About House Bill 2939

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

  legs_notes.htm   |   orgs_ommp.htm   |   cont_tipz.htm   |   orgs_actn.htm   |   OMMA_hist.htm   |

  TOP   |   Status   |   History   |   Text of Bill   |   Making Contact   |   Call TODAY!   |   LETTERs   |   Get ORGd!   |   Strategy NOTES   |   Support HB2939? An Opposing ViewPoint   |   FAQs   |   Legislation   |   LINKs   |   ACTION!   |   How they Voted   |   Leave a Comment   |   Bottom   |

What is HB2939? House Bill 2939 was a legislative item concerning medical cannabis that attempted to make it's way through the Oregon state political process. It was introduced / sponsored by Representative Kruse at the request of the Narcotics Enforcement Association (a.k.a, the "police") and the OMMP office - the Oregon medical Marijuana Program, part of the Oregon Health Dept. This bill was designed to limit access to Medical Marijuana, and, after reading it is clear this bill was going to wreak havoc on many in the program without – (1) accounting for the cost -or- (2) having a good reason.

For example, the bill would have restricted one grow per location forcing couples and cooperatives into no end of expense and inconvenience. Also, it would have restricted the term of attending physician to the physician who is primarily responsible for the patient's care. That can be interpreted to mean no more doctor clinics and back to the Catch 22 days of being eligible for the program but having a doctor who is too scared of the feds to write the language necessary. Another concern is that a doctor can say that the patient no longer suffers from the diagnosis that led to receipt of the OMMA card, yet they give the patient little time or clear avenues to dispute the diagnosis or find an alternative.

We have attached some comments regarding some of these changes to OMMA (the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act), and suggest that you read the complete text of the bill and be prepared to take action in case they try it again. Some observers see it as composed of some very bad things, a few ugly things and a few "deck chair arranging" items. In the opinions of learned insiders, the very bad things and some of the ugly things come from the cops and everything else is from the manager of the OMMP. It was recommended that the best thing is to just get rid of it and address any legitimate concerns through other means.

Many thanks to the watchdogs keeping an eye on the legislature and the activists who contributed to this action alert. See Oregon NORML’s Legislative web page at: http://www.ornorml.org for more analysis and talking points and info on other legislation.

1. Consider the Source. A proposed requirement for "patient education classes". This boils down to a statement to be signed by the patient (and caregivers?) that they have read & understand the legal requirements for the medical use of marijuana.

Comments: More expenses for the Program, as it must supply written materials (and keep them updated) for the patients in excess of what they already send out. Further, who is the source of info and judge? We want the program to work, "they" want to shut it down. The policy of the police is that cannabis has no medical value and the OHD remains willfully ignorant of needs of the people and the purpose of the program. Can we separate the medical & health-care aspects from prison-industry oriented solutions and bureaucratic empire building? If not, then let's not do this. Education can't hurt, but make it meaningful by allowing input from sources not so blatantly opposed and full of misinformation.

2. Think about Patient Rights. Section 2, 475.309 (5) calls for the notification of one physician of another physician's determination regarding a patient, without the willing consent of the patient.

Comments: This is contrary to the patient - physician confidentiality, neutrality and privacy preached about by the Program. Further, it may violate other state statutes concerning disclosure of a person's private medical records.

3. Don't waste resources continuously punishing Felons. Section 2, 475.309 (6) & (8) calls for the denial of an application if person has drug sales conviction, prevents further application permanently, and Section 3, 475.316 (2)(b) allows permanent revocation of an existing registry card for a drug sales conviction.

Comments: This is unconstitutional, a case of double jeopardy, cruel & unusual punishment and a whole mess of other things. Only a third-rate dictatorship would deprive a person of medicine, in some cases the only one that works, condemning them to literally rot to death - and do it for political purposes dressed as a "health & safety emergency".

Further, to deny a Caregiver with the expertise of growing medical quality cannabis to a needy patient merely on this basis is likewise mean and unnecessary. And illogical, impractical and unreasonable - who else is likely to be the best source for this kind of knowledge?

4. No real need to make it harder on the doctors & patients. Section 2, 475.309 (10)(a)(B)(i) calls for a physician to provide even more documentation than before and tries to make them commit even further by forcing them to state, "... and that the medical use of marijuana may continue to mitigate the symptoms or effects ..."

