is modeled after Alcoholics
Anonymous. He read the following statement from them:
Who are the marijuana addicts? We who are marijuana
addicts know the answer to this question. Marijuana
controls our lives! We lose interest in all else; our
dreams go up in smoke. Ours is a progressive illness
often leading us to addictions to other drugs,
including alcohol. Our lives, our thinking, and our
desires center around marijuana - scoring it, dealing
it, and finding ways to stay high.
2:01:28 PM
DR. FIELDER said anyone who questions whether marijuana is a
dangerous substance need only to talk to someone who has ever
had a serious problem with the drug. The Institute of Medicine
of the National Academy of Science has reported the following:
Thirty-two percent of people who try tobacco become
dependent, as do 23 percent who try heroin, 17 percent
who try cocaine, 15 percent who try alcohol, and 9
percent who try marijuana.
If these numbers are correct, what we are seeing in treatment
programs and in the justice system is just the tip of the
iceberg. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and
Health, 95 million American's age 12 and older have tried
marijuana at least once. If only 5 percent of them became
dependent, it means that there are almost 5 million Americans
who are dependant on marijuana.
2:04:01 PM
Many of these individuals are children who are exposed to
marijuana when their parents use the drug. Often times such
children are too immature to discern the risk of smoking
marijuana even if their parents attempt an honest education. He
made the following summary statements:
The picture that I get from the emerging statistics on
the impact of marijuana on individuals, families,
communities and crimes rates, frankly, looks pretty
scary. Even if there are errors in the collecting and
reporting of the data, which there always are, even a
conservative interpretation of the data suggests that
we have an insidious epidemic at hand. Even though
the cause and effect relationship in marijuana in
school, work, family, social and crime problems is not
fully understood, the drug is woven in the fabric of
our society and cannot help but contribute, in a
negative way, to the growing numbers of problems that
we see. I think that it is disingenuous to say, and
some people do, that there is no evidence that
marijuana does not cause crime or violence or school
or work problems. Cause and effect is not simple and
direct with regard to this issue.
It is being reported that marijuana with a higher
level of THC potency is becoming more available to
consumers in the marketplace. I have heard that the
sample average in Alaska is about 14 percent with
individual samples testing as high as 17 percent THC.
What that means, in terms of all of the issues that
pertain to marijuana, is far from clear at this point
in time, but it can't be a good thing because there is
no way for users to determine potency without actually
trying the product. First-time users can be blindsided
just as easily as chronic users and, if alcohol can be
used as an analogy, one can at least be aware of the
relative amounts of alcohol in products because of
labeling requirements. No one would mistake the
alcohol in an aperitif for 151-proof rum. Like alcohol
however, marijuana is still a dangerous drug
regardless of its potency. We are less open to the
fact that certain people are vulnerable to the effects
that drugs like marijuana, alcohol, cocaine, et cetera
provide and become dependent, chronic users.
2:06:30 PM
Marijuana is, in my opinion, a human problem whose
immediate and personal benefits are soon lost when the
person becomes addicted. I cannot tell you how many
times I have heard the story, from patients, that the
initial pleasure of marijuana soon gave way to a
nightmare of craving, dependence, and spiraling out-
of-control problems. Like the drug absinthe, before it
was finally banned in France during the early 1900's,
marijuana is having a growing impact on the psychology
and health of the United States. In my opinion the
issue is not whether marijuana is not a dangerous and
addictive drug, but what can be done about it. I think
that it is a problem of Alaska and the rest of the
United States in general.
2:07:56 PM
CHAIR DYSON asked Dr. Fielder if he had seen reports that are
contrary to the information that he had cited.
DR. FIELDER responded the only such information that he has seen
have been anecdotal reports.
CHAIR DYSON asked whether it was true that the social cost of
marijuana is greater than that of alcohol.
DR. FIELDER said that was Doctor Murray's claim.
CHAIR DYSON asked the number of states that have outlawed
marijuana.
DR. FIELDER did not know.
CHAIR DYSON asked Dr. Fielder about the symptoms he typically
finds among patients.
