Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Face of Pot Politics: Why Don Haumant - and Some Legislators - Want Minnesota to Legalize Medical Marijuana
"Statistically, I'm supposed to be dead," says Don Haumant, 57, as he sits in his Minneapolis living room, the winter light coming in through half-closed shades.
Don Haumant holds a number of medications he used to take before relying on medical marijuana to keep his pain in check. (Pioneer Press: Ben Garvin)
The one-bedroom apartment is decorated with period furniture - "You might be comfortable on a mission chair," he offers a guest - and flourishes of 1950s and Hollywood memorabilia. Above the couch is a photograph of MGM's studio players from Tinseltown's golden era. Clark Gable anchors the shot.
"There's not a whole lot that can be done," said the onetime actor, his speech leisurely but his posture crisp. "That's why I've had to take it upon myself to do the things that are within my power to live a better life. And one of the things I've done is find the substances that are the most helpful and least damaging."
Haumant has liver disease and muscle pain, which he manages by smoking marijuana. He has done it with the knowledge of his doctors, and, while living in California, he did it legally.
But when he moved to Minnesota in 2002 to be nearer his boyhood home of Frederic, Wis., Haumant became an outlaw.
"It's much more of a stigma here," Haumant said. "In the circles that I travel, people are pretty much accepting of it, and public opinion is pretty much in favor of it. But still there are very strong forces here that consider me to be a criminal and an addict."
Haumant is one of the few advocates for a pair of medical marijuana bills moving through the Minnesota Legislature
Advertisement
Quantcast
who will confess to breaking the law. The bills are expected on the floors of the House and Senate within weeks and come as President Barack Obama's administration has signaled a seismic shift in federal attitudes toward state medical marijuana laws.
But it may not be enough to bring Haumant in from the cold. Bowing to law enforcement concerns, Gov. Tim Pawlenty is expected to veto the bills if passed. If he does, Minnesota will mark a decade of Capitol debates about medical marijuana that have led nowhere.
"Sometimes that's the way it goes in the legislative process: Things take a long time," said Sen. Steve Murphy, DFL-Red Wing, chief sponsor of the Senate version of the bill. "Even if the governor vetoes this, I think we may have enough votes to override it. If that's the case, then we'll definitely take that path."
HELP WITH NAUSEA
Haumant has long battled a variety of ailments. As a youth, he was diagnosed with adolescent scoliosis and in 1981, while living in California, with hepatitis-B. In 1996, a friend who used medical marijuana suggested he try it.
He first bought marijuana at a San Francisco dispensary operated by noted marijuana activist Dennis Peron.
"It was like going to a bar. You could go to the Mexican bar, where you could buy Mexican dope. ... You could go to a separate bar (for different kinds of marijuana). And at that time, you could smoke it right on the premises," Haumant said.
The marijuana helped him overcome nausea related to his liver condition, which in turn has helped him put on weight. It also eases his muscle pain, allowing him to turn down prescriptions for powerful painkillers that are too taxing on his liver.
He told his doctor, whose only advice was not to hold the smoke in very long to avoid damage to his lungs.
A "supplier" provides him a "tenuous" connection to a substance he considers vital to his well-being. "I don't really have a good backup," he said. And Haumant said he won't buy drugs on a street corner.
"I'm sort of on marijuana maintenance. It keeps me going," Haumant said. "I like to live an independent life, and I think that my smoking marijuana has helped facilitate that. ... I would rather be a regular user of marijuana than pop four or five oxycodones a day, which I have done."
Supporters say marijuana helps cancer patients overcome the nauseating effects of chemotherapy and can stimulate the appetites of those suffering from HIV-related wasting disease. Some glaucoma sufferers use it for relief, as do many who suffer from pain.
The latest versions of the bill would require written certification from a doctor, allowing patients to obtain a registration card giving them access to marijuana purchased from a nonprofit registered with the state. Those dispensaries would not be allowed within 500 feet of a church or school.
