CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 74(JUD) "An Act making findings relating to marijuana use and possession; relating to marijuana and misconduct involving a controlled substance; and providing for an effective date." This was the second hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance Committee. Co-Chair Green stated that public testimony pertaining to this issue would be provided. 9:06:38 AM DR. LESTER GRINSPOON, Emeritus Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard University testified via teleconference from an offnet site. He informed the Committee that he has studied marijuana for 40 years and is the author of numerous books and other publications on the subject. He declined to testify, stating that the 15-minute timeframe being afforded for his testimony would be an insufficient amount of time in which to adequately address the 18 separate Findings presented in Sec. 2 of the bill. Each finding would individually "demand" a minimum of 15-minutes of "careful discussion since they are so off-target from a scientific point of view that they have to be carefully discussed; together they seem to comprise a kind of modern day reefer madness." He opined that the limited timeframe being provided to this legislation was an indication that the Committee had "no interest in what we [testifiers] have to say" and that the Committee had "already prejudged this, because the nature of your Findings are so absurd that if you're really serious about those Findings" sufficient time would have been allotted for discussion. In response to a comment from Co-Chair Green, Dr. Grinspoon stated that it was not that he has chosen not to testify, it was that he "can't testify"; he could "barely introduce himself" in the time allotted and, as a result, the Committee would be denied the "benefit" from his remarks. He wished "the citizens of Alaska good luck; I hope they're not burdened with this bill the way it is." DR. EARLYWINE, Professor, New York State University, testified via teleconference from an offnet site. His credentials included the authoring of a book titled "Understanding Marijuana" which was based on his review of approximately 500 marijuana studies. 9:11:53 AM Dr. Earlywine characterized the history of marijuana as being "extensive," with cannabis use being documented as early as 8000 BC and its medical use documented as early as 2800 BC. While no lethal dose of marijuana has been established to date, research estimates that an individual would be required to smoke a minimum of two pounds of marijuana in that regard. Dr. Earlywine shared that one of the concerns that has been raised during his presentations on marijuana is "the notion that today's marijuana has an increase in potency" when compared to its potency in the 1970s. While it is "true that marijuana today is probably a little stronger than it was back in the 1970s … the increase is no where near as big as what some of us have been led to believe" via "certain alarmist media reports". Rather than today's estimates being "awry, it's that the estimates" conducted in the 1970s "were inaccurate." It was unknown at that time, how tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is the active chemical ingredient in marijuana, "broke down." Therefore, the one percent THC reading estimates that are considered "typical of that era" were based on marijuana "that had been thrown in pot police evidence lockers and allowed to degrade" before being sent for laboratory analyses. Dr. Earlywine informed that, in a laboratory setting, a person who smoked marijuana with a one-percent THC level might simply experience a headache and thus think they had been provided a placebo. Marijuana "is not psychoactive at that level"; it could be compared to the "THC levels in hemp and things used for clothing…" The consensus could be that the 1970s studies underestimated the THC strength. 9:14:31 AM Dr. Earlywine continued that while one might hear reports today of marijuana with THC levels ranging between 15 and 20 percent, the average would be in the four to six percent range. He shared that, in the 1970s, an independent laboratory that did not rely on police marijuana evidence, had reported average THC readings in the two to four percent range. Thus "a doubling" of the THC concentration might be the appropriate manner in which to consider the strength of the increase. Dr. Earlywine stated that, "underlying all this is the tacit assumption that … stronger marijuana is somehow more dangerous." While, "it's true that stronger proof" alcohol might lead to "problems more readily", that is not the case with marijuana. Laboratory research indicates that when people smoke marijuana with higher THC content, "they subconsciously take shorter and smaller puffs" in an effort to control their level of intoxication. In addition, "the impact of any inhaled smoked drug is very rapid" so that an individual could determine "what the dose is within a few seconds rather than the case with alcohol" consumption where it might take more than half an hour to experience the effect. Numerous factors such as the "state of your stomach" would come into play with alcohol. "This idea that more potent marijuana is necessarily more dangerous is also worth questioning." Some people would argue "that more potent marijuana has a kind of protective effect because it would lead to smoking less in total". Therefore there would be less lung exposure to carcinogens. 