Cannabis

I am what is commonly referred to as a Red Tory.  Which means that, while I am a card-carrying member of both the Conservative Party of Canada and the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario ( and a board member on both riding associations ), I don’t necessarily agree with everything that my two political parties set as policy.

And that’s fine; this is a democracy, and the policies of the parties I belong to are built from the grassroots-up.  Any party member can propose a policy or policy change, which then is debated locally, regionally, and nationally.

Most of us Red Tories are lockstep with the economic policies of the Conservative parties, but tend to be a little more relaxed when it comes to social policies.  I like to look at each of these issues individually, and base my opinions on my own understanding of the facts.

I don’t let my political beliefs drive my attitudes; it’s my attitudes and beliefs that drive my political affiliations.

And, in what my conservative colleagues will call a sharp left-turn, I think it’s high time ( pun intended ) that we legalize marijuana.

Now, I don’t smoke pot.  I am not advocating for the legalization of the stuff in the hopes that I will be able to get high in peace.  My reasons are more practical and pragmatic.

There are massive amounts of research into marijuana, its use, medical consequences of use, and its addictive properties.  The vast majority of the science indicates that marijuana is no more harmful to humans than alcohol or tobacco.

Yet, it has gained an unfair stigma as a “gateway drug.” Advocates of that theory postulate that because most harder-drug users admit to using marijuana in the past anyone who uses marijuana today runs the risk it will serve as a “gateway” to these more toxic, more addictive substances.

Yet, what those against the legalization of pot fail to mention is the fact that those who use harder drugs also admit to using tobacco and alcohol.

Besides, a reverse-proof argument like this has no merit.  All politicians may have ridden bicycles as children, but it doesn’t necessarily follow that all children who ride bicycles will become politicians.

Laws are implemented by our elected officials, and maintained by the state, for the protection of the citizenry.  Yet, the more I look at this issue, I see more harm coming to us from the “war on drugs” and illegality of marijuana than if it was legalized.

Prohibition of something high in demand never works – it didn’t work with alcohol, and it certainly doesn’t work with pot.  In fact, it creates a criminal industry that produces higher property crime rates, more violence, and less support for those who use the drug.

The economic side of it is what really blows my mind.  How many hundreds of millions of dollars are spent each year by our federal, provincial, and local police services to enforce these anti-marijuana laws?

Are we really winning this “war” against our own citizenry? Imagine the tax revenues and economic benefits that would come from completely legalizing and regulating the industry.

Would we need the austerity measures currently proposed by our federal and provincial governments if we had this additional tax base? Perhaps, but the level of cuts would probably be lessened.

In poll after poll, the majority of Canadians have indicated that they believe marijuana should be legalized.  I have yet to see a convincing argument to the contrary.

It’s up to each family to live by their own moral code; just because something is legal, doesn’t mean my family has to do it.  But if freedom is truly what we stand for, then it’s time our federal government listened to the majority.

Let’s legalize marijuana, and move on to solving more important issues.

Source: Intelligencer, The (CN ON)
Copyright: 2012, Osprey Media Group Inc.
Contact: http://www.intelligencer.ca/feedback1/LetterToEditor.aspx
Website: http://www.intelligencer.ca/
Author: Glenn May-Anderson

When federal agents raided Oaksterdam University, Richard Lee’s downtown Oakland, Calif.-based trade school, earlier this month, it wasn’t simply a crackdown on a local pot business, it was one of the highest-profile moves in the Obama administration’s nationwide assault on medical marijuana.

DEA and IRS agents hauled away computers, files and pot plants, leaving behind little more than office furniture. They did not disclose the reason for the raid and have not charged Lee with any crime as of yet. In an exclusive interview with The Huffington Post, his first since the raid, Lee, 49, blasted the federal crackdown as a senseless act of intimidation. “This is one battle of a big war,” said Lee, “and there’s thousands of battles going on all over.”

“Before he was elected, [President Barack Obama] promised to support medical marijuana and not waste federal resources on this,” Lee said. “About a year and a half ago, the policy seemed to change. They’ve been attacking many states, threatening governors of states to prevent them from signing legislation to allow medical marijuana. They’ve been attacking on many fronts.”

Lee was a vocal advocate behind California’s Proposition 19, a 2010 ballot question that sought to legalize marijuana. He put more than a million dollars behind the effort, which was opposed by the Obama administration and ultimately went down to defeat.

Medical marijuana is currently legal in California and 15 other states, plus the District of Columbia, and during his campaign for president, Obama vowed to stop the raids on medical marijuana users that were prevalent under George W. Bush, saying raiding patients who use marijuana for medicinal purposes “makes no sense.”

It was in that political climate, in the fall of 2007 that Oaksterdam was founded by Lee, who started using medical marijuana for pain control more than 20 years ago, after a work accident left him paralyzed from the waist down. Often referred to as “the Princeton of pot,” the school has offered classes to would-be medical cannabis caregivers and patients in subjects ranging from horticulture to business to the finer points of running a dispensary.