DR. FIELDER responded they typically exhibit a very wide range
of symptoms including anxiety, paranoia and hallucinations. He
said in outpatient psychiatry and emergency rooms at St. Mary's
he has seen full-blown psychosis, high anxiety and serious
personal neglect.
CHAIR DYSON asked Dr. Fielder to comment on the apparent
discrepancy between the correlation of marijuana use and
violence and the common perception that marijuana has a
pacifying effect on its users. He asked if any researchers are
positing a cause and effect relationship between marijuana use
and violent behavior.
DR. FIELDER responded there is defiantly some kind of
relationship between marijuana use and violent behavior.
DR. MURRAY said there are two pieces of literature that strongly
suggest an association between marijuana and violence. One is a
correlation found in school and household-based surveys of young
people which shows that frequent marijuana users are four to six
times more likely then non-users to be involved in property
crime and violence.
The second account is a data set called the Arrestee Drug Abuse
Monitoring System (ADAM), which represents data derived from
urine samples from people who have been arrested, largely in big
cities, from any crime. This data shows an extraordinary
percentage of these people have illegal substances in their
blood at the time of arrest and the leading drug is marijuana.
Depending of the city, 40-50 percent of arrested males were
marijuana positive at the time of their arrest.
While it is difficult to establish the cause and effect
relationship between marijuana use and violence, there is
clearly an issue of marijuana's effects on judgment, there is an
issue of dependency as a contributing factor to criminal
behavior and there is an issue of the poly-drug effects that
occur when marijuana is combined with other drugs, particularly
alcohol.
2:14:39 PM
CHAIR DYSON asked whether Americans are spending more money on
marijuana than alcohol.
DR. MURRAY did not know. He said there is a greater need for
treatment among people under the age of 18 for marijuana abuse
than for alcohol abuse.
2:17:38 PM
BILL HOGAN, Director of the Division of Behavior Health (DBH),
said that prior to undertaking his current position he was the
executive director of Life Quest, the community mental health
facility in Wasilla. He has 30 years of experience as a
clinician, supervisor, administrator, and consultant. The DBH
agrees with the assertion of Dr. Murray and Dr. Fielder that
children who use marijuana before the age of 14 have an
increased likelihood to be drug dependant.
The division recognizes that children who use marijuana before
14 have a smaller chance of graduating from high-school, an
increased likelihood of being involved in delinquent or deviant
behavior and an increased likelihood of having multiple sexual
partners which, in turn, puts them at a higher risk of
contracting HIV.
The state spends about $15 million a year on substance abuse
treatment. One third of the individuals treated in the substance
abuse system are treated for a primary or secondary diagnosis of
cannabis abuse or cannabis dependence.The division recognizes
that cannabis use has a direct impact on mental health problems
such as depression, anxiety, personality disorders, suicidal
ideation and in some cases, suicidal behavior.
CHAIR DYSON asked Mr. Hogan to define suicidal ideation.
MR. HOGAN responded suicidal ideation is thinking about suicide
but not actually acting on the thoughts.
2:19:54 PM
CHRISTY WILLARD, Deputy Director of the Division of Behavioral
Health, supported SB 74. Before she assumed her current position
she was the director of drug and alcohol services for the
Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation for 17 years. THC content of
marijuana in the 1960s and 1970s was, on the national average,
less than 1 percent. Today the national average is 6.4 percent,
and the Alaskan average is 14 percent. The increasing potency of
THC may explain the increasing rate of conversion of casual
users to dependant users.
The Journal of the American Medical Association asserted that,
although the rate of marijuana usage has changed little in the
past decade, the rate of abuse and dependence has increased by
about 5.4 percent. According to the Diagnostic Statistical
Manuel of Mental Disorders (DSM-MD) used by physicians to
diagnose drug dependence and abuse, one is cannabis dependant if
they satisfy three or more of the following criteria; tolerance,
withdrawal symptoms, the expenditure of significant amounts of
time seeking and using the drug, marijuana related problems at
work, school, family life or recreation or persistent use
despite an awareness of physical or psychological effects.
According to the DSM-MD, one abuses marijuana if they satisfy
one of the following criteria; diminished school or work
performance, persistence in performing dangerous activities such
as driving while under the influence of marijuana, experiencing
legal problems, or family conflict.
