Congress takes passive stance as D.C. fires up medicinal pot program

By Tom Howell Jr.

The Washington Times Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Congress, which for years has needled the District of Columbia from atop Capitol Hill, watched from the sidelines this week as the city launched its medicinal pot program.
Its passivity to this point is significant, since the federal government still considers the production and use of marijuana illegal and Congress is vested with legislative oversight of the nation’s capital.
“It’s highly symbolic that medical marijuana is being sold to patients at the doorstep of the same federal legislature that has refused to change a very outdated policy,” said Kris Hermes, spokesman for Americans for Safe Access, an organization that promotes patients’ legal access to cannabis.
Despite efforts to implement D.C. home rule in the 1970s through a city mayor and council, Congress at times has banned left-leaning initiatives that Republican lawmakers object to, such as public funding for abortions. Some of the prohibitions, such as one that thwarted the city’s needle exchange program to fight HIV infections, were lifted in later years.
City health officials said the District’s nascent program hasn’t raised the ire of federal lawmakers or Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.’s Justice Department so far, although only nine D.C. patients have registered to obtain the drug and two dispensaries, Capital City Care and Takoma Wellness Center, have been cleared by city inspectors to sell it.
Rep. Darrell E. Issa, the California Republican with oversight of the District, has not raised any public objections to the program to date. A spokesman for the congressman could not be reached Tuesday.
And Justice Department spokeswoman Allison Price said the department has advised U.S. attorneys that prosecution of significant drug traffickers, including marijuana, remains a core priority, but that focusing enforcement efforts on those with cancer and other serious illnesses who use marijuana as part of a recommended treatment regimen likely is not an efficient use of federal resources.
She noted that the department is continuing to review ballot initiatives in Colorado and Washington, both of which have legalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana for recreational use.
But the legalization of marijuana in various forms remains a lightning rod from coast to coast, as states introduce a patchwork of medical-cannabis programs and grapple with the Obama administration’s unpredictable enforcement of federal laws that prohibit the drug’s cultivation and use in all cases.
D.C. voters supported a medical marijuana program in 1998, only to see it held up by a congressional rider known as the Barr Amendment until 2009.
After four more years of rule-making, a 51-year-old D.C. resident who is HIV positive kicked off the city’s program Monday by purchasing a half-ounce of three strains of marijuana from Capital City Care on North Capitol Street, according to The Washington Post.
Nineteen states have medicinal marijuana programs, yet only Colorado and Washington adopted recreational use laws.
Both states legalized the use of marijuana by adults through ballot initiatives in November, yet Colorado Attorney General John W. Suthers still doesn’t know how the federal government will treat the state’s efforts to legalize and regulate the drug’s market.
“We are still waiting for the imminent guidance promised in February,” spokeswoman Carolyn A. Tyler said Tuesday, referring to a prior pledge by Mr. Holder at the National Association of Attorneys General in the District.

The U.S. government’s approach to marijuana laws, or enforcing the federal ban, has wavered in recent years.
A 2009 memo, issued by U.S. Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden, reminded federal prosecutors that “no state can authorize violations of federal law” while also advising U.S. attorneys not to target individuals acting in compliance “with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.”
Federal prosecutors basically looked the other way in states that legalized medical marijuana, but a letter sent from the Justice Department to U.S. attorneys across the country in mid-2011 signaled that law enforcement — despite what the Ogden memo said — would not acquiesce to those who cultivate or sell marijuana.
All the while, the District was taking pains to roll out its medical marijuana program in a tightly regulated fashion. Its been more than two years since the city began to collect notices of intent from entrepreneurs looking to enter the D.C. pot business.
But before they could, applicants had to a sign waiver. The document released the city from liability if the federal government prosecutes the program’s participants.

Congress takes passive stance as D.C. fires up medicinal pot program

American Mayors: Let Them Smoke Pot

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

Published: June 28, 2013



It has been more than seven months since voters in Colorado and Washington State chose to legalize marijuana for recreational use, in contravention of federal drug laws. It has been more than three months since Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he would announce his department’s response to the new statutes “relatively soon.”

