MJ News for 03/26/2014

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/big-pot-rising-on-capitol-hill-nations-first-full-time-marijuana-lobbyist-makes-his-rounds/2014/03/24/dbc8c0c0-b07b-11e3-95e8-39bef8e9a48b_story.html

Big Pot rising: The marijuana industry’s first full-time lobbyist makes rounds on Capitol Hill
​

It took Michael Correia more than a week after getting his new job to tell his parents he was a marijuana lobbyist.

“I just got a job lobbying for a small-business trade association that focuses on taxes and banking issues,” he told them four months ago after being hired by the National Cannabis Industry Association.

He wasn’t lying, but for a guy who had been working for Republicans and conservative organizations for the better part of 16 years, telling his mom and dad about representing Big Pot wasn’t exactly high on his list. It wasn’t the first time he neglected to tell his parents about marijuana in his life. He smoked it about a dozen times as a teenager before deciding that all it did was make him hungry and tired.

“That’s news to me,” says his mother, Joanne, noting that she counseled all three of her children against the dangers of drugs. “If he ever smoked it, I don’t think we were ever aware of it. But if he did, he got past it, obviously. Now he doesn’t even drink coffee.”

Correia, 44, may not have intended to tell his parents about his past marijuana use, but he didn’t plan on hiding the details of his new job forever. Eventually, Correia let them know he was the first full-time lobbyist on Capitol Hill for the NCIA — essentially the Chamber of Commerce for marijuana. It was true that he was focusing on small businesses; they just happened to have names such as Weedmaps, Chronic Clinic and Haze City.

“When he told us, it never entered our minds, ‘Good grief — that’s illegal, immoral’ or anything,” Joanne says. “He’s not going to do anything that’s not all right. We’re in*cred*ibly proud.”

Standing at 6-foot-4 with the remnants of a California tan, a full head of hair, a red power tie and a black overcoat, Correia, a guy who never saw the inside of a principal’s office growing up, is the new face of marijuana in Washington. Gone are the culture warriors, the fliers of freak flags. They’re not needed here anymore. In 1969, a Gallup poll found that only 12 percent of the country supported the legalization of marijuana. Last year, that number was 58 percent.

The battle over whether marijuana is a moral turpitude is over. It has been replaced by a series of smaller, professional fights: where it should be legalized, how it should be taxed and how it must be regulated. But add up all those little skirmishes and what you have is a fight for the soul of the marijuana movement.

“I think what we’re seeing now is the transition from the movement to the lobby,” says Mark Kleiman, a UCLA professor who moonlights as Washington state’s drug czar. “The hippies are being pushed aside by the suits. That’s too bad, because the interest of the hippies has been consistent with the public view, and the interest of the suits is opposed.”

That’s one way to look at it. The other is that the movement has grown up.

“It’s really a legitimate and respected force now,” says Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), one of the leading voices on marijuana legalization in the House. “It’s not just true-believer activists running around, getting off-message.”

The bottom line

It would be impossible to mistake Correia for a “true believer.” Even today he won’t say whether he supports the legalization of marijuana.

“Luckily, I don’t have to get into that argument or discussion,” he says.

Correia is a hired gun, someone who understands how things get done in Washington more than he cares about whether people get high.

Born into a family of Democrats, Correia found a different political identity when he went to the University of California at San Diego. After college, he spent nine years working as a Republican staffer on the House Committee on Natural Resources before getting a job leading outreach to Capitol Hill and the White House as the director of federal affairs for the American Legislative Exchange Council, an organization that helps draft conservative legislation with financial support from the Koch brothers. Among other things, ALEC has helped write tough sentencing laws targeting drug users.

Though Correia was a generalist at ALEC — he worked on issues such as Internet taxation and also helped maintain alumni relations — he says he had no dealings with its drug policy work. He thus felt no moral qualms about applying for a job with NCIA last year. If you take out the word “marijuana,” Correia’s job sounds incredibly boring. His main job is to persuade lawmakers to do two things: change the tax code to lessen the burden on entrepreneurs and give these small businesses access to banks.

It comes across as small-bore to some marijuana activists.

“We want to switch out the engine, and they just want to make a quarter turn on a screw on the carburetor,” says Allen St. Pierre, head of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML. “Myself, I’ve always been much more comfortable advocating for civil rights rather than someone’s bottom line.”

St. Pierre smiles when he says this. A self-described “polemist,” he’s always looking for a fight, but he also knows the major battle has been won.