9:16:59 AM Co-Chair Wilken understood therefore that contrary to the ten to 14-percent THC potency range reflected in Sec. 2(1) page two lines eight through 18 of the bill, Dr. Earlywine's testimony would be that today's marijuana THC content would be in the four to six percent range. To that point, he asked whether different regions of the country might produce higher potency levels than another. 9:17:52 AM Dr. Earlywine responded that there is "an incredible variation across different strains and like any other plant, it responds to good care and light" and other factors. While there is marijuana with 14 percent THC levels, it is "extremely rare". Most of the samples he has reviewed range between two and five percent. Other researchers' support a four to six percent THC range. Co-Chair Wilken pointed out that language in Sec. 2(1) page two lines 13 and 14 states that, during the period from 1997 to 2004, the THC level of Alaska marijuana ranged from ten to 14 percent. 9:19:09 AM Dr. Earlywine next addressed the respiratory effects of marijuana. "Lungs are designed to breath fresh clean air and anything that's inhaled into them" could cause potential problems. The media portrays marijuana as being four or eight times more carcinogenic than cigarettes. However, there is insufficient data to support such claims. A California study found that while those who solely smoked marijuana "didn't have any real differences in their rates of lung cancer", they did portray "an increase in some respiratory problems" such as coughing and bronchitis. However, their 36 percent rate of these problems was only slightly higher than the 33-percent rate of those who did not smoke anything at all. Even though the increase is minor, efforts to reduce respiratory issues are being furthered. To this point, new technology "for consuming cannabis" has been developed to prevent respiratory problems. This device, referred to as a "Vaporizer", would "capitalize" on the fact that marijuana could be heated to a point at which it releases THC and other chemicals in mist form, without igniting the marijuana; thus no carcinogens, which are the sources of respiratory problems, would be released into the air. Therefore, while the respiratory issues associated with cannabis are nowhere "near as bad as cigarettes", "the advent of the vaporizer" would negate any respiratory issue relating to marijuana use. 9:21:42 AM Dr. Earlywine also addressed "the idea of marijuana as being a gateway drug." It is commonly believed that once a person uses marijuana they would be "propelled downwards towards a desire to use cocaine and heroin and" other drugs. However, he has determined that this is not the case. While there are people who use heroin who say that they "used marijuana first, the vast majority of folks who use marijuana have never even seen heroin or hard drugs". Rather than there being "a pharmacological connection between using cannabis and hard drugs", the connection is that "they are just part of the same underground market." Dr. Earlywine stated that another California study indicates that certain personalities are risk-takers: not only might they use hard drugs, they would also not wear their seat belts, they would have unsafe sex, and they would ride in the front car on a roller coaster. Such individuals would tend to be the ones using a variety of different drugs and doing other risky things. Therefore, marijuana usage would not predetermine that the user be on "an inevitable quest towards hard drugs, it's just that there is a whole subset of folks who happen to use marijuana first and then go on to use hard drugs." 9:23:25 AM Co-Chair Wilken understood therefore that evidence would indicate that for the "vast majority" of marijuana users, the drug is not a gateway. However, marijuana use might be a gateway for a minority of the State's population; perhaps more so in Rural areas as evidenced by the amount of problems the State is experiencing in those areas. There might also be a physiologically propensity for Native Alaskans in this regard as well. 9:24:10 AM Dr. Earlywine responded that this would depend on the definition of gateway. The original studies used the term "stepping stone"; the idea being that people would use marijuana prior to using other drugs. Over time, the idea has transitioned to the belief that marijuana use "leads to these other drugs." However, no studies would support that position. It could be that marijuana users are exposed to other drugs due to the fact that the wares are available in "the same underground market. Co-Chair Wilken acknowledged. 9:24:44 AM Dr. Earlywine next addressed the theory that cannabis use could lead to aggression by voicing surprise that this theory has resurfaced as laboratory research conducted 30 years prior negated the theory. Research has been conducted in which an aggressor has been "planted" in the laboratory setting to test the response of the user when aggressed upon, wronged, or subjected to things such as having their hand placed in cold water. "Counter to the affects that we get with alcohol, marijuana either has no impact on the aggressive response or in one study actually decreased the aggressive response, relative to the folks who smoked a placebo." It should be pointed out that there could be "a subset of aggressive" personalities who happen to use marijuana; however, research would support "that marijuana does not increase aggression, and if anything it stays the same or actually lowers." 