About 15,000 students have graduated from Oaksterdam to date, according to Dale Sky Jones, the school’s executive director. On October 15, 2010, however, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that federal authorities would continue to prosecute individuals for marijuana possession, even in states that have legalized it. That “threw a wet blanket” on enrollment at Oaksterdam, Jones said.

Then, last June, the Justice Department went even further. Deputy Attorney General James Cole argued in a memo that “caregiver” protections applied only to “individuals providing care to individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses, not commercial operations cultivating, selling or distributing marijuana.” That meant pot shops, even those operating legally under state law, were vulnerable again.

Since then, the administration has unleashed an interagency cannabis crackdown that goes beyond anything seen under the Bush administration, with more than 100 raids, primarily on California pot dispensaries, many of them operating in full compliance with state laws. Since October 2009, the Justice Department has conducted more than 170 aggressive SWAT-style raids in 9 medical marijuana states, resulting in at least 61 federal indictments, according to data compiled by Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group. Federal authorities have also seized property from landlords who rent space to growers, threatening them with prosecution, and authorities have even considered taking action against newspapers selling ad space to dispensaries.

“There’s no question that Obama is the worst president on medical marijuana,” Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project, told Rolling Stone in February.

The IRS has joined in the attack, invoking an arcane tax code provision originally intended to stymie druglords. That law, known as IRS Code Section 280E, is an uncontroversial measure aimed at preventing criminals from deducting the costs of their illicit activities from their taxable income. But the IRS has interpreted it to apply to medical marijuana dispensaries in such a way that they can no longer deduct the cost of salaries, rent, inventory and other operating expenses. Few brick-and-mortar businesses are able to survive under those terms, as taxes end up being substantially larger than profits.

Lee told HuffPost he thinks the tax issue is where the school may have run into trouble with the authorities.

“It may have something to do with the 280E taxes we’ve been forced to pay,” he said. “It was impossible to pay them on top of the other taxes we’re forced to pay: $60,000 to the City of Oakland for the permit fee, $130,000 for the Oakland Business Tax, 10 percent state sales tax, state income tax, federal income tax, unemployment insurance, workman’s comp insurance, health insurance.”

“Our income tax more than doubled because payroll, rent and other tax deductions were disallowed,” he added. “On top of this, the federal government has been closing our bank accounts, making it more difficult for us to operate as a normal business and pay our taxes.”

Jones said she’s almost surprised the raid didn’t come sooner. “There’s just no way we can afford the building as it is,” she said. “We always half expected it.”

The IRS used the same provision in late 2011 to pursue Oakland’s Harborside Health Center, one of the largest and most respected dispensaries in the state, demanding $2.4 million in taxes, a full $2 million more than the 83,000-member dispensary actually paid for the year. “Federal prosecutors are not trying to clean up the regulated medical cannabis industry, they are trying to destroy it,” said Harborside President Steve DeAngelo at a press conference in San Francisco in October.

“This is not just an attempt to tax us,” he explained earlier this year. “It’s an attempt to tax us out of existence.”

Harborside has filed a petition in tax court to protest the IRS’ assessment, which Harborside has characterized as “a dagger pointed at the heart of medical cannabis.”

U.S. attorneys have repeatedly claimed that the decision to crack down on medical pot establishments was their own decision and not the result of any directive from Washington.

“The actions taken by U.S. attorneys are solely in response to concerns expressed in their communities and by law enforcement about the proliferation of large-scale grow facilities and distributors that clearly fall outside of the definition of individual caregiver,” Justice Department spokesperson Laura Sweeney said.

Deputy attorney Cole has argued that the memo speaks for itself and has refused to say whether the crackdown in California represents a shift in federal policy that could lead to raids in other states.

It wasn’t the policy that shifted, according to Sweeney, but rather “the landscape has evolved,” she said, citing “industrial-scale marijuana operations planned in several states.”

With the apparent disconnect between Obama’s 2007 campaign promises and the actions of his administration over the last four years, voters may be skeptical of any statements out of the incumbent in the course of the coming election. The issue itself has growing and wide-spread support among the electorate. Gallup has found that a full 70 percent of Americans favor the legalization of prescription marijuana to reduce pain and suffering. In Colorado, a key swing state, two-thirds of voters favor legalizing medical marijuana.

If Lee is charged, Jones says she hopes his case goes before a jury. “If they bring a fight, Richard is prepared to take it all the way,” she said. “They can come after the guy in the wheelchair, and he’ll stand up for his rights and the rights of the rest of us.”

“It makes me irate that this is how we’re spending our resources right now,” she said of the federal raids. “And to watch them try to take down a school that’s teaching everyone how to do it right, it just puts the exclamation point on it.”

Oaksterdam, which will cease operations at its current location at the end of the month, “will have to start from scratch,” said Jones, who is looking for a smaller, more affordable home.

