ARTICLE: New Jersey Medical Marijuana Faces Further Delays

by Brendan Ferreri-Hanberry
August 29, 2012

After a long delay in New Jersey, many medical marijuana patients are still waiting for their medicine. Then-Gov. John Corzine first signed the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act in January 2010, but since then, implementation of the measure has been slow. Although the state originally planned to have the necessary alternative treatment centers open in July 2011, the state’s first licensee, Greenleaf Compassion Center, is not scheduled to open until September of this year. A total of only five other planned facilities have been approved, four of which still have no approved location. Assemblyman Reed Gusciora (D-Mercer) has even called for a hearing into the cause of the delays, protesting that there is “no adequate explanation” for the current situation. Difficulties with organization, vetting the necessary officials, and objections by local authorities have all been cited by the Star-Ledger as causes.

Dr. Walter Husar, a neurologist from Rockaway, complains that along with disorganized lists of participating physicians, strict regulations are another barrier to safe access to the drug. Under the current system, patients must have an existing “bona fide” relationship with one of the limited number of participating physicians, as defined here. The physicians must then submit an official statement recommending the patient. The doctor must then transfer a unique reference code to the patient, who can then use it to register him- or herself. The registration of a patient is only valid for 90 days, after which the doctor and the patient must repeat the process. According to Chris Goldstein with the Coalition for Medical Marijuana of New Jersey, this is the only state where only the doctors on an official list can prescribe marijuana. Sixteen other states, plus the District of Columbia, have medicinal marijuana programs. Access to marijuana in New Jersey is also limited to patients with one of a set list of serious medical conditions such as cancer, AIDS, and multiple sclerosis, with use for some conditions only permitted when other treatments have failed or particular complications are present.

Husar and other doctors report themselves flooded with calls from potential patients. However, in a stark demonstration of the difficulty of joining the program, more physicians than patients have been registered. Approximately 50 patients have been recognized as eligible for medical marijuana, while only around 150 physicians are participating, out of over 30,000 in the state.

Husar agrees that marijuana can be helpful for multiple sclerosis sufferers in particular, citing his 25 years of experience with such patients, some of whom obtained the drug illegally. He is, however, concerned that since there is still no legal source of medical marijuana, even the patients who are already registered with the program may be subject to legal penalties if they are caught with their medicine. Under New Jersey’s current laws, this is a serious risk. Possession of even the smallest amount is punishable by up to six months in prison and a $1,000 fine, while those caught growing even a single plant could be subject to a felony conviction, a fine of up to $25,000, and a prison sentence of up to five years.

ARTICLE: Patients Are Fed Up

Huffington Post: August 28, 2012

Medical marijuana patients are sick and tired of being sick and tired. We don't want our issue to be treated like a criminal justice issue, but as a healthcare issue. We need leadership that respects our medical needs. Obama's biggest mistake was trying to deal with medical cannabis in a brief memo. He should have put together a team of agencies along with governors of medical cannabis states to find a long-term solution.

ARTICLE: Journalist makes the economic case for cannabis legalization in 'Too High to Fail'

By Wallace Baine, Santa Cruz Sentinel, Calif. McClatchy-Tribune Information Services

