WORK TO REPEAL, REPLACE MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW BREAKS DOWN; FEW DAYS
REMAIN IN SESSION

HELENA - When lawmakers return to work this week, one of the
remaining major issues they will face is the bill to tighten down
Montana's booming medical marijuana industry and greatly restrict the
product's availability to patients.

In what's likely their final week, legislators appear ready to pass
Senate Bill 423, the "repeal and regulate" measure by Sen. Jeff
Essmann, R-Billings.

It's the last-surviving major bill to address medical marijuana after
Gov. Brian Schweitzer vetoed House Bill 161 by House Speaker Mike
Milburn. The speaker's bill would have repealed Montana's 2004
voter-passed initiative that legalized the use of medical pot here.

SB423 surfaced about a month ago and has changed often since then.

After the Senate Judiciary Committee deadlocked on Milburn's repeal
bill, a subcommittee headed by Essmann drafted this new bill as an
alternative. After SB423 passed the Senate, a House committee did a
complete rewrite before the House approved it. Then it was rewritten
yet another time by a Senate-House conference committee.

Both the Senate and House have to approve the final version before it
heads to Schweitzer, who has said he would like to make some
amendatory vetoes to offer more changes.

Here, in question-and-answer format, is a look at what's in the
latest iteration of this oft-changing bill.

Question: What does SB423 do?

Answer: It would repeal the state's current medical marijuana law on
July 1 and put a strict new regulatory law in its place. Essmann and
other supporters believe it will add some needed regulatory controls
to the medical marijuana industry that were lacking before. Opponents
contend it's nothing more than repeal by another name.

Q: How would it work?

A: Once the current law is repealed, SB423 would ban all medical
marijuana growing operations, storefront dispensaries and infused
marijuana product manufacturers.

Q: So how would patients get medical marijuana under the new law?

A: SB423 would go to a decentralized, volunteer growing model.
Marijuana cardholders could grow their own pot at home. They could
possess up to four mature plants, 12 seedlings and one ounce of
usable marijuana.

Or they could find a volunteer provider - the new name for caregiver
- - to grow pot for them, but at no cost. The same no-compensation
restriction applies to marijuana-infused product manufacturers that
make oils, butters and other products.

However, the bill would allow patients to reimburse providers or
manufacturers for the cost of their state registration cards or
renewal fees, estimated to be $500 apiece.

A provider could grow marijuana for up to three people, counting
himself or herself, again without compensation.

Registered cardholders who designate a provider could not be
providers for others. That's an attempt to prevent "daisy chain"
situations that would exponentially increase the number of providers.

Q: What restrictions are there on marijuana cardholders?

A: They would have to be Montana residents and not under the
supervision of courts or the Department of Corrections. They would
have to keep a new laminated card in their possession. Those
convicted of driving while intoxicated would lose their marijuana cards.

Cardholders could not use marijuana while operating a motor vehicle,
aircraft or motorboat. They could not use it at health care
facilities, on schools or post-secondary school property, at public
parks, public beaches, public recreation centers or youth centers or
on the property of places of worship. They could not use marijuana
"in plain view or in a place open to the general public" or where
exposure to marijuana smoke adversely affects children.

Q: What do volunteer marijuana providers have to do?

A: To qualify, providers first would have to undergo fingerprinting
and criminal background checks. They could not have any felony or
drug convictions.

Providers would be forbidden to advertise their services.

Q: How would the bill limit the number of medical marijuana cardholders?

A: SB423 is intended to make it much harder for people claiming
severe or chronic pain to get cards. Critics of the current law
believe this has been the major loophole that has allowed thousands
of people to obtain medical marijuana cards. The number of medical
marijuana cardholders skyrocked from about 4,000 in September 2009 to
about 30,000 last month.

State statistics show about 28,000 people obtained medical marijuana
here for some sort of severe or chronic pain. Only about 2,100
patients are authorized medical marijuana for wasting syndrome,
cancer, glaucoma or HIV, multiple sclerosis, seizures or severe
nausea. (Sometimes people cite multiple reasons so the numbers may not add up.)

Essmann has said he would like to limit marijuana cardholders to less
than 2,000 people under his bill.

The surge occurred after the Obama administration's Justice
Department said it would not prosecute medical marijuana users and
suppliers in states that had legalized it. Hundreds if not thousands
of cardholders here were signed up at traveling "cannabis clinics"
around the state. Critics said that many patients received cards in
less than 10 minutes with a brief visits with a physicians, often
out-of-state doctors via Skype, an Internet videoconferencing program.

Q: How would SB423 restrict cards for what is now called "severe chronic" pain?

A: Using a definition from state Board of Medical Examiners, the bill
defines it as "persistent pain of severe intensity that significantly
interferes with daily activities as documented by the patient's
treating physician and by objective proof of the etiology of the
pain, including diagnostic tests that may include but are not limited
to the results of an X-ray, computerized tomography scan or magnetic
resonance imaging."

Or, a second physician, independent of the original doctor, would
have to confirm the severe chronic pain diagnosis through a physical
examination.

Q: What about physicians?

A: They would have to have an ongoing bona-fide professional
relationship with patients in order to certify them for a marijuana card.

They would be obliged to follow a "standard of care" specified in the bill.

The Department of Public Health and Human Services would inform the
Board of Medical Examiners with the names of any physicians who
certified more than 15 patients each for medical marijuana over a
12-month period. The board would review these physicians' practices
to determine whether they met the standard of care, with the
physicians responsible for paying the cost of these reviews.

The bill would ban the doctors' use of telemedicine to certify that
patients for marijuana.

Physicians also would be forbidden from having any affiliation with
marijuana providers.

Q: Who would regulate the industry?

A: The Department of Public Health and Environmental Sciences would
issue cards to marijuana cardholders and providers. The department
would have to provide the names of cardholders and providers to the
local law enforcement agencies where they live.

The department would have to set up a toll-free hotline for people to
report suspected abuses of the law. The department could investigate
them or refer them to local law enforcement agencies.

Q: What authority would local governments have?

A: Cities and counties could, by ordinance or resolution, regulate
and inspect marijuana providers and marijuana-infused product providers

Q: What about the transition if SB423 passes?

A: If it passes, no new medical marijuana cards would be issued as of
the bill's passage date. On June 1, marijuana card renewals would be
subject to the new provisions of SB423. Cards would be reissued when
volunteer providers are identified.

On July 1, the current medical marijuana law would be repealed.
Current medical marijuana growers, storefront dispensaries and
manufacturers would be shut down. They would be required to turn over
any mature marijuana plants, cuttings, clones, useable marijuana or
marijuana-related products still in their possession to local law
enforcement agencies for destruction.

Oct. 1 would be the deadline for the state to complete its
fingerprinting and background checks for volunteer providers.