Medical marijuana faces new, old hurdles. Will SC patients get relief in 2024?

Medical marijuana for ailing South Carolinians is back on the table. The proposed legislation has evolved as it has knocked at the State House doors for years. But whether it can get out of the Senate again, then pass the House remains to be seen.

The Compassionate Care Act, S.423, would allow South Carolinians with certain conditions, such as cancer, multiple sclerosis or terminal illnesses to be prescribed certain forms of medicinal marijuana. The Senate fast tracked the legislation this week, sparking discussion over two days of back and forth debate on the issue.

In 2022, the Senate passed a similar version of the bill, but it failed in the House on a technicality. The bill is considered conservative compared to other states medical marijuana laws, limiting the delivery method to topical, oral or vaporized products only. Burning the plant and smoking are prohibited

Tom Davis, R-Beaufort, has been working on passing a medical marijuana bill for 10 years. and presented the bill Wednesday where he said he was confident it would pass in the Senate, but expected opponents to bring forth debate.

Greg Hembree, a former prosecutor, said he felt the current bill’s 41 changes needed to be vetted by the Senate. He led a discussion with Senators on Thursday about the the changes and his other issues with the bill.

Hembree, R-Horry, listed a handful of the differences, noting, for example, that the new bill removes the requirement for a physician to advise patient the variability, quantity and concentration of a product, as well as the potential “psychotic disorders” and adverse affects for children and young adults. It also changed the wording from requiring only pharmacists to dispense the medicine to allowing “other person authorized to dispense medical cannabis,” Hembree said.

Law enforcement and distribution concerns were among other issues Hembree and opponents have with the bill. Hembree cited recreational use and the damage it can cause in young people. He also spoke to the potential misuse of the drug by doctors and the fiscal impact.

“It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad ... a 420 doctor,” Hembree said in reference to doctors and their websites in Florida who prescribe medical marijuana. “It’s funny except it tells you, what is this about. It’s about the money. This is a money making proposition. I question this notion that every doctor will be doing this for the right reasons.”

Supporters of the bill like Davis argue this drug is needed, especially for terminally ill patients that have not found options that work for them to reduce pain.

Davis said he would come back Tuesday ready to discuss a more clear side-by-side version of the 2024 and 2022 bills. Ultimately, he said he would be fine with reverting many of the changes that Hembree listed back to S. 150, because to him, they weren’t substantive.

The bill’s only non-technical changes, Davis said Wednesday in an interview after session, is the revenue raising component. This version makes no reference of sales tax. The fees generated though medical marijuana sales can only defray the cost of the program, Davis added.

“I was disappointed that they ruled it out of order two years ago but look, that’s their rules and we cured what I think down the line the problem was,” Davis said in reference to the House decision.

Davis said he believes the bill will pass the Senate. He’s hopeful the House will get the bill through committee and onto the floor, because he does think enough members would vote yes.

The problem, however, is the number of opponents and proposed amendments during discussion, he said.

“The only way you can get to a vote on a bill when somebody is putting up a thousand amendments is for leadership to make clear that they’re going to sit there and work through them and they’re going to get to a vote on the bill,” Davis said. “Until leadership expresses that, it just gets carried over.”

Davis specifically mentioned Rep. John McCravy, R-Greenwood, who had put up amendments along with others against the bill in 2022.

“It’s going to take leadership over there saying to the members ‘it’s been ten years, we deserve a vote on this,’ and obviously that’s up to the speaker whether to do that. I hope that he does. I think it deserves an up or down vote in the House, but that’s not my territory that’s his,” Davis said.

McCravy said while he’s not sure whether the House will pass the bill, he does know a number of representatives including himself, are opposed to it. He also expects there to be a number of amendments filed if goes to the House.

“If this bill we’re talking about was simply allowing somebody that’s dying of cancer to use marijuana or something like that, I don’t think anybody would oppose that,” McCravy said. “But a lot of people like me see this bill as the first step towards recreational marijuana. And there are a lot of things in the bill that indicate that.”

Some of McCravy’s major concerns are the addition of 270 cannabis pharmacies, allowing “marijuana doctors” and the inability for businesses and other places to discriminate against those with a medical marijuana card.

“This bill is recreational marijuana part one,” McCravy said.

McCravy also opposes the fiscal impact. Low estimates range from $10 million up to as high as $100 million, he said since the bill leaves out a revenue component, taxpayers would fund the program