Tag Legalization

Marijuana legalization receiving fewer contributions than previous drug-related propositions – California

08 August, 21:41, by admin Tags: , , ,

Many big-money donors, such as George Soros, played a major role in the state’s pathbreaking 1996 medical marijuana initiative. But this year, Proposition 19 has attracted few large donations.

Two years ago, when Californians were voting on an initiative that would have trimmed prison time for nonviolent drug offenders, Bob Wilson, a wealthy New York City investor, spent $2.8 million on the ultimately unsuccessful campaign to get it passed.

Wilson would seem a likely sugar daddy for Proposition 19, the marijuana legalization initiative on the November ballot. He has been giving away much of his fortune, more than $500 million so far, and he believes that pot, which he tried but didn’t much like, ought to be legal.

“There’s no intellectual argument whatever for not legalizing it,” Wilson said. “People who get stoned do much less damage to themselves and others than people who get drunk.”


» Don’t miss a thing. Get breaking news alerts delivered to your inbox.


Wilson has kept an eye on the initiative, but he doesn’t plan to send a check. The polls, he said, don’t look good. He thinksRichard Lee, the sponsor, should have waited until 2012. And, after Proposition 5 was trounced in 2008, he no longer trusts the state’s voters to be progressive trendsetters.

“I’m going to let Californians stew in their own juice,” he said.

Wilson is not alone in holding back. Despite the measure’s potential to inspire copycat initiatives, it has attracted few big-money supporters. This contrasts sharply with previous drug-related initiatives, which began the election year with major contributions. Notably missing is George Soros, the hedge-fund multibillionaire who has invested about $3 million to liberalize California’s drug laws.

“I think they are just waiting,” said Lee, who acknowledged that the poll numbers may have made them wary. “I’ve got to do a better job of showing them this is different.”

Lee remains by far the campaign’s biggest donor. He gave $1.5 million of the $1.9 million raised through June, according to the most recent finance reports. Lee, who has joked that he’s no longer a millionaire, donated $45,000 in the three months ending in June. Fundraising from other sources is picking up, but not at the pace Lee needs to reach the $10 million needed for a significant television campaign.

Lee and his allies remain hopeful that six-figure checks will roll in, but they also have plans to run a less expensive grassroots campaign. They believe they can win by persuading the narrow slice of undecided voters, primarily mothers with school-aged children, and turning out pro-legalization young voters. Lee also notes the initiative is getting extensive free nationwide media coverage.

But when Proposition 215, the pathbreaking medical marijuana initiative, was on the ballot in 1996, wealthy supporters, mostly from out of state, gave early and often. Midway through the election year, Soros; Peter Lewis, head of an Ohio-based insurance company; John Sperling, founder of the University of Phoenix; and George Zimmer, founder and chief executive officer of Men’s Wearhouse, had already donated and loaned a total of almost $1 million.

Four years later, Soros, Lewis and Sperling split a $1 million contribution to kick off Proposition 36, which replaced prison time with drug treatment for some nonviolent crimes.

The campaign for Proposition 5, a drug-sentencing reform measure, had raised $3.4 million by June 2008 from Soros; Sperling; Wilson; Jacob Goldfield, a New York investor; and Irwin Mark Jacobs, a founder of Qualcomm, the San Diego-based telecommuncations giant.

Only Zimmer has donated to Proposition 19. A spokesman said he would not discuss his $20,500 contribution. Soros, Lewis and Sperling could not be reached. Goldfield declined to comment.

Jacobs, who said he has never used illegal drugs, said he has been too busy to look at Proposition 19 but believes marijuana should be decriminalized. “I have certainly not opted out,” he said. “We’ve taken one approach for years and years, and it just hasn’t worked.”

The initiative’s opponents are not yet a financial threat, but “no” campaigns typically start slowly. By June, the campaign had raised $41,100 from five donors. “We just started,” said Andrew Acosta, a spokesman, “so I would assume that the more groups we talk to, things are going to start looking up for us.”

Opposition campaigns have attracted few big donors — except Proposition 5, which drew $1 million from the prison guards’ union and $250,000 each from A. Jerrold Perenchio, the former head ofUnivision, and Meg Whitman, the former Ebay executive who is now bankrolling a multimillion-dollar race for governor.

Soros and most other major donors to the California initiatives are supporters of the Drug Policy Alliance, a prominent advocacy group and a force behind the previous measures. Like the other pro-legalization groups, the alliance wanted to aim an initiative for 2012, when the presidential election would draw more liberal voters. That would also have given its donors four years to recover from a dispiriting loss.

“They didn’t give money in 2008 with the understanding that they would be funding another statewide campaign two years later,” said Stephen Gutwillig, the alliance’s California director.

Lee, however, brushed aside the pressure to wait. Doug Linney, Lee’s top political consultant, acknowledged these donors were not involved in the key decisions.

“Richard felt like the time was right and wanted to go out with this, and so we put it together a different way,” he said.

Wilson said that he admired Lee’s passion, but that he was on his own.

“I think the people who got this going this year ahead of when the drug people wanted to do it, it’s their ball and they’ve got to run it,” he said.

Linney and Lee think the deep-pocket donors, faced with a historic initiative, will not watch from the sidelines. “We’ve got one of the more juicier kind of things in town these days,” Linney said.

Ethan Nadelmann, the founder and the executive director of the decade-old Drug Policy Alliance, has cultivated Soros and other donors for years and is the main conduit to them. His role could be decisive.

“A victory for Prop. 19 would be a major breakthrough,” Nadelmann said, “so I am doing everything I can to help it, including trying to raise significant funds, but it’s difficult when the polling is 50-50.”

The biggest donor to Proposition 19 besides Lee is Philip D. Harvey, another Drug Policy Alliance backer. Harvey, who started one of the largest retailers of sex toys and pornography, gave $100,000 to the alliance’s committee, which will run an independent campaign for the initiative.

“The war on drugs is one of the most destructive, foolish and wasteful government efforts that we have ever come up with,” said Harvey, who now runs a foundation that promotes birth control in impoverished countries. “We put hundreds of thousands of perfectly peaceful people behind bars. I think it’s obscene.”

Harvey, who said he was almost sorry to say he didn’t get much out of smoking marijuana, said he was thrilled to see a legalization initiative on the ballot and was not dissuaded by the polls.

“It’s going to be close,” he said. “I understand that.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Calif. NAACP endorses legalizing marijuana

29 June, 23:24, by admin Tags: , ,

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES (KABC) — The California chapter of the NAACP is endorsing Proposition 19, the ballot initiative that seeks to make marijuana possession legal in the state.

The state’s chapter of the civil rights group said blacks are unfairly targeted for marijuana-related offenses.

“It is time for them to stop using my community to populate the prison system on such minor offenses as having a joint,” said Alice Huffman, president of the California chapter of the NAACP.

Huffman said because of that inequity, her organization is supporting Prop. 19.