Aug. 23--A few years ago, Doug Fine was giving a talk on sustainability when he happened to share an airport shuttle ride with a woman who was a USDA-approved expert on biofuel.
The two struck up a conversation about the possibilities of biofuel when Fine asked, "Well, what about hemp?"
"Instantly, she said, Oh, that's the best one of all. Hemp can provide benefits that corn and soy can't. But we can't look at it as an alternative fuel,' " Fine said.
Now it is Fine who is making that case and more in his new book "Too High to Fail: Cannabis and the New Green Economic Revolution." He comes to the Capitola Book Cafe to discuss the current political and economic status of cannabis tonight.
The book, he said, is an economic argument that the prohibition against cannabis and the larger War on Drugs is hurting the American economy. The book has already gotten the attention of pop culture's most prominent critic of the drug war, comic and talk-show provocateur Bill Maher.
Maher reviewed the book for the New York Times and wrote, "He has written a well-researched book that uses the clever tactic of making the moral case for ending marijuana prohibition by burying it inside the economic case. We've become a ruthless society, and almost everything has to be sold as first, it's good for business.' To his credit, Fine doesn't do what so many of us do and scream, Can't we just stop jailing potheads because that would be the right thing?' "
In
the book, Fine illustrates the state of the marijuana industry by following one particular plant from Mendocino County in its journey from seed to a medical-marijuana patient. He describes the unique pot culture in Mendocino County, perhaps the nation's most tolerant county of the cannabis industry. And he outlines the potentially enormous economic lost opportunity that cannabis prohibition engenders.
But the Obama administration, despite the widespread hope that it would be more open to the idea of decriminalization, has instead cracked down on cannabis growers. Citing a Rasmussen poll released in May, Fine said of the Obama administration, "Journalistically speaking, it's just very confusing. Polls show that 56 percent of Americans say they support legalizing and regulating cannabis and 80 percent support medical marijuana. I mean, you have people like Pat Robertson and George Schultz coming out for this and it seems clear the American people are ready to address it. You would think that, as a candidate, Obama would want to take advantage of that."
Fine -- who lived in Santa Cruz for a few years in the 1990s and, in fact, worked as an intern with the Sentinel -- admits that his book is not exactly a dispassionate journalistic examination of the issue. He is not afraid to speak out as an advocate as well, particularly when it comes to his disappointment in the Obama approach to the issue. "As an American father and taxpayer and patriot, yes, I'm frustrated. The drug war has cost taxpayers a trillion dollars. It is one of the worst policies in our history, right up there with segregation, and clearly, it's time to end it. We would be a safer and better off country."
Fine often invokes American's failed experiment with Prohibition in the 1920s. But, unlike some cannabis proponents, he doesn't point to a vast conspiracy of industrialists and conservatives holding back legalization.
"I think it's simpler than all that. I think it's just bureaucratic inertia. There's $30 billion a year that goes into law enforcement to fight the drug war, and that's a hard tap to turn off. The only industry that really has a strong vested interest in the status quo is the private prison industry, and that's just not enough to hold back legalization on its own. It's more about a tipping point in public opinion and that's coming."
___
(c)2012 Santa Cruz Sentinel (Scotts Valley, Calif.)
Visit the Santa Cruz Sentinel (Scotts Valley, Calif.) at www.santacruzsentinel.com
Distributed by MCT Information Services

ARTICLE: Is keeping marijuana a Schedule 1 drug politically motivated?

"Medical marijuana patients are finally getting their day in court," said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access, the country's leading medical marijuana advocacy group. "This is a rare opportunity for patients to confront politically motivated decision-making with scientific evidence of marijuana's medical efficacy," continued Elford. "What's at stake in this case is nothing less than our country's scientific integrity and the imminent needs of millions of patients."

ARTICLE: DEA destroys more than $1 billion of marijuana

By Alex Moore 2 hours ago

Yet another reason banning marijuana instead of regulating and taxing it is completely idiotic.

Yesterday Warren Buffett made news for backing out of massive credit default swaps in a 5-year long bet he’d held that states would continue paying their debt. That Buffett stopped backing this insurance led many to believe he sees risks that states and municipalities will go bankrupt and start defaulting on their debts. California, in particular, is one of the most indebted, struggling to balance tax revenue against its huge debt.

Which makes it especially asinine that the DEA has destroyed more than $1 billion worth of marijuana, concluding a two-month operation that saw 80% of this haul pulled from California.

Marijuana was also dug up from Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, in the billion-plus dollar haul.

California’s current budget deficit is just north of $15 billion dollars. It was only $9 billion just last January. This is clearly a state that could use the tax revenue from $1 billion dollars worth of marijuana—not to mention the huge savings in the prison system and state bureaucracy that would come with decriminalization. The combination of the two might put a serious dent in California’s formidable deficit.

But, no, the Obama administration’s war on marijuana and the DEA’s overreaching past state laws must continue. For what? What purpose does it serve? Fully 50% of America now supports decriminalization, and 61% support it in Colorado, a predictably blue state with a legalization measure on the ballot for November. If the administration were really smart, they would start campaigning for legalization on economic grounds. The blue states would support it, so it wouldn’t really cost him any votes, and Obama would be bringing a multi-billion dollar revenue stream to the table that Republicans wouldn’t go near in a time when the country desperately needs new revenue.

The administration’s war on weed isn’t only outdated and irrelevant, it’s downright wasteful.

ARTICLE: Bipolar disorder and pot: Study claims marijuana helps mental condition

August 19th, 2012
by Heather Tooley

Bipolar disorder is a common condition among millions and a new study suggest smoking pot might actually help the mental condition.