For proof, St. Pierre picks up a receipt for $73.01 — Super Lemon Haze: $22.16; Kool Aid Kush: $22.16; exit jar: $0.82; Wana Rolls: $14.77; tax: $13.10. A legal purchase from Terrapin Care Station in Boulder, Colo.

Look around the organization’s office and it’s easy to tell that, for NORML, it’s always been about the weed. There’s a vintage “Acapulco rolling papers” advertisement, a fake potted marijuana plant, a scale with a pot leaf on it, and an old “Reefer Madness” movie poster.

But don’t be fooled, this paraphernalia is no longer a demarcation of the counterculture. Pot is becoming square.

“I pick up the Wall Street Journal, Barron’s and Forbes,” St. Pierre says, “and they’ve written more about marijuana in the last 18 months than the prior 24 years I’ve been here. And they are writing about it as pure capitalism.”

New set of challenges

NORML has come a long way since Keith Stroup founded the organization with $5,000 in seed money from Playboy in 1970. Stroup, who currently works as legal counsel for NORML, says it’s a luxury to nitpick over issues such as whether marijuana needs to be stored in a locked box. And yet, the shift from movement to industry does come with it’s problems.

“People in the industry are primarily interested in getting rich,” says Stroup, whose long white hair and prominent cheekbones make him look like a composer from the 1600s. “When we were a distance off, you see people as either being for legalization or opposed to it. Those were the sides. Now, it’s not that simple.”

Now there are folks such as Kleiman, the Washington state drug czar, who worry that Big Pot could start to look like Big Tobacco; there are medical marijuana groups that worry that recreational usage could cut into their market share; and there are members of Congress who might want to see change but have other forces to deal with.

“I’ve seen plenty of movement among our constituency,” says Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), who supports a state’s right to legalize marijuana. “It’s the elected Republicans who are still cowering, thinking that if they would support any type of legalization, they would face negative ads portraying them as pro-drug-cartel.”

Congress tends to lag behind public opinion, but it usually catches up. And in this way, Correia has one of the most exciting jobs in lobbying.

“I used to be able to cycle through my Rolodex in a couple of days,” says the Marijuana Policy Project’s Dan Riffle, the other full-time lobbyist working on marijuana issues on the Hill. “Only a couple of offices were willing to meet. Now it’s fair play in every office.”

Correia has been on the job for only four months, but he already knows this to be true. With his more than a dozen years working on the Hill, there are plenty of familiar faces. But no, his Republican colleagues don’t avert their eyes when they see the newest pot lobbyist coming their way.


“After saying congratulations on the new job,” he says, “the first thing they ask me is if I have any samples.”

 

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://www.wzzm13.com/story/news/health/2014/03/24/veterans-with-ptsd-can-now-use-to-medical-marijuana/6835877/

(MI) Veterans with PTSD can now use medical marijuana​

GRAND RAPIDS (WZZM) -- Last week the Michigan medical marijuana review board added post traumatic stress syndrome to the list of conditions that qualify for medical marijuana. This means PTSD sufferers have another treatment option, but with marijuana still illegal on the federal level, this poses a unique challenge for Michigan veterans with VA benefits who want to try medical marijuana.

An estimated 1 in 5 veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from some kind of post traumatic stress syndrome according to Carrie Roy, the director of the Kent County Veteran Affairs. Her office deals with hundreds of veterans and she says not to expect a VA doctor to prescribe medical marijuana. "VA doctors are not going to start prescribing medical marijuana because it is still federally against the law," explains Roy.

The best thing to do is to talk to your doctor about all the medications you are taking, including medical marijuana.This means a veteran wishing for the alternative treatment will need to go to a private doctor. The worry for some is that this may put their VA benefits in danger.

"If they are under a treatment of a VA doctor, they need to follow the treatment of that doctors orders because that could potentially mess with their other treatment regiment," explains Roy. "If it is improving their symptoms and improving their quality of life, they need to do what is best for them and what their doctor recommends."

If you have any questions or concerns be sure to talk your doctor and you can call the Kent County Veterans Affairs at (616) 632-5722.

 

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2014/03/oregon_marijuana_legalization_1.html

Oregon marijuana legalization measure backed by national funders may soon begin petitioning​

Backers of an Oregon marijuana legalization measure received some welcome news from the state Supreme Court this week -- no one filed a legal challenge to the ballot title for the latest version of their initiative.

