Cannabis – Page 164

11 Aug 2012

MJ Ballot Measure Favored By Colorado Voters

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

A new poll released this week by Public Policy Polling shows that likely voters in Colorado are in support of Amendment 64, the ballot measure that seeks legalization and regulation of marijuana similar to that of alcohol — and that support appears to be growing.

The survey of 779 likely Colorado voters conducted between the dates of August 2nd and 5th shows 47 percent would vote for Amendment 64 if the election were held right now and only 38 percent would vote against it. 15 percent of those surveyed were “not sure.”

Read PPP’s full report and see the question’s wording here: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_CO_080812.pdf

The poll also suggests support is growing for Amendment 64 in the Centennial State. Back in June, PPP conducted a similar poll and those in favor of the legalization measure narrowly outpaced the opposition 46 percent to 42 percent. Now, two months later, that support has grown to 47-38. The reason for this, according to PPP, are the independent and young voters who are increasingly in favor of legalization. From the PPP report:

This movement is entirely because of independents, who were already in favor of the amendment by a 49-40 margin; they now support it by 30 points, 58-28. Democrats are still slightly more in favor (59-22) than Republicans opposed (26-61).

Voters under 45 support it by a 58/30 margin, while those over 45 oppose it by a 44/39 margin.

This is the highest percentage of Colorado voter support for Amendment 64 that a PPP poll has shown to date. The survey also showed growth in general sentiments about marijuana legalization with 50 percent of those surveyed in favor of marijuana usage being legal and 42 percent in opposition to marijuana legalization (8 percent were “not sure”). This percentage is also slightly up from June’s support at 49-43.

However, Amendment 64′s opponents at “No on 64″ say that this percentage of approval is simply not high enough to pass. From a press release:

Ballot measures usually require a much higher level of support at this point in an election cycle because the default position for most voters is no, especially when it comes to amending the Colorado Constitution. In October 2008, a Mason-Dixon poll found Amendment 59, a school funding proposal, at 41% approval. It failed 55%-45%.

An October 2010 poll by SurveyUSA for The Denver Post and 9News revealed that 20% of polled voters supported the “personhood” Amendment 62, while 56% were opposed and 25% were undecided. Amendment 62 failed 70%-30%. Another 2010 ballot measure, Amendment 63, an attempt to undercut the Affordable Care Act, also failed 53%-47%.

But survey results often rely on question wording and marijuana legalization has seen other higher poll numbers recently. PPP’s survey follows a June Rasmussen poll of 500 likely Colorado voters which showed 61 percent were in favor of legalizing marijuana if it is regulated the way that alcohol and cigarettes are currently regulated.

Coloradans are getting ready to vote on Amendment 64 and will decide whether Colorado should legalize marijuana this November — a vote that some say could affect the presidential race in a state where marijuana dispensaries in Denver alone outnumber the Starbucks throughout the entire state, The Denver Post first reported in 2010.

This will be the second time Coloradans will vote on recreational pot legislation — state voters considered and rejected a similar recreational pot legalization initiative in 2006. But Mason Tvert, co-director of the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol, believes that Colorado has come a long way since 2006, he recently told The Huffington Post:

More Coloradans than ever before are aware of the fact that marijuana is not as dangerous as they have been led to believe and is actually far less harmful than alcohol.

They have also seen firsthand via our medical marijuana system that it is possible for the state and localities to regulate and control the production and distribution of marijuana. They have read stories that quote law enforcement officials acknowledging that it has not contributed to crime or caused any significant problems.

The environment here has changed dramatically.

The marijuana legalization initiative also recently received support from both Republicans and Democrats — in March, 56 percent of the delegates at the Denver County Republican Assembly voted to support the legislation, and in April, the Colorado Democratic Party officially endorsed Amendment 64 and added a marijuana legalization plank to the current party platform.

Source: Huffington Post (NY)
Author: Matt Ferner, The Huffington Post
Published: August 10, 2012
Copyright: 2012 HuffingtonPost.com, LLC
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

6 Aug 2012

Congresswoman Barbara Lee Sponsors Legislation

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

California Rep. Barbara Lee won’t be spooked by the Justice Department’s aggressive curtailing of medical marijuana dispensaries in her own backyard.

Lee, a top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, introduced the States’ Medical Marijuana Property Rights Protection Act in Congress this week, which she says would curb the Obama Administration’s efforts to intimidate state medical marijuana dispensaries from setting up shop.