Statistics in a test studied show that those who used marijuana had less severe bipolar than those who haven't tried the banned substance. It's also claimed that pot helps with anxiety, insomnia, certain eye conditions, and chronic pain. The idea this could help with psychiatric disorders is a new one -- and likely to be with even more controversy.

Scientific researchers at Zucker Hillside Hospital on Long Island reviewed 200 participants in their test -- with 150 those who have never smoked marijuana in the past. The other 50 had used pot at some point. Every one of the participants consistently experienced the onset of bipolar disorder at a standard age.

The study showed that the participants who used pot had better "neurocognitive performance."

Researchers wrote:

“Results from our analysis suggest that subjects with bipolar disorder and history of (marijuana use) demonstrate significantly better neurocognitive performance, particularly on measures of attention, processing speed, and working memory.”

They continued that similar results showed up in studies for schizophrenia and pot use.

The researchers also stated that "it is also possible that these findings may be due to the requirement for a certain level of cognitive function and related social skills in the acquisition of illicit drugs.”

ARTICLE: Medical Marijuana in the US

Disclaimer: This article is meant to be purely educational—HOPES neither condones nor condemns the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes.



Throughout the past several decades the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes has received increasingly more attention. The active ingredient in marijuana belongs to a class of compounds called cannabinoids, which have been used to treat numerous conditions ranging from insomnia and PMS to chemotherapy-induced nausea and appetite loss associated with AIDS therapy. More recently, cannabinoids have been shown to be effective against motor disturbances in patients with multiple sclerosis. This latter finding points to a potential use of medicinal marijuana to treat movement problems in Huntington’s Disease.

While the biochemical and physiological effects of marijuana have been examined in ever more precise ways through scientific research, discussions over the appropriate role of the drug in society have long been mired in social and political controversy. Medical marijuana is currently legal or soon-to-be legal in eighteen states, although these policies conflict with the federal government’s drug laws. The current federal stance on marijuana also places strict limitations on its use in biomedical research. This article will give an overview of marijuana’s use and regulation in United States history, and then address some of the contradictions and controversies over medical marijuana policy today.

Table of Contents

Brief history of marijuana in US
State legalization – The case of California
Medical Marijuana and Research
Medical marijuana in the United States today
Further reading:
Brief history of marijuana in US ^

The cultivation of Cannabis sativa, otherwise known as marijuana, has been documented in the United States since the early 17th century, when settlers brought the plant to Jamestown, Virginia to produce hemp. The plant was also recognized for its medicinal purposes, even meriting an entry in the 1850 edition of the medical reference book United States Pharmacopeia. These relatively permissive attitudes toward marijuana would, however, change dramatically in the beginning of the 20th century, as social reform movements attempted to eradicate the recreational use (and abuse) of marijuana and other substances such as alcohol, morphine, and opium. Local and state jurisdictions codified these prohibitions, passing laws that restricted the non-medical use of marijuana or banned the drug completely. By the time Congress passed the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act, a bill that levied a fee on commercial transactions involving the Cannabis sativa plant, every state had laws in place that criminalized the general possession or sale of marijuana.

Despite the regulations and restrictions, the prescription of marijuana for medical use remained legal until 1970, when the federal government enacted the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act (now know as the Federal Controlled Substance Act). This law classified controlled substances into five “schedules”, a framework designed to provide a hierarchy of their potential for abuse, medical utility, and health consequences. (See Table 1.) Marijuana was categorized as a Schedule I controlled substance, meaning that it was now illegal for physicians to prescribe the drug to their patients.


Table 1. Criteria for Scheduled Substances

Not long after the drug’s outright ban, an advocacy group known as the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) petitioned the federal government to “reschedule” marijuana to allow for regulated medical use. Proponents pointed to the drug’s widespread recreational use and the absence of significant associated harm, as well as its potential to benefit individuals suffering from serious illnesses. This petition would wind its way through the federal courts system for 22 years before ultimately being struck down by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. However, the publicity that it generated (and perhaps the prominence of drug culture in 1960s/1970s America) likely played an important role in prompting state authorities to reassess the strict restrictions against marijuana.

By 1982, 31 states and the District of Columbia had passed legislation pertaining to medical marijuana, many of them establishing therapeutic research programs that allowed physicians to distribute the drug to patients enrolled in approved clinical trials. (However, because of the strict protocols involved in obtaining approval, only eight such programs became operational.) In anticipation of a federal policy shift, six states reclassified marijuana as a Schedule II substance. Although this move theoretically allowed qualifying physicians to prescribe marijuana without fear of arrest by local or state police, providers were still subject to federal arrest and prosecution if they recommended the drug. Even in the states that opted to reschedule on their own, more protection was needed before marijuana could be used for medicinal purposes.

