one toke over a Douchebag du jour (IV)

It started out as nice news. From The Boston Globe
HARTFORD, Conn. --A move to legalize marijuana for people suffering from certain medical problems cleared its first legislative hurdle Wednesday, giving hope to those who've been pushing for the bill for several years.

I read that and I thought "Isn't that great?" Then I read this part.

Rep. Arthur O'Neill, R-Southbury, opposed the bill on Wednesday. He said the federal government has classified marijuana as a drug with no therapeutic benefit. But O'Neill expressed frustration that authorities have agreed not to prosecute people living in the 11 states where medical marijuana is legal.

"I feel somewhat put upon as a legislator in the state of Connecticut to have to sort of stand up for a system that the federal government itself seems reluctant to stand up for," O'Neill said.

A quick search on State Representative Arthur O'Neill shows he seems to have issues with those who choose to inhale. As a member of the State legislature's Judiciary committee and Finance committee, he played a significant role in the death of a similar bill a couple of years ago. He voted against it, twice. But more importantly, when the bill managed to make it to the house floor for a vote and passed, he sent it off to be tied up in committee - where it died. Guess who voted against it, again, in the Finance committee? Yeah. Representative O'Neill. The moral of that story is if your vote is not enough to count in the majority when the tally is taken of 146 elected state reps, then try try again in a committee where your vote is one of only 39! (Yay!)

In fact, it looks like it went through the Finance committee ok. Seems O'Neill really is just in the minority. But that committee voted on it 5 days before the end of the legislative session. The last action on that bill reads "tabled for the calendar". I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess this means sending it back to committee that close to the end of the legislative session means O'Neill killed the bill.
Anyone who's a big fat politics nerd who knows for sure, please share.

Still...after mulling over Representative O'Neill's comments on this most recent incarnation of the bill, I have to say, while I might disagree with his persistent opposition to the bill, I think I can see it might be possible that one could maybe sort of respect a guy who's somewhat willing to stand up for something someone else makes the pretense of believing in. Especially when you consider who he's standing up against - quite sick people who just won't stop lobbying for even a chance at an improved quality of life. Those blasted, nefarious special interest groups. Lobbyists even!
Sweet jesus.