By Christen Smith
Staff Reporter
Capitolwire
HARRISBURG (Oct. 5) — The House could vote on a medical cannabis bill by the end of the year, but some Republican lawmakers say it will have to look a lot different from Senate Bill 3 to get the support it needs.
House Majority Leader Dave Reed, R-Indiana, understood as much when he organized a legislative working group — led by Rep. Kerry Benninghoff, R-Centre — four months ago to recommend parameters of legislation, other than SB 3, that could pass the chamber.
In the report sent to Reed Thursday, however, the group’s recommendations didn’t provide a clear direction on some of SB 3’s most controversial regulatory issues, though Reed’s spokesman Steve Miskin said the goal is still to vote a bill within the next three months, if not before the end of 2016.
“It’s fair to say the budget situation is still taking priority right now,” he said.
Benninghoff, fresh off Reed’s request to oversee the working group, said the House is still trying to find common ground on the issue.
“I see this as something that’s going to be evolutionary,” he said. “It’s not going to be just one bill and all of a sudden PA has this medical marijuana program.”
In the report, the group struck a balance between SB 3 and the “far more conservative” House Bill 1432 by allowing 14 qualifying illnesses — including chronic pain and PTSD — but limiting the number of licenses and dispensaries.
“The working group was almost all people who support it,” Benninghoff said. “I have mixed emotions on it, so I don’t put myself in the pro or against category, but I’m not convinced that we should pass Senate Bill 3 as-is.”
“There’s a very divergent group of opinions,” he added. “There are some who think we shouldn’t even be talking about this. The work group was not necessarily reflective of every member, but what it does is allow the process to move forward another step.”
SB 3, sponsored by Sen. Mike Folmer, R-Lebanon, passed the Senate in May on a vote of 40-7. It seeks to create a State Board of Medical Cannabis Licensing that would have authorized 260 licenses for 65 growers, 65 processors and and 130 dispensaries.
The scope was too broad for many House Republicans, who favored fewer licenses and dispensaries in order to stymie potential abuse of the system.
Enter legislation from Dauphin County Republican Rep. Ron Marsico, HB 1432, which deviates from SB 3 in that it forgoes a state Board of Medical Cannabis Licensing in favor of a medical marijuana program administered through the state Department of Drug and Alcohol.
The Marsico bill gives the Drug and Alcohol Department power to authorize up to five “medical marijuana organizations” who will handle every aspect of growing, processing and selling. Each of the organizations can operate four dispensaries, resulting in just 20 dispensaries for the entire state.
Marsico, who was apart of the working group, knew his bill wouldn’t please everyone, but said it still created access for patients who need the drug most.
The working group, in one of its biggest “compromises,” recommended creating a two-license system — one for growers/processors and a separate for 65 dispensaries — to be authorized by the state Department of Health each year and regionally located. Though, the report cautions, this number “was not supported by everyone.”
The report reads: “The Majority Leader should continue to work to determine the need, access and internal caucus politics to allow a bill to move forward when pinpointing the number, or range of numbers, of growers/processors and dispensaries.”
Folmer finds the recommendations troubling.
“Senator Folmer is concerned with oversight of the proposed medical cannabis program,” said Fred Semach, Folmer’s chief of staff. “Senate Bill 3 calls for an independent board focused on patients. Senator Folmer will need to see the details of the structure of the oversight entity as proposed by the House.”
Benninghoff said the group’s decision to recommend a system managed by the Department of Health provided a more comfortable level of oversight for some members and would prevent the creation of “yet another government bureaucracy.”
“He [Folmer] also has questions about the number of licenses as the report leaves open the number for growers/processors and half of what he was hoping to see for dispensaries,” Sembach said. “States with restrictive systems have forced patients to seek other alternatives for their medication as access is limited and costs are prohibitive.”
Benninghoff agreed the recommendations haven’t sorted all of the concerns surrounding the bill.
“Those things have to be sorted out as well,” he said. “It’s not as simple as, well there’s sick patients so lets pass this. I think people should be glad we are being this insightful versus rubber stamping.”
-30-
