Archive for the ‘marijuana legalization’ category

How To Legalize Pot

May 22nd, 2013

THE first time I talked to Mark Kleiman, a drug policy expert at U.C.L.A., was in 2002, and he explained why legalization of marijuana was a bad idea.  Sure, he said, the government should remove penalties for possession, use and cultivation of small amounts.

He did not favor making outlaws of people for enjoying a drug that is less injurious than alcohol or tobacco.

But he worried that a robust commercial marketplace would inevitably lead to much more consumption.  You don’t have to be a prohibitionist to recognize that pot, especially in adolescents and very heavy users, can seriously mess with your brain.

So I was interested to learn, 11 years later, that Kleiman is leading the team hired to advise Washington State as it designs something the modern world has never seen: a fully legal commercial market in cannabis.  Washington is one of the first two states ( Colorado is the other ) to legalize the production, sale and consumption of marijuana as a recreational drug for consumers 21 and over.  The marijuana debate has entered a new stage.

Today the most interesting and important question is no longer whether marijuana will be legalized – eventually, bit by bit, it will be – but how.

“At some point you have to say, a law that people don’t obey is a bad law,” Kleiman told me when I asked how his views had evolved.

He has not come to believe marijuana is harmless, but he suspects that the best hope of minimizing its harm may be a well-regulated market.

Ah, but what does that look like? A few places, like the Netherlands, have had limited legalization; many jurisdictions have decriminalized personal use; and 18 states in this country have approved the drug for medical use.  ( Twelve others, including New York, are considering it.  ) But Washington and Colorado have set out to invent a whole industry from scratch and, in theory, to avoid the shortcomings of other markets in legal vices – tobacco, alcohol, gambling – that lurched into being without much forethought, and have supplied, along with much pleasure, much misery.

The biggest shadow hanging over this project is the Department of Justice.  Federal law still makes felons of anyone who trades in cannabis.  Despite the tolerant drift of the polls, despite evidence indicating that states with medical marijuana programs have not, as opponents feared, experienced an increase in use by teenagers, despite new moves toward legalization in Latin America, no one expects Congress to remove cannabis from the list of criminal substances any time soon.  ( “Not until the second Hillary Clinton administration,” Kleiman says.  ) But federal authorities have always left a lot of room for local discretion on marijuana enforcement.  They could, for example, declare that they will prosecute only drug producers who grow more than a certain amount, and those who traffic across state lines.

Attorney General Eric Holder, perhaps preoccupied with scandal management, has been slow to come up with enforcement guidelines that could give the states a comfort zone in which to experiment.

One practical challenge facing the legalization pioneers is how to keep the marijuana market from being swallowed by a few big profiteers – the pot equivalent of Big Tobacco, or even the actual tobacco industry – a powerful oligopoly with every incentive to turn us into a nation of stoners.

There is nothing inherently evil about the profit motive, but there is evidence that pot dealers, like purveyors of alcohol, get the bulk of their profit from those who use the product to excess.  “When you get a for-profit producer or distributor industry going, their incentives are to increase sales,” said Jonathan Caulkins of Carnegie Mellon, another member of the Washington consulting team.  “And the vast majority of sales go to people who are daily or near-daily consumers.”

What Kleiman and his colleagues ( speaking for themselves, not Washington State ) imagine as the likely best model is something resembling the wine industry – a fragmented market, many producers, none dominant.

This could be done by limiting the size of licensed purveyors.  It would help, too, to let individuals grow a few plants at home – something Colorado’s new law permits but Washington’s does not, because polling showed Washingtonians didn’t want that.

If you read the proposal Kleiman’s team submitted to Washington State, you may be a little boggled by the complexities of turning an illicit herb into a regulated, safe, consumer-friendly business.  Among the things on the to-do list: certifying labs to test for potency and contamination.  ( Pot can contain, among other nasty things, pesticides, molds and salmonella.  ) Devising rules on labeling, so users know what they’re getting.

Hiring inspectors, to make sure the sellers comply.

Establishing limits on advertising, because you don’t want allowing to become promoting.

And all these rules must account not just for smoking but for pot pastries, pot candies, pot-infused beverages, pot lozenges, pot ice cream, pot vapor inhalers.

One of the selling points of legalization is that states can take a cut of what will be, according to estimates, a $35 billion to $45 billion industry and earmark some of these new tax revenues for good causes.  It’s the same tactic used to win public approval of lotteries – - and with the same danger: that some worthy government function comes to depend on creating more addicts.