9:26:09 AM Senator Dyson thanked the testifier for providing his expertise to the Committee. He asked whether an individual's judgment might be impaired by marijuana. Dr. Earlywine responded that the studies that have been conducted have focused on tasks that might not be relevant to the key issues being experienced in Alaska. Research involving complex reaction time tasks such as requiring a person under the influence of marijuana to press, for instance, the red light when it lights up or the green button when it lights up, have found that a person's reaction is somewhat impaired. However, findings do not indicate that a person would be willing "to take more risks" or "engage in anything potentially dangerous". One study found the opposite affect. Senator Dyson clarified that, rather than to the affect on one's coordination, his question was to whether a person's judgment of right or wrong might be affected. He recalled theories attesting that marijuana use inflated egos and changed "cultural norms". There has been testimony to the fact that some users might be less capable of making judgments about what would be "appropriate conduct and response". Dr. Earlywine communicated that a person intoxicated on alcohol could "lose some of your connection to your idea of your stated morals". In other words "the super ego is alcohol soluble". Unfortunately the literature on marijuana is unclear on this matter, as it is difficult to study in a laboratory setting. People in test studies are not willing to make risky decisions "even when they are intoxicated". 9:28:30 AM Senator Dyson understood therefore that a person intoxicated on marijuana might not be impaired in the matter of making good decisions on their own behalf. 9:28:44 AM Dr. Earlywine affirmed that to be the result of laboratory testing. However, he noted that clinical researchers who work with marijuana abusers have stated that the abusers have reported doing "some silly things" when they were "high". To that point however, laboratory testing has indicated "that often people have that expectation or they use it as an excuse" for doing something that they had intended to do all along. "In truth, the impact of marijuana on tasks that require … making the best decision has been really minimal." Senator Dyson asked regarding the danger of allowing a marijuana user to operate heavy equipment. 9:29:49 AM Dr. Earlywine stated that studies relating to driving abilities of those under the influence of marijuana have been "very controversial". He would not recommend that anyone should "drive after smoking marijuana". The findings of three studies that tested marijuana users after they were involved in an accident found that results "were comparable to folks who hadn't smoked marijuana". A foreign study in which people smoked marijuana in a controlled setting and drove on the streets of Amsterdam in the Netherlands reported some small problems such as staying in the center of the driving lane, but no impairment of stopping distance, direction following abilities, or turn signal abilities. It appeared that people were actually compensating in that they increased the distance between their car and other cars, were unlikely to pass other cars, and "they drove more slowly than the folks who had smoked a placebo". Therefore, the study found that people who were driving under the influence were actually compensating for their condition. Senator Dyson acknowledged. 9:31:00 AM Senator Stedman stated that he would be unwilling to work around someone who was using marijuana or drinking alcohol and operating heavy equipment or involved in other dangerous situations. Dr. Earlywine agreed. Senator Stedman asked how children and young adults are affected by using marijuana or by living in a home "where marijuana use is prevalent", specifically how it might affect their short-term memory and their ability to learn. 9:31:57 AM Dr. Earlywine noted that he is currently studying this issue, as it is the basis for another book he is writing. No one could dispute the idea that marijuana is not for children. School literature on this issue is "complicated". There are claims that marijuana use would cause young people to lose their motivation and that teens would decide not to continue their schooling or would "do very poorly" in school. Studies have found that "high school students who used marijuana had lower grades than their peers who did not use". However, it was found after reviewing those students' grades before they began to use marijuana, that their grades "were also lower then". Therefore, rather than marijuana use lowering their grades, the thought is that "students who are having trouble in school end up using marijuana at a younger age. Nevertheless", as medical tests, including MRIs, are developed, "it is becoming clearer and clearer that marijuana is hard on the developing brain… this is not something that teens should play with." Dr. Earlywine continued that literature regarding short-term memory clearly indicates, "that during intoxication, it is extremely hard to learn new material". "Students should not go to class high" as