“The people of California have made it legal for patients to have safe access to medicinal marijuana and as a result thousands of small business owners have invested millions of dollars in building their companies, creating jobs, and paying their taxes,” Lee says. “We should be protecting and implementing the will of voters, not undermining our democracy by prosecuting small business owners who pay taxes and comply with the laws of their states in providing medicine to patients in need.”

The bill will make it illegal for the federal government to seize the assets of medical marijuana business owners, a tactic DOJ has begun using to crack down on pot shops. While DOJ rarely takes legal action against businesses that comply with their local and state laws, Americans for Safe Access, a group that is committed to legalizing medical marijuana says the threat alone has been enough to scare roughly 400 medical marijuana dispensaries in the state of California to close their doors.

The Justice Department has sent roughly 300 letters to landlords in California and Colorado threatening to file lawsuits if they don’t stop operating dispensaries.

“For the price of postage, the Justice Department gets to threaten an entire population of property owners and it is a very effective tactic,” says Kris Hermes, a spokesman with Americans for Safe Access.

Lee announced her legislation just weeks after U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag filed a lawsuit against Oakland and San Jose, Calif.-based medical marijuana dispensary Harborside Health Clinic. Haag argues the clinics, which serve about 100,000 medical marijuana users, could be violating local laws because of the number of patients they provide pot to.

“The larger the operation, the greater likelihood that there will be abuse of the state’s medical marijuana laws, and marijuana in the hands of individuals who do not have a demonstrated medical need,” Haag said in a statement.

The asset forfeiture lawsuit caused an uproar in the community, with thousands of signatures gathered for an anti-lawsuit petition drive, protests, and political rallies.

“They won’t stop until they have closed every single regulated law-abiding dispensary in California unless people rise up and say enough is enough,” says Steve DeAngelo, the executive director at Harborside Health Clinic. But DeAngelo says it wasn’t always this way.

The federal government’s dogged pursuit of medical marijuana dispensaries has escalated since 2009. On the campaign trail and at the beginning of President Barack Obama’s time in office, medical marijuana seemed low on the administration’s priority list.

“I think the basic concept of using medical marijuana for the same purposes and with the same controls as other drugs prescribed by doctors, I think that’s entirely appropriate,” Obama said in the Spring of 2008 during an interview with Oregon Newspaper, the Mail Tribune. “I’m not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue.”

Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have medical marijuana laws and Americans for Safe Access estimates the Justice Department has carried out roughly 200 raids on dispensaries or growing facilities in nine states.

Hermes fears if the lawsuits persist, patients who need medical cannabis could be forced into the unregulated drug market. “[Rep. Lee’s] law would take the wind out of the sails of the Justice Department to intimidate dispensaries who are serving patients in need,” Hermes says.

Source: U.S. News & World Report (US)
Author: Lauren Fox
Published: August 3, 2012
Copyright: 2012 U.S. News & World Report
Website: http://www.usnews.com/

4 Aug 2012

MMJ Rescheduling To Be Heard In Federal Court

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Medical marijuana advocates will get their day in court later this year, when they argue the therapeutic value of cannabis.

The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed late last week to hear oral arguments in Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration, a case that could have major implications for the rescheduling of marijuana out of Schedule I, a category that also includes heroin and LSD. Schedule I drugs are described as substances that have “a high potential for abuse, have no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and there is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.” Rescheduling can take place either by congressional vote, or through independent action by the executive branch in the presence of new research.

Marijuana policy reformers initially petitioned the DEA in 2002, arguing that the current classification of marijuana was improper. In 2011, the DEA finally denied their request, prompting Americans for Safe Access to file a lawsuit earlier this year. Advocates are excited about the opportunity to present scientific evidence before federal court, and especially optimistic considering the recent release of a report that claims, in the clearest terms yet, that there are medical benefits to marijuana.

From the Americans for Safe Access press release:

The announcement of oral arguments comes just weeks after a study was published in The Open Neurology Journal by Dr. Igor Grant one of the leading U.S. medical marijuana researchers, claiming that marijuana’s Schedule I classification is “not tenable.” Dr. Grant and his fellow researchers concluded it was “not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking.” The study urged additional research, and stated that marijuana’s federal classification and its political controversy are “obstacles to medical progress in this area.” Marijuana’s classification as a Schedule I substance (along with heroin) is based on the federal government’s position that it has “no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.”

Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access, says the court’s decision is long-awaited.

“Medical marijuana patients are finally getting their day in court,” he said. “This is a rare opportunity for patients to confront politically motivated decision-making with scientific evidence of marijuana’s medical efficacy … What’s at stake in this case is nothing less than our country’s scientific integrity and the imminent needs of millions of patients.”

While marijuana is currently accepted for medical use in 17 states and the District of Columbia, the Obama administration and DEA have been unmistakably hard-nosed in their approach to the substance.

During congressional testimony earlier this year, DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart refused to say whether crack or heroin posed bigger health risks than marijuana.

The administration has meanwhile continued an aggressive crackdown on marijuana dispensaries in California.

Oral arguments in Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration are set to begin on Oct. 16.

Source: Huffington Post (NY)
Author: Nick Wing, The Huffington Post
Published: August 1, 2012
Copyright: 2012 HuffingtonPost.com, LLC
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

2 Aug 2012

Amsterdam’s Evolving Relationship With Weed

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Dutch pot smokers are complaining that the generation that was running around Amsterdam’s Vondelpark in the Sixties naked and on acid is now threatening the well-established, regulated marijuana trade in the Netherlands.

Responding to international pressure and conservatives in rural and small-town Holland, the federal government is cracking down on the coffeeshops that legally sell marijuana. But big-city mayors, like Amsterdam’s, will fight to keep them open. Amsterdam’s leaders recognize that legalized marijuana and the Red Light District’s prostitution are part of the edgy charm of the city; the mayor wants to keep both, but get rid of the accompanying sleaze.

The Dutch have learned that when sex and soft drugs are sold on the street rather than legally, you get pimps, gangs, disease, hard drugs and violence. Amsterdam recognizes the pragmatic wisdom of its progressive policies and is bucking the federal shift to the right.

Locals don’t want shady people pushing drugs in dark alleys; they’d rather see marijuana sold in regulated shops.

While in Amsterdam, I took a short break from my guidebook research to get up-to-speed on the local drug policy scene. I find this especially interesting this year, as I’m co-sponsoring Initiative 502 in Washington State, which is on track to legalize, tax, and regulate the sale of marijuana for adults (on the ballot this November).

The Netherlands’ neighboring countries (France and Germany) are complaining that their citizens simply make drug runs across the border and come home with lots of pot. To cut back on this, border towns have implemented a “weed pass” system, where pot is sold only to Dutch people who are registered. But the independent-minded Dutch (especially young people) don’t want to be registered as pot users, so they are buying it on the street — which is rekindling the black market, and will likely translate to more violence, turf wars, and hard drugs being sold. The next step: In January of 2013, this same law will come into effect nationwide — including in Amsterdam, whose many coffeeshops will no longer be allowed to legally sell marijuana to tourists.

Locals point out that the Dutch are not more “pro-drugs” than other nations. For example, my Dutch friends note that, while the last 20 years of US Presidents (Clinton, Bush, Obama) have admitted or implied that they’ve smoked marijuana, no Dutch prime minister ever has. Many Dutch people are actually very anti-drugs. The Dutch word for addiction is “enslavement.” But the Dutch response to the problem of addiction is very different from that of the US.

Being a port city, Amsterdam has had its difficult times with drug problems. In the 1970s, thousands of hard-drug addicts made Amsterdam’s old sailor quarter, Zeedijk, a no-go zone. It was nicknamed “Heroin Alley.” To fight it, they set up coffeeshop laws (allowing for the consumption of pot while cracking down on hard-drug use). Today Zeedijk is gentrified, there’s no sense of the old days, and various studies indicate that Holland has fewer hard-drug users, per capita, than many other parts of Europe.

From the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s, the number of coffeeshops exploded. The Dutch observed that marijuana use rates increased, too, so they made changes, closing shops that ignored rules or generated neighborhood complaints. Now, new coffeeshop licenses are no longer being issued, and the number of coffeeshops in Amsterdam has declined from a peak of over 700 to about 200 today. With the movement afoot to crack down on things, coffeeshops are trying harder than ever to be good citizens and to nurture good relations with their neighbors.

