Continuing the tour, Wedding
Dress pressed a finger to an
electric scanner, opening the
door to a back room. Three men
sat in a waiting room with
duffel bags full of marijuana.
In the next room, two Harborside
employees were sorting through
the deliveries and negotiating
prices with guys who could
reasonably be called drug
dealers.
* * * * *
Patriotic potheads love to
point out that cannabis was
grown at Jamestown, that George
Washington might have used
hashish, and that Thomas
Jefferson wrote a draft of the
Declaration of Independence on
hemp-fiber paper. But recent
history offers more compelling
reasons that marijuana is a
definitively American drug:
since the 1930s, it has slotted
neatly into the age-old debate
over chemically induced pleasure
versus chemically induced pain
relief. Since the 1990s, it has
been at the center of a conflict
between states' rights and
federal authority; it's
considered by advocates and
opponents alike to be the most
likely of all controlled
substances to change the terms
of U.S. drug policy.
Of course, the
medical-marijuana movement is
hardly unprecedented in our
national history. During
prohibition, congressional
hearings were held on "medical
beer," a serious effort to get
around the law. There has always
been some legitimacy to the
medical-use argument: alcohol
and marijuana can both make
people feel better. But there
has always been some cynicism.
In March 1921, under the
scare-quoted headline "Brewers
Jubilant Over 'Medical' Beer,"
the New York Times dryly noted
that "one physician in Chicago
wrote 7,000 prescriptions for
liquor, none for less than a
pint, in the course of a few
weeks."
Medical marijuana clubs have
come a long way since the August
day in 1996 when Dennis Peron
heard boots pounding up the
stairs of his Cannabis Buyers
Club in San Francisco's Castro
district and thought he was
being robbed. His club had been
openly selling marijuana to the
ill--and, allegedly, the
non-ill--since at least 1991.
That year, San Francisco voters
passed Proposition P, which made
enforcement of laws against
medical marijuana the city
police's lowest priority. Within
days of Peron's arrest--which
was made with a deliberate lack
of assistance from local
authorities--four more clubs had
opened.
"Repression isn't used to
that reaction," suggested
DeAngelo. "Repression is used to
bringing down the hammer and
having a ripple effect. Instead,
all they did with Peron was cut
off the head, and now the four
managers needed somewhere to go.
So they started their own
clubs."
A few months after Peron's
arrest, the voters of California
legalized medical marijuana with
Proposition 215. The people who
had opened the state's first
shops quickly found themselves
overwhelmed by demand. "The
first dispensaries were started
by activists, really
well-intentioned people who
didn't have any business
experience, who didn't have any
capital, who didn't know how to
manage or run a business, who
often didn't really know that
much about the cannabis business
because they were activists, not
dealers," said DeAngelo, who
proudly keeps detailed
accounting records at Harborside.
"There were so many patients
flocking to them. They found
themselves, without even trying
to, in the middle of these very
lucrative businesses bringing in
millions of dollars a year."
In a pattern that would
repeat itself in cities across
the state, a second wave of
entrepreneurs entered the fray.
In San Francisco, pot clubs
quickly outnumbered McDonald's
franchises. Their owners had the
same motivation as those of the
Golden Arches: profit. Out went
the idealism that had helped to
police a business illegal on the
federal level and quasi-legal on
the local level. Though medical
marijuana wasn't prohibited
anymore, it wasn't regulated or
licensed, either, with no
central authority controlling
zoning, licensing, or consumer
protection. And despite the
state law, some aggressive
law-enforcement
officials--including the
far-right state attorney general
Dan Lungren, who'd ordered the
raid against Peron's club--still
sought to prosecute
dispensaries, citing federal law
as justification.
"[The second wave of pot
clubs] was started by people,
unfortunately, who were more
interested in those millions of
dollars than they were attracted
to doing service for the
community or moving the
medical-cannabis movement
forward," said DeAngelo. "So
[their clubs] were opened
quickly, often in inappropriate
locations. They weren't up to
code. They were run by people
that had shady backgrounds. And
inevitably, problems started
occurring. There were robberies,
there were neighbors and nearby
business that complained. Cars
were double-parked. There were
shootings. There were not good
things happening," he said.