And how do you divvy up the revenues? How much goes to offset health consequences? How much goes to enforcement? How do you calibrate taxes so the price of pot is high enough to discourage excessive use, but not so high that a cheap black market arises?

All this regulating is almost enough to take the fun out of drugs.

And then there is the issue of drugged driving.

Much about the chemistry of marijuana in human beings remains uncertain, in part because the government has not supported much research.

So no one has come up with a pot version of the breathalyzer to determine quickly whether a driver is impaired.

In the absence of solid research, some legalization advocates insist stoned drivers are more cautious, and thus safer.  ( Hands up if you want Harold and Kumar driving your taxi.  Or piloting your airplane.  ) On this and much else, Washington and Colorado will probably be making it up as they go, waiting for science to catch up.

And experience tells us they are sure to get some things wrong.

New York decriminalized possession of small amounts of pot way back in 1977, with the condition that there be no “public display.” The lawmakers meant to assure that you partied at home, not in the parks or on the sidewalks.

They did not envision that this provision would create a pretext for throwing young black and Latino men in jail.  When police in New York City stop and frisk, which they do a lot in rougher neighborhoods, they order their targets to turn out their pockets and – whoa, public display, come with us, son! Gov.  Andrew Cuomo is promoting an amendment to curb that abuse of power.

On the opposite coast, California demonstrates a different kind of unintended consequences.  The state’s medical marijuana law is such a free-for-all that in Los Angeles there are now said to be more pot dispensaries than Starbucks outlets.

Even advocates of full legalization say things have gotten out of hand.

“It’s a bit of a farce when you can watch people come out of a dispensary, go around the corner and resell their drugs,” said Gavin Newsom, the lieutenant governor and former San Francisco mayor, who favors legalization.  “If we can’t get our medical marijuana house in order, how do we expect voters to deal with legalization?” He is now part of a group discussing how to impose more order on California’s medical marijuana market, with an eye to offering broader legalization in 2016.  And, he told me, his state will be paying close attention to Washington and Colorado, hoping somebody can, as Mark Kleiman puts it, “design a system that gets us to ‘orderly’ without getting us to ‘way too stoned.’ ”

Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 2013 The New York Times Company
Contact: http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/lettertoeditor.html
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Author: Bill Keller

Americas Coalition Suggests MJ Laws Be Relaxed

May 19th, 2013

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is Marijuana Booming Among Boomers?

May 17th, 2013

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

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

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

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

The Return of Reefer

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

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

‘Everybody Smokes Dope After Work’

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pot Prescriptions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Targeting the Boomer Market

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Medical Marijuana Supporters Push For Legalization

May 6th, 2013

Legislators are disagreeing on a lot of big issues, but they found a bit of common ground Thursday — medical marijuana.

It’s too late to push a bill through this session, but about 40 legislators in both parties, including more than a dozen committee chairmen, sent a strong signal that they want to add Minnesota to the 18 states where marijuana can be legally prescribed.

Legislators passed the legalization of medical marijuana in 2009, but were stopped by Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who vetoed the bill.

Now they’re ready to try again, in part because of such Minnesotans as Joni Whiting, of Jordan. Whiting watched as her 26-year-old daughter, Stephanie Whiting Stradinger, endured surgeries for malignant melanoma that ate away her face and ultimately took her life. There was just one thing, Whiting said, that eased her daughter’s suffering, and getting it meant her entire family had to break state law.

“They cut her face off, one inch at a time, until there was nothing left to cut,” Whiting said at a Thursday news conference, holding up a picture of Stradinger, smiling and lovely. She then covered it with a later photo of her daughter, her face flayed open and raw from treatments for the melanoma that started to grow on her cheek during her third pregnancy.

“The pain she was experiencing was unimaginable and the nausea was so severe that it became difficult for her to eat,” Whiting said. “That was when a doctor at the hospital pulled me aside and told me that Stephanie might benefit from using marijuana.”

The legislation proposed Thursday would allow doctors or other medical professionals to write prescriptions for up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana for patients with “debilitating” medical conditions. Those conditions include cancer, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma and post-traumatic stress.

The marijuana would be available through licensed dispensaries that would grow the drug on site in locked greenhouses. Patients in remote areas could be licensed by the state to grow a small number of marijuana plants for their own use.

