Marijuana, whether medical or recreational, has long been a controversial topic of discussion. In Maryland, there has been no shortage of laws regarding possession of marijuana. In 2011, the state decided that a person caught with under an ounce of marijuana could present a doctor’s note or have their doctor testify for them in court regarding their medical need. And, recently, it was decided that possession or use of up to 10 grams of marijuana would not be considered a criminal offense and would not result in jail time or a criminal record.
The decriminalization of marijuana has moved another step forward in Maryland recently, with the discussion and sustainment of House Bill 1452, which moves to extend the state’s marijuana possession defenses to veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. The bill, backed by Delegate David Vogt, had its most recent hearing on March 11th. The bill can be considered a continuation of what has been happening with other states; gradual decriminalization of marijuana through the medical context. Whether or not Maryland will follow in the footsteps of California, Washington, or Colorado remains a mystery at the moment, since some still firmly oppose the legalization.
Delegate David Vogt III (photo taken from his msa.maryland.gov profile)
Though Delegate Vogt is facing opposition on his bill, several of his peers are vocal about their support for widespread decriminalization. Delegate Dan Morhaim was quoted saying that last year’s effort to set up distribution and infrastructure for medical marijuana was “a big step in the right direction” (Sun 1).
Earlier this month, he said he would support Vogt’s bill if it were modified, also asserting that the bill could eventually extend beyond the men and women who serve in the military, which raises an interesting and complex point about this bill and its path through Maryland legislation.
Delegate Morhaim (photo taken from his msa.maryland.gov profile)
“It’s a good, well-intended bill,” Morhaim said, “However, virtually all the things the bill wants to do are in law. In context I support the bill, but there’s no reason to pass the bill.” Delegate Morhaim’s webpage makes his opinion on the decriminalization of marijuana perfectly clear; he provides a link to an op-ed story about how “we cannot police ourselves out of this mess” (Sun 1).
Delegate Jeff Waldsteicher (photo taken from his msa.maryland.gov profile)
Delegate Vogt’s passion for this bill is apparently rooted in his own service and his observation of the post-war veteran suicide rate. “The lead sponsor is a veteran himself […] he has a tremendous amount of credibility on this issue. I would defer to him,” said Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher, a supporter of medicinal marijuana legalization. Waldstreicher went on to say that the issue of legalization will be on the radar screen for many years to come, but Vogt’s proposal was “an incremental step in the right direction.”
Whether Delegate Vogt’s passion extends to non-veterans with PTSD remains to be seen. If his support of marijuana decriminalization or legalization is contingent on the military background of the possessor, then he may not support an extension to non-veterans. This may garner him a negative reaction and thus waning support from his peers who are pushing for widespread legalization, as it only aligns with part of their case.
The overlying issue in this case is the fact that marijuana is still considered illegal in the eyes of the federal government, and marijuana is still classified as a Schedule 1 drug, which it has been since theControlled Substances Act passed in 1970.
The fiscal ramifications of this bill would be a decrease in the money obtained from fining veterans in possession of marijuana. Also, since this bill could be seen as a step forward in the process of legalization, the fiscal effect could extend into distribution and taxation of medical marijuana.
