The nationwide debate over marijuana laws is finding a home in the South Dakota state legislature this year. States like Colorado and Washington moved toward legalization of pot in the November elections. In South Dakota lawmakers are considering a few bills that change the penalties for marijuana use. SDPB’s Charles Michael Ray has today’s Dakota Digest on the debate over reforming marijuana law.
The pro-marijuana stereotype is a passed out hippy, with some gnarly dreadlocks, lying in front of a dirty three foot water bong. But in the case ofHouse Bill 1227it would be wrong to stereotype. This measure has the support of those like a retired Rapid City police chief.
“This is about allowing people who are critically ill to defend themselves by presenting that case in court if and when they’re charged,” says Tiezen.
Republican State Senator Craig Tiezen spent over three decades in law enforcement before becoming a legislator. He insists this bill, called the Necessity Defense Act, is not about allowing full on medical marijuana in the state.
“This bill is not about legalization of marijuana, it’s not about setting up the goofy street corner pharmacy systems that have been set up in other states. I oppose all of that,” says Tiezen.
Rather, Tiezen and others say people with serious health problems who get caught using marijuana to alleviate their symptoms, should have the option of presenting their illness as a defense to a judge. Dr. Costas Hercules is a retired medical doctor who says he’s seen marijuana work to help treat patients when other drugs fail.
“If you’re suffering from multiple sclerosis, or PTSD veterans with PTSD or getting chemotherapy with nausea and vomiting that can be somewhat helped by very expensive drugs or helped by some people with marijuana,” says Hercules.
Those in favor of the measure like State Senator Tiezen add that by the numbers marijuana is less harmful to society than alcohol and he says prosecuting very sick patients for using it is wrong.
“And so I weighed my compassion for victims of these illnesses, and I weighed that against the issue of how serious an issue I believe marijuana in our society is. And based on that I came to this conclusion that I believe these people ought to have the opportunity to defend themselves in court if they happen to be arrested,” says Tiezen.
But opponents don’t take these arguments sitting down.
“The possession of Marijuana in South Dakota is illegal. There is no defense to it,”
Paul Bachand is with the South Dakota State’s Attorneys Association. He testified before a state house committee that under this bill a medical marijuana card from California could essentially become a get out of jail free card in South Dakota.
“By allowing this bill to go through, you will have created an exception for those in individuals in other states who have medical cards, who come to South Dakota for their skateboard injury or whatever, or bad back and now have their card – that’s a complete defense and that we simply object to,” says Bachand
Others opposed to the idea say it sends the wrong message to children. Ryan Mechaley with the Highway Patrol is a drug recognition expert. He worries if it becomes law it could be allowed in juvenile cases.
“The bill is not age specific, on school property smoking marijuana, being in possession of marijuana and as long as they’ve got a medical defense they’re good,” says Mechaley.
Opponents argue the measure is a step towards legalization in South Dakota. They argue it gives criminals more incentive to traffic marijuana in the state. Those in favor of the measure deny that this bill is a backdoor to legalization in South Dakota. Emmitt Reistroffer is a lobbyist with a group called South Dakota Families First. He argues that if this bill is passed it will be used as a reason to quash any future push for all out legalization.
“If the culture changes and Bob Newland with NORML comes back in four years and has a little more muscle and wants to fully legalize marijuana I guarantee you the state leadership, the attorney general, the opponents will point to this law and this law will be the basis for not going any more liberal direction with marijuana,” says Reistroffer.
Reistroffer is among those who advocate for deeper reforms to the state’s marijuana laws. Proponents argue pot prohibition has miserably failed in the same way alcohol prohibition failed. Those who argue for its legalization say marijuana should be heavily regulated and taxed and that revenue should go to schools and other needs. Reistroffer is also lobbying for a second bill this year in Pierre. Senate Bill 221reduces the penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana from a class one to a class two misdemeanor.
“What this bill will do is enhance public safety significantly because police officers will now have a new window of digression when they discover such an offender. If it’s a class two they’ll always confiscate the marijuana, give them their paperwork, and they can move on and go after other criminals in the community without hauling that person to jail,” saysReistroffer.
Whatever the outcome of state laws those opposed to changing marijuana regulations argue that federal law supersedes whatever is passed here. Charles McGuigan (MA-gwig-in) is the Chief Deputy Attorney General in South Dakota.
“Because the federal government schedules marijuana as a schedule one controlled substance. What that means is the FDA has found the marijuana is highly addictive and it has no medicinal value. Therefore if this a passes it would not be an affirmative defense in federal court,” says
Marijuana remains illegal in a majority of states. But the national debate is on-going. How far the pendulum swings toward more liberal drug laws depends in part on how successful marijuana legalization turns out in Colorado and Washington.