State Legislation

Happy Thanksgiving - Thank You Iowa Board of Pharmacy!

Carl Olsen — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 20:58:45 GMT

KCCI TV 8

Board Makes Next Move Toward Medical Marijuana

Des Moines Register

Pharmacy board unanimously OKs medical-marijuana plan

KCCI TV 8 - November 2, 2010

Carl Olsen — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 19:39:22 GMT

Board: Lawmakers Should OK Medical Marijuana

What's wrong with the Marijuana Policy Project model legislation?

Carl Olsen — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 01:45:08 GMT

http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=Billbook&menu=false&hbill=SF293

SF 293

6 9    5. A school, employer, or landlord shall not refuse to
6 10 enroll, employ, or lease to, or otherwise penalize, a person
6 11 solely on the basis of the person's status as a registered
6 12 qualifying patient or a registered designated caregiver,
6 13 unless failing to do so would put the school, employer, or
6 14 landlord in violation of federal law or cause the school,
6 15 employer, or landlord to lose a federal contract or funding.
6 16    6. For the purposes of medical care, including organ
6 17 transplants, a registered qualifying patient's authorized use
6 18 of marijuana in accordance with this chapter shall be
6 19 considered the equivalent of the authorized use of any other
6 20 medication used at the direction of a physician, and shall not
6 21 constitute the use of an illicit substance.
6 22    7. Unless a failure to do so would put an employer in
6 23 violation of federal law or federal regulations, an employer
6 24 may not discriminate against a person in hiring, termination,
6 25 or any term or condition of employment, or otherwise penalize
6 26 a person, if the discrimination is based upon any of the
6 27 following:
6 28    a. The person's status as a registered qualifying patient
6 29 or registered designated caregiver.
6 30    b. A registered qualifying patient's positive drug test
6 31 for marijuana components or metabolites, unless the patient
6 32 used, possessed, or was impaired by marijuana on the premises
6 33 of the place of employment or during the hours of employment.

http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=Billbook&menu=false&hbill=HF2179

HF 2179

6 13    5. A school, employer, or landlord shall not refuse to
6 14 enroll, employ, or lease to, or otherwise penalize, a person
6 15 solely on the basis of the person's status as a registered
6 16 qualifying patient or a registered designated caregiver, unless
6 17 failing to do so would put the school, employer, or landlord
6 18 in violation of federal law or cause the school, employer, or
6 19 landlord to lose a federal contract or funding.
6 20    6. For the purposes of medical care, including organ
6 21 transplants, a registered qualifying patient's authorized
6 22 use of marijuana in accordance with this chapter shall be
6 23 considered the equivalent of the authorized use of any other
6 24 medication used at the direction of a physician, and shall not
6 25 constitute the use of an illicit substance.
6 26    7. Unless a failure to do so would put an employer in
6 27 violation of federal law or federal regulations, an employer
6 28 may not discriminate against a person in hiring, termination,
6 29 or any term or condition of employment, or otherwise penalize
6 30 a person, if the discrimination is based upon any of the
6 31 following:
6 32    a. The person's status as a registered qualifying patient or
6 33 registered designated caregiver.
6 34    b. A registered qualifying patient's positive drug test for
6 35 marijuana components or metabolites, unless the patient used,
7 1 possessed, or was impaired by marijuana on the premises of the
7 2 place of employment or during the hours of employment.

http://www.mpp.org/legislation/model-medical-marijuana-bill.html

Section 6. Discrimination Prohibited.

(a) (1) No school or landlord may refuse to enroll or lease to, or otherwise penalize, a person solely for his or her status as a registered qualifying patient or a registered designated caregiver, unless failing to do so would cause the school or landlord to lose a monetary or licensing-related benefit under federal law or regulations.

(2) For the purposes of medical care, including organ transplants, a registered qualifying patient’s authorized use of marijuana in accordance with this chapter shall be considered the equivalent of the authorized use of any other medication used at the direction of a physician, and shall not constitute the use of an illicit substance or otherwise disqualify a qualifying patient from needed medical care.

(3) Unless a failure to do so would cause the employer to lose a monetary or licensing-related benefit under federal law or federal regulations, an employer may not discriminate against a person in hiring, termination, or any term or condition of employment, or otherwise penalize a person, if the discrimination is based upon either of the following:

(A) The person's status as a cardholder; or

(B) A registered qualifying patient's positive drug test for marijuana components or metabolites, unless the patient used, possessed, or was impaired by marijuana on the premises of the place of employment or during the hours of employment.

WHERE IS THE PROTECTION FROM FEDERAL LAW AND REGULATIONS?

Oregon reclassifies marijuana

Carl Olsen — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:55:48 GMT

Momentum is building - Oregon reschedules marijuana

http://www.pharmacy.state.or.us/Pharmacy/Marijuana-Rescheduling.shtml

Oregon: Marijuana - Controlled Substance Information

Oregon: Marijuana - Press Release

Oregon: 2009 - Senate Bill 728

Rescheduling in Oregon - March 29, 2010

Carl Olsen — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 22:41:26 GMT

Here's an interesting video from the Oregon Board of Pharmacy saying they just got back from speaking with the DEA in Washington, D.C.

