Prop 19 Analysis: Will Marijuana Legalization Increase Use?

As California moves toward the legalization of marijuana — next month, voters will decide on Proposition 19, the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 — a key question remains: could the new law produce a whole generation of stoners?

Opponents of legalization say, yes, fearing it will lead to a massive increase in pot smoking among youth. But some supporters suggest the opposite: legalizing cannabis could de-glamorize it and ultimately prompt reductions in toking. Who's right?

That question is surprisingly hard to answer, but two recent research reports offer some potentially useful insight. The first, a Rand Corporation report that led to related testimony before the California legislature on Sept. 21, discusses the effects of price changes and taxation on consumption of drugs.

A newer report, released Thursday, comes from the new scientist-led International Centre for Science in Drug Policy (ICSDP). It takes a historical look at how U.S. drug policy has affected use, and suggests how to regulate drugs effectively.

One thing the ICSDP report makes clear is that current U.S. drug policy has no effect on marijuana prices or use. While spending on federal drug law enforcement has increased 1,200% and marijuana arrests have risen 150% since 1981, the rate of marijuana use nationwide has bounced around, with no relationship to these efforts.

"No scientific evidence demonstrates an association between the amount of money governments spend on drug law enforcement and rates of drug use," says Dr. Evan Wood, a professor of medicine at the University of British Columbia, founder of ICSDP and lead author of the report. "And some nations like the U.S., which spend the most have among the highest rates of drug use."

Meanwhile, according to national surveys, high school students continue to report that marijuana is universally available, purity has increased and prices have fallen.

The Rand report forecasts how legalization and taxation of marijuana could affect its market price and overall use in California. Although the public tends to view drug users, and addicts in particular, as too irrational and irresponsible to base their behavior on drug prices, research debunks these notions. Studies on legal drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco, for example, show that taxing them and raising prices can often be quite effective in lowering consumption — even among the heaviest users. "After legalization, we expect a large price drop. That's the biggest take away message from this report," says Beau Kilmer, co-director of the Rand Drug Policy Research Center and lead author of the report. "We expect the price [of marijuana] to drop at least 80%. There are a couple of other figures out there, ours falls in the middle and you can quibble about the details but there's a general agreement that the price will drop."

The trick is to determining how high to set the tax — the price has to be high enough to minimize consumption, but low enough to avoid creating a black market. Kilmer says that the current price for an ounce of good sinsemilla (a type of highly potent marijuana) ranges from $250 to $400. "If that drops down to $50 to $60 an ounce, it would require a really large tax to get [the price back up to that level]. But if the tax is set too high, [we] worry about tax evasion," he says.

Experts disagree on how much tax evasion occurs under California's tobacco tax regime, with smokers ordering cigarettes by mail to avoid state taxes, for instance. Some put the figure at 1% to 4%, but the agency that administers the state's tobacco taxes has said that the rate is more like 15%. Either way, the majority of cigarette taxes do seem to be paid rather than evaded.

Kilmer notes, however, that if Prop 19 passes, each local jurisdiction can set its own tax rate, which could prompt a "race to the bottom," as localities compete for a piece of the pie. "Regardless of how you feel about Prop 19, how to stop a race to the bottom is going to be important for everyone. No one wins if we end up with a really low tax rate on a really low price," Kilmer says. To prevent that, he suggests that the state government could withhold certain types of funding to localities that set marijuana taxes under a certain limit.

But let's say the price of marijuana does end up dropping precipitously. What effect might that have on consumption? Neither report can answer that. "Ultimately, we don't come up with a conclusion at all on a consumption increase," Kilmer says, explaining that many factors other than price can affect use.
The highest rates of marijuana use reported in the U.S. were in the late 1970s and early '80s, despite harsh drug laws. At the time 60% of high school seniors reported trying marijuana at least once; by comparison, the rate in 2009 was 42%. And what became of Generation X? The kids seem to have turned out all right.

Other countries that have decriminalized or quasi-legalized marijuana — such as Portugal and Holland — also have not seen social disasters because of their drug laws. In fact, they have benefited from reduced enforcement costs and increased access to addiction treatment.

One study did find that rates of marijuana use among Dutch youth increased when "coffee shops" — cafes where selling and smoking of marijuana are permitted — were proliferating and being widely marketed. But, overall, even those elevated rates of use were no higher than U.S. rates under marijuana prohibition. "It wasn't the decriminalization, it was commercialization that could have caused this," says Kilmer.

Advertising and commercialization may end up being cause for concern in the U.S. as well, given that medical marijuana ads already seem to be sustaining some newspapers. But, then again, even if Prop 19 passes, marijuana wouldn't be completely legal — it would still be prohibited under federal drug laws, which could put pressure on the Obama Administration to enforce them (though this Wall Street Journal article suggests that supporting legalization measures could be a boon for Democrats — putting similar measures on other states' ballots could draw out some key voters on Election Day).
Many questions remain about what will happen if Proposition 19 passes, but the only result I can unequivocally predict is that drug policy debates will finally become less theoretical — and much more interesting.

- Article from TIME.

Medical Marijuana Takes City to New Sales Tax High

While El Paso County deals with a lawsuit over a ballot measure to ban medical marijuana businesses, the city of Colorado Springs is laughing all the way to the bank.

The August sales of medical marijuana and marijuana-infused products generated $56,991 in sales tax revenue for the city, a record high and a nearly 12 percent increase from July.

So far this year, the city has collected nearly $325,000 in sales tax revenue from the medical marijuana industry – almost three times the amount collected all of last year.

“I think this provides a little more evidence to us that we should let the industry continue and see how it works in our community and not shut it down prematurely,” Mayor Lionel Rivera said Thursday of the latest sales tax numbers.

At the same time, he said, the Police Department and other city agencies involved in regulating the industry need to compile information to ensure the costs, “both from just a people standpoint and the social impacts,” don’t outweigh the financial benefits.

“I think that’s one good reason why we, the city, did not put something on the ballot in November,” Rivera said.

