D.C. Initiative From 1998 Likely to Finally Take Effect

[Ganjarden]

On November 3, 1998, the voters of the District of Columbia passed Initiative 59 by a vote of 69%-31%. The title was "Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998″. However, the Board of Elections refused to release the election returns for that initiative, because on October 21, 1998, Congress had passed the Barr Amendment to the D.C. Appropriations Act. The Barr Amendment said, "None of the funds contained in the Appropriations Act may be used to conduct any ballot initiative which seeks to legalize or otherwise reduce penalties" for marijuana.

On September 17, 1999, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Roberts ruled in Turner v D.C. Board of Elections that the U.S. Constitution requires the Board of Elections to count the votes and release the results. The decision says, "To cast a lawful vote only to be told that that vote will not be counted or released is to rob the vote of any communicative meaning whatsoever."

However, the decision did not say that the federal Barr Amendment could be overridden by the voters of D.C., so for 10 years, the initiative has been on the D.C. law books, but can't be implemented due to the Congressional override.

But on July 16, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the D.C. Appropriations Bill for 2010 without the Barr amendment. If the U.S. Senate concurs, and President Obama signs the bill, D.C. will finally be able to implement Initiative 59.

There are double ironies here. The more obvious one is that former Congressman Bob Barr, as a lobbyinst for the Marijuana Policy Project in recent years, has been working to delete the Barr Amendment. This has been noted in most stories about the recent U.S. House action.

But another irony, unmentioned in the press, is that Barr is about to sue the D.C. Board of Elections to force the Board to count the write-in votes of voters who voted for Barr in November 2008. Barr was a properly certified write-in candidate in the District last year, yet D.C. refuses to say how many write-ins he received, even though the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled in1974 that D.C. must permit and count such write-in votes for president. The Turner decision from 1999 will help Barr win that case.


News Hawk- Ganjarden 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Ballot Access News
Contact: Ballot Access News
Copyright: 2009 Ballot Access News
Website: D.C. Initiative From 1998 Likely to Finally Take Effect

 

[Propa Gator]

Washington DC, home of the executive branch, congress and the supreme court. Three ring circus to make PT Barnam proud with fools speaking every day. Then you have local government to make me real happy I don't have to live there. I'm counting my blessings down here in the swamp.

 

[Pythaglio]

In November I held my nose and voted for Bob Barr. Turns out there really wasn't any reason to hold my nose.

Just because DC is a 3 ring circus is no reason to decry its being on the verge of becoming a legal medical 'state'. Clowns are always funnier to me when I'm medicated.

 

[Pythaglio]

Text of DC Initiative 59

"Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998"
Summary Statement

This initiative changes the laws of the District of Columbia to:

Restore the right of seriously ill individuals to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes when recommended by a licensed physician to aid in the treatment of HIV/AIDS, glaucoma, muscle spasm cancer, or other serious or chronic illnesses for which marijuana has demonstrated utility; protect seriously ill Washingtonians, their licensed physicians and caregivers from criminal prosecution or sanction; legalize -- for medical purposes only -- the possession, use, cultivation, and distribution of marijuana in the District of Columbia, and maintain the prohibition and criminal sanctions against the use of marijuana for any nonmedical purpose.

Text

Be it enacted by the Electors of the District Of Columbia. That this act may be cited as the "Protecting Medical Patients and Providers from Marijuana Prosecution Initiative of l998".

Sec. 2. All seriously ill individuals have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes when a licensed physician has found the use of marijuana to be medically necessary and has recommended the use of marijuana for the treatment (or to mitigate the side effects of other treatments such as chemotherapy, including the use of AZ1, protease inhibitors, etc., radiotherapy. etc.) or diseases and conditions associated with I HIV and AIDS;, glaucoma, muscle spasm, cancer ant other serious or chronic illnesses for which the recommending physician reasonably believes that marijuana has demonstrated utility.

Sec.3 3. Medical patients who use, and their primary caregivers who obtain for such patients, marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a licensed physician do not violate the District of Columbia Uniform Controlled Substances Act of 1981, effective August 5, 1981 (D.C. Law 4-29; D.C. Code § 33 501 et seq.) (controlled Substances Act"), as amended and in so far as they comply with this act, are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction.

Sec. 4. (a) Use of marijuana under the authority of this act shall not be a defense to any crime of violence, the crime of operating a motor vehicle while unpaired or intoxicated, or a crime involving danger to another person or to the public, nor shall such use negate the mens rea for any offense.

(b) Whoever distributes marijuana cultivated, distributed or intended to be distributed or used pursuant to this act to any person not entitled to possess or distribute marijuana under this act shall be guilty of crime and subject to the penalty set forth in section 401 (a)(2)(D) of the Controlled Substances Act (D.C. Code § 33-541(a)(2)(0)).

Sec. 5. Notwithstanding any other law, no physician shall be punished, or denied any right, privilege or registration for recommending, while acting in the course of his or her professional practice, the use of marijuana for medical purposes. In any proceeding in which rights or defenses created by this act are asserted a physician called as a witness shall be permitted to testify before a judge, in camera. Such testimony, when introduced in a public proceeding, if the physician witness so requests, shall have redacted the name of the physician and the court shall maintain the name and identifying characteristics of the physician under seal.