That would put Minnesota among the minority of medical-marijuana states that license and oversee drug transactions through dispensaries. Users would be allowed to possess up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana, or to grow as many as 12 plants.
The bill also lists and defines which medical conditions would qualify a patient for medical marijuana. "It would be one of the tightest laws on the books," Murphy said.
POPULAR SUPPORT, LARGE BARRIERS
Thirteen states have added medical-marijuana laws since California voters first approved them in 1996, and several others are weighing them. Voters have led the way in the debate, with eight of the 13 laws having been passed by popular vote. A wide majority of Minnesota voters appears to support such a change. In May 2008, a SurveyUSA poll found a solid 2-to-1 majority behind it.
But making it law here has hit a wall. Lately, that wall resembles Pawlenty, who has said he will stand with law enforcement in opposition to the bill.
While states can create exceptions in their drug laws, they cannot do so for federal prohibitions. That throws the use and distribution of medical marijuana into limbo - while legal in the state, federal authorities still could arrest and charge someone who sells or uses pot.
That strange legal position has propelled the argument over medical marijuana to the august halls of the U.S. Supreme Court, even while the Drug Enforcement Administration has carried out raids on state-approved dispensaries in California. The debate is an interplay of pot smokers, constitutional lawyers and agents with very large guns.
But last month, Attorney General Eric Holder might have opened the door for a change of heart from those who worry that setting up medical-marijuana dispensaries is to invite a federal crackdown.
Days after Obama was sworn in, the DEA engaged in 11 eyebrow-raising coordinated raids in California, where there is widespread suspicion that users with no legitimate medical condition have easy access to pot. The raids came despite Obama's campaign pledge that medical marijuana was a state issue into which the federal government should not tread.
Since then, there have been no further raids, and DEA representatives refuse to discuss them. During a Feb. 25 news conference, Holder was asked about the situation.
"Well, what the president said during the campaign, you will be surprised to know, will be consistent with what we will be doing here in law enforcement," Holder said.
On Wednesday, Obama nominated Gil Kerlikowske to head the Office of National Drug Control Policy as the nation's so-called drug czar. During his tenure as Seattle's police chief, Kerlikowske was known for emphasizing drug treatment over prosecution for small-scale drug crimes.
"I really believe that law enforcement needs to consider (Holder's comments) and calm down," Murphy said.
But they aren't changing the minds of top state law enforcement officials.
"(Holder's) got a memo that he received from the president, as I understand it," said Michael Campion, commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety. "I'm not sure it does anything. It doesn't change the law."
ANOTHER OPTION: CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
But Chris De La Forest, a Republican former state lawmaker from Andover who is lobbying for the bill, thinks the new approach should change the debate. His group, the Marijuana Policy Project, met with law-enforcement officials in December and requested they notify the policy group of any objections.
"To date, law enforcement refuses to negotiate with us. They refuse to tell us what, in their opinion, is wrong with the bill and needs to be fixed," De La Forest said.
Campion said his opposition is well founded. He does not want to see Minnesota turn into another California and says a process is in place for approving medically necessary drugs - through the Food and Drug Administration.
"If there was legitimacy and there was an appetite and there was a need, you don't think these pharmaceutical companies would be all over that to make money?" Campion said.
He also pointed out that Minnesota's drug laws are not overly punitive and that the state has a fair, balanced approach to drug policy.
"I don't think I'm just a hysterical bureaucratic cop saying the sky is falling," he said.
Neither the American Medical Association nor the Minnesota Medical Association endorses medical marijuana, but several studies published in prominent medical journals have pointed to its benefits.
One comes from an unlikely source - the White House itself. A 1999 report commissioned by the Office of National Drug Control Policy concluded:
"For patients who suffer simultaneously from severe pain, nausea and appetite loss, such as those with AIDS or who are undergoing chemotherapy, cannabinoid drugs" - such as marijuana - "might offer broad-spectrum relief not found in any other single medication."
