Cannabis – Page 145

20 May 2013

Americas Coalition Suggests MJ Laws Be Relaxed

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

A comprehensive report on drug policy in the Americas released Friday by a consortium of nations suggests that the legalization of marijuana, but not other illicit drugs, be considered among a range of ideas to reassess how the drug war is carried out.

The report, released by the Organization of American States walked a careful line in not recommending any single approach to the drug problem and encouraging “flexibility.”

Prompted by President Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia at the Summit of the Americas last year to answer growing dissatisfaction and calls for new strategies in the drug war, the report’s 400 pages mainly summarize and distill previous research and debate on the subject.

But the fact that it gave weight to exploring legalizing or de-penalizing marijuana was seized on by advocates of more liberal drug use laws as a landmark and a potential catalyst for less restrictive laws in a number of countries.

“This takes the debate to a whole other level,” said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates more liberal drug use laws. “It effectively breaks the taboo on considering alternatives to the current prohibitionist approach.”

The report said “the drug problem requires a flexible approach,” and “it would be worthwhile to assess existing signals and trends that lean toward the decriminalization or legalization of the production, sale and use of marijuana.

“Sooner or later decisions in this area will need to be taken,” it said. “On the other hand, our report finds no significant support, in any country, for the decriminalization or legalization of the trafficking of other illicit drugs.”

Some analysts interpreted the inclusion of decriminalization as a thumb in the eye to the United States, the country with the heaviest drug consumption and one that has spent several billion dollars on drug interdiction in the Americas, only to find that marijuana and cocaine continue to flow heavily and that violence has surged in Mexico and Central America as the drugs move north.

The report comes two weeks before an O.A.S. meeting in Guatemala, whose president has been open to legalizing marijuana and where the central topic is drug policy in the hemisphere. Uruguay’s president has put forward a plan for the government to legalize and regulate the sale of marijuana.

“The region’s leaders expressed their frustration with the limits and exorbitant costs of current policies and their hunger for a fuller, more creative debate,” said John Walsh, a drug policy analyst at the Washington Office on Latin America, a human rights group.

But the United States has so far rejected legalization as a solution to drug violence.

A State Department spokesman, William Ostick, said the report would be carefully reviewed and discussed with fellow O.A.S. members in Guatemala.

“We look forward to sharing our latest research and experiences on drug prevention and treatment, and to strengthening operational law enforcement cooperation with our partners around the globe in support of our common and shared responsibility for the world drug problem,” he said. “We know other leaders will similarly bring their own data, and anticipate a productive and useful dialogue.”

Kevin Sabet, director of the Drug Policy Institute at the University of Florida, said advocates of drug liberalization were overplaying the significance of the report, which he said contained a lot the Obama administration would agree with.

He said a discussion of legalization was only natural, particularly since two American states, Washington and Colorado, have moved in that direction.

But the report, he said, also suggested that countries in the hemisphere needed to redouble their efforts to fight the impunity of drug gangs, something often overlooked or played down in the debate on the war on drugs. The report notes that drug organizations have atomized into a range of gangs carrying out kidnapping, extortion and other crimes.

“Institutions in the drug-producing nations are going to have to change the way they do business,” Mr. Sabet said. “You cannot only rely on reducing demand and ignore deep-seated institutional problems.”

Mr. Santos, in accepting the report in Bogota, said more study was needed. “Let it be clear that no one here is defending any position, neither legalization, nor regulation, nor war at any cost,” he said. “What we have to do is use serious and well-considered studies like the one the O.A.S. has presented us with today to seek better solutions.”

A version of this article appeared in print on May 18, 2013, on page A7 of the New York edition with the headline: Americas Coalition Suggests Marijuana Laws Be Relaxed.

Source: New York Times (NY)
Author: Randal C. Archibold
Published: May 18, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The New York Times Company
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/

18 May 2013

Is Marijuana Booming Among Boomers?

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Like many of her peers, Zoe Helene, 48, smoked marijuana in her early 20s but gave it up as her career in the digital world took off in the 1990s. Today the multidisciplinary artist and environmental activist lives in Amherst, Mass., and is building a global network of trailblazers called Cosmic Sister. Since she married an ethnobotanist in 2007, she has returned to using cannabis occasionally — “as a tool for evolving and expanding my psyche.”

Helene is among a group of women that Marie Claire magazine has dubbed “Stiletto Stoners — card-carrying, type-A workaholics who just happen to prefer kicking back with a blunt instead of a bottle.” She’s also one of a growing legion of boomers who are returning to marijuana now that the stigma and judgment (and laws) surrounding its use are becoming more lax.

Massachusetts, which decriminalized pot in 2008, became the 18th state to legalize medical marijuana, last year. In the 2012 presidential election, which New York Times columnist Timothy Egan called America’s “cannabis spring,” Colorado and Washington voters legalized recreational use, launching weed into the national spotlight and spawning a flurry of marijuana initiatives. Since then, decriminalization bills have been introduced in 10 additional states, and legalization is being considered in 11 states and Puerto Rico.

This trend, along with decriminalization in cities like Chicago, Boston, New York and Denver, has removed a major “barrier to entry” for law-abiding citizens who would use cannabis as medicine or a substitute for alcohol. No longer worried about breaking the law or having their kids discovering their “dirty little secret,” many boomers are returning to a substance they once enjoyed. Others, who never stopped smoking, are coming out of the closet (or the garage) about their use.

The Return of Reefer

While boomers looking for stress relief turn to exercise, yoga, meditation or religion, plenty relax with alcohol or pharmaceuticals. For those who don’t drink (or can’t anymore for health reasons) or take prescription drugs but still want to unwind at the end of the day, laxer laws and attitudes have made marijuana acceptable.

Many respected doctors, homeopaths and naturopaths tout cannabis as natural medicine for a range of conditions, both physical and mental — especially when it’s ingested by means other than smoking. And with the rise of medical marijuana and legal dispensaries, adults don’t have to resort to clandestine meetings on street corners with black market strangers. They can with a prescription walk into a legitimate business establishment and choose from a variety of strains with the help of a “bud tender.”

‘Everybody Smokes Dope After Work’

Clearly there’s been a sea change. In 1969, 84% of all Americans opposed legalizing marijuana. In April 2013, Pew Research found that for the first time in more than four decades of polling on the issue, more Americans than not (52%) want marijuana to be legal. And that’s not just college kids: Among boomers the number is only slightly lower (50%).

A segment of the boomer generation never stopped smoking pot, but many did. In the 1980s, while starting families and building careers, they were influenced by the zeitgeist: Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” campaign and the Drug Abuse Resistance Education program, known as DARE, in their kids’ schools. People didn’t want to be associated with the stoner caricatures they saw depicted in movies, like Sean Penn’s iconic Jeff Spicoli inFast Times at Ridgemont High.

President Bill Clinton’s confession that he had smoked marijuana once but “didn’t inhale” did little to encourage open use. Contrast that with President Barack Obama’s statement that not only did that he inhale frequently but “that was the point.”

Legalized marijuana is gathering increasingly high-profile support. Last year chef, author and TV personalityAnthony Bourdain told The New York Times that “everybody smokes dope after work.” And a host of respected public figures — including Paul Volcker, Deepak Chopra, Michael Pollan and PBS’s Rick Steves — have been vocal advocates for legalization.

Another sign of the changing times is the proliferation of marijuana lifestyle stories in the media. In February, The New York Times Style section ran an article on marijuana etiquette, soliciting “an Emily Post to hack a pathway through this fuggy thicket, particularly given pot’s increased presence in the mainstream.”

The Cannabis Closet: Firsthand Accounts of the Marijuana Mainstream, published in 2010 by The Dish, surprised a lot of people with its candid testimonials from pot-smoking corporate executives, government officials and responsible parents.

Pot Prescriptions

Not all the rebudding boomers are coming back for recreational purposes. A large segment isn’t after the buzz but is using marijuana for a panoply of health issues. In the 19 states (plus the District of Columbia) where medical marijuana is legal, it’s being prescribed to alleviate symptoms associated with cancer, glaucoma, gastrointestinal disorders, arthritis, multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, AIDS, migraines and chronic pain and countless other maladies. Some studies show that it might even help prevent Alzheimer’s disease and fight tumors.

Steve DeAngelo, 55, executive director of Harborside Health Center, which operates dispensaries in Oakland and San Jose, believes marijuana can be “part of a more holistic approach” to health care. Many of his clients suffering from insomnia, anxiety or lowered libido are using cannabis as an alternative to “pharmaceuticals that come with a list of side effects reading like something out of a Stephen King novel,” he says.

Medical marijuana entered the national consciousness in 1991, when San Francisco physicians were first allowed to prescribe it. Five years later California voters approved the first statewide medical marijuana laws. (Interestingly, marijuana was listed in the United States Pharmacopeia from 1850 until 1942 and wasn’t illegaluntil the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. The U.S. government categorized it a Schedule 1 substance without medicinal value in 1970.)

Like a slow train gathering steam, other states followed California’s lead. The train took off like a bullet in 2009 when Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration would essentially look the other way if state-approved dispensaries complied with local laws.

Today medical marijuana is a highly profitable industry. Precise customer numbers are elusive, but as acceptance spreads, the head count grows. To obtain a medical marijuana card, patients have to be diagnosed with an approved condition by a licensed physician and register with the state.

Once their doctor writes a prescription, users can enter a marijuana emporium, offering a dizzying array of cannabis strains as well as new delivery systems, including electronic vaporizers, capsules, tinctures, teas, honeys, drinks and oils. Marijuana-infused food products, aka “medibles,” have expanded way beyond pot brownies to include pizza, pasta sauce, popcorn, ice cream, soda and even salad dressing.

This booming business, which was the subject of a recent Fortune cover story, is estimated to generate annual revenues of $36 billion — and that number is expected to double over the next five years.

Targeting the Boomer Market

This expanding market segment isn’t lost on marijuana cultivators, who are hybridizing varieties with particular appeal to users more interested in preventive health care and pain maintenance than catching a buzz. These strains are higher in the non-psychoactive cannabinoid CBD, which has anti-inflammatory properties and provides pain relief but doesn’t affect thinking and productivity.

Established players are using their business acumen to shape the industry. Former Microsoft manager Jamen Shively (aka “the Bill Gates of Cannabis”) recently took things in a new direction when he opened Diego Pellicer, which bills itself as “the first legal retail brand in the United States focused exclusively on legal, premium marijuana for pleasure and creative pursuits.” Shively has said that he’s specifically appealing to “baby boomers with disposable incomes who smoked during college years but took a 30-year break to raise a family.”