County commissioners opted otherwise and referred a question to the Nov. 2 ballot asking voters whether medical marijuana businesses should be prohibited in the unincorporated areas of the county.
Now, commissioners are staring at a lawsuit filed by a pro-medical marijuana group seeking a preliminary injunction to have the measure removed from the ballot.

Rivera said City Council members considered the possibility of a lawsuit if they placed a similar question on the ballot, which some residents urged them to do.

“We knew that municipalities or county governments would put things on the ballot that may be challenged in court (and) that we’d rather have them do that and spend the money to test the court rather than us do that,” he said.

“We believe, at least six out of the nine of us believe, that we’re following what the state constitution allows,” he added. “We’ll wait and see how the court cases fall out from other cities and counties.”

- Article from The Gazette.

Federal Agents Raid Las Vegas Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

The federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) conducted raids yesterday on at least five medical marijuana dispensaries in Las Vegas, Nevada, and reportedly seized patient and financial records, but made no arrests.

According to the Associated Press, Natalie Collins, spokeswoman for the local U.S. Attorney's office said that the federal search warrants and "supporting affidavits stemming from what she called 'an ongoing law enforcement operation' were sealed by federal court order." The dispensaries raided yesterday by federal agents and local police included: Happiness Consultant, Salvation Haven, Nature's Way, Organic Releaf, & Holistic Solutions.

The federal raids come nearly a year after an October 2009 Justice Department directive issued to U.S. Attorneys in medical marijuana states, deprioritizing enforcement against medical marijuana patients and providers. The Las Vegas raids occurred less than two months after another spate of federal raids in July against state-compliant patients in California and Michigan. "The federal government should never be called on to enforce local or state medical marijuana laws," said Caren Woodson, Director of Government Affairs with Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy group. "The federal DEA must abide by the Justice Department policy and stay out of the enforcement of local and state medical marijuana laws."

In July, Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman stated publicly on local television that allowing dispensaries was "a very legitimate goal," and that, "If doctors say that it does a patient some good and gives relief to somebody that has a dire need for it, I'm all for it." Nevada failed to consider the issue of distribution at the time of adopting its medical marijuana law in 2000. Although the state allows "Designated Primary Caregivers" to supply medical marijuana to patients, the qualifications are stringent and require "significant responsibility for managing the well-being of a person diagnosed with a chronic or debilitating medical condition."

Nevada's effort to address the need of sick patients to access local distribution of medical marijuana mirrors the efforts in other states like California, Colorado, Michigan, Oregon and Washington. Both Maine and Rhode Island have amended their laws to include state-licensed distribution similar to the medical marijuana laws of New Mexico. The trend to ensure safe access to medical marijuana by establishing licensed distribution facilities has even extended to states currently deliberating new medical marijuana laws, such as Iowa, Kansas, Maryland and Wisconsin.

"A failure to regulate the much-needed distribution of medical marijuana by states such as Nevada should not be seen as a green light by the feds to conduct raids," continued Woodson. ASA has and will continue to work with both federal officials in the Obama Administration as well as local and state officials in Nevada to address the safe distribution of medical marijuana as a public health issue.
The DEA is currently being directed by Bush-appointee Michele Leonhart, who served as deputy under DEA Administrator Karen Tandy; both were responsible for more than 200 federal raids in California and other medical marijuana states during the Bush Administration. Against objections from medical marijuana advocates, President Obama nominated Leonhart to head the DEA under his Justice Department, but her Senate confirmation has yet to be scheduled.

Further Information:
Justice Department memorandum from October 2009 regarding medical marijuana: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192

6-Month Delay for Pot Permits Stressful?

Patients seeking to use medical marijuana are being forced to wait as long as six months by Health Canada because a backlog of permit applications, a B.C. doctor says.
Dr. Gwyllyn Goddard said patients are told that getting a permit to use medical marijuana should take about 60 days. Each year, however, they're waiting longer for Health Canada to approve their applications — from two months to three months, and now six months.

Because of the delays many patients ended up buying pot illegally while they wait for the official government permit, Goddard said.

"A lot of these patients are resorting to purchasing these products illegally, such as from compassion clubs, which are not legal, or from mom-and-pop operations that are growing it illegally. As well there are gangs that are growing the product and you never know what," he said.

"It is also a financial burden."

Goddard has authorized medical marijuana for more than 100 patients, including Joseph Chenier, a 47-year-old carpenter who was taking morphine for chronic pain from a knee he describes as "destroyed" after an injury on the job.

The morphine was giving Chenier nightmares, however, and making him depressed, so Goddard prescribed medical marijuana instead last December.

Once Chenier applied to Health Canada for a licence to use medical marijuana, he was told it would take 60 days. By April, he still didn't have his permit, so he started to complain.

"Finally, after five months or so, I started to threaten them that I was going to fly to Ottawa and camp outside their office, and two weeks later I got my card," he said on Monday.

Health Canada blames the delays on a sharp rise in the number of people applying to use medical marijuana, noting it received twice as many applications this June as in the same month last year.
Health Canada also said it has since hired new staff to deal with the backlog, but would not say how many.

Goddard said government staff may be doing the best they can, but the wait is stressful on patients.
"I think the long wait times are very difficult for the patient," Goddard said. "You know, it causes anxiety, it increases their sense of doing something illegal, because they don't have a licence for it."

By: CBC News

41 Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Eligible to Stay in Business in LA

Los Angeles city officials announced Wednesday that only 41 medical marijuana dispensaries are eligible to stay in business under the city’s restrictive ordinance, a number so low that the city will suspend the winnowing process and ask a judge to rule that it is legal.

MAP: Most L.A. Pot Dispensaries Ordered Closed

“It was a surprise,” said Jane Usher, a special assistant city attorney who worked closely with the City Council to draft the complex law and is defending it in court.

 Rather than move ahead with a selection process that would clearly trigger a spate of lawsuits by disqualified dispensaries, the city attorney’s office decided to sue them first and ask a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge to determine that the city’s process was appropriate.
“We’re trying to be proactive,” Usher said.