And some medical groups, such as the Lymphoma Foundation of America and the American Public Health Association, have endorsed medical marijuana.
De La Forest is hopeful the legislative process can lead to a good bill, but he's keeping his options open. If Pawlenty continues to block it, he said, advocates would take their case directly to the voters.
"If it's determined that (the legislative) route is unavailable to us, then a constitutional amendment is something that will happen," De La Forest said.
For now, Haumant isn't optimistic the bill will pass this year.
"There are a lot of areas in rural Minnesota where this sort of thing is regarded as evil, with a capital 'e,' and so those legislators are down on it," Haumant said. "People are afraid."
- Posted in



17 Comments so far
Show AllFrom the photo caption:
"Don Haumant holds a number of medications he used to take..."
And there's your problem in a nutshell. If you could grow oxycontin on your window sill, it would be illegal too.
I grow Medical Marijuana.
It is an amazing analgesic and so much more. What a threat to pharma profits, but what a blessing for people in pain, and with many other ills. (Unlike aspirin or opiate derivatives though, analgesics too, marijuana is good for nausea, helps the stomach, does not hurt it....
I've watched Pot dry a lot of tears, watched people hurting and shaking, overcome with pain, take a hit, then another, then the slow smile as the pain ebbs, then the relaxing.
It is a gift from God, like air or water or comida.
Joe.
Only a criminal mind would allow sentient beings to be in constant pain so there would be a market for their overpriced product.
Only a scum-of-the-earth governor would allow people to be in pain just to maintain his popularity among Bible thumpers and drug companies.
Only a sick society would have 3% of its population in the criminal justice system because they prefer drugs from which corporations cannot profit.
We are at war because we cannot mind our own business and allow others to do the same.
The USA is dying. I saw the chairman of the fed on 60 minutes last night. When he would say 'we will recover and be stronger than ever' his voice quivered just enough to let us know he did not believe what he was saying.
"Law enforcement" is against it because decriminalizing pot and other drugs will destroy the Prison Industrial Complex and its "law enforcement" water bearers. The comments aimed at BigPharma are also correct. The "fear" factor releaved at the article's end proves just how effective the Propaganda and Indoctrination Systems are at twisting people's minds. That US laws reign supreme illustart yet another failure of the federal government's blueprint and its need for replacement.
"He does not want to see Minnesota turn into another California"
Not much chance of THAT...
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Why isn't religion illegal? Many more people have died from that than from smoking/eating pot.
Pot prohibition is the most pernicious of all the conservatives rules.
ALL marijuana should be legal. Not just when it's used for medical purposes.
amen
I second the motion.
Now if I could only remember where I put those petitions . . . ; )
The Tobacco companies are scared that pot is a competitor. Since Tobacco has
all the high paid Lobbyists to keep pot illegal, pot will stay illegal..
It's that simple..
Pot don't threaten Johnny Walker or Philip Morris,
But pot would eviscerate big Pharma, just eff it up,
Not just by displacing half the pharmacuetical drugs out of the chute,
But by demonstrating what a Sham big Pharma is, killing people, sucking them dry in exchange for their side-effect ridden, useless stratospherically expensive pills for any ills.
Leg broken? Pill.
Suicidal. Two pills.
Already Dead? Pills for the grieving.
Wish You Were? All the pills. But pay your pharmcay first.
The article's title asks, "Why Don Haumant - and Some Legislators - Want Minnesota to Legalize Medical Marijuana" (?).
Well, see, the "elites", they like the major international drug-trafficking business, while of course not wanting anyone of the public to realise this, and the CIA is their organisation, the CIA operations branch or division, whatever it's called, anyway. And plenty of members of the U.S. Congress and Senate, both, are "friends", say, with the "elites", also getting in on some of the "action" when it's profitable anyway.
Sort of reminds of the very old history, about the period during which the "elite" of the Roman Empire were the ones who chose who would be bishops, cardinals, and popes, in the RCC; appointing sons and nephews, who in turn served the interests of the very selective and appointing "elites". Okay, it's not a [perfect] analogy, but I still see some similarity(ies), between that corrupt period of the church and how "elites" rather always like to manipulate, control, [dominate] over ... [society].
