Pubdate: Fri, 08 Feb 2013
Source: Seattle Times (WA)
Copyright: 2013 The Seattle Times Company
Contact:  http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/409
Author: Bob Young

TWO LETTERS EXPOSE RIFT OVER NEW POT LAW

Acrimony and Politics Brewing As Washington Begins to Write Its Laws 
Controlling Legal Marijuana.

Debate, acrimony and recriminations - in other words, politics - 
around the state's new legal marijuana law have intensified in the 
state Capitol.

Led by Rep. Christopher Hurst, D-Enumclaw, a handful of legislators 
recently drew up a letter raising questions and concerns about the 
law, including whether it can be implemented by December as required 
under voter-approved Initiative 502.

On Thursday, one of the law's sponsors defended it in a 
point-by-point response to Hurst's letter.

Alison Holcomb, drug-policy director for the ACLU of Washington, said 
several times in her rebuttal that the new law should be allowed a 
real-world test in 2014, its first full year of implementation, 
before state officials change it.

Holcomb also implied that some of Hurst's concerns could lead to a 
"Big Marijuana" industry whose advertising targets young people.

Holcomb's letter was not well-received by Hurst, who chairs the House 
committee overseeing the new law.

He called it nasty, cynical and an attempt to crush free speech.

"She needs to step back and calm down," Hurst said, adding that he 
likes Holcomb, thinks she did a good job drafting the law and should 
be applauded for wanting a tightly regulated seed-to-store, 
state-licensed system.

The dueling letters seem to spotlight a potential rift between the 
law's staunch advocates and lawmakers who say they want the new 
system - untested anywhere - to operate as voters intended, with the 
state getting the taxes it hopes for, and the black market driven to 
extinction.

"We are in the middle of history," said Philip Dawdy, spokesman for 
the Washington Cannabis Association about the dueling letters. "And 
it's going to be weird and rocky."

Hurst's chief gripes are that Holcomb responded as if he is proposing 
changes to the law when he's asking questions, and that she fired off 
her letter before waiting for the Washington State Liquor Control 
Board (WSLCB), the state agency charged with implementing the law, to 
answer Hurst's letter. Hurst said Holcomb makes it seem like you're 
"engaging in heresy if you ask questions."

He also was peeved that Holcomb insinuated that he was "selling out 
to Big Marijuana" when he asked if business license fees should be 
higher. "We didn't make any such proposal. She's ascribing terms to 
us for just asking questions," he said.

In response, Holcomb said it was her civic duty to weigh in on ways 
to implement the law. She wasn't trying to chill anyone's free 
speech, she said, and didn't think she linked Hurst to Big Marijuana.

State officials estimate that the new industry would generate annual 
income of $1.6 billion just in the growing, processing and selling of 
marijuana. The law requires the WSLCB to have regulations in place by Dec. 1.

Also signed by Rep. Cary Condotta, R-East Wenatchee; Sen. Janea 
Holmquist Newbry, R-Moses Lake; and Sen. Steve Conway, D-Tacoma, 
Hurst's letter raises seven concerns. Holcomb attempts to rebut each 
in her letter to the liquor-control board.

Among the main points of contention, Hurst asks if the annual $1,000 
license fee for producers, processors or retailers is high enough. 
Hurst notes that Colorado charged $18,000 for medical-marijuana 
business licenses, and the WSLCB recently auctioned liquor licenses 
for six figures. He wonders if the board should consider 
alternatives, including auctions.

Holcomb said large license fees pose a barrier to small businesses 
entering the market and favor big business. "We do not want to start 
our experiment with a legal marijuana market by funneling the 
licenses to a new Big Marijuana with big upfront investment requirements."

Given that its model is untested, Hurst asked if the state has time 
enough to address concerns with the federal government, revenue 
collection and moving an industry that is now largely run by 
criminals, to a legitimate one that protects public safety.

Delay doesn't clarify whether the federal government - which 
considers all marijuana illegal - will try to block Washington's new 
law; only moving forward does, Holcomb said. She said she was 
confident the WSLCB will adopt sufficient rules in time. And, she 
said, the shift from black market to legal sales will occur much like 
it did with alcohol prohibition: Legal businesses will cut off 
revenue from criminals; police will continue to enforce laws against 
withering black markets.

Saying there's no incentive for consumers to move from an illegal 
market to a legal one, Hurst also asked if the state should create an 
infraction for possessing unregulated, untaxed marijuana.

Holcomb said consumers will be motivated to move away from the black 
market "because we are, overwhelmingly, law-abiding citizens." The 
legal market, she noted, will have other advantages: quality control, 
assurances that a customer's money is flowing to a tax-paying legal 
business, and lower prices - although some may dispute the last point.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom