MEDICAL MARIJUANA

IN 1998, 69 PERCENT of D.C. voters endorsed the medicinal use of
marijuana for those suffering from serious illnesses. Nothing came of
the initiative because Congress immediately prohibited the use of
local funds to support the program. The ban was lifted last year, and
the 11-year lag has actually proved to be something of a blessing,
because the District is crafting legislation based on lessons learned
from the experience -- and mistakes -- of other states.

Initiative 59 was pretty basic; it gave individuals the right to use
marijuana for medical purposes. By contrast, a bill (B18-622) that
will come before the D.C. Council on Tuesday, with a vote scheduled
for next month, would set up a strict regulatory structure that aims
to guard against the problems experienced by some of the 14 other
jurisdictions that allow marijuana use for individuals debilitated by
illnesses such as cancer or multiple sclerosis. Key to that effort
are strict registration requirements for patients, caregivers,
dispensaries and cultivation centers. In addition, the bill caps the
number of dispensaries at five and limits the quantity of marijuana
that can be prescribed each month, making the proposal one of the
most restrictive in the country.

Council member David A. Catania (I-At Large), chair of the council's
health committee and the bill's lead sponsor, is right to want to
prevent abuses that occurred in places such as California, where
medical marijuana has become a euphemism for recreational drug use.
There, dispensaries are akin to marijuana cafes and people with
complaints as minor as back pain caused by wearing high heels qualify
for use. "I want this to be professional and orderly and
evidence-based," said Mr. Catania, mindful that anything less could
invite renewed congressional intervention.

If the proposal is approved, critical details will need to be worked
out in its implementation, such as who will be allowed to grow and
distribute the drug. It's commendable that particular attention is
paid to the dangers of drug interaction and the need for proper
education of consumers. If society wants to legalize marijuana for
all, it should do so explicitly. Until then, council members are on
the right track in formulating a program that meets the legitimate
needs of the chronically ill but guards against those who just want
permission to get high.