[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 116 (Thursday, July 31, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10846-S10847]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Nomination of Karen Tandy

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the nomination of 
Karen Tandy to be Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration.
  According to the DEA website, the top two DEA responsibilities are 
the following:

       Investigation and preparation for the prosecution of major 
     violators of controlled substance laws operating at 
     interstate and international levels; and investigation and 
     preparation for prosecution of criminals and drug gangs who 
     perpetrate violence in our communities and terrorize citizens 
     through fear and intimidation.

  Why, then, does the DEA continue to focus its limited resources on 
the question of medical marijuana?
  Over the past seven years, ten States have passed referendums or 
enacted laws authorizing medical marijuana in those States. The ten 
States are Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, 
Maryland, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.
  The first of these states was California. In 1996, voters in 
California passed the California Compassionate Use Act, also known as 
Proposition 215, to allow seriously ill people who have a doctor's 
recommendation to cultivate and use marijuana as a form of treatment.
  However, in 2001, the Drug Enforcement Administration began 
aggressively targeting medical marijuana providers in California--
regardless of the fact that these individuals were complying with state 
law.
  I understand that the Supreme Court has ruled that federal law does 
not provide for a ``medical necessity'' exception to the prohibition on 
the distribution of marijuana, and that the DEA therefore has the right 
to enforce federal laws regarding marijuana.
  However, especially given the DEA's own stated priorities and limited 
resources, is it appropriate for the DEA to focus on medical marijuana?
  This is the question I asked Ms. Tandy, and she did not back off an 
inch. She simply did not give us any room to work in terms of this 
issue.
  For example, I asked if she would be willing to support a moratorium 
on the raids of medical marijuana providers until Congress could hold 
hearings on this matter.
  She replied, ``If I am confirmed as Administrator of the DEA, it will 
be my duty to see to the uniform enforcement of federal law. I do not 
believe it would be consistent with that duty for me to support a 
moratorium on enforcement of this law, or any law, in selected areas of 
the country.''
  Let me be clear. I was not asking for a moratorium on the enforcement 
of all marijuana laws--only on the raids of these medical marijuana 
providers who are complying with State law.
  I also was not asking for an endless moratorium--just the opportunity 
for Congress to exercise its oversight role of the Drug Enforcement 
Administration.
  Yet she was unwilling to budge.
  Who are these so-called criminals that the DEA is targeting and 
arresting?
  Suzanne Pfeil is 42 years old and suffers from post-polio syndrome. 
She experiences extreme pain and muscle spasticity. She is allergic to 
opiates and does not tolerate many pharmaceutical drugs, so her 
physician recommended medical marijuana, in accordance with California 
state law. Here, in her own words, is what happened to her last 
September:

       At dawn on September 5, 2002, I awoke to five federal 
     agents pointing assault rifles at my head. I did not hear 
     them come in because my respirator is rather loud.
       They yelled at me to put my hands in the air and to stand 
     up ``NOW.'' I tried to explain to them that I needed to put 
     my hands down on the bed in order to sit up because I am 
     paralyzed. They again shouted at me to stand up. I pointed to 
     my crutches and braces beside the bed and said, ``I'm sorry, 
     I can't stand up without my crutches and braces and I 
     normally use a wheelchair.''
       At that point they ripped the covers off the bed and 
     finally realized what I was trying to explain amid their 
     shouts and guns. They handcuffed me behind my back and left 
     me on the bed.
       The DEA then proceeded to confiscate medication recommended 
     to me by my physician under California State Law Proposition 
     215. My crime? I am a member of WAMM, The Women's Alliance 
     for Medical Marijuana, a nonprofit collective of patients and 
     their caregivers working together to provide free medication 
     and hospice services to approximately 250 seriously ill and 
     dying members.
       The DEA then destroyed our collective garden and arrested 
     our Director Valerie Corral, who is an epileptic, and her 
     caregiver and husband Michael Corral.''