But is a state that doesn’t allow wine sales in grocery stores ready to legalize marijuana dispensaries?

The issue is not one that breaks along party lines.

Like Pawlenty, DFL Gov. Mark Dayton opposes legalization, and for the same reason — law enforcement agencies are firmly against it.

Rep. Carly Melin, DFL-Hibbing, is a chief sponsor in the House, joined by Republican Rep. Tom Hackbarth, of Cedar. For Hackbarth, the cause is painfully personal. His wife is terminally ill.

“It’s a matter of the quality of life in the final days for me,” Hackbarth said. “We’re introducing it now so we can gain support, talk to legislators and then really hit the ground running when the session starts next year.”

But even if the House and Senate pass a bill to legalize medical marijuana next year, they face a formidable obstacle in the governor’s office.

“The governor will not be able to support the legalization of medical marijuana as long as law enforcement is opposed,” Dayton spokeswoman Katharine Tinucci said. “If advocates are able to reach an agreement with law enforcement, the governor would consider the measure.”

Police officials remain deeply skeptical. Legal marijuana greenhouses won’t make the job of clamping down on illegal drug use any easier, they warn.

“It is an absolute regulatory and enforcement nightmare,” said Dennis Flaherty, executive director of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association. “We are not convinced that there really is a medicinal purpose to marijuana. … We see marijuana as a harmful drug and a gateway drug.”

But Whiting doesn’t want the governor to wait until law enforcement officials are on board with medical marijuana. Smoking the drug, she said, was the only thing that gave her daughter relief before her death in 2003 at age 26.

“He’s the governor and he should lead,” she said. “It’s his responsibility to lead, and then it’s law enforcement’s responsibility to do what he says.”

Source: Minneapolis Star-Tribune (MN)
Copyright: 2013 Star Tribune
Contact: http://www.startribunecompany.com/143
Website: http://www.startribune.com
Author: Jennifer Brooks

Proposals Would Legalize Marijuana in Ohio

May 3rd, 2013

As poll numbers show Ohioans are growing increasingly comfortable with the idea of marijuana use, a Youngstown Democrat wants to give people the chance to make the drug fully legal in Ohio.

Rep. Robert F. Hagan has made a few attempts over the years to persuade his colleagues to allow for the use of medical marijuana in Ohio, and each effort has died a quiet death. A spokesman for Speaker William G. Batchelder, R-Medina, declined to comment on the pair of proposals Hagan introduced yesterday.

One is a bill that would allow patients with certain chronic conditions such as cancer or sickle-cell anemia to use marijuana for treatment. Eighteen other states have approved similar measures.

“In addition to the studies that show marijuana to be a valuable treatment option for chronic pain, nausea and seizure disorders, I have heard countless stories of how cannabis has made a difference in the lives of people who are sick or dying,” Hagan said.

His other proposal, modeled after an amendment recently passed in Colorado, would ask voters to approve allowing people 21 or older to purchase and use marijuana. The drug could be sold only by state-licensed establishments and would be subject to a 15 percent excise tax.

“With billions upon billions spent on the war on drugs with little progress to show for it, it is time for more-sensible drug policy in this country,” Hagan said, arguing that the revenue could help restore cuts to education and local governments.

It takes a three-fifths vote for the legislature to put an issue on the ballot.

A recent Saperstein Associates poll of more than 1,000 Ohioans for The Dispatch found that legalizing medical marijuana was overwhelmingly favored, 63 percent to 37 percent, but making pot completely legal was opposed by a 21-point margin.

Martin D. Saperstein, head of the Columbus polling firm, noted that surveys in other states are finding growing acceptance of legalizing marijuana, especially if it would be regulated and taxed.

The Ohio Ballot Board last year approved language for two medical-marijuana issues, though neither appears likely to collect the 385,000 signatures needed to qualify for the November ballot. One group has reorganized, calling itself OhioRights.org, and plans to submit a new petition that will include legalized growing of hemp, a plant related to marijuana.

Source: Columbus Dispatch (OH)
Author: Jim Siegel, The Columbus Dispatch
Published: Friday May 3, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Columbus Dispatch
Contact: letters@dispatch.com
Website: http://www.dispatch.com/

Some Dispensaries Not Too Thrilled By Legal Pot

May 1st, 2013

Medical marijuana groups are wary of a bill that would legalize and tax marijuana in Maine.

