23 Apr 2013

The Conservative Pro-Pot Argument

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

If you want smaller government and you want the government out of people’s private lives, you need to support the legalization of marijuana.  It’s the logically consistent viewpoint for a conservative.

I write this in the leadup to the annual 4/20 marijuana marches where otherwise law-abiding citizens who consume, grow or trade the substance will take to the streets nationwide to show their love of pot.

It’s absurd that we have laws making it mandatory to toss someone in jail for six months if they have six plants or more.  And that’s one of the lighter sentences.

Let’s look at some of the data from QMI columnist Thane Burnett’s multi-part feature on pot last December.  The piece was inspired by Washington State and Colorado voting in support of legalization.

In an Angus Reid poll done at the time, 57% of Canadians supported legalization.  Only 39% opposed it.

According to Health Canada, more than 40% of Canadians have used cannabis.  In a poll on the Sun websites – though not scientific, certainly informative – 81% of readers voted for legalization.

Criminal

My view is the law criminalizes commerce.  It criminalizes gardening.  And it criminalizes your right to do what you want with your body so long as you’re not violating anyone else’s liberties.

All the arguments in favour of the status quo – or tighter laws – can be knocked aside with one hand tied behind your back.

They’re mostly about how pot can ruin a person, their family or their wallet.  Or they’re arguments about organized crime.

The first puts pot on par with booze, gambling, or any other supposed vice people can be obsessed with.  Should we make all those illegal? There are many things which, done to excess, can harm a person and their family.  But it’s up to individuals to moderate themselves, not the state.  I believe in personal responsibility, do you?

Now, organized crime arguments are all tertiary.  They’re all, “But if we legalize pot then this other bad thing might happen…” Well guess what? After pot is legalized, drug-related gang fights in the streets will still be illegal.  All the spinoff crimes that the underground drug trade produces will still be illegal.  In fact, they’ll likely decrease.

Many people who smoke, grow and sell marijuana do so in a completely peaceable way.  It’s wrong to make them criminals.

You can come up with all the technical arguments in the world to support the status quo.  But ultimately all you’re saying is you want to infringe on people’s liberties because you don’t like what’s in their garden or pocket, or because they like a joint after a hard day at work instead of a beer.

Don’t forget, billions of tax dollars have been wasted on big government pot intrusion.  It’s time to go from losing billions on pot to gaining billions via consumption taxes.

Some try to argue most drug laws aren’t even enforced anyway so who cares? Two problems with that.

The first is it’s incorrect.  According to Statistics Canada, of the more than 113,000 drug crimes across the country in 2011, 54% were for cannabis possession.  The second problem is we should always be striving to get bad laws off the books.

The NDP and Liberals want to decriminalize, if not outright legalize, the substance.  But they’re not in power.  It’s time for small government proponents to do the same.  Calling all conservatives: Puff, puff, pass the legislation!

Source: Ottawa Sun (CN ON)
Copyright: 2013 Canoe Limited Partnership
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.ottawasun.com/
Author: Anthony Furey, QMI Agency

20 Apr 2013

Bill Introduced to Define Drug-Endangered Children

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Proposed legislation cites federal law in defining when a child is endangered by a caregiver’s use or possession of drugs, potentially trumping Colorado law and making it illegal to possess, smoke or grow pot near children or in their homes.

Senate Bill 278, which was introduced Thursday and assigned to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee, would create a legal definition of a drug-endangered child in the context of abuse and neglect.

Under the proposal, any child whose well-being is endangered by the use, possession, distribution or manufacture of a controlled substance could be a victim of child abuse or neglect.

That definition could include the use and possession of marijuana, which is legal under Colorado law, but still considered illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act, which the bill cites.

Colorado’s passage of Amendment 64 in November legalized the use and limited possession of the drug by people 21 and older. It also allows people to grow six plants in their homes.

The bill is intended to create consistency in practice between law enforcement, child welfare services and other agencies, said one of its sponsors, Sen. Linda Newell, D-Littleton.

With the legalization of medical and recreational marijuana and Colorado’s recent ranking as the second worst state for prescription drug abuse, the bill will spark a complicated and important conversation, Newell said.

“This bill is not without its complications,” Newell said. “It is really difficult to find that delicate balance between making sure the kids are protected, but at the same time not overstepping and having unintentional consequences for a family who is providing a very safe home.”

Under the bill, children who test positive for either a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance could also be considered endangered and possible victims of abuse or neglect.

Infants who test positive for Schedule II drugs at birth will not be considered endangered if their mothers were prescribed the drugs. Schedule II drugs include commonly prescribed opiates, such as codeine. That portion of the bill cites Colorado law and does not include infants who test positive for marijuana at birth.

Newshawk: The GCW
Source: Denver Post (CO)
Author: Jordan Steffen, The Denver Post
Published: April 19, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Denver Post
Website: http://www.denverpost.com/
Contact: [email protected]

20 Apr 2013

Marijuana reform high on electorate’s list

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Here’s something you won’t see happen on Saturday: Christy Clark or Adrian Dix’s campaign buses rolling up to the north lawn of the Vancouver Art Gallery to the cheers of thousands of marijuana activists. Neither Mr. Dix nor Ms. Clark will push their way through the happy crowds and skunk-scented smoke, glad-handing potential voters. It is even less likely that either will make their way to the stage brandishing a freshly rolled spliff, spark it up and declare 4/20 officially “on.”

Neither will inhale deeply, nor extol the virtues of weed, nor pass the dutchie to the left-hand side. And you certainly won’t hear them making speeches calling for the decriminalization, legalization, or the regulation and taxation of pot.

A pair of polls released this week suggests that the party leaders are lagging behind their constituents when it comes to attitudes about the decriminalization and eventual legalization of marijuana in B.C.

In fact, if the poll numbers are right, not driving the campaign buses on to the art gallery lawn with Bob Marley blaring from the speakers and waving marijuana-leaf flags out the windows might be something of a missed opportunity.

The first poll comes from the Sensible Change Society of B.C., a group headed by one-time federal NDP candidate Dana Larsen, who withdrew from the 2008 race after a video showing him with a mouthful of joints surfaced on the Web. Three years later, Mr. Larsen ran for the leadership of the BC NDP and won just 2.7 per cent of the vote.

Mr. Larsen has proposed what he calls “The Sensible Policing Act,” which would, first, direct police to ignore minor marijuana offences, and second, call on the federal government to repeal the prohibition on marijuana so the province could legally regulate pot the same way it regulates alcohol and tobacco.

The poll shows that roughly 70 per cent of respondents support both parts of the plan. It also shows that just under half of those surveyed say they would be more likely to support a political leader who called for marijuana reform.

A second poll, also timed to coincide with the annual 4/20 “cannabis celebration,” shows that nearly three-quarters of British Columbians would support further research into the regulation and taxation of marijuana. The Ipsos Reid poll shows significant support for leaders who would endorse such research.

In both polls, support for marijuana reform crosses all political stripes, geographic boundaries, age groups and levels of education.

This is, of course, not a new issue in our province. Stop the Violence B.C., a coalition of law enforcement, health and academic experts which commissioned the Ipsos Reid poll, has been arguing for marijuana reform since the coalition was founded in 2011.

Along with many others, Stop the Violence contends that regulating and taxing marijuana production and distribution would take the profits out of the hands of criminal gangs, and result in not only safer streets but also in a potential tax windfall for the province.

But so far, even with numbers that show support for reform, even with the arguments that regulation would curb violence and contribute significantly to provincial coffers, both Christy Clark and Adrian Dix have ducked the issue. When questioned, both have repeatedly pointed to the fact that drug enforcement is a federal responsibility.

Dana Larsen notes that neither leader has had trouble commenting on other issues that are regulated by the federal government.

“We take action and talk about federal issues all the time, whether it’s the Coast Guard station being closed or pipelines, or the long-gun registry back in 2003, so there’s really no reason the province can’t take action on this issue as well,” Mr. Larsen said in an interview.

Indeed, “Pressing for new Coast Guard resources to be placed in Vancouver” even appears in the Liberal Party’s platform.

As for the NDP, Mr. Larsen suspects that while the party may be sympathetic, it would be folly to tackle an issue as controversial as marijuana legalization during an election campaign.

Professor Neil Boyd, who teaches criminology at Simon Fraser University, agrees that making marijuana reform an issue during a provincial election campaign is difficult.

But like Mr. Larsen, Prof. Boyd says the province can play a part. “The province does have power over the administration of justice and could certainly decide not to spend, for example, the $10-million a year it currently spends enforcing marijuana possession laws,” he said.

Given that it happens to fall on Saturday, and in the middle of an election campaign, organizers of this year’s 4/20 rally estimate it will be the biggest gathering of its kind Vancouver has ever seen.

But it may have little impact once the smoke clears.

Source: Globe and Mail

Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/marijuana-reform-high-on-electorates-list/article11436140/

Author: STEPHEN QUINN

19 Apr 2013

Mysterious Player Shakes Up Marijuana Game

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The name appeared out of nowhere, unfamiliar to the players who have worked for months to influence how recreational marijuana will be regulated in Colorado.

On March 28, someone named Matt Taylor hired high-powered lobbying firm Axiom Strategies to work on “marijuana issues,” records show. Taylor has since expanded his lobbying team to rival that of anyone with a stake in adult-use marijuana legalized by Amendment 64 in November.

“No one knows who he is, and with a name like that, no one has been able to find out much,” said Joe Megyesy, who lobbies for a law firm that specializes in marijuana and for the Marijuana Policy Project, the main funder of the Amendment 64 campaign. “I haven’t seen anything like it — but we’ve never seen anything like Amendment 64.”

Colorado’s marijuana mystery man, it turns out, describes himself as a former Marine and failed race-car driver who made his wealth in home heating oil on the East Coast and wants to get in on the ground floor of a budding industry worth untold millions in his home state.

Big Spender

The appearance of a new, big-spending character comes at a key moment as Colorado enters unchartered territory of legalized pot. Disparate interests and unlikely alliances are trying to shape the rules that will determine who can enter a highly lucrative business and how the market will be structured.

Marijuana interests — led by medical marijuana business groups and dispensaries — already have paid at least $137,475 to lobbyists in the fiscal year that began in June, a Denver Post analysis found.

And the real battle has not begun: Bills in the General Assembly to establish rules for recreational pot have yet to be introduced, and fewer than three weeks remain in the session.

One issue has proven especially controversial: whether to let recreational pot stores and commercial growers operate independently.

Snipped

Complete Article: http://www.denverpost.com/news/marijuana/ci_23058748/

Source: Denver Post (CO)
Author: Eric Gorski, The Denver Post
Published: April 19, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Denver Post
Website: http://www.denverpost.com/
Contact: [email protected]

18 Apr 2013

The Marijuana Two-step

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The 42nd Annual Hash Bash in Ann Arbor

The 42nd Annual Hash Bash in Ann Arbor was the highlight of a flurry of activities around marijuana the past few weeks.  A reported 3,000 people were at the University of Michigan Quadrangle for the Bash – part pep rally, part political effort and part toke-down.

State Rep.  Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor, was one of many speakers at the well-organized and well-run event, which included local and national activists.  Mason Tyvert, who works for the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project, and who headed up the legalization campaign team in Colorado, spoke; other speakers included National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws founder Keith Stroup and seed geneticist D.J.  Short.

Irwin got the crowd cheering when he said, “I believe we should legalize marijuana.  …  The good news today, on the 42nd anniversary of Hash Bash, is we’re winning.  We’re winning the battle against marijuana prohibition.”

He cited electoral victories for legalization in Washington state and Colorado as evidence of the changing tide.  Then he talked about how activist involvement had made a difference in softening some of the more draconian measures in bills passed by the Michigan state Legislature last December regarding medical marijuana, adding that he would introduce a decriminalization bill in the state Legislature.  Irwin asked for help in pressing other legislators to support decriminalization.