In Oakland in the late
nineties, as in San Francisco a
few years earlier, federal raids
served only to increase the
number of cannabis clubs. If a
club owner was jailed and his
place shuttered, his former
staffers often kept themselves
employed by opening new clubs.
Soon, downtown Oakland was being
referred to as "Oaksterdam,"
host to at least eight pot clubs
and a culture of pot smoking.
Even some cafes and bars began
to allow patrons to smoke on
their premises.
Jeff Jones, a longtime
medical-marijuana activist,
opened a pot club right around
the corner from Oakland City
Hall--with the full knowledge of
those who worked in the
building. He was one of those
who, like Peron, jumped out
ahead of the pack without any
legal protection from the state.
He told me that he opened his
shop in July 1996, five months
before the election. City
politicians, he says, had been
generally supportive but were
unsure of what to do next. In
March of that year, the city
council had set up a task force
to study the medical-pot issue
and passed a resolution
endorsing Jones's club. "'What
do you want, another liquor
store?'" Jones said he would ask
cops and council members
whenever they got squeamish.
Local politicos were certain
that Prop 215 would fail and
that he would then have to close
his shop. Indeed, some were
actively lobbying against the
legislation. Senator Dianne
Feinstein, who as mayor of San
Francisco had opposed the
movement, said that the proposed
law was "riddled with loopholes
so big that it would have the
effect of legalizing marijuana."
She was partly right, but 56
percent of the state didn't
care. "They were blown away when
we won," Jones said of city
officials. "'What do we do now,
Jeff?'" Oakland politicians had
company in their surprise:
eleven days after California
passed Prop 215 and Arizona
approved its own
medical-cannabis law, Clinton
drug czar Barry McCaffrey
convened a high-level meeting to
formulate a response. The
opposition had been caught
flat-footed. California and
Arizona, he vowed, would be the
last two states to legalize
medical marijuana.
McCaffrey summoned two of the
initiative's most vocal
opponents, Orange County sheriff
Brad Gates and California
Narcotic Officers' Association
spokesman Tom Gorman, to D.C. to
plot how to thwart
implementation of the law. (At
this same meeting, the
participants conjured up the
antipot advertising campaign
that led to accusations of
federally sponsored payola.)
McCaffrey announced that the
federal government would work
hard against doctors and
patients involved with medical
marijuana, going after the
licenses of physicians who
recommended it. Doctors sued,
arguing that the penalty
violated their First Amendment
rights, and won a landmark
victory.
* * * * *
Since then, medical-cannabis
centers have spread across the
state of California, and they
now represent the single
greatest threat to current
pot-prohibition policies. In
2003, the California legislature
attempted to codify the new
industry with the passage of a
bill designated--seriously--SB
420. If the clubs remain
successful--and, as Harborside's
self-image has it,
"professional"--they could
fundamentally alter America's
cultural relationship with
drugs. The backers of
prohibition know this, and
they've dug in against medical
marijuana, making it a major
target of the drug war.
In McCaffrey's defense, there
was little that he could have
done to beat Prop 215. The
movement had been gaining
strength in response to another
phenomenon that the federal
government had initially
ignored: the AIDS epidemic.
"Once AIDS came on the scene,
[the movement] exploded. That's
what put us over the top," said
Mykey Barbitta, who runs the
Compassion Care Center, a
descendant of the Cannabis
Buyers Club located at the same
spot on Market Street as Peron's
clinic. "The medical-cannabis
movement was a response to a
need, HIV," agreed Randi
Webster, founder of the San
Francisco Patients Care
Collective, who lost more than
thirty friends in the early
years of the AIDS epidemic. "It
started as a treatment for
patients with extreme bone
disease."
Long before the Reagan
administration was taking AIDS
seriously, people suffering and
dying from it spread the word
that marijuana could ease nausea
and increase appetite, both
crucial to living with the
disease. Some early AIDS
patients turned to a
little-known Food and Drug
Administration pilot program
that allowed those with
legitimate medical need to get
marijuana directly from the
government. The program dated to
1976, when Washington, D.C.
resident and glaucoma patient
Robert Randall, using the
medical-necessity argument,
essentially forced the feds into
growing pot on a farm in
Mississippi. Today, a handful of
surviving patients get a monthly
canister containing three
hundred prerolled joints.
