LAWMAKERS MULL MARIJUANA ID CARDS

Patients using medicinal marijuana would be free from arrest if they
obtain identity cards under a state Senate proposal that has law
enforcement support.

Backers of the measure say the system would identify who is eligible
to use pot for medical purposes under Proposition 215, which in 1996
legalized marijuana for patients with severe conditions.

Some sufferers and their advocates are skeptical because the bill has
broad support from several of the same law enforcement groups and
prosecutors who opposed Proposition 215.

But the bill's author, state Sen. John Vasconcellos, D-Santa Clara,
said that support could bring enough votes in the Legislature to get
the bill approved. A similar bill died in the Assembly last year.

When the voter-approved initiative allowed qualified Californians to
use marijuana, it did not specify limits nor describe an
implementation process, said Vasconcellos, a longtime champion of the
drug's medicinal use.

Under the bill, the state Department of Health Services would
determine how much pot a patient could legally use. The department
also would outline how such marijuana should be grown and sold.

Law enforcement groups have been particularly concerned about their
inability to accurately determine who can legally use marijuana under
the 1996 initiative.

The proposed system would work like driver's licenses, offering an
on-the-spot indication of whether someone is authorized to have
marijuana. Patients would apply through their county health agencies,
which would run the program in conjunction with the state.

"This provides some clarity for all concerned with 215," Vasconcellos
said. "If someone is stopped, but he or she has a card, the police can
let them go and won't drag them off to jail. It's clear and simple for
all those involved."

A task force assembled by state Attorney General Bill Lockyer
developed the proposals two years ago to improve implementation of the
medical marijuana law.

While using pot remains illegal under federal law, seven other states
have passed medical marijuana measures since California became the
first in 1996. Vasconcellos' legislation does not resolve the conflict
between state and federal law, which is now pending at the U.S.
Supreme Court.

Instead, the bill tries to create a single, statewide standard that
local officials can apply uniformly across California, Vasconcellos
said. Thus far, many counties have used their own interpretations.

Prosecutors are particularly interested in the crafting of specific
limits on how much marijuana is legal, said Lawrence Brown, executive
director of the California District Attorneys Association.

"Proposition 215 as passed was absolutely silent as to any quantity
specifications," Brown said. "As a result, patients, law enforcement
and prosecutors have been operating in the dark, not to mention juries."

But the sheer fact that the district attorneys' group and police
organizations - which opposed Proposition 215 - now support the
Vasconcellos measure is cause for concern among some medical marijuana
advocates.

Dennis Peron, a driving force behind Proposition 215, said allowing
their changes to the law "is like asking right-to-lifers to regulate
abortion."

"They're going to register every plant in the state, in addition to
every patient," Peron said. "It'll be a bureaucratic nightmare."

Peron said he is principally concerned that state and local officials
will restrict access to medical marijuana. He said the proposed law
would only scare off more sufferers from using marijuana.

"It is intimidating, it is very intimidating for a sick person to
register with the state for anything," he noted.

Vasconcellos stressed that the registry would be voluntary and any
information collected would be confidential.

Yet Peron argued that "the law is working" as it is. He said many
officers today are aware of who qualifies under the 1996 law.

"They never arrest people if they have some kind of document or card
from clubs," he said. "Why do we have to get the state involved
between doctors and their patients?"

The bill also has opposition from those who believe marijuana has no
medical value. Art Croney of the Committee on Moral Concerns, said the
proposal would actually expand the definition of who can harvest marijuana.

"This is the next step toward drug legalization," Croney said.