Lee, for his part, is largely stepping away from Oaksterdam and is planning to focus his efforts on campaigns in Colorado and Washington state, where legalization initiatives are on the ballot this year.

As for the administration’s murky position on drug legalization, Lee takes a dim view. “They can’t have their cake and eat it, too,” he said. “They can’t keep it illegal and tax it. No more taxation without legalization.”

Carly Schwartz contributed reporting.

Source: Huffington Post (NY)
Author: Lucia Graves
Published: April 18, 2012
Copyright: 2012 HuffingtonPost.com, LLC
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

Leaders at a summit meeting of many of the Western Hemisphere nations on Saturday discussed alternatives to what many consider a failed “war on drugs” that is too reliant on military action and imprisonment. But President Obama said flatly that “legalization is not the answer.”

The issue was placed on the agenda of the Summit of the Americas this weekend by the host, Colombia’s president, Juan Manuel Santos. Even so, Mr. Santos suggested that he had in mind some unspecified middle ground short of fully decriminalizing the drug trade that for years has undermined societies throughout the region, notably in Colombia.

“We have the obligation to see if we’re doing the best that we can do, or are there other alternatives that can be much more efficient?” Mr. Santos said during an informal panel discussion with Mr. Obama and President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil just before the summit meeting began. “One side can be all the consumers go to jail. On the other extreme is legalization. On the middle ground, we may have more practical policies.”

In his turn, Mr. Obama said, “I think it is entirely legitimate to have a conversation about whether the laws in place are ones that are doing more harm than good in certain places.”

But, he added, “I personally, and my administration’s position, is that legalization is not the answer.” Drug operations could come to “dominate certain countries if they were allowed to operate legally without any constraint,” he said, and “could be just as corrupting if not more corrupting then the status quo.”

The prominence of the drug-enforcement issue at the meeting, which drew more than 30 leaders from North, Central and South America and Caribbean nations, in part reflected a positive development: the increased prosperity in Latin America in recent years has made economic issues less of a problem, and at the same time has emboldened Latin American leaders to take a bigger role in setting the agenda when they meet.

Mr. Santos, in opening the meeting on Saturday afternoon, said the leaders should stop stalling in re-examining the region’s approach to the war on drugs, which he dated more than four decades back to President Richard Nixon in 1971. President Otto Pérez Molina of Guatemala has called for full legalization of narcotics, though no specific proposals are on the table here.

“Despite all of the efforts, the immense efforts, the huge costs, we have to recognize that the illicit drug business is prospering,” Mr. Santos told the leaders. “This summit is not going to resolve this issue,” he added. “But it can be a starting point to begin a discussion that we have been postponing for far too long.”

Mr. Obama, in his remarks at the formal session, before reporters were ushered out, said: “I know there are frustrations and that some call for legalization. For the sake of the health and safety of our citizens — all our citizens — the United States will not be going in this direction.”

Earlier, on the informal panel before an audience of corporate executives and members of the nations’ official delegations, Mr. Obama had drawn applause when he said of narcotics trafficking, “We can’t look at the issue of supply in Latin America without also looking at the issue of demand in the United States.”

Latin Americans have long complained that the United States criticizes its neighbors’ antidrug efforts when it is American users and guns that stoke the drug trade and violence.

At the formal meeting, Mr. Obama said: “As I’ve said many times, the United States accepts our share of responsibility for drug violence. That’s why we’ve dedicated major resources to reducing the southbound flow of money and guns to the region. It’s why we’ve devoted tens of billions of dollars in the United States to reduce the demand for drugs. And I promise you today — we’re not going to relent in our efforts.”

Absent from the meeting was Venezuela’s president, Hugo Chávez, who is battling cancer; officials said he stayed away on his doctors’ advice. The absence of Mr. Chávez, a fierce critic of the United States, eliminated the potential for a tense meeting with Mr. Obama. After the previous Summit of the Americas in 2009, when the two presidents were photographed shaking hands, Mr. Obama was criticized by some Republicans.

Separately, in an interview with Univision, Mr. Obama strongly reiterated a promise to seek an overhaul of immigration policy in a second term. But Mr. Obama, who also pledged in 2008 to seek a new law, said he needed more support in Congress, where Republicans have led the opposition.

“This is something I care deeply about,” he said. “It’s personal to me.”

Source: New York Times (NY)
Author: Jackie Calmes
Published: April 14, 2012
Copyright: 2012 The New York Times Company
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/

President Barack Obama touted a progressive attitude on medical marijuana on the campaign trail, but since taking office, Obama’s administration has hardened its stance and supporters of the drug are crying foul on the flip-flop.

In a March 2008 interview, Obama told the Oregon Mail Tribune that medical marijuana ranked low on his list of priorities.

“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. “I’m not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue.” But the numbers tell another story.