Private equity firms are getting in on the action by strategically investing in the legal cannabis industry — and they’re targeting boomers. Michael Blue, co-founder of Privateer Holdings, says that midlifers represent about 40 percent of the visitors to his company’s first acquisition, Leafly.com, where “discerning connoisseurs who select cannabis strains like they select fine wines” can rate and compare marijuana.

A prime target: Zoe Helene, whose casual use is part of her holistic vegetarian lifestyle. She occasionally eats her husband’s “marjoons” (marijuana macaroons) to heighten her creativity, loosen up her body for dance and yoga, and help her grow spiritually.

“I’m not a pothead,” the boomer says. “For me, cannabis is a loving plant spirit that helps me understand myself. It heightens my senses and reminds me of higher levels of consciousness I can attain. And then I attain them, without it.”

Boulder, Colorado–based writer Robyn Griggs Lawrence is working with a group of professional chefs on a cookbook that will help people safely and responsibly make and eat haute cannabis cuisine.

Source: Forbes Magazine (US)
Author: Robyn Griggs Lawrence, Next Avenue Contributor
Published: May 16, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Forbes Inc.
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.forbes.com/

18 May 2013

Illinois Senate Approves Medical Marijuana Bill

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The Senate today approved legislation that would allow doctors to prescribe medical marijuana to patients with serious illnesses, sending the measure to Gov. Pat Quinn. The issue pitted supporters arguing for compassion for those suffering from pain they say only cannabis can ease against opponents who contend the legislation would undermine public safety.

Sponsoring Sen. Bill Haine, D-Alton, argued the measure is one of the toughest in the nation. Haine said his bill does not reflect other states that have “sloppily” instituted medical marijuana laws.

“This bill is filled with walls to keep this limited,” said Haine, a former Madison County state’s attorney.

Sen. Kyle McCarter, R-Lebanon, raised concerns about lawmakers endorsing a product that classified as a controlled substance by the federal government, arguing marijuana is a gateway drug that could lead users to harder substances.

“For every touching story we have heard about the benefits to those in pain, I remind you today that there are a thousand time more parents who will never be relieved from the pain of losing a child due to addiction which in many cases started with the very illegal, FDA-unapproved addiction-forming drug that you are asking us to now make a normal part of our communities,” McCarter said.

The proposal would create a four-year trial program in which doctors could prescribe patients no more than 2.5 ounces of marijuana every two weeks. To qualify, patients must have one of 33 serious or chronic conditions — including cancer, multiple sclerosis or HIV — and an established relationship with a doctor.

Patients would undergo fingerprinting and a criminal background check and would be banned from using marijuana in public and around minors. Patients also could not legally grow marijuana, and they would have to buy it from one of 60 dispensing centers across Illinois. The state would license 22 growers.

The measure drew strong opposition from the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police and the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association, which sent a letter to the governor and lawmakers warning the proposal would not stop medical marijuana card holders from driving while under the influence. They suggested blood and urine testing be included in the legislation to allow police to determine whether card holders had marijuana in their system while driving.

Haine argued the law has safeguards to prevent that, including designating on a driver’s license whether they use medical marijuana.

The Senate vote was 35-21, with 30 needed to pass the bill. It goes to Quinn, who has not indicated whether he will sign it. The Democratic governor recently said he is open minded to the legislation.

Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Author: Monique Garcia Clout Street
Published: May 17, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Chicago Tribune Company, LLC
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/

17 May 2013

Orr Becomes a Weed-Whacker

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

If those behind the idea of turning the arena in MacTier into a legal marijuana grow-op thought they had a fight on their hands before, No. 4 has just jumped over the boards.

Bobby Orr was famous for scoring big goals and, if necessary, dropping the gloves, too.

This time he’s prepared to do both.

In his more than half century of celebrity, Orr rarely speaks out or steps into controversy.

However, when it comes to closing down an arena and community centre on his home turf to rent out to a company so they can grow medicinal marijuana, it brings out the anger in the Hockey Hall of Famer.

When he first heard of it, the two-time Stanley Cup winner who also led Canada to the 1976 Canada Cup, thought somebody must be smoking something.

But it turns out, there really is a move to shut the MacTier Community Centre and lease the space out it to grow pot.

“Its outrageous,” Orr said in an exclusive interview.

Somebody must be smoking the strong stuff up there on Hwy. 69 if they thought they were going to sneak this one by without reaction.

But it seems, that is exactly what has happened.

And Monday at 9 a.m. the council is expected to discuss a letter of understanding they have struck with the medical marijuana company Mettrum Ltd.

It will be a heated debate for the people who live there, some of whom have formed Save the Community Centre Committee led in part by Steven Schell.

Orr said to add his name to the cause.

“Shame, shame, shame. Shame on those decision makers,” said the Boston Bruin’s legend and Canadian icon. “What are they thinking?”

The whole thing is upsetting for the pride of Parry Sound, Ont. since, although he grew up 20 minutes north, Orr considers himself hailing from MacTier too.

“I love MacTier. I spent a lot of my youth there,” said Orr. “My sister Penny married Ron Blanchard from MacTier. These are very good people.”

The community centre was built in the 1970s and although Orr never played in it, he played baseball at the diamond nearby. In fact he was on the 1964 MacTier Legionnaires championship team which is displayed in a picture in the arena.