2:25:33 PM
The common tendency of people to misunderstand and trivialize
the effects of marijuana tends to affect attitudes toward the
relative risk of its use. A national survey on drug use and
health conducted in 2004 shows that one's perceived risk of
marijuana use influences one's willingness to try the drug.
Statistically, Alaskans are in the top percent in the nation for
marijuana use and, not surprisingly, we generally report that we
perceive a low risk associated with marijuana use.
2:27:22 PM
Children often adopt their parent's attitudes towards various
risky behaviors. According to a 1998 State of Adolescent Health
Report on Alaska, adolescents whose parents used marijuana were
3.5 times more to use marijuana than children whose parents did
not use it frequently. According to the report, only 5.4 percent
of children who perceived their parents as strongly disapproving
of marijuana used the drug themselves while 28.7 percent of
children who perceived their parents as neither disagreeing nor
approving of marijuana used it themselves.
2:29:45 PM
Parental use also increases a child's access to the drug.
According to a national survey, 53 percent of child respondents
whose parents use the drug claimed that marijuana is easy to
obtain, and 48 percent of those respondents got their marijuana
from home. Thirteen percent of them got it from a family member
or relative.
A 2003 Alaska Youth Risk Behavioral Survey showed that one in
eight children reported using marijuana before the age of
thirteen. A more recent state survey of the Northwest Artic
Borough showed that 10 percent of the middle school participants
reported using marijuana before the age of eleven. Alaskan youth
are at a higher risk of using marijuana than those of the
national population and Alaskan Native youth are at a greater
risk than non-native youth. About 70 percent of Alaska Native
youth that have responded to various surveys have reported using
marijuana as opposed to about 41 percent of non-Native youth.
In 2001, approximately half of the admissions to marijuana
treatment programs in the state were for youth between the age
of 12 and 17 and over a third were Alaskan Natives. Compared to
the national average, Alaska Natives are three times more likely
to use marijuana.
2:33:23 PM
Between 1992 and 2002 marijuana surpassed alcohol as the number
one drug causing young people to seek admission to treatment
programs. In 1992, 56 percent of children admitted to treatment
were admitted for alcohol while 23 percent were admitted for
marijuana. Today, 20 percent were admitted for alcohol and 64
percent were admitted for marijuana.
MS. WILLARD said about 69.2 percent of the adult males arrested
for domestic violence in Anchorage in 2002 tested positive for
marijuana. While the claim cannot be made that marijuana has a
causational link to violence, this statistic seems to conflict
with the commonly held notion that marijuana pacifies its users.
In her experience as a treatment provider, marijuana or alcohol
does not pacify its users.
Marijuana reduces one's driving ability by decreasing one's
reaction time, distorting time and distance perceptions, causing
sleepiness, and impairing one's motor skills and ability to
concentrate. She has witnessed several instances in which
alcoholics in the early stages of recovery turn to marijuana as
a safe high and then relapse into alcohol use while under the
influence of marijuana.
2:35:33 PM
CHAIR DYSON asked Ms. Willard if she has seen many cases in
which marijuana was used to entice young people into sexual
exploitation.
MS. WILLARD has encountered many cases in which marijuana was
used to entice boys and girls into sexual exploitation.
MR. HOGAN said 63 percent of the Alaska Natives in the state
treatment system with a primary diagnosis of alcohol dependence
also have a secondary diagnosis of marijuana dependence.
CHAIR DYSON remarked the suicide rate among young Native Alaskan
males is four or five times the national average. He asked if
there have been any studies directed towards the affects of
marijuana with regard to the suicide rate of young Alaska Native
males.
MR. HOGAN said there has been a study that has directly linked
marijuana to suicide, but he has yet to hear of any such study
directed towards the effects of young Alaska Native males in
particular.
2:39:02 PM
MR. GUANELI said a study has shown that five percent of pregnant
women in Alaska use marijuana, whereas the national average is
three percent. He said his department believes that marijuana
use affects a developing fetus.
