HOUSE PASSES MEDICINAL MARIJUANA

MONTPELIER -- The House gave preliminary approval Thursday to a bill that
would bring Vermont in line with eight other states that allow the use of
marijuana for medicinal purposes.

After four hours of emotional debate that saw more than one lawmaker break
down in tears, the Republican-controlled House approved the controversial
bill, 81-53.

Lawmakers split on the issue with those supporting it viewing the measure
as a mechanism to offer seriously ill patients another option in trying to
ease their pain.

Opponents worried that it would set the stage to legalize marijuana in the
state and questioned whether the committee responsible for the bill took
enough testimony from physicians and others who dispute the effectiveness
of the drug.

The bill would allow the cultivation and use of marijuana by seriously ill
patients, as long as they obtain a certificate from their physician. The
measure limits the amount a person can possess for this purpose to 3 ounces
of usable marijuana, three mature plants or four immature plants.

Supporters of the bill attributed its approval to the heartrending stories
from lawmakers of all political stripes who offered examples of friends,
relatives and loved ones who could have benefited from the drug while
enduring agonizing deaths.

"I really think it was the personal stories," said Rep. David Zuckerman,
P-Burlington, the chief sponsor of the bill.

Rep. Warren Kitzmiller, D-Montpelier, shared a story about his wife, Karen,
whose seat in the House he took last year when she died of breast cancer.
Kitzmiller re-called how a family friend, a doctor, appeared at their home
one evening with a canister of marijuana to help Kitzmiller deal with her
pain from the disease.

Kitzmiller said his wife's pain was not so severe, but told his colleagues
he was touched by the risk his friend took as a doctor to suggest the
treatment.

"We all know this subject has been the butt of many jokes in the hallways
... but I want all members of this House to understand that for all the
people in this situation, it is not funny at all," he said. "I can forgive
the jokes ... but underneath it all, it's not a funny subject, it's
terribly painful. This is an issue of compassion for their suffering."

Some lawmakers did show signs of flippancy by wearing sunglasses during the
debate on the floor.

Opponents of the bill worried that the proposal would open the door to
legalization and send a dangerous message to young people in the state
about the use of drugs.

"The real issue here is to get the foot in the door on legalizing
marijuana," contended Rep. Thomas DePoy, R-Rutland, who supported a move to
send the bill to the Health and Welfare Committee, where it was promised to
hang on the wall until the session was over.

DePoy said he was concerned that the medicinal purposes of the drug were
not well vetted during the hearings in the Judiciary Committee and wanted
the bill to go to the Health and Welfare Committee, of which he is vice
chairman.

The House voted not to send it to the other committee.

Rep. Margaret Flory, R-Pittsford, chairwoman of the Judiciary Committee,
said her panel did not try to answer the question of whether the drug was
more effective for nausea than others that can be prescribed by a physician
now.

Rather, she said, committee members were attempting to make it possible for
those physicians and patients who believe marijuana to be a helpful
treatment to have that option.

"If doctors do not think it's medically indicated, then they won't
prescribe it," she said.

Supporters of the measure called it the toughest in the country, by adding
further restrictions that the plant be grown indoors in a secure building
or room, and by limiting to one the number of caregivers allowed to
purchase it or grow it for any patient.

The bill also sets up a database of those who have permission from their
physicians by requiring the doctors to file a copy of the certification
with the state Department of Public Safety so police can verify that
information.

"I think it shows some and, boy, I hate this term, compassionate
conservatism," Flory said.

Not everyone who spoke about a personal experience supported the bill.

Rep. Linda Kirker, R-Essex, said she had watched loved ones die, but still
could not support the bill.

"It doesn't mean we are not compassionate people," she said.

The bill is scheduled for a final vote today, during which some amendments
are expected, including one that inserts a sunset on the measure and allows
for some status report to the Legislature.

The future of the bill is uncertain. Senate President Pro Tem Peter
Shumlin, D-Windham, has said he supports the proposal and other Senate
leaders have said they are open to the debate.

The measure does have one strong opponent -- Democratic Gov. Howard Dean.

Dean evaded questions about whether he would veto the bill if it arrived on
his desk. He has been an ardent opponent and, when questioned Thursday, he
suggested he would try to avoid having to veto it.