So far: nothing. Mr. Holder has yet to indicate whether he will side with all nine former heads of the Drug Enforcement Administration, who published an open letter urging federal pre-emption.

On Monday, the United States Conference of Mayors passed a resolution suggesting the opposite: that the Obama administration should let the states decide this issue for themselves. “Despite the prohibition of marijuana,” the resolution reads, “and the 22 million marijuana arrests that have occurred in the United States since 1965,” some “42 percent of Americans” have used the drug.

Organized crime, the mayors continue, dominates the illegal marketplace; enforcement is not only costly, but also racially biased, with African-Americans far more likely than Caucasians to be arrested for possession despite similar rates of use across ethnic groups. In light of these facts, they say, states should be able to “set whatever marijuana policies work best to improve the public safety and health of their communities.”

A guy named Barack Obama might have agreed with that when he was running for president. Asked about medical marijuana in 2008, he said, “I’m not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue.” But the Barack Obama who actually became president seems to have no problem with interference. In the past four years, the D.E.A. has conducted at least 270 SWAT-style raids on medical marijuana providers at a cost of roughly $8 million.

What the Conference of Mayors resolved seems appropriate — and sensitive to the reality that public attitudes toward marijuana are liberalizing rapidly. In 1969, Gallup found that only 12 percent of Americans favored legalizing the drug. By 2010, the Pew Research Center put the figure at 41 percent. In 2013, again according to Pew, it was 52 percent, a majority.

At any rate, Mr. Holder’s dithering helps no one. The status quo is chaotic and untenable. If you live in Denver or Seattle and you are thinking of applying for a license to sell marijuana, you have a right to know whether federal prosecutors will move to seize your property and jail you.

Meet The New York Times’s Editorial Board »

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:Correction: July 1, 2013
An earlier version of this editorial misstated the source of the 1969 survey of Americans favoring legalizing marijuana. It was conducted by Gallup, not the Pew Research Center. 

American Mayors: Let Them Smoke Pot

Washington State Marijuana Regulators Want Clarity From Feds

OLYMPIA, WA – Two Washington state regulators who are drafting rules for the state’s newly legal recreational marijuana industry said they would benefit from clearer directives by the federal government on how to build a system that would avoid being shut down.

Chris Marr, one of three appointed members of the state Liquor Control Board charged with drafting state pot rules, said the U.S. Department of Justice had so far provided scant guidance on how to develop an industry that federal authorities, who view pot as an illegal drug, won’t feel compelled to shutter.

“Policy is being established that will be a precursor for a large number of states,” Marr said. “It’s irresponsible. They should at least engage even if just for the purposes of information gathering.”

Washington and Colorado last November became the first U.S. states to legalize recreational pot use, even as the drug remains illegal under federal law, and both expect to have recreational-use marijuana stores open starting next year.

Despite the federal prohibition of cannabis, the states are proceeding with efforts to create rules for their nascent markets with provisions including advertising restrictions and security requirements for growing operations.

Engagement in those efforts could give federal authorities a voice in a process that could also serve as a model for other states that may pursue legalization in the future, Marr said.

But apart from a handful of opaque or piecemeal statements, the Obama administration has been tight-lipped in how it plans to respond to state legalization of the recreational marijuana.

In December, President Barack Obama told ABC news that he “has bigger fish to fry” than going after recreational marijuana users. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder later told a U.S. House subcommittee he was committed to upholding federal drug laws.

“People on the outside may think that ‘Surely they’re monitoring it, getting information quietly,’” Marr said. “My understanding is as far as the federal government is concerned they’ve been totally unengaged.”

Ruthann Kurose, Marr’s colleague on the Liquor Control Board, agreed that more feedback from the Obama administration would be helpful, but was reluctant to level criticism.

“They have to think not only about one or two states but about the national implications,” Kurose said. “I do think it would be easier if we had some clarity.”

Board Chairwoman Sharon Foster was not immediately available for comment. The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment.