Yamileth Bolanos, who runs PureLife Alternative Wellness Center, found out that the city had determined her dispensary was not eligible to continue to operate. “I’m not going to take this lying down,” she said. “This is ridiculous. They have screwed up one thing after another. Not once have they thought about the patients of Los Angeles.”

Los Angeles is already tangling with about 85 dispensaries that have filed almost 30 lawsuits challenging the procedure the City Council adopted Jan. 26 to limit the number of dispensaries. Most
of the dispensaries that have sued are among more than 400 ordered to shut down.

The city experienced a dizzying increase in the number of dispensaries when it failed to enforce a pot-shop moratorium put in place in 2007. Under that ban, only 186 dispensaries were approved to operate, but hundreds opened, a trend that accelerated after the Obama administration
indicated last spring that it would not raid dispensaries complying with state law.

Judge Anthony J. Mohr is presiding over all the lawsuits and has set a Sept. 21 hearing on constitutional issues. It is unclear how quickly Mohr might act on the lawsuit, which the city attorney’s office intends to file Thursday.

“The judge has considered things very expeditiously to date,” Usher said. “He seems to have a very keen awareness of the harm it causes to the community to leave this unaddressed.”
When the City Council passed the ordinance, it acted on an estimate that about 130 dispensaries might qualify to stay open. Under the ordinance, however, if the number dropped below 70, additional dispensaries would be chosen in a lottery. The total number of dispensaries in the city would then be capped at 70.

City officials said 169 dispensaries applied to be allowed to remain in operation, but 128 failed to meet the stringent criteria. The city clerk's office mailed letters Wednesday to each dispensary notifying it of its status and also posted the list on the office's website. [Corrected at 8:50 p.m.: A previous version of this post said 170 dispensaries applied to remain in operation.]

The ordinance, which became effective June 7, allowed only those dispensaries that had registered by Nov. 13, 2007, to operate during the moratorium. But they also had to show that the ownership and management had not changed, that the management had no major criminal record and that the dispensary was at its original location, or had moved just once after being evicted by landlords who received warning letters from the Drug Enforcement Administration.

“We took a very strict interpretation of the ordinance, and if it didn’t match the ordinance exactly, then we declared them ineligible,” said Holly Wolcott, executive officer for the city clerk.

The city will not seek to shut down the disqualified dispensaries before a court ruling. “As of Tuesday,” Usher said, “the entities that filed notices of intent to register and who fully comply with state law will not be prosecuted under the city’s ordinance.”

- Article from Los Angeles Times.

Court: California State Law Does Not Conflict With Federal Law on Dispensaries

 The California 4th District Court of Appeal of Anaheim's ordinance, which prohibits medical marijuana dispensaries and makes it a crime to operate them, has been reversed and the matter has been sent back to court.

The decision has been a long time in coming - opening arguments were heard in September 2009 - and represents a major victory.

The origins of the case date back to July 2007, when Anaheim unanimously approved its ordinance.

A group of medical-marijuana patients sued the city in Orange County Superior Court, but a judge dismissed that case. So the patients appealed to the state court, saying that the Anaheim ordinance was unfair to "qualified patients" and was counter to the state's Compassionate Use Act, approved by California voters in 1996.

A decision was expected last July and eagerly awaited by attorneys and both sides. But the court delayed its decision until today:

"We agree with plaintiffs the trial court erred as a matter of law in concluding federal regulation of marijuana in the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 812 et seq. ) preempted California's decision in the CUA and the MMPA to decriminalize specific medical marijuana activities under state law. We therefore reverse the judgment of dismissal and remand the matter to allow plaintiffs to pursue their declaratory judgment cause of action."

A support (amicus) brief filed by State Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) in his personal capacity stated that, "the clear intent of the [Medical Marijuana Program Act] in providing an exemption under the nuisance law was to preempt local ordinances and enforcement efforts based on nuisance law of any kind," and "To permit otherwise would undermine the expressly stated intent of the legislation." As an Assemblymember at the time, Mr. Leno was one of the principal co-authors of SB 420, the Medical Marijuana Program Act of 2003.

Credit for this important win goes to Joseph Elford, Chief Counsel for Americans for Safe Access, for his amicus brief, that played a key role in the decision.

Steve Kubby is director of the American Medical Marijuana Association.

Medical Marijuana Patient Faces Life in Prison for a Half Ounce in Texas

A Texas asthma sufferer who went to California for a medical marijuana recommendation and then got busted in June on a Texas highway with small amounts of marijuana and hashish is facing up to life in prison after being indicted by a Brown County grand jury.

He is charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, a first-degree felony in the Lone Star State.

Chris Diaz, 20, has been jailed on $40,000 bond since the June 27 arrest. He was busted with 14 grams of weed and hash.

Under Texas law, possession of less than two ounces of marijuana is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail, while possession of hashish is either a state jail felony punishable by up to two years for less than a gram, or a second-class felony punishable by up to 20 years if less than four grams, although probation is also possible. It is unclear exactly how much hash Diaz had.

Diaz was pulled over for an expired license tag while en route from California to Austin, and according to the DPS trooper's report, could not produce a drivers' license or proof of insurance. He was then arrested for failure to identify, and during a subsequent search, police found a small amount of hashish on his person. A search of the vehicle then turned up more hash and marijuana in pill bottle from a California medical marijuana provider.

The DPS report said the search also turned up a cell phone "containing text messages referring to drug sales" and a notebook with "drug and law writings." Those are apparently the basis, legitimate or otherwise, for the drug distribution charge.

Texas does not have a medical marijuana law, and its authorities do not recognize having a recommendation from another state as a defense against prosecution.

Diaz has attracted supporters both inside Texas and nationally. The Texas Coalition for Compassionate Care and a group called I Am Sovereign are publicizing the case and pressuring Brown County officialdom. And the asthmatic Diaz sits in jail in Central Texas awaiting trial, without his medicine.

- Article from StoptheDrugWar.org.