That declaration is not sitting well with leaders of the African American community. Some say it unfairly portrays blacks as heavy marijuana users.

“Marijuana is the drug of choice for every stoner in the valley,” said Joe Hicks, vice president of Community Advocates, a civil rights think tank in Los Angeles.

He criticizes the California chapter of the NAACP for making poor decisions. This latest endorsement, Hicks said, sends the wrong message to the African American community.

“If you just did a random poll of black folks on the street and said, are these the things that you would like to see this organization address itself to, I don’t think you would see the decriminalization of marijuana anywhere in the list of 100 things,” Hicks said.

On the streets, there was little support for the NAACP’s decision.

“I think they should leave it alone,” said B.J. Hill. “It’s not their problem.”

Michael Murrel said that if the law passed, his children might be more influenced to use marijuana.

“I have two children. I wouldn’t want them to be exposed to the marijuana or being exposed that they can easily have access to it,” Murrell said.

The NAACP’s endorsement of Prop. 19 doesn’t necessarily guarantee it any votes.

While the NAACP stood against Prop. 8, the same sex marriage band, African Americans voted overwhelmingly in favor of it.

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES (KABC) — The California chapter of the NAACP is endorsing Proposition 19, the ballot initiative that seeks to make marijuana possession legal in the state.

The state’s chapter of the civil rights group said blacks are unfairly targeted for marijuana-related offenses.

“It is time for them to stop using my community to populate the prison system on such minor offenses as having a joint,” said Alice Huffman, president of the California chapter of the NAACP.

Huffman said because of that inequity, her organization is supporting Prop. 19.

That declaration is not sitting well with leaders of the African American community. Some say it unfairly portrays blacks as heavy marijuana users.

“Marijuana is the drug of choice for every stoner in the valley,” said Joe Hicks, vice president of Community Advocates, a civil rights think tank in Los Angeles.

He criticizes the California chapter of the NAACP for making poor decisions. This latest endorsement, Hicks said, sends the wrong message to the African American community.

“If you just did a random poll of black folks on the street and said, are these the things that you would like to see this organization address itself to, I don’t think you would see the decriminalization of marijuana anywhere in the list of 100 things,” Hicks said.

On the streets, there was little support for the NAACP’s decision.

“I think they should leave it alone,” said B.J. Hill. “It’s not their problem.”

Michael Murrel said that if the law passed, his children might be more influenced to use marijuana.

“I have two children. I wouldn’t want them to be exposed to the marijuana or being exposed that they can easily have access to it,” Murrell said.

The NAACP’s endorsement of Prop. 19 doesn’t necessarily guarantee it any votes.

While the NAACP stood against Prop. 8, the same sex marriage band, African Americans voted overwhelmingly in favor of it.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Saskatchewan Licensed pot grower sees opportunities beyond medical marijuana

29 June, 23:15, by admin Tags: , ,

SASKATOON – A reputation of any kind, even for a business, is hard to shake.

And when your company is the only federally licensed medical marijuana producer in Canada, that’s the first thing people think of when they hear the company’s name, says Brent Zettl, the company’s president and CEO.

But providing cannabis to patients authorized by Health Canada isn’t the Saskatoon-based company’s only focus, even if sales of the CanniMed herbal treatment account for between 60 and 65 per cent of its revenue, Zettl says.

“It’s kind of like our gateway drug, if I can use that term,” he says in an interview. “It’s our gateway drug to these other compounds that we’re planning to have produced in plants.”

For nearly 10 years, PPS has been producing medical marijuana on a contract basis for the federal government. Originally grown in the deep depths of a decommissioned mine in Flin Flon, Man. – known unofficially as the Ganja Mine – PPS moved its legal hydroponic pot operation out of the town on the Saskatchewan border when the contract with the mine’s owner ended last summer.

PPS is still growing the marijuana for the government, but the location of the operation must remain confidential under federal regulations, Zettl says.

Rumour has it the cannabis crop is being grown somewhere in Saskatchewan, a theory Zettl cannot comment on. He can say only that the operation is somewhere in Canada.

“North of the 49th and in between the Atlantic and the Pacific and Arctic oceans, that’s where it is,” he says with a smile.

Although the high-profile, legal and still-controversial practice of growing medical marijuana is what PPS is best known for, Zettl hopes the distinction will change over time.

“I think a lot of people forget this is a contract we bid on,” he says. “But we had a bigger purpose in mind. . . . Although it’s our reputation at this point, we’re trying to change that.”

The company, along with the Plant Biotechnology Institute, has designed a plant to produce a therapeutic enzyme known as adenosine deaminase, or ADA. The enzyme, Zettl explains, is part of the body’s immune system and is deficient in people with severe combined immunodeficiency disease (SCIDS), a condition often referred to as bubble-boy syndrome.

People with the disease must undergo enzyme-replacement therapy, Zettl says, and at the moment, most of the ADA used in the treatment is purified from cow spleens.

PPS’s ADA takes the animal out of the equation.

“We’ve successfully designed a plant to make that very same enzyme – except a human form of it – in the plant,” he says. “Now we’re at a point where we’re just purifying it enough to see if we can get it to clinical trial.”

The hope is to one day turn the enzyme into medicine for SCIDS patients, Zettl says, adding PPS is working on isolating three other enzymes using the plant system.

“It’s still a form of agriculture, but it’s again where that convergence of pharmacy and agriculture are combining to produce more effective medicines,” he says

The cannabis side of the business, he adds, has helped PPS move forward with its therapeutic enzyme studies, with growing conditions, industry standards and pharmaceutical credibility supporting its scientific work.

Zettl can see the enzyme development becoming a much more significant part of the company’s business plan.

“I think the market potential for Prairie Plants extends far beyond medical marijuana into these other areas. We think there’s much larger potential than that,” he says.

Meanwhile, the company’s environmental division, which helps mining companies reclaim work sites, continues to operate. So too does PPS’s bio products division – the segment that started the business back in 1988 – which sells fruit plants and seed potatoes to farmers.

On the company’s mission to “improve” its reputation, Zettl concludes the enzyme work will help PPS both grow its revenues and create a new identity. At the same time, he says, the medical marijuana side of the company’s business isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

“We’re on a mission to produce these other higher-value enzymes in plants,” he says. “It doesn’t mean that we’re going to ignore the other side at all.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

California Grand Jury says government could benefit from legal pot: County could see $7.5 million gain from new taxes and decreased costs

29 June, 23:14, by admin Tags: , ,

SANTA CRUZ – Local governments could cash in on legal pot to the tune of $7.5 million, a new Santa Cruz County Grand Jury report concludes.

The analysis of the financial impact of Proposition 19, a measure on the Nov. 2 statewide ballot, which seeks to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, is one of several reports released Tuesday by the Grand Jury – and no doubt the most unusual.