State legalization – The case of California^


In the absence of progress on the federal front, advocates for medical marijuana took to local- and state-level initiatives to loosen restrictions on growing, distributing, and using the drug. Perhaps the best-known example of this strategy has been California’s Proposition 215, a 1996 ballot measure protecting patients and physicians from state prosecution. Understanding the success of this referendum and its reverberations across American law and culture provides a good overview of the benefits and challenges of local- and state-level reform.

Even before the passage of Proposition 215, medical marijuana had found support in various regions across California. In November 1991, the voters of San Francisco passed a measure known as Proposition P, which urged state lawmakers to make marijuana available for medical use. California’s elected officials seemed to be similarly inclined, approving laws in 1994 and 1995 that recognized the use of medical marijuana. Despite public support for the legislation, then-Governor Pete Wilson vetoed both measures, actions consistent with his strong stance against marijuana use for any purpose.

Recognizing the limitations of attempting reform through the legislature, a long-time activist named Dennis Peron spearheaded a drive to legalize marijuana by bringing the issue directly to state voters in the 1996 election. Since the turn of the 20th century, California’s constitution has allowed citizens and organizations to put initiatives on statewide ballots for a yes-or-no vote. This referendum process is a legacy from the Progressive Era of the same time period designed to bolster direct democracy. To get his initiative on the November ballot, Peron needed to gather 433,000 signatures, a long and expensive undertaking that required significant organization and financial resources.

To mobilize this effort, Peron and his allies formed a political action group (PAC) known as Californians for Compassionate Use that took the responsibility of writing the initiative, which it titled “The Compassionate Use Act.” However, this measure also benefited from the substantial largess of a PAC known as California for Medical Rights, whose donors included George Soros, a billionaire financier, and Laurence Rockefeller, of Rockefeller family fame. With over $1 million, supporters of the measure gathered about 850,000 signatures, which Peron noted was one-fifth of the total number of votes that they needed for passage in November.

By the time Proposition 215 came up to a vote, Peron and his allies had out-organized and outspent their opposition many times over, raising nearly $2.5 million dollars. (The bill’s opponents, who called themselves Citizens for Drug-Free California, took in $33,612 in contributions.) On November 5, 1996, the Compassionate Use Act passed with the approval of 56 percent of state voters, making California the first state to establish a legal framework for medical marijuana.

At its core, Proposition 215 protects patients and their caregivers who cultivate, possess, or use marijuana for pre-approved medicinal purposes from state-level prosecution. The statute also guarantees that physicians who recommend marijuana for their patients would not be punished by state authorities. Critics of the initiative, however, noted that its language seemed deliberately ambiguous, leaving room for a broader interpretation of its provisions than what initially meets the eye. For example, Section 1(A) of the measure lays out the ailments which would qualify for treatment using medical marijuana: “cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief (emphasis added).” Critics note that “any other illness” could allow for vague symptoms such as stress, anxiety, and headaches to qualify, allowing the de facto legalization of marijuana for general use. Dennis Peron did not calm such fears by declaring after the passage of Proposition 215: “I believe all marijuana use is medical—except for kids.”

Two months after the passage of the Compassionate Use Act, the Clinton Administration took a coordinated hard line against the new law. In a press conference, Barry McCaffrey, the director of the Office of National Drug Control and Policy announced that: “Nothing has changed. Federal law is unaffected by these propositions.” Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala worried that California’s initiative reinforced the belief that marijuana was benign. Finally, Attorney General Janet Reno stated that she was reallocating federal enforcement resources to target California physicians who recommended marijuana to their patients, threatening to revoke their registration with the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and prohibit them from participating in the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Despite staunch federal opposition, subsequent court rulings blunted some of the threats, even though they did not provide much clarity on the everyday legality of medical marijuana use in California. For example, not long after the Clinton Administration’s strong rebuke of the new Californian law, a group of physicians, patients, and nonprofits filed a complaint (Conant v. seeking to block the federal government from punishing physicians that recommended marijuana to their patients. This complaint, known as Conant v. McCaffrey, was settled in September of 2000, when the US District Court for Northern California (a federal judiciary) issued a ruling that limited the ability of federal officials to punish physicians who prescribed medical marijuana under the guidelines of Proposition 215.