doing so would impair their ability to "absorb" new information. Nonetheless, studies indicate that when adults are no longer intoxicated, both their short-term and long-term memories seem to be relatively "unaffected" by either occasional or frequent use over a couple of years. Senator Stedman stated that while that is good to hear, there would continue to be concern about youth in high school who use marijuana during those formative years, as they would have "a substantial gap in their education". Dr. Earlywine agreed. Nobody could attend high school and absorb all that they were being taught if they were high. 9:34:51 AM Senator Bunde, noting that there is considerable concern about exposing children to second hand tobacco smoke, asked regarding the affect of second hand marijuana smoke on children. 9:35:24 AM Dr. Earlywine stated that no studies have been conducted in this area. "The issue is an interesting one in part because although marijuana may have more chemicals in it than tobacco smoke, people tend to smoke markedly less marijuana than they do tobacco." Thus the issue might be "relatively minor in comparison". The more prominent issue might be the idea of smoking marijuana in front of teens or children. This would be "ill-advised". 9:36:04 AM Dr. Earlywine addressed the economic costs of the prohibition of marijuana. Research indicates that absent this prohibition, billions of dollars could be saved nationwide and law enforcement efforts could be focused on other important issues, such as the use of hard drugs like methamphetamine. Another recommendation would be that law enforcement efforts focus on youth rather than adult usage as that has more serious consequences, developmentally. Dr. Earlywine stated that a big social issue is the evolving of marijuana for medical uses. A number of ailments such as AIDS- related wasting, cancers, spinal cord injuries, and migraine headaches respond extremely well to marijuana. Allowing use of medical marijuana for such things would be "a humane way" of dealing with them. Co-Chair Green noted that medical marijuana uses have been discussed in Alaska for many years. 9:38:16 AM Senator Olson, a medical doctor, asked whether some research findings might be outdated; specifically whether Dr. Earlywine agreed with the "findings that cannabis does not have any affect on the exhibition of violence". 9:39:04 AM Dr. Earlywine replied that those findings are "consistent with laboratory data. There is a subset of folks who seem to be aggressive who also seem to use marijuana, but actual marijuana intoxication doesn't increase aggression." 9:39:24 AM Senator Olson asked whether those finding would be maintained "in spite of the incidents within the criminal community that has pointed out or have stated that they do become aggressive when they do smoke marijuana." Dr. Earlywine remarked that upon close review, "most of those antidotes" end up involving marijuana combined with the use of alcohol. His own data would support that the use of alcohol "is the contributor to aggression." 9:39:42 AM Senator Olson revisited Dr. Earlywine's comments regarding the carcinogens associated with smoking marijuana. A publication by a researcher named Iverson stated that rather than the issue being THC, the level of tar in the product is of concern. 9:40:12 AM Dr. Earlywine agreed. The aforementioned Vaporizer would address that issue. Senator Olson noted that research quoted in Iverson's publication found that pre-malignant lesions occurred when the skin of mice was exposed to marijuana. 9:40:34 AM Dr. Earlywine characterized that study as "an interesting one". However, due to the fact that "the dosage that the mice were exposed to was so high relative to what a normal human dosage would be" that he was hesitant to draw a conclusion from those findings. Senator Olson voiced concern in regards to the impact of marijuana on pregnancy, particularly in regards to Alaska Native women. This would not only affect "the generation at hand" it would affect "the next generation". In his clinical setting experience, he has observed that THC appears "to exacerbate other mental illnesses". 9:41:38 AM Dr. Earlywine recounted that a 1990s study involving people who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia had determined that those people "should clearly stay away from marijuana", as it tended "to make their subsequent psychotic breaks happen more readily." The media however has encouraged the theory that marijuana could cause schizophrenia. "That's an exaggeration". 9:42:03 AM Co-Chair Green thanked Dr. Earlywine for his testimony. Dr. Earlywine voiced appreciation for the opportunity to speak to the Committee and encouraged them to contact him were there any further questions. Co-Chair Green acknowledged. WILLIAM TANDESKE, Commissioner, Department of Public Safety, remarked that his approach to any issue is one of focusing primarily on whether the action being taken would affect the Department's "constituents in a positive way and how do we reduce the incidents that come up in the public's safety arena." Commissioner Tandeske stated that the Department has identified some "core missions for the Alaska State Troopers" including drug and alcohol issues, rural public safety services, and Statewide criminal investigations. 