Video: Should Children Be Given Cannabis By Their Parents

Video: Former Reagan Official Says - Legalize It

TYT!

News: Toronto's CALM Compassion Club Raided Again (VIDEO included)

This Article Is Written By Jeremiah Vandermeer, Cannabis Culture - Wednesday, August 4 2010 

"This time they were a lot more polite and didn't punch anyone in the face," C.A.L.M.'s attorney Ron Marzel told Cannabis Culture, referring to violent police actions during the first raid reported on by Cannabis Culture and picked up by the mainstream press. "They used fake ID cards again. Once they were in they identified themselves immediately and said 'get on the ground!

Marzel said police confiscated about 200 grams of hash and some shake. Staff members were arrested, but Marzel said they were all released without charges. C.A.L.M.'s owner Neev Tapiero, who is currently fighting trafficking charges stemming from the first raid, was arrested at his house a few blocks from the dispensary. His bail hearing is scheduled for tomorrow, meaning he will be forced to stay the night in jail.

Less than 10 officers from Toronto's 51 Division were involved in the raid according to Marzel. 51 Division officers did not return phone calls from Cannabis Culture at the time of publication of this article.

"The detective indicated that the only reason he got the warrant was because he continued to get complaints about the smell of smoke," Marzel said. "This is completely unnecessary, and Neev wasn't even on site when they raided the facility."

Marzel said Tapiero's case from the first raid was moving along swiftly, with Tapiero already electing to have it proceed by indictment.



"We've been moving the process along fairly quickly because we want to get this resolved before the courts sooner rather than later," Marzel said. "Neev has nothing to hide. He's upfront about the fact that he's selling cannabis to people who have a legitimate medical need. He wants to have his day in court. He wants to be tried. We've already elected. We're waiting for a judicial pretrial next month. I got an application scheduled to be heard on August 25th to get the medicine back in the hands of patients. So everything was moving along quite well. This is, again, coming out of left field."

Back in March, police also said the raid was due to "community complaints."

The first raid sparked protests from cannabis activists, leading to more arrests.
Marzel said police were still inside C.A.L.M.'s building at the time of his interview (5:15pm).
C.A.L.M. is one of the oldest medical cannabis clubs in Canada, established in 1996. C.A.L.M.'s website states that the organization is a "peer-run organization that provides almost 2,000 Canadians living with severe or chronic illnesses with safe and continuous access to medicinal cannabis in a safe empowering environment."

The raid is a continuation of a series of police actions against medical marijuana dispensaries in recent months after a long period of peace.

Headline News In DC, No Such Thing as Too Poor for Medical Pot

No one should be too poor to buy pot if they live in Washington, at least if the marijuana is for a medical condition. That's the conclusion of a new medical marijuana law enacted in the nation's capital.


The District of Columbia passed a law earlier this year that allows residents to legally obtain the drug for medical reasons. But it also includes a provision unlike the 14 other states with medical marijuana laws, requiring the drug to be provided at a discount to poor residents who qualify. Who will get the reduced-price marijuana and how much it will cost, however, is still being worked out.
"Obviously because there's no roadmap on how to do this, it may require some tweaking over time," said David Catania, a D.C. councilman and the chairman of the city health committee that drafted the law. "We may, in fact, set an example for other states."

The first round of regulations implementing the law is expected to be released Friday. It may answer some questions about how low-income residents will be treated, but the regulations will also be revised over several months, and patients aren't expected to be able to purchase medical marijuana in the city until 2011.

Right now the law says that patients "unable to afford a sufficient supply of medical marijuana" will be able to purchase it "on a sliding scale." Low-income patients will also get a discount on a required city registration fee. Dispensaries, meanwhile, will have to devote some revenue to providing marijuana to needy patients.

The range of what the drug will ultimately cost low-income residents is anyone's guess. On the illegal market, an ounce of marijuana can range from about $100-$140, according recent police estimates. City officials have estimated that an ounce from a dispensary will cost about $350 and that the average user will purchase about that much a month, though up to two ounces would be permitted. While one city report suggests 300 people would buy marijuana in the first year - a number some consider low - no one knows yet how many would qualify for a reduced rate. One guess is 30 percent, about the same as the percentage of the district's population that is on Medicaid.

Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, a Washington-based nonprofit that advocates for the legalization of marijuana, said the city will have to be careful that dispensary prices aren't too different from what it costs to buy marijuana illegally, a price he estimated ranges from $200 to $500 an ounce. If buying marijuana at a dispensary costs more, some people - poor patients in particular - may just keep buying illegally.
No other states require dispensaries to provide the drug at a discount, though in November residents in Berkeley, Calif., will vote on a ballot measure that could require dispensaries there to provide free marijuana to poor patients. A number of California dispensaries already voluntarily do that for patients who can prove hardship.

"I think that ethic of taking care of people who can't take care of themselves has been part of the medical cannabis movement from the beginning," said Steve DeAngelo, the executive director of Harborside Health Center in Oakland, Calif., which until recently had a program that gave out free weekly "care packages" to about 600 patients on unemployment or pensions.

For Washington residents, qualifying for a reduced rate may also be tied to the federal poverty level. The city has among the highest poverty rates in the nation - only Mississippi is substantially higher - and more than 1 in 3 residents get some form of health care assistance.

Teresa Skipper, an HIV-positive resident who uses marijuana to stop frequent nausea and help her eat, said she hopes the new law will make getting the drug easier for her since she is a Medicaid patient. She would like to get the drug legally, but she says she can't and won't pay more than the $50 an ounce she pays on the illegal market.

"People under the poverty level and below shouldn't have to pay anything," said Skipper, who uses about an ounce a week. She's waiting to see what officials will decide, but she said it may not change much for her.

"Marijuana is like gas and food to me. It's in the budget," she said.

- Article from KOMO News.

Pot Factories A Gamble?

Oakland rushed last week to raise medical cannabis business taxes and to be the first city in the nation to legitimize industrial-sized pot production. The cash-starved city is hoping to reap millions of dollars in tax revenues from medical cannabis businesses while positioning itself to capitalize on the explosion of recreational pot sales should state voters go that way in November.