As is typical, the Grand Jury spent the past year studying various government agencies, and in its final report raises issues and makes recommendations for the studied programs and groups, including the County Jail, the public defender’s contract, a drug treatment website and the Watsonville Personnel Commission, as well as for public libraries and the Lompico Water District, sections that were previously released.

But the pot report aimed to scrutinize the finances without weighing in on the issue.

“At the end of the day it’s up to the voters,” said Patrick Henderson, who chaired the marijuana committee. “We didn’t look into the morality of it, just the dollars and cents impact on Santa Cruz.”

The report, which opens with a light-hearted preamble titled “Getting the Dope on Dope: The Grand Jury Attempts to Clear the Smoke in the Joint from the Numbers,” derives some of its data from statewide estimates of marijuana use and enforcement costs. It also looked at local crime statistics.

Santa Cruz Police spokesman Zach Friend questioned one piece of data.

He said department figures from 2008 show 315 adult arrests/citations, while the Grand Jury report says there were 724. Friend said adults are the “overwhelming” majority when it comes to arrests and citations for marijuana.

Henderson said all the numbers came from the agencies themselves.

“If the data’s wrong, it’s because they gave us the wrong data,” he said.

The report assumes pot would cost $100 an ounce, that 19 million ounces would be sold statewide, and that the county would impose a $50-per-ounce tax. Under that scenario the county would collect $129,200 in sales taxes and $6.46 million from its pot tax.

The county also would lose about $400,000 in fines, seized property and enforcement grants, but would save $1.36 million in arrest, prosecution and incarceration costs, the report says.

What’s unknown, Henderson said, are the potential costs of legalizing the drug, lost productivity and addiction treatment, for example.

Supervisor Tony Campos, who is serving as board chair, hasn’t taken a position on Proposition 19, but he said he’s seen a huge change in attitudes about marijuana, even among some in law enforcement, during his 12 years in office. His “gut feeling” is that the measure will pass. If it does, he’s willing to tax sales.

“We sure could use it … to help our county pay for law enforcement, mental health services, health care for our elderly, to make sure there’s child care, and probably No. 1, to make sure our schools have money,” he said.

Santa Cruz Mayor Mike Rotkin, who favors legalizing pot with “reasonable regulation,” said his city can’t go it alone, but if state voters approve the measure, “it would be a good thing.” Marijuana is not more dangerous than alcohol, he said, and much of the problem revolves around its status as an illegal substance, violent turf wars, for example.

“We certainly would tax the hell out of it,” Rotkin said. “Certainly, it’s not a necessity. It’s a luxury.”

2010 Grand JURY REPORT

Watsonville Personnel Commission

The fairness of an Aug. 20 hearing was questioned after the department head defending against an employee complaint attended a dinner with commissioners beforehand. The jury concluded that the hearing was fair, commended the commission for its process, but said the dinner, while legal, could have resulted in the appearance of bias, and recommended limiting future dinners to commissioners, their legal counsel and recording secretary.

RecoveryWave.com

The jury commended county health officials for a website that provides information about recovery and addiction treatment programs, but said accuracy of information should be verified and updated, and a disclaimer should be more prominent to avoid the appearance of official endorsement of private services.

Public Defender’s Contract

The jury recommended the county make its contract with a private law firm for public defenders services more transparent by adding an audit clause and consider opening the contract to a competitive bidding process. The same firm has provided legal representation for indigent defendants in the county for 35 years and the jury noted that services have been satisfactory. This year’s contract costs the county more than $5.2 million.

For details, visit www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/grandjury/

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Before it’s law, medical-marijuana bill already triggering challenges

24 May, 02:47, by admin Tags: , ,

Even before Gov. Bill Ritter has signed into law new rules for Colorado’s medical-marijuana industry, the next moves in the ongoing chess match of cannabis regulation and adaptation are already taking shape.

Last week, a team of attorneys who specialize in medical-marijuana cases met with several dozen potential plaintiffs in preparing a lawsuit to challenge the rules as unconstitutionally restrictive.

At the other end of the spectrum, prosecutors and others who believe the legislature overstepped its authority in liberalizing marijuana regulations were pondering their legal options.

City councils that have been unreceptive to medical-marijuana dispensaries began taking steps to formally ban them — something the new rules would allow them to do.

Meanwhile, dispensary owners and independent marijuana growers engaged in a mad scramble for dance partners to comply with the rules’ requirement that dispensaries grow at least 70 percent of the marijuana they sell.

The rules — spelled out in House Bill 1284 and Senate Bill 109 — require dispensaries to be licensed at the state and local levels.

Dispensary owners must pass a criminal-background check and have lived in the state for two years, with some exceptions. Local governments or voters can ban dispensaries but not small-scale caregivers, who could serve no more than five medical-marijuana patients.

Lawyer and medical-marijuana advocate Jessica Corry said the five-patient caregiver limit, the residency requirement for dispensary owners and the option for local dispensary bans are “an incredible slap in the face to the (state) constitution.”

Corry is one of the attorneys who have been meeting with medical-marijuana patients and dispensary owners to put together a lawsuit challenging the rules.

If that lawsuit materializes, it could have company in the courts from a challenge that questions whether dispensaries are even legal.

Adams County District Attorney Don Quick said dispensary opponents may look at tacking on a counterclaim to any lawsuit that dispensary advocates file.

Quick said Amendment 20, the voter-approved measure that created the state’s medical-marijuana system, did not give lawmakers the authority to allow commercial dispensaries.

“This is (lawmakers) rebalancing the line the citizens approved in 2000, and they don’t have the right to do that,” Quick said.

Other cities act

A number of local governments have wasted no time in responding to the new rules.

In a study session last week, Greenwood Village’s City Council instructed city staffers to draft an ordinance banning dispensaries, said Ryan Greg ory, the assistant to the city manager.

Friday, Aurora’s City Council took the first step toward putting a ballot question banning dispensaries before voters in November.

Boulder County’s planning commission gave an OK to a set of regulations governing where dispensaries and marijuana-growing facilities could locate in the county.

The frenzy of moves has been dizzying to dispensary owners, who have until July 1 to apply for a local license and Sept. 1 to prove they are growing 70 percent of the marijuana they sell.

Laurel Alterman, the owner of AlterMeds in Louisville, said the uncertain local regulations have made it nearly impossible to know if the plans she is making now to comply with state rules will hold up in a few months.

“We are really, really scrambling right now,” she said. “There are so many layers to this.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

California Debt Crisis Opens the Door for Legal Marijuana – Californians to vote on legal marijuana rules

27 March, 18:13, by admin Tags: , , ,

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — It’s official: Californians will decide whether legal marijuana should be used to plug the state’s $20 billion budget gap.

OAKLAND, Calif.: A medical marijuana activist holds a sign during a rally on Jan. 4, 2010.

California residents are expected to vote this year on whether legalization should be approved to raise nearly $1.4 billion in state revenue. That’s based on an estimate from the State Board of Equalization, a tax administration agency.