Since October 2009, Americans for Safe Access, a group committed to legalizing medical marijuana, estimates the Justice Department has carried out 170 raids on dispensaries and cultivation facilities in nine states.

“Every time a dispensary is shut down, there are literally hundreds of people waking up that day wondering where they will get their medication,” saysKris Hermes, the spokesperson for the Americans for Safe Access.

Hermes says he’s confident that the number of raids since the president took office is actually around 200.

“He’s broadened his attack,” Hermes says. “Until Obama was elected, George W. Bush had the most aggressive posture toward medical marijuana…he’s been even more aggressive than his predecessor.”

Americans for Safe Access estimates that during the entire eight years of the Bush administration, roughly 200 raids were carried out, something Hermes says the Obama administration has accomplished in less than four years.

Asked why the Obama administration had been so aggressive in pursuing federal drug law violations involving medical marijuana, the DOJ told Whispers, “Sorry, we do not have statistics to support [that accusation].”

Pro-marijuana groups say Obama has expanded the attack on medical marijuana from DOJ to a wide array of other federal agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service, which has lead dozens of audits of medical marijuana businesses. The IRS has also aggressively penalized medical marijuana businesses for selling an illegal drug by requiring the businesses to pay federal taxes on gross income, not net income, eliminating the tax break most businesses receive from deducting payroll costs.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development released a memo in 2011that allows public housing agencies to evict tenants who use medical marijuana. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives also issued a memo in September banning the commercial sale of firearms to medical marijuana patients.

There are 16 states and the District of Columbia that have their own medical marijuana laws.

And experts say U.S. attorneys’ threats against local and state officials who enact medical marijuana laws in their states have even slowed down the implementation of new laws in Arizona, Montana, Rhode Island, and Washington.

“It’s a weaselly threat, but it has scared a few governors,” says Bill Piper, the director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, a group committed to finding alternatives to current drug laws. “The intensity and multi-agency assault is far worse than the Bush administration and the Clinton administration.”

Allen St. Pierre, executive director for NORML, which seeks to reform marijuana laws, says the president might have political as well as legal motivations for reversing his initial position on medical marijuana. St. Pierre argues that current laws prohibit the Obama administration from turning a blind eye to state’s medical marijuana legalization.

“In essence, the administration is sort of hamstrung,” St. Pierre says.

St. Pierre says letting states regulate marijuana as they please would burn up a lot of the president’s political capital, adding that Obama has to take action or he risks earning a reputation in 2012 election as soft on drugs.

Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Author: Lauren Fox, U.S. News & World Report
Published: April 12, 2012
Copyright: 2012 Chicago Tribune Company
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/

Enderby politicians want marijuana decriminalized and taxed.

A majority of council voted Monday to ask senior government to regulate cannabis as a way of reducing crime, rationalizing police resources and creating a new source of revenue for communities.

“We’re not saying we agree with marijuana but the current process is not working and it fuels the gangs,” said Mayor Howie Cyr, a former RCMP officer.

“Instead of throwing countless people into jail ( for marijuana possession ) and spending money on enforcement, treat it like cigarettes or prescription drugs.”

Cyr believes marijuana-related investigations, which can take years, can be a drain on policing resources, and they prevent authorities from dealing with other matters.

“Smaller communities paying for policing are being hit really hard.”

Cyr suggests a new approach to marijuana could also benefit those who use the substance.

“We need to regulate it and tax it and put money into education and rehabilitation,” he said.

Lone opposition came from Coun.  Beryl Ludwig.

“Any drug addicts or former addicts you talk to say they started with marijuana,” she said.

“Marijuana is the gateway to harder drugs.”

Ludwig admits, though, that she understands the concerns about drug-related crime and police officers spending time on marijuana grow-ops that keep surfacing in the community.

“It would be nice to have the taxes from marijuana but would the taxes be enough to pay for the people that need rehabilitation?” she said.

“It’s hard to legalize something that wrecks so many lives.”

The officer in charge of the North Okanagan RCMP was reluctant to comment on Enderby council’s decision.

“The RCMP’s position is the politicians make the laws and we enforce them,” said Supt.  Reg Burgess.

“At this point, we are going with the laws given to us to enforce and there is no change there.”

Council decided to lobby for cannabis control after a request from Stop the Violence B.C., which advocates for a new approach to marijuana.

“The coalition, along with other organizations such as the Health Officers Council of B.C.  and the Canadian Public Health Association, believes that a strictly regulated legal market for marijuana could better control availability of the drug while at the same time starve organized crime of this enormous cash cow,” said Evan Wood, Stop the Violence B.C.  spokesperson and a University of B.C.  professor of medicine.

Source: Morning Star, The (CN BC)
Copyright: 2012 The Morning Star
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.vernonmorningstar.com/
Author: Richard Rolke

Montana ranks ninth among the top 17 states for marijuana use among teens, which is predictable, according to local law enforcement officials who blame the state’s “goofy” and “convoluted” marijuana laws.

