Flora Growth Pursues Research on Cannabinoid-Based COVID-19 Treatment in Colombia

There may be an end in sight to a medical cannabis proposal in the South Carolina Senate, but lawmakers are talking about bringing a change of clothes to their anticipated late-night debates this week.

Floor discussion of the SC Compassionate Care Act, which offers a conservative approach to legalizing medical cannabis, first began on Jan. 26, but that discussion has extended several sessions and now enters its third week of consideration by chamber members, who are scheduled to reconvene on the matter Tuesday afternoon.

RELATED: South Carolina Senate Takes Up Medical Cannabis Debate

At the conclusion of floor debate last Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey said he hopes to start taking up some of the nearly 40 amendments offered and steer toward a vote on the bill this week.

“Tuesday will almost certainly be a late day. Wednesday will likely be a late day, too,” he said. “So, just everybody be prepared for that. As the [late Sen. Hugh Leatherman] from Florence used to say, ‘You might want to bring an extra shirt.’”

Authored by Sen. Tom Davis, a Beaufort Republican who has advocated for a medical cannabis program in the state since he first started crafting legislation more than seven years ago, the SC Compassionate Care Act aims to enact one of the most tightly regulated programs in the country, he said Jan. 26. There are currently 37 states where medical cannabis is legalized.

Specifically, the legislation includes 13 qualifying conditions and would ban smoking as a method for use.

“Unlike other states, we have a very tightly defined window of conditions that can qualify,” Davis said. “I only wanted to have conditions in this bill listed for which there is solid, peer-reviewed medical evidence that cannabis can be a benefit.”

The 13 conditions include: cancer; multiple sclerosis; a neurological disease or disorder, including epilepsy; glaucoma; post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); Crohn’s disease; sickle-cell anemia; ulcerative colitis; cachexia or wasting syndrome; autism; severe or persistent nausea; severe and persistent muscle spasms; and any chronic or debilitating disease or medical condition for which an opioid is currently or could be prescribed by a physician.

In addition to having fewer qualifying conditions for the program, Davis said the bill offers tighter definitions of those conditions compared to other states. Also, it would require doctors to have in-person relationships with patients, run background checks for a history of substance abuse and create a written treatment plan.

“We amended the bill to say that in instances of PTSD—this pains me to do it—but there has to be written evidence, authoritative evidence, that the individual seeking cannabis for PTSD has had an underlying trauma experience,” he said. “In regard to chronic pain, we put in there that it needs to be tied to something that’s diagnosable by a physician.”

He added, “That was an attempt to work around this argument that somehow people might be faking it, which I would just submit that economically doesn’t make any sense, because why would you commit a fraud and a felony, and get a medical cannabis card to get cannabis for twice what you could then go down the street and buy it?” 

Under current state laws and penalties, possessing 1 ounce or less of cannabis is a misdemeanor punishable by up to 30 days of incarceration and a $200 fine for first-time offenders, according to reform advocacy group NORML.

In addition, the bill would only allow for patients to buy a two-week supply at one time, and it would forbid home grows.

Despite Davis advertising the legislation as one of the most conservative in the country, the bill has both bipartisan support and bipartisan opposition, setting up a rare, cross-aisle showdown. Also, Davis said he received a lot of pushback from State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) officials—who represent South Carolina’s state police.

Through his years of crafting the legislation, Davis said he’s tried to accommodate anyone and everyone whose made recommendations for the bill.

“I’ve built into this everything they wanted, in terms of monitoring, in terms of security, in terms of making sure there wasn’t diversion, in terms of you can’t smoke it,” he said, specifically referring to SLED officials. “I gave and gave and gave and gave to the point where they won’t engage with me anymore.”

While many of Davis’ colleagues in the Senate acknowledged him for taking up their concerns in the bill, the legislation remains unfinished with the roughly 40 amendments to consider this week.

Considering it took more than an hour to discuss the possibility of federal law and state law colliding under the Controlled Substance Act should South Carolina adopt a medical cannabis program, there was no specific timeline for a vote when members adjourned last week.

“There’s legal authority of states to act—there’s no preemption,” Davis said. “There is overwhelming medical evidence that cannabis can be of medicinal benefit in some instances that pharmaceuticals cannot.”

He added, “Let’s not be the 50th state to do this. We’re better than that.”