The Compassionate
Investigational New Drug program
had very few initial
participants. For one thing,
marijuana was widely available,
cheap, and of increasingly high
quality. For another, the nation
had a permissive attitude toward
the drug, with even President
Jimmy Carter calling for
decriminalization. There was
little incentive for a patient
to apply, especially given a
built-in disincentive: that your
name would now be on a federal
list associated with marijuana.
That changed with HIV. As AIDS
patients discovered pot's
palliative effects, cancer
patients took notice, too. In
1992, overwhelmed with
applications, the feds closed
the Investigational New Drug
program to new members.
Two years before, the
medical-marijuana movement had
received a significant
public-relations boost in the
form of an elderly San Francisco
General Hospital volunteer, Mary
Jane Rathbun, who'd realized
that marijuana eased the
suffering of AIDS patients and
allowed them to eat. Brownie
Mary, as she became known, was
arrested and charged with drug
distribution for baking pot
brownies and giving them to AIDS
patients. Rathbun refused to
take any plea bargain, demanding
a jury trial and creating a
media disaster for the district
attorney. The charges were
dropped, and Brownie Mary was
free to help Peron open the
Cannabis Buyers Club and
advocate for Prop 215.
By the time that Prop 215
made the ballot, the
medical-marijuana movement had
some real money on its side.
George Soros, an eccentric
billionaire on a quest to spread
freedom across the globe, had
met Ethan Nadelman, a
drug-policy wonk with an
activist streak, in the early
nineties. Soros offered to fund
Nadelman's effort to reform drug
policies and was soon
bankrolling a large percentage
of the Prop 215 campaign.
Soros's money made a
difference, certainly, but
without the grassroots movement
behind it, the campaign couldn't
have been won. By 1996, many
Californians knew at least one
cancer or AIDS patient who had
benefited from using medical
marijuana--either on the
recommendation of a doctor or
not. And if they didn't, they
had probably heard of the
charismatic septuagenarian who
gave free brownies to the
terminally ill. Recall that
medical-cannabis clubs had
opened in San Francisco even
before they were legal by state
standards, bolstered by the
passing of 1991's citywide
Proposition P, which urged that
doctors "shall not be penalized
for or restricted from
prescribing hemp preparations
for medical purposes." Some
local officials, including City
Supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor
George Moscone, had openly
supported medical cannabis as
early as the seventies. Milk's
support of Peron even while he
was in prison on a separate pot
charge enraged the right-wing
minority trying to hold back the
wave. (In fact, conservative
supervisor Dan White was
apoplectic about Milk's defense
of a convicted criminal, and
there's plenty of reason to
believe that it contributed to
his decision to walk into City
Hall in 1978 and assassinate him
and Moscone. Moscone's acting
mayoral replacement, Feinstein,
immediately reversed Moscone and
Milk's pro-medical-marijuana
policy.) As the clubs began
opening post-1996 throughout the
Bay Area, as well as in other
parts of the state, most cities
decided to work with them, and
the few Southern California
towns that battled the clubs
generally lost in court.
But the Clinton
administration and California
attorney general Lungren, a
McCaffrey ally then considered a
possible GOP vice presidential
candidate, had more political
firepower than officials in the
conservative rural counties that
opposed medical pot. On August
4, 1996, agents carried out the
raid on Peron's club in the
Castro, seizing computers, 40
pounds of marijuana, and medical
records. Lungren, who is now a
member of Congress, claimed that
Peron had sold pot to an
undercover agent for nonmedical
reasons. According to Peron, the
agent had claimed to be an AIDS
patient intent on establishing a
dispensary for other sufferers.
The attorney general's claim
is noteworthy: Peron was selling
to those other than medical
patients. Prop 215 wouldn't be
voted on for another few months,
so at the time, it wasn't legal
to sell pot to anyone. Public
opinion, however, was such that
Lungren knew that he couldn't
take Peron down just for selling
to patients.