“This comes as no surprise,” said Billings Deputy Police Chief Tim O’Connell.  “We are definitely seeing an increase in the schools, and it’s definitely related to bad legislation.  We can thank the passage of legalizing marijuana.  The laws aren’t clear.”

O’Connell said school resource officers are keenly aware of the growing problem and are battling it through education and enforcement.

Kristin Lundgren, director of Impact, a United Way of Yellowstone County program that works to curb underage drinking, said there is no “crisis of increased youth drug and alcohol use.”

“We did see an increase in eighth-grade use as reported in 2010 surveys, and we also saw teens were saying that marijuana is less risky and not harmful to your health,” she said.  “We also have lots of anecdotal reports from School Resource Officers and school principals of increased incidents with marijuana in the schools.”

Montana voters approved medical marijuana by initiative in 2004.  The state, which in 2009 had fewer than 4,000 medical marijuana patients, now has 11,993 on the Montana Marijuana Program registry.  Of those, 1,778 are in Yellowstone County.  Growth and sale of the drug have become a burgeoning business in the state.  The law allows qualified patients and their caregivers to grow and/or possess a restricted number of marijuana plants.

The latest revelation about increased marijuana usage among Montana teens comes with the release of a study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry.  The study, which looked at a representative sample of 10,123 teens between ages 13 to 18, shows that by the time most teens reach late adolescence, most of them have consumed alcohol and abused illicit substances.

Researchers asked the teens in person about their drinking and drug habits.  The results showed that 78 percent of U.S.  teens had drank alcohol, and 47 percent said they had consumed 12 drinks or more in the past year.  When it came to drug use, 81 percent of teens said they had the opportunity to use illicit substances, with 42.5 percent saying they actually tried them.

In a twist not usually associated with risk-behavior studies, researchers compared teens’ current usage with lifetime estimates of alcohol and illicit substance abuse.  Fifteen percent of the teens met the criteria for lifetime alcohol abuse, and 16 percent could be categorized as drug abusers.

It’s the second time in about 16 months that the issue of marijuana use among teens has come to the forefront.  Last December, the rate of eighth-graders saying they had used an illicit drug jumped to 16 percent, up from 14.5 percent, with daily marijuana use up in all grades surveyed, according to the 2010 Monitoring of the Future Survey.

According to that survey, the decline in cigarette use accompanied by the increases in marijuana use put marijuana ahead of cigarette smoking.  In 2010, 21.4 percent of high school seniors had used marijuana in the past 30 days, while 19.2 percent smoked cigarettes.

Chris Simpson, a school resource officer at Skyview High, said at the time that marijuana use is a problem throughout the school district and the community.  The mixed message about the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes is a large part of the problem, he said.

Youths seeking a high will sometimes steal marijuana from those possessing a medical marijuana card.  Students have told school resource officers how much easier it is to obtain pot since the passing of the medical marijuana law.

The state Department of Public Health and Human Services has acknowledged that marijuana is making a strong comeback among high schoolers.

The 2010 Montana Prevention Needs Assessment suggests that marijuana use rises as the parental acceptability increases.  Perceived peer acceptability of marijuana use also plays a role.

“Availability and access to drugs, alcohol and marijuana, is the number-one way kids get substances,” said Vicki Turner, director of the DPHHS Prevention Resource Center.  “The more it is available, the more likely they are to use.  If family and friends use and the substance is available, youth are more likely to use, regardless of the substance.”

Source: Billings Gazette, The (MT)
Copyright: 2012 The Billings Gazette
Contact: http://billingsgazette.com/app/contact/?contact=letter
Website: http://www.billingsgazette.com/
Author: Cindy Uken

Medical marijuana advocates say they’ll take their “humanitarian” cause to the ballot if the Legislature won’t pass it, but top Bay State cops and prosecutors caution that using pot is not a victimless crime, and legalizing it could put Massachusetts at odds with the feds, who are still battling murderous drug cartels and growers.

The issue is expected to heat up the Gardner Auditorium tomorrow, when the Joint Committee on Public Health holds a hearing on the initiative spearheaded by Richard Elliott Doblin of the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies. “There’s no doubt about it: Either through the Legislature or a ballot initiative, there will be medical marijuana in Massachusetts,” vowed Doblin, 58, of Belmont, whose supporters gathered 80,710 certified voter signatures to make marijuana available as a painkiller to people with cancer, AIDS, glaucoma and other unspecified maladies.

“It raised a lot of questions about possible abuse,” Worcester District Attorney Joseph Early Jr., president of the District Attorneys Association, said. “It suggests you could prescribe marijuana for a headache or an ankle sprain.”

“We’ve had several murders involving marijuana dealers being ripped off,” Early said, questioning how well the cultivation, transport and marketing of medical marijuana can be separated from criminal endeavors. Still, he said, “You have to have compassion. You can’t be labeled conservative, you can’t be labeled liberal on this when you’re talking about a cancer patient who can’t hold down food.”