Comments: This is still problematic, in that doctors still are reluctant to put themselves on the firing line. The current wording stating that the patient continues to have a qualifying condition should still be sufficient for the Program.

5. Consider the Tactics. Added section, #5, states, "This 2003 Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2003 Act takes effect on its passage."

Comments: Excuse us, but what "peace, health, or safety emergency" . . . ? This smacks of more Reefer Madness scare tactics and smells like someone is trying to get something nasty passed through in a hurry before the people can be made aware of it.

In short, the changes represented by this bill will do little more than add sick pot-heads to the "justice" system pool at the expense of other programs, like those for schools. These changes will NOT discourage abuse or reduce crime. They WILL increase investigations, prosecutions, jailings and paroles - of people who are no harm to society to begin with. We just say "NO" to HB2939. See below for more thots on our options.

back to [ Top of Page ]


HB 2939 stalled in Sen. Morrisette's Health committee and will likely die there. The Health committee will be closed for the rest of the session except for a about a week in which to do work on a very SHORT list of bills which can be taken care of in good order, and controversial measures are considered to be time wasters this late in the game.

Do not feel especially bad that we did not win the floor vote, the education which house members received about the public interest re: OMMP will be with them the next time someone tries to have a "quiet" conversation between the Cops and the legislature about OMMP.) Activists are continuing calls to Senate leadership to help them make HB2939 comfortable for its last days alive.

back to [ Top of Page ]

Some HISTORY on HB2939

HB 2939 was assigned to House Health and Human Services Committee (as opposed to Judiciary), with a public hearing on March 21, 2003. At the Work Session held 4-14, amendments were added and it passed out of committee (HB2939_sumy.htm) with a 'do pass' recommendation. There was only one 'no' vote, that of Representative Carolyn Tomei. She is to be thanked. (HB2939_comm.htm )

The bill passed the House floor vote and went to the Senate for a basic repeat of the whole show - hearing, work session and floor vote. The next most likely chance for new citizen input to be heard in person would have been a Senate committee hearing. BUT! Having said that, just because there may be no further hearings on HB2939 in the House, there is NO limit on the amount of contact to be made to any legislator on this matter.

We flooded the office of the State Senate with as many letters, emails, faxes and phone calls as possible and the bill has stalled in the Senate Health committee chaired by Sen. Morrit.

Now we must talk to our own Representatives and fight to keep this from happening again. Oregon residents, please contact House legislators in Salem and urge them to vote against things like HB 2939. For their contact info, look here: http://www.leg.state.or.us/house/houseset.htm

There are a lot of other bad, costly changes in HB 2939. For the dirty details directly from the horses mouth, go here: http://www.leg.state.or.us/comm/sms/sms03/hb2939ahhs04-14-2003.pdf … for a copy of the Staff summary -or- visit: http://www.leg.state.or.us/cgi-bin/findsms03.cgi?BILLNO=HB2939

Coming soon, some history on OMMA.

Text of the Bill

If you need a copy of the bill (without the amendments yet) go to: http://www.leg.state.or.us/03reg/measures/hb2900.dir/hb2939.intro.html

Or go to http://www.leg.state.or.us/03reg/measures/hb2900.html, Scroll down to HB 2939 and click on it.

back to [ Top of Page ]

Making Contact

To contact us > http://www.mercycenters.org/contact.html <

"How can I have input?"

Our Democratic friends can always use assurance that they are supported in helping us with our problem bill- please let them know how much you will appreciate their help. Oh, and then please do remember to drop a note of thanks to those Reps. who voted NO on HB 2939 and a note of perhaps polite regret (or something?) to those who did not.

Our main goal now should be to watchdog for things like HB2939 and convince the D's to oppose a hearing. Remember that there can be no agenda for any committee unless the chair approves it and that would require that first a chair can prove to him that he has a majority going into the hearing for the bill. If we had tried to amend the bill and it passed in an amended form, then it can not be sent to Gov. until the differences are resolved in a conference committee. This committee would be chaired by Kruse (remember him?) and we would have had ZIP chance of getting his support to modify his own bill to help us.

Conversations with senate leadership gave us some good hope that they wished not to want this bill to advance. Insiders allowed that they would probably have not assigned HB 2939 a spot on the short list due to its clearly controversial nature- how controversial? - enough to light up the switchboard.--So folks, PLEASE keep those calls and letters rolling in-there is no time like the present to prepare for the next rendition. If we wish to romance the Cops into liking us (after we teach pigs to sing) then we could do it next session.

