Bob Newland responded to the item regarding Tim Johnson's letter to Eddie by asking Todd Epp to answer questions about medical marijuana. Since I posted the item -- and because I've thought about this issue quite a bit since Bob rode his bike across the state this summer -- I decided that I would take the time to answer.

First, I want to point out that the reason the item was posted is because Johnson took a position on Medical Marijuana. John Thune has also answered Eddie's question; he said he was opposed to legalizing it. The item is news -- big news -- and deserves more coverage.

I would sign the petition, but only because I believe that it deserves a place on the ballot. I am in favor of letting the public vote on a variety of initiatives. That doesn't mean I favor it. That said, I am firmly in the undecided column. Hopefully, my answers will give you a better understanding why.

(I will also say that I am not a pot smoker. And I am of the school that believes it is not a harmless drug. But so is aspirin when abused.) 

Bob's questions are in bold. 


1. Do you think that the people who use marijuana medically are lying about their assertions that it works for them, and that many have tried prescriptive medicines and found that they don't work, or that they have serious adverse side-effects?

No. In fact, I believe that many of them have found comfort in using marijuana for medical purposes. 

2. What, exactly, is the danger to society in adult (or juvenile, with parental involvement) use of marijuana under the guidance of a doctor?

I worry about legalizing access to marijuana and the possible problems it might cause. I wonder how we would go about acquiring a drug that is illegal to produce. Who would produce and market marijuana? Would it be distributed at the drug store like Vioxx? (bad example).


3. Can you present even one benefit from marijuana prohibition?

There a plenty of studies that question the health effects of marijuana. Alcohol prohibition probably was beneficial, since it is a substance that is easily abused. The question itself gives me pause, since it suggests that you see the Medical Marijuana initiative as a step toward the wholesale legalization of the drug. And that's my biggest problem with it is that, while I don't doubt the sincerity of many of the people who use it, I do question the sincerity of the people pushing for legalization of marijuana for medical use.

Now, if you would say, "can you present even one benefit from the prohibition of marijuana for medical purposes," I have a tougher time answering the question. Probably not. Because of the popularity of marijuana, I expect that access to it by recreational users would increase. That's not the point of your campaign, at least in the way that it 's being presented to the public.

Assure me that you are advocating for patients and not for pot and I will be firmly in your corner. Right now, you haven't been able to do this.

SDBWM