But is it just a pipe dream? No one really knows whether Oakland will find that pot of gold in the cannabis industry. Growers and dispensaries are making money, to be sure, and the city wants its share. But competition, legal risks and the unknown economic effects from potential legalization make the sure bet anything but.

California voters in 1996 overwhelmingly passed Proposition 215, the so-called Compassionate Use Act, which decriminalized medicinal use of marijuana. Dispensaries popped up almost overnight, supplied by a cottage industry of growers selling pounds of pot for $2,500 to $3,500, tax-free. Retail prices are double that, but not enough to stop the flood of patients willing to spend more than $300 an ounce for high-grade marijuana.

The estimated value of California's pot crop is $13.8 billion, according to an analysis for California NORML, a nonprofit organization devoted to marijuana reform. About 3 million people in the state use marijuana, medical and recreational, and consume an estimated 1 million pounds a year.
Oakland's four medical marijuana dispensaries do their share, supplying patients with 6,000 pounds of pot worth $28 million last year. The city is asking voters to raise business taxes on medical marijuana sales to 5 percent, a rate that dispensaries, patients and small growers warn will drive them out of Oakland and into neighboring communities with lower tax rates or no taxes at all.

The four new industrial-sized farms the city plans to license in January should do well, given the growing demand for medical marijuana across the state. But the ventures are not without risk. State law allows medical marijuana cultivation by collectives of patients and caregivers, with no profiteering.

Although the Obama administration has pledged a hands-off approach to honor states' laws, several experts warn that the federal government may not be able to ignore commercial-sized growing and manufacturing plants, which are not allowed under current state law.
That is a concern expressed by Oakland Councilmember Nancy Nadel, who sees pros and cons in the plan and worries about excluding small growers. "I was willing to go along with some large growers, but is this an invitation to federal attention? It puts a lot of product in one space, so if there is a fire, or theft, or mold, you could impact the availability of product to the patients," Nadel said.
New tax revenue

Still, it's easy to see why the City Council majority backs the concept of large indoor farms. Regulating medical marijuana production in modern facilities located in industrial areas should ensure a reliable, consistent supply of high-grade marijuana. It conceivably should cut down on the hundreds of dangerous, illegal grow houses spread around Oakland, especially if the huge growers can offer lower wholesale prices. It also makes it easier for the city to track the money.

Perhaps the most convincing argument arrived in a report commissioned by Jeff Wilcox, a retired contractor who first approached city leaders about the commercial grow idea. His proposal for a 100,000-square-foot AgraMed cultivation facility would produce 21,000 pounds of pot with a wholesale value of $60 million. That translates into $3 million in new tax revenue for the city and 300 to 400 jobs for Bay Area residents — from just one business.

That's on top of the revenue the city will get from its four dispensaries. If sales remain static, the city stands to gain another $1.4 million.

Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML, says Oakland is smart to get ahead of the curve, and it could gain millions in new tax revenue if the city's sales and production estimates pan out. But setting too high of a tax rate could backfire initially, and he thinks that establishing the large-scale production facilities will be neither quick nor problem-free.

"I think there is a risk here on jumping ahead on this tax on medical marijuana," Gieringer said. "San Francisco doesn't have a tax. At 5 percent, this gives other places an advantage. Oakland could be in danger of killing the goose that lays the golden egg. Patients will not go to Oakland if they can go to San Francisco and get it cheaper."

Oakland might have been the first to realize the revenue benefits of taxing medical marijuana businesses, but several other economically strapped municipalities are following its lead. San Jose, Richmond and others are scrambling to place similar tax measures on the November ballot. Berkeley is asking voters to raise cannabis tax rates as well as allow up to six commercial cultivation facilities.
Oakland's four proposed cultivation permits are intended for medicinal production only — for now. The proposal also lays the framework should Proposition 19 pass in November, legalizing recreational use of pot for adults 21 and older. The city is asking voters in November to set the business tax rate for recreational sales at a whopping 10 percent.

But will it be a bonanza or bust?

Legalized pot
According to a RAND Corp. study released this month, legalization could boost the number of pot smokers and drive down the pretax price of an ounce of pot by as much as 80 percent. The authors warn that it potentially could fuel problems with smuggling as dealers from other states rush to buy low-cost cannabis in California.
"Legalization would drive the price so low that even if taxes are high, marijuana coming from California would still be cheaper than a lot of places in the country," said Beau Kilmer, lead author of the study and co-director of the Drug Policy Research Center. "If dealers come here to buy several pounds, pay the taxes and then smuggle it out, they would still make money."
Even with hefty state or local taxes added on, consumers likely would pay hundreds of dollars less than they do now. That's good news for patients who rely on the herb to ease their pain, control their nausea or boost their appetite, but it could put a huge dent in the amount of tax revenue the city collects from its medical marijuana dispensaries.
If the wholesale price of medical marijuana drops to $800 a pound, a scenario Wilcox said could happen, the city's cut would drop to $1.35 million.
"Right now there's an 85 percent profit margin (enjoyed by the growers and dispensaries), and that's too high, in ?my opinion," Wilcox said. "If you can grow for $400 and sell it $800 wholesale, people will be doing just hunky-dory."

Oakland Councilmember Desley Brooks said she's not pinning all her expectations on legalization, especially when there is plenty of revenue to be had from the medical cannabis industry.
"There's a lot of money in that industry and not a lot of regulation," she said.

Kilmer said his work focused on what might happen if marijuana were legalized in California. The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act 2010 ballot initiative would allow people 21 and older to possess, grow or transport small amounts of pot for personal use. Cities and counties could choose whether to regulate and tax the commercial cultivation and sales of marijuana or to keep such activities illegal.

"The impacts of legalization on medical marijuana is unknown," Kilmer said. "But it will be interesting to see what happens in Oakland because it's unclear what the feds will do" about the commercial growers.