Estimates nationwide suggest if marijuana were legal, much of the profit gained by medical retailers and black-market criminals would disappear.

That worries Glenn Peterson, the owner of Canuvo, a Biddeford medical-marijuana dispensary.  He also serves as president of the Maine Association of Dispensary Operators, a trade group made up of five Maine dispensary owners.

Peterson said his group is concerned that the bill could “eliminate the medical marijuana industry” in Maine.

“I tend to be libertarian,” he said.  “On the other hand, I am quite protective of my dispensary.”

Paul McCarrier, a lobbyist for Medical Marijuana Caregivers of Maine, an advocacy group for state-licensed caregivers who grow marijuana for small groups of medical patients, said his group is opposing the bill.  McCarrier said it would favor dispensaries through licensing requirements, which could regulate small-time growers out of existence.

“The scope of protections for the individual to cultivate for themselves is too limited,” he said.

The head of a national group that has supported the Maine bill and similar proposals nationwide says his organization has run into opposition to legalization from medical-marijuana groups in other states.

Allen St.  Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML, said that “probably the most vexing thing that we’re facing right now ( in pushing for legalization ) is not the government or law enforcement agencies,” he said.  “It comes from, oddly put, anti-prohibitionists versus anti-prohibitionists.”

The Maine bill to legalize marijuana, sponsored by Rep.  Diane Russell, D-Portland, is a sweeping measure.  Chiefly, it would allow those 21 and older to possess 21/2 ounces of marijuana and six plants.

It also would license cultivators, producers of products containing marijuana, retailers and laboratories, giving preference for licensing to officials at existing dispensaries.

David Boyer, Maine political director for the Marijuana Policy Project, a nationwide group backing Russell’s bill, said the provision to give preference to existing dispensaries was partially due to a drafting error in the bill, and he and Russell are open to amending it.  Boyer has been lobbying legislators to support the bill.

Peterson said his group is lobbying for dispensaries to be granted automatic cultivation, retail and production licenses.  He said it wouldn’t oppose the bill then.

McCarrier said it isn’t clear whether caregivers are on the same plane as dispensaries in the bill.

Russell’s bill would assess a $50-per-ounce tax on cultivators, 75 percent of which Russell has said she wants to divert to the state’s General Fund.  Under her plan, the rest would go toward substance abuse programs, marijuana research and implementing the act.

Only two states, Colorado and Washington, have legalized marijuana, and they did so in 2012 referendum votes.  Marijuana possession is illegal under federal law, so even states with medical-marijuana programs are running afoul of that law.

In those states and others, legalization efforts ran into patches of opposition from medical-marijuana groups as well.

St.  Pierre suggested that’s because of economic protectionism: Simply put, when marijuana becomes legal, consumption will go up and prices will fall sharply.

McCarrier said it’s not about protecting money, but protecting “the ability for caregivers to continue to operate.”

Peterson said he sells marijuana for $360 per ounce; McCarrier said caregivers sell for between $175 and $250 per ounce.  Street prices could be higher or lower.

A paper by a group of marijuana researchers published this month in the Oregon Law Review says the American marijuana market is a $30 billion industry annually.  But modern farming techniques could supply that demand for “hundreds of millions of dollars.”

So, the paper says, most of those billions could be captured by businesses or states, but “only if competitive pressure does not drive prices down.”

Peterson said he has hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in his operation, and he’s not sure what would happen to it under legalization.

“I have no investors.  I don’t take a salary,” he said.  “But that’s what you have to do to have a program in this state.”

Medical marijuana wouldn’t be taxed at $50 an ounce, according to Russell’s proposal, and Boyer said he doesn’t want to affect the medical system “in any bad way.”

Still, “it’s kind of an evil trade-off,” Peterson said of the tax on recreational marijuana.  “You can have it legally, but it’s going to cost you.” Russell has said the price drop after legalization would more than make up for the tax.

On taxes, a fine line would have to be walked to turn the average consumer to the new, recreational market.  If the marijuana tax is too high, people will likely seek the black market or a doctor’s recommendation for patient status, say many working on tax proposals in other states.

Colorado and Washington are establishing regulations for their legal programs.  They are seeking to establish a tax system that strikes those balances.

According to The New York Times, Colorado is considering excise and sales taxes of up to 30 percent combined on recreational marijuana.  In Washington state, the Times said three levels of taxes will be levied on producers, processors and retailers.  Consumers will pay a 44 percent effective rate.