That means they can soon complete the paperwork allowing them to begin gathering the 87,213 signatures needed to qualify for the November ballot.

Anthony Johnson, executive director of New Approach Oregon, said he was expecting a legal challenge to the ballot title that could keep the initiative on ice for another month or two while it was reviewed by the Supreme Court.

Attorney Michael McNichols of Canby had appealed an earlier version of their measure, Initiative Petition 37, and filed comments with the secretary of state's office objecting to the newer measure, Initiative Petition 53, filed by New Approach Oregon. But he didn't appeal this time.

McNichols, who earlier told the Portland Mercury he supported legalizing marijuana, could not be immediately reached for comment Tuesday.

Johnson said members of his group and their financial backers will now meet and figure out their next step. Should they finish up the paperwork so they can begin gathering signatures on IP 53? Or should they wait and see what kind of ballot title they get from the Supreme Court for IP 37?

Whatever the case, "it's definitely great news" that his campaign has the option of moving forward soon on petitioning, Johnson said. The group has until July 3 to gather the needed signatures, so time is starting to get short.

Both versions of the measure would allow 21-and-over adults to possess up to eight ounces of marijuana. New Approach Oregon received $96,000 from insurance magnate Peter Lewis before his death last year as well as $50,000 from the New York-based Drug Policy Alliance.

Paul Stanford, who runs a Portland-based chain of medical marijuana clinics, is already collecting signatures for two proposed ballot measures aimed at legalizing marijuana. Stanford would allow adults to possess up to 24 ounces of marijuana.

 

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://rt.com/usa/marijuana-washington-yakama-nation-169/

Native Americans fight to ban marijuana in a quarter of Washington state​

The Yakama Nation tribe of Native Americans is ramping up its efforts to ensure a new law legalizing recreational marijuana in Washington state won’t apply on ancestral land.

Voters in 2012 elected to abolish the prohibition against pot in both Colorado and Washington states, but the latter is only this month issuing its first legal weed licenses to dispensaries that will grow and process marijuana. If the Yakama Nation has its say, however, then a large chunk of Washington will reject the new state law.

The 10,000-member Yakama Nation has already said pot will stay illegal on around 1.2 million acres of reservation in central Washington where state law is trumped by local rules, but Reuters reported this week that the tribe is considering “a bold move that could test the limits of tribal sovereignty” by seeking to keep weed outlawed on another 10.8 million acres of ancestral land.

According to Reuters journalist Jonathan Kaminsky, the Yakama want to make sure the cultivation and selling of marijuana remains against the law on a huge stretch of Washington that was ceded to the United States government through an 1855 treaty, but where the tribe members maintain hunting, food-gathering and fishing rights.

The Yakama has previously won similar legal battles, Kaminsky wrote, including one in which it successfully fought off efforts to put a landfill on the ceded land. This time, however, the tribe wants to make sure marijuana remains outlawed on a chunk of land that now includes parts of 10 counties across the state.

Already, Kaminsky acknowledged, the Yakama have filed challenges to roughly 1,300 pending marijuana licenses being considered in that part of the state. If the tribe’s efforts fail, he added, then the Yakama may file suit.

In an editorial published by the Seattle PI newspaper last year, Nation Chairman Harry Smiskin said “The citizens of the state of Washington do not have the authority to vote what happens on Yakama lands.”

“It is that simple,” Smiskin said. “The Yakama Law and Order Code prohibit the sale, use or production of marijuana on the lands we control. We are constantly finding very sophisticated grows and ending them. Our police have won federal awards for this work. We are proud of our efforts. We do not want our people, or anyone else, to use, grow or sell marijuana on our lands.”

“We have had a long and unpleasant history with marijuana — just as we have had with alcohol,” Smiskin added. “We fight them both on our lands.”

"We're merely exercising what the treaty allows us to do, and that is prevent marijuana grows (and sales) on those lands,” he told the Yakima Herald-Republic back in January. Since then, the Yakama have filed around 1,000 additional objections with state and federal governments against marijuana license applicants, indicating that the tribe has without a doubt refused to relinquish its fight.

According to some, though, those challenges won’t end up the way the Yakama want them to.

"I think they run into the issue of not having standing to, in essence, bring suit on behalf of the federal government," American Civil Liberties Union Washington criminal justice director Alison Holcomb Holcomb told the Associated Press earlier this year. "The federal government at this time has shown it has no intention of trying to stop the law."