Anyway, they also have pointy-headed people who claim to be medical doctors working for the "interests" of the "elites"; doctors who clearly can't perform sound analysis, or, if they can, then they wittingly lie and then act as if they can't conduct competent analyses ... in some regards anyway.
So there are those servants, plus members of Congress and the Senate who evidently have very small brains; both of these groups serving the interests of the "elites".
Heroin and cocaine trafficking is much more profitable; it's obtained for relatively [very] little cost and sold with a [very] high mark-up. The profit margin, given the prices per volume, is much, very much higher with heroin and cocaine, than it is with marijuana. Or so I am conjecturing, but I believe that it's accurate enough, or more than enough, that is, strongly.
And they don't want masses of peace-loving, ... citizens, and consuming marijuana is not conducive to being violent. People who are violent when they consume tend to be, if not always are, violent before ever having consumed, to begin with. But I think the profit margin is surely the greater factor of interest; I think. If mistaken about that, then both factors are of serious interest; because the profit certainly is.
Or, maybe it's because of their obsession with always trying to be in control, and I don't mean of themselves, but over or of others; their obsession with [domination].
Yet, perhaps it's for all of these reasons, too. One certainty is that there is absolutely [no] sanity in illegalising marijuana even [at all], so much less sanity is there in illegalising it or keeping it illegal for medical or medicinal purposes.
Consider, also, how extreme the related U.S. laws of prohibition are compared to other western countries! There's a [tremendous] difference! And there isn't really any problems due to consumption in these other [western], industrialised, ... countries!!! That's three !'s in a row; well, five if you count the '!!!' concluding the last sentence, but you got the "drift" of my meaning, right(! or ?).
There's [absolutely] ... [no] ... [sanity] ... in illegalising marijuana at all, and for that matter, there's no sanity in criminalising anyone for any drug consumption. Do they criminalise people for consuming alcohol, the liquor kind? NO! Yet it's another narcotic, and one certainly more dangerous than marijuana (and hash or hashish, a concentrated form of marijuana)!
Marijuana is a Natural herbal medicine; it [is] a medicinal plant. But then also is opium. We all know it's been used for a very long time for medical purposes, and that it was legal for free consumption during the early part of the 20th century, so legal until not even a century ago.
Prohibition leads to criminal violence. We wouldn't have violent gangs, cartels, ... killing, ... innocent people if the drugs weren't illegal and thereby removed from being a black market product that's very, very lucrative as long as not "busted". Police, judges, lawyers, politicians, there are plenty who are "on the take" in order to protect their "friends" in black market trades that are profitable. And the CIA's big in international drug trafficking; apparently also the DEA, which certainly is positioned to be part of the profiteers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oszATUJ4IRE
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/03/16-5
Know this: The illegalisation cannot be ethically maintained, and doing so, keeping it that way, illegal, is far more dangerous for society than legalisation would ever come close to being.
"People are afraid" That's what everything comes down to isn't it? That's how they keep us in line.
LeeAnnG
This is the third article in three days (the other two were, I believe on Alternet) about legalizing marijuana. The others concerned legalizing it for the tax benefits, especially in California.
The movement seems to be gaining momentum, and more people are talking about it. Maybe the economy will be the final push needed to legalize and tax it like other controlled substances - alcohol and tobacco, for example.
LeeAnnG,
If we tax it, how does that help the economy?
It takes money out of people's pockets and gives it to the government.
To stimulate the economy we legalize growing and selling it, by anyone to anyone-and folks start EXPORTING it. We could turn our trade deficit around in about six months (right after harvest) and end the recession.
We grow the best Marijuana in the World.
I got blueberry haze & goo almost done now.
Then we pay taxes on the income from sales.
LeeAnn, these next coupla hits are for you. Joe.