The Political Pot Thread

[Undermind]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new-hampshire/2013/04/07/senate-hold-hearing-medical-marijuana/zzTNrEMoyWoG8HLAFZmXYL/story.html

[VDB]

This

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/the-war-on-drugs-is-far-more-immoral-than-most-drug-use/274651/

...

Very well stated.

[Undermind]

http://weedfinder.com/dash/news/california-lt-gov-calls-on-state-to-lead-nation-in-ending-marijuana-prohibition/

and

http://weedfinder.com/dash/news/police-return-60-lbs-of-medical-marijuana-to-two-vallejo-dispensaries/

[Mr. Natural]

http://weedfinder.com/dash/news/police-return-60-lbs-of-medical-marijuana-to-two-vallejo-dispensaries/

"Instead, the [Vallejo] City Council has enacted a moratorium this April on new dispensaries, and reportedly called the feds to enforce federal law, instead of state law in Vallejo. A similar situation is playing out in San Diego."
Individual counties going rogue and inviting the feds to come on in?
This is gonna get messy.

[runawayjimbo]

http://weedfinder.com/dash/news/california-lt-gov-calls-on-state-to-lead-nation-in-ending-marijuana-prohibition/

I don't always agree with his politics, but Gavin Newsome seems like the real deal. Anytime I've heard him speak I've been impressed. I hope Californians respond.

[Mr. Natural]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/21/meet-mark-kleiman-the-man-who-will-be-washington-state-s-pot-czar.html

[runawayjimbo]

DoJ pushes in with CA crackdown, threatening LANDLORDS with 40 yrs if they don't evict state law abiding, rent paying dispensaries. Meanwhile, Holder has still not responded to CO and WA legalization, saying only they are "still considering" 2 laws that are now 6 months old.

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/30/feds_threaten_medical_pot_dispensaries_with_40_year_sentences/

Feds threaten medical pot dispensaries with 40-year sentences
A lawful San Jose, Calif., dispensary has been ordered to vacate in latest federal crackdown to challenge state law

In the latest act in the ongoing drama pitting federal drug laws against state legislation permitting the sale of marijuana, a U.S. attorney is threatening the landlords housing medical marijuana dispensaries with 40 years in federal prison. After ballot measures legalizing the sale and possession of recreational pot use passed in Colorado and Washington state, we wondered whether Obama's second term would see the beginning of the end of the federal war on drugs.

But as the San Jose crackdown, among others, suggests, the Justice Department will not be backing down. In January, Southern California medical marijuana dispensary operator Aaron Sandusky was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison for running a business deemed legal in his state since California legalized marijuana for qualified patients, caregivers and collectives in 1996 and 2003. Now, as the East Bay Express reported, "a new round of actions against lawful medical cannabis dispensaries in the South Bay" has begun following crackdowns in 2011:

Landlords are receiving threatening letters from US Attorney Melinda Haag, warning of forty-year-prison sentences if landlords do not evict their dispensary tenants...

In October 2011, Haag and three other US Attorneys declared war on California's estimated $1.3 billion medical marijuana industry, threatening hundreds of landlords with forfeiture. Hundreds of dispensaries across the state moved or closed. Haag is attempting to seize Harborside Health Center in Oakland, as well as its sister club in San Jose.

Last year, California Gov. Jerry Brown asked the feds to call off their crackdown, saying California didn't need "federal gendarmes" kicking in the doors of lawful businesses. In January, Assemblyman Tom Ammiano told a San Francisco crowd that Haag had "gone rogue," adding, "I'm sorry a house fell on her sister," alluding to the wicked witch in The Wizard of Oz. Last week, Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom called for decriminalizing, regulating, and taxing California's multi-billion dollar marijuana industry.

The second-term Obama administration was presented an aperture to push back against the ruinous war on drugs. The Department of Justice is choosing to continue to act against good reason and the general will.

