MARIJUANA IN THE MEDICINE CABINET

Medical marijuana advocates took a hit last year. And they weren't
happy about it.

Last year, Gov. M. Jodi Rell vetoed medical marijuana legislation that
passed easily through the state House and Senate. It was a significant
setback for those who had lobbied for years to get Connecticut to
adopt such a bill.

Fast forward a year later, and medical marijuana advocates remain
steadfast, emboldened by a recent position paper by the American
College of Physicians (ACP).

The 13-page paper was written by a dozen of doctors who threw their
unanimous support behind the therapeutic use of marijuana and strongly
advised that more research was needed.

"Unfortunately, research expansion has been hindered by a complicated
federal-approval process, limited availability of research-grade
marijuana, and the debate over legalization," the study's authors said
in a written statement. In particular, the ACP report maintained that
the medical uses of marijuana have been overshadowed by the lingering
debate regarding the general legalization of the drug.

Powerful Allies

The study put another powerful ally - doctors - on the side of medical
marijuana advocates.

Also advocating for legalizing medical marijuana is the Drug Policy
Alliance. The alliance has been at the forefront of the state's debate
over the issue, leading a coalition of Connecticut organizations that
pushed the legislation last year all the way to Rell's desk.

"There's no doubt we're going to continue with this," said Gabriel
Sayegh, policy director for the Drug Policy Alliance. "It's pretty
interesting that the American College of Physicians, that has 130,000
members, would come out endorsing this."

Most upsetting to medical marijuana advocates is Rell vetoed the
legislation despite attempts for a compromise.

"There was ample opportunity [for compromise] because we solicited
feedback," Sayegh said. "We will do what we can do to make this happen."

Rell spokesman Christopher Cooper said there were two primary
concerns: a wide variety of diseases would have been eligible under
the bill, and the availability of marijuana. The legislation would
have allowed terminally ill patients to grow their own marijuana
plants, but obtaining seeds would have, in Rell's words, forced them
to "seek out drug dealers."

Those reasons don't fly with advocates, as Sayegh accused federal
officials and the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) of
getting involved. "We have reason to believe that [Rell] took a call
from the White House before she vetoed the bill," he said. "The ONDCP
has raised a stink in other states. We believe they did so here."

To back up his claims, Sayegh pointed out wording in Rell's veto
statement that said prescribing marijuana would be a "violation of
federal law."

"[Her statement] was riddled with inaccuracies," he said. "Ninety-nine
out of 100 marijuana arrests are made due to state law, not federal
law."

In response, Cooper disputed Sayegh's contention about White House
involvement, stating that he would like to "debunk that myth."

Meanwhile, medical marijuana advocates remain patient. "We were
emboldened last year and then deeply disappointed that people still
essentially have to commit a crime to get access to medicine," Sayegh
said.

Based on last year's vote, the medical marijuana bill was one vote
short in the Senate and 12 votes shy in the House of reaching the
necessary threshold for a veto override.

However, criminal justice reforms have "dominated every corner space"
at the state Capitol, Sayegh said, and they have found it difficult to
promote a new bill with other hot button topics dominating the session.