One possibility is the oversight commission in OMMA II to set policy. Now it is set by whatever whimsy strikes the OMMP.

Main advice is to sack the prohibitionists and civil liberties antagonists for better Democrats next election. And, thank you to those who worked with Senator Kate Brown to get a 15-15 split in the Oregon Senate. Let us hope we will reap some dividends from that split. If this bill is killed, Senator Brown really deserves some extra special very nice thank you notes for all her efforts. And, when she writes you next time to get a Democrat majority in the Senate, please be generous.


After HB 2939 is killed, then we will be entering voter initiative season. The persons who wrote OMMA2 (medical) can tell us more about that (www.voterpower.org) and the persons who wrote OCI (mj decrim) can tell us more about that. I think these are the two main initiatives filed so far (is that correct?). Based on prior history, we need to avoid beating up on each other (med mj versus recreational mj/decrim mostly) while signature gathering and campaigning is active. The media love to see us fight and it hurts all who think mj laws are too severe.

The even bigger picture is to get politicians in office who understand civil liberties, support health care, education, and don't have an ideological ax to grind. As you know, the 2004 elections are already underway (do they ever stop? LOL). Anyway that is how we summarize it. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts. Let's keep the forum active.

Contacting your Legislator

To find out the contact info for YOUR legislators go to: http://www.leg.state.or.us/findlegsltr/findset.htm All you have to do is type in your address and you'll get it all.

Another method to figure out who is your Representative and/or Senator. Go to: http://www.leg.state.or.us/index.html and get contact info from the lists under the House and Senate buttons. Click on House (or Senate), click on Representative Information and then click on Alphabetical Listing of State Representatives. Each Rep. clicked on will lead you to the stuff you need. Perhaps you can bookmark this main site to facilitate using the info on it.



Oregon State House legisn_OR_sen.htmby Name and District

Oregon State Senate by Name and District

Here is how you figure out who is on which committee. Go to the above site, click on Committees at the top, click on House Committee Assignments by Committee.

We know everyone is busy and for certain would far rather be out in the garden pulling out all the nasty weeds. Too bad we can't weed the legislature the same way. Or can we? That's another challenge the upcoming vote(s) will help us define. <tracking votes at:

<<HB2939_sen.htm>by NM and DIST


<HB2939_rep.htm> by NM and DIST


Let's be sure that our own legislators understand that this bill was not about helping patients.

We should encourage all representatives to, at least, think of the resulting costs and benefits in their decision. Next time something like this comes along, Contact your representative and/or the Health and Human Services Committee at the Capitol Bldg, Salem, Oregon. We suggest that you confine your comments to the changes contained in this bill, for maximum effectiveness and consideration.

Contacting the OMMP of the OHD

Anyone sharing the point of view that the OMMP is conspiring with law enforcement is encouraged to write the acting program director to tell her how you feel about her working against patients and the intent of the OMMA in drafting and promoting HB2939. Click here.

Help us improve the system, document problems and solutions. On a related subject Laird Funk would appreciate real life recent stories of the response times and service (or lack of it) provided by Mary and the OMMP. He was planning to (and I think he did) meet later this session with some "unnamed senior officials" (we can say that kind of B.S. just like the big guys!) regarding the incestous relationship which has grown up between the Cops and OMMP. We need real life facts to take to these meetings and beyond.

You can email Laird at: funson@internetcds.com

back to [ Top of Page ]

Contact Tipz

Click here for tips on contacting your rep or media, including examples.

back to [ Top of Page ]

Strategy NOTEs & FAQs

There were three approaches to HB2939 discussed:

(1) One was asking for OMMA II to be introduced as an amendment. [We vote YES]

(2) Another was asking for HB 3919 from last session to be introduced as an amendment. [We vote MAYBE]

(3) Yet another was amending the existing language of HB2939 to be beneficial to us but acceptable to the law enforcement interests which are responsible for this bill. [We vote NO]

As the "flap" w/ an opposing position shows, we do have something other that a monolithic block on our side- we are humans w/ differences here as well as in the rest of life. I would suggest that it will always be so- we'd rather deal with humans than the alternative. It is a constant in our issue that there are those who will always disagree with the utility of going to the legislature and prefer the initiative- it is just as reasonable that among those who would work w/ the legislature that there would be differences in how to do so. There are those among us who have nothing but horrible experiences w/ Cops and it colors our trust of them- those who have had less trouble or have a sympathy in some degree for law enforcement's general importance in our soceity have a differently colored view.