2:41:54 PM
BARBARA BRINK, Director of the Alaska Public Defender Agency.
said:
The testimony today has been that there is no medical
evidence, literature, or research that supports
opposing principles. Unfortunately I am not a doctor,
I am not a psychologist, but I have tried to keep up
with the literature of the harmful effects of
marijuana. I have found that there is a lot of
literature and research out there that makes the
conclusions that are listed in the beginning of the
bill somewhat problematic. For example, on page 2,
paragraph 2, it says that there is evidence that
marijuana has addictive properties similar to heroin.
Frankly, all of the research that I could find on the
addictive qualities of popular drugs puts marijuana at
the very bottom and nicotine at the very top, and
heroin, cocaine, alcohol, and even caffeine ahead of
marijuana.
I would suggest that the literature you have been
provided contains a lot of research that has been done
by people who have a stake in an outcome, such as
those supporting federal drug policy in the United
States. There is certainly a lot of research out there
that comes to a different conclusion. With regards to
subparagraph 5 on page 2, it says, 'A high percentage
of adults arrested in this state for domestic violence
tested positive for marijuana at the time of arrest.'
The pharmacological aspects of testing are so
sophisticated that we can now detect marijuana in
someone who hasn't used it for a month. So while there
might be a correlation between use at some point in
time, there certainly doesn't seem to be any causative
effect regarding violence.
I have a good book that I have read, in case anyone is
interested in going beyond the binder, Mitch
Earleywine wrote a book called Understanding
Marijuana, a New Look at the Scientific Evidence
published by Oxford University Press. Dr. Earleywine
received his PhD from Indiana and he is the director
of clinical training of psychology at the University
of Southern California. He, frankly, finds no
correlation between the research literature and the
findings that there is some causality with violence.
Similarly, he talked about whether there is a
correlation between marijuana consumption and using it
as a starting point for the use of other hard drugs.
Again he found that any correlation is negligible. He
also finds that long-term exposure to cannabis
probably does not affect growth and intellectual
function. I appreciate that you have been given a lot
of scientific material, but I don't think that there
is any consensus for universality in the scientific
community about the very issues that you are trying to
make factual findings.
2:45:30 PM
I would like to point out some of the large policy
implications. You say in paragraph 14 that criminal
penalties for marijuana possession and education
efforts are effective at reducing marijuana use.
Frankly I don't have any idea where that is coming
from. Most of the data that I have looked at says that
approximately one-third of all Americans have tried
marijuana at one time or another and there are 200-300
million people world wide who have tried it, but less
than five percent of those people use the drug on a
weekly basis.
Since 1973 we have really tried winning this war on
drugs by using the criminal justice system to affect
people's behavior. In 1973 there were about 300,000
arrests for drug law violations. By 2003 that number
had risen to 1,600,000. Of these arrests, 80 percent
were just for possession and only 20 percent were for
the sale and manufacture of drugs. So even though we
all think that the war on drugs targets drug smugglers
and kingpins and is effective in reducing the
availability, such a high degree of arrests for simple
possession indicates a couple of things; that we are
not getting at the sources of the drugs and two, that
our policy regarding locking these people up is really
not having any effect. One of the witnesses testified
earlier that the rate of marijuana consumption has not
changed over the last ten years.
I question our desire to use the criminal justice
system to try and decrease the use of marijuana among
our young people. I think that the consequences of
what we are proposing in this bill are very, very
serious. For example, Section 3 raises from a low
level misdemeanor to a B level felony the delivery of
any amount of a schedule 6A controlled substance,
including marijuana, to someone who is under 21. It
used to matter what the age of the person who
delivered was, but under this bill it doesn't even
matter. So you could have a 16-year-old passing a
joint to a 20 year old and that person is guilty of
committing a class B felony. A class B felony, as we
know from the recent Blakely bill is now going to get
somebody at least a year in jail. That seems like a
very harsh and punitive reaction given the degree of
the offence.
We were discussing how marijuana may have a different
affect on the adolescent brain because it is not fully
developed. So too do these studies show that the
ongoing development of the adolescent mind leaves
someone of that age to not really understand the
consequences of their decisions. So we are taking that
in one respect and finding it important in deciding
our drug policy, but we are not taking it into account
when we develop our punishment policy.