A. Wayne Sampson of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association said his group also has concerns about the proposed legalization: “We don’t want to be put in the middle of a situation where the citizens vote to allow a law that the federal government says it will prosecute.”

Doblin counters that crime and cartels can be cut out by legalizing domestic suppliers. By forcing patients to turn to the black market to ease their pain, “we’re endorsing murder,” he said. “The more that you can create a domestic production market, the more you take away from the cartels.”

The Humanitarian Medical Use of Marijuana bill would protect registered patients, doctors, caregivers and prescription pot dispensers from local and state penalties, but not from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. Patients could possess a 60-day supply of marijuana. Storage and cultivation would be restricted to designated nonprofit treatment centers.

Linda Brantley of the New England Coalition for Cancer Survivorship said, “For a lot of people who use (marijuana), it alleviates nausea, it alleviates pain symptoms. Why should people, when they’re in terrible pain and unable to eat and unable to sleep, be thrust into the position of doing something illegal?”

Sixteen states, including Maine, Vermont and Rhode Island, have legalized medical marijuana. If the Legislature rejects or fails to act on the measure by May 2, certified signatures of 11,485 voters are needed to place a binding question on the November ballot.

Source: Boston Herald (MA)
Author: Laurel J. Sweet
Published: Monday, April 9, 2012
Copyright: 2012 The Boston Herald, Inc.
Website: http://www.bostonherald.com/
Contact: [email protected]

Richard Lee has been one of the state’s most visible activists for liberalized marijuana laws, having spent $1.5 million of his own money supporting an ill-fated ballot initiative in 2010 to decriminalize recreational use. But Lee is also an entrepreneur in the legally cloudy arena of medical marijuana, and on Monday the Internal Revenue Service and the Drug Enforcement Administration raided his home and his hemp-related ventures, including Oaksterdam University, a trade school focused on the marijuana industry.

The feds haven’t disclosed what they were looking for, other than to say the raids grew out of a federal criminal investigation. Nevertheless, Lee’s supporters complain that the Obama administration isn’t honoring its own policy from 2009, when a top Justice Department official advised U.S. attorneys not to go after “individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.”

That policy doesn’t seem to have much sway these days, considering the recent crackdowns by federal authorities on medical marijuana dispensaries in California and Colorado. But even if it were still in effect, the vagueness of state law and conflicting judicial interpretations make it well nigh impossible for anyone in California to be in clear and unambiguous compliance. That’s because Proposition 215, the 1996 measure that decriminalized the medicinal use of marijuana, and SB 420, the 2003 law to clarify its provisions, left far too many loose ends.

Foremost among these is the ability of local governments to set their own, specific policies on medical marijuana. Oakland has been a leader in that effort, adopting an ordinance regulating and taxing medical marijuana-related ventures. But a recent California appeals court ruling calls into question any city’s ability to set restrictions of any kind on dispensaries. Another ruling held that dispensaries had to grow all their marijuana on site, but cities couldn’t ban them. There are also fundamental questions about whether dispensaries can sell their wares, and if so, how much money they can make without violating SB 420′s ban on profiting from the sale or distribution of marijuana.

State lawmakers appear to be waiting for the California Supreme Court to resolve the disagreements in the lower courts, which would clear away some of the haze. But regardless of what the justices decide, there will still be major issues to resolve. The Legislature should stop waiting and fill in the many blanks in medical marijuana laws. That won’t resolve the basic conflict between state and federal governments regarding marijuana, but at least it will clarify what the state’s policy is.

Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Published: April 5, 2012
Copyright: 2012 Los Angeles Times
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.latimes.com/

Elected lawmakers in five states have a message for the federal government: Don’t interfere with state medical marijuana laws.

In an open letter to the federal government, lawmakers from both sides of the political aisle called on the government to stop using scarce law enforcement resources on taking pot away from medical marijuana patients.

“States with medical marijuana laws have chosen to embrace an approach that is based on science, reason, and compassion. We are lawmakers from these states,” the lawmakers explained in their letter.

“Our state medical marijuana laws differ from one another in their details, such as which patients qualify for medical use; how much marijuana patients may possess; whether patients and caregivers may grow marijuana; and whether regulated entities may grow and sell marijuana to patients. Each of our laws, however, is motivated by a desire to protect seriously ill patients from criminal penalties under state law.”

The letter — signed by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-Calif.), Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles (D-Wash.), Rep. Antonio Maestas (D-N.M.), Sen. Cisco McSorley (D-N.M.), Assemblyman Chris Norby (R-Calif.), Rep. Deborah Sanderson (R-Maine) and Sen. Pat Steadman (D-Colo.) — comes directly on the heels of a federal raid in the heart of California’s pot legalization movement: medical marijuana training school Oaksterdam University in downtown Oakland, where U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration officials on Monday blocked off doors with yellow tape and carried off trash bags full of unknown substances to a nearby van. An IRS spokeswoman could not comment on the raid except to say the agents had a federal search warrant.