  Eighty-five percent of the patients in this organization are 
terminally ill with cancer or AIDS. Is this how the DEA should spend 
its precious resources?
  In another case, the City of Oakland enacted a medicinal marijuana 
ordinance, as permitted by California law. Under the auspices of this 
ordinance, Ed Rosenthal grew marijuana to be sold for medicinal uses.
  Even though Mr. Rosenthal was acting as an officer of the city, in 
February 2002, DEA agents raided his facility and arrested him for 
marijuana cultivation and conspiracy.
  Since the federal law does not recognize ``medical necessity'' as a 
defense, Mr. Rosenthal was not allowed to tell the jury that he was 
growing the marijuana for medicinal purposes.
  The prosecutors took this opportunity to present Mr. Rosenthal as a 
big-time drug dealer, and the jury had no choice but to convict Mr. 
Rosenthal.
  After the trial, the jurors learned that Mr. Rosenthal was growing 
medical marijuana and complained that they had been misled by the 
court. Five jurors immediately issued a public apology to him and 
demanded a new trial.
  Their statement said, ``In this trial, the prosecution was allowed to 
put all of the evidence and testimony on one of the scales, while the 
defense was not allowed to put its evidence and testimony on the other 
side. Therefore we were not allowed as a jury to properly weigh the 
case.''
  During the sentencing phase of the trial, nine of the twelve jurors 
asked that Mr. Rosenthal not be imprisoned because they had convicted 
him ``without having all the evidence.''
  Due to these unique circumstances, the judge sentenced Mr. Rosenthal 
to one day in prison and a $1,000 fine, the most lenient sentence 
allowed under law.
  Yet, the prosecutor, who had asked for a six-and-a-half-year 
sentence, has appealed this sentence.
  The San Francisco Examiner has called this a ``mean-spirited attempt 
to revive a losing case [and] is only throwing good money after bad.''
  I think that accurately describes not only the prosecution's latest 
appeal, but the DEA's campaign against medical marijuana as a whole.
  These raids of medical marijuana facilities also are creating tension 
between the DEA and local law enforcement agencies.
  In California, several cities are pushing their local police to stop 
cooperating with the DEA.
  Most notably, in October 2002, San Jose Police Chief William 
Lansdowne pulled his five officers from a DEA High Intensity Drug 
Trafficking Area task force.
  In doing so, Chief Lansdowne said, ``I think the priorities are out 
of sync at the federal level . . . . The problem in California right 
now is methamphetamines, not medical marijuana.''
  In order for the DEA to be successful in its efforts to target major 
drug traffickers and drug gangs, it must have the cooperation of local 
law enforcement.
  This is yet another reason why the raids of medical marijuana 
providers must end.
  Finally, I would like to address the debate regarding the potential 
medicinal benefit of marijuana.
  I am not a doctor or a medical professional. However, the following 
organizations have endorsed supervised access to medical marijuana: The 
AIDS Action Council, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the 
American Nurses Association, the American Preventative Medical 
Association, the American Public Health Association, Kaiser Permanente, 
and the New England Journal of Medicine.
  In 1999, the Institute of Medicine issued a report entitled 
``Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base.'' This report, 
authorized by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, 
stated, ``Nausea, appetite loss, pain, and anxiety are all afflictions 
of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana.''

[[Page S10847]]

  Furthermore, the following international agencies have recommended 
the use of medical marijuana: the Canadian government, the British 
Medical Association, the French Ministry of Health, the Israel Health 
Ministry, and the Australian National Task Force on Cannabis.
  Even the DEA has registered eight researchers to further examine the 
possible medicinal benefits of smoking marijuana.
  This obviously is an ongoing debate. The citizens and legislatures of 
ten states have spoken. I believe the DEA should suspend its raids of 
medical marijuana providers in these states and place such efforts at 
the bottom of its list of priorities.
  Since Ms. Tandy is unwilling to yield at all on this point, I 
respectfully oppose her nomination.

                          ____________________