This bill makes possession of over four ounces of
marijuana a C-felony, whereas before you had to
possess over a pound. It makes it an A-misdemeanor for
possession of anything over an ounce where previously
it was half a pound. We have created all these new
offences as well, for possessing marijuana as a
passenger of a car, even though there is no evidence
that the person has used it or had anything other than
possession while he was a passenger. I don't
understand what public concerns we have there. You can
also be charged as a driver if you knew your passenger
possesses marijuana.
I feel that we are getting very sucked into addressing
how we can punish people, how we can label people, and
how we can turn people into felons, but we are not
really addressing whether any of that is effective in
changing behavior. I would much prefer a bill that is
focused on education and prevention efforts instead of
trying the same old song of locking people up and
letting them go and expecting it to have some sort of
positive effect.
CHAIR DYSON asked Ms. Brink whether she had defended many who
were brought to court of marijuana charges.
MS. BRINK responded she had, back in the early 1980s when she
was doing misdemeanor cases. Her organization defended about 500
people on misdemeanor charges throughout the state last year.
SENATOR WILKEN asked whether she was the Director of the Public
Defender Agency.
MS. BRINK said yes.
SENATOR WILKEN asked whether her testimony was made as the
Director of The Public Defender Agency or if it was just a
personal observation.
MS. BRINK said:
It is as the Director of the Public Defender Agency
talking about criminalizing new behavior, talking
about using this as a method to change behavior. It is
important to me to know what our state is spending its
money on in the criminal justice system and I think
that if we have learned anything from what has
happened in other states, its that when drug laws
increase the penalties, increase the punishment,
increase the jail sentences, what we have found in a
lot of places is that the expenses exceed any
benefits.
Recently the citizens of California initiated a
proposition that would require first offender, drug
offenders to be offered an opportunity of treatment
and rehabilitation first before they wind up with a
criminal record and a permanent impediment to their
future employment. I am just trying to help the State
of Alaska develop a good, sound drug policy based on
things that we have seen happen already in other
states.
2:52:05 PM
CHAIR WILKEN said:
Thank you Barbara. I guess I wish that you would have
answered that the other way. For years I have wondered
why the public defender agency budget grows at
hundreds, this year $800,000 per year and why, when we
have flat population in Alaska, the public defender
agency outstrips in growth many agencies that we deal
with here. I think that your testimony, with all due
respect sheds some light on that. I would think, in
your position Barbara, that you of all people should
be neutral in these kinds of issues, but what you have
just said to me on behalf of the Public Defender
Agency is that anyone who happens to come to you with
a marijuana charge is being maligned by the system.
It seems to me that you have said by your testimony
you're innocent and I am going to make sure that you
stay innocent just because of your personal views. I
am really disappointed by your testimony and not only
disappointed but surprised and curious. It's some of
the most amazing testimony that I have had in my nine
years. We will just keep that in mind, but I am
shocked.
2:54:20 PM
JIM GARHART, Wasilla, said the courts have made their position
very clear in the recent ruling in the Ravin case as well as in
the decisions in McNeil, Noy and Crocker. SB 74 is an attempt to
override the courts in a way that conflicts with the intent
behind the division of powers within the United States
Government. There are many statements in the legislative
findings that cause him great concern. He quoted the following
from page 1591 the MERC manual:
Even daily smokers do not develop obstructive airway
disease. Pulmonary carcinoma has not been reported in
persons who smoke only marijuana, possibly because
less smoke is inhaled than during cigarette smoking.
He said the term auto-titration refers to the tendency of users
to smoke less marijuana when they perceive that it is strong and
remarked that given this tendency, the increased potency of
modern marijuana may actually have health benefits since it
involves inhaling less smoke to achieve the same dose.
MR. GARHART addressed earlier discussion about the correlation
between violence and marijuana with the following quote from the
MERC manual:
...tests that identify an inactive metabolite,
identify use only, not dysfunction. The smoker may be
free of the drug effect after the urine is tested. The
tests can detect extremely small amounts and so is of
little value in identifying the pattern of use.
MR. GARHART said line 9 on page 2 says, "The main psychoactive
ingredient nationwide was up to 1 percent in the 1960s and
1970s, but it increased in the 1980s and 90s." However, in the
past few years when Germany, Great Britain, and Canada
relegalized the hemp industry, their laws required that hemp
products had to be less than 1 percent THC since they considered
that level to be the threshold level for a psychoactive affect.