9:43:41 AM Commissioner Tandeske stated "drug issues, including marijuana, tend to reach across all three of those disciplines." The Department must be provided the tools necessary to address the issues. Since he has been involved in law enforcement in the State since 1973, he is aware of numerous Alaska State Court decisions, specifically the Crocker v. State decision that served to impede law enforcement efforts to obtain search warrants. "It was an issue that did not need resolution because the search warrant process is a check and balance process involving a judicial officer and law enforcement where information is vetted properly prior to issuance of a search warrant." Commissioner Tandeske noted that he had reviewed search warrants obtained by his drug enforcement staff in regards to "marijuana grows". While a significant number of those involved very small amounts of marijuana, 90-percent of the 81 marijuana grows search warrants in the Matanuska Valley over a four-year period involved over a pound of marijuana. More than 92-percent of them involved more than a quarter pound of marijuana. The conclusion is that "the process that was in place prior to the Crocker decision was working effectively in addressing the public's expectation of the Department". 9:45:32 AM Commissioner Tandeske continued that the second issue of importance in this legislation "that is long overdue" is how the Department would "quantify" or "weigh products" without having "to process a marijuana grow" as a dealer would. The proposed process would allow the Department to spend more time conducting law enforcement and intelligence efforts and less time on the "tedious processing issue". Commissioner Tandeske stated that this legislation "would maintain the checks and balances that are appropriate and that the public expects." It would also allow the Department to conduct its activities in a manner expected by the public. 9:46:33 AM Co-Chair Green shared that a concern that has been expressed to her is the retention of the rights of the recreational user who might have a small amount of marijuana; therefore she asked whether safeguards to address this concern have been incorporated into this legislation. 9:46:53 AM Commissioner Tandeske responded "absolutely". The fact that 90- percent of the search warrants that had been served in the Mat-Su Valley had involved more than a pound of marijuana would indicate that the efforts are focusing on commercial grows. 9:47:27 AM Senator Hoffman, recalling that 92-percent of the search warrants involved at least a quarter pound of marijuana, asked the smallest amount prosecuted relating to the remaining eight percent. Commissioner Tandeske stated that that information would require research. It was his experience that small amounts of marijuana have not been prosecuted. He deferred to the Department of Law to address the parameters for what would result in prosecution as well as "how many convictions for small amounts might have resulted from plea agreements from larger amounts down to smaller amounts". Senator Olson asked regarding an earlier testifier's claim that the THC content of marijuana thirty year's ago might have been one percent, as this is contrary to the Department of Law's message that the THC content might range from 14 to 20 percent. To that point, he asked whether the Commissioner was "disputing" that information due to shelf life and other factors. Commissioner Tandeske voiced being unqualified to speak to the scientific aspects of marijuana. However, he recalled that when he was an active Alaska State Trooper, "there was a time that marijuana in the Matanuska Valley was marketed as the best in the world". Senator Olson asked opponents' position on the quantifying measures being proposed in Sec. 6 of the bill, specifically whether the determination that the end product would be one-sixth of a live marijuana plant's weight "would be a credible number". 9:49:56 AM Commissioner Tandeske, while reiterating that science was not his field of expertise, believed that "imperial data … would support that as being a reasonable way of quantifying a grow." Senator Olson acknowledged. 9:50:23 AM Senator Bunde noted that "alcohol has been a problem" with most cultures for thousands of years. One of the most common arguments in defense of not limiting access to marijuana "is that it's no worse than alcohol; it's not as bad as alcohol". He requested the Department's view of this; in other words, "why bother with marijuana" when there are worse issues to address. Commissioner Tandeske stated that in his 26-years of experience as a State Trooper, he has seen the affects of both "drugs and alcohol all too graphically. It is hard to minimize the impact of marijuana": its impact on Rural Alaska, its involvement in motor vehicle accidents, gun "shoot outs" and other violence such as robberies that goes with the drug trade. One of the consistent things accompanying a marijuana grow is its being accompanied by weapons and money. There could also be a crossover into other drugs. He recounted that in a recent case involving a search warrant obtained for cocaine, marijuana for sale and illegal weapons and cash were found. Such things usually accompany the drug trade. In response to an earlier testifier's comments that a marijuana user who is driving might overcompensate for their condition, he shared having arrested many people driving under the influence of alcohol who also overcompensated for their condition. "There's a lot of parallels." Senator Bunde asked whether it would "be fair to summarize" that a marijuana user might "tend to be non-violent" whereas the producer of marijuana would "tend to be violent". Commissioner Tandeske "hesitated to make such blanket characterizations" of users or producers of marijuana; however, he declared, "there is violence in the drug trade." He has had physical confrontations with people under the influence of marijuana as well as those under the influence of alcohol and other drugs. 