T
The420Guy
Guest
Author: Clarence Page
WASHINGTON -- Until now, I have admired Al Gore's candor on the marijuana question.
After all, he is the first presidential candidate to admit not only that he smoked marijuana but
that he even inhaled it.
His boss, President Clinton, confessed during his 1992 campaign to smoking the wicked weed
in his youth but insisted he "didn't inhale." That's like saying you subscribe to Playboy for the
articles. Maybe he enjoyed that distinctive marijuana smell, which is sort of like burning
socks.
On the Republican side, Texas Gov. George W. Bush simply has avoided talking about
anything naughty he might have done in the first three decades or so of his life. That is his
right. Besides, no one can accuse you of lying if you don't say anything at all.
No, it is not the candidates' private lives from decades past but their public positions at
present that should concern us.
With that, I find it informative to see how the two Baby Boomer presidential candidates from
the two major political parties dance around the issue of medicinal marijuana.
It is informative because medicinal marijuana is what many Washington politicians call a
"third-rail" issue--touch it and you die!
Bush and his running-mate Dick Cheney have tried to avoid saying much on the issue, except
that they "support states' rights" but also will "vigorously enforce" federal laws. That's a
prudent, pragmatic position in the midst of a stormy and divisive political issue. That's also
called having it both ways.
Gore, too, tries to have it both ways, although at different times. When he was asked by a
young MTV audience member last week whether he supported the legalization of marijuana
for medicinal use, the vice president responded that he did not. Current research, he said,
does not show marijuana to be any more effective at relieving the pain and misery of cancer
patients and others who are ill than other, less controversial drugs.
I wondered what research he had been reading. A 1999 Institute of Medicine report
commissioned by the Clinton-Gore administration, for example, found marijuana to be
effective enough to be recommended for short-term use of up to six months by some
seriously ill patients.
More than six months posed health risks, not because of the active ingredients, known as
cannabinoids, but because of the respiratory damage smoking anything can cause.
Gore's response sounded all the more amazing when compared to his position during the
primaries. When he was running against Bill Bradley and appealing to Democrats, he
sounded a lot more open to the idea of letting doctors prescribe marijuana. In a televised
forum in Derry, N.H., in December, Gore poignantly recalled how his late sister's doctor
prescribed marijuana for her before she died of cancer in 1984. She refused to take it, he
said, but "if it had worked for her, then I think she should have had the ability to get her pain
relieved that way."
"I do not favor legalizing marijuana," he said, according to Associated Press reports. "But
where you have sufficient controls, I think doctors ought to have that option."
Right on. And he was not alone. So far, Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Nevada,
Maine and the District of Columbia have passed voter initiatives to allow other patients to
have the choice that was offered to Al Gore's sister.
Hawaii passed such a law April 25. Colorado citizens vote on a similar measure in November
and supporters say its chances look good. None of the state ballot efforts for medicinal
marijuana has failed, so far.
But the Clinton administration stands fast in its anti-marijuana position. After Gore's
statement, White House spokesman Joe Lockhart maintained that, "We don't have conclusive
scientific evidence that marijuana provides a therapeutic benefit that exceeds currently
prescribed drugs."
And, presto! By May, the White House position became Al Gore's position, too. Answering a
student in Cudahy, Calif., on May 11, Gore said he sees "no reliable evidence" that medical
marijuana is an effective pain reliever.
Yes, it is interesting to see how quickly reliability can fade in the midst of an election
campaign--right along with candor.
Or maybe there's some truth, after all, to the rumors about early marijuana use causing
late-life memory loss.
MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager
Newshawk: www.maximizingharm.com
Pubdate: Sun, 01 Oct 2000
Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Copyright: 2000 Chicago Tribune Company
Contact: ctc-TribLetter@Tribune.com
Address: 435 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60611-4066
Website: Chicago Tribune: Chicago breaking news, sports, business, entertainment, weather and traffic
Forum: Chicago Tribune: Chicago news, sports, weather, entertainment - Chicago Tribune
WASHINGTON -- Until now, I have admired Al Gore's candor on the marijuana question.
