D.C.'s MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW HAS PROBLEMS BUT IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION

The risk with the District's new medical marijuana law isn't that the
city will become another California with hundreds of pot shops and
doctors who'll approve it for people feeling just jittery or blue.
Instead, the worry is that the statute is so restrictive there won't
be enough legal weed to meet demand.

Fearful that Congress might kill the law, the D.C. Council approved
what cannabis advocates say is probably the least-permissive measure
in the country.

No growing at home. Only five to eight "dispensaries" to sell it.
Licensed cultivators are limited to 95 plants. They have to grow
indoors, which means smaller plants.

The limits could mean that people with ailments such as cancer and
multiple sclerosis would have to use the black market to get
marijuana for relief from nausea, muscle spasms and other symptoms.

Other controversies are likely. Competition will be fierce among
would-be pot entrepreneurs eager for lucrative licenses to operate
dispensaries or grow plants. Unsettling r?sum?s will abound, such as
from big operators outside the state and local people who've been in
the business illegally for years.

"They're calling wondering, who do I need to grease? Who do I need to
show our support to?" said Allen St. Pierre, executive director of
the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws.

None of this is to say the law was a mistake. Quite the opposite.
Loyal readers know I support legalizing marijuana, including for
recreational purposes. My goals for pot policy can be summarized in
four words: good quality, reasonable prices.

Until that's achieved -- St. Pierre predicts it'll take a decade for
public opinion to shift that far -- we must settle for small steps in
the right direction.

Thus, I applaud the council, led by Health Committee Chairman David
A. Catania (I-At Large) and Public Safety Chairman Phil Mendelson
(D-At Large), for pushing through a carefully crafted bill. Mayor
Adrian M. Fenty (D) plans to sign it soon. It'll take effect this
fall, if all goes well.

To the extent there's a problem, the culprits are overwrought
antidrug moralists in Congress. They'll have 30 working days after
Fenty's signature to try to block the bill. Nobody expects them to
succeed, but their mere presence means the measure is too cautious.

The biggest shortcoming is the ban on patients growing their own pot.
That blocks a sure way to get it cheaply and easily. It significantly
increases the risk of shortages.

This gets complicated because of great uncertainty over how many
users there'll be. Catania estimates the number to be between 300 and
1,000. However, the view was unanimous among marijuana advocates whom
I interviewed that the figure will be much higher, based on
experience elsewhere.

"The demand out there is huge," said Caren Woodson, director of
government affairs of Americans for Safe Access. She said more than
15,000 District residents suffer from cancer, MS or HIV/AIDS, all of
which are included on the law's list of conditions that potentially
qualify people for medical marijuana.

That number doesn't include people with glaucoma, which is also on
the list, or other chronic, debilitating illnesses that the D.C.
Health Department could add to the roster.

Then there's the limit of 95 plants per licensed grower. Each plant
can support one or at most two patients. Based on a conservative
assumption of 1,000 users, that means at least five to 10 cultivators
are needed. If there are 5,000 users, then the number of growers
rises to 25 to 50.

Who will they be? The application rules are strict and prohibit
felons or individuals with misdemeanor drug convictions. Presumably
that means area dealers and growers who apply will be ones too smart
or lucky to have been caught.

Finally, there's the issue of where to locate the growers and
dispensaries. There should be some interesting community battles, as
the law assigns "great weight" to views of Advisory Neighborhood
Commissions on deciding the sites.

St. Pierre predicted the grow houses will be "in Northeast by the
railroad tracks. It's going to be in the same places where we put
other problematic adult commerce, like strip clubs."

At least there shouldn't be any problem finding people hoping to do
the job. It's easy for a grower to make six figures a year after the
initial start-up cost, according to activists and other experienced observers.

"The average person, if they were even somewhat competent, they'd be
able to make something like a hundred grand a year," said Conor, 30,
of Northwest, who plans to apply both to grow marijuana and operate a
dispensary. He declined to give his last name for fear of angering
his employer.

Conor said he grew marijuana until seven years ago, and the proceeds
helped finance his college education. Although eager to resume, he is
unhappy about the bureaucracy.

"I have a kind of an individualist, libertarian slant on it," Conor
said. "Governments tend to put these barriers to entry up and hurt
small business."

Maybe that's how the District should get conservatives in Congress to
back off. Make it about excessive government regulation. Free
markets, more weed.