Pennsylvania: Medical Marijuana Amendment Would Limit THC, Distribution Points

[Jacob Redmond]

Proposals from state Rep. Ron Marsico of Dauphin County would limit the amount of THC, the main psychoactive ingredient in medical marijuana, and also reduce the number of producers and dispensers.

That's a disappointment to one of the leading Pennsylvania supporters of medical marijuana.

"We're still praying it doesn't make it through," Christy Billet, the founder and and executive director of Pennsylvanians For Safe Access, said about the amendment.

Her biggest concern involves the fact that the amendment by Marsico, a Republican, would allow up to 50 dispensaries. SB 3, the medical marijuana bill that was overwhelmingly passed by the state Senate earlier this year and which Marsico's amendment would alter, calls for 130.

Billet said she fears dispensaries will be few and far between in some parts of the state, resulting in some patients being "driven to the black market."

Marsico's bill calls for dividing the state up into at least three regions, and spreading out dispensaries based on population and the number of people with state issued cards needed to obtain medical marijuana.

Billet said Marsico's 44-page amendment seems to have the most support among 100 or so proposed amendments to SB 3. Capitolwire reported Marsico's amendment is the only one that has the support of House Majority Leader Dave Reed, R-Indiana.

The long-awaited and historic vote on whether to legalize medical marijuana in Pennsylvania could take place within the next two weeks.

SB 3, which passed 40-7, was authored by state Sen. Mike Folmer, R-Lebanon, and has strong support from advocates including parents of children with severe seizures which aren't well-controlled with currently approved medications.

Marsico's amendment, which would replace much of SB 3, is nearly identical to SB 3 regarding the illnesses that could be treated with medical marijuana.

They include: cancer; HIV and AIDS; ALS; Parkinson's disease; multiple sclerosis; spinal cord damage resulting in spasticity; epilepsy and seizures; glaucoma, chronic pain; inflammatory bowel disease; and Crohn's disease.

It would limit the amount of THC – the ingredient that causes a high – to ten percent or less per dose. SB 3 has no such limit.

Marsico's bill also calls for smaller numbers of growers, processors and dispensers, with his bill calling for growers-processors to operate under a single licensing, and initially allowing up to 25. A small number of growers/processors would also be allowed to operate as dispensers.

SB 3 would allow 65 growers, 65 processors and 130 dispensaries.

Much of Marsico's amendment reflects the recommendations of a 14-member working group that recently worked on coming up with a proposal that can pass the House.

Marsico's amendment, like SB 3, establishes application and licensing fees. For example, a grower-processor would pay a $200,000 registration fee and a $10,000 renewal fee, and a dispensary would pay a $30,000 registration fee and a $5,000 renewal fee.

Marsico's amendment would impose a 5 percent tax on growers-processors, which wouldn't be allowed to add the tax to invoices presented to dispensaries or patients. SB 3 calls for a 6 percent tax, and also calls for the tax to be paid before the product reaches the patient.

Patients, or their registered caregiver, would need a recommendation from a doctor and a state-issued card in order to buy medical marijuana.

Dispensaries would have to have a physician and other trained medical professionals on staff.

Marsico's amendment, as per the working group's recommendation, calls for the medical marijuana program to be run by the state Department of Health.

News Moderator: Jacob Redmond 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Medical Marijuana Amendment Would Limit THC, Distribution Points
Author: David Wenner
Contact: Email Author
Photo Credit: David Wenner, PennLive
Website: Pennsylvania Live

 

[SweetSue]

Don't be misled. The intent of the Republican majority in our State Legislature is to frustrate the process as much as possible and water it down so far as to make it as though nothing really happened in the end. You have to understand that for well over a decade our legislature has done little more than give themselves raises and spend our tax dollars on themselves. The black market has nothing to fear in our Commonwealth.

What could possibly be the reason for limiting the amount of THC, the most beneficial of the cannabinoids in treating disease, to a meager 10%? Or to limit the number of dispensaries to a rediculously small number in a state with the size of our major population centers? You could easily drop those 50 dispensaries down in either end of the state, either in Philly or Pittsburgh, and not meet the need in that area alone, much less the rest of the state. There are well over 3 million citizens in SW PA alone. It's a cruel joke perpetuated by people who apparently have no one in their immediate family with a need for the medication.

I also have serious problems with the restrictive list of "acceptable illnesses". Are these people for real? I wish I had the stomach to stay and fight in PA. I'm still convinced they'll be the last state to make the move to legalize. They hate to be considered progressive.

It's also so disturbing that our state legislatures have set up fee schedules that push the price of a medication we could easily grow on our own to limits that take it out of the realm of possibility for those citizens who are under the greatest financial stress, a group that typically develop any number of stress-related ailments. Must we really profit so much from the suffering of our neighbors? Wouldn't it make more sense to reduce those costs as close to free as we could? That attitude would require that you accept the available evidence on the healing potential of cannabis. They're still stuck in a mentality of viewing cannabis as a danger to the safety and sanctity of our precious communities. It's still "Devil Weed" to them.

Sorry for the rant Jacob, but as a citizen of PA and someone who uses cannabis as a medicinal herb for something not covered under their "acceptable illness" list, this rankles me to no end. My daughter has a severe anxiety disorder that's driven her to suicide attempts twice in her brief life. Cannabis offers her the first real hope for freedom from this devastating disability. You notice this disorder, and none of the mental and emotional disorders that respond so favorably to cannabis are not under that umbrella of "acceptable". This means we'll still be skirting the legalities if I want to offer her peace, but because of her disability she worries incessantly about the legal concerns so it becomes a catch-22 for me.

This is social madness.