9:54:05 AM Senator Dyson restated the question he had asked of a previous testifier in regards to the effect that marijuana use might have on a person's judgment. While acknowledging people's opinion that marijuana users are "more laid back and less aggressive", he asked whether they could also be considered as being "more compliant"; specifically whether evidence would indicate that marijuana is being used as "a vehicle to enhance … sexual seduction". Commissioner Tandeske responded that differentiating the cause of a person's behavior is sometimes difficult. In addition to marijuana, alcohol might have been consumed. Ultimately, the combination of factors occurring in Rural Alaska resulting in such things as accidental deaths, suicides, and violent crime must be addressed. This effort would be part of the solution. 9:55:43 AM Senator Dyson further clarified his question by asking whether the Commissioner has ever encountered sexual assault, albeit non- violent, caused by a perpetrator using marijuana "as a kind of an access drug". Commissioner Tandeske responded that due to the fact that he has not recently worked in the field, he could not specifically recall encountering such as situation. 9:56:20 AM Senator Stedman shared that when he was in high school, he and other students characterized the government's drug education findings as being "almost comical due to the inaccuracies". While not as blatant, the findings of this legislation could be viewed as being "tilted over the line in that direction." With exception to the Findings, he was more comfortable with the enforcement components that would assist the Department of Public Safety with its mission of providing public safety, obtaining search warrants, and dealing with those possessing four or more ounces of marijuana. 9:58:02 AM Senator Stedman opined that the Legislature would better serve the public by concentrating more "on the intent and direction of this bill" than on the Findings section. While the testimony thus far has focused on the affect of marijuana on adults, he voiced concern that the State would face more problems in the future with the impact of the drug on children. Schoolteachers have told him that they could smell marijuana on children's clothes in elementary school. 9:59:14 AM Senator Hoffman commented to the fact that the Department of Public Safety indicates in its fiscal note that the passage of this legislation would have zero fiscal impact. While that might be the case, in separate testimony, the Department has testified that, "they are overworked". It could be assumed that the added responsibilities that would be imposed were this legislation adopted would result in something else being moved to a position of lesser priority. Therefore, he asked whether this was a matter of concern to the Department, in light of the fact that no additional personnel were being requested. 10:00:16 AM Commissioner Tandeske responded that the Department is not concerned as this legislation would reinstitute search warrant provisions that had been in effect two years prior. Thus, the probable cause provisions dealing with search warrants for marijuana grows would be less cumbersome. Nothing else would be negatively affected. 10:01:11 AM WES MICHAEL MACLEOD-BALL, American Civil Liberties Union, testified via teleconference from Anchorage and shared that, while it did not work out, efforts had been exerted to have another testifier, Jeffrey A. Miron, Professor of Economics at Harvard University, discuss his June 2005 study titled "Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition". That study's findings indicate that legalizing marijuana would save the nation $7,700,000,000 annually in regards to government spending on efforts to enforce the prohibition on marijuana. Therefore, it could be extrapolated that criminalizing marijuana in this State would incur expenses relating to enforcing anything more that zero marijuana possession issues as opposed to its sale or manufacturing. A table in the study indicates that Alaska "spends less than the national average in terms of marijuana possession arrests, but about in the middle of the nation percentage wise in terms of sale and manufacturing enforcement issues". Changing the marijuana possession level to anything more than zero would not necessarily change those figures. 10:03:17 AM Mr. Ball asked the Committee to research other drug reform studies that are available on the Internet including Citizens Against Government Waste's website at www.taxpayer.net\drugreform and the American Enterprise Institute's website www.aei.org. These studies would be informative in regards to the fiscal impact of marijuana related legislation. Co-Chair Green ordered the bill SET ASIDE. AT EASE 10:04:07 AM / 10:13:46 AM