While most Americans like their joints made purely of marijuana, the Dutch (like most Europeans) are accustomed to mixing tobacco with marijuana. There are several reasons: Back in the 1970s, most “pot smokers” here smoked hash, which needs to be mixed with something else (like tobacco) to light up. Today, more Dutch prefer “herbal cannabis” — the marijuana bud common in the US — but they still keep the familiar tobacco in their joints. Tobacco-mixed joints also go back to hippie days, when pot was expensive and it was simply wasteful to pass around a pure marijuana joint. Mixing in tobacco allowed poor hippies to be generous without going broke. And, finally, the Dutch don’t dry and cure their marijuana, so it’s hard to smoke without tobacco. Any place that caters to Americans will have joints without tobacco, but you have to ask specifically for a “pure” joint. Joints are generally sold individually (for €3 to €5, depending on the strain you choose).

Coffeeshops are allowed only half a kilo (about a pound) of pot in their inventory at any given time. On a typical day, a busy shop will sell three kilos (and, therefore, take six deliveries). Very little marijuana is imported anymore, as the technology is such that strains from all over the world can be grown in local greenhouses. (And the Dutch wrote the book on greenhouses.) “Netherlands weed” is now refined, like wine.

The Dutch hemp heritage goes way back in this sailing culture. In the days of Henry Hudson, hemp was critical for quality rope and for sails. The word “canvas” comes from the same root as “cannabis.” In fact, there was a time when tobacco was the pricey leaf, and sailors mixed hemp into their cigarettes to stretch their tobacco.

Tourists who haven’t smoked since they were students are famous for overdosing in Amsterdam, where they can suddenly light up without any paranoia. Coffeeshop baristas nickname tourists about to pass out “Whitey” — because of the color their face turns just before they hit the floor. The key is to eat or drink something sweet to stop from getting sick. Coca-Cola is a good fast fix and coffeeshops keep sugar tablets handy.

No one would say smoking pot is healthy. It’s a drug. It’s dangerous, and it can be abused. The Dutch are simply a fascinating example of how a society can allow marijuana’s responsible adult use as a civil liberty and treat its abuse as a health-care and education challenge rather than a criminal issue.

They have a 25-year track record of not arresting pot smokers, and have learned that if you want to control a substance, the worst way to do it is to keep it illegal. Regulations are strictly enforced. While the sale of marijuana is allowed, advertising is not. You’ll never see any promotions or advertising in windows. In fact, in many places, the prospective customer has to take the initiative and push a button to illuminate the menu in order to know what’s for sale. And, surprisingly, marijuana is just not a big deal in the Netherlands — except to tourists coming from lands where you can do hard time for lighting up. A variety of studies have demonstrated that the Dutch smoke less than the European average — and fewer than half as many Dutch smoke pot, per capita, as Americans do.

Source: Huffington Post (NY)
Author: Rick Steves
Published: August 1, 2012
Copyright: 2012 HuffingtonPost.com, LLC
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

31 Jul 2012

Indoor Pot Farms Pose Risks

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Despite indoor marijuana-growing operations having been the source of numerous local fires in recent years, city efforts to create an ordinance regulating these gardens have died due to the ongoing conflict between state and federal law.

While the state of California allows the use of medicinal marijuana and the cultivation of the plant, the federal government still classifies marijuana as an illegal drug. Because of this, public safety officials have realized that regulating marijuana cultivation is not currently possible.

Petaluma firefighters responded Saturday to a fire at an eastside home that officials say stemmed from faulty electrical wiring to an indoor pot garden. To prevent such fires, which have become more prevalent in recent years, the police and fire departments last year began jointly developing a safety ordinance aimed at regulating indoor medical marijuana growing operations, but ran into conflicts with federal law that prohibits growing marijuana at all.

“The ordinance was put aside because we realized that we cannot have an official fire ordinance that contradicts federal law,” Petaluma Fire Marshal Cary Fergus said. “So we had to stop working on it.”

Petaluma Police Lt. Tim Lyons said last year that the number of indoor marijuana garden-related fires had increased steadily over the past five years. He added this week that the ordinance the department had been developing is completed and sitting on the police chief’s desk, but that due to the federal conflicts, they have been told to shelve it for the time being.

Saturday morning’s 1525 Yarberry Drive fire, reported at 5:48 a.m., was caused by an electrical short circuit in the corner of the garage, officials said. Electrical fires are common at indoor marijuana gardens where electricity is often siphoned illegally to avoid the electrical usage and costs. When the makeshift circuiting fails, it can cause electrical fires that spread easily throughout surrounding structures.

