Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/24/1999 01:40 PM Senate HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 94-MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA
Number 576
CHAIRMAN MILLER brought up SB 94, relating to the medical use of
marijuana initiative. He stated that SB 94 is a very controversial
bill that raises emotions on both sides of the issue, but he
believed a fair discussion could take place about policies and
which direction the state should be heading. He cautioned, "be
forewarned, I will not tolerate anybody in the audience raising the
personal motives of anybody in the State Senate." He would not
tolerate anybody questioning the motives or attacking a senator
personally. "We may attack their legislation, that's fair game, but
not them personally." He warned that he would rule anybody out of
order who does that.
TAPE 99-14, SIDE B
Number 588
CHAIRMAN MILLER repeated that SB 94 would not move out today
because of the number of people waiting to testify and the
committee having to adjourn and vacate the room by 3:00. He was
unsure when the next hearing on SB 94 would take place. He set a
2-minute time limit on all speakers except the bill's sponsor,
Senator Leman, and former state Representative David Finkelstein,
representing Alaskans for Medical Rights, the sponsor of the
initiative.
SENATOR LOREN LEMAN, expressed appreciation for the committee's
willingness to hear the bill. SB 94 addresses an issue that is
timely and needs to be debated. It proposes several amendments to
the medical marijuana initiative that was enacted last November.
The amendments are designed to close loopholes in the initiative
and ensure that it works as intended and as advertised. The bill
was drafted with input from Attorneys General in the Department of
Law, and the Department of Public Safety. A draft CS for the
committee's consideration is from the Department of Health & Social
Services and youth counselors from around the state, and law
enforcement personnel from Anchorage and other communities. These
people told him they had trouble with the initiative as it is
worded and it would cause them trouble enforcing the drug laws of
Alaska. The initiative can't be repealed but it can be amended to
work as intended.
SENATOR LEMAN continued, his aim is to ensure that marijuana is
legally available only for valid medical reasons as defined and
intended in the initiative, and not for recreational use. The
people voted to recriminalize the recreational use of marijuana
when Ballot Measure 2 was approved in 1990. Sponsors of Ballot
Measure 8 in the 1998 official election pamphlet described their
proposal as designed to help terminally ill patients and others
suffering from debilitating medical conditions. Marijuana would
still be illegal for non-medical use, and Ballot Measure 8 would
provide full protection against abuse of the new law.
Unfortunately, SENATOR LEMAN said, close study of the initiative by
legal experts and those who work in law enforcement revealed there
is plenty or room for abuse of the new law. "It is rife with legal
loopholes, ill-defined terms and vague language." These are well
outlined in the bill's sectional analysis and he wouldn't discuss
them in detail today.
SENATOR LEMAN said he believes the Legislature, as public
officials, must respect and honor the views of voters. In this
case of marijuana policy, however, there are two ballot initiatives
to consider. On one hand, the 1990 initiative affirmed that
possession, use or distribution is a criminal act, punishable by
imprisonment of up to 90 days and fines up to $1,000. These are
not trivial punishments and reveal how seriously the voters take
the problem of drug abuse, particularly among the youth. On the
other hand, Ballot Measure 8 from last year proposed to allow
unlimited marijuana use for valid medical purposes. Because the
latter initiative does not repeal the earlier ballot measure, the
Legislature's job is to make both measures work together. SB 94 is
designed to reconcile the provisions of both initiatives, which
both represent the majority will of Alaskan voters.
SENATOR LEMAN stated he believes the constitution's provision for
voter-initiated ballot measures is a great freedom, giving citizens
a direct voice in crafting laws under which we live. However, the
crafters of Alaska's constitution recognized one potential
shortcoming of ballot initiatives. Unlike legislative measures,
voter initiatives are not subjected to scrutiny or the amendment
process before their final presentation to the voters. Accordingly,
the crafters included in the constitution a provision allowing the
Legislature to make needed amendments to approved ballot
initiatives. This authority is found in Article XI, Section 6.
The Legislature has exercised this authority in the past, and in
response to legal challenges the Alaska Supreme Court has upheld
the Legislature's authority to do so. SENATOR LEMAN cited 1975
Warren v. Boucher in which the Alaska Supreme Court described why
the constitution grants this power to the Legislature. He said,
clearly, the Legislature has the authority, acting on behalf of the
people, to pass amendments but not to repeal the initiative.
The constitution which grants the Legislature the authority to
amend initiatives was ratified by the people. The voter approval
of Ballot Measure 2 in 1990 is no less valuable a measure of public
opinion than the passage of Ballot 8 in 1998. He hoped these facts
would put to rest "venomous rhetoric about defying the will of the
people," stating the greatest service the Legislature can provide
the public is to have an intelligent, informed and civil debate on
the merits of the legislation.
The key elements of SB 94 clarify the standards the physician would
use and that registration would be required. Law enforcement could
access the information for purposes of an investigation, but it
would not be a public document. It further restricts the use and
display of medical marijuana to the doctor's office or the home of
the patient or primary care giver. It defines primary care giver
as someone over 21 who hasn't been convicted of a felony under
Alaska's controlled substance laws. The law enforcement people will
discuss why these elements of the bill are important to them in
enforcing the drug laws of Alaska.
SENATOR LEMAN concluded that his intent in introducing this bill is
to lay a very important topic on the table. He has met with David
Finkelstein and staff in the Department of Law, Department of
Public Safety, Department of Health & Social Services, the lobbyist
opposing this effort, and the Governor's Office. He said he intends
to work cooperatively to accomplish legislative objectives that
allow enforcement of the drug laws of Alaska.
Number 437
MR. DAVID FINKELSTEIN, representing Alaskans for Medical Rights,
encouraged people who can't testify today to leave a short
statement at the LIOs to give to the committee. He asserted the
provisions of SB 94 are overwhelming, and a complete re-write of
the initiative. He said it took him over five hours to read and
understand the bill, cross-referencing it with the existing law.