“It would be another source of revenue for the state,” said Anita Gore, spokeswoman for the board. The board has not issued an opinion on legalization as a means of easing the state’s budget crisis, she added.

California Secretary Debra Brown confirmed on Wednesday that enough signatures had been collected to put AB 390, a marijuana legalization bill, on the ballot for Nov. 2. A press release from the secretary said that legalization proponents submitted 694,248 petition signatures for the bill, easily surpassing the required 433,791.

“The momentum for reform has grown exponentially since we introduced the bill last year,” said Quitin Mecke, spokesman for Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, the lead sponsor of the bill. “We’re excited about the prospect to reform drug laws again.”

Mecke noted that California was the first state to pass legislation allowing medicinal marijuana, 14 years ago.

Unlike prior legislation that has passed in California and other states, this form of legalization is not restricted to medicinal use of marijuana. The bill proposes that marijuana be regulated and taxed in a similar way to alcohol.

According to the bill, people would have to be 21 years or older “to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use.” Californians would not be permitted to use the drug in public or within the presence of minors, and would not be allowed to possess it on school grounds.

Most importantly, as far as the budget gap is concerned, the bill stipulates that the drug would be subject to a sales tax. An additional retail fee of $50 would be imposed on every ounce that’s sold.

The State Board of Equalization estimates that the state could raise $1.382 billion in annual tax revenues from legal marijuana. The figure is based on estimated revenue of $990 million from the retail fees and $392 million from sales taxes.

“With the state in the midst of an historic economic crisis, the move towards regulating and taxing marijuana is simply common sense,” Ammiano said in a press release when he first proposed the bill last year.

Also, Mecke said that legalization could prompt the state to “reallocate” more than $300 million in law enforcement spending away from non-violent drug activity to address violent crimes.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Medical Marijuana Legal in 14 States – See list below

14 February, 14:20, by admin Tags: , ,

Article corrected – its 14 states now – we added New Jersey. For a convenient chart check out:
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/viewresource.asp?resourceID=000881

Progress seems to be being made in the USA. Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington and Vermont are states where you can legally use marijuana as prescribed by a doctor. This is great news for many people suffering from illnesses where marijuana can help. There is still a long way to go but the future is looking brighter for the USA.

The safest delivery method is to use a vaporizor. This is a 100% smokeless system whereby you heat the marijuana to a specific temperature that releases the THC. This eliminates the hacking and coughing normally associated with marijuana, and also eliminates the risk of chronic bronchitis among other smoke related illnesses that can occur.

The safest way to get the marijuana is to grow it yourself. Great progress has been made with home-growing operations. We suggest you take a look at the Aero Garden. The Aero Garden is a home hydroponic system used by 250,000 people worldwide to grow herbs, vegtables and flowers. The Aero Garden Pro 200 has an adjustable light mast that can extend up to 2 feet. This is the way things are going so users can save money and grow at home. Every 10 weeks you should be able to harvest enough to last you through to another 10 weeks, depending on how much you’re using.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Medical marijuana is legal in 14 states; why not New York?

03 February, 23:11, by admin Tags: , ,

It makes no sense whatsoever to treat cancer patients and other chronically ill folks as criminals for trying to ease their debilitating pain or nausea.

But that’s just what New York has been doing by refusing to allow its sickest residents to use marijuana under a doctor’s supervision. For many, prescription painkillers or other medicines fail to help. Only marijuana is effective. Denying them that level of comfort is nothing less than cruel.

Fourteen states have legalized medical marijuana use for qualified patients since 1996. The most recent, on Jan. 18, was New Jersey; that state’s law takes effect in six months.

In New York, a bill in the Legislature would bring the state in line with the other 14. But lawmakers have considered seven versions of the current legislation since the 1997-98 session. In 2007-08, the proposal died in the Senate, then controlled by Republicans. The fate of this year’s bill remains to be seen.

The bill is modeled after Rhode Island’s medical marijuana law, though there are some differences. For example, patients in Rhode Island can legally possess 2.5 ounces of marijuana and 12 marijuana plants that must be stored indoors. New York’s bill also allows 2.5 ounces but leaves out plants — an approach that appears to be better suited to prevent the wrong people from getting their hands on the controlled substance.

Both states would allow children to use medical marijuana, but Rhode Island’s law seems to afford more protection for sick kids. In Rhode Island, a medical practitioner must explain the potential risks and benefits of marijuana to the child and to a parent or guardian. The parent or guardian also must consent in writing to allow the child’s medical use of marijuana, serve as one of the child’s primary caregivers and control the acquisition, dosage and frequency of the youngster’s marijuana use.

New York’s bill requires only that a parent, guardian or someone designated by the parent or guardian be the caregiver. There is no informed consent clause in the bill, although the medical practitioner must give a copy of his or her certification for marijuana use to the patient. The bill needs some retooling to better inform kids and their parents of what they’re getting into.

In the meantime, marijuana use and possession remain illegal for everyone in New York. Possessing 2.5 ounces, as the bill would allow patients to do, is a misdemeanor punishable by a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

Seriously ill people, for whom marijuana is the only thing that will relieve their symptoms, have an unenviable choice: break the law or continue to suffer.

It’s time for lawmakers to show some compassion by making medical marijuana legal.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Poll by Coloradans for Medical Marijuana Regulation Finds Overwhelming Support for Licensed Dispensaries

18 January, 16:25, by admin Tags: , ,

Coloradans for Medical Marijuana Regulation, a coalition of medical marijuana patients and providers supporting responsible regulation of medical marijuana, today released a statewide poll illustrating that Colorado voters overwhelmingly favor regulating state-licensed dispensaries to serve persons who are suffering from debilitating medical conditions.

By a margin of two-to-one, 64 percent of voters said they would approve proposals that would establish state-licensed marijuana dispensaries to cultivate and provide marijuana to patients with doctors’ recommendations. Just 32 percent said they would reject it.

“This is a powerful endorsement by Coloradans that medical marijuana dispensaries are valid businesses that need to be regulated in order to protect patients and providers,” said Matt Brown, Executive Director of Coloradans for Medical Marijuana Regulation. “As with any other industry, it is now critical that we develop tax and fee structures and put the appropriate regulations in place to ensure these businesses can responsibly serve the needs of their patients and the community.”

Coloradans for Medical Marijuana Regulation formed earlier this year to provide a leading voice for the emerging medical marijuana business community. The coalition supports the creation of reasonable regulations that protect patient choice and incorporate best practices within existing regulatory structures.

“Our campaign goal is to work with all parties to ensure safe, responsible access to and use of medical marijuana,” said Brown. “Colorado has the opportunity to take the lead and set the standard for what a responsible medical marijuana industry should look like.”

The telephone survey of 500 Colorado voters who are likely to participate in the 2010 general election was conducted November 6-9, 2009, using a statistically valid random sample drawn from a current list of registered voters.(i)

Other survey results found wide support for a state-licensed dispensary system within every major demographic group:

– A total of 64 percent of both men and women said they would support the dispensary system model.

