
Due
to the complications of implementing the original medical marijuana
legislation, there are few controls on the location of stores, their
density, the quality of the product, the validity of patient
authorizations, and the legitimacy of the business.
The
current system has been an interesting demonstration of the rules of
a free marketplace, but it has also created an atmosphere of
questionable legality. Keeping marijuana business operations fully
legal is a challenge, due to vague or inconsistent information from
state and federal agencies. In comparison to the recreational
system’s heavily regulated licensing, tracking, and taxation, it
becomes obvious that state legislators will want to make some
changes.
Lawmakers
have recognized that a truly successful recreational market depends
upon the state reconciling the medical market’s disparities in
labeling, taxation, traceability, quality control, and allowable
locations. During the 2014 legislative session, the state senate and
house debated several bills addressing regulation of medical
recreational marijuana, but none made much progress.
One
of the bills that received the most attention last year, SB 6178,
sponsored by Jeanne Kohl-Welles, addressed many of the problems of
the existing medical marijuana system and proposed more closely
aligning the medical and recreational systems. SB 6178 was reviewed
by the State Senate but never made it out of the Ways and Means
Committee last year.
Senator
Kohl-Welles will propose a new bill for the upcoming 2015 session.
The most notable provisions of her bill will:
- Create a state registry for medical marijuana patients, to provide tax exemptions and arrest protection
- Allow delivery of marijuana products
- Facilitate research on and about marijuana use
It
is vital to a healthy industry that changes in regulation come from
the state, rather than a patchwork of changeable regulations in local
jurisdictions. The people of Washington State need clear guidance
regarding the possession and use of this newly legal product, and
that guidance should come from the state or federal level. Although
the desire for local control is understandable, local lawmakers
should regard their changes as temporary, and plan to fully
reconsider the situation once new state legislation is in place.