That approach continued, up
until Holder's announcement, at
the federal level, with the
DEAoften claiming that the
cannabis-club owners whom it
busts had been selling to people
other than patients. In 1998,
the feds filed suit against and
closed down Jones's club,
arguing not only that the
dispensary had violated the
Controlled Substances Act, but
also that medical cannabis had
not been declared safe by the
FDA, making its distribution
doubly illegal. The Oakland City
Council responded, somewhat
desperately, by declaring the
club a city agency. The case
eventually made it to the
Supreme Court, where, in United
States v. Oakland Cannabis
Buyers Cooperative, justices
overturned the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals and ruled that
there's no medical-necessity
defense in the war on drugs.
"It is clear from the text of
the [Controlled Substances] Act
that Congress has made a
determination that marijuana has
no medical benefits worthy of an
exception," wrote Justice
Clarence Thomas in the May 14,
2001, decision. "The statute
expressly contemplates that many
drugs 'have a useful and
legitimate medical purpose and
are necessary to maintain the
health and general welfare of
the American people,' but it
includes no exception at all for
any medical use of marijuana."
Having failed to strip the
feds of the authority to raid
medical-marijuana clubs,
advocates have instead pleaded
with them not to exercise it.
It's working. In the middle of
my interview with Harborside's
owners, DeAngelo, looking at his
desktop computer, threw his
hands up and shouted, "Yes!"
Hillary Clinton, campaigning for
president in New Hampshire, had
just told a
video-camera-wielding
marijuana-policy activist that,
if elected, she would end
federal raids on pot clubs in
California. That meant that all
three leading Democratic
candidates--including the
ultimate winner--had vowed as
president to leave DeAngelo and
Wedding Dress alone.
* * * * *
It hasn't been one long,
smooth ride. In 2003, Oakland
mayor Jerry Brown ordered an
investigation of the city's
cannabis clubs, hoping to clean
them up before, as he had warned
Jones, the feds did it for him.
City Council president Ignacio
De La Fuente went a step
further, suggesting that Oakland
needed only one medical-cannabis
dispensary. The resulting
regulation shut down all but a
few of the shops and the whiff
of pot smoke downtown subsided a
bit. But the owners of the
closed shops simply headed
across the bridge to San
Francisco, which was still a
regulatory Wild West.
Soon enough, though, San
Francisco was following
Oakland's lead. In the spring of
2005, the city counted within
its limits at least forty-three
unregulated dispensaries, one of
them in the same building as a
center for drug and alcohol
rehabilitation. Others were near
schools, day-care centers, and
other places that neighborhood
folks justifiably tend to hold
sacrosanct. In June of that
year, the city council
instituted a six-month
moratorium that would allow it
to write and review regulations
covering the existing clinics.
"The absence of laws has allowed
adverse opportunities to
emerge," Supervisor Ross
Mirkarimi, who proposed the ban,
said at the time.
The dispensaries were also
becoming difficult for the cops
to countenance. "It's a huge
scam," said Captain Rick Bruce
of the San Francisco police,
telling the New York Times that
dealers were hiding behind the
law. "We see guys coming out of
these places, and the only
description I can come up with
is that it looks like a Cheech
and Chong movie. They are what
you would call your traditional
potheads; whether they have a
medical condition beyond that is
subject to debate."
As municipalities struggled
with the details of the reality
of medical marijuana, they also
joined with activists in the
fight against federal
intervention. By 2004, another
nine states had passed
medical-cannabis laws, and the
debate in California began to
take the turn that the feds
feared most. At the time, I was
working with the Marijuana
Policy Project as a staffer
assigned to state-level policy.
The organization teamed up with
activists in Oakland to help
organize and fund the campaign
for Measure Z, on behalf of
which I did marginal
paper-pushing, drafting messages
to MPP membership and
coordinating with folks on the
ground.
Measure Z sought to make
enforcement of marijuana
laws--all laws, not just those
relating to medical
marijuana--the lowest priority
of local law enforcement. In
that ambition, it followed in
the path of legislation by
several other localities that
had done the same. It went a
significant step further,
however, by declaring that the
"City of Oakland shall establish
a system to license, tax and
regulate cannabis for adult use
as soon as possible under
California law."
It passed with 65 percent of
the vote.