– A majority of registered Republicans (53%), Independents (64%) and Democrats (75%), supported the proposed dispensary system.

– A majority of people within every age group backed the proposal, with the highest levels of support among the over 55 (64%) and under 35 (71%) age groups.

– White voters (65%) supported the proposal at a slightly higher rate than non-white voters (61%).

– Metro Denver was the most supportive area in the state (69%), along with Denver (68%) and the South Front Range (64%). Fifty-two percent of voters in the Western Slope were supportive.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Medical marijuana dispensary begs city to lay off

During what is traditionally a short ceremonial meeting to install Walnut Creek’s newest mayor, supporters of the city’s first medical marijuana dispensary decided to protest the city’s ongoing legal battle against it.

Members of the C3 Collective, working from a storefront on Oakland Boulevard to provide medical marijuana to its members, asked Tuesday night that the city ease up on its efforts to close the dispensary, which opened last summer.

The nonprofit is hit with $500 in zoning violation fines every day it’s open.

“By prosecuting this facility, you are in turn inhibiting and neglecting community growth,” said Brian Hyman, executive director and CEO of C3. “I try and meet your fine requests. It’s not feasible every day.”

Walnut Creek officials say the dispensary’s operation is prohibited because marijuana is illegal under federal law. According to an injunction filed in Contra Costa County Superior Court on Nov. 9, the collective is also in violation of Walnut Creek zoning laws. A dispensary, like a pharmacy, is prohibited where the collective operates.

The city sued the collective in October in an effort to shut down the dispensary; the first hearing in that case is in March. The city filed the injunction hoping to force C3 to close even sooner, but the injunction hearing isn’t until Feb. 25.

Supporters of the collective urged the council Tuesday to hold off the court case and allow patients to go to C3 until the council makes a decision about allowing and regulating dispensaries in Walnut Creek. City staff members are currently studying the issue.

Gary Skrel, who a half-hour later turned over reins as mayor to Sue Rainey, told the group that Tuesday’s meeting was unlike others, more of a celebration for the mayor’s appointment. He asked if they wanted to proceed anyway and speak, and seven chose to.

Bruce Reckel told the council he needs medical marijuana to function.

“The medication I receive there “… allows me to go to functions like this,” he said. “I hope that you would support the collective and support us by ending this lawsuit.”

Scot Candell, attorney for the collective, said Tuesday the city has spent $20,000 to $30,000 on the suit.

“The city is suing the collective. The collective is made up of patients, so basically the city is suing the patients,” Candell said. “I know this is (a) ceremonial (meeting) and everyone will go and have cocktails and everyone will live happily ever after, but hopefully once we start a new session this will be an issue that you can consider.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Coalition Releases Guidelines for Responsible Regulation of Medical Marijuana Businesse

13 January, 20:16, by admin Tags: ,

Coloradans for Medical Marijuana Regulation, a coalition of medical marijuana patients, providers and growers supporting responsible regulation of medical marijuana, today released proposed guidelines for regulating medical marijuana dispensary businesses that would protect the commercial enterprises and their patients, and promote public safety.

The coalition’s guidelines support medical marijuana business regulations that set uniform state standards and provide for local control to ensure public input. The guidelines also incorporate best practices within existing regulatory structures and provide state and local governments with adequate taxes and fees.

“Both citizens and lawmakers want reasonable regulations that provide safe, responsible access to and use of medical marijuana,” said Matt Brown, executive director of Coloradans for Medical Marijuana Regulation. “Colorado has a real opportunity to be a model for meaningful medical marijuana regulation — protecting the public and ensuring that dispensary businesses can continue to provide needed services to their patients.”

The Need for Responsible Regulation:

In 2000, Colorado voters passed Amendment 20, a constitutional amendment authorizing the use of medical marijuana by persons who are suffering from debilitating medical conditions. The amendment also creates exemptions to Colorado criminal law for medical marijuana patients and their primary care-givers. One of the areas of Amendment 20 needing further clarity is the role of medical marijuana dispensaries. Legislation to regulate the medical marijuana dispensary industry is expected to be introduced during the 2010 session of the Colorado General Assembly.

Key tenants of reasonable regulation include:

– Working within existing regulatory structures: There is no need to create a whole new regulatory structure; existing statutes and regulations for other businesses provide a starting point for medical marijuana regulations.

– Maintaining crucial medical oversight: Oversight of doctors should stay where it is today — at the Medical Board; standards should be set for future licensed medical marijuana healthcare training; and the state should also have enforcement authority to prevent unauthorized prescriptions.

– Avoiding “one-size-fits-all” regulation: Lawmakers need to accommodate non-commercial, as well as commercial-sized, dispensaries and growers, applying different levels of regulation based on magnitude of operations.

– Generating appropriate taxes and fees: Regulations should authorize sales tax payment at both the state and local levels — as well as impose specific, commercially reasonable fees to offset possible increased costs of government for local law enforcement, health inspectors, etc.

– Setting state standards and preserving local control: Statewide uniformity is a critical component of effective regulation, but Coloradans for Medical Marijuana Regulation understands that local control, including opportunities for public input in zoning and siting processes, is also an important element.

– Ensuring public safety: Guarantee public safety though the non-adjacency of licensed dispensaries and growers to schools and other facilities; and enabling law enforcement officials to maintain focus on illegal activities outside of marijuana with responsible regulations.

A recent poll showed that Colorado voters overwhelmingly favor establishing state-licensed marijuana dispensaries for persons who are suffering from debilitating medical conditions. By a margin of 2-to-1, 64 percent of voters said they would approve proposals that would establish state-licensed marijuana dispensaries to cultivate and provide marijuana to patients with doctors’ recommendations.

“From Iraq veterans, to people with cancer and AIDS, to Crohn’s disease patients, we serve a community of people that benefits greatly from medical marijuana,” said Brown. “We want to ensure that the businesses that offer this legitimate and effective treatment can be contributing, tax-paying, regulated members of the business community.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Now experts say cannabis should be legal

01 January, 09:49, by admin Tags: ,

CANNABIS should be legalised and taxed, an influential Scottish think tank recommended yesterday, just weeks after the Government hardened its attitude towards the drug, reclassifying it as a class B substance.

The Scottish Futures Forum yesterday published a report on drugs and alcohol in Scotland, saying one way to tackle the problem of addiction to harder drugs was to tax and regulate cannabis.

Forum chairman Frank Pignatelli said studies of San FrancADVERTISEMENTisco, where cannabis is illegal, and the Netherlands, where it is decriminalised, showed that the idea is worth considering because it breaks the link with class A drugs. In the Netherlands, only 17 per cent of cannabis sellers were also selling drugs such as crack, cocaine and heroin, while in San Francisco it was more than 50 per cent.

The idea was one of several aimed at halving drug addiction in Scotland by 2025.

This included introducing shooting galleries, where heroin addicts can go and take drugs in supervised surroundings, as revealed in yesterday’s Scotsman.