The $50-per-ounce rate has been discussed in other places.  California considered a bill that would use that rate in 2009, and lawmakers effectively killed it in 2010.

Beau Kilmer, a drug policy researcher for the RAND Corp., a nonprofit think tank, said there are a number of ways that regulators could tax marijuana, including per ounce and by the plant’s chemical makeup.

However, it’s too early to tell what would work best, so Kilmer suggests flexibility in the tax system.

“If large barriers are created to changing the taxes, it’s going to make it a heck of a lot harder to update them based on new research,” he said.

That lack of clarity makes Boyer, of the Marijuana Policy Project, wonder why some are opposing Russell’s bill so soon, before a legislative committee gets to amend it.

“I’m a little disappointed that some people are jumping the gun on this bill before it’s a final bill,” Boyer said.  “I think everyone would benefit from ending marijuana prohibition.”

McCarrier said that philosophically, he could support legalization, but “the devil’s in the details.”

Peterson also said he could support the right plan, but “I would not want to do anything that disrupted the medical side of things.  It really puts a death knell to the program.”

For St.  Pierre, the NORML director, the schism is particularly divisive for the overarching cause of his group for years — totally legal marijuana.

“For me, it is a necessary but fascinating footnote in history that some of the most active opposition is oddly coming from those who are fellow travelers of the road, shall we say — those who enjoy and use marijuana, be it for medical reasons or recreational,” he said.

Source: Morning Sentinel (Waterville, ME)
Copyright: 2013 MaineToday Media, Inc.
Website: http://www.onlinesentinel.com/
Author: Michael Shepherd

An Unlikely Defender Of State Pot Laws

April 30th, 2013

Orange County Rep.  Dana Rohrabacher Is Hoping More Colleagues Are Starting to See Things His Way.

WASHINGTON – For more than a decade, conservative Orange County Rep.  Dana Rohrabacher has formed an unusual alliance with liberals on an unexpected topic – the defense of marijuana.

Rohrabacher ( R-Huntington Beach ) and his allies have so far waged a futile effort to pass legislation that would prevent federal authorities from interfering with medical marijuana use in California and other places where pot use is permitted by state law.

But as more states have moved to allow the drug’s use, Rohrabacher believes his Respect State Marijuana Laws Act may be gaining momentum in Congress.

The recently reintroduced measure would shield from federal prosecution people acting in accordance with their states’ marijuana laws, including new Colorado and Washington laws that allow adult recreational use of the drug.

“The prospects are much better now,” said Rohrabacher, whose co-sponsors include Rep.  Barbara Lee ( D-Oakland ), a Bay Area liberal who is usually about as far apart ideologically from Rohrabacher as anybody in Congress.

Still, Rohrabacher has his work cut out for him.  The House last year soundly rejected, by a 262-163 vote, an effort he led to block the use of federal funds to prevent states from implementing medical marijuana laws.  Only 28 Republicans supported the measure.

Rohrabacher has a libertarian bent but became more interested in the medical benefits of marijuana after having to spoon-feed his dying mother because of her loss of appetite.  He has talked about the relief that marijuana might have afforded her.

He has been emboldened by a recent Pew Research Center poll that showed respondents, by nearly 2 to 1, believe the federal government should not enforce federal laws prohibiting the use of marijuana in states where it is legal.

Perhaps as important as the shifting public opinion, he said in an interview, is his colleagues’ eagerness to erase Washington’s red ink.  Substantial majorities of Republicans and Democrats in the Pew survey regarded federal enforcement of anti-marijuana laws as not worth the cost.

“If people of the states recognize what a waste of limited resources this is, then the federal government should respect what the people of those states want for their own criminal justice system,” Rohrabacher said.

Since 1996, when California became the first state to legalize the drug’s use for medical treatment, 17 other states and the District of Columbia have approved medical marijuana measures.  Last year, Colorado and Washington state voters opted to allow recreational users to possess an ounce of marijuana.  A move is underway to put a measure on the Alaska ballot to permit recreational use of the drug.

Efforts are underway in other states, including Idaho, Illinois and New Hampshire, to allow medicinal use of marijuana.

Rohrabacher also is hoping to convince GOP colleagues that his bill fits with the party’s traditional support for states’ rights.

“It is time that we respect states’ rights, get serious about prioritizing our federal government’s activities, and show some common sense and compassion when dealing with the sick among us,” Rohrabacher said last year when he proposed his measure.