* * * * *
The same week that I toured
Harborside, in the summer of
2007, the federal government
sent letters to the landlords of
about 150 Los Angeles-area
dispensaries. The list would
eventually expand to more than
300. The letters politely
informed the recipients that
their tenants were operating
illegal drug-manufacturing and
-distribution centers, and that
if they didn't boot the renters
out, the feds would seize their
property. L.A. shop owners,
recalled Jeff Jones, were
petrified, telling him, "'The
sky is falling! I have no
protection!' Well, what did you
think? You never had any
protection."
Jones guessed that blatant
advertising in alt-weeklies and
pot-focused newspapers and on
the Internet brought the federal
response. Oakland, he said, had
been shrewder. "The city hated
advertising," he said. "They
were fearful of it. They said,
'It's gonna bring the feds out.'
They don't want it."
Today, it's much easier to
find a pot club in Los Angeles
than it is in the Bay Area. In
2007, when there were close to
five hundred L.A. clubs, I
pushed opened the door to one,
prompting the tattooed owner to
rush out from behind a Plexiglas
wall: "Whoa, whoa! What are you
doing?!" I told him I was a
reporter covering the crackdown.
Predictably, he consented to an
interview only if I didn't
identify him. "Some of these
guys will sell to anybody. Kids,
even," he said. "They're going
after those kinds." He said that
he, by contrast, checks all pot
cards, doesn't sell to children,
and provides only small amounts
of marijuana to each customer.
But ultimately, he conceded, he
just prays.
Few, if any,
medical-marijuana advocates saw
the landlord move coming.
Tactically, it was brilliant:
Landlords, like most
Californians, are generally
sympathetic when it comes to
medical marijuana. But how many
are willing to lose property
over it? Allison Margolin, a
prominent Los Angeles pot
lawyer--she calls herself
"L.A.'s Dopest Attorney"--said
that the landlord letters have
led to a significant number of
evictions and created a "culture
of fear." "But there are still
tons of clubs," she added. One
club owner took his landlord to
court to prevent the eviction
and prevailed. His attorney
hopes that if the feds now come
after the club owner, he can
argue that it was a selective
prosecution and thus
unconstitutional. "It's one of
the better ideas I've heard,"
said Margolin. "I don't know if
it'll work, but at least it's an
idea."
In the meantime, pot clubs
were becoming more and more
legitimized in the Golden State.
They're even becoming a
significant source of
above-board state revenue, which
bodes well for not only such
clubs' long-term survival
locally, but also for their
viability outside of California.
In the fall of 2006,
California clarified to its
cannabis dispensaries that they
were, in fact, responsible for
paying its 7.25 percent sales
tax, and had been since 2005.
(Depending on the jurisdiction,
some clubs are also required to
add on a bit for local and
county taxes.) Some club owners,
backed by ASA, had argued that,
as quasi-pharmacies, their
businesses were exempt, a line
of reasoning dismissed by the
state. Others, such as DeAngelo,
initially opposed the tax but
came to support it, arguing that
the perennially underfunded
state would get addicted to the
tax dollars generated by its one
thousand or so pot clubs--a
number that will continue to
climb absent any major federal
intervention.
Harborside is charged an 8.75
percent tax. With revenue of
around $1 million per month, its
annual sales-tax bill comes in
at something like $875,000 per
year. And that's just one shop.
Betty Yee, chairwoman of the
State Board of Equalization,
which oversees tax collection,
told me that there's no way to
break out exactly how much money
the state is getting from pot
clubs because it doesn't require
them to state on their tax forms
what product they sell.
("Regardless of legal status,
anyone can get a seller's
permit," she explained.)
However, she did release the tax
records of some clubs that had
been raided by the federal
government, noting that because
they employed sizable numbers of
people, they also paid state and
federal income and payroll
taxes. The Compassion Center,
licensed by Alameda County, paid
$3 million before being
shuttered in October 2007 by the
DEA. Nature's Medicinal,
licensed by Kern Country, paid
close to $1 million in 2007,
which included $203,000 in state
and federal income taxes,
$365,000 in payroll taxes, and
$427,000 in sales taxes. The
Compassion Center employed and
provided health benefits to
fifty people; Nature's Medicinal
twenty-five. (The demise of the
latter wasn't universally
deplored by the medical-pot
community, however: It's alleged
affinity for high-powered
weaponry didn't jibe with the
pacifist vibe the industry
espouses.)