Cheryl Ward, general manager of the Stockey Centre and Bobby Orr Hall of Fame, said Orr also played minor hockey on outdoor rinks in MacTier.

“Where would I be if not for the hockey rink,” asked Orr. “Where would any Canadian kid be?”

The local connection aside, Orr said, he would have taken the rare approach of speaking out if this was being done in any Canadian arena.

“Does it seem right to you?” asked Orr. “Who would close down a community centre to grow marijuana? Who would close a community centre down for any reason?”

Township of Georgian Bay Mayor Larry Braid told QMI Agency’s Roberta Bell “the annual cost of operating the community centre is about $250,000″ and it only “generates about $30,000 in revenue for the township.”

Orr said he had never heard of such an argument before in his decades around hockey.

“It doesn’t make enough money? Give me a break,” said Orr. “Are these community arenas supposed to make money? When did they ever make money? That’s not what they are for.”

And the one in MacTier is so vital to the community, the irony is it was there 300 of the 800 residents gathered last week for a meeting with the company about this proposal.

Many stormed out in disgust.

Orr said he understands how they felt and agrees with them wholeheartedly.

“They are going to haul the marijuana out of the old arena right past the kids in the school across the street and right through the downtown?” asked Orr.

“It’s disgraceful. I can’t believe this. It’s a community centre. A community place. They have weddings there. Seniors gather there and play cards. There are birthday parties, funerals. I just don’t understand this.”

Braid told QMI Agency this new operation could create 35 jobs and provide a better return on investment in the ledger book.

“But where are the kids going to play hockey and figure skate?” asked Orr. “They just put money into this arena last year to fix it up and now the kids will have to drive to Midland 40 minutes away and the seniors will have nowhere to go.”

Others Orr has talked to about this have nothing against the company or growing pot for medical use but wonder “is this the only place in the Georgian Bay region where they could put it?”

The hockey legend said his involvement in this fight will continue when he comes up for his annual visit this summer. “This is just not right,” said Orr.

Time will tell how it turns out but history shows when Bobby Orr is in the game, his team usually wins.

Source: Intelligencer, The (CN ON)
Copyright: 2013, The Belleville Intelligencer
Contact: http://www.intelligencer.ca/letters
Website: http://www.intelligencer.ca/
Author: Joe Warmington

16 May 2013

Medical Marijuana Shouldn’t be for ‘Adults Only’

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

My 9-year-old daughter has Aicardi syndrome, a rare genetic disorder that causes extremely hard-to-control seizures, debilitation, disability and early mortality. She began having seizures at three months of age, and since that time has had multiple seizures every day, with rare exception — probably to the tune of nearly 200,000 seizures in her lifetime.

For most families, even one such day would be an emergency. For ours, it is the norm.

My daughter is a beautiful, loving girl who goes to school, enjoys music and parks, loves to be read to and adores looking at big, modern art in museums. She cannot walk independently, cannot talk and wears diapers. Every day she is at risk of Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy, or SUDEP, which accounts for 34 percent of all sudden deaths in children.

She is one of the 3 million Americans who have epilepsy, and one of the 40 percent whose seizures cannot be controlled by anti-seizure drugs. She has tried 10 anti-seizure medications as well as a high-protein/low-carbohydrate diet called the ketogenic diet; she takes three anti-seizure medications at once and has a vagus nerve stimulator implant that sends mild electrical pulses to the brain. These drugs help her, but she nonetheless experiences an average of three seizures every day. Moreover, the medications cause persistent side effects that negatively impact her quality of life, particularly her gastrointestinal, bone, dental, cognitive and mental health.

The Illinois Senate Executive Committee recently voted, 10-5, to move the House-passed medical marijuana legislation to the Senate for a vote. The bill is expected to pass, and though Gov. Pat Quinn has not committed to signing it, the general expectation is that the bill will become law. This should be received as great news for the many people with “debilitating” conditions that the bill is supposed to help — people for whom medical science has documented real, measurable and safe outcomes of the controlled use of cannabis or its component of chemical compounds.

It’s too bad that the legislature has ignored the medical needs of some of the most debilitated, and most vulnerable, patients in the state: children with epilepsy.

Imagine her father’s and my reaction upon learning that the legislature, in its concern not to send a “message” to kids that it is safe to smoke marijuana, decided that kids like ours, for whom medical cannabis has the potential to be as safe and effective as typical anti-seizure drugs, should be excluded from the benefits of this new law.

They have done so, I hope, only out of ignorance. Take, for instance, the parent survey conducted by Stanford University neurology researcher Dr. Catherine Jacobson. These parents had children with some of the most difficult-to-treat syndromes of epilepsy found in children: Dravet syndrome, Doose syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. All of the kids were being treated with a nonpsychoactive compound made from cannabis — cannabidiol. Their parents report remarkable results — 83 percent noted that their children’s seizure frequency had been reduced.

Two-thirds of these children achieved a greater than 80 percent reduction in seizure incidence. Seventy-five percent of the parents reported success in weaning their kids from other ASDs; a similar proportion noted improved sleep, mood and alertness in their children. Most important, the survey’s author notes that common negative side effects reported on other ASDs were notably absent on cannabidiol, including rash, vomiting, nausea, confusion, insomnia, anxiety, irritability, dizziness and aggressive behavior.