After all, he is the first presidential candidate to admit not only that he smoked marijuana but
that he even inhaled it.
His boss, President Clinton, confessed during his 1992 campaign to smoking the wicked weed
in his youth but insisted he "didn't inhale." That's like saying you subscribe to Playboy for the
articles. Maybe he enjoyed that distinctive marijuana smell, which is sort of like burning
socks.
On the Republican side, Texas Gov. George W. Bush simply has avoided talking about
anything naughty he might have done in the first three decades or so of his life. That is his
right. Besides, no one can accuse you of lying if you don't say anything at all.
No, it is not the candidates' private lives from decades past but their public positions at
present that should concern us.
With that, I find it informative to see how the two Baby Boomer presidential candidates from
the two major political parties dance around the issue of medicinal marijuana.
It is informative because medicinal marijuana is what many Washington politicians call a
"third-rail" issue--touch it and you die!
Bush and his running-mate Dick Cheney have tried to avoid saying much on the issue, except
that they "support states' rights" but also will "vigorously enforce" federal laws. That's a
prudent, pragmatic position in the midst of a stormy and divisive political issue. That's also
called having it both ways.
Gore, too, tries to have it both ways, although at different times. When he was asked by a
young MTV audience member last week whether he supported the legalization of marijuana
for medicinal use, the vice president responded that he did not. Current research, he said,
does not show marijuana to be any more effective at relieving the pain and misery of cancer
patients and others who are ill than other, less controversial drugs.
I wondered what research he had been reading. A 1999 Institute of Medicine report
commissioned by the Clinton-Gore administration, for example, found marijuana to be
effective enough to be recommended for short-term use of up to six months by some
seriously ill patients.
More than six months posed health risks, not because of the active ingredients, known as
cannabinoids, but because of the respiratory damage smoking anything can cause.
Gore's response sounded all the more amazing when compared to his position during the
primaries. When he was running against Bill Bradley and appealing to Democrats, he
sounded a lot more open to the idea of letting doctors prescribe marijuana. In a televised
forum in Derry, N.H., in December, Gore poignantly recalled how his late sister's doctor
prescribed marijuana for her before she died of cancer in 1984. She refused to take it, he
said, but "if it had worked for her, then I think she should have had the ability to get her pain
relieved that way."
"I do not favor legalizing marijuana," he said, according to Associated Press reports. "But
where you have sufficient controls, I think doctors ought to have that option."
Right on. And he was not alone. So far, Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Nevada,
Maine and the District of Columbia have passed voter initiatives to allow other patients to
have the choice that was offered to Al Gore's sister.
Hawaii passed such a law April 25. Colorado citizens vote on a similar measure in November
and supporters say its chances look good. None of the state ballot efforts for medicinal
marijuana has failed, so far.
But the Clinton administration stands fast in its anti-marijuana position. After Gore's
statement, White House spokesman Joe Lockhart maintained that, "We don't have conclusive
scientific evidence that marijuana provides a therapeutic benefit that exceeds currently
prescribed drugs."
And, presto! By May, the White House position became Al Gore's position, too. Answering a
student in Cudahy, Calif., on May 11, Gore said he sees "no reliable evidence" that medical
marijuana is an effective pain reliever.
Yes, it is interesting to see how quickly reliability can fade in the midst of an election
campaign--right along with candor.
Or maybe there's some truth, after all, to the rumors about early marijuana use causing
late-life memory loss.
MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager
Newshawk: www.maximizingharm.com
Pubdate: Sun, 01 Oct 2000
Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Copyright: 2000 Chicago Tribune Company
Contact: ctc-TribLetter@Tribune.com
Address: 435 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60611-4066
Website: Chicago Tribune: Chicago breaking news, sports, business, entertainment, weather and traffic
Forum: Chicago Tribune: Chicago news, sports, weather, entertainment - Chicago Tribune