It's estimated that between
150,000 and 350,000 Californians
have medical-marijuana cards.
(There's no comprehensive state
list, for obvious reasons.) A
1999 study by Australian
economists Kenneth W. Clements
and Mert Daryal found that a
daily marijuana smoker consumes
on average 18.57 ounces of pot
annually. They found
once-a-week-or-more smokers toke
13 ounces; once-a-monthers
inhale 1.7 ounces. (The emphasis
must be on the "or-more" in the
former case, otherwise those
folks were puffing a quarter
ounce per sitting.) Let's
assume, then, that out of about
200,000 medical-pot smokers,
half are daily users. That
number yields nearly 2 million
ounces of pot. At $400 an ounce,
we're talking about nearly $800
million worth of weed. At the
lowest sales tax rate, 7.25,
that's nearly $60 million. If
there are 50,000 occasional
smokers, they'd kick in another
$20 million. The monthly smokers
are worth another $3 million,
for a total of more than $80
million. And that's just sales
tax. In the case of Nature's
Medicinal, sales tax made up 42
percent of total taxes paid,
suggesting that the California
pot industry would pay total
taxes of about $200 million per
year. Even if that estimate is
wildly overblown, the state is
unlikely to give up easily
revenue anywhere near that
amount: a special notice sent to
clubs by the Board of
Equalization assured sellers
they "may decline to provide
information on products sold due
to concerns about
self-incrimination."
A November 2006 report by the
City of Oakland's Measure Z
Oversight Committee came up with
similar figures. It estimated
that Californians consume
between $870 million and $2
billion in medical marijuana per
year, generating sales-tax
revenue between $70 million and
$120 million. In 2004, when
Oakland's clubs were thriving,
it took in, according to city
records, $2.3 million in taxes
on more than $26 million in
revenue. As the feds swept
through, that dropped, in 2006,
to just $477,000 in taxes on
$5.5 million in revenue. Two
million dollars pulled from an
annual city budget of about $900
million isn't exactly spare
change.
NORML and ASA estimate that
medical users make up about 10
percent of California's pot
smokers. But given the laundry
list of conditions that qualify
someone as a legit patient, it's
safe to assume that we're
looking at a serious growth
industry here. If the system
eventually encompassed all of
California's pot smokers, the
tax revenue would be in the
range of $2 billion. As the
movement evolves into an
industry, the feds will find it
increasingly difficult to roll
it back.
The pro-pot folks found out
just what power entrenched
industries can wield in 2008.
Drug-policy reformers campaigned
on behalf of a ballot initiative
that would reduce
marijuana-possession charges to
small infractions and divert
other drug offenders into
treatment instead of prison. It
had the backing of the
California Nurses Association,
California Society of Addiction
Medicine and the California
Academy of Family Physicians.
But it had stronger opponents.
The California State Sheriff's
Association, the California
Narcotics Officers Association,
the California Peace Officers
Association and the Police
Chiefs of California, all lined
up against it. In 2007, the
state declared its overcrowded
prison system to be in a state
of emergency. But one
prison-industry group didn't
quite see the urgency.
California's prison guards union
spent some two million dollars
fighting the proposition. It
went down sixty to forty.
California's fiscal situation
is becoming increasingly
unstable, with towns, counties,
and even the state teetering on
the brink of bankruptcy.
Maintaining the bursting prison
system may be a luxury
unaffordable in tough economic
times. Extra tax revenue, too,
is nice in good times. During
bad times, it's an absolute
necessity. And the nation is due
for some bad times. "We're
headed for the wall at lightning
speed," former Treasury
Secretary Paul O'Neill put it in
December 2008, as the U.S.
economy reeled. The movement to
repeal Prohibition was given a
major boost by the economic
collapse of the late twenties
and early thirties. Legalizing
booze would create tax revenue
and jobs, the argument went
then. Today, as we head for the
wall, opponents of the drug war
make the same case, citing the
billions in tax revenue and
economic growth that could be
generated by legalization.