A wide ranging dicussion is always good and wil help focus on what is real in this session. The real power of this web page (and related communications), is that we can increase our unity by eliminating our differences through discussion amongst equals- equals in interest, in motives and goodwill towards each other. We all are doing the same work for the same reasons. We just have had enough problems working together that some of us start to believe that "so and so must be the problem because he doesn't agree w/ me and I am doing good work and so he must not be". Understandable progression of thought perhaps, but still wrong and of no use in our work.

But, this continuing discussion on changing HB 2939 should be kept in the context of the legislative reality in Salem. Changes to wording are made in work sessions following hearings in either house. Amendments to bills on the floor are theoretically possible but kind of like hens' teeth. Also, as far as changing HB 2939 goes, it can be compared to a monster spawned by Satan born w/ seven legs. Cutting off the extra five so it has the same number as normal human does not make it a human. Likewise, changes to HB 2939, the spawn by proxie of Ashcroft, have done nothing to make not be a problem to us (and in reality the time for changes in the house is over and the hope that we can make it our bill in the Senate, after what happened to our attempts in the House, is based on realities which do not as of Friday seem to exist in the Senate leadership) and the best we can do for OMMA now and later this session is KILL HB 2939 anyway we can!!

If we have the misfortune of not killing it in the House then it will go to the Senate. There the game changes significantly due to an even split between R's and D's. Also an upcoming deadline for Senate hearings to be scheduled will change things even further. At this time it looks to me that if we have to go to the Senate the best chance we all have is to keep it sat on by friendly Senators (we do have friendly Senators in the leadership. Sympathy is not hard to come by there. In theory)

The Current, Ruling (Cops/Government) are NOT our Friends, they are NOT here to help us

Personally, we must say that some Cops have been good friends of ours. We like them out there arresting bad guys-we do have them around here. some activists report they have always had amiable relations with various members of the law enforcement community, at all levels. But you know, you would never ask them for medical advise and do not want them looking back at you from your medicine chest. Nor do you want the OMMP / OHD officials jumping to their tune.

And, unfortunately, the "good" cops are staying away from the issue. They are not our enemies and may even be sympathetic to a degree, but they must remain silently neutral, at best. So the "bad" cops are the only ones involved with the process. Just as we can report positive solutions in some cases we can also tell you tales of police in the faces of activists telling them the law is a fraud and they (the cops) are going to take it away and mess us up.

And so, as much as it pains us to suggest it, there REALLY ARE Cops who want to make it hard on OMMA and patients and make Ashcroft happy and they are the ones behind this current mess called HB 2939. Further, it has been our experience that police force administrators and their lobbyists do not have little peoples best interests at heart when they do things like this (re- quota-filling "speed traps" and the like).

Therefore - here is our opinion with some deserved negativity that hopefully we can learn from. Our advice is –

NEVER, NEVER, NEVER (got that?) trust "the cops".

If a bill comes from the ONEA (Oregon Narcotics Enforcement Association) in the next legislative session in 2005, kill it. There will never be anything good for the OMMA coming from the cops especially Welty and Durbin (or Noelle or Elkins for that matter). Period. In 1999, HB 3502 was bad for the OMMA and the next bill from ONEA will be bad for the OMMA. REMEMBER - the official policy of the police force is that cannabis is not medicine and the cops will overturn OMMA if they can get away with it!

It freaking blows ones mind that some alleged medical cannabis proponents could be so "politically challenged" to even think anything good for medical cannabis users will ever come from the cops. It won't ... EVER!!! Please learn that ASAP. It has been a tough fight with the cops and drug warriors ever since we helped campaign for OMMA in 1997-8 and it won't get easier for a while especially as cannabis clubs are getting raided in California and patients abused. We remember being hassled as we tried register voters, the stories regarding Ms. Boje and Mr. Kubby and the all too recent example of Ed Rosenthal also - so don't forget to look outside Oregon to observe the general trend of the US government (especially the Bush Administration) to undo the state mmj laws. The DEA and other narcotics cops don't care about patients (they consider them fraudulent scum, not even worthy of basic medical care) although they may try to fool us that they do. It is treasonous to EVER trust any cops on the OMMA - especially the drug warriors.