However, a subsequent Supreme Court decision in 2005 (Gonzalez v. Raich) maintained that under the Controlled Substance Act, federal law enforcement had the right to punish anyone who dispensed, possessed, or used marijuana, regardless of state laws. This ruling, however, did not strike down California’s Compassionate Use Act, but was instead an affirmation of the federal government’s power under the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, the justices ruled by a vote of six to three that the Commerce Clause, which gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce, allowed the federal government to prohibit the use of marijuana because of its potential for trade on the illicit market. The Court’s majority opinion did not address the obvious conflict that persisted between federal and state law.

Medical Marijuana and Research^

At the time of this article’s publication, marijuana is classified by the federal government as a Schedule I controlled substance, which means that the drug has no accepted medical benefit and a high potential for abuse. (See Table 1.)

Because of this designation, biomedical investigators interested in including marijuana in their research must first obtain a special license from the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and then apply for access to the supply kept by the National Institutes of Drug Abuse (NIDA) for research purposes. The challenges involved in obtaining the drug, along with political and financial considerations, have significantly dampened attempts to examining the potential use of marijuana as a therapeutic agent. For example, in the 1990s, both the DEA and the NIDA refused numerous requests by Dr. Donald Abrams, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco who was interested in investigating the potential use of marijuana to counter the weight loss seen in individuals affected by AIDS-wasting syndrome. Though his study was reviewed and approved by several regulatory bodies, including the FDA, the DEA and NIDA’s decisions effectively blocked Dr. Abrams’ research for several years before finally approving it in 1998.

Scenarios like Dr. Abrams’ have prompted major scientific and professional organizations to issue recommend a reexamination the existing federal policy. Committees from the National Institutes of Health, the American Medical Association, the Institute of Medicine, and the American College of Physicians, have all noted the potential therapeutic uses of marijuana and have called for federal regulations to recognize and allow for such research. For example, at the 2009 meeting of the American Medical Association’s House of Delegates (the organization’s policy-making arm), Board of Trustees member Dr. Edward L. Langston noted:

“[The current scheduling] limits the access for cannabinols [a class of compounds that include the active ingredient in marijuana] for even research—it is very difficult…We believe there should be a scientific review of cannabinols in the treatment of pain and other issues…We support research on the use of cannabinols for medical use”

It is important to note that these organizations’ support for further research should not be interpreted as support for cannabis programs or the legalization of marijuana, or that the present scientific evidence supports the use of marijuana as a prescription drug. Nevertheless, these professional health organizations have clearly sent a message that the current restrictions on marijuana research do not support active investigation into the drug’s physiological effects. Whether the federal government decides to take these recommendations into account remains to be seen.

Medical marijuana in the United States today^


As of the beginning of 2012, medical marijuana legislation is either in place or set to take effect in 17 states and the District of Columbia. (Figure 1.) Because these laws were passed on a state-by-state basis, there exists a patchwork of state policies governing medical marijuana. While Alaska only allows for the possession of one ounce and six plants, with no legal protection from arrest, Oregon permits patients to possess up to 24 ounces and 15 plants, with state registration protecting qualified patients from prosecution. Though most states which have decriminalized medical marijuana have also provided legal protections for its users, the majority of these laws have not established mechanisms for dispensing the drug or for regulating its quality and safety. The very definitions of what qualifies patients for medical marijuana can vary greatly, with New Mexico, for instance, only permits its use for a limited set of conditions (cancer, glaucoma, HIV/AIDS, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord damage, and terminal illness), while California has an expansive list that encompasses general ailments such as migraines, severe or chronic pain, and of course “any other illness for which marijuana provides relief.”

Figure 1. The states in green have laws concerning medical marijuana as of May of 2012.
.

In 2009, shortly after President Barack Obama took office, the Department of Justice issued a memorandum to its 93 U.S. Attorneys informing them that prosecuting individuals who use medical marijuana in compliance with state laws should not be a priority. However, federal law enforcement agencies have continued to conduct raids on marijuana dispensaries, demonstrating a continuing commitment to enforcing the federal Controlled Substance Act. For instance, in October of 2011, the four U.S. Attorneys of California issued warnings to the landlords of dozens of marijuana dispensaries throughout the state, accusing their tenants of using the Compassionate Use law as a front for large-scale drug sales. Such enforcement initiatives demonstrate the tenuous balance that still exists between federal and state laws on medical marijuana.