Yakima, WA Councilman Bill Lover, who opposes pot businesses, told Reuters for this week’s report that the Yakama’s plan could put a lot of other issues at stake.

“When they start talking about ceded land, there's a lot of other things involved other than marijuana, like water rights," he told Kaminsky.

“It's a steep hill they're trying to climb," added Ron Allen, the chairman of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe in western Washington where pot use remains banned on reservation land. "But I recognize their right to try to control the environment their community lives within."

The Washington state Liquor Control Board has previously ruled that no marijuana licenses will be issued to business on federal land, including Indian reservations, but did not address ceded grounds like the 10-million acres now being discussed. Meanwhile, the first recreational marijuana dispensaries became licensed by Washington state on March 6, and retail stores are expected to open in late June.

In Colorado, where the nation’s first legal weed shops opened on January 1, the state managed to collect around $ 2 million in taxes within the first four weeks of operation.

 

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-senate-panel-plans-vote-on-medical-marijuana/2014/03/25/41516708-b437-11e3-bab2-b9602293021d_story.html

Md. Senate panel approves medical marijuana bill​

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A measure to make Maryland’s stalled medical marijuana law work would remove a cap on the number of growers in the state and include a study on how to best provide medical marijuana to veterans, under changes to a bill approved by a Senate panel on Tuesday.

The Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee made substantial changes to a measure already passed the House of Delegates. The bill now heads to the full Senate.

One of the biggest changes removes a cap of 10 growers in the state to produce marijuana for people who have received a recommendation to receive it by a certified doctor. The Senate panel also set a two-year term for a license for growers, rather than a five-year term under the House bill.

“We do understand that there’s investment that’s being made by the businesses that are going into growing, but apparently there’s no shortage of candidates and people expressing interest in it, and we think that a two-year license would more than justify the upfront investment they would have to make,” Sen. Jamie Raskin, D-Montgomery, said.

Sen. Stephen Hershey, R-Queen Anne’s, said he was concerned that removing the cap of 10 growers would put a lot of pressure on a state commission overseeing the program to determine how many licenses should be issued.

“I think it potentially leaves some room for fraud,” Hershey, who voted against the bill, said. “You know, we could have a number of growers that can grow way too much product and maybe not have the medical treatment centers to buy that from them.”

Another significant change to the bill would separate growers from treatment centers that would distribute the marijuana. There could be two treatment centers in a state legislative district, with the possibility for more at the discretion of the commission, if the district includes more than one county.

The measure approved by the Senate committee also would require a report on how best to provide medical marijuana to veterans in Maryland.

“We know a lot of veterans suffer from a number of conditions which are treatable by medical marijuana, and we wanted to become the first state in the country to specifically recognize that and address the needs of veterans under our program,” Raskin said.

Maryland lawmakers are revisiting medical marijuana a year after they approved a framework to create a program in the state. The state’s current law requires academic medical centers to make marijuana available to qualifying patients. However, none of the academic medical centers stepped forward. The proposed change to the law this year would enable licensed Maryland physicians who are certified by a state commission to recommend marijuana to patients with debilitating, chronic and severe diseases and conditions.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

 

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://www.denverpost.com/marijuana/ci_25420620/state-marijuana-regulators-pledge-stronger-enforcement

(CO) State marijuana regulators pledge stronger enforcement​

The state agency overseeing Colorado's historic experiment in marijuana legalization is adding enforcement agents, data analysis and undercover operatives — steps officials say will help them better hold businesses accountable.

A year ago, a state audit criticized what was then the Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division for failing to track marijuana as promised, managing its budget poorly and not clearly defining its role.

More stable funding from application and licensing fees has what is now the Marijuana Enforcement Division on stronger financial footing. The agency has a new director — its third in less than four years — and finally has cleared a backlog of medical marijuana license applications that dated to mid-2010.

Still, some industry officials wonder whether the agency is equipped to deal with challenges that lie ahead, including more new business applications and enforcement of product testing.

By the end of the fiscal year, in June, the division says it expects to employ between 50 and 55 people, up from about 30 now.

The increased manpower will allow for field offices in Colorado Springs, the Grand Junction area and northern Colorado.

The division closed three field offices and laid off staff in 2012 after a moratorium on new business applications forced it to stretch operating expenses budgeted for one year over two.