Sec. 6. (a) Any District law prohibiting the possession of marijuana or cultivation of marijuana shall not apply to a medical patient, or to a medical patient's primary caregivers, when a medical patient or primary caregiver possesses or cultivates marijuana for the medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation of a licensed physician. The exemption for cultivation shall apply only to marijuana specifically grown to provide a medical supply for a patient, and not to any marijuana grown for any other purpose In determining a quantity of marijuana that constitutes a medical supply. this act shall be interpreted to assure that any medical patient protected by the act shall have access to a sufficient quantity of marijuana to assure that they can maintain their medical supply without any interruption in their treatment or depletion of their medical supply of marijuana.

(b) The prohibition in the Controlled Substances Act against the manufacture, distribution, cultivation, or possession with intent to manufacture, distribute, or cultivate. or against possession, of marijuana shall not apply to a nonprofit corporation organized pursuant to this act.

Sec. 7. A medical patient may designate or appoint a licensed health care practitioner, parent, sibling, spouse, child or other close relative domestic partner, case manager/worker, or best friend to serve as a primary caregiver for the purposes of the act. A designation under this act need not be in writing; however. any written designation or appointment shall be prima facie evidence that a person has been so designated. A patient may designate not more than four persons at any one time to serve as a primary caregiver for the purposes of this act. [r the purposes of this subsection, the term "best friend means a close Friend who is feeding, nursing, bathing, or otherwise caring for the medical patient while the medical patient is in a weakened condition.

Sec. 8. Residents of the District of Columbia may organize and operate not-for-profit corporations for the purpose of cultivating, purchasing, and distributing marijuana exclusively for the medical use of medical patients who are authorized by this act to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes. Such corporations shall comply with the district's nonprofit corporation laws. Fees and licenses shall be collected by the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs ("DCRA") in the same manner as other not-for-profit corporations operating in the District of Columbia. The Director of DCRA shall issue such corporations exemptions from the sales tax, use tax, income tax and other taxes of the District of Columbia in the same manner as other nonprofit corporations.

Sec. 9. The exemption from prosecution for distribution of marijuana under this act shall not apply to the distribution of marijuana to any person under 18 years of age unless that person is an emancipated minor, or a parent or legal guardian of the minor has signed a written statement that such parent or legal guardian understands: (i) the medical condition of the minor, (ii) the potential benefits and the potential adverse effects of the use of marijuana generally and in the case of the minor, and (iii) consents to the use of marijuana for the treatment of the minor's medical condition. Violation of this section shall be subject to the penalties of the Controlled Substances Act.

Sec. 10. (a) The Director of the Department of Health of the District of Columbia must develop a plan and submit it, within 90 days of the approval of this act to the Council of the District of Columbia to provide for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients enrolled in Medicaid or a Ryan White CARE Act funded program who are in medical need, who desire to add marijuana to their health care regimen and whose licensed physician reasonably believes that marijuana would be beneficial to their patient.

(b) Within 30 days of the certification of the passage of this act by the people of the District of Columbia, the Mayor of the District of Columbia shall deliver a copy of this act lo the President and the Congress to express the sense of the people of the District of Columbia that the Federal government must develop a system to distribute marijuana to patients who need it for medical purposes.

Sec. 11. If any provision of this measure or the application thereof to my person or circumstance is held invalid. that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the measure which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end he provisions of this measure are severable.

Sec. 12. This act shall take effect after a 30 day period of Congressional review as provided in section 602(c)(1) of the District of Columbia Self-government and Governmental Reorganization Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. Code § 1-233(c)(l)).

 

[Pythaglio]

Great news, the Barr Amendment is gone from the final appropriations bill.

Details on the MPP blog at D.C. Takes Another Step Toward Medical Marijuana — MPP Blog

 

[yavapai]

I'm very interested in any news abut D.C. and legalizing MJ for medical use - that's where I live. So far from what I read, if I read it right, it sounds like it has been a long process and it closer, but no cigar! Thanks for the info. Yavapai

 

[Pythaglio]

yavapai, my understanding is that it's a done deal if the bill is passed.

The agenda seems to be allowing DC to have actual home rule, and this is one of the laws the District wanted that Congress put the kibosh on.

Mr. Obama has to sign the bill into law, but the bill is an appropriations bill for FY 2010, not an MMJ law. FY2010 started October 1 so they really don't have the luxury of time.

The DC City Council still has to give it the OK, but wow, we may as well just give up if they don't implement. They're getting ready to implement gay marriage with little opposition on the council.

Then Congress has 30 days which they could negate the deal. But they don't have to actually vote, just wait 30 days and it becomes law. So no Congress critter has to worry about voting 'in favor of drugs'. It seems silly even in the theater of the absurd that is Congress that they would repeal the Barr Amendment at this stage, and then proactively reinstate it after the Council OKs it.

There's a meetup group for patients run by a friend of mine. It doesn't look like it's been very active since he started it, but then there hasn't been anything to do. Here's a link if you're interested:
District of Columbia Medical Marijuana Initiative 59! (Washington, DC) - Meetup.com