The lawmakers called on President Obama to live up to his campaign promise to leave the regulation of medical marijuana to the states, adding raids would only “force patients underground” into the illegal drug market.

The president as a candidate promised to maintain a hands-off approach toward pot clinics that adhere to state law. At a 2007 town hall meeting in Manchester, N.H., Obama said raiding patients who use marijuana for medicinal purposes “makes no sense.” At another town hall in Nashua, N.H., he said the Justice Department’s prosecution of medical marijuana users was “not a good use of our resources.” Yet the number of Justice Department raids on marijuana dispensaries has continued to rise.

Read the full letter here:

Over the last two decades, 16 states and the District of Columbia have chosen to depart from federal policy and chart their own course on the issue of medical marijuana, as states are entitled to do under our federalist system of government. These states have rejected the fallacy long promoted by the federal government — that marijuana has absolutely no accepted medical use and that seriously ill people must choose between ignoring their doctors’ medical advice or risking arrest and prosecution. They have stopped using their scarce law enforcement resources to punish patients and those who care for them and have instead spent considerable resources and time crafting programs that will provide patients with safe and regulated access to medical marijuana.
States with medical marijuana laws have chosen to embrace an approach that is based on science, reason, and compassion. We are lawmakers from these states.

Our state medical marijuana laws differ from one another in their details, such as which patients qualify for medical use; how much marijuana patients may possess; whether patients and caregivers may grow marijuana; and whether regulated entities may grow and sell marijuana to patients. Each of our laws, however, is motivated by a desire to protect seriously ill patients from criminal penalties under state law; to provide a safe and reliable source of medical marijuana; and to balance and protect the needs of local communities and other residents in the state. The laws were drafted with considered thoughtfulness and care, and are thoroughly consistent with the American tradition of using the states as laboratories for public policy innovation and experimentation.

Unfortunately, these laws face a mounting level of federal hostility and confusing mixed messages from the Obama Administration, the Department of Justice, and the various United States Attorneys. In 2008, then candidate Obama stated that as President, he would not use the federal government to circumvent state laws on the issue of medical marijuana. This promise was followed up in 2009 by President Obama with a Department of Justice memo from former Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden stating that federal resources should not generally be focused “on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.” This provided welcome guidance for state legislators and administrators and encouraged us to move forward with drafting and passing responsible regulatory legislation.

Nonetheless, the United States Attorneys in several states with medical marijuana laws have chosen a different course. They have explicitly threatened that federal investigative and prosecutorial resources “will continue to be directed” towards the manufacture and distribution of medical marijuana, even if such activities are permitted under state law. These threats have generally been timed to influence pending legislation or encourage the abandonment of state and local regulatory programs. They contradict President Obama’s campaign promise and policy his first year in office and serve to push medical marijuana activity back into the illicit market.

Most disturbing is that a few United States Attorneys warn that state employees who implement the laws and regulations of our states are not immune from criminal prosecution under the federal Controlled Substances Act. They do so notwithstanding the fact that no provision exists within the Controlled Substances Act that makes it a crime for a state employee to enforce regulations that help a state define conduct that is legal under its own state laws.

Hundreds of state and municipal employees are currently involved in the licensing and regulation of medical marijuana producers and providers in New Mexico, Colorado, Maine, and California, and have been for years. The federal government has never threatened, much less prosecuted, any of these employees. Indeed, the federal government has not, to our knowledge, prosecuted state employees for performing their ministerial duties under state law in modern history. It defies logic and precedent that the federal government would start prosecuting state employees now.

Recognizing the lack of any real harm to state employees, a number of states have moved forward. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie drew on his own experience as a former United States Attorney in deciding that New Jersey state workers were not realistically at risk of federal prosecution in his decision to move forward implementing New Jersey’s medical marijuana program. Rhode Island, Vermont, Arizona, and the District of Columbia are also in the process of implementing their state laws.

Nonetheless, the suggestion that state employees are at risk is have a destructive and chilling impact. Washington Governor Christine Gregoire vetoed legislation to regulate medical marijuana in her state and Delaware Governor Jack Markell suspended implementation of his state’s regulatory program after receiving warnings from the United States Attorneys in their states about state employees. Additionally, a number of localities in California ended or suspended regulatory programs after receiving similar threats to their workers.

We, the undersigned state legislators, call on state and local officials to not be intimidated by these empty federal threats. Our state medical marijuana programs should be implemented and move forward. Our work, and the will of our voters, should see the light of day.

We call on the federal government not to interfere with our ability to control and regulate how medical marijuana is grown and distributed. Let us seek clarity rather than chaos. Don’t force patients underground, to fuel the illegal drug market.

And finally, we call on President Obama to recommit to the principles and policy on which he campaigned and asserted his first year in office. Please respect our state laws. And don’t use our employees as pawns in your zealous and misguided war on medical marijuana.

Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-CA)

Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles (D-WA)

Representative Antonio Maestas (D-NM)

Senator Cisco McSorley (D-NM)

Assemblymember Chris Norby (R-CA)

Representative Deborah Sanderson (R-ME)

Senator Pat Steadman (D-CO)

Source: Huffington Post (NY)
Author: Lucia Graves
Published: April 2, 2012
Copyright: 2012 HuffingtonPost.com, LLC
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

The District has selected six companies to grow marijuana and supply medical cannabis to users — clearing the way for growers to start producing hundreds of plants in as little as a month.

The Health Department is expected to announce Friday that it has selected the winning bidders for cultivating plants that will feed the dispensaries city officials hope to approve by the summer. All the growers will be in Northeast, including a company partly owned by celebrity talk show host Montel Williams.

Combined, they will be tasked with producing thousands of plants annually, in possible violation of federal law.

Two years ago, the D.C. Council voted to establish as many as 10 cultivation centers, where up to 95 marijuana plants could be grown at a time at each location. Once harvested, the marijuana will be sent to five distribution centers for patients to buy.

Mohammad N. Akhter, director of the Health Department, said he and a task force evaluated dozens of bidders before selecting the six applicants. Akhter said they were chosen based on their ability to grow “quality” marijuana “in a safe environment” that includes heavy security.

Akhter said he also tried to ensure that the cultivation centers were not too tightly clustered in the same blocks.

“I have taken every single step that I could to make sure this is done in a safe environment in which we can have a quality product that can meet the needs of the patient in a way that the community is also satisfied,” he said in an interview. “These are the best people who can do the best job.”

Williams’s cultivation center, Abatin Wellness Center, has been approved for the 2100 block of Queens Chapel Road in Langdon, according to a city list obtained by The Washington Post.

The department also selected Montana Apothecary dba Alternative Solutions in the 2100 block of 24th Place NE in Langdon; District Growers in the 2400 block of Evarts Street NE in Langdon; Holistic Remedies in 1800 block of Fenwick Street NE in Ivy City; Phyto Management in the 3700 block of Benning Road NE in Benning; and Venture Forth dba Center City in the 2200 block of Channing Street NE in Langdon.

Before the applicants can open, however, Akhter said they must apply for their business license and building permits from the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs. He added that the permitting process may take less than two weeks, meaning the marijuana growers may be able to start production in less than a month.

But Helder Gil, a spokesman for DCRA, said it could take some providers longer to open if they plan to make major renovations, including additional electric or water supplies.

“If they are just doing minor stuff . . . they can get a building permit quickly and then come in and get the sign-off,” Gil said.

The Health Department does not expect to complete the approval process for dispensaries until June.

“It takes about 90 days to grow the plants and have them ready,” Akhter said. “By the time growers are ready with the plants, the dispensaries should be in operation.”

But the District could still face big challenges in the implementation of its medical marijuana program.

In recent weeks, some residents and community activists fought attempts to open the cultivation centers in their neighborhood.

In January, D.C. Council member Vincent B. Orange (D-At large) successfully pushed to limit the number of cultivation centers that could operate in Northeast. Last week, council member Yvette M. Alexander (D-Ward 7) won approval of a bill barring cultivation centers from high-profile retail corridors — including the location Phyto Management wants to open on Benning Road.

It was not clear Thursday night how the bill would affect the company’s plans, but Alexander pledged to work with the group to find a new location.

The fight over the cultivation centers could pale in comparison with the community opposition that could surface as the Department of Health reviews the applicants to run the distribution centers. But under the law, they are not allowed 300 feet from a school, recreation center or a city park.

Another challenge could come from law enforcement officials because, under federal law, the sale or possession of medical marijuana is illegal. Federal authorities have declined to publicly sanction the program, which restricts patients to no more than 2 ounces of marijuana per month.

But Akhter said he remains optimistic that the city’s program will withstand legal scrutiny, citing his view on the medical benefits of marijuana.

Under the city regulations, patients suffering from cancer, HIV-AIDS, multiple sclerosis and glaucoma qualify for the program.

“I know one thing for sure, there are a lot more dangerous drugs that we prescribe,” said Akhter, a former senior associate dean for public and international health at Howard University College of Medicine. “We made this program exactly like for other drugs we prescribe for other purposes.”

Although medical marijuana patients will not be able to grow their own marijuana, the District’s first purveyor of medical pot supplies plans to open on Rhode Island Avenue NE on Friday.

WeGrow, a company billing itself as the “Wal-Mart of Weed,” will sell materials needed to cultivate and care for the plants, but not the plants or seeds themselves.

Staff writers Mike DeBonis and Katie Rodgers contributed to this report.

Source: Washington Post (DC)
Author: Tim Craig
Published: March 30, 2012
Copyright: 2012 Washington Post Company
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/