Dear Governor Gregoire,

I am a medical marijuana patient who suffers from Multiple Sclerosis. My personal garden was confiscated by police after my house was burglarized in 2003. The City of Seattle tried to seize my house. I spent 15 months in the legal system desperately trying to stay out of jail. This was an unbearable burden in addition to maintaining my health.

Senate bill 6032 would do much to clarify protections for patients like me. Sick people do not need the extra stress of having their medicine taken away from them.

My health depends on my access to medical marijuana. My ability to medicate depends on not having my medicine taken away by law enforcement.

Please ensure that 6032 passes into law. The health and well-being of many in Washington State is depending on these protections.

Sincerely,

Rafael Wilson
Seattle, WA

April 10, 2007

Dear Honorable Eileen Cody,

Thank you for taking the time to consider the clarification of Washington State medical marijuana patient protections as outlined in 6032-S.E AMH HCW H3219-1.

I am a medical marijuana patient who suffers from a condition that causes chronic pain. Being ill is difficult enough without the fear of having your medicine confiscated by law enforcement. It would be a great relief to know that these legal provisions are distinctly outlined and conveyed to the understanding of all involved; state agencies as well as patients, their designated providers and the medical establishment.

The inclusion of the clause requiring the Department of Health to consult scientific documentation and medical opinion when drafting the 60-day guidelines is very important. Law enforcement should not be dictating patient medical treatment. It would be ideal for these guidelines to be available January 1, 2008 rather than the later date of July 1, 2008 as proposed in amendment # 496.

Amendment #495 poses a potential pitfall for the protection of medical marijuana patients. If the state does choose to provide marijuana confiscated by law enforcement then the integrity of the marijuana provided is potentially jeopardized. Many agricultural chemicals applied to commercial marijuana crops could cause further medical complications in those with very delicate health.

Your constituency in Washington State includes some severely ill patients. The health and well-being of these patients rests with your ability to see beyond the status quo and to look with compassion at an issue that should not be dictated to by law enforcement.

I urge you to expedite the passage of 6032-S.E AMH HCW H3219.1 Please help alleviate one more stressful aspect of living with a debilitating illness.

Gratefully,

Kristina

May 1, 2007

RE: Bill 6032

Dear Governor Gregoire:

I sent you a 48 minute DVD last year titled, The Miracles of Marijuana. You replied with a letter to me which mentioned that your former secretary had been a medical marijuana patient. You wrote: "Ultimately, I believe that the use of medicinal marijuana should be determined at the state level, based on what best serves our population". I want to thank you for living up to your words.

In this package I have enclosed a copy of my personal testimony before the House this spring in support of Senator Kohl-Welles' Bill 6032. I spoke with Cristina Hulet this morning. She had a number of question regarding my position and how that relates to the positions of those in opposition. I have written this letter to you to clarify any confusion on this subject.

I am personally acquainted with the voices who oppose 6032. The original version of this bill drafted by ACLU attorneys included an allowance for cooperative gardens. Those in opposition were all completely supportive until that particular section was removed. The main motivation of those who oppose Bill 6032 is to profit from marijuana sales despite the one-patient-per-designated-provider limitation intended to prevent the commercial sales of medical marijuana in Washington.

I sent to Ms. Hulet via email my response to a Seattle Times journalist who quoted me in a recent article. That emailed letter describes my opposition to the commercialization of marijuana. I am still in contact with many patient-activists in California. The conflict between federal and state laws there has created many easy targets. DEA has shut down more than 30 marijuana dispensaries in CA within the last year. The Medical Use of Marijuana Act of 1998 was created to protect marijuana patients from the sort of legal problems I incurred in 1996 and 1997. The commercialization of medical marijuana in this state would only invite disaster. Those who are so firmly set on legalizing marijuana sales drastically underestimate the continuing enforcement of federal law. The publisher of my book, The New Prescription-Marijuana As Medicine, Ed Rosenthal, currently faces a second federal trial for his possession of 600 marijuana plants even though he was a deputized agent of the City of Oakland at that time. I do not believe commercialization of marijuana production best serves our population in WA.