Unless the federal government takes steps to reschedule marijuana, or the states which have decriminalized the drug move to reverse such policies, the legality of medicinal marijuana will likely remain hard to define.

Further reading:^

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/m/marijuana/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=marijuana&st=cse
This New York Times special provides an excellent overview of recent developments concerning the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes.
http://www.npr.org/2011/07/12/126137481/medical-marijuana-laws-a-state-by-state-comparison
This interactive map by National Public Radio shows which states have decriminalized medical and how their laws differ
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1931247,00.html
This TIME article provides a brief history of medical marijuana in the United States
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/mmp/pages/compassionateuseact.aspx
California’s Compassionate Use Act—note the list of treatments eligible under the law in Section 1(A).
Hoffman DE, Weber E. Medical Marijuana and the Law. 2010. New England Journal of Medicine 362(16): 1453-1456.
This very readable article provides a good overview of the status of state medical marijuana laws as of 2010.
Vitello M. Proposition 215: De Fact Legalization of Pot and the Shortcomings of Direct Democracy. U. Mich. J.L. 31(3): 707-776.
Although the intended audience of this article is likely legal students and scholars, the author provides a summary of the events leading up to and following California voters passing Proposition 215.
Annas GJ. Reefer Madness—The Federal Response to California’s Medical-Marijuana Law. 1997. Legal Issues in Medicine 337(6): 435-439.
This article gives a summary of how the Clinton Administration’s reaction to Proposition 215, including the government’s main arguments against the legalization of medical marijuana.
Cohen P. Medical marijuana 2010: It’s Time to Fix the Regulatory Vacuum. 2010. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 38(3): 654-666.
In this article, the author argues that the federal government’s current position on medical marijuana’s use and research is flawed.
Pacula RL, Chriqui JF, Reichmann DA, Terry-McElrath YM. State Medical Marijuana Laws: Understanding the Law and their Limitations. Journal of Public Health Policy 25(4): 413-439.
The authors provide an excellent summary of marijuana’s complicated history in the United States.
-Y. Lu, 5-15-12

Scheduled I controlled substance
Print PDF

ARTICLE: State Registration Starts for New Jersey Medical Marijuana Patients, Serious Access Questions Remain

August 13th, 2012
Posted by Kris Hermes
Last week, the New Jersey State Department of Health (DOH) began the process of issuing identification cards to qualifying medical marijuana patients. While this represents progress, it’s been slow in coming. The “New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act,” which was signed into law in January 2010, is far from bring fully implemented. At a press conference held last Thursday by the Coalition for Medical Marijuana–New Jersey at the State House in Trenton, patients and advocates addressed the status of the law. In a written statement, CMMNJ Executive Director Ken Wolski, RN said:

We are glad to see that the patient registration process has finally gotten started. There are significant hurdles for patients to contend with, however, and it remains to be seen how successful this program will be.

Some of the hurdles for patients include restricted access to physicians registered to recommend marijuana, a burdensome and expensive process for obtaining a mandatory ID card, and an inadequate supply of medical marijuana in the state.

Lack of registered physicians

The New Jersey law requires that medical marijuana patients have a bona fide doctor-patient relationship with a physician who is registered with the DOH. Unfortunately, only about 150 out of more than 30,000 licensed physicians have so far registered to recommend medical marijuana. This amounts to less than one percent of New Jersey’s physicians who are able to recommend medical marijuana. Once physicians have registered with the state, they’re given a Reference Number, which is supposed to be used by qualifying patients in order to obtain their ID card.

Vanessa Waltz of Princeton, who has stage III breast cancer, wants to use marijuana in order to reduce her pharmaceutical intake. However, she’s running up against a lack of registered physicians.

I’ve looked at the doctors who have signed up already; there isn’t one near me.

Burdensome and expensive process for patients

In order to begin the registration process, patients must have a Reference Number from a qualified physician. Patients must also have computer access and an email address to complete the registration, but can be assisted by their doctor. Government-issued photo ID, proof of New Jersey residency, and a passport-style photograph are all required to register as a patient. All documents must be converted to digital format and uploaded to the DOH website.

After the DOH has reviewed the documentation, patients are prompted to submit a mandatory fee of $200 for a two-year period. If patients are receiving government assistance, they can register for $20, but must provide proof of such assistance.

Jay Lassiter, a New Jersey resident living with HIV, called the registration process “burdensome,” and asked how people who are “literally at deaths door…[not] able to even get out of bed” are supposed to deal with the “bureaucratic and financial hurdles.” Commenting on Governor Chris Christie’s implementation of the law, Lassiter said:

[I]t’s hard to imagine a governor bumbling a program…worse than Christie has done here.

