Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2007

SCIENCE, STATE, JUSTICE, COMMERCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Hinchey amendment.

I acknowledge that this is a controversial issue, and it has been a difficult decision for me. While scientific evidence is inconclusive and the medical community has yet to speak with one voice as to whether there is a unique, therapeutic benefit to inhaled marijuana, some studies suggest that marijuana can relieve pain, nausea, and appetite loss. I have heard from many patients, suffering from some of life's most challenging conditions, who have informed me that the therapeutic value of inhaled marijuana is unmatched. I have always supported further study of medical marijuana because of the potential to ease the suffering of the many Americans dealing with chronic illness and disease

While I have not supported amendments similar to this one in the past, the issue is different for me this year, as the Representative from the Second Congressional District of Rhode Island. Since we last debated this issue in June 2005, the state legislature of Rhode Island has passed--and the state Department of Health has implemented--a law allowing for legal access to medical marijuana. Under this law, the state established a registry that issues identification cards to qualifying patients or caregivers who register with the state. These patients, who suffer from an approved list of conditions including cancer, multiple sclerosis and AIDS, must provide certification from a Rhode Island physician. Once approved in the registry, the patient or a designated caregiver is permitted to possess up to a certain amount of cultivated marijuana and to grow up to 12 marijuana plants. The statewide discussion over the issue made clear that my constituents overwhelmingly support regulated access to marijuana for medical purposes; and the state legislature responded with overwhelming support by overriding a governor's veto with significantly more than the necessary 2/3 support in each chamber. I am aware that I now represent some constituents who are using medical marijuana, in compliance with state laws. I am also aware that under federal law, these Rhode Island patients run the risk of being arrested and prosecuted for federal drug offenses--and this troubles me greatly.

My vote for the Hinchey amendment should not be interpreted as an unconditional endorsement of medical marijuana. I do believe the therapy deserves further clinical trials and scientific scrutiny. As we move forward with these policy discussions, we must bear in mind that marijuana is a narcotic and therapeutic usage must be carefully controlled. However, I rise today in support of the Hinchey amendment because I do not want my constituents, or those of the ten other states that have passed similar laws, to live in fear of arrest when they are complying with state law.

I urge my colleagues to support the Hinchey amendment, as well as the further study of the therapeutic value of medical marijuana

http://thomas.loc.gov