There is no likelihood that my daughter will become a drug addict from using a compound within cannabis in a medically controlled setting. There is, however, a good chance that participation in a controlled study of these compounds could open the door to new treatments for her, and the many children like her, who desperately need medical innovation to save or improve their lives.

I urge the bill’s chief sponsors, Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, and Sen. William Haine, D-Alton, to reconsider and amend the bill to allow for the medically controlled and regulated use of cannabis for pediatric and adult patients with uncontrolled epilepsy. And to all Illinoisans who know or love someone with epilepsy, please let your legislators hear your voice on this matter.

Margaret Storey lives in Evanston.

Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Author: Margaret Storey
Published: May 15, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Chicago Tribune Company, LLC
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/

14 May 2013

Vermont Moves Toward Decriminalizing Marijuana

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Vermont’s legislature on Monday approved a bill that would decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana, a measure the state’s governor expects to sign into law in the coming weeks.

The move sets up the New England state to be the 17th in the United States to remove criminal penalties for having small amounts of pot. It does not go as far as Colorado and Washington, which in November became the first states to legalize possession, cultivation and use of marijuana by adults for recreational use.

Vermont’s House of Representatives on Monday gave final approval to a proposal to remove criminal penalties for adult possession of up to one ounce (28.3 grams) of marijuana and instead penalize with a civil fine, similar to a traffic ticket. Persons under age 21 caught with pot would be required to undergo substance abuse screening.

The House’s action upheld changes to the bill last week by Vermont’s Senate, including a provision that decriminalized possession of up to five grams of hashish, a potent pot derivative.

“I applaud the legislature’s action to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana,” said Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin. “Vermonters support sensible drug policies. This legislation allows our courts and law enforcement to focus their limited resources more effectively to fight highly addictive opiates such as heroin and prescription drugs that are tearing apart families and communities.”

A spokeswoman said the governor will sign the bill into law “within a few weeks.”

Currently in Vermont, possessing up to two ounces of pot is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail for a first offense and up to two years in jail for later offenses.

The measure was introduced in early February by state Representative Christopher Pearson of Burlington, with 38 co-sponsors from the Democratic, Republican and Progressive parties. A similar proposal also was introduced in the Senate.

The latest proposal is similar to “decriminalization” laws in California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New York, Oregon and Rhode Island, where private, non-medical possession of marijuana is treated as a civil, non-criminal offense, said NORML, a group that supports marijuana legalization.

Five other states — Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, North Carolina and Ohio — treat marijuana possession as a fine-only misdemeanor offense, NORML said.

Alaska also imposes no criminal or civil penalty for the private possession of small amounts of marijuana, after action by its state Supreme Court, said NORML.

Vermont already had legalized pot for medical use in 2004.

Editing by Scott Malone and Nick Zieminski

Source: Reuters (Wire)
Author: Zach Howard
Published: May 13, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Thomson Reuters

13 May 2013

Federal Crackdown Busts Montana’s MMJ Industry

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

If American society’s tolerance for marijuana is now growing, then what happened in Montana illustrates just what can happen when the government decides things have gone too far. Pot advocates were running caravans, helping hundreds of residents in a day get medical marijuana user cards. Some doctors who conducted cursory exams on scores of people were fined. As the number of users quickly grew, so did a retail industry that led some to dub the state “Big High Country.”

Today, thousands of medical pot providers have gone out of business, and a health department survey showed that the number of registered users have fallen to less than a quarter of their 2011 numbers.

The drop was driven in part by a tougher 2011 law on medical marijuana use and distribution. But more than anything, marijuana advocates say, the demise of the once-booming medical pot industry was the result of the largest federal drug-trafficking investigation in the state’s industry.

The three-year investigation by the U.S. attorney’s office, the Drug Enforcement Administration and other federal agencies wrapped up last week when the last of 33 convicted defendants was sentenced. That allowed its architect, U.S. Attorney Michael Cotter, to speak publicly for the first time on the crackdown.

“For a long time, we were hearing complaints from local law enforcement and from citizens … that they were tired of marijuana and they were tired of it next to schools, to churches, people smoking it openly on the streets,” Cotter said in an interview with The Associated Press.

“It was just something that had to be done,” he said. “And the result of doing it the way that we did, it was a strong statement that marijuana wasn’t going to be tolerated in Montana.”

Cotter said he believes he is on the right side of history, regardless of what is happening in the country. Last fall, voters in Colorado and Washington state passed laws to legalize recreational pot use, and a Pew Research Center poll released last month found 52 percent of Americans think marijuana should be legal.

The Justice Department has yet to decide whether to sue in federal court to block Colorado and Washington’s laws under the legal argument that federal laws outlawing any use, possession or distribution of marijuana prevail over state laws.

In Montana, what started out as a system to provide marijuana to those with health problems turned the state into a source for drug trafficking, Cotter said. The industry had ballooned so much and so quickly that drug traffickers were operating under the guise of medicinal caregivers, and the pot was being sent to users in New Jersey, Virginia, Colorado and other states, he said.

Now, marijuana is still in Montana, but it’s manageable, he said.

The investigations were split geographically into three parts: Operation Smokejumper, Operation Weed Be Gone and Operation Noxious Weed. They targeted medical marijuana providers dealing in more than 100 plants and came away with 34 indictments, from a longtime state lobbyist to a former University of Montana quarterback.

Most of those arrested argued at first that they were following the state’s medical marijuana law. When federal prosecutors, led by Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Thaggard, successfully squelched that argument in court, all but three of the providers made plea deals.