Fergus said Saturday’s fire at the home of Reyes Mendoza displayed the dangers indoor marijuana gardens pose, since firefighters had to wait for PG&E crews to arrive and fully shut off electrical service to the home. This was needed because the short circuit had caused dangerous electrical arcing — during which electricity jumps back and forth between wires and metal surfaces — to occur underground.

Once PG&E had shut off power, fire crews were able to extinguish the blaze. The fire caused approximately $15,000 worth of damage to the home, according to officials. Fergus said that the department will be billing Mendoza for several broken chainsaws and the man-hours used to combat his fire if it is discovered it was the result of an illegal growing operation or electrical theft.

Petaluma Police Lt. Dave Sears said officers will be investigating the possible electric services theft and whether the grow house was an illegal operation. “There is some indication that it may have been a medical grow, but collectives don’t usually steal utilities,” he added.

In May of 2011, a fire related to a suspected marijuana-growing operation destroyed a duplex on Alma Court, while just four days later another indoor pot farm fire caused $80,000 in damage at a Cotati home.

Fergus added that police officers and firefighters must exercise extreme caution when entering an indoor marijuana-growing operation. He said that firefighters can be electrocuted if electrical arcing is occurring from stolen and makeshift electrical panels. “Because we don’t know where the power source is coming from, it is also nearly impossible for firefighters to ensure that power has been shut off completely,” he said.

Firefighters also do not know what they are dealing with when it comes to indoor growing operations that are almost never in compliance with safety standards, said Sears, who is leading the investigation on the Mendoza house fire. “Operations can cause structural hazards from high humidity and excessive mold growth that weakens walls and frames,” he said.

Mayor David Glass said that in light of the recent fire it would be prudent to put some sort of ordinance in place, but acknowledged that it would be up to the fire and police department to find a way to make it legal.

“It probably needs to happen, but if and when is another story,” Glass said.

Source: Petaluma Argus-Courier (CA)
Copyright: 2012 PressDemocrat.com
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.petaluma360.com/
Author: Janelle Wetzstein

28 Jul 2012

L.A.’s Medical Marijuana Mess

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The Los Angeles City Council is plainly out of its depth when it comes to regulating medical marijuana. This was already clear after years of fumbling and court-delayed attempts to limit the number or locations of cannabis dispensaries, but it became painfully obvious Tuesday when the council approved a ban on all dispensaries — along with a separate motion to draft an ordinance that would allow well-established pot shops to stay open, partially defeating the council’s own purpose.

Not that we can really blame the council for being confused. We’re confused about how to legally restrict a quasi-legal business too. For that matter, so is the entire state of California. And that’s causing even bigger problems than usual as the federal government, which considers marijuana an illegal drug, has begun a series of raids on California pot outlets.

Is L.A.’s new ban even legal? There’s no clear answer to that question, but a recent court ruling suggests that it isn’t. After Los Angeles County imposed a blanket ban on pot distribution in unincorporated areas in December 2010, it was challenged by a Covina collective, which won a key victory this month in the state’s 2nd District Court of Appeal. Writing for the three-justice panel, Justice Robert Mallano said the county’s ban was preempted by state law and contradicted the intent of the Legislature.

Of course, it isn’t that simple. The Los Angeles County ban would have closed all distribution outlets, whereas the city of L.A.’s ban would allow small collectives with three or fewer members to stay open. The city’s lawyers say that key difference should persuade the courts to approve L.A.’s “gentle ban,” and as ammunition they point to a separate ruling by a different 2nd District Court justice that suggested the city’s approach would neither constitute a true ban nor violate state law.

If thinking about all that isn’t enough to give you a migraine — which, on the plus side, is enough justification to get a medical recommendation for a dose of cannabis in California — there is the added complication that could arise if the City Council goes ahead with the separate ordinance to allow certain dispensaries to stay open. Specifically, Councilman Paul Koretz called Tuesday for staff to draw up a draft that would grant immunity from the ban to those facilities that were in place before a 2007 city moratorium on new dispensaries was approved. This brings up unhappy memories of L.A.’s years-long attempts to regulate billboards, when strict regulatory ordinances were undermined by council members carving out exemptions for certain signs in their districts. Courts tend to take a dim view of that kind of favoritism.

So let’s review: L.A. has banned all but the tiniest marijuana collectives. When it attempts to enforce this ban, it will be sued. Action will be delayed for months, or quite possibly until the state Supreme Court weighs in on a series of marijuana cases next year. Mission accomplished?

Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Published: July 26, 2012
Copyright: 2012 Los Angeles Times
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.latimes.com/

23 Jul 2012

Pot-smoking Moms Defend Their Habit

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Which parent is worse: The one who smokes pot or the one who knocks back wine?

Some pot-smoking mothers are defending their habit and say they’re tired of being judged by other moms who religiously drink glasses of wine. “Any hypocrisy is hard to swallow. A drunk mother is pathetic and I often leave parties when I experience other mothers tying one on,” Margaret, a mother of two boys, told Today Moms.

And she’s not the only mom who feels this way. One mother recently raised eyebrows when she acknowledged that she takes care of her daughter when she’s stoned. And the Moms for Marijuana group has garnered close to 20,000 likes on Facebook.

Margaret, who didn’t want her last named used, told Today Moms that smoking marijuana helps her relax so she can get through her day without stressing. “It can make folding a pile of laundry fun. If I didn’t smoke, that’d be three piles later in the week.”

But she’s careful to keep her habit hidden. Margaret keeps her stash locked away from her kids and doesn’t tell other moms for fear of ostracizing her children.

“Marijuana parents aren’t perfect, but they’re far less imperfect than parents who use alcohol irresponsibly,” says Diane Fornbacher, the co-vice chair of the Women’s Alliance at NORML, the non-profit lobbying group working to legalize marijuana.

She told Today Moms that parents shouldn’t be judged if they’re using a substance that makes them more productive and causes no harm. “Cannabis can influence people to be nicer to one another. You rarely find a story that says two stoners beat each other up outside of a bar.”

In Canada, it is legal to use marijuana for medical purposes. But according to a recent poll, 66 per cent of Canadians believe possession of small amounts of the drug should be decriminalized.

But, of course, there are health concerns for parents who smoke pot around their kids, such as a higher likelihood that the child will use the drug or starting smoking it earlier. And those who smoke marijuana before 16 have a higher rate of psychiatric disorders, according to Today Moms.

23 Jul 2012

Medical Marijuana: The Facts

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Christie Administration Has Been Responsive on Issue

I was surprised and saddened to see the editorial Wednesday titled “Med marijuana: What’s the deal?” The Asbury Park Press’ editorial board is typically thorough and factually accurate, but in this instance it couldn’t be more off the mark.

While this program appeared to get off to a slow start, we have seen real, and substantial, progress over the past year, particularly the past few months.

The problem right now isn’t the program or the progress. The problem is the Press’ lack of factual followup. The same day the editorial appeared in the Press, an article ran in The Wall Street Journal titled, “Legal for some, pot crops up in N.J.,” highlighting the headway being made in our program.

The same people whom the Press quotes as taking issue with the administration – quotes from months ago – are quoted from the past few days praising the people in the Christie administration and the folks directly running the program. That is downright sloppy – and ultimately unfair to those of us who have broken our butts to get this program on track and moving forward.

One facility run by the Greenleaf center is already growing plants that are now a foot high. They should begin dispensing the much-needed medicine to patients as early as mid-September. A second facility run by the Compassionate Care Foundation hopes to have a crop ready by November. The claim that none of the centers around the state have begun operating is just plain wrong.

The editorial says the Christie administration is at the heart of the delays, yet the Journal article quotes Bill Thomas, CEO of Compassionate Care, as saying, “We have had complete cooperation with the Department of Health. They are helping us.” While these two facilities are moving forward, the other four are “searching or in negotiations for locations,” according to the Department of Health.

In my efforts to move this program forward, I have found the administration to be responsive to fair and legitimate questions or issues every step of the way. John O’Brien, the executive director of the medicinal marijuana program appointed by the governor, and Charlie McKenna, the governor’s chief counsel, have received well-deserved praise from the people legitimately trying to move their operations forward.

My office has reached out to every one of the approved entities. Some have really engaged and some have completely blown off offers of help – – now having only themselves to blame for their lack of progress. But no entity at this point can legitimately blame the administration for a lack of progress.

If all of the approved entities don’t begin to move forward, we will at some point have to consider revoking the approvals of those not moving forward, and reissue those rights to other entities. While the guidelines the Christie administration put in place are strict, it is the high bar set by those guidelines that has given our program here in New Jersey the extremely high level of credibility it has throughout the country. The programs in California and Colorado are complete disasters by comparison. The strict regulations in New Jersey destroy the arguments of anyone fear-mongering or casting aspersions on our program or medical marijuana in general.

