http://www.nhinsider.com/matt-simon/Copyright NHInsider.com 2006-2007en-USSquarespace Site Server v5.0.0 (http://www.squarespace.com/)Matt SimonMon, 25 Aug 2008 19:02:00 +0000http://www.nhinsider.com/matt-simon/2008/8/24/gop-candidates-split-on-medical-marijuana.html#comments13961:1409652:comment/1826707
This might perhaps be said for California, but not for the other 11 states which have chosen to protect seriously ill patients from arrest. These laws do not permit businesses to emerge -- they merely allow patients to provide for themselves without risking arrest and incarceration.

"If you want to seek drug "reform" like this, go for it, but be honest about it -it has as much to do with "medicinal uses" as happy hour at your local bar does."

I am very honest about my belief that marijuana should be legal for all adults. However, if the absurd "War on Marijuana" is destined to last another 10 or 20 years (I hope not), getting seriously ill patients off the battlefield is a moral imperative, today.

NH voters support medical marijuana reform by a 71% to 21% margin. If "democracy" means anything to the folks who run our state, medical marijuana will pass in 2009.

Matt]]>Richard BarnesMon, 25 Aug 2008 18:57:35 +0000http://www.nhinsider.com/matt-simon/2008/8/24/gop-candidates-split-on-medical-marijuana.html#comments13961:1409652:comment/1826695
And the problem with that would be???

Unless a drug can be shown to hamper someone's self control to the point they become a danger to those around them what would be the problem to your or I if Matt or whoever choose to toke up in their home on their free time?

If insurance companies are FORCED to cover it that's a problem (I've already written about such issues if you're interested in my take on it) but beyond that where is the problem in legalizing mariguana for any level of use, medical or otherwise? I just don't see it.]]>Concerned TaxpayerMon, 25 Aug 2008 17:52:23 +0000http://www.nhinsider.com/matt-simon/2008/8/24/gop-candidates-split-on-medical-marijuana.html#comments13961:1409652:comment/1826514
We can talk about medical uses but let's face facts - most of the people pushing for pot legalization just want to be able to smoke it without fear of retribution. In states where they have legalized "medical" uses, the business that emerge are just fronts for run of the mill pot dealers.

If you want to seek drug "reform" like this, go for it, but be honest about it - it has as much to do with "medicinal uses" as happy hour at your local bar does.]]>ToddMon, 25 Aug 2008 01:53:57 +0000http://www.nhinsider.com/matt-simon/2008/8/24/gop-candidates-split-on-medical-marijuana.html#comments13961:1409652:comment/1822473
I spoke with Stephen one-on-one for several minutes earlier this year. I had meant to ask him his thoughts on drug policy. We never got past the first topic of the Patriot Act.

Based on his responses on that issue involving police powers, I am not hopeful that he would be for medical marijuana reform.

But you are right. It would be interesting to hear exactly what he has to say on the subject.]]>Matt SimonMon, 25 Aug 2008 00:07:23 +0000http://www.nhinsider.com/matt-simon/2008/8/24/gop-candidates-split-on-medical-marijuana.html#comments13961:1409652:comment/1822347
To my knowledge, the CD1 candidates have not yet been asked.

For the past several years, Congress has considered legislation called the Hinchey-Rohrbacher Amendment which would simply end the federal raids in states where medical marijuana is legal. Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter both voted correctly this year to end the raids, but the bill did not pass.

Jeb Bradley voted against the Hinchey-Rohrbacher Amendment when he was in office. It will be interesting to see what John Stephen has to say on this topic, especially since he bills himself as a limited government conservative and likes to talk about the Constitution. He will be asked... anybody can ask!

Matt]]>