However, Rep.  Frank R.  Wolf ( R-Va.  ), chairman of the appropriations subcommittee that oversees Justice Department spending, responded at the time: “If a state said sex trafficking is OK, would we honor that?…  States, in the past, have done some things that have not been good in this country.”

The president’s drug czar, R.  Gil Kerlikowske, recently said at the National Press Club that the Justice Department was responsible for enforcing the Controlled Substances Act, and “that remains unchanged.  No state, no executive, can nullify a statute that’s been passed by Congress.”

Kevin Sabet, a former advisor to Kerlikowske, said Rohrabacher’s latest attempt would “likely suffer the same fate as his several previous attempts that have failed over the past decade.”

Steve Fox, national political director for the Marijuana Policy Project, which promotes legalization, regards the bill as a long shot in this congressional session.  But he said the legislation “sends the message that it is simply not a rational use of federal law enforcement resources to prosecute and imprison individuals who are acting in compliance with state marijuana laws.”

Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Copyright: 2013 Los Angeles Times
Contact: letters@latimes.com
Website: http://www.latimes.com/
Author: Richard Simon

A Smarter Federal Path on State-Voted MJ Laws

April 29th, 2013

The time is at hand for the Obama administration to stop dithering, to take a clear position on the rights of Washington state and Colorado — and by precedent all others — to experiment with legalized marijuana.

That’s what Govs. Jay Inslee of Washington and John Hickenlooper of Colorado are asking the Justice Department to do — even though they personally opposed the marijuana legalization measures their voters approved last November.

The governors insist they can make their states’ new laws work well through responsible regulations that license, regulate and tax the production and sale of marijuana. New state labeling laws, say supporters, will also remove confusion and dangerous use levels by showing the potency in terms of THC, the psychoactive component of the cannabis plant, analogous to the labeling of alcoholic beverages.

Clearly it’s a direction the American people — who favor marijuana legalization 52 to 41 percent in recent polling — would approve.

A collaborative approach would be consistent with President Obama’s own marijuana history — a substance he tried himself as a youth. Asked last December about the Colorado and Washington legalization votes, he told Barbara Walters “It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it’s legal,” because “we’ve got bigger fish to fry.”

But Mr. President, there are serious issues to resolve. As personal purchase and use of marijuana are permitted in some states, can the practice really be contained at state borders? Will television, Web and print advertising be allowed? Will the legalizing states allow many small or just a few large suppliers? How much marijuana will be eligible for sale at one time? How will “marijuana tourism” — out-of-state visitors coming just to stock up — be handled? Will retail outlets be allowed near a state’s borders?

And then questions that undecided states may want to hear answered: Will the big tax revenues that marijuana supporters predict actually come true? Will driving under the influence of marijuana prove a real problem — and if so, how will it be controlled? Or on the health front: Will freely available marijuana help returning veterans suffering from PTSD? And generally, will it lead to more or less use of a substance we know is clearly dangerous: alcohol?

Those are the types of intriguing questions that journalist-scholar Stuart Taylor Jr. probes in a newly released Brookings Institution policy paper — “Marijuana Policy and Presidential Leadership: How to Avoid a Federal-State Train Wreck.”

Central to his case: the argument for an early, upfront agreement by the Obama administration and the states. Because the opposite — a fierce federal crackdown on Colorado and Washington state’s licensed marijuana producers and sellers — could well “backfire by producing an atomized, anarchic, state-legalized but unregulated marijuana market that federal drug enforcers could neither contain nor force the states to contain.”

And back to Obama — what about the U.S. Justice Department? It could use threats of conspiracy prosecutions to scare off applicants for state licenses to grow and sell marijuana. But there are federalism barriers: Washington can’t directly force states to enforce federal law. And there are only 4,400 federal Drug Enforcement Administration agents — “nowhere near enough,” Taylor suggests, “to restrain the metastasis of the grow-your-own-and-share marijuana market” — with small-time criminals crowding in — “that state legalization without regulation would stimulate.”

The recent precedents aren’t good. Faced by 18 states’ laws already allowing marijuana for medical use, the Justice Department has swung back and forth from general permissiveness to cracking down unmercifully in individual cases.

A crux of the problem is the federal Controlled Substances Act of 1970, which insists that marijuana has no medicinal properties — an assertion “on its face nonsensical,” says Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore.

