With just about a month to go in the signature collection efforts by United For Care to get a proposed medical marijuana amendment on Florida's 2014 general election ballot, supporters are gathering signatures while detractors are explaining why they believe the proposed change to the state's Constitution would be a bad idea.

Florida law states that any amendment proposed by voter initiative must secure a certain number of signatures before it can be presented to the Florida Supreme Court for review.  In December, Florida's highest court heard presentations from both sides of the proposed amendment.  Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi came out in opposition of the proposed amendment, and made a few statements supporting her position.  Among them, Bondi said the following:

"Florida’s proposed medical marijuana amendment would make Florida one of the most lenient medical-marijuana states, allowing use for limitless ‘other conditions’ specified by any physician."

Our partners at PolitiFact decided to check out Ms. Bondi's statement to see if she was correct about the proposed constitutional amendment.  Angie Holan, the Editor of PolitiFact, reports back that Pam Bondi's statement rates MOSTLY TRUE on the Truth-O-Meter.  Holan said that, for the most part, Bondi was correct.

"We took the proposed Florida law and compared it to existing laws from other states around the country," said Holan.  "What we found was that the proposed Florida law contains the phrase 'other conditions' when describing what sort of ailments the medical marijuana is supposed to treat.  By having that phrase in the law, you're allowing far more leniency in who exactly can be prescribed medical marijuana.  It boils down to this: if your physician believes that the benefits of medical marijuana outweighs any potential harm, they can prescribe it for whatever condition you might have, and that could be for anything."

Holan said that the use of a phrase like "other conditions" is one of the things that worries lawmakers and law enforcement about the proposed law.  In a previous PolitiFact ruling, the Truth-O-Meter gave a MOSTLY TRUE rating to Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd, who had claimed that "Florida’s proposed amendment for medical marijuana would allow people who alleged minor ailments such as muscle spasms, neck pain, back pain and even menstrual cramps (to qualify) for government-sanctioned pot-smoking."

Holan points out that, while Florida's law may seem all-encompassing when it comes to what medical marijuana can be prescribed to treat, it's not necessarily the most lenient of the laws in the country.  "In a few states where medical marijuana has been legalized, you can actually grow your own supply of the drug," said Holan.  "That can't happen here in Florida because that language is not included in the proposed amendment.  You would actually need a prescription and then have it filled at a sanctioned state agency."

Holan said that Florida's proposed constitutional amendment seems to place about halfway between the most stringent and the least stringent of the existing medical marijuana legislations that are already enacted, and is not the most lenient of the medical marijuana laws already on the books, which earns Attorney General Pam Bondi a MOSTLY TRUE rating from the Truth-O-Meter.

 

SOURCES: MEDICAL MARIJUANA LENIENCY