The forum’s vice-chairman, Tom Wood, former deputy chief constable of Lothian and Borders, said that there are “no easy options” and insisted that a different and sometimes uncomfortable approach was needed to tackle Scotland’s drug problems.

He said: “Where we are now is living in a country where there is one of the highest prevalences for drugs.

“We’re living in a country where we have the highest drug death rate, we’re living in a country which has one of the highest hep C rates in Europe. So we’re hardly in a good place now. A lot of the things we’ve done in the past clearly have not worked and so we have to move, and I think we are moving in the right direction, but we have to move quite radically.”

Just last month the Home Office announced it was reclassifying cannabis to class B, reversing a decision in 2004 to lower it to class C.

The decision was made because stronger forms of cannabis such as skunk are becoming more readily available and there is new evidence linking the drug to psychiatric problems.

Both the Home Office and the Scottish Government have made it clear that they do not support the idea of legalisation.

The community safety minister Fergus Ewing, who last week unveiled a new drugs strategy, welcomed upgrading cannabis to class B.

There were two failed efforts to open cannabis cafés in Edinburgh. Scottish Socialist Party member Kevin Williamson almost bankrupted himself trying to open one in Haymarket and Paul Stewart was forced to quit for Amsterdam after being fined for selling cannabis at his café Purple Haze in Leith.

The forum’s suggestion has been welcomed by the Legalise Cannabis Alliance UK, which claimed Scotland is leading the way on the issue.

Don Barnard, a spokesman, said: “The Scots seem to have been taking a more mature view and I hope the recommendation is taken seriously.”

The idea has also been backed by the Greens. Patrick Harvie, MSP, said: “The current approach to criminalising drug users has been one of the most obvious failures of social policy over the last 50 years, and the Futures Forum should be thanked for their efforts to move the debate on. We broadly welcome their report.”

But the Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie, who persuaded the SNP to produce a drugs strategy as part of a deal on supporting its budget, described the forum’s report as “flawed”.

She added: “The taxing and regulation of cannabis is akin to legalisation. This will not decrease use of this extremely harmful substance. Fortunately the long-term consequences of cannabis usage are now universally acknowledged and there is a consensus at Westminster that the damaging downgrading of cannabis to a class C substance should be reversed.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Holland and the limits of tolerance

31 December, 22:47, by admin Tags:

The Dutch are going through an identity crisis. There is a growing view that liberty to choose has become a licence to do as you please, a free-for-all in which the baleful consequences include a rise in drug-related crime and the trafficking of prostitutes from eastern Europe.

Once among the most strait-laced of northern European nations, Holland has for the past 40 years been a byword for post-1960s tolerance. It embraced the permissiveness of that era with an enthusiasm born less of a desire for excess than of a strong belief in personal freedom. There was a laudable absence of hypocrisy in Dutch attitudes. As any visitor to Amsterdam can testify, the consequences of this latitude were in full view, with prostitutes in windows and cannabis smokers openly using designated cafés. Holland’s laws on euthanasia, unique in the world, tap into the same philosophical seam that has a direct line back to the 18th-century Enlightenment and also to its mercantilist history.

However, the Dutch are now going through an identity crisis. There is a growing view that liberty to choose has become a licence to do as you please, a free-for-all in which the baleful consequences include a rise in drug-related crime and the trafficking of prostitutes from eastern Europe.

The immigration of large numbers of Muslims, who object to the perceived degeneracy, has triggered a debate among the Dutch over what sort of society they wish to be. There are moves to clean up the more tawdry manifestations of past permissiveness, with Amsterdam planning fewer prostitution windows and fewer cannabis shops. Other cities will get rid of them entirely. Political parties in Holland are all responding to the public mood and edging away from the moral leniency of the past. One Dutch academic said: “There is a feeling that our tolerance is the principal cause of many of the problems we experience now. The debate is about where liberty and tolerance should end and where order should begin.”

Such a discussion is commendable. It would be nice to think it could take place here.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Inside Holland’s “Half Baked” Pot Policy

30 December, 20:45, by admin Tags: , ,

When it comes to the debate over legalizing marijuana, even the president of the United States has a hard time keeping a straight face.

After legalization questions got high ratings in an online town hall in March, Mr. Obama couldn’t suppress a grin and a joke about what the popularity of the topic “says about the online audience.” To the disappointment, if not the surprise, of marijuana advocates, he went on to say that he doesn’t think legalizing and taxing marijuana “is a good strategy to grow our economy.”

Yet there are many Americans – and public officials – who are taking the issue more seriously. In a CBS News poll released Monday, 41 percent of Americans said they favor marijuana legalization. Other polls put that figure as high as 52 percent.

Meanwhile, Reps. Barney Frank and Ron Paul co-authored a bill to end federal penalties for possession of small amounts of pot. Sen. Jim Webb has put forth legislation to create a commission examining drug policy and problems in the criminal justice system.

In California, Assemblyman Tom Ammiano introduced a bill to legalize recreational use of the drug in order to generate desperately-needed tax revenue – and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says he is open to a debate over doing just that.

These are significant steps for American politicians, who have long been loath to take on drug legalization for fear of being labeled soft on crime. But they mark little more than an early effort to prompt discussion around the issue.

For a more substantive look at how politicians are grappling with decriminalization, one must cross the Atlantic and take a look at Holland, where casual marijuana use has been de facto legal since 1976.

Where Pot Is Both Legal And Illegal:

Despite what the typical backpack-toting college student might think, pot exists in something of a legal netherworld even in Amsterdam. While coffee shops in some areas of the country can sell marijuana without risk of punishment, proprietors cannot legally obtain the product for sale. And possession and production are technically misdemeanors that can prompt a fine.

“The Dutch model is a little half baked,” quips Tim Boekhout van Solinge, a drug policy expert at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands. “The supply side is still illegal, the production is illegal.”

Experts on both sides of the issue lament the ambiguity of marijuana policy not just in Holland but also in places like California, where there are not clear rules about the distribution of medical marijuana.

Dutch drug policy is grounded in the separation of soft drugs like marijuana from harder drugs like cocaine and heroin. “The policy has evolved slowly over time,” said Craig Reinerman, a sociology professor and drug policy expect at the University of California Santa Cruz. “At first they had a national commission, much like the Nixon administration had. And their national commission said, ‘look, all drugs have risks, even legal ones. Some are acceptable, and some are just too high.’”

Because history suggested people would use marijuana regardless of the limits imposed by the government, the Dutch tried to manage use as part of an attempt to keep transactions as safe as possible. (They have a similar philosophy when it comes to prostitution).

Dutch law enforcement will not go after coffee shops that sell small amounts of marijuana (up to five grams) to people over the age of 18, though the coffee shops can only operate if the local municipality allows it. The coffee shops can only keep 500 grams of marijuana onsite at any one time, can’t advertize, can’t sell alcohol or hard drugs and can be shut down if they become a nuisance to the neighborhood. Customers are permitted to consume the drug on the premises or at their home.