There are over 40 major amendments to the existing law, which can
be counted in the sponsor's sectional analysis, not including
additional technical and conforming amendments.
As he could not address these 40 amendments in the time available,
MR. FINKELSTEIN talked about the two categories they fall into.
First, minor amendments based on misinterpretations of the law or
based on interpretation questions, or correcting citations. He
stated any of these changes that are necessary can be accomplished
either through the current regulation process, with the comment
period open through Friday, March 26; or in the Revisor's Bill. He
said some of the amendments just aren't necessary.
The second category are provisions that would eliminate otherwise
qualified patients from the initiative. For example, no patients
would be covered except those with cancer, glaucoma or AIDS, and
then only where it causes them "severe and chronic pain and
nausea." It doesn't say "severe or chronic..." It is his
experience with about one hundred patients who use medical
marijuana that most of them would be excluded by just this
provision alone. Another provision requires doctors to make a
finding that there are no other legal treatments that can be
tolerated by the patient that are as effective. There will always
be other drugs that are effective, but many of those are dangerous
or have side effects and, he said, no doctor would be willing to
make an analytic finding like this when they can prescribe other
narcotics and drugs with no findings whatsoever.
"The sponsor's apparent fear is that many doctors will get carried
away recommending medical marijuana." In his view it is not very
likely. Only licensed doctors can make the recommendation. Under
existing statute AS 08.64.101 doctors can be investigated, and if
necessary, even lose their license.
SB 94 eliminates the protection patients receive under the
initiative and replaces it with an affirmative defense. This
places the burden of proof with the patient to prove their case.
Even a patient with ID card, complying with the law and possessing
less than an ounce would still have to demonstrate that the entire
amount in their possession was intended for their own medical use.
He asked how a patient can prove that.
In conclusion, MR. FINKELSTEIN stated that SB 94 is not necessary
and if passed, will eliminate hope for all the patients who would
be helped under the initiative. He offered to work with the
sponsor during the interim to see which concerns were addressed
through the regulation process, check whether the registration is
working as intended, and address any problems that may have arisen
under the law. He asked, on behalf of Alaskans for Medical Rights,
to be given a chance to let this initiative work.
Number 375
CHAIRMAN MILLER stated Mr. Finkelstein's reputation in Juneau has
always been one for "open government and full disclosure." He
mentioned the talk about the expensive ad campaign floating around
the state. While acknowledging Mr. Finkelstein not legally required
to disclose the source of the the funds to his group, CHAIRMAN
MILLER asked in the spirit of open government where those funds
came from.
MR. FINKELSTEIN replied that he respects and considers Senator
Leman a worthy adversary, but Alaskans for Medical Rights which
represents the majority of Alaskans wasn't included in any of the
deliberations on how this bill was developed. He stated the cost
of the ad campaign was probably $4,000 to $5,000 and it came
entirely from individuals in and outside Alaska, with no government
or PAC money involved.
SENATOR WILKEN echoed Chairman Miller's request. He didn't know
how he stands on SB 94, but he opposed groups that try to influence
public opinion through the media. He would like to know all donors
of over $100, and asked that the information be sent to the
committee in the interest of full disclosure.
CHAIRMAN MILLER again promised that SB 94 would not move from
committee until everyone wanting to testify had the opportunity to
do so. He apologized to those who will not have that chance today.
Number 331
LT. AUDIE HOLLOWAY, Narcotics Enforcement Division, Anchorage
Police Department, spoke in support of SB 94 which gives some clear
guidelines for the police department in dealing with those people
who want to take advantage of the initiative. He said, "I can
assure you that we will have a lot of people who will try to take
advantage of it." He has a limited number of people working on a
lot of drug cases. A standardized registration and format for
those people who are using medical marijuana and deserving of it
would help in cutting down the workload of the department. He
doesn't have time to investigate people with legitimate use for the
plant. Rigorous standards should be in place. A lot of people in
Alaska make a lot of money off the illegal use of marijuana, and he
suspects money is coming from "that area to keep it as vague as
possible." He reads police reports everyday about people who are
driving and using marijuana. There needs to be a standard
addressing that, to prevent hiding behind medical use and driving
because it's as bad as alcohol in that regard.
MR. RICHARD WELCH stated he is a long-time resident of Fairbanks
and has HIV and Hepatitis C and chronic pain. This bill would
severely limit what his doctor can tell him he can have. He's also
a member of the Interior HIV Care Consortium, a group that performs
needs assessments and quality assurance tasks regarding HIV care.
The consortium is sponsored by the Interior Aids Association whose
executive director could not stay, but wanted Mr. Welch to convey
that they object to any effort to change the peoples' initiative
about medical marijuana.
Number 276
CAPT. BILL MILLER, Headquarters, Anchorage Police Department,
stated headquarters deals with major crimes including homicides,
sexual assaults and narcotics. His officers must have the ability
to distinguish between what is legal and what is not. Officers
need definitions and clear understanding. This bill would clear up
confusion, and prevent wasting time and resources. It defines who
can prescribe the medical marijuana and who decides who can
prescribe it.
MR.JAY SNODDERLY, Ward Cove, stated he is opposed to anything that
would restrict the wishes of the people as expressed last November.
He admitted he does not understand the bill, so he doesn't know if
it would do that, but he's heard it both ways.
CHAIRMAN MILLER stated he would hold SB 94 and take further
testimony the next time it is brought up, and again apologized for
the time constraints. The committee will take up bills previously
heard, the education bills and the proposed CS for SB 73, next
Monday, March 29. He thanked the members for their hard work in
his absence, and adjourned at 3:01 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|