Medmar proponents press the issue

Newsday has this piece on the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment. (In case you've somehow missed the coverage, the amendment, which is to be attached to a spending bill Tuesday, " would bar federal authorities from making arrests in such cases."

The prohibition profiteers, led as always by the reprehensible Rep. Mark Souder, are in a state of panic judging from the skewed logic of their rhetoric.

Joseph Califano, chairman of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, derided Hinchey's effort as political interference with medicine. "This is the drug version of the Terri Schiavo case. This is Congress legislating medical practice and it makes no sense," said Califano, referring to the intense legal and legislative battle that erupted earlier this year over a court decision to remove the Florida woman's feeding tube.

Um - right-o Joe. Preventing the wrongful arrest of thousands of terminally ill and chronic pain patients is exactly like stopping the entire business of the country and calling the Congress in from recess to vote on a law tailored to keep one brain-dead woman on life support. And perhaps Califano hasn't heard that the DEA set the goal posts on interference when it decided it's more qualified than the medical professionals to decide just exactly how much legally prescribed pain medicine is appropriate to dispense to the chronically ill. And I'm sure Califano's statement has nothing to do with the fact that his entire livelihood depends on prohibition remaining in full force and effect.

Califano and the rest of the professional prohibitionists like drug czar John Walters were quick to pronounce the drug policy reform movement DOA after the Supreme Court's ruling. Maybe someone should tell them it's foolish to underestimate their opponents. Nah - let them find out for themselves. We've only just begun to fight.