“We’re going to end the drug war,” Irwin said.  “We’re going to legalize marijuana here in Michigan.  The amount of blood and treasure that we’ve spilled in this failed drug war are an embarrassment to our country.”

The Hash Bash came on the heels of a Pew Research Center poll showing that 52 percent of Americans believe marijuana should be legalized.  Speaker after speaker referenced the poll that, for the first time, showed a simple majority in favor of legalization.  In the past, polls have shown a plurality of Americans in support of legalization but never a majority.

“It smells like freedom,” said Tyvert.  “This is not just the tipping point; this is the tip of the iceberg.”

No fool’s day: Things aren’t quite so friendly for the herb in the Michigan state Legislature, where folks still seem to look at certified medical marijuana patients as possibly criminal.  Bills passed in December 2012, which went into effect April 1, 2013, put strictures on medical marijuana in Michigan.  HB4856 stipulates that marijuana transported in vehicles has to be in a container in the trunk.  If the vehicle has no trunk, then marijuana must be “enclosed in a case that is not readily accessible from the interior of the vehicle.” That seems to follow the model of alcohol law, which prohibits open containers inside cars; however it doesn’t seem to regard marijuana as medicine because I don’t know of any laws forbidding carrying any kind of medicine inside a car.

That thinking seems to follow the same path with HB4851, which requires doctors who recommend marijuana use to establish a “bona fide physician-patient relationship” that involves reviewing patient records.  This is all well and good, except it seems as if it’s more a view that medical marijuana patients are criminal.

Its ( unstated ) aim seems to be restricting access to patients seeking cannabis as a medical solution.  For instance, in last week’s Higher Ground column, I discussed a medical marijuana patient who was addicted to painkillers.  His pain management doctor knew nothing about marijuana and would not recommend it for him.  The patient found another doctor who would.  He then got off the prescribed opiates he was addicted to.  He went back to his pain doctor and showed that he was off the drugs.  Now, the doctor understands that marijuana can be useful.  Still, with little training or understanding of marijuana, and legal issues remaining unsettled, many doctors are loath to recommend it.

A couple of years ago I reported about an HIV doctor who had been recommending marijuana for patients.  After State Attorney General Bill Schuette said that federal law trumped state law, the doctor stopped recommending marijuana for fear of prosecution.  In another case, a patient who had previously been recommended to use medicinal cannabis went back to his doctor for recertification.  The doctor wouldn’t do it because he had been told that if he recommended marijuana to his patients he could no longer work at that clinic.

Doctors are being ostensibly pressured to eschew a course of treatment for fear of retribution should they prescribe – or even recommend – a substance that is purportedly “legal.”

There currently exists a punitive atmosphere toward physicians who choose a “legal” medical protocol, which effectively places undue hardships on patients who may be forced to “shop” for doctors who are even open to the idea that marijuana is a useful therapy.

Another part of the same bill allows outdoor grows.  However, the garden must be enclosed on all sides and not visible to the unaided eye.  The enclosure must be locked and anchored to the ground.  Anyone planning to grow marijuana should be warned to take a close look at the law – as there are specific materials required for use in making the enclosures.

April 1 was actually a good day in Rhode Island: A law that was passed last year decriminalizing possession of as much as 1 ounce of marijuana went into effect.  The law, first introduced in 2010, makes possession a civil offense punishable by a $150 fine.

Getting spacey with time: We all know that time is relative, and that marijuana users’ time perception may get a little rubbery while under the influence.  It seems like the federal government has fallen into that time-vortex when it comes to having anything to say about last November’s legalization votes in Colorado and Washington.

U.S.  Attorney General Eric Holder has said at least a few times since late in 2012 that the Obama administration would “soon” have something to say on the subject.  Last month, Holder said the administration was “still considering” its response.  I’m wondering what “soon” means to those folks.  Maybe they’ve inhaled and don’t realize that it’s been five months since the historic votes.  On the other hand, they have been busy with the fiscal cliff and the sequester – not to mention North Korea threatening to toss a nuclear weapon at its neighbor.  So maybe we just have to hold our breath a little longer.  As the old western swing song says, “Anytime you’re thinking ’bout me.  That’s the time I’ll be thinkin’ of you.” …  Anytime, Mr.  Holder.