Martin Martinez

Dear Governor Gregoire,

I am a qualified medical marijuana patient and I support Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6032 as it was passed by the legislature.

Many legitimate medical marijuana patients in Washington State are at risk of having their medicine seized by law enforcement; or worse, subject to unjust prosecution.

Bill 6032 serves to further clarify protections for medical marijuana patients, their designated providers (caregivers), and the medical community.

It also directs the Department of Health to establish general guidelines on how much constitutes a 60-day supply of medicine.

Please sign this Bill 6032 into law in order to protect those of us who are most vulnerable, the medical marijuana patients of Washington State.

Thank you for your consideration of this important Bill.

Sincerely,

Dear Carol Ostrom,

I am Martin Martinez, marijuana patient quoted in your "House passes measure to clarify . . ." article of April 6, 2007. Thank you for your attention to this critically important issue. With a population of marijuana patients numbering tens of thousands, the nuances of these changes to our Evergreen state law will have a resounding impact on many people for years to come. That is why I am compelled to identify and correct misunderstandings that have proliferated in recent weeks.

I personally helped develop our state law during my fight for medical necessity that began in 1996. My physician, Rob Killian, MD, filed the original medical use act of 1998. The first version of Bill 6032 did legalize the production of medical marijuana "cooperatively by qualifying patients." That section was removed by the Senate. The original medical use of marijuana act did not prohibit nor allow cooperative gardening, and this recent legislative update does not change the law in that respect. Those who are so dramatically opposed to bill 6032 because it does not legalize cooperatives are in effect "crying wolf". Bill 6032 is a clarification of existing state law that neither expands nor restricts the current rights of Washington's medical marijuana community, as noted by Prosecutor Tom McBride.

The original bill contained the word "cooperative", but another marijuana patient named in your article uses the word "collective", which is distinctly different. The word "cooperative" is derived from agriculture. Farmers have frequently banded together to market their wares. That group effort is called a cooperative. The word "collective" is also rooted in agriculture. In collectives, there is no markets; people actually farm together. Correct understanding of these distinctly different terms is essential to understanding what is and what is not allowed under WA state law, irregardless of the passage of Bill 6032.

Federal laws have an overriding influence here. The WA state legislature is wise to avoid the commercialization of medical marijuana that has developed in CA. Federal authorities have shut down 30 marijuana dispensaries in the Golden state just in the last year I do oppose the commercialization of medical marijuana in WA because I have seen too many patient activists ruined by greed and the ensuing pursuit of federal police. The whole intent of our statute is to remove medical marijuana patients from the dangers of this continuing war on drugs. This is one of the reasons why I support Bill 6032 in its current form.

Sincerely,

Martin Martinez
www.cannabismd.org

Dear Speaker Chopp:

I testified in support of ESB 6032 at the House Hearing last week. I must amend my testimony because you have been subjected to an assault of objections from a handful of opponents, and I must clarify these issues to set the record straight, much as it displeases me to focus on the negative aspects of this issue.

I have a copy of a letter to you from attorney Douglas Hiatt and his cadre of signers who say ESB 6032 is a "grave concern . . ." As these topics are directly related to and derived from personal works in this area, I am inclined to rebut some of the arguments presented to you by Mr. Hiatt.

First of all, discounting the entire text of 6032 and then harping on one deleted subject can hardly be called a "Summary of Current Bill". However, to rebut that argument, I must point out that the protections afforded patients in Washington has never explicitly included or excluded cooperative gardening. The current version of ESB 6032 is similar in that respect. The illogic of this opening argument is remarkable. Why must ESB 6032 be rejected because it does not legalize cooperative growing?