* * * * *
The advent of the
medical-marijuana industry is a
crucial development in the
medical-marijuana movement. But
the industry's activist roots
are what keep it from toppling
under the weight of federal
pressure. Marijuana might be
good business, pro-cannabis
do-gooders suggest, but it does
actually help sick and dying
people.
The San Francisco Patients
Care Collective, founded in
1999, has a lineage stretching
all the way back to Peron and
Brownie Mary. It's an
emphatically noncommercial
venture, according to its owner,
Randi Webster. "I want no
mercantile terms associated with
me. We don't 'buy' our supply;
we 'get' it," she said, wearing
a purple velvet dress, thick
glasses, and a crown of pot
leaves. "'Club' is like the
N-word. We prefer 'facility.'"
A look around her facility
confirmed that she's not
profit-hungry: the clients all
appeared to be in serious need
of medical treatment with little
ability to pay for it--no fakers
here. The collective also serves
as a community center. There's a
small stage for open-mic night,
and bingo night is also popular,
said Webster. Peron's spot,
which has gone through a series
of names as it survived bust
after bust, maintains an
activist feel, too. It offers a
free joint to patients with no
money, free Internet access, and
free video games on a
flat-screen TV. A framed letter
on the wall thanks the club for
what it does for patients and
the community. The writer thanks
Peron for an offer of a tour,
saying that she hopes to make it
one day. Signed, Nancy Pelosi.
By about 2010, if the pace
keeps up, more than half of the
American population will live in
states where it's legal to smoke
pot for medical purposes--which
in California means for the
relief of not only glaucoma,
AIDS, and cancer, but also of
irritable bowel syndrome,
insomnia, and that infinitely
flexible catch-all, "etc."
Although some states originally
limited medical marijuana to
specific ailments, these have
gradually expanded access under
pressure from patients not
covered by the law.
The federal government, it
would seem, is up against the
tide of public opinion.
Nearly half of Americans polled
now say that marijuana should be
taxed and regulated much like
alcohol. Solid majorities--from
two-thirds to
three-quarters--support medical
marijuana. Liberals, especially
the young ones who run the
blogosphere, don't have the same
fear of being called soft on
crime that dogged their
Clinton-era predecessors, and
they have embraced drug-policy
reform as a defining issue.
Meanwhile, the religious right
that helped elect George W. Bush
to the presidency has become
disillusioned with his
administration's moral failings
and once again begun to fade
from politics. As it has done
so, it has taken its calls for
temperance legislation with it,
leaving the libertarian wing of
the Republican party ascendant.
The feds' fear is that, if they
lose ground now, they won't ever
regain it. (Which, if they knew
their history, they would know
isn't true.)
With that in mind, the
President Bush's drug czar
routinely called out the
medical-marijuana movement as a
fraud, an attempt to legalize
drugs using sick and dying
people as a cover. He reiterated
that take in a discussion that
the White House posted online in
December 2007. "Funded by
millions of dollars from those
whose goal it is to legalize
marijuana outright, marijuana
lobbyists have been deployed to
Capitol Hill and to States
across the Nation to employ
their favored tactic of using
Americans' natural compassion
for the sick to garner support
for a far different agenda," he
said. "These modern-day snake
oil proponents cite
testimonials--not science--that
smoked marijuana helps patients
suffering from AIDS, cancer, and
other painful diseases 'feel
better.' While smoking marijuana
may allow patients to
temporarily feel better, the
medical community makes an
important distinction between
inebriation and the controlled
delivery of pure pharmaceutical
medication. If you want to learn
more about this, we have
information available that shows
how medical marijuana laws
increase drug-related crime and
protect drug dealers."
Wedding Dress, of course, has
a different way of describing
what he's up to. "I still
believe that our intention and
what we're doing in the world is
actually insulating us," he
said, adding that Harborside's
legit relationship with the city
also helps. He offers Hope Net,
a club that San Francisco police
protected from the federal
government, as a demonstration
of the connection that a
responsible pot clinic can forge
with local officials. "That
dispensary is still open and
functioning," he said, "and no
one was charged."
Not yet, at least. "I'm not
as optimistic as my partner in
terms of the federal threat,"
DeAngelo said. "The federal
strategy is very difficult to
read, and we don't know where
they're going to hit next.
Anybody who opens a dispensary
has to be ready to go to federal
prison."