But a spokesman for Washington state Governor Jay Inslee, a Democrat, said Inslee and state Attorney General Bob Ferguson had met with Holder in January to discuss the state’s plans.

In that meeting, Holder posed questions on issues from labeling requirements to keeping pot from leaving the state, and Inslee responded in a letter the following month, the spokesman said. Inslee has not been in direct contact with Holder since.

“But our Washington D.C. staff stays in touch with the Department of Justice, and we made sure they saw the draft rules and the final rules when they came out. They’re aware of what’s happening,” Inslee spokesman David Postman said.

Postman said that “it would be nice to have an affirmative statement from the federal government that they would allow things to happen.” He said the Justice Department had offered no timeline for clarifying its position.

One clue to how the federal government will handle recreational pot may lie in its approach to the medical marijuana industry, which now legally operates in 18 states and the District of Columbia.

The Justice Department has given individual U.S. Attorneys some discretion in taking state laws into account in addressing medical pot, marijuana business lawyer Hilary Bricken said.

In Washington state, Bricken said, there is “a vast difference” in approach between the Seattle-based Western District and the more rural Eastern District, with the latter taking a harder line in shutting dispensaries and growing operations.

In Marr’s view, such decentralization raises the prospect of a recreational-use system that “is allowed to flourish” in one part of the state but “not allowed to function” in another.

Emily Langlie, spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington, referred questions to the Justice Department. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney for the state’s Eastern District did not return a call for comment.

Washington State Marijuana Regulators Want Clarity From Feds

Washington Lawmakers To Eric Holder: 'Respect The Will Of The Voters' On Marijuana Policy

Seven Democrats from Washington's congressional delegation called on U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder this week to consider the results of last year's election as he determines how the Department of Justice will respond to the state's successful marijuana legalization effort.
"As federal representatives of these states we request that your Department's course of action in this matter respect the will of the voters, and that you announce this course of action as soon as possible to assure our citizens that they will not be penalized by the federal government for activities legal under state law," the letter, signed by the state's two senators and five of its congresspeople, read. "[W]e hope that you will exercise your significant discretionary authority by choosing not to purse preemption of these laws, or prosecute our residents and state employees acting in compliance with these laws."
In November, Washington voters passed I-502, an initiative that legalized marijuana for recreational use and began the process of setting up a system of taxation and regulation. Colorado also passed a similar measure, Amendment 64. Both were approved by a margin of more than 10 percent.
The moves have left Holder and the DOJ to make a decision about how the administration will treat these states that now openly flout federal law, which considers cannabis an illegal Schedule I substance. In February, Holder said an announcement was coming "soon." Nearly four months later, there has been no visible movement.
As HuffPost's Ryan Grim and Ryan J. Reilly reported earlier this year, some experts believe the DOJ will decide to treat the newer recreational marijuana laws differently than state medical marijuana laws. While medical marijuana laws are seen as a somewhat limited encroachment on federal policy, many officials within Holder's department and the Drug Enforcement Administration consider recreational marijuana laws to be a full-out assault on federal law:

The Justice Department may respond to the legalization of recreational marijuana in Washington and Colorado in several ways. One option would be to go after low-level marijuana users as scapegoats and seek a court ruling that would declare federal law trumps state law. One of the more extreme options, which officials acknowledge is currently being weighed by the department's Civil Division, would be to preempt the laws by suing the states in the same way the feds sued Arizona over its harsh immigration law. Federal authorities could sue Washington and Colorado on the basis that any effort to regulate marijuana would violate the federal Controlled Substances Act.

Perhaps aware of that possibility, the Washington Democrats touted the steps the state already had taken to ensure the legitimacy of the legal marijuana industry and urged restraint from Holder.
“During a time of constrained federal resources, we believe DOJ has higher priorities than the pursuit of legal action against persons in compliance with the laws of the states,” the letter read. “We expect and encourage your continued prosecution of activities that occur outside the bounds of state law.”
As the Seattle Times reports, the public statement by the federal lawmakers is likely to help shore up support from pot advocates who had expressed frustration at their general silence on the issue.
Read their entire letter here.