I participated in authoritative estimates of the WA state patient population published in the highly esteemed Journal of Cannabinoid Medicine with the Director of CA NORML. In 2003, we estimated that at least 10,-20,000 qualified marijuana patients reside in WA. These numbers correlate well with Oregon's current registered population which is currently near 20,000. I know from years of direct experience with Green Cross and several other marijuana patient groups that the numbers of these groups total less than 2,000. Hiatt's statement that supports ". . . the cooperative grows from which the vast majority of patients obtain their medicine" is untrue. The majority of patients do not obtain their medicine from cooperative grows. In his third paragraph, Hiatt asserts that ". . . cooperative grows are the backbone of this community." Obviously, cooperative grows are the backbone of only ten percent of the medical marijuana community.

The 60 Day Supply issue is of great concern to me and many other patients. That is why we support 6032 because there must be some general guidelines to help reduce the amount of time and money I have spent helping other marijuana patients who have had trouble with enforcement of The Medical Use of Marijuana Act of 1998. Because I was arrested and tried in 1996-1997, I have been called to testify in more than a dozen cases where other qualified marijuana patients were subjected to destructive criminal prosecution. Mr. Hiatt has testified numerous times that he has "represented the majority of medical marijuana patients in this state", but that is definitely not true. I have a record of many of cases I have been involved in online at www.cannabismd.org. Hiatt is one of many different attorneys I have worked with on medical marijuana cases in WA.

Another misleading statement is made by Hiatt concerning Dr. Carter. Dr. Greg Carter embarked on the peer-reviewed paper titled "Rational Guidelines for Dosing" at my request in conjunction with the City of Seattle's Medical Marijuana Working Group formed by Councilman Licata with City Attorney Tom Carr. I contributed crucial anecdotal evidence from nearly 100 qualified marijuana patients for that paper, which is why my name is found in the references, also available online at www.canabismd.org. I do agree with Dr. Carter in many of his conclusions. I do not agree with Hiatt, however, that the State Department of Health is a poor choice for determining general guidelines to help reduce the amount of cases that Hiatt may handle in the future.

I have included a DVD titled The Miracles of Marijuana that examines some of the problems faced by medical marijuana patients in WA today. I hope you find it in your heart to overlook the vocal minority and pass ESB 6032 for the good of the majority of marijuana patients who are so dependant of the compassion of our society.

Yours truly,

Martin Martinez

TESTIMONY BEFORE THE STATE HOUSE

Madam Chair and members of the Committee, I am Martin Martinez from Seattle. I represent marijuana patients who want to live free of the fear they can be arrested for possession of this herbal medicine.

I was struck by a car in 1986, head-on at 60 miles per hour. Doctors said I would not survive. Then, during months in the hospital, I was given massive doses of morphine and other powerful drugs. None of those medicines reduced the terrible nerve pain I experience every day of my life. I found that marijuana is a superior pain reliever in many ways. But the science that now supports my experience was incomplete at the time of my first arrest in 1996.

I have lived with constant fear for over a decade. I faced a jury trial and a second arrest before my physician changed our state laws by filing The Medical Use of Marijuana Act of 1998. Since then, I have been called to testify in more than a dozen cases where a qualified patient was prosecuted unjustly. Please, try to imagine what it is like to be terribly ill and to need a medicine that carries the risk of jail time.

When I testified before the Senate last year, I noted that not much has changed since my first arrest. Finally, Bill 6032 promises to reinforce protection of people who are severely ill.

I support 6032. Dr. Killian, originator of The Medical Use Act, also supports 6032. My current physician recommends marijuana and he is another supporter of this Bill. Please help sick and dying people live free from the fear of incarceration. Please pass Bill 6032.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak with you today.


A path with heart

Joanna McKee and I both support 6032 because it is a small step in the right direction. We have both been here to help develop and support progressive medical marijuana implementation in the past, and we will be here to continue this process next year. We are realistic. We understand there is no hope of changing WA law to accommodate commercial production. "Tax and regulate" initiatives have failed in this state. Marijuana is a Schedule I substance under federal law, and that is the major concern of every state politician who has considered this issue.