The federal Controlled Substances Act, which bans any distribution or use of marijuana, trumps state law, Thaggard said. Besides, the investigation found that none of the defendants was following state law, he added.

“I think that we were confident that if we had to go down that road, we would show just how out of compliance these people were,” Thaggard said.

The final scorecard: 33 convictions. Thirty-one made plea deals, two went to trial and lost and the case against the accountant of a provider was dismissed.

Federal prosecutors in other states watched closely as the probe unfolded in Montana, and was widely seen as a success and possibly a model for others, Cotter said.

“Speaking through enforcement action does have the deterrent effect that is needed,” Cotter said. “It had the effect that we were looking for, and that was to deter the trafficking of marijuana.”

Montana Cannabis Information Association spokesman and Marijuana Policy Project lobbyist Chris Lindsey — who also was one of the 33 providers convicted in the probe — agreed the federal investigation was the main driver in changing the shape of the industry.

But a federal crackdown won’t stem the tide of the public will, he said.

Montana residents are increasingly in favor of improving the medical marijuana laws so there is better regulation and better access for those who need it, Lindsey said. “In Montana, it seems our options have only been the wild, wild West or no activity at all. Ultimately, we will be in the middle,” Lindsey said.

Cotter and DEA Agent in Charge Brady MacKay, who led much of the investigation, dispute that medical marijuana is beneficial for the seriously ill. They say patients who need the relief that marijuana provides should get it from Marinol, a prescription drug that contains some of the properties of marijuana.

“I think it’s Madison Avenue marketing, the person who dreamed up tying medical and marijuana together,” Cotter said. “It’s a powerful marketing tool. But the fact of the matter remains that marijuana is a dangerous drug and it’s harmful to people,” Cotter said.

Source: Billings Gazette, The (MT)
Published: May 12, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Billings Gazette
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.billingsgazette.com/

13 May 2013

Lt. Gov Supports Medical Marijuana

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Lt. Gov. Sheila Simon said she is in favor of a bill allowing the medical use of marijuana, explaining Sunday that testimony from seriously ill veterans and other patients helped change her mind.

“As a former prosecutor my first reaction was, ‘I’m not interesting in changing our laws on medical marijuana,’” she told The Associated Press in an interview Sunday. But she said that after hearing from patients and reading up on the bill, she’s convinced the regulations are strict enough. Backers of the measure, which has cleared the Illinois House and awaits a Senate vote, have said the same thing.

The plan, touted as the strictest in the nation among states that have legalized medical marijuana, would authorize physicians to prescribe marijuana to patients with whom they have an existing relationship and who are living with at least one of more than 30 medical conditions, including cancer.

The proposal creates a framework for a pilot program that includes requiring patients and caregivers to undergo background checks. It also sets a 2.5-ounce limit per patient per purchase and sets out state-regulated dispensaries.

Supporters say marijuana can relieve continual pain without the detrimental side effects of prescription drugs. But opponents say the program could encourage recreational use, especially among teenagers.

The Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police and the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association are opposed to the measure, saying there’s no sure way to figure out whether a motorist is driving under the influence of marijuana.

But Simon told the AP the bill is strict enough to prevent misuse.

“It does a good job of both getting medical marijuana to people who need and keeping it away from those who don’t,” she said.

Gov. Pat Quinn, a Chicago Democrat, has been noncommittal whether he would sign the bill, saying instead that he is open-minded to the idea.

Simon is weighing a run for another statewide office instead of seeking another term as lieutenant governor. The Carbondale Democrat declined Sunday to say which office she will run for, saying she will wait to see how other shape up.

Simon is likely choosing between Illinois’ attorney general, comptroller or treasurer. In recent months, Simon has played up her law-related background and accomplishments including as a pro bono lawyer and prosecutor.

Her decision comes as the 2014 governor’s race is heating up and Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan is weighing a possible challenge to Quinn.

The bill is HB1.

Online: http://www.ilga.gov

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Sophia Tareen, Associated Press
Published: May 10, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Associated Press

11 May 2013

The Marijuana Measures

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The regulation of medical marijuana in Los Angeles is a mess and has been ever since Proposition 215 was approved by California voters in November 1996.

Repeated state and city efforts to bring the chaotic situation under control have had little effect. A move by the City Council in 2007 to register medical marijuana dispensaries, for instance, led instead to an unexpected proliferation. An attempt to limit them in 2010 drew 66 lawsuits and a court-ordered injunction. An ordinance to ban them outright in 2012 was quickly repealed after marijuana businesses gathered enough signatures for a referendum to overturn the measure. Court decisions designed to clarify the murky laws have instead contradicted one another.

Today, there are an estimated 850 dispensaries — or maybe it’s 1,000 or 1,600 (no one seems sure) — operating in Los Angeles despite the city’s position that they’re illegal. Everyone knows that medical marijuana can be easily obtained by recreational users who aren’t truly sick. The “medicine” is not monitored by the government for potential health or safety problems; the dispensaries, by many accounts, are not nonprofit “collectives,” as state law requires (although it’s not really clear what a nonprofit collective is or isn’t). Residents in some neighborhoods complain that they are being overrun by dispensaries, and that many pot shops serve as hubs for crime.

A mess, like we said. And on May 21, Angelenos will have the opportunity to muck it up even further, if they’re not careful. On the ballot will be not one or two but three competing marijuana initiatives: Measures D, E and F.