But the law’s criminal sanctions for cultivating, possessing or distributing marijuana aren’t alone, notes Taylor. The statute also instructs that the attorney general “shall cooperate” with states on controlled substances, with power “to enter into contractual agreements … to provide for cooperative enforcement and regulatory activities.”

This is the opening, Taylor argues, that the Obama administration should take to negotiate with the states legalizing marijuana use — a process that would lead them toward careful regulation and standards, and away from the threat of irrational federal prosecutions.

In a more sensible world, Congress would be rewriting the Controlled Substances Act to reclassify marijuana as the relatively low-risk drug it clearly is. But who’d expect this Congress to do anything so rational?

That leaves states to regulate carefully on their own. And a clear challenge for Obama. Here’s a president who’s been bold enough to jump ahead of Congress on issues ranging from gay marriage to amnesty for DREAM Act immigrants. So now, why not smooth the way to marijuana reform when states choose it?

Copyright: 2013 Washington Post Writers Group

Source: Seattle Times (WA)
Author: Neal Peirce, Syndicated Columnist
Published: April 27, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Seattle Times Company
Contact: opinion@seatimes.com
Website: http://www.seattletimes.com/

Marijuana Repeal Considered In Colorado

April 27th, 2013

” Marijuana legalization could be going back to the ballot in Colorado — a prospect that infuriated pot legalization activists Friday.

The proposal for a marijuana ballot measure came as the House started debate Friday evening on bills to regulate and tax pot. One bill would state how pot should be grown and sold, and the other would tax recreational marijuana more than 30 percent.

A draft bill floating around the Capitol late this week suggests that a new ballot question on pot taxes should repeal recreational pot in the state constitution if voters don’t approve 15 percent excise taxes on retail pot and a new 15 percent marijuana sales tax. Those would be in addition to regular state and local sales taxes.
Lawmakers have only a few days left to finish work deciding how to regulate the newly legal drug.

Marijuana activists immediately blasted the proposal as a backhanded effort to repeal the pot vote, in which 55 percent of Coloradans chose to flout federal drug law and declare pot legal in small amounts for adults over 21.

“It’s clear that the intent … is to prevent marijuana from being legal and being regulated and being controlled,” said Mason Tvert, who led last year’s campaign to add recreational pot to the state constitution, which has allowed medical marijuana since 2000.

Sen. Larry Crowder, R-Alamosa, said the whole purpose of legalizing recreational marijuana was to raise money for education and other programs. “So if there’s no money, we shouldn’t have marijuana,” Crowder said.

A volunteer group that has been critical of proposed marijuana regulations, Smart Colorado, praised the effort to get rid of recreational pot without approval of the taxes.

A spokesman for the group, Eric Anderson, said in a statement that marijuana activists “sold the ballot issue to Colorado voters as a way to pay for state priorities like education, but increasingly it’s looking like it could be a net drain on the state budget.”
The marijuana measure approved last year won more votes than President Barack Obama, who carried the state. The pot measure directed lawmakers to come back to the ballot with a tax proposal, with much of the money going to school construction. Because of Colorado’s Byzantine tax laws, the recreational pot taxes can’t be levied until voters again sign off on them.

In Washington state, the only other place where voters last year approved recreational pot, the ballot measure set taxes at 75 percent, settling the question. Both states are still waiting to find out whether the federal government plans to sue to block retail sales of the drug, set to begin next year.

The Colorado repeal effort wouldn’t apply to medical marijuana, which voters approved in 2000.

Lawmakers from both parties have expressed worry this year that Colorado won’t be able to afford to give recreational pot the kind of intense oversight and regulation many expect. From labeling and potency standards to making sure pot taxes are collected, the regulatory scheme under consideration in Colorado wouldn’t be cheap.

The state House started debate Friday on the tax ballot question. The repeal provision, if it appears, would come later, likely when the pot tax shifts to the Senate.

Some lawmakers said Friday they doubt lawmakers would send pot legalization back to voters this year.

“That’s almost like saying to voters, ‘Vote for this, or else,’” said Sen. Cheri Jahn, D-Wheat Ridge. “I don’t think you threaten voters like that. When over 55 percent of the people vote for something, I think we have to respect that.”

Marijuana repeal debate could dominate the Legislature’s closing days. The path to repeal would be uncertain, but some lawmakers say it’s only fair to ask again if voters are willing to legalize pot and risk federal intervention in exchange for a tax windfall projected to exceed $100 million a year.