After discussiing this issue with w/ Durbin of the Cops and Dale Penn of the DA group and even Higginson it is clear to many activists that their intention is, AT BEST, make the program administratively easier for the management and the Cops and if that means that the patients get screwed, so be it. We must keep in mind that OMMP management regards you as a "registrant" only if you do not complain, but will label you w/ their new pejorative "advocate" if you get tired of gross incompetence tinged w/ ignorance. We have nothing to gain by trying to appease law enforcement and can lose much if we do not call their interference what it is.

My negativity is directed at the cops and state representatives who want or allow medical cannabis patients to be harassed, at the expense of our kids school budgets. Our advice is to sack the prohibitionists and civil liberties antagonists for better Democrats next election. And, thank you to those who worked with Senator Kate Brown to get a 15-15 split in the Oregon Senate. Let us hope we will reap some dividends from that split. If this bill is killed, Senator Brown really deserves some extra special very nice thank you notes for all her efforts. And, when she writes you next time to get a Democrat majority in the Senate, please be generous.

We did not create OMMA with the intention of giving Cops, mangers or politicians veto rights over our medication needs. That is why we wrote 'Shall' issue a card rather than "may". Anyone putting "may" in the act goes against the interests of patient/registrants and must be opposed. If you are sick, you get a card, not if you are sick and approved of by Cops!!!

Divide and Conquer; "patients" -vs- "legalizers"


Many of us think that Nevada and MPP made a mistake in 2002 when they mixed in recreational with medical and then the opponents really worked mj reformers over the coals with plenty of help from the Bush Administration. But that is hindsight and we would have been jumping for joy if the initiative had passed. Most US polling is in a majority for med mj but still in a minority for recreational mj.

Although one has to vote "yes" or vote "no" there is a lot of variation in the degree of support one gives to an issue. There will always be some head scratching and choosing of lesser evils when we cast a ballot. Our opinion is that if we are very supportive, we volunteer or send money, but if we think an action is futile or not warranted, then we just chill out and work on more rewarding goals.


One goal we would like to see achieved is that reformers don't badmouth any mmj reform or other reformers in public media. DPFOR will probably not end up in the public media but we can and have hurt each other's feelings so if one thinks a topic is too hot, one can always send a private mail or make a personal phone call. That is the way most forums work when they work well.


As an example of not stepping on toes, we medical reformers would really like the support of students who might lose loans if they get a mj violation and we want support from environmentalists who don't use cannabis but feel growing industrial hemp will help preserve forests and clean water. The bottom line is we will do better if we mj reformers all support (or at least don't oppose) each other, especially in public.


You can tell the OMMA is not perfect but that is mostly due to the political realities including polling, funding, and public opinion. The major funders where far more interested in a victory than in what the OMMA contained. Another way to put it was that passion was trumped by political science. We are very fortunate to have the OMMA and to have prevented recrim in 1998 but although things change, the opponents have not gone away, and we need to be smart and vigilant.

We are all doing the same work for the same motives-we have various ways of going about it. The medical community is going to be part of "public education" re:mj and is exposing as many people to it as possible so that its truth can be seen and the most benign way for that is for medical use to become common.

Our work in the legislature is not over by any means, and that remains my most important target of our energies until we clearly win and they all go home.

We don't worry too much about what some prohibitionist newspapers like The Oregonian or Bend Bulletin or (sometimes!) Salem Statesman Journal think. They often reflect the point of view of the drug warriors rather than the voters. Maybe that should motivate us to write letters to the editor, etc. We won OMMA in spite of the opposition of those newspapers and it is our opinion that public media will not be a leader in mj reform. We will have to do the work ourselves.

back to [ Top of Page ]

Arguments in Support of HB2939


April 24th, 2003

Dear Legislators,

Please give this health bill a chance: OMMA PATIENTS NEED YOUR HELP!

The Oregon Medical Marijuana Act was passed in 1998. Today OMMA is the best medical marijuana program in the country with over 4,700 patients. OMMA establishes OMMP, a registration system, which allows patients to register with the Oregon Health Department to grow their own medicine. Patients need to be able to keep enough of each harvest of medication to last them until their next harvest (4 months) occurs.