Cooperatives have never been legal in WA. It is clear, as I wrote earlier, that WA government does not want to see a repeat of CA-style dispensaries and the conflict of constant police raids in the press or in the court system here in the Evergreen State. Joanna and I are educated on this subject. We know the government will not allow marijuana sales in WA. It is ridiculous to slander us with paranoid delusion that we have made some deal with the legislature.

There are now over 250,000 mmj patients in California with hundreds of dispensaries. Some of those dispensaries serve tens of thousands of patients with multi-million dollar budgets. I have posted many news articles about some of them in the recent past. CA law allows doctors to recommend mj for "any condition . . ." so there are far more patients per capita there than any other state. (Patients who are qualified to use medical marijuana in WA are severely ill by definition.) Nearly every medical marijuana dispensary in CA is run by non-patients for profit. Valerie and Mike Corral in Santa Cruz lead the only certified non-profit medical marijuana group in that state. That group has a few hundred, not a few thousand members.

Joanna and I advocate and educate. We care for small numbers of patients who need help. These are private and personal relationships among friends. Helping a sick patient find a caregiver or a P-patch garden group is nothing at all like the shameless profiteering going on in CA. I do not support the right to make millions of dollars buying and selling an illegal substance. Joanna and I both have a spiritual and social conscience. Getting rich on the suffering of others is bad Karma.

Martin Martinez


Working within the system

When I testified before the Senate on SB 5943 last year I repeated an important point:

In practice, not much has changed in the legal treatment of medical marijuana growers since my first arrest in 1996. The fact is, the real treatment of medical marijuana growers could not be much worse that it is today. Even in Seattle, the official plant limit is still only 9 plants. Does no one remember the case of John Graves?

Severely ill people who use marijuana as medicine are by definition dependant on the existing health care system for their survival. People with AIDS who must take enormously expensive medicines are one prominent example. Medical marijuana patients in WA are generally not well enough to be independent or self-sufficient. We are not in a position to demand anything from government. We have no lobby or political might. Our only power lies with the will of the people who vote and who decide cases as jury members.

I have spent more than ten years intent on integrating medical marijuana use with society as a whole. Most of those who are staunchly opposed to 6032, the compromise Bill now before the House, have not had much legal or political experience. Compromise is the state where no one gets exactly what they want. That is American democracy. This is the system the way it is now. 6032 is a small step.. It is the first step of any value since 1998, even though pro-mmj bills have been introduced every year in WA. By passing 6032, the legislature would send a strong message to police that they must respect the rights that have been trashed in so many cases in the last eight years.

6032 is the beginning, not the end of progress in our state. There is a strong likelihood that the Bill will pass with the Department of Health's authority to determine dose amounts intact because that is what the government wants. Directly opposing the expressed will of purr government will only cause further alienation. It is smarter to try to work within the system to positively affect the outcome of this process than to fight in an arena where we have no real influence. We must prove realistic dose amounts to the authorities in public hearings and/or in court. To fight against scientific and legal determinations causes the authorities to view us as unreasonable outlaws. WA government will not allow the federally-policed freedom here that is now prevalent in California. It is precisely those capitalists who most violently oppose this Bill that are of greatest concern to the WA state government.

I do not like the imposition of limits. However, it is better to help develop the limits that are probably going to be set than to rail against the system which will only strengthen the resolve of those in power.

By refusing to accept this process of government regulation, we invite attack from those who oppose us. If we follow the process and it turns out badly, then we still have the power to affect change in the court system. Fighting for our rights in court is a difficult chore I have been doing for over ten years now. 6032 may be less progressive than I wish, but it is a small step in the right direction. Right now the 60 day issue is decided by police and prosecutors. I think medical professionals would make better determinations, especially because there is an Administrative Rule process that can be used to take our issue to court in a worst-case scenario.

It is easy to destroy things and blame others for our failures. Creation is much more time-consuming and requires great dedication.

Martin Martinez