Consequently, if the THC average really was less than 1 percent
in the 60s and 70s, then there is evidence that none of the
people using the drug at that time really experienced a
psychoactive effect.
2:59:11 PM
MR. GARHART said if SB 74 passed, the courts would throw it out.
JOHN FAIRLEIGH, Anchorage, said that while the intent of the
bill seems to be to keep marijuana away from children it does
not speak to that intent. Contributing to the delinquency of a
minor is already a crime and distributing marijuana is already a
felony. The Surgeon General released the following information
over the last 20 years regarding the danger of marijuana
relative to other substances in terms of the number of deaths
caused:
Tobacco over 400,000 deaths per year; alcohol between
125,000 and 150,000 deaths per year; aspirin over a
1000 deaths per year; caffeine 10,000 deaths per year;
legal drug overdoses over 30,000 deaths per year;
illicit drug overdoses over 5,000 deaths per year.
3:03:40 PM
He stated he has yet to see evidence of even a single death
directly caused by marijuana. Even the government does not claim
that marijuana can be lethal and, consequently, it is simply not
productive to compare marijuana to heroin. He asked his 7th
grade son if he could get marijuana and his son responded that
it was not a problem to get marijuana in middle school, but he
said that he could not find alcohol or tobacco.
MR. FAIRLEIGH said the outcome of 2004s Proposition 2 shows that
44 percent of Alaskan's voted in favor of legalizing marijuana.
Any efforts spent on the bill would be wasted since the courts
would simply rule the bill unconstitutional and the committee
members would do well to consider the implications of the bill
in their political calculus.
SENATOR WILKEN said:
Sir, I just wanted to tell you my political calculus.
I am looking forward to going home and telling the
people that I represent why I support this bill. So
thank you.
3:06:53 PM
LINDA RONAN, Anchorage, said SB 74 is an unwarranted intrusion
on the privacy of Alaskan's and she is extremely disappointed by
it. She has smoked marijuana for 30 years and has two adult
children who are currently nurses who have never smoked
marijuana. She said that she never smoked marijuana in front of
her children because she is a responsible adult. She said that
she had recently lost a daughter to a cocaine overdose and
remarked that law enforcement agencies should devote more of
their resources to hard drugs such as cocaine and heroin.
3:11:12 PM
MAKO HAGGERTY, Homer, testified he is 50 years old, a business
owner, a member of the Chamber of Commerce, a Republican and an
active member of the community. He opposed SB 74. He said that
the bill would criminalize a whole segment of his community. The
proponents are applying backward logic in citing the correlation
between marijuana and violence. They have cited this correlation
to imply that marijuana causes violent crime, but they have no
evidence of a causal link between the two. He said that the
logical mistake is all the more glaring given that any police
officer will tell you that a marijuana user is one of the
individuals least likely to exhibit violent behavior.
Many references were made to the growing use of marijuana by
juveniles but, the only thing that SB 74 would do is penalize
adult users without affecting juvenile users. The attached
fiscal note is $165,000 for the first year alone and he remarked
the committee should be more concerned with failing schools or
rural infrastructure instead of whether or not some individuals
are getting high in the privacy of their own homes. He said the
fiscal note is under-projected since it does not mention the
inevitable increase in the cost to the Department of Corrections
that SB 74 would cause. He begged the committee to be honest
about the real cost of the bill.
3:14:49 PM
DAVE SWARTHOUT, Homer, opposed SB 74. He praised Ms. Brink for
her courage in her testimony. Most of the people he knows that
use marijuana run their lives successfully and properly and they
are honorable citizens. The bill could make people felons
overnight and is an affront to privacy. He said Dr. Fielder's
statement that marijuana creates a nightmare of craving must
refer to exceptional cases. The assertion that the social cost
of marijuana exceeds that of alcohol is ridiculous.