WATCH: Dutch Doctor Frederick Polak talks to CBSNews.com about the relationship between repression and use.

WATCH: An American cannabis tour guide talks to CBSNews.com about drug tourism in Amsterdam.

In addition, if not for international treaties designed to restrict supply, the Dutch may well have crafted a policy in which the supply side is (at the very least) de facto legal as well, according to Boekhout van Solinge. In the current system the state can only generate tax revenue indirectly, via the incomes of those who run the coffee shops. And many proprietors have little choice but to engage in somewhat shadowy transactions in order to secure the product.

“The fact that production and supply are still left in the underground certainly creates some problems,” said Bruce Mirken at the Marijuana Policy Project.

Over the years, Dutch policy has prompted serious grousing from neighbors. In the 1990s, French president Jacques Chirac suggested the country’s position was weakening Europe-wide efforts to combat drug use. One of his allies in the legislature went so far as to dub Holland a “narco-state.” Holland has long fought illegal drug trafficking, yet remains a significant producer of a number of drugs and a key entry point for narcotics into Europe.

Yet as defenders of the Dutch policy are all too happy to point out, the Dutch actually smoke less pot than many of their neighbors – the French included. According to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 22.6 percent of Dutch citizens between ages 15 and 64 reported having used cannabis in their lifetime. In France, the percentage in that age group who reported using the drug was nearly four points higher – 26.2 percent.

Among Spaniards the lifetime usage rate for this age group is even higher – 28.6 percent – while among Italians it sits at a relatively robust 29.3 percent. In the United Kingdom, where the sample included 16 through 59 year olds, the percentage who said they had used cannabis was above 30 percent.

For the record, the country with the most liberal drug policy in Europe is actually Portugal – which happens to have the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in the entire European Union. (But that’s a different story.)

In the United States, meanwhile, more than 40 percent of people 18 and older have used marijuana or hashish. America boasts one of the highest pot usage rates in the world.

“If you look at the data, it really dispels any notion that allowing adults to possess marijuana creates a nation of potheads,” Merkin said.
Dutch public opinion over the nation’s drug policy has long been split, with polls usually suggesting that a slim majority favor the coffee shop-based system. In recent years, however, the country has moved to become more restrictive, thanks in large part to resentment over the impact of so-called “drug tourists,” whose partying has long angered locals.

In 2007, the Netherlands banned the use of psychedelic mushrooms (which had essentially been treated as soft drugs) after a drug-related suicide, and several municipalities have moved to close coffee shops to discourage crime and drug tourism. The U.S. Department Of Justice says that 81 percent of the country’s municipalities did not allow coffee shops as far back as 2000. One Dutch professor predicts there will be no more coffee shops in Holland by 2010, thanks in large part to anger over drug tourists.

One of the key debates around pot policy in Holland, the U.S. and elsewhere centers on the question of destigmatization – whether or not giving the drug the imprimatur of legality will drive up usage rates. Joel W. Hay, a Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Economics & Policy at the University Of Southern California and an opponent of marijuana legalization, says yes.

“A lot of people are now getting the clear social signal that pot is not that great because it is illegal” in the United States, he said. “It certainly doesn’t deter use, but it probably deters a substantial amount, and that’s for the good.”

But Reinerman argues that destigmatization is a “tricky question.”

“I interviewed a Dutch parent once and asked about this, and he told me, ‘my son will smoke a little pot now and then, but mostly it doesn’t occur to him to do that. There’s no allure of the forbidden fruit,’” he said.

Reinerman allows that “in the first six months or a year or two [after legalization] there might be an increase” in marijuana use, but says the destigmitization that would come with legalization ultimately works both ways. “Availability is not destiny,” he argues.

Peter Reuter, a University of Maryland professor of criminology, believes that any increase in usage rates if marijuana were decriminalized would be modest. He points to the fact that Dutch marijuana users tend to give up the drug at the same time as Americans do – in their 20s.

“I’m reasonably confident that if we followed the Dutch model we would not see a big uptick in usage,” he said.

That could depend, however, on whether the United States could successfully follow one aspect of the Dutch policy that both legalization advocates and opponents laud: its ban on advertising. Hay notes that under a legalization policy business interests would be incentivized to try to drive up demand.

In the United States, he argues, a policy that bans advertising on legal marijuana would raise questions of Constitutionality. (Congress and the Obama administration did recently pass legislation more strictly limiting tobacco advertising.)

“I think it would be tightly contested whether restrictions could be put on it, because the adverse health effects are not that great,” said Reuter. “Potential producers could bring suit.”

These sorts of complex questions are being seriously considered in some American circles for the first time since the 1970s. The federal government, however, is not exactly joining the conversation. Though new drug czar Gil Kerlikowske has been lauded for his emphasis of treatment over incarceration – and for abandoning the phrase “war on drugs” – he recently told Rolling Stone that legalization is not something worth considering “under any circumstances.”

Hay believes there is simply no good reason to abandon the status quo and emulate the Dutch policy, let alone move to full legalization.

“We have a philosophical question if potheads should be able to [use marijuana], and they sort of already can,” he said. “It’s not really that illegal right now. And I think having society saying this is something you shouldn’t do, but we don’t throw the book at you when you do it, is sort of a socially optimal policy.”

But while medical marijuana use has been decriminalized in some areas of the country, police still arrest between 750,000 and 900,000 people per year on marijuana-related charges, the vast majority for possession.

“It just should be accepted that cannabis is consumed by hundreds of millions of people around the world,” said Boekhout van Solinge. “When governments arrest people, it hasn’t stopped people from consuming cannabis.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Obama Deflects Question on Legalizing Drugs, Prostitution

30 December, 12:41, by admin Tags:

When President Obama told attendees at his economic town hall today that he only had time to take three questions, he probably did not expect the first question to be about legalizing drugs and prostitution.

He ultimately responded to four questions from the crowd at Lehigh Carbon Community College in Schnecksville, Penn. but took his time to steer the initial inquiry from a discussion about drugs to the future of the U.S. economy, emphasizing that manufacturing will play a less significant role in the nation. The town hall was part of Mr. Obama’s tour of cities around the country in which he will discuss the economy.

“I appreciate the boldness of your question,” Mr. Obama said to laughter after a young man asked him if he would consider legalizing drugs, prostitution, gambling or nonviolent crimes. “That will not be my job strategy.”

“First of all, part of what you’re supposed to do in college is question conventional wisdom,” the president continued. “You’re doing exactly what you’re supposed to be doing.”

CBSNews.com Special Report: Marijuana Nation

The rest of the nation, Mr. Obama went on to say, will have to rethink the shape of the nation’s economy.

“Manufacturing will never be as high of a percentage [of the economy] as it was in the 1950s,” he said, but the capacity for states to cash in on new sectors is “enormous.”