We all want our patients suffering from illness and chronic pain to get relief, but we also need to make sure we put the right program in place and administer it thoroughly and carefully, to build credibility with a somewhat skeptical public. The polls show a majority of people favor medical marijuana, but too many folks then turn around and say they don’t want the facilities in their back yard. The comprehensive, clear, consistent and strict design of our program – a design devised by the Christie administration – should allay any reason for fear.

Source: Asbury Park Press (NJ)
Copyright: 2012 Asbury Park Press
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.app.com/
Author: Declan O’Scanlon

23 Jul 2012

Experts Warn On Impact Of Legal Pot

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Legalizing marijuana in even a single state could drive down prices dramatically across the country, encouraging more people to smoke the drug, a panel of experts said at a briefing Tuesday.

Last week, Oregon became the third state that will vote this November on a ballot measure to legalize marijuana, joining Colorado and Washington.

“Legalization is unprecedented – not even the Netherlands has done it – – it is entirely possible it will happen this year,” said Jonathan Caulkins, co-author of “Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know.”

“The effects will be enormous,” said Caulkins, a professor at Carnegie Mellon, during an event at the American Enterprise Institute.

The Obama administration opposes legalizing marijuana and has taken action to shut down some medical-marijuana dispensaries in California and Colorado.

Caulkins said one of the main reasons for outlawing the drug is to make it riskier to produce and sell, driving up prices and curbing use. A price collapse after legalization in some states could undermine marijuana laws nationally.

Caulkins said Colorado’s proposition would allow residents to obtain a grower’s license fairly easily, making the state a good home for exporters of marijuana.

“They would be able to provide marijuana to New York state markets at one quarter of the current price,” he said, predicting similar price declines in other states.

Mark Kleiman, a professor of public policy at the University of California, Los Angeles, said his advice to federal officials would be “to sit down with the governor of the state and say, ‘Look, we can make your life completely miserable – and we will – unless you figure out a way to avoid the exports.”

One option would be to impose strict limits on how much of the drug retailers could sell to each customer.

Washington’s proposal would present authorities with a different problem. The state is proposing to create a strong system of regulations with the aim of propping up prices. Caulkins said the federal government could strike down the regulations but would leave a free for-all behind.

“The federal government will face some really difficult choices where actions are like double-edged swords,” Caulkins said.

ource: Seattle Times (WA)
Copyright: 2012 The Seattle Times Company
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/
Author: Ian Duncan, Tribune Washington bureau

18 Jul 2012

3 States Mull MJ Legalization Experts Warn: Beware

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Legalizing marijuana in even a single state could drive down prices dramatically across the country, encouraging more people to smoke the drug, a panel of experts said at a briefing Tuesday. Last week, Oregon became the third state that will vote this November on a ballot measure to legalize marijuana, joining Colorado and Washington.

“Legalization is unprecedented – not even the Netherlands has done it – it is entirely possible it will happen this year,” said Jonathan Caulkins, co-author of “Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know.”

“The effects will be enormous,” said Caulkins, a professor at Carnegie Mellon, during an event at the American Enterprise Institute.

The Obama administration opposes legalizing marijuana and has taken action to shut down some medical marijuana dispensaries in California and Colorado.

Caulkins said one of the main reasons for outlawing the drug is to make it riskier to produce and sell, driving up prices and curbing use. A price collapse following legalization in some states could undermine marijuana laws nationally, the experts warned.

Caulkins said Colorado’s proposition would allow residents to obtain a grower’s license fairly easily, making the state a good home for exporters of marijuana.

“They would be able to provide marijuana to New York state markets at one quarter of the current price,” he said, predicting similar price declines in other states.

Mark Kleiman, a professor of public policy at UCLA, said his advice to federal officials would be “to sit down with the governor of the state and say, ‘Look, we can make your life completely miserable — and we will – unless you figure out a way to avoid the exports.”

One option would be to impose strict limits on how much of the drug retailers could sell to each customer.

“The federal government will face some really difficult choices where actions are like double-edged swords,” Caulkins said.

Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Author: Ian Duncan
Published: July 17, 2012
Copyright: 2012 Los Angeles Times
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.latimes.com/

« 1 … 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 … 174 »