There’s only 1 bill in the 72nd Legislative Session that can give Oregon patients some relief from the continuing difficulty of having enough cannabis medication. Some patients are forced to the black market when they are out of medicine.

PLEASE Support HB-2939 with LANGUAGE CHANGES to help patients and Law Officers better implement The Oregon Medical Marijuana Act of 1998.

{-} Page 3 (6) (c) Line 38 [The department may permanently revoke the registry identification card of a person who has been convicted of violating ORS 475.992 (1)(a), (b) or (c), or an equivalent offenses in another jurisdiction].

DOES: Establishes a penalty for life on cardholders for PAST convictions prior to OMMA being available. NO PATIENT OR CAREGIVER should be penalized from being a part of OMMA because of past offenses prior to this great Oregon law.

Patients didn’t become patients because OMMA was passed. Many of us were deathly ill and lived in fear of arrest, and some patients were arrested. Marijuana laws have touched many Oregonians, including patients seeking relief from their afflictions.

{-} Page 6 (1) (b) If the person is present at a location at which marijuana is produced, including any residence associated with that location, three mature marijuana plants, four immature marijuana plants, and one ounce of usable marijuana per each [mature] plant.

Thus, patients can keep 1 ounce per plant. Then patients could keep more of the medicine they’ve grown and need.

Would allow OMMA patients to keep enough medication from a harvest to last them until their next harvest. It takes a garden about 4 months of growing before it can be harvested.

PLEASE, request this amendment to HB-2939. Amendment would allow patients to keep more of the safe, non-contaminated, organically grown, correct strain of medicinal marijuana they need from their gardens.

{-}Page 6 Sec.4. (3) 475.312 {A person who has been issued a registry identification card may not serve as a designated primary caregiver}.

{-}Page 6 Sec.5 (3) A person described in subsection (1) of this section may not grow more than three mature marijuana plants and four immature marijuana plants [at one grow site].

{+} Page 6 Sec.5 (3) A person described in subsection (1) of this section may not grow more than three mature marijuana plants and four immature marijuana plants for each registered patient.

OMMA patients make great caregivers because they understand what the medication means to a patient. Cardholders have been able to reduce the costs of their gardens by sharing the same location. Registered patients assign their garden (7 plants) at the garden site. Patient has his garden at his home address (site #1). He assigns a caregiver to come over to help him grow his medicine. He has the room, security and desire to help other patients that do not have a caregiver, or room for a garden, or the cost to set up a garden. But he himself will need his caregiver to help him or he will not be able to help others. Though this patient can offer the place for other gardens, he can not do the physical work his own garden needs.

A garden can cost an average of $1,500. to set-up, plus $35. to $50. a month. Each patient registers their garden site with the OMMP. Several registered gardens at one location allows for better confidentiality and security of the garden. Many have been able to network with other patients to get excess medication to help them until their harvest occurs.

Not every patient has a situation where they can have a garden in their home. Many patients are caregivers for other patients. OMMA patients make great caregivers because they understand what the medication means to a patient.

The wording in HB-2939 has sections that are punitive to current and future patients. OMMA patients don’t believe that the drafters of HB-2939 intended to make it harder for the patients or the program. Officers know that many patients do not have enough medication. Officers take it very serious when they see medicine being diverted from OMMA patients.

God Bless,

Stormy Ray, CEO

Stormy Ray Cardholders' Foundation

P.O. Box 220086, Portland, OR 97269

503-587-7434 / www.stormyray.org


back to [ Top of Page ]

FAQS; Questions and Answers:

Q: If HB2939 passes with positive language changes, wouldn't OMMA 2 then override it if we managed to get it passed later?

A: Yes. This possiblitliy was anticipated and included a section of OMMA 2 which would expressly repeal any amendment to the OMMA passed in this legislature.

Lee Berger



Q: What about the ACLU?

A: In 1998, the ACLU of Oregon supported the OMMA. They provided the legal muscle of get the OMMA through the Supreme Court because of a ballot title challenge so without ACLU of Oregon, there would be no OMMA. Activists are interfacing with ACLU Oregon on this so please keep any new posts coming to the forum that further explain the evolution of this bill and please provide "talking points" as to why this bill must be defeated. Other endorsements were by Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon, Eugene Register Guard, Albany (?Times-Herald), and Willamette Week (Portland) so if anyone has great connections with these organizations, then consider contacting them please.