He called investments in clean energy technology a “triple win situation.”

“We can clean up our environment, we can free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil… and we can put people to work right now,” Mr. Obama said. “Those jobs can’t be shipped out. Those are jobs that have to be done right here in the United States of America.”

He added, as an example, “There’s no reason we shouldn’t have the corner on wind turbine technology.”

Obama Takes Jobs Message to Allentown
W.H. Declines to Say Which Obama Family Member Is Unemployed
At Town Hall, Obama Seeks to Stay on Message
Photo: President Obama in Allentown

The president also disputed that the ongoing health care debate has distracted his administration from working on rebuilding the economy. Small business owners cannot afford to see health care premiums continue to rise at the current rate, he said.

“We’ve been working on jobs the whole time,” he said. “Health care is part in parcel with where we need to be in the economy.”

Mr. Obama also said the government could assist in refurbishing the U.S. economy by increasing exports to regions like Asia and ratcheting up the focus on education to match the educational fervor of productive nations like South Korea.

He also said his administration hopes to pass financial regulation reforms by the beginning of next year and that he hopes to meet with bankers sometime this month on the issue of loosening up credit.

After kicking off the town hall with an unexpected question, Mr. Obama ended with a very personal question: A discharged soldier asked if the president could help him get the benefits he is owed by the Veterans Administration.

“You went straight to the top,” Mr. Obama said. “I suspsect somebody will be calling you on your cell phone in about two seconds.”

He said the government has a “solemn obligation” to take care of its soldiers and that veterans should be able to apply for benefits online.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Digg.com vote presses Schwarzenegger on legalizing marijuana

29 December, 22:37, by admin Tags: , , , ,

As more government officials choose to publicly answer questions submitted by Internet users, they’re encountering a new phenomenon: marijuana activists intent on forcing answers to the would-you-legalize-pot question.

In March, President Obama’s first virtual town hall took a detour when questions about legalizing marijuana were voted to the top of the “financial stability,” “jobs,” “budget,” and (of course) “green jobs” polls on WhiteHouse.gov

On Wednesday, it was California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, who was put on the spot. Digg.com users propelled a legalize-marijuana question to the No. 2 position (behind one asking about what he was thinking when photographed grimacing at President George W. Bush).

Earlier this month, Schwarzenegger said “it’s time for debate” about legalizing marijuana. Read on for an excerpt from the CNN interview.

Q: What is your stance on the legalization, cultivation, and regulation of marijuana in the state of California?

A: I like the law that we have in place. And I don’t believe in legalizing marijuana, but I’m always open for the debate because there are people that feel differently. And I said I’m always interested in debating any of these issues because there’s always different ways of looking at it. And I think it would be interesting to see the information that is available, if there’s any information available, of how well countries are doing that have legalized marijuana. But I don’t think that information is available, and I’d want us to see that.

But I believe in the law, the way the law is right now, and I think it’s worked very well for the state of California. And I think it would be a mistake to just go and legalize something that we don’t believe in just because it would produce an extra billion dollars in revenues. And I think we just have to learn how to live within our means rather than trying to do things we really don’t want to do.

Q: New polls actually show that more than half of Californians support legalizing marijuana. So would that sway your stance on it whatsoever in this open debate that you’re calling for? Would it sway your opinion?

A: Well, it could very well go on an initiative one day, where they ask the voters directly, that could very well be. And if the voters make that decision, that’s fine. But I think it is very important for us to make certain decisions not just because they would bring in some extra money, and I think this is why people have been talking about that in California, to go in that direction, and to start debating that issue. Because it would produce, as they say, $1.3 billion, $1.4 billion extra revenues.

Thanks to a 1996 ballot measure, medical marijuana is already legal under California law, though local officials have substantial discretion. Although that conflicts with federal law, the Obama administration has chosen not to target California medical marijuana dispensaries.

State legislator Tom Ammiano, a San Francisco Democrat, introduced a bill in February to legalize recreational marijuana. Bill AB 390 would license “commercial cultivators of marijuana” and establish a complicated web of regulations and tax rules they and retailers must follow.

It could raise over $1.2 billion a year in new tax revenues, assuming a $50-an-ounce tax, according to an analysis by California NORML, an organization working to reform the state’s marijuana laws.

A Field poll released on April 30 found that 56 percent of the state’s registered voters support legalizing marijuana and taxing its sale.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

“…Marijuana Legalization: the time is now” Gov: Arnold Schwarzenegger

29 December, 22:25, by admin Tags: , , , ,

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Decriminalization of Marijuana in Canada –Law 12

26 December, 22:18, by admin Tags: ,

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Marijuana Reform Activist Destroys Former DEA Head

22 December, 22:10, by admin Tags: , ,

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Medical marijuana may be on November 2010 Arizona state ballot

21 December, 12:11, by admin Tags: , ,

Arizona residents may be able to vote on medical marijuana once again. The November 2010 ballot initiative, sponsored by the Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project, recently reached 192,000 signatures, significantly more than the 150,000 required for placement.

If passed, the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act would allow seriously and terminally ill patients in Arizona who find relief from marijuana to use the drug with a doctor’s approval.

“There are thousands of patients that use marijuana under a doctor’s recommendation,” said Andrew Myers, the campaign manager for AMMPP. “We strongly believe that a patient should not go to jail because they are simply doing what their doctors told them to do.”

The initiative would permit patients and caregivers to purchase up to two-and-a-half ounces of usable marijuana from regulated clinics rather than the criminal market.

The regulated clinics, often known as dispensaries, will all operate as non-profit organizations. The initiative also would allow permitted patients or caregivers to cultivate their own marijuana for medical purposes if a regulated clinic is not located within 25 miles of the patient.

Arizona voters have passed medical marijuana initiatives in both 1996 and 1998. However, the 1996 act didn’t come to fruition because of a systematic error in the wording of the ballot, while the 1998 initiative was unable to pass because of conflicting federal laws.

Heather, a 29-year-old brain cancer patient and Arizona resident, said that smoking marijuana is the best way to cure her nausea from her chemotherapy. For legal reasons, Heather did not disclose her last name.

“The nausea medicine that my doctor prescribed just doesn’t work fast enough,” Heather said. “I would be suffering with horrible nausea from anywhere between 30 minutes to an hour.”

Heather was diagnosed with brain cancer in April 2007 when she began 30 radiation treatments coupled with chemotherapy. A relative first recommended trying marijuana to help relieve her nausea in August of the same year.

“When I smoked marijuana for the first time after my chemo appointment, the relief was instantaneous,” Heather said. “I automatically felt relief from my nausea; it was a comforting feeling. You don’t get the side effects when smoking marijuana that you do with the prescribed medicine.”

Dr. Sue Sisley, a private-practice physician and an assistant professor of inter-professional education at the University of Arizona and Arizona State University College of Medicine in Phoenix, believes that doctors should begin to become educated about the medical benefits of marijuana.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • HackerNews
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter