Info needed from Supervisor Jew's office to rebut suggestion he is against medical marijuana

Hi guys,

  I'm sure you're busy these days, but if you can send me something to rebut comments like the one below, and/or explain how the motivation behind sending that legislation to committee was *not* anti-medical marijuana, so I can stick up for Ed in the cannabis community, it is in our interest to clear up this misconception.

  Cannabis activists are concerned that people be able to get their medicine without having the state control access (and potentially soak them for revenue) by means of a state ID card which raises the specter of the Feds using those records to prosecute people. Having a separate local ID card that people can use would be better, as the Feds are less likely to get their hands on the data and more pressure can be exerted on this issue at the local level to keep fees or other bureaucratic hurdles from spiraling out of control. But better yet would be having *no* government-issued IDs at all, and just making it city policy or practice that people can use a doctor's prescription to access dispensaries. Thank you for standing against government violation of our civil liberties on this issue.

  Regarding all the hullabaloo about the $40,000 seized by the FBI, and the residency issue, I hope that you will communicate with your supporters and let us know what your strategy is and how we can help. We need you as a voice for smaller government on the Board of Supervisors, and I've been encouraged to see that you continue to adamantly deny any intention of resigning. Keep hanging in there, and again please try to share as much info as you can so that Libertarians and others can credibly speak up for you in ways that will help.

Love & Liberty,
        <<< starchild >>>
  Vice Chair, Libertarian Party of San Francisco

recent comment from a local cannabis activist: