California governor criticized vetoing a bill to permit medical marijuana in hospitals
After the signing of numerous cannabis-related bills earlier this month, California Governor Gavin Newsom is currently facing criticism over proposed laws he vetoed.
One of the statements that failed to get Newsom’s trademark was Ryan’s Law, that could have allowed terminally ill patients to get marijuana on hospital grounds.
Because of weed’s illegality on the Federal level, the California governor chosen to “begrudgingly” veto the bill.
“It is inconceivable that the federal government continues to regard cannabis as having no medicinal value. The federal government’s ludicrous stance puts patients and those who care for them in an unconscionable position,” he wrote in his veto message but mentioned the contradictory legal character of marijuana because he could not sign the invoice.
Advocates claim invoice insured hospitals fearing loss of Federal funding
Currently some proponents of this bill claim Newsom must have signed the bill anyway, pointing towards how the legislation was made to permit hospitals to suspend cannabis on-grounds from case a Federal agency “issues a rule or otherwise provides notification to the health care facility that expressly prohibits the use of medical marijuana in health care facilities.”
Condition Senator Ben Hueso who penned the bill attracted attention to how similar legislation exist in New York and Maine. “I don’t see why we can’t achieve the same in California,” Hueso said.
Among those taxpayers campaigning for the legislation, Jim Bartell, told the Los Angeles Times that the governor’s veto was unfounded.
Bartell’s son Ryan, after which the invoice has been termed died from pancreatic cancer in the time of age 41. His dad claims cannabis assisted Ryan deal with all the pain and other signs of his disease during his last weeks.
Another disgruntled supporter of this invoice is Ken Sobel – a medical marijuana advocate who works as a lawyer for its Cannabis Nurses Network.
Sobel slammed the governor’s decision in a letter, saying Newsom’s veto gave an edge to large pharmaceutical companies, that are increasingly being scrutinized because of their function in the country’s opioid epidemic.
“Your veto simply rewards big pharma and the medical-industrial complex allowing them to use opioids as the sole source of pain relief for dying mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers,” Sobel wrote.
Before Newsom’s veto, the California Hospital Association stated it had been opposed to this invoice as they fear it might lead to the reduction of Federal funding despite its support for medical marijuana.