"They are really going to staff this, put boots on the ground," said Jeff Gard, a Boulder lawyer who represents marijuana businesses. "If you have been getting away with stuff because the state was underfunded, you may find yourself not only out of business but in jail."

Consulting jobs The division's latest director, Lewis Koski, was hired in January, shortly after the state's first retail pot shops opened. His predecessor, Laura Harris, is one of several former division officials who have taken consulting jobs in the cannabis industry.

Koski, 42, started his career as an Arvada police officer. He moved to the Department of Revenue in 2004, first working in the Colorado Division of Gaming's business enforcement group. He jumped to the Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division in 2010, and was chief of investigations before his promotion to director.

Koski said the division is being careful to hire wisely and cautiously purchase new assets. The state audit criticized the division for questionable spending on patio furniture, $1,000 office chairs, BlackBerry phones and a fleet of vehicles it didn't need.

"A lot of the criticisms in the audit were really taken to heart," Koski said. "And as new leadership at this division, we're putting that at the forefront."

The division made itself visible when recreational sales began Jan. 1. Inspections led to 63 warning letters being sent to businesses for packaging and labeling oversights or not being properly logged into the state's new inventory tracking system, the division said.

"The large majority of our licensees want to comply with the law," said Ron Kammerzell, the division's senior director of enforcement. "They've got a lot invested in this. But there's a smaller percentage that either don't understand the rules or don't care. Those are the ones we need to be focused on."

Mark Slaugh of iComply, a Colorado Springs company that trains marijuana companies in following regulations, said warning letters can cause problems for businesses. Some local jurisdictions take a merit-based approach for granting new licenses and renewing existing ones, and a warning could be a black mark, he said.

Kammerzell said the division also plans to send operatives to attempt to make underage purchases at recreational stores and medical marijuana purchases without mandatory patient cards.

Tracking system The division's most significant new enforcement tool, however, is its new inventory tracking system, which launched at the end of 2013 after a lengthy delay.

Business owners must purchase radio-frequency identification tags, attach them to plants and packaging, and log them into the system, called Marijuana Inventory Tracking Solutions.

The system will notify the state if a product does not make it from a cultivation location to a shop. Once there is enough information to form a baseline, Kammerzell said agents will be able to pinpoint the average yield on a plant, and businesses may be red-flagged if a grow location is reporting production below that.

"The MITS system is going to give us a better opportunity to focus on high-risk areas," he said.

The division can shift more resources to enforcement in part because it has finished processing a final batch of medical marijuana license applications that date to summer 2010.

Those businesses, which opened before the state began regulating the industry, have been allowed to operate while their applications were pending. Included in that group are dispensaries and grow warehouses affiliated with VIP Cannabis, the target of a federal raid in November.

The fate of those final license applications, however, has not been made public. The division will only say it has begun "administrative action" in those cases, which may include notices of proposed denial.

"I think it's accurate to say they were in the last pile for a reason," Kammerzell said.

"These were complex investigations and resource-intensive, and our resources were minimal for a substantial period of time," Koski said.

The division did quickly process retail marijuana license applications last fall — an easier task because all had been vetted already in applying for medical licenses.

But more paperwork awaits.

The state's first recreational marijuana licenses were only available to existing medical marijuana business. In July, the state begins accepting applications from all comers. So far the state says it has received notices of intent for 255 business licenses, which include retail stores, grows and marijuana-infused products makers.

Mike Elliott, director of the Marijuana Industry group, which represents many of Colorado's largest players in the business, said the division appears to be adequately funded now.

The process for employees to acquire state badges required to work in the industry, he said, is much improved and no longer a nightmare that required multiple trips to the MED office and entering a lottery.

"But we need money in reserve," Elliott said. "There should be a surplus available as problems come up so they can be addressed."

The division is required to have reserves equal to 16.5 percent of total expenditures, which would total about $1.8 million in fiscal year 2013-14, said division spokeswoman Julie Postlethwait.

Mandatory testing The next few months will also bring mandatory testing of products, which is to be carried out by state-licensed independent labs.

Starting May 1, statute requires all marijuana edibles sold in retail stores be tested for potency. And later in the year, businesses are expected to test for contaminants in all their marijuana products.

Phillip Hague, a co-owner of Gaia Plant-Based Medicine, said he welcomes stronger oversight. He said his business meticulously follows the law, and that is not always the case elsewhere.

"It thins the herd, is the way I see it," Hague said. "I would love to see (the state) come in and grab the bull by the horns."

