Pubdate: Wed, 19 Dec 2012
Source: Metro Times (Detroit, MI)
Copyright: 2012 C.E.G.W./Times-Shamrock
Contact:  http://www.metrotimes.com
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1381
Column: Higher Ground

MARIJUANA AND FISH FRIES

A Question Of Priorities For Federal And State Officials

The preliminary reaction from the federal government regarding legally
regulated marijuana in Colorado and Washington state seems fairly
benign. During an exclusive interview with President Barack Obama and
first lady Michelle Obama that aired on ABC's "20/20" on Friday
evening, Barbara Walters asked him if marijuana should be legalized.

"I wouldn't go that far," Obama answered. "What I think is that at
this point, in Washington and Colorado, you've seen the voters speak
on this issue."

Wow! But there's more. He went on to say, "It does not make sense from
a prioritization point of view for us to focus on recreational drug
users in a state that has already said that under state law that's
legal."

"We've got bigger fish to fry," the president added.

Observers of marijuana issues have been waiting for the federal
reaction since voters in two states chose to regulate marijuana in
manners similar to alcohol and tobacco in the November elections.
Obama discussed finding some middle ground with conflicting state and
federal laws, pointing to changes in public opinion on the issue and
limited government resources.

I thought that it was telling that he said, "Congress has not yet
changed the law."

Does that mean he expects Congress to address the issue? It certainly
bespeaks an attitude that is not hell-bent against changing the law.
Maybe we're going to have some real discussion about this at the
federal level. Although results vary, most public opinion polls show
about 50 percent of Americans believe marijuana should be legal.

We'll see how the federal fish fry goes, and it may not be a long
wait. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said last week in Boston,
"There is a tension between federal law and these state laws. I would
expect the policy pronouncement that we're going to make will be done
relatively soon."

In Michigan, it seems legislators willy-nilly fried all the fish last
week, big and little. In a nauseating display of raw power,
Republicans made this a right-to-work state, passed a new emergency
manager law (even though voters had just repealed the previous one),
limited abortions and expanded the places where concealed weapons
could be carried. Having done all that, state legislators kept the
deep-fryer cooking in the wee hours of the morning to consider
modifications to the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act on Friday, Dec.
14.

It was still not exactly clear what happened between Thursday, when it
seemed that HB 4834 (privatizing the certification issuing process)
had been defeated, and Friday morning when it passed. The same goes
for HB 4851 (defining a bona fide doctor-patient relationship) which
was pulled from consideration on Thursday, but reappeared at a 4 a.m.
session that took outside observers by surprise. It was literally a
dark-of-the-night deal.

"Nobody understands what happened," says Tim Beck, a leading proponent
of the MMMA who's been involved with lobbying on the modifications.
"This lame duck session is an extraordinary time. It seems they put
off and put off and put off this stuff forever and then rush it all
through. It's a time when some legislators' terms limits are up.
They're looking to get a job in some cases and don't care about party
loyalty anymore. ... There's a lot of horse-trading behind the scenes.
Apparently some promises were made and deals were cut and nobody is
ever going to know what happened."

The language of the bills has evolved over time and there seems to be
a lot of confusion over what exactly was enacted. I read the final
Senate versions of both bills in PDF form on the state website.
However the House enrolled bill, which is the version passed by both
houses of the Legislature in identical form, was not available as of
Friday afternoon. The major points of the Senate version of HB 4834
outline the privatization of the processing and issuing MMMA registry
cards. It also sets a deadline for convening a panel to consider new
qualifying medical conditions.

The major points of HB 4851 define the doctor-patient relationship,
reading "the physician has completed a full assessment of the
patient's medical history and current medical condition, including a
relevant, in-person, medical evaluation." It includes provisions that
doctors create and maintain records and intend to provide follow-up
care. The bill also says that patients and caregivers must present a
valid state-issued photo identification card along with a medical
marijuana registry card to be considered immune from arrest and
prosecution. And there is language defining what comprises an
"enclosed, locked facility" for growing outdoors.

Two other less controversial bills were also passed. HB 4856 says that
marijuana transported in a motor vehicle must be kept in the trunk or,
if there is no trunk, not readily accessible from the inside of the
vehicle (whatever that means). HB 4853 changed sentencing guidelines
for illegally selling medical marijuana. I repeat that I am cautious
about these depictions of the new bills because I did not read final
versions of what was passed.

These changes, which go into effect April 1, 2013, were met with
outrage by some individuals, who registered their protests on activist
websites. But David Brogren, president of Cannabis Patients United
(CPU), which did significant lobbying around the language of these
bills over the past two years, was not put off.

"I don't think they were that bad," Brogren says. "I can live with
them."

Brogren believes that CPU's efforts neutered the most onerous
provision of HB 4834. That would have allowed law enforcement officers
access to the state registry.

"We won that battle in the end," he says. "They were going to let
everybody in, including the bouncer at the local bar."

The provision of HB 4834 calling for convening a panel to consider new
conditions was a moot point. The panel met for the first time on
Friday, Dec. 14. Brogren, a medical marijuana patient, is the only
non-physician member of the panel. He says the first petitions they
will consider are for post-traumatic stress disorder and Parkinson's
disease. But going forward Brogren sees the battle royale for the next
year to be around HB 5580, regulating medical marijuana provisioning
centers - that's dispensaries to us civilians.

But for the moment it seems things haven't changed that much, although
there seems to be a fair amount of anger rippling around. Legislators
can say they did something about clearing up the "hazy" law even
though they sneaked in the middle of the night to do it. And
law-abiding medical marijuana patients can pretty much continue doing
what they've been doing.

Nationally and in Michigan there will be quite a few initiatives to
consider. Medical Marijuana Business Daily predicts that more than a
dozen states, mostly those that already have medical marijuana laws,
will consider legalizing marijuana in 2013 through legislation or
citizens' initiatives. The Web publication expects that only a couple
of them will win.

Having failed to get a full legalization measure on the ballot this
year, Michigan advocates aren't expected to immediately try another
statewide effort; it looks like 2016 could be the next target date for
that.

Instead, activists here are mulling proposals similar to those passed
in Flint and Grand Rapids this year for some other cities around the
state. Nothing definite, but stay tuned. There are plenty of fish yet
to fry. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D