Mark Kleiman, a UCLA professor of public policy who has written extensively on the topic, believes cities such as Oakland that are hoping to cash in on medical marijuana, and legalization if it happens, should try to see through the dollar signs to the possible pitfalls.

"Yes, (Oakland is) in for a big letdown," he said. "Competition among growers and among jurisdictions would drive legal prices through the floor, leaving California with a large (illegal) export trade to the rest of the country and not much revenue. The feds wouldn't hold still for it and would crack down."

- Article from Oakland Tribune.

Medical Marijuana To Treat Tourette’s

Pending approval this fall, people with Tourette’s Syndrome may be able under state law to use medical marijuana to help quell symptoms of the disorder.

If so, it’ll be thanks to a patient who approached the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment in March armed with research that suggests Tourette’s patients may find relief with marijuana.

A formal request, as required by law, by the health department to add the disorder to the list of treatable ailments was submitted Tuesday to the Department of Regulatory Services, which has the authority to approve or deny the request. Tourette’s is a neurological disorder that causes involuntary motor or vocal “tics” that are repetitive and rapid such as blinking, twitching, or grunts. Symptoms range from moderate to severe, and treatments vary.

The health department found the information submitted to department staff last March to be credible.

“Based upon both the information supplied by the petitioner and a review of the medical literature which shows some scientific evidence of efficacy in humans and no evidence of harm, the department is bringing this rulemaking action to add Tourette’s syndrome as a debilitating medical condition for which an individual could apply to the Medical Marijuana Program for a registry identification card,” read the request.

Colorado voters approved a citizens initiative in 2000 allowing the using of medical marijuana to treat a variety of ailments. State regulators wield the authority to fine-tune the list of allowable uses of medical marijuana.

However, policy makers in state and local government have been trying to rein in the proliferation over the last year of medical-marijuana dispensaries that have popped up in larger cities. Marijuana is still illegal under federal law.

Two measures passed by the legislature curbing the herb’s use were signed into law this year by Gov. Bill Ritter after rigorous debate and considerable wrangling over the details. House Bill 1284, sponsored by House members Tom Massey, R-Poncha Springs, and Ken Summers, R-Lakewood, along with Senate members Chris Romer, D- Denver, and Nancy Spence, R-Centennial, put in place guidelines for medical marijuana dispensaries in the name of weeding out illegitimate dispensaries. Senate Bill 109 fine-tuned the doctor-patient relationship when medical marijuana is recommended, and was sponsored by Romer, Spence, Massey and Rep. Beth McCann, D-Denver.

Spence said that she supports the addition of Tourette’s if the evidence points to the effectiveness of medical marijuana in treating the disorder.

“I don’t have a problem with Tourette’s being added to the list,” said Spence. “I would defer to the experts though in making that determination, and I trust that the department will look at the research.”

A hearing is set for 10 a.m. on Sept. 15 at the health department and is open to the public.

- Article from State Bill Colorado.

Medical Marijuana Now Legal in Washington D.C.

Medical marijuana is now legal in the District after the Democrat-controlled Congress declined to overrule a D.C Council bill that allows the city to set up as many as eight dispensaries where chronically ill patients can purchase the drug.


Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) said in a statement the bill become law after Congress finished its business Monday night because neither the House nor Senate opted to intervene.
The council approved the bill in May, and under Home Rule Congress had 30 legislative days to review it.

"We have faced repeated attempts to re-impose the prohibition on medical marijuana in D.C. throughout the layover period," said Norton. "Yet, it is D.C.'s business alone to decide how to help patients who live in our city and suffer from chronic pain and incurable illnesses."
Although the bill has now cleared Congress, patients will likely have to wait at least several months before they can obtain the drug from a city-sanctioned dispensary.

Mayor Adrian M. Fenty and the Department of Health now have to establish regulations outlining who can bid for a license to open a dispensary.

(See how different states handle medical marijuana.)

The law allows patients with cancer, glaucoma, HIV/AIDS and other chronic ailments can possess up to four ounces of the drug.

Patients will not be allowed to grow their own marijuana, but licensed companies will be able to sell the drug to people who first obtain a doctor's prescription.

The council also approved a provision in the 2011 budget that calls for medical marijuana to be subject to the city's 6 percent sales tax. Underprivileged residents who qualify will be eligible to purchase their drugs free or at reduced cost.

Under the legislation, sponsored by council members David A. Catania (I-At large) and Phil Mendelson (D-At large), both non-profit and for-profit organizations will be eligible to operate the dispensaries.

Even after the Department of Health licenses the dispensaries and cultivation centers, they could be delayed by a zoning process in which residents could protest where the dispensaries will be located. The legislation states the dispensaries will not be allowed to be located within 300 feet of a school.
Distributors also will be limited to growing no more than 95 marijuana plants at a given location, an apparent effort to keep dispensers within federal law that heightens penalties on anyone arrested with at least 100 plants.

The law caps a years-long struggle to act on a 1998 referendum in which 69 percent of District residents voted for to allow medical marijuana. Until last year, Congress blocked the city from enacting the referendum.

City leaders, hoping to avoid the quasi-legalization of the drug, say the District will have one of the most restrictive medical marijuana laws in the country. They fear a future Congress could reverse the law if it is abused.

- Article from The Washington Post.

Veterans Affairs Easing Rules for Users of Medical Marijuana

The Department of Veterans Affairs will formally allow patients treated at its hospitals and clinics to use medical marijuana in states where it is legal, a policy clarification that veterans have sought for several years.


A department directive, expected to take effect next week, resolves the conflict in veterans facilities between federal law, which outlaws marijuana, and the 14 states that allow medicinal use of the drug, effectively deferring to the states.

The policy will not permit department doctors to prescribe marijuana. But it will address the concern of many patients who use the drug that they could lose access to their prescription pain medication if caught.