 

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/utah-marijuana-limited-medical-23054257

Utah to Welcome Marijuana for Limited Medical Use​

Parents of Utah children with severe epilepsy are cheering a new state law that allows them to obtain a marijuana extract they say helps with seizures, but getting it involves navigating a thorny set of state and federal laws.

Utah's Republican Gov. Gary Herbert has already approved the law and held a signing ceremony for about 50 parents and children at the state Capitol on Tuesday afternoon.

The new law doesn't allow medical marijuana production in Utah but allows families meeting certain restrictions to obtain the extract from other states.

Similar legislation is pending in at least one other state, and Utah advocates hope more will follow.

The marijuana extract, which some believe helps with a severe form of epilepsy, is produced in nearby Colorado and is designed not to produce a high.

But Colorado experts say restrictions passed in that state to appease the federal government make it a murky process for Utah families to actually get marijuana-derived products, particularly as all state medical marijuana laws are illegal under federal law.

Utah Rep. Gage Froerer, a Republican from Huntsville who sponsored the new state law, said families are willing to take that risk to treat their children with the oil.

"They know very well that this may not protect them from the DEA if the federal prosecutors stepped in," Froerer told his colleagues earlier this month.

To gain support in conservative Utah, the push for the legislation focused on helping children suffering from a severe form of epilepsy and the law itself is tempered with restrictions.

The law takes effect on July 1 and expires in 2016. It's restricted to those with severe epilepsy for whom the regular treatments are not effective, and requires a neurologist's consent to obtain and use the extract.

The extract comes from a strain of marijuana called Charlotte's Web, named after the first child treated with it. The plant is low in THC, the hallucinogenic chemical in marijuana, and high in CBD, a chemical that may fight seizures.

Doctors and others have warned that there's no proof yet that the extract is effective at treating epilepsy or even safe, but for parents like Jennifer May of Pleasant Grove, the hope that he oil will give their kids a better quality of life is worth pursuing.

"It helps more than our kids. It will hopefully help other states," said May, whose 12-year-old son can suffer hundreds of seizures a day. "It will hopefully push things a little more on a federal level if they see that even the most conservative states want something done."

A similar medical cannabis oil bill was passed recently by the Alabama Legislature and awaits the governor's signature.

Some legal experts say states authorizing certain strains of marijuana medicine may be unlikely to produce any relief for patients.

Sam Kamin, a University of Denver law professor who helped craft Colorado's marijuana regulations, said there's no provision to allow Colorado businesses to sell or ship marijuana products out of the state.

"They could sell an ounce to someone who shows up here, then that person could take it home at their own risk," Kamin said

Joel Stanley and his brothers grow the plant in the mountains west of Colorado Springs and have a waitlist of about 2,000 for the marijuana product.

Stanley said families on his waiting list now have to meet Colorado residency requirements, such as establishing an address and becoming a registered patient, in order to obtain the product under that state's medical marijuana laws.

With the new Utah law, families will still need to go through those hoops to get the product, but they'll be allowed to possess it in both states, Stanley said.

"From a federal government standpoint, the fact that it crosses state lines doesn't really make it any more illegal," he said. "It's just illegal period."

Stanley's group is working to produce the extract as a hemp product later this fall, which he said makes it no more illegal than products such as hemp oil and hemp milk sold at stores around the country. He said that will allow patients to bypass residency requirements to get the extract.

However, Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML, dismissed the theory that some strains of this drug are so low in THC that they would grow it as industrial hemp and not pot.

"Whether you can derive CBD oil from hemp, nobody has any idea," Armentano said, arguing that parents of sick children in cannabinoid oil states will be disappointed. "The proposed solution to their plight is not a solution at all."

 

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://www.leafly.com/(F(CPJmL5dJKHrC2TDn3v2JzOQjUBNHXCpl3Y6LiVnL8vYAaV19aeB7ff-LyYZBkYkBwD43kRpwjQvLpxXmM-SJVFqGvnCrNuIVl5OSk7nQURC6gP7wbaw_UHw2i_Km0YAJFEQzUNKEA64n1CFx0))/news/lifestyle/cannabis-duids-how-much-is-too-much

Cannabis DUIDs: How Much Is Too Much?​

Saturday night is coming to a close, and after a relaxing evening full of Trainwreck and comaraderie with your friends, it’s time to go home. As a veteran cannabis consumer, you know the short drive home will be a simple task. Besides, it’d been at least an hour since you inhaled anything other than oxygen and a sleeve of Oreos.