3:17:09 PM
MR. SWARTHOUT said given his personal experience with marijuana
users, it seemed the researchers that testified earlier must be
looking at a different population. He does not know anybody that
spends a significant amount of time seeking out marijuana. He
objected to Senator Wilken's criticism of Ms. Brink's testimony
and remarked that to continue and intensify the same war on
drugs that has been proven to be both extensive and hugely
ineffective just serves to make a bad situation worse. He said
America already has a higher prison population than most first
world countries and most of our prisoners are incarcerated for
drug offenses.
DR. BOB JOHNSON, Kodiak, said:
I am Doctor Bob Johnson, a retired physician. I
practiced medicine in Kodiak for forty years. My
chosen specialties were substance abuse and addiction
and mind-body medicine. I was a founder of the Kodiak
Mental Health Center in 1970, the Kodiak Council of
Alcoholism (KCA) in 1971 and the first JCAH approved
substance treatment abuse program in Alaska, the Whole
House. I was a medical consultant to that program and
held weekly education sessions with clients until my
retirement.
I taught a 40-hour science course on alcoholism at the
Kodiak College in 1976 and 1977 and was a director of
the National Council on Alcoholism in the Alaska
region in 1978. I served as president of the
governor's advisory board on alcoholism from 1981 to
1984. I was medical director of the KCA outpatient
detoxification unit from 1990 to 1994 and I was an
advocate for combining the drug and alcohol review
board.
Let me acquaint you with some history that I feel is
pertinent to SB 74. Punitive measures for the control
of drug use have been tried for centuries. The most
common of such drugs was alcohol and laws attempting
to control drunkenness appeared first in the early
14th century. These continued to appear, particularly
in England up until the discovery of America. In this
country, one state after another instituted laws
prohibiting the use and manufacture of alcohol, but
every one was repealed when it was found that they
were ineffective including the Holmstead Act of 1920,
which was known as National Prohibition. This law
lasted ten years before it was repealed, at which time
the problem of organized crime in Chicago and New York
City had become more serious than the alcohol problem.
Besides, the per capita consumption of alcohol had
grown beyond that prior to the enactment of the act.
The alcohol problem still exists, but is under control
largely because of the Uniform Alcoholism Act of 1970,
which recognized addiction as a disease and lead to
research into the problem and the establishment of
institutions and treatment programs all over the
country. The Presidential Commission put together the
Uniform Control Substances Act of 1970, which
recognized addiction to the other drugs as a disease,
and acknowledging that their use was illegal,
emphasized research and treatment as a more
appropriate means of control.
Treatment programs were being established throughout
the county until, during the Regan years, congress
enacted more punitive laws designed to control what is
visualized as the quote 'Drug Problem'. Since then
more and more punitive laws have been established.
Each have had little effect on the problem of drug
abuse and addiction, but have created a billion dollar
industry in illegal drug trafficking, which as in
prohibition, has created far more problems than has
been associated with drug use per se.
Now to marijuana, which you are dealing with in this
bill. At the request of the State Legislature, a
committee of the Alaska State Medical Association, of
which I was a member, investigated the effects of
marijuana in the early 80s. The committee concluded
that there are no long-term ill effects other than
those similar to cigarette smoking and it was not
addicting. It was found less dangerous than alcohol.
The Alaskan State Medical Association felt it should
be legally available. Unfortunately because of fear
created and perpetuated by misinformed politicians,
this relatively harmless drug has been made illegal.
Many who possessed or used it, regardless of whether
or not anyone was harmed, are now serving prison
terms. In addition, those who would benefit from its
use for the control of nausea induced by chemotherapy
or terminal illness encounter great difficulty
obtaining it.
The media often makes misinformed claims about the
health effects of marijuana that are exactly the
opposite of what we know. Assistant Federal Drug Czar,
Scott Burns, visiting Alaska, told audiences that
marijuana is dangerous, addictive, and of no medicinal
value. Former United States attorney, Wev Shea, cited
a handful of studies that he purports prove
marijuana's evils. Even some physicians like Charles
Hermden, who let his name be attached to the statement
opposing ballot measure 2 in the last Alaskan
election, will claim that marijuana has been
scientifically proven harmful.
Who are we supposed to believe? The most recent
national research body to weigh all the available
evidence about marijuana's safety and medicinal
potential was the Institute of Medicine (IOM), part of
the National Academy of Science. Their 1999 report
made detailed findings in a number of areas including
that, 'compared to most other drugs, dependence among
marijuana users is relatively rare'. They further
found that 'there is no conclusive evidence that it
causes cancer in humans, including cancers usually
related to tobacco use' and 'it does not appear to be
a gateway drug.' Earlier studies purporting to show
structural changes in the brains of heavy marijuana
users have not been replicated with more sophisticated
techniques.
Alaskans might be especially interested to learn that
there is little evidence that decriminalization
necessarily leads to a substantial increase in
marijuana use. Those questioning its medicinal value
should know that nausea, appetite loss, pain and
anxiety all can be medicated by marijuana. Although
some medications are more effective than marijuana for
these problems, they are not equally effective in all
patients. The full (IOM) report can be viewed on line.
Cases of aberrant behavior, whether under the
influence of a mood altering drug or not, are matters
for law enforcement. Controlled use of a drug should
not be. It is a sad fact that our federal government
continues to base its marijuana laws on traditional
misinformation rather than on the best science even
when the government itself has paid for that research
and analysis. Alaskans should not follow suit and be
guilty of perpetuating the problem with enhanced
punishment for marijuana use when no harm results from
that use.
FRANK TURNER, Fairbanks, said the claim of a relationship
between marijuana and violence is false. He said SB 74 would
cause the incarceration of citizens who do not pose a threat to
their communities. There would be astronomical costs associated
with the enforcement of the bill if it passes. The bill would
cause greater harm to society by locking up non-violent
offenders than that which is currently caused by marijuana use
and distribution. The aforementioned correlation between violent
crime and marijuana does not exclude the possibility that
marijuana may have no effect upon or may actually pacify
inherently violent individuals. He said he knows people who have
violent tendencies for whom marijuana is a godsend.
3:28:12 PM
DIRK NELSON, former licensed Alaskan social worker, said he has
been a student of marijuana policy for the last 33 years. He
said that the studies of the Marijuana Potency Project conducted
in Mississippi that concluded the average THC content of
marijuana in 1976 was .67 percent should be reconsidered in
light of evidence put forth by Dr. John Morgan which concluded
that at the same time, private laboratories were testing
cannabis from the same market and getting an average of
approximately 2.5 percent.
He said that the DSM, which references cannabis delusional
disorder, dependence and abuse, was created by people who were
his former collogues and who benefit financially by
pathologizing various issues. He said that when one considers
how many instances of voluntary participation in marijuana
treatment programs involve a suspended imposition of a sentence,
one might arrive at a different interpretation of the
aforementioned statistics than that which was given by the
former speakers.
He said that in the last ten years of practicing as a clinician
in a variety of places in Alaska, he has never once had an
individual enter his door and say 'doc ya gotta help me with my
cannabis addiction.' According to The MERC Manuel, very few
people are addicted to cannabis; the MERC index indicates that a
greater number suffer from psychological addiction. The
definition and criteria of a psychological addiction is much
more controversial than that of a physical addiction. He said
that there is no credible evidence to date of psychological or
other delusional disorders caused, in mass, by cannabis use.
3:30:48 PM
MR. NELSON said SB 74 concerns the court's decision in the Ravin
case, which made the age of consent 19 years of age. It does not
concern whether or not it is ok for adolescents to use pot. He
said that so long as we are on the issue, he would like to
reference Bernard Segal's 1988 study that showed that there was
no correlation between the legal status of cannabis and its rate
of use among adolescents. He said studies involving self-
reporting should be taken with a grain of salt since adolescents
often misrepresent themselves on such surveys.
He said that, with regards to Dr. Murray and the (ONDCP), in
late 2003, Representative Ron Paul of Texas filed an inquiry
with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about the
credibility of the ONDCP's claims. The response he received from
the GAO was somewhat history making because, they stated, in
March 2004, that they were not going to scrutinize ONDCP's
statements for factual relevance. In other words, in the first
time since the 1940's Anti-propaganda Law was passed, the
American Government gave an agency permission to lie.
CHAIR DYSON held SB 74 in committee. There being no further
business to come before the committee, he adjourned the meeting
at 3:33:03 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|