It would be easy enough to urge a no vote on all three, and to call on the city to impose a full-scale ban instead. After all, The Times opposed Proposition 215 from the outset, partly because it was sloppily written and partly because it set up an inevitable conflict with the federal government, which continues to classify marijuana as illegal and dangerous.

But voting no solves nothing. The people of Los Angeles, like the people of California, overwhelmingly support making medical marijuana available to cancer patients, glaucoma sufferers and others. A ban would be unlikely to pass, and besides, denying marijuana to truly sick patients who can benefit from it would be a step backward. Given that, and given that the status quo is entirely unacceptable, the city’s best hope is to try to carry out the will of the voters with minimal confusion and maximum control to ensure that medical marijuana remains accessible to those who need it.

Measure D will come the closest to accomplishing that goal, or at least will put us on the right road.

Most important, it would impose limits on the number of marijuana businesses in the city, allowing about 135 dispensaries to remain open — those that were operating and registered under city laws in 2007 and that sought to re-register in 2011. Limits are essential. Even people who support easy access to medical cannabis can see that there need to be rules and oversight, as with bars and liquor stores. But resources are limited, and the city can’t police an infinite number of establishments.

Measure D is backed by both mayoral candidates and the current city attorney and his challenger. It applies to any organization of four or more people who cultivate, process, distribute or give away medical marijuana. It hikes the gross receipts tax on their operations — to $60 per $1,000 of gross receipts — and establishes the distances they must keep from schools, parks, one another and residential neighborhoods. It sets hours — they must be closed between 8 p.m. and 10 a.m. — prohibits the consumption of marijuana on the premises and requires background checks on managers, among other provisions.

It is far from perfect. For one thing, it is somewhat arbitrary. Why should a handful of dispensaries that got in under the wire in 2007 be the ones that now get to stay open? There’s no reason to think those particular establishments are more responsible than any other. For another, if it is passed, the city will be required to close hundreds of existing dispensaries, which could prove difficult, legally and practically. Here’s another thing: Measure D doesn’t create a process for a new dispensary to open when one of the 135 closes; that seems like an unfortunate oversight. And it would be far better if the measure could be amended or repealed by the City Council without requiring an additional vote of the people. But it cannot.

Still, Measure D is the best of the bunch.

Measure F, by contrast, sets no limits. It includes some strong rules and protections — in some cases stronger than those in D. But the city simply can’t sustain an unlimited number of dispensaries. Supporters of F say there would be de facto limits as a result of the requirements about how close dispensaries could be to schools, parks and one another, and that the final number would be in the hundreds. But what guarantee is there? Certainly nothing in the law.

As for Measure E — ignore it. That measure became moot after its supporters agreed to throw their support to Measure D.

No matter what you think of medical marijuana, it’s hard to deny that implementation of Proposition 215 has been unsuccessful. The Legislature and the state attorney general’s office were late to offer much-needed guidance. The federal government sent mixed messages about what it would or would not tolerate. The city of Los Angeles has flailed around, trying and failing to devise a workable set of rules.

Even if Measure D passes, there will still be no way to ensure that medical marijuana goes only to the sick people who are entitled to it, or that the product being sold is safe and untainted. Moreover, there will still be no resolution to the ongoing conflict between state and federal law. Perhaps one day the U.S. government will decide that marijuana should no longer be a Schedule I controlled substance, which means it has no medical use and is as dangerous as heroin. If that happens, perhaps the Food and Drug Administration will regulate it, doctors across the country will be able to prescribe it for patients they believe need it, and pharmacies will be able to provide it, just as they do with other medicines.

Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Published: May 10, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Los Angeles Times
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.latimes.com/

9 May 2013

Medical Marijuana Dispensary Bans Upheld By High Court

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

California Supreme Court Rules Cities and Counties Can Use Zoning to Ban Pot Shops

The state Supreme Court decisively ruled Monday that cities and counties have the right to ban medical marijuana dispensaries from operating within their territory, but leading activists say their fight for easy access is not over.

“This is pretty much the end of the road, unless the state Legislature changes how much it allows the city to regulate,” said J. David Nick, who argued the dispensaries’ position in front of the high court and represents a few dispensaries in the Coachella Valley. He does not anticipate any sort of appeal. “You’re going to see some very specific legislation to address the decision of the court.”

The Supreme Court ruled 7-0 in favor of Riverside, which took the Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center to court after it opened in defiance of that city’s ordinance banning dispensaries in 2009.

Since first filing a complaint the following year, Riverside has prevailed at the trial and appellate levels, but judges across the state have been handing down contradictory opinions on whether local governments could outlaw storefront dispensaries under California’s 1996 voter-approved medical marijuana act, the nation’s first.

The decision written by Justice Marvin. R. Baxter says nothing in the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 or the Medical Marijuana Program adopted by the state in 2004 overrode cities’ and counties’ zoning power, up to and including prohibition of storefront pot shops.

“Of course, nothing prevents future efforts by the Legislature, or by the People, to adopt a different approach,” the 38-page opinion concluded. “In the meantime, however, we must conclude that Riverside’s ordinances are not preempted by state law.” A concurring opinion was submitted by Justice Goodwin Liu.

Lanny Swerdlow of Whitewater has been a longtime medical marijuana activist in the Coachella Valley, and is the founder and a board member of the Inland Empire dispensary at the heart of the Supreme Court case. He agreed the fight now must return to the public arena, particularly the Legislature.