We may not have to wait for him.  Last Friday, rumors began circulating about a proposed bipartisan bill in Congress that would protect marijuana users and businesses from federal laws as long as they are compliant with state laws.  Like I said, anytime.

They really meant it: Meanwhile, things seem to be moving along in the legalized states.  That is if you consider the 25 percent tax in Washington state and the 38 percent tax they’re considering in Colorado ( in the Denver area ) to be moving along.  They must have really meant it when they said they wanted to “tax and regulate” the substance.  Then again, the Colorado law allows folks to grow their own in an “enclosed, locked space.” Am I having deja vu here?

Source: Metro Times (Detroit, MI)
Column: Higher Ground
Copyright: 2013 C.E.G.W./Times-Shamrock
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.metrotimes.com
Author: Larry Gabriel

17 Apr 2013

Backers of Marijuana in Alaska Want 2014 Vote

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Alaska voters may get the chance next year to make their state the third in the country to approve the recreational use of marijuana by adults 21 and older.

Backers of the move on Tuesday took the first step toward getting the measure on the August 2014 primary ballot. Three prime sponsors of the effort filed their application for an initiative petition along with signatures from what they say are at least 100 other supporters with the state lieutenant governor’s office.

The group is led by Tim Hinterberger, an associate professor at the University of Alaska Anchorage. The other two prime sponsors are Bill Parker and Mary Reff, according to Gail Fenumiai, state elections director.

The measure would tax and regulate marijuana sales and allow Alaskans to cultivate marijuana for personal use. Among other things, it would allow the Legislature to create a Marijuana Control Board, though until then, the Alcohol Beverage Control Board would regulate marijuana sales. Alaskans age 21 and older could legally possess up to one ounce of marijuana under the proposal, or six marijuana plants, three of which could be mature.

If state officials decide everything’s in order after a 60-day review, backers will have until mid-January to get signatures from another 30,169 people — 10 percent of the number who voted in the last general election — to force a vote, said Steve Fox, the national political director of the Marijuana Policy Project, a pro-legalization group in Washington. The Marijuana Policy Project is working with the local committee.

The signatures would have to be gathered from at least 30 of the state’s 40 House districts, under procedures specified in the state constitution.

Alaskans rejected a legalization initiative in 2004, with only 44 percent of the state’s voters backing the idea. But Alaska’s marijuana laws are among the most liberal in the nation. In 1975, the state’s Supreme Court ruled that a person’s privacy included the right to possess up to 4 ounces of marijuana in his or her home — which is more than the new proposal would allow.

Snipped

Complete Article: http://drugsense.org/url/RX7AcJSi

Source: Anchorage Daily News (AK)
Author: Rob Hotakainen and Lisa Demers, Anchorage Daily News
Published: April 16, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Anchorage Daily News
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.adn.com/

17 Apr 2013

Marijuana Groups Kick Off DC Legalization Campaign

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

National and local advocates for marijuana policy reform are using a new poll to kick off a major push for the legalization or decriminalization of cannabis in the District — one that could include the pursuit of a ballot initiative in 2014.

The poll was sponsored by the Marijuana Policy Project, the Drug Policy Alliance and financed by Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, a company that had backed legalization referendums in four states. Public Policy Polling conducted the automated telephone poll on April 10 and 11, reaching 1,621 registered voters.

It showed two-thirds of D.C. registered voters would at least partially support a legalization referendum similar to the ones passed last year in Colorado and Washington state. Three-quarters of poll respondents favored the decriminalization approach adopted by several states and municipalities, which would turn the possession of small amounts of marijuana from a criminal offense to something more akin to a traffic ticket.

A January 2010 Washington Post survey found residents more closely split when asked whether they favored legalizing the possession of marijuana for personal use, with 46 percent in favor to 48 percent opposed. The Post poll, which carried a three-point margin of error, showed white residents were much more likely to favor legalization (60-35) than black residents (37-55).

The new poll, which did not report a margin of error, found a racial disparity, but a less dramatic one. Both white and black residents favored Colorado/Washington-style legalization, though by different degrees — 77-19 for whites, 53-38 for blacks. Same goes for the decriminalization question, which was supported by 85 percent of white residents and 69 percent of black residents.

There is evidence that national attitudes on marijuana policy have changed in recent years. A Pew Research Center poll released earlier this month found a majority of Americans favored legalization, marking a dramatic shift from even a decade ago, when closer to two-thirds of national poll respondents opposed legalization.

Adam Eidinger, a longtime local activist who is employed by Dr. Bronner’s, said the time has come for city leaders to change District law to reflect popular opinion. ”It’s a popular issue, and up until now the council has ignored it,” he said. “Maybe now they’ll realize the citizens want to to decriminalize at the very least.”

Officials with the Marijuana Policy Project and Drug Policy Alliance said they will be lobbying the D.C. Council in the coming months to pursue legislative changes. Mason Tvert, MPP’s communications director, said his group “will be talking to community leaders and elected officials about various options for adopting a more sensible marijuana policy in the District.” Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, said decriminalization would be a “no-brainer” but legislators “should do more.”

“There is an opportunity to make a clean break from the past and treat drug use as a health issue instead of a criminal justice issue,” Piper said.

The new push comes just as the city’s first medical marijuana dispensary is set to open. But city legislators, most notably Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, have been wary of pursuing wide scale decriminalization or legalization — or even a more liberal medical marijuana regime — citing the likelihood that federal marijuana laws will remain in effect and the potential response from the city’s congressional overseers.

“There is a good argument for decriminalizing a drug that is widely used and that results in a lot of arrest records and not having an effect on violent crime,” Mendelson said in December, but “I don’t think this is the time for the District to be discussing that.”

Eidinger said Tuesday that he is prepared to mount a ballot initiative should the council fail to act. He has founded DCMJ — a skeleton organization consisting, he says, “basically me and a few other people in the city who are interested in advancing the issue.”

“The idea is that we need to create a grassroots organization in the city that is going to advance this ballot initiative if we have to do it,” Eidinger said. “Meanwhile, [MPP and DPA] will be accelerating their lobbying. I think it’s unnecessary if the council does their jobs.”

Piper, of the Drug Policy Alliance, acknowledged “internal and external discussions about doing a ballot measure” but “our preference is to work with the council on a set of reforms to reduce incarceration, racial disparities, and drug overdoses.”

Source: Washington Post (DC)
Author: Mike DeBonis
Published: April 17, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Washington Post Company
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/

15 Apr 2013

Why Legal Pot Is Coming to Nevada

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

nevada-welcomeIt was no great feat, but as I predicted last October, Colorado and Washington have legalized pot, and Nevada is now in danger of losing our rightful place as the capital of forbidden fun.

On his tourism blog, Arthur Frommer wrote last year that we could “expect a torrent of new tourism to Seattle and Denver.”

The media is all over it, with a recent story filled with enough dumb pot puns and jokes to merit an editor’s termination, including references to “smoke signals,” grilled cheese sandwiches and food trucks, and fears that the feds could “harsh the mellow.”

Medical marijuana is already legal here, and Thursday a Nevada legislative committee approved the creation of medical marijuana dispensaries.

And last week, the Nevada Legislature took up a bill to legalize recreational marijuana.  It’s not going anywhere, but I applaud the Assembly Judiciary Committee for giving it a hearing.

Here’s why: There’s a better-than-even chance that recreational pot will be legal in Nevada after the 2016 election.

Wait, what’s that? you ask.

Let me explain.

For the first time, the Pew Research Center, the highly respected nonpartisan polling outfit, found that a majority of Americans favor marijuana legalization.

This wasn’t all that surprising, however, because a majority favored legalization for the first time in a Gallup poll last year.

More striking than the raw numbers is the trend, which points to rising support for legalization.

In fact, as an insightful recent piece in Talking Points Memo pointed out, the trend seems to parallel support for gay marriage.

The movement on gay marriage, recall, has been caused by a massive demographic shift whereby younger voters overwhelmingly favor marriage equality.  Same with marijuana.  Stay calm: Before you freak out, fearing the young are sitting around getting high all day, keep in mind that 6.9 percent of the population report using marijuana regularly, according to the most recent data.  Yes, that’s up from 5.8 percent in 2007, but way down from a high of 13.2 percent in 1979.

The real driver of the surge in popularity for both gay marriage and legalization of marijuana is a rapid increase in what I’d call the “Who Cares?” Caucus.  These younger voters – 1 in 5 of all voters in November were ages 18 to 29 – just don’t see the big deal with gay marriage or legal pot.

Conservatives have begun to throw in the towel on gay marriage, but on pot, some of them are actually leading the way, including National Review magazine, the organ of the establishment right.

So the trend is clear, and now, legalization advocates are looking for their next round of target states.  ( Just how the feds will react to this remains to be seen; marijuana is still illegal in the eyes of Washington.  )

Morgan Fox, a spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, told me that the big prize is California, home to 38 million people and a cultural bellwether for the rest of the nation.

But Nevada is also at the top of the list, he said.  It’s not hard to figure out why – we’re libertarian when it come to vices and have been able to integrate them into our culture and economy while maintaining a sense of normalcy.  ( OK, not entirely, but you get the point.  )

The voters rejected legal pot in the past, but that was seven years ago.

The target year is 2016, when lazy Democrats will get off the couch to elect the first woman president in American history.

Again, it’s happening.

Legalizers should temper their joy.  Yes, this is the right policy.  It could raise tax revenue and keep people out of the vortex that is the legal system.

And surely Nevada’s creative minds will figure out how to capitalize on legal pot.

But, as with end of the prohibition of gambling and alcohol, we need to put the right policies in place to deal with the relevant issues, including increased marijuana consumption, crime, underage use, driving while intoxicated, addiction, etc.

These are not simple issues, and while ending prohibition will relieve certain problems, it will create others.

If we don’t get the policy right, we could wind up with prohibition again.

So, in a way, it’s good that we aren’t taking action yet.  We can watch Colorado and Washington state, which are both pretty rational, decently governed states.  Then we can follow their lead, learning from their successes and failures.

But we need to start figuring this out, because it’s happening.  And 2016 will be here quick.

Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV)
Copyright: 2013 Las Vegas Sun, Inc
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.lasvegassun.com/
Author: J. Patrick Coolican

13 Apr 2013

New Stricter State Proposal Would Allow MMJ

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Lawmakers have introduced a measure with stricter provisions than past failed efforts to legalize marijuana sales to New Yorkers who have a “severe debilitating or life-threatening’’ health condition.

The new bill, which ends such past ideas as letting people grow their own marijuana, would have the state Health Department regulate the process, which would include allowing a certain number of private for-profits or not-for-profits to grow the plants and sell the drug under new security protocols to patients with treatment plans approved by a physician, physician’s assistant or nurse practitioner.

The measure was introduced by its past sponsors, Assemblyman Richard Gottfried, a Manhattan Democrat, and Sen. Diane Savino, a Staten Island Democrat. Savino has more political power this year as one of five breakaway Democrats who jointly run the Senate with Republicans.

The bill has 68 co-sponsors, including 10 Senate Democrats. It has previously sailed through the Assembly.

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has opposed the idea of medical marijuana legalization, though advocates believe he could be flexible, especially since he is already promoting a plan to relax marijuana possession laws. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have medical marijuana laws.

Advocates say the measure will more strictly regulate the drug than prescription painkillers; patient advocates in the past have said marijuana will be cheaper, less addictive and less dangerous than many of the painkiller prescriptions they take.

The bill defines those eligible to be certified by the Health Department to obtain marijuana as someone with a “serious’’ health condition, including cancer, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injuries, epilepsy, diabetes, post-traumatic stress syndrome and others.

The patient would have to be under a doctor’s supervision. Patients who a doctor believes have less than a year to live also would be eligible to buy the drug. Medical marijuana also would be listed as one of the covered drugs on a new state prescription drug tracking system intended to reduce doctor and pharmacy shopping by addicts.

Marijuana could be grown and dispensed by hospitals, for-profit companies and not-for-profit corporations, and an excise tax would be imposed on the facilities, with part of the proceeds shared with local “host’’ communities.

“The bill is much more restrictive than the New York laws regulating highly dangerous drugs like morphine, Oxycontin or Valium,’’ Gottfried said.

“Anybody who ever had a family member suffer from a debilitating disease learns very quickly the limitations of modern medicine at treating pain,’’ added Savino.

The bill’s backers include the American Public Health Association, American Bar Association, New York State Nurses Association, Pharmacists Society of the State of New York, New York AIDS Coalition, the Independence Party of New York and the Drug Policy Alliance.

Critics, including some Senate Republicans and the state Conservative Party, have said marijuana could be diverted by patients to others not eligible for the drug and that the plan sends the wrong message, especially to teenagers, about a drug some call a gateway to stronger drugs.

Source: Buffalo News (NY)
Author: Tom Precious, News Albany Bureau
Published: March 28, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Buffalo News
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.buffalonews.com/

13 Apr 2013

Support for Legal Marijuana Reached Tipping Point

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

For the first time, a major US poll has found that a majority of Americans support legalization of marijuana.

The Pew Research Center announced Thursday that 52 percent of Americans say that marijuana use should be made legal, versus 45 percent who say it should not. The trend line has been moving gradually in the direction of majority support for more than 20 years. In 1991, only 17 percent supported legalization, while 78 percent opposed.

As with gay marriage, which has also seen a sharp rise in support in the past few years, the Pew poll found major generational differences in views on marijuana. Among Millennials – those now aged 18 to 32 – support is at 65 percent, up from just 36 percent in 2008. Among Generation X, those born between 1965 and 1980, support has risen dramatically, from 28 percent in 1994 to 54 percent today.

Half of Baby Boomers support legalized marijuana today, and among the over-65 Silent Generation support has doubled since 2002 – from 17 percent to 32 percent.

Among other noteworthy findings in the Pew poll:

Nearly three in four Americans (72 percent) say government efforts to enforce marijuana laws cost more than they are worth.

Sixty percent say the federal government should not enforce federal laws prohibiting marijuana use in states that have legalized it. Last November, voters in Colorado and Washington state approved the personal use of small amounts of marijuana.

Some 48 percent of Americans say they have tried marijuana, up from 38 percent a decade ago.

Republicans oppose legalization, while Democrats support it. Among Republicans, it’s 37 percent favoring legalization to 60 percent opposing. Among Democrats, 59 percent say legalize it and 39 percent say don’t.

Marijuana’s image as a “gateway” drug is fading. Today, 38 percent of Americans agree that “for most people the use of marijuana leads to the use of hard drugs.” In 1977, 60 percent felt that way.

Despite the trends, those opposed to legalization are not giving up. In a column in the Washington Post, former Bush administration official Peter Wehner writes that as Republicans search for new issues to champion, fighting drug use and legalization should be one.

“Today, many parents rightly believe the culture is against them. Government policies should stand with responsible parents – and under no circumstances actively undermine them,” writes Mr. Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington.

“Drug legalization would do exactly that. It would send an unmistakable signal to everyone, including the young: Drug use is not a big deal.”

But in fact, Wehner writes, “the law is a moral teacher,” and government can play a role in the shaping of character. Therefore, “Republicans should prefer that it be a constructive one, which is why they should speak out forcefully and intelligently against drug legalization.”

Source: Christian Science Monitor (US)
Author: Linda Feldmann, Staff Writer
Published: April 4, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Christian Science Publishing Society
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.csmonitor.com/

1 … 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 … 16