Under department rules, veterans can be denied pain medications if they are found to be using illegal drugs. Until now, the department had no written exception for medical marijuana.
This has led many patients to distrust their doctors, veterans say. With doctors and patients pressing the veterans department for formal guidance, agency officials began drafting a policy last fall.
“When states start legalizing marijuana we are put in a bit of a unique position because as a federal agency, we are beholden to federal law,” said Dr. Robert Jesse, the principal deputy under secretary for health in the veterans department.

At the same time, Dr. Jesse said, “We didn’t want patients who were legally using marijuana to be administratively denied access to pain management programs.”

The new, written policy applies only to veterans using medical marijuana in states where it is legal. Doctors may still modify a veteran’s treatment plan if the veteran is using marijuana, or decide not to prescribe pain medicine altogether if there is a risk of a drug interaction. But that decision will be made on a case-by-case basis, not as blanket policy, Dr. Jesse said.

Though veterans of the Vietnam War were the first group to use marijuana widely for medical purposes, the population of veterans using it now spans generations, said Michael Krawitz, executive director of Veterans for Medical Marijuana Access, which worked with the department on formulating a policy.

Veterans, some of whom have been at the forefront of the medical marijuana movement, praised the department’s decision. They say cannabis helps soothe physical and psychological pain and can alleviate the side effects of some treatments.
“By creating a directive on medical marijuana, the V.A. ensures that throughout its vast hospital network, it will be well understood that legal medical marijuana use will not be the basis for the denial of services,” Mr. Krawitz said.

Although the Obama administration has not embraced medical marijuana, last October, in a policy shift, the Justice Department announced that it would not prosecute people who used or distributed it in states where it was legal.

Laura Sweeney, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department, would not comment spefically on the veterans department policy. “What we have said in the past, and what we have said for a while, is that we are going to focus our federal resources on large scale drug traffickers,” she said. “We are not going to focus on individual cancer patients or something of the like.”

Many clinicians already prescribe pain medication to veterans who use medical marijuana, as there was no rule explicitly prohibiting them from doing so, despite the federal marijuana laws.
Advocates of medical marijuana use say that in the past, the patchwork of veterans hospitals and clinics around the country were sometimes unclear how to deal with veterans who needed pain medications and were legally using medical marijuana. The department’s emphasis on keeping patients off illegal drugs and from abusing their medication “gave many practitioners the feeling that they are supposed to police marijuana out of the system,” Mr. Krawitz said.

“Many medical-marijuana-using veterans have just abandoned the V.A. hospital system completely for this reason,” he said, “and others that stay in the system feel that they are not able to trust that their doctor will be working in their best interests.”

In rare cases, veterans have been told that they need to stop using marijuana, even if it is legal, or risk losing their prescription medicine, Mr. Krawitz said.

David Fox, 58, an Army veteran from Pompey’s Pillar, Mont., uses medical marijuana legally to help quiet the pain he experiences from neuropathy, a nerve disorder. But he said he was told this year by a doctor at a veterans’ clinic in Billings that if he did not stop using marijuana, he would no longer get the pain medication he was also prescribed.

A letter written to Mr. Fox in April from Robin Korogi, the director of the veterans health care system in Montana, explained that the department did not want to prescribe pain medicine in combination with marijuana because there was no evidence that marijuana worked for noncancer patients and because the combination was unsafe.




“In those states where medical marijuana is legal, the patient will need to make a choice as to which medication they choose to use for their chronic pain,” Ms. Korogi wrote. “However, it is not medically appropriate to expect that a V.A. physician will prescribe narcotics while the patient is taking marijuana.”

Mr. Fox was shocked by the decision, he said.
“I felt literally abandoned,” he said. “I still needed my pain meds. I thought they were supposed to treat you. It was devastating for me.”

Mr. Fox, who said that at one point he was weaning himself off his pain medication for fear of running out, has held one-man protests in front of the clinic, carrying signs that read “Abandoned by V.A., Refused Treatment.”

Veterans officials would not comment on specific cases, citing medical privacy laws.
This month, Dr. Robert A. Petzel, the under secretary for health for the veterans department, sent a letter to Mr. Krawitz laying out the department’s policy. If a veteran obtains and uses medical marijuana in accordance with state law, Dr. Petzel wrote, he should not be precluded from receiving opioids for pain management at a veterans facility.

Dr. Petzel also said that pain management agreements between clinicians and patients, which are used as guidelines for courses of treatment, “should draw a clear distinction between the use of illegal drugs, and legal medical marijuana.”

Dr. Jesse, the veterans department official, said that formalizing rules on medical marijuana would eliminate any future confusion and keep patients from being squeezed between state and federal law.
Steve Fox, director of government relations for the Marijuana Policy Project, which favors the legal regulation of the drug, called the decision historic. “We now have a branch of the federal government accepting marijuana as a legal medicine,” he said.

But Mr. Fox said he wished the policy had been extended to veterans who lived in states where medical marijuana was not legal.

He said it was critical that the veterans department make its guidelines clear to patients and medical staff members, something officials said they planned on doing in coming weeks.

Said Dr. Jesse, “The whole goal of issuing a national policy is to make sure we have uniformity across the system.”

Written By Dan Frosch, The New York Times

- Article from The New York Times.

Patient Advocates Condemn Federal DEA Raids in San Diego

Federal agents raided at least three San Diego-area medical marijuana dispensaries today in the early morning hours.


Sources say that Green Kross, Unified Collective and Kush Lounge were all served federal search warrants and were subjected to aggressive SWAT-style raids which resulted in the arrest of as many as 12 people and the seizure of money, medical marijuana and patient records. These raids come as the City of San Diego is deliberating an ordinance to regulate the local distribution of medical marijuana.
"The patient community is outraged by these actions and demands answers," said Eugene Davidovich of the local San Diego chapter of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country's leading medical marijuana advocacy group. "Why is the federal government attempting to undermine our local efforts to regulate?" A recent San Diego Gran Jury encouraged local governments to follow through on implementing state law by regulating medical marijuana distribution facilities that provide needed medicine to patients throughout the county. Both the City and County of San Diego are on the verge of approving regulatory ordinances.
 
