Idaho Senate committee delays vote on measure to ban marijuana, psychoactive drugs
Update: This story has been updated to reflect that Wednesday morning’s committee vote was delayed until Friday.
After two hours of public comments, a state Senate committee on Monday delayed a vote on a measure to ban psychoactive drugs that are already illegal in Idaho.
The constitutional amendment, introduced by Sen. C. Scott Grow, R-Eagle, would put the prohibition against now-illicit drugs in the state’s Constitution instead of just code — if voters passed it. Putting the ban in the Idaho Constitution would make it more difficult to legalize marijuana and other drugs in the future.
Grow said the measure would preserve Idaho’s values and “ensure the health and safety” of children. He cited Oregon’s recent drug reform measure that voters approved in November, in which small amounts of several street drugs were decriminalized, as an “end game where all drug legalization is headed.”
Some opponents of the measure questioned whether lawmakers this session would focus on legalizing hemp, which contains small amounts of THC, after it was legalized at the federal level. Braden Jensen, of the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation, spoke in favor of Grow’s amendment but clarified that the federation supports the legalization of hemp. Grow promised that lawmakers plan to legalize hemp this session.
Idaho is the only state that has not legalized hemp to line up its laws with the federal code.
More than 20 speakers, both supporters and opponents, showed up in front of the Senate State Affairs Committee, running into the time that senators needed to convene on the floor. They now plan to vote on Friday.
Critics of the legislation said it places too much power with the Food and Drug Administration to determine what’s medically admissible, and also testified about the benefits they’ve personally seen of medical marijuana. Proponents expressed support for keeping those drugs illegal.
Jeremy Kitzhaber, a retired U.S. Air Force veteran with a rare Stage 4 terminal cancer, said banning the possibility of medical marijuana legalization would force Idaho residents to either live in pain and take opioids — or risk criminal prosecution by crossing state lines to obtain medical marijuana.
Idaho is surrounded by border states that have legalized the drug in some capacity, with the exception of Wyoming. Washington, Oregon, Nevada and Montana have legalized recreational and medical pot, while Utah allows only medical marijuana. Voters in more conservative states, such as Montana and Arizona, approved recreational use during the November election. A total of 36 states have approved medical marijuana use, while 15 allow recreational use.
Kitzhaber, a Boise resident, said he takes three types of opioids, but they give him unwanted side effects. Bowel obstruction can be deadly, painful and last longer then 12 hours, he said. His medical specialist has told Kitzhaber that he would prescribe him medical marijuana if he could in Idaho.
If the committee moves the constitutional amendment forward, it would need two-thirds approval from both the House and the Senate. Republicans hold strong majorities in both. The measure would then go on the ballot for Idaho voters to support or reject in the 2022 general election. It would need just a simple majority to pass.
The new section of the Idaho Constitution would ban “the production, manufacture, transportation, sale, delivery, dispensing, distribution, possession, or use of a psychoactive drug” unless it’s approved by the Food and Drug Administration and lawfully prescribed.
Jeff Lavey, executive director of the Idaho Sheriffs Association and retired Meridian police chief, said he’s seen the “devastation” caused by illicit drugs. He criticized other states for legalization measures and said “one just has to look at our neighboring states to see the unintended consequences” of those drugs.
Megan Romero said she’s a registered nurse in Idaho who has seen that drugs prescribed by the FDA don’t work for everyone, and criticized the legislation for handing over broad control to the federal government.
“This resolution looks like an ax trying to do a scalpel’s job,” Romero said.
Several law enforcement representatives and addiction workers testified in favor of the legislation. Many had personal stories about how illicit, addictive drugs affected their family or others they’ve known. Several claimed their family members began with marijuana and witnessed it acting as a “gateway” to other substance abuse.
There is little evidence to support marijuana can act as a “gateway drug.” People who use “hard” illicit drugs — such as heroin or cocaine — are likely to have first smoked marijuana, the most easily accessible illegal drug in the U.S., according to Drug Policy Alliance. Some studies have found links to the use of pot and alcohol abuse or nicotine addiction. But most people who use marijuana do not later use “harder” substances, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Sen. Grant Burgoyne, D-Boise, criticized the legislation for trying to bar future legislatures or members of the public to vote on drug policies through initiatives. He also said the measure fails to adequately address the problem of substance abuse because it doesn’t include tobacco or alcohol.
Grow said the amendment isn’t “carved in stone.”
Dr. Dan Zuckerman, an oncologist, told senators that he’s seen medical marijuana relieve hundreds of patients’ suffering. He also warned lawmakers that the amendment could place even more restrictions on medical professionals than illicit drugs — the FDA often may not have approved experimental medication, or only approved cancer treatments for certain types of cancers. He believed that would place Idaho at a disadvantage in future medical breakthroughs.
Zuckerman said that five or 10 years ago, he would’ve been skeptical of using medical marijuana, too.
“I had to unwind myself and my own mind as I saw that people truly benefited from this,” he said.
This story was originally published January 25, 2021 at 5:07 PM.