It would be easy to shorthand this article by saying, “Don’t smoke and drive,” but there will always be people who won’t accept that their confidence is not the only thing separating them from a DUID (Driving Under the Influence of Drugs).

As technological as we humans claim to be, roadside impairment devices have not kept up with the sprinting pace of cannabis policy reform. Lawmakers in Washington and Colorado established per se limits on THC blood levels with the passage of recreational laws, but some scientists and critics believe these limits to be unscientific and arbitrarily derived.

If you are a regular cannabis consumer, it would behoove you to familiarize yourself with the current state of cannabis DUID measurement and understand that there are more factors at play than you might realize.

Two hours have now gone by since your last breath of cannabis and you feel completely sober, being the seasoned, high-tolerance consumer you are. You may feel unimpaired, but the blood running through you is still riddled with THC. This is because your body stores the chemical for long periods of time -- especially if you’re a daily consumer.

One 2009 study published in the journal Addiction examined THC blood concentrations in frequent cannabis consumers, both before and after a one-week abstinence period. The results demonstrated perplexing variability among the subjects, some of which had no detectable THC in their system while others had high concentrations even after seven days of no cannabis. Other studies have also noted significant differences in long-term THC retention between occasional partakers and heavy consumers.

Franjo Grotenhermen, a researcher of cannabinoids and toxicology in Germany, explains why these results are problematic for zero-tolerance laws and per se limits.

“This approach effectively sets the legal limit at the technically achievable limit of detection (LOD), making the legal limit a function of the detectability of a drug, rather than the impairment caused by it,” Grotenherman writes. “Zero-tolerance laws will classify many cannabis users as impaired drivers even if they separate drug use and driving by many hours. The same applies to the increasing number of individuals who legally use cannabis for medicinal purposes and, while not acutely impaired, may present with measurable THC concentrations at all times.”

Science exploring the impact of cannabis on motor skills comes in at a slow trickle, so it could be a while before we have enough research to inspire a change in policy. Until then, frequent cannabis consumers should be aware that everything from body weight to metabolism affect the body’s storage of THC.

Measuring Intoxication

The difficulty of establishing THC blood concentrations that accurately reflect impairment is just one facet of the problem. Another is the technology police use to measure that content, adding another murky layer to the issue.

With one blow of a breathalyzer, a police officer will get a pretty good idea of whether or not a driver has had too much to drink. Because of its complex storage and circulation, no comparable test exists for cannabis intoxication. Nevertheless, police continue to rely on underdeveloped testing to determine a DUID case.

A study published earlier this year assessed the accuracy of roadside testing methods, including oral swabs and observational sobriety evaluations also known as the Drug Evaluation Classification (DEC) Program. Accuracy was measured by comparing the results with off-site blood tests.

The researchers first evaluate Drug Recognition Experts (DREs) who perform DEC evaluations in Canada, Australia, Europe, and the United States. Data was collected across studies beginning in 1985, both from on-site police fieldwork and controlled lab tests. Field evaluation accuracy ranged from about 74% to 90%. Not bad, until you consider that those accuracy rates cannot possibly include any cases of impairment that went undetected. Controlled lab environments reflect much lower success rates: DREs identified only 30% to 53% of subjects who had consumed cannabis.

Oral swabs performed considerably better, with accuracy rates falling between 52% and 100%, depending on the brand. “If on-site oral fluid tests had higher levels of device reliability,” researchers noted, “they could be seen as the best technique, given that they have the ability to detect the psychoactive cannabis compounds indicating recent use or impairment and are less subjective than the DEC as performed by police officers. Unfortunately, these devices have not yet achieved an acceptable level of reliability.”

Urine tests are a whole different beast as they measure for both active THC and its inactive metabolites, which are detectable for days (or weeks for regulars) after use. These tests are becoming less popular for DUID evaluations because, a) they can’t pinpoint recent use, b) the test can be adulterated, and c) most police don’t like touching urine.

Researchers believe blood tests are better indicators of intoxication, but given their invasive nature and complexity, they are impractical for on-site use. The authors conclude that current testing methods are not up to snuff, and that more research is necessary to improve measurement, per se limits, and our understandings of cannabis motor impairment.