“I think that’s why the people supported it,” Crowder said.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/04/2…in-colorado-2/

Advocates Eye Legalizing Marijuana in Alaska

April 27th, 2013

Alaska, known for its live-and-let-live lifestyle, is poised to become the next battleground in the push to legalize the recreational use of marijuana. The state has a complicated history with the drug, with its highest court ruling nearly 40 years ago that adults have a constitutional right to possess and smoke marijuana for personal use in their own homes.

In the late 1990s, Alaska became one of the first states to allow the use of pot for medicinal reasons.

Then the pendulum swung the other direction, with residents in 2004 rejecting a ballot effort to legalize recreational marijuana. And in 2006, the state passed a law criminalizing possession of even small amounts of the drug — leaving the current state of affairs somewhat murky.

Supporters of recreational marijuana say attitudes toward pot have softened in the past decade, and they believe they have a real shot at success in Alaska.

The state is reviewing their request to begin gathering signatures to get an initiative on next year’s ballot. The proposal would make it legal for those 21 and older to use and possess up to 1 ounce of marijuana, though not in public. It also would set out provisions for legal grow operations and establish an excise tax.

It’s a significantly different version of the failed 2004 ballot effort that would’ve allowed adults 21 and older to use, grow, sell or give away marijuana or hemp products without penalty under state law.

“The whole initiative, you can tell, is scaled down to be as palatable as possible,” said one of the sponsors, Bill Parker.

If the initiative application is accepted, backers will have until January, before the next legislative session starts, to gather the more than 30,000 signatures required to qualify the measure for the primary ballot.

The effort could determine whether the pendulum swings back.

The Alaska Supreme Court, in its landmark 1975 decision, found possession of marijuana by adults at home for personal use is constitutionally protected as part of their basic right to privacy, though the court made clear it didn’t condone the use of pot.

The laws tightened again with a 2006 state law criminalizing marijuana possession. The American Civil Liberties Union sued, saying the law conflicted with the 1975 ruling. The state maintained marijuana had become more intoxicating than in the 1970s, a point disputed by ACLU.

But the high court, in 2009, declined to make a finding, concluding any challenge to the law must await an actual prosecution.

Parker said the lack of clarity regarding marijuana possession is a problem, but he noted police aren’t exactly peeking into people’s homes to see if they have the drug.

Deputy Attorney General Richard Svobodny said in an email that home-use marijuana cases in Alaska are few because authorities have no reason to get a search warrant unless something else is going on inside a house that attracts their attention.

The proposed initiative includes language that says it’s not intended to diminish the right to privacy interpreted in the 1975 case. But it notes that case is not a “blanket protection for marijuana possession,” said Mason Tvert, a spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project.

“In order to have a system where individuals can go to a store, buy an ounce of marijuana, drive home, and enjoy it at home, it is necessary to make up to an ounce of marijuana entirely legal,” Tvert said.

Alaska is one of many states mulling changes to marijuana laws. Last fall, voters in Colorado and Washington state passed initiatives legalizing, taxing and regulating recreational marijuana.

This year, bills were filed in more than half the states to enact a medical marijuana law, decriminalize or reduce penalties for simple possession, or to tax and regulate marijuana for adult use, according to the Marijuana Policy Project. However, many of those proposals died, stalled or will be carried over.

Tvert said his group is working to promote initiatives allowing recreational marijuana in a handful of other states, including California, Oregon, Maine and Nevada. He thinks those states will be ready to pass such a measure in 2016.

“Ultimately we are starting to see the marijuana policy debate shift away from whether marijuana should be allowed or prohibited and toward how we will treat it,” Tvert said.

The U.S. Justice Department has not said how it will respond to the laws in Washington and Colorado. A bipartisan group of congressmen, including Alaska’s lone U.S. House member, Don Young, recently introduced legislation that would ensure the federal government respects stat e marijuana laws. For the Republican Young, it’s a states’ rights issue, his spokesman said by email.

Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell, who consistently has fought the feds when he believes they’ve overstepped their bounds, supports a state’s right to establish its own laws and appreciates Young’s effort, Parnell spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said. But he also considers marijuana a “gateway drug that can lead to more serious patterns of substance abuse and criminal offenses,” she said by email. He has not stated his position on the proposed initiative.

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Becky Bohrer, Associated Press
Published: April 26, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Associated Press