Q: The A-Engrossed House Bill 2939 is now at http://pub.das.state.or.us/LEG_BILLS/PDFs/AEHB2939.pdf . Does anyone know who are supporters of this bill? Representative Kruse is listed as sponsor but Dr. Higginson of DHS has stated this is not DHS's bill. Is it the chiefs of police association, or the Oregon state police, or some Oregon Narcotics Officers association? Contact info please? If they D.A.R.E. … !

Richard E. Bayer, MD



NOTE: We should find out all those responsible and take appropriate action. Legislators can voted out. Other officials will need to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis utilizing reprimands or other consequences. Financial interests should be targeted - ie; any businesses owned by any of those involved should be boycotted.

back to [ Top of Page ]

LINK Summary - related Links & Orgs

OMMA 2The Life with Dignity committee has on the Oregon ballot an initiative (#33) designed to expand and clarify the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act to improve patient access. OMMA 2 ( http://www.voterpower.org/ )

Oregon NORML

Oregon NORML has info and talking points on this and other legislation at: www.ornorml.org

related Organizations

The Hemp & Cannabis Foundation's Medical Clinic




Campaign for the Restoration & Regulation of Hemp


back to [ Top of Page ]


We need to do things like > Medical Marijuana Information (OMMA Ed) Day. Last was set up by Voter Power (contact Jody for details), working with the capitol facilities staff to arrange for our interests to be represented in the Galleria (south lobby) all day on April 14, 2003. There were invitations sent out and responded to and the line up in the Galleria seemed to represent a cross section of those groups helping our friends. It was be a time also to discuss the subject with all Reps. and Sens. to raise their conciousness level as we prepared to deal with the rest of the session.

Register, Vote and get EVERYONE you know to do so also!

We agree fully w/ those who have noted that a lack of communication between all parties involved has resulted in the PERCEPTION of there being two conflicting views on the bill and w/ more clear discussion the similarities in expressed views would have been clarified. Live and learn.<?> We do know that the House was impressed by 1) the volume of contact, 2) the quality of the commentary and 3) the overall politeness of the contacts (w/ a couple of outstanding exceptions!!) This is good work friends. On the Senate – let’s win friends there!!

go and see How They Voted, and tell 'em what you think of their vote.

Steve March-D Y

Rep. March has had two positions on this bill depending (we do not wish to imply any negativity here) on who he was talking to-this is because he was truly conflicted about it.

According to a spokesperson in Representative Steve March's office, the reason Rep. March voted for HB 2939 was because they had been working on this bill with activists (see Arguments For HB2939 ) who are "behind the bill". He also understands the real problems w/ HB 2939.

They were able to get some changes made; such as the Program (MAY, rather than SHALL) deny a card to someone convicted of a marijuana crime. would hazard a guess that he honored activists position knowing full well that the bill had a short future ahead of it. would also hazard a guess (since unfortunately that is what we have to do absent anything from said activists on the subject) that activists position of apparently supporting the bad language in HB2939 by "supporting the bill" with "language changes to make it better", is a classic manner of speaking against a measure without overtly offending the parties you may yet want to work with.

conversations w/ March only reinforce that conclusion. The person did also state that there were some, testifying at the hearing about full legalization, who confused the issue and hurt our ability to kill the bill. regrets that we did not make more of an effort to communicate with Rep. March, it was thought he was already on our side and would vote against the bill.

She said Rep. March would not vote for it if the changes to make it better did not occur in the Senate. She indicated that he would be interested in hearing from other credible groups about the issue before them, medical marijuana.

Representative Steve March


900 Court St. NE H-385

Salem, OR97301


Write letters expressing disappointment or delight, politely of course. Please follow through with your Representative, so they are aware that you cared how they voted. Send us your comments on your legislative responses so we may build a voters guide. That is, AFTER you contact your Senator.(!)

to leave your comment, anonymous if you like, go to the Legislation Station Bulliten Board > legs_notes.htm <

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

You are visitor # 2194!     (since 2/25/2005)  Thanx for stopping by. Tell your friends. Tell your enemies!   This page ( /legis/2005/HB2939.html ) was last modified on:  Saturday, 13-Jan-2007 17:09:53 PST