FEDERAL MEDICAL POT RULING WOULDN'T NIX LOCAL LAWS; COURT COULD HELP EASE
SUFFERING

A recent Capital Times article about Monday's U.S. Supreme Court
hearing of the historic medical marijuana case, Raich v. Ashcroft,
gave the mistaken impression that if justices rule for the federal
government's position, the ruling would invalidate state and local
laws allowing medical use.

This is not true.

Medical cannabis laws like those in California and 10 other states, as
well as local ordinances like Madison's Ordinance 23.20 and those
passed by voters in Detroit, Ann Arbor Mich., and Columbia, Mo., this
year, will continue to stand.

The worst that could happen is a continuation of the status quo, and
since most marijuana arrests are made at the local and state level,
the federal prohibition will continue to be worrisome but not fatal.

If the case for medical cannabis prevails, it will be a great victory
for millions of Americans using it to treat ailments including cancer,
multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, Lou Gehrig's disease (ALS),
glaucoma, arthritis, epilepsy, HIV/AIDS, asthma and other painful and
debilitating medical conditions. It would mean that across America,
patients, their families and their doctors would not have to balance
the fear of illness getting out of control against the fear of arrest
and jail.

Polling has found most Americans support legal access to medical
cannabis. It is one issue this increasingly fragmented nation mostly
agrees on. Several Supreme Court justices, including Chief Justice
Rehnquist, are cancer patients or cancer survivors themselves. It
should be evident to them, that in a supposedly free country, when one
is faced with uncontrollable suffering, every option ought to be available.

For the sake of anyone who has ever faced serious illness, or may have
to in the future, let us hope and pray that a majority of the Supremes
agree.

Gary Storck

Madison