“We’re going to have to get better organized and work with our legislators to get new bills passed, because the courts have told us that the collective idea the Legislature came up with isn’t going to work,” he said.

That process has already started, he said, with one bill putting medical marijuana regulation under the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

Attorney Joseph Rhea, who represents open and closed dispensaries in Palm Springs, plus the shuttered Rancho Mirage Safe Access Wellness Center, said the open shops he represents will now close.

“I think the lawyers have done what they can here,” Rhea said.

Rancho Mirage City Attorney Steve Quintanilla said the ruling appears to reach beyond the issue of dispensaries by indicating there’s nothing in state law to stop cities from barring medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, even if they distribute the drug to members without a storefront, as well as any kind of cultivation.

“I read the the part about collectives and thought, wow, they’re going farther than I thought,” he said. “Then I saw the section about cultivation and said, ‘Oh my God, they’re going even farther.’ ” He would not advise any of his cities to go that far, he said.

Rancho Mirage was the Coachella Valley city most affected by the crossfire of conflicting opinion on the issue, with its dispensary ban ruled invalid by a Riverside County Superior Court judge in 2011. The city appealed the ruling, which had been on hold since the Supreme Court first agreed to hear the Riverside case in January 2012.

Quintanilla, also the city attorney for Desert Hot Springs and deputy city attorney for Cathedral City, said the decision settles seven lawsuits pitting his cities against dispensaries trying to set up shop.

Palm Springs is the only city in Riverside County that allows limited dispensary operations. It holds the cap for such businesses to three, with plans to offer a fourth permit on hold.

The Supreme Court decision validates its efforts to close down more than a dozen illegal shops over the past several months, said City Attorney Doug Holland.

Since December, the city has been trying to close those collectives operating without a license by issuing them notices and fines for thousands of dollars.

So far, 12 dispensaries have closed. The city, though, is still battling with five operators – four of which have either preliminary or permanent injunction orders to close. The city has a court hearing soon on the fifth dispensary.

“We feel very confident that, based on the Supreme Court decision, there’s no room for these dispensaries … to argue that they have any right,” Holland said.

The argument used by illegal dispensaries is that state law – which allows the use of marijuana to people with a doctor’s prescription – pre-empts local law and gives them the ability to operate.

“The Supreme Court clearly said, ‘No, that’s not the case,’ ” Holland said.

The city will continue trying to close the remaining five, he said, which could eventually come to criminal charges if civil methods don’t work.

“Now we will also be looking at pushing our criminal remedies, which could be, in addition to fines, it could be jail time,” said Holland.

“These are guys that somehow seem to think they are above the law. The Supreme Court says, ‘No, they are not,’ ” he said.

According to the Weed-Maps.com website that shows dispensary locations across the valley, there are fewer dispensaries listed than a few months ago, but more delivery services.

The city is currently addressing only “bricks and mortar” operations, Holland said.

But he added that the district attorney and local law enforcement agencies could eventually decide to look at whether the delivery operations are being consistent with the Compassionate Use Act.

Julie Smith is a volunteer at C.C.O.C, one of the illegal dispensaries still open in Palm Springs. She said she didn’t have a problem with the court’s ruling because the decision should be made by individual cities, maybe through a vote of the people.

But there’s already a shortage of legal dispensaries between local bans and federal crackdowns, she said, which has helped C.C.O.C.’s membership grow to about 3,000.

“We’ve got people coming in from Riverside, Blythe, Arizona, San Diego, because all the ones in San Diego are being shut down,” she said.

C.C.O.C., 650 S. Oleander Road, is fighting Palm Springs’ efforts to close them down because “the city isn’t being responsible with how they’ve decided which stores do get the permit and those that don’t,” she said.

The city is choosing dispensaries in a way that lowers competition and increases prices, she said.

There is nothing in the court’s ruling stopping cities from allowing dispensaries to come in, and while the legal pressure has been on Cathedral City and Rancho Mirage recently, new slates of city council members have come in to cities farther east.

Indio Mayor Elaine Holmes said she’s never dealt with the issue in her 21/2 years on the council, though she remembers the issue being discussed in City Hall before she was elected.

Before taking a stand for or against allowing dispensaries in the city, “I’d have to see it on a case-by-case basis,” she said. “I’d need to know about the location, and a lot of other things. But I try to keep an open mind.”

Palm Desert Mayor Jan Harnik was elected to that city’s council at about the same time, after the city dealt with a dispensary on El Paseo.

“If anyone can show me how medical marijuana helps people who are really in pain, then I’m all for it,” she said. “But in that case, it should be through a pharmacy.”

Marijuana’s status as a Schedule 1 drug under federal law, along with heroin and cocaine, makes that impossible.

Rick Pantele is a representative of C.A.P.S., one of the three legally permitted dispensaries in Palm Springs. With the recent voter-approved legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington, he foresees the drug being legal nationwide in the next five to 10 years.

The momentum is headed that way, he said, even in California, “but this doesn’t help that at all,” he said.

Desert Sun reporter Xochitl Pena contributed.

Source: Desert Dispatch, The (Victorville, CA)
Copyright: 2013 Freedom Communications, Inc.
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.desertdispatch.com/
Author: Blake Herzog

« 1 … 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 … 174 »