Know the Law and Your Limits

Shoddy testing and unreasonable THC limits might be a frustrating reality, but it’s our reality nonetheless. For now, they are the cost of forward movement toward legalization, and eyes are turned toward us to act them out responsibly. Knowing the law and, more importantly, your cannabis limits will go a long way while research plays catch-up.

Laws and procedures can vary widely across state and country borders. Some areas like California have vague “effect-based” DUID laws, where a person is only tested if detectably impaired. Other states like Washington and Colorado have an objective cut-off THC blood concentration of 5 ng/mL. And then there are states like Arizona and Georgia who have even less tolerance for drugged drivers, giving DUIDs for any trace of cannabis or its metabolites in the body.

This puts many of us, patients and adult consumers alike, in an unsettling position where the extent of our personal control goes no further than our actions and decisions behind the wheel. We have just one job: to recognize our impairment honestly and resist driving after recent use. After all, you would hope that an unimpaired driver would never make it as far as that off-site blood test.

 

[7greeneyes]

hMPp://www.nwherald.com/2014/03/25/public-shows-interest-in-ill-medical-cannabis/ajbifna/

Public shows interest in Illinois medical cannabis
​

CHICAGO – It’s a surprising sentiment to find in a government document: “Marijuana frees the mind and brings inner peace.”

But that’s the blissed-out nature of at least a portion of the public comments pouring into Illinois government agencies about the state’s new medical marijuana program.

Others submitted business-realm rants about the “exorbitant startup costs” and the “outrageous, ridiculous, unworkable and outdated” requirements in draft rules.

The “inner peace” line is contained in a one-page summary of public comments to the Illinois Department of Public Health, which cited patient privacy as its reason not to disclose the more than 400 written comments it’s received. Three other agencies released 100 pages of citizen input in response to a public records request from The Associated Press.

A new state law legalizes medical marijuana in a four-year pilot project with some of the strictest standards in the nation, but the system won’t be up and running until later this year.

First, regulators are reviewing feedback received from would-be growers, dispensary owners and patients. The agencies next will submit their proposed regulations to a legislative committee for review. Then more public comments will be heard.

For now, the comments are full of questions about how the program will work. Some reflect an entrepreneurial eagerness to get involved.

Bob Morgan, coordinator of the state’s medical marijuana program, answered a few questions pulled from the public feedback during an interview. Here are edited excerpts:

Q: Can patients grow their own?

A: They cannot grow their own medical cannabis. Only a registered cultivation center may, according to the new law.

Q: Can a parent or guardian sign up a special needs adult child for medical cannabis?

A: Anyone under the age of 18 cannot be an eligible patient. But anyone 18 and older – special needs or not – can be. Anyone who is a special needs adult would go with their caregiver to a physician’s office and have the physician certify their qualifying condition and then send in the paperwork.

Q: What is the minimum age requirement for a qualifying patient and for a designated caregiver?

A: It’s 18 and over for a patient. A caregiver has to be a minimum of 21 years old, according to the law.

Q: If an employer requires a drug test, what would the implications of disclosure be for the potential employee who is a medical cannabis user?

A: The law allows employers with drug-free workplace policies to continue to use them. It’s ultimately going to be a question of impairment. These types of situations already occur today, whether it’s somebody on Vicodin or another prescription drug that could impair them in the workplace. We imagine employers will develop policies to address these issues.

Q: The law allows licensing of up to 22 cultivation centers and up to 60 dispensaries in the state. Can a company own a dispensary as well as a cultivation center?

A: Yes, the proposed rules allow a single entity to own up to three cultivation centers and five dispensaries. We took into account how other states have addressed this issue and tried to find the right balance.

Q: Will farmers be able to grow hemp?

A: This law only addresses medicinal cannabis. It does not address industrial hemp, which is currently not legal in Illinois.

Q: Will cultivation centers be able to sell cannabis to dispensaries outside of their district?

A: The rules allow a cultivation to sell to any dispensary in the state.

Q: Do cultivation centers and dispensaries have to be owned by Illinois residents?

A: They do not have to be owned by Illinois residents, but there are several provisions in the rules that allow additional scoring points for applicants with Illinois headquarters and applicants that will generate Illinois-based jobs.

Q: Can a city dictate where dispensaries are located?

A: Local municipalities will certainly be involved in the process. They can impose reasonable restrictions but they cannot outright prohibit the placement. The law says a dispensary cannot be located within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center or child care facility. Dispensaries cannot be within an area zoned for residential use.