Oregon Board of Pharmacy Set to Reschedule Marijuana from Art Witkowski on Vimeo.

The strategy moving forward

Carl Olsen — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 00:09:18 GMT

I received an email from Americans for Safe Access a moment ago. I've been meaning to write this post, but this email got me moving on it:

ASA will build the federal framework that will bring safe and legal access to all Americans by 2013.

For too long the medical marijuana movement has been forced into a reactionary and defensive position, constantly having to push back against outrageously unjust legislation our movement has been so busy fighting for what we don't want, we lost sight of how to fight for what we need. That ends today.

I don't know why, and ASA doesn't say, but I suspect that ASA's strategy is quite different than mine. I hope I'm wrong and pleasantly surprised (maybe ASA has a clue), but I just haven't spoken with anyone who has my perspective on this situation. So, here goes with my strategy moving forward.

The federal framework that will bring safe and legal access to all Americans by 2013 is already in place. The federal drug law classifies marijuana as having no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and yet 14 states have accepted the medical use of marijuana since 1996. What's wrong with this picture?

Well, here it is in a nutshell, folks. None of those 14 states has bothered to officially tell the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to remove marijuana from its current classification. Furthermore, all 14 states tell patients they are in violation of federal law and there is nothing the state can do to protect them from the DEA.

Sure, President Obama has issued a memo to federal prosecutors telling them not to prosecute medical marijuana patients in states that have enacted medical marijuana laws, but that was only necessary because the states have not been doing their part under the federal drug law.

That is what is so critical about my work here in Iowa. Iowa should not be the 15th state to enact a state medical marijuana law that leaves patients to the mercy of the DEA. The DEA really is not obligated to do anything unless a state uses the administrative procedures set out in the federal drug law to have marijuana federally reclassified.

I suspect ASA is going to tell us they have a legislative solution and they are going to have a new law enacted. Well, a new law is not the answer. The answer is simply obeying current federal law and following the procedures set out in the federal drug law. I predict that Iowa is going to do that in 2012 and we'll have safe and legal access to medical marijuana by 2013 as the result.

Drug czars waiting to see science on medical marijuana - Nov. 2, 2009

Carl Olsen — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:45:05 GMT

Both the national and state drug czars came out this past week in favor of science over politics in the Iowa debate on the legalization of marijuana for medical use. The national drug czar was in Iowa to attend the release of Iowa's Drug Control Strategy 2010

National drug czar, Gil Kerlikowski, said last week that Iowa medical marijuana policy should be decided by science, not votes. He said the medical marijuana program in his home state of Washington was not a significant problem for law enforcement authorities.

On November 1, 2009, Iowa drug Czar, Gary Kendell, released Iowa's Drug Control Strategy 2010, which says Iowa is waiting for the "concensus of medical evidence." See page 8. The Iowa Board of Pharmacy is currently reviewing that medical evidence and will issue it's report to the Iowa Legislature sometime in early January of 2010.

For news media reports on this and related issues, see:

Radio Iowa

http://www.radioiowa.com/2009/11/03/u-s-drug-czar-stays-out-of-iowa-marijuana-debate/

U.S. Drug Czar stays out of Iowa marijuana debate

KCCI-TV, Des Moines, IA

Federal Drug Czar Stops In Iowa

http://www.kcci.com/video/21502688/

WHO-TV, Des Moines, IA

Drug Treatment Cuts

Des Moines Register - August 20, 2009

Carl Olsen — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 23:57:55 GMT

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090820/NEWS10/908200365/1007/NEWS05

Board hears stances on medical marijuana

Board hears stances on medical marijuana (scan)

Peer-Reviewed Studies on Marijuana

Carl Olsen — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:22:07 GMT

This looks like a useful site:

Peer-Reviewed Studies on Marijuana

More thoughts on Iowa Pharmacy Board Hearing

Carl Olsen — Sat, 30 May 2009 13:50:43 GMT

The public hearing on June 1 was not announced. I’m the petitioner, and they didn’t even bother to notify me. I just happened to look at their web site on Friday, May 29 and noticed it by accident.

I don’t know why they are holding a public hearing. The judge's order told them to rule on my petition. It’s a legal question, so I’m not sure what public opinion has to do with it.

I called and they said it was okay for me to attend the public hearing on my petition, so I’ll be there. Several patients will be there. I think the ACLU of Iowa will be there.

It will be interesting to see who they invited. There’s nothing else on the agenda that afternoon, so they are giving it quite a lot of time.

Here's a conspiracy theory.

Senator Joe Bolkcom is working on medical marijuana legislation here in Iowa, SF 293.

In March, the Board of Pharmacy sent SF 293 to the Iowa Pharmacy Association for review. See page 3 of the March 13, 2009, minutes of the Board of Pharmacy.

Something tells me the Iowa Pharmacy Association will be the ones who got an invitation to Monday’s public hearing while the rest of us just have to watch their web site (so they can say it was publicly announced).

I don’t predict the outcome will be any different, but the Board just seems to have a strange way of operating.

Isn’t the Board supposed to be protecting the citizens from the pharmaceutical industry?

Isn’t that why we have regulations?