Several federal raids have occurred in San Diego over the past few years, typically with the cooperation of local law enforcement and District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis. The latest raids happened in September 2009 under a multi-agency law enforcement operation. Despite the confidence of Dumanis in prosecuting state cases against local dispensary operators, one of them being Davidovich, they have only resulted in jury acquittals. "Despite a failure to win convictions in state court, Dumanis continues to aggressively enforce and prosecute groundless medical marijuana cases," continued Davidovich.

In October 2009, one month after raids were conducted on more than a dozen medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego, the Justice Department issued a new policy aimed at deemphasizing federal enforcement in medical marijuana states. Nonetheless, the Justice Department has continued to take action in California and other medical marijuana states, with San Diego dispensaries being the latest targets. In addition, the first federal trial of a medical marijuana provider under the Obama Administration is due to take place in the next few weeks. San Diego dispensary operator James Stacy was raided in the same September 2009 raid, but is being federally prosecuted. He is currently trying to mount an entrapment and medical use defense, something routinely denied federal medical marijuana defendants due to court rules that favor the prosecution.

"These raids underscore the importance of developing a comprehensive federal policy on medical marijuana, which will also allow states to care for the health and welfare of their people without unnecessary federal interference," said ASA Government Affairs Director Caren Woodson. "It is not the purview of the federal government to enforce local or state laws."

Further Information:
October 2009 Justice Department policy directive on medical marijuana: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192

- Article from Americans For Safe Access.

Marijuana Advocacy Group Decries Covelo Pot Raid

A marijuana activist group on Friday protested a federal law enforcement raid on a Mendocino County pot farm, saying it was protected by the county’s new medical marijuana cultivation ordinance.
The federal Drug Enforcement Administration confirmed the Wednesday raid in Covelo, but a spokeswoman declined to comment on the details.

“We did conduct an enforcement operation, but everything is under court seal,” said Casey McEnry, a spokeswoman for the DEA in San Francisco.

Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML, a group pushing to ease marijuana laws, said, “This raid is clear evidence that the DEA is out of control.”

The Covelo farm owned by Joy Greenfield, 68, was registered with Mendocino County authorities under an ordinance that allows medical marijuana collectives to grow up to 99 plants. The plants were being grown for a collective in San Diego called Light the Way, NORML said.

She paid a county application fee and the garden had been inspected by Mendocino sheriff’s deputies, the group said. Greenfield was the county’s first such applicant, NORML said.

Federal agents removed 99 plants and took a computer and cash, the group said. Greenfield wasn’t there at the time.

Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman confirmed Friday that the property owner had the proper paperwork and the marijuana was legal in the eyes of the county.

“This was a federal operation and had nothing to do with local law enforcement,” he said. “The federal government made a decision to go ahead and eradicate it.”

He said conflicting county, state and federal marijuana laws create a problem for law enforcement. “They’ve created a huge gray area,” Allman said.

He said federal drug investigators may have information about the Covelo operation that isn’t known to local law enforcement.

- Article from The Press Democrat.

The MPP Insider: Episode #11

MPP Insider: revisits a story brought to you weeks ago about Walmart discriminating against a medical marijuana patient in Michigan, MPP Insider's got coverage of happenings in New York, Oregon, and Washington, and will look at both victims of marijuana prohibition as well as marijuana prohibition by the numbers!

Recent Studies The Mainstream Media Forgot To Mention

Investigators and pundits alike are fond of calling for ‘more research’ into the safety and efficacy of marijuana and its active compounds. Ironically, when such calls are heeded and new research is published, nobody wants to talk about it.


For example, researchers at the State University of New York (SUNY), Upstate Medical University in Syracuse publisheddata in the June issue of the journalPharmacology concluding that the administration of the plant cannabinoids delta-8-THC and delta-9-THC halted cellular respiration and tumor growth in human oral cancer cells. Specifically, investigators reported that cannabinoids were a “potent inhibitor” of Tu183 human cancer cells, a notoriously difficult to treat type of oral cancer.

Of course, this is hardly the first time that pot’s compounds have been demonstrated to possess anti-cancer properties. As has been widely reported here and elsewhere, US government researchers were first aware of this finding over 35 years ago, and today there exist published scientific studies demonstrating that cannabinoids can inhibit the proliferation of a wide range of cancers — including brain cancer, prostate cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, skin cancer, pancreatic cancer, biliary tract cancer, and lymphoma. Nonetheless, abstract prohibitionist concerns regarding marijuana’s supposed cancer risk continue to dominate the headlines while actual scientific studies debunking these allegations tend to go unnoticed.

Similarly, preclinical data published online last week in the journal Cell Communication and Signaling reported that the administration of the non-psychoactive cannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD) increases adult neurogenesis (the active production of new neurons) in laboratory animals. Authors speculated that cannabis’ pro-neurogenic effects may explain why the plant appears to be useful in the treatment of certain neurodegenerative disorders like Alzheimer’s disease or ALS.
As I wrote last week, to date there are now over 20,000 published studies or reviews in the scientific literature pertaining to marijuana and its active compounds — making marijuana the most studied plant on Earth. But what’s the point in further research if nobody even bothers to pay attention to the research that’s already been done?

- Article from NORML on July 6, 2010.
By Paul Armentano, NORML

Investigators Raid Medical Marijuana Protest Organizer

The medical marijuana patient and caretaker who organized a protest outside the Saginaw County Courthouse last week, says investigators raided his home Tuesday.



Thomas Township resident John Roberts organized the protest, accusing The Saginaw County Sheriff of raiding patients and caretakers. Protesters came from around the state, some holding signs reading, “Learn the Law.”

Roberts, who is vice president of the Tri-City Compassion Club, said at the protest, "Our patients had to suffer because they don't believe in it. I don't give a rat's {expletive} what they believe in."
Wednesday Roberts told NBC25 he believes investigators raided his home in retaliation. He says now he has patients who will suffer.

Saginaw County Sheriff William Federspiel says his department had nothing to do with the raid, and that it was part of a federal investigation.

- Article from NBC25