Alternative Treatment Centers

According to New Jersey’s medical marijuana law, patients or their registered caregiver must obtain medical marijuana from a licensed Alternative Treatment Center (ATC). However, only six ATCs are allowed to operate in a state that covers more than 7,800 square miles. Although patients must designate the ATC they will use to obtain their medication, none are currently dispensing marijuana. Two ATCs have approved locations, one of which — the Greenleaf Compassion Center in Montclair — is expected to begin dispensing this fall, but the other four are in land use battles with local zoning officials.

It’s unclear whether six ATCs will be sufficient to meet the demand of New Jersey patients or if the burden of getting to one of them will pose insurmountable problems. On top of that, questions remain about the ability of ATCs to produce medical marijuana of acceptable potency. New Jersey resident Colleen Begley uses medical marijuana for anxiety and as an appetite stimulant to counteract the side effects of another drug she takes. Begley told NBC News:

I don’t think anybody in their right mind would want to go and pay anything more than what hay is worth in New Jersey.

Fate of New Jersey’s Law?

Some advocates are concerned that the array of obstacles preventing physicians and patients from participating in New Jersey’s medical marijuana law may force an untold number of otherwise qualifying patients to do without or get it from the illicit market. Either way, Governor Christie is making participation in the “New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act” much more difficult, a sign that patients and their supporters will have to continue lobbying elected officials in order to effectively implement the law.

ARTICLE: Medical marijuana patients in NJ can get ID cards

Published: August 12, 2012 12:36 PM
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

More than two years after New Jersey legislators passed a law allowing doctors to prescribe medical marijuana, patients qualified to receive the drug may register for identification cards beginning Thursday.
That doesn't mean they will soon receive a prescription for cannabis.
The state Department of Health has granted preliminary approval to just six nonprofit marijuana dispensaries, and only one is expected to have the drug available by next month.
The Greenleaf Compassion Center in Montclair, Essex County, announced a few months ago that it would likely harvest a crop in September, but it has not received final approval to sell the drug to patients.
Another dispensary owner has said he plans to open for business in Egg Harbor, Atlantic County, in October if he receives approval.
The rest of the would-be dispensary operators - including one who hopes to set up in South Jersey - are still trying to find sites and obtain local permits.
For months, the dispensary owners have prodded the state to begin the registration process so patients can be ready to buy the drug as soon as crops are processed.
Julio Valentin, an owner of the Greenleaf Compassion Center, said in April he had been reluctant to begin growing, given the uncertainty about when the registry would open.
"I'm very happy. I'm looking forward to serving the people of New Jersey," Valentin said Wednesday.
He said he expected his crop to be ready to dispense next month, and plans to meet with state officials soon to obtain final approvals to open for business.
Patients with qualifying medical conditions - such as terminal cancer, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, and Crohn's disease - can apply for identification cards after their condition has been evaluated by a doctor registered with the medical marijuana program. Qualified caregivers also will be issued cards.
Patients may register on the department's Web page at . Patients can call 609-292-0424 for information.
Seventeen states and Washington, D.C., have legalized marijuana for medical use, though selling and using the drug remains a violation of federal law.
About 150 doctors have registered with New Jersey to prescribe the drug. In Burlington County, participating physicians are James Crudele in Moorestown and Edward Tobe in Marlton. In Camden County, they are Mark Angelo of Voorhees, Sherita Latimore Collier of Camden, Marshall Lauer of Collingswood, and Julius Mingroni of Blackwood.
In Gloucester County, they are Daniel Abesh of Sewell, and Peter Corda, Vannette Perkins, and Jeffrey Polcer, all of Williamstown.
"The opening of a patient registry is a crucial and welcome step. . . . This represents the light at the end of the tunnel," said Assemblyman Reed Gusciora (D., Mercer), a primary sponsor of the medical marijuana law.
A registration card costs $200 and is valid for two years. Patients on assistance programs, such as Medicare or Medicaid, will pay $20.
I

ARTICLE: Gov Christie photo to hang on wall of dispensary.

By JILIAN FAMA
August 10, 2012
The commissioner of New Jersey Department of Health announced this week that for the first time physicians can register qualified patients for the state's medical marijuana program.

It's a move that got support from Republican Gov. Chris Christie, whose face will hang in a place of honor on the wall of the first functioning dispensary in the Garden State.

"At one point we felt that the progression of the program installation was slow," according to Julio Valentin, COO of Greenleaf Compassion, the dispensary in Montclair. "But we understand that Gov. Christie and the state of New Jersey is doing the best they can to cross their T's and dot their I's to make this program as successful as possible."

Get more pure politics at ABC News.com/Politics and a lighter take on the news at OTUSNews.com

Valentin, who intends to hang a framed photo of Gov. Christie on one of the walls of the dispensary, says that Christie has given them "the green light" to proceed with developing the program.

Valentin told ABC News he wants the dispensary to look like any other official government building. "I think it is respectful to hang a picture of the governor as well as other governmental officials in the store." Valentine continued, explaining that having a photo of the controversial Republican governor is not intended to be factious. "It is out of respect. We will have our certificates, an American flag and the N.J. state flag hanging inside too."

Allen St. Pierre, executive director of NORML, however, isn't as convinced that Christie's intentions in supporting the medical marijuana project are all good. According to him Christie "begrudgingly embraced" the legislation.

St. Pierre believes that Christie is not doing this because he is a supporter; he is doing to for "political pragmatism."

Though the governor seems supportive of medical marijuana, in June he vowed to veto a bill decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of marijuana. Advocates for decriminalization hope that one day Republicans will see their argument from a financial point of view.

"It'll be awesome the amount of money these places will generate," according to St. Pierre.

"The most infamous dispensary in California, Harborside Health Center pulls in $60,000- $70,000 per day in cash sales. That's over 30 million dollars a year in revenue," he said. "There is a lot of money to be generated in these dispensaries. Legislators are beginning to see that money and want to get a piece of it, which is very logical."

St. Pierre hopes that once establishments get going in New Jersey they will set a precedent for other East Coast states. "New Jersey's marijuana program is the antithesis of that in California," St.Pierre said. "Everywhere and every state looks to California and says that is not the model they want to replicate." That is why Christie has made a push for the strictest possible laws.

The newly installed patient registry system allows doctors to go online and electronically sign patients up to participate in the program, allowing them to explore alternative treatments of specified illnesses through means of medicinal marijuana. The qualifying conditions required to receive a med card include terminal illness, cancer, glaucoma, and Multiple Sclerosis.

EDITORIAL: GET MOVING ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES!

Pot plants, now about a foot tall, are legally spreading their fine leaflets in a secure warehouse in some undisclosed location in New Jersey.

We should all be rooting for these plants to thrive. They spell pain relief for people suffering from chronic illnesses such as cancer and multiple sclerosis. These plants offer a long-awaited sign that the state’s medical marijuana program may finally get off the ground, despite Gov. Chris Christie’s bureaucratic foot-dragging and the unfounded fretting of local governments.

The plants are being carefully tended by Greenleaf Compassion Center, which is preparing to open in Montclair in September — the first dispensary in the state. Another nonprofit group plans to start harvesting in November. But what about the other five centers? They were all originally scheduled to open last July. There’s no need for any more dawdling. Legislators should hold a hearing to examine their progress, as Assemblyman Reed Gusciora (D-Mercer) has called for.

But even as New Jersey’s first pot plants reach for the light, another important initiative seems to be buried, for now: the effort to end the destructive witch hunt over possession of small amounts of marijuana. A bill that would reduce penalties, making possession the equivalent of a traffic ticket with a small fine that brings no criminal record, is stalled in the state Senate. Christie has vowed to veto it, in defiance of most voters in this state.

This is Christie cultivating his national political image. Because as the former prosecutor surely knows, petty pot prosecutions leave law enforcement with fewer resources to chase truly dangerous criminals. They also drag too many young people into the court system, leaving them branded with criminal records that can make it impossible to land a job. Why rely on criminal sanctions when that causes so much collateral damage?
For many dying patients, marijuana could be the only solace. So while the governor is forcing us to wait for a more rational approach to marijuana prosecutions, let’s at least expedite access to the drug for sick people who desperately need it.

After all, New Jersey’s medical marijuana program, the 19th in the country, is one of the strictest. The operators of these centers undergo extensive, months-long background checks.

For patients, the qualifying conditions are narrowly defined; unlike many states, New Jersey doesn’t include chronic pain or anxiety. People who want medical marijuana must maintain an ongoing relationship with their recommending doctor, and they can’t get pot above a certain level of potency.

So let’s get all the pot centers open for business. They are safe and set to go.