[emay]

Some anti-marijuana group is submitting a proposal to repeal Amendment 64 in CO.

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2013/04/amendment_64_repeal_unconstitutional_draft.php

Update: Yesterday, we shared a draft proposal that would repeal Amendment 64, which allows adults 21 and over in Colorado to use and possess small amounts of marijuana, if voters don't approve a 15 percent sales tax during a November election. Also included was an opinion by attorney Ed Ramey that such a measure would be unconstitutional; see our previous coverage below. We've now heard back from a rep with a group that sees value in such an approach even as a modified tax proposal is moving forward. Details below.

As we've reported, the Taxpayers Bill of Rights, shorthanded as TABOR, requires a vote to approve tax increases. Hence, House Bill 13-1318, the original version of which can be seen below, was designed to set rates to be considered in this November's election. An excise tax of 15 percent was envisioned in A64's language, but a sales tax of up to 15 percent not sketched out in the amendment has also been pushed.

Thumbnail image for Mason Tvert, Denver Press Club 1.JPG
Photo by Sam Levin
Mason Tvert at a press event earlier this year.
Amendment 64 proponent Mason Tvert sees the 15 percent sales tax as too high. He supports a 10 percent tax, which he believes would cover enforcement costs with plenty of room to spare. Moreover, in an interview last week, he pointed to a Public Policy Polling survey conducted on April 15 and 16, which "found that 77 percent of voters would support a 10 percent special sales tax and only 18 percent would oppose one."

Given that, Tvert said that "If legislators are concerned about whether a 15 percent tax would pass, they should consider reducing it to 10 percent instead of embracing the nuclear option."

That's what wound up happening yesterday. As reported by the Denver Post, the version of the bill that will face a final vote in the House before continuing to the Senate sports a 15 percent excise tax and a 10 percent sales tax. The latter number was supported by Republicans, who feared that if rates were too high, voters might reject the tax in November, putting the state on the hook for enforcement without new revenues to pay for it.

Still up in the air is the prospect of A64 repeal language should the taxes be voted down. Attorney Ed Ramey believes such a tactic is unconstitutional, as outlined below, but Smart Colorado spokesman Eric Anderson says his organization sees value in the concept. He also insists that Smart Colorado supports a 15 percent tax, despite Tvert's claim to the contrary. Here's how Anderson put it in a statement supplied to Westword just prior to the final vote yesterday:

    As we've stressed before, we're not taking the lead on the accountability amendment proposed last week but understand that its legislative proponents are confident in its constitutionality.

    We've stated our support of House Bill 1318's tax structure and the inclusion of the same numbers in the potential two-part accountability amendment, which we support. We applaud the bipartisan leadership of legislators who are proposing this accountability amendment to ensure that Coloradans don't subsidize the cost of regulating recreational marijuana.

    These measures would be consistent with the recommendations of the legislature's Joint Select Committee on the Implementation of Amendment 64: a 15 percent excise tax on the wholesale value of commercial marijuana, a 15 percent retail sales tax, and an extension of the state's existing 2.9 percent general sales tax to sales of marijuana. Those levels come closest to creating the necessary tax structure although, as the new report from Colorado State University's Colorado Futures Center notes, even then "marijuana tax revenues may not cover the incremental state expenditures related to legalization." We're focused on the legislative debate right now and we're not looking beyond the legislative session at this time.

    Amendment 64 proponents told voters that passage of the measure "would result in immediate savings, and it will quickly grow into a major new revenue stream for our state and localities." Citizens must now demand that the industry be held accountable and deliver on promises made. So, let's see if the marijuana industry will back up its campaign promises by supporting this proposed accountability amendment instead of fighting it.

It's important to note that while the legislative session ends Friday, changes can still be made between now and then -- so it's entirely possible that the 10 percent sales tax currently envisioned could be increased to 15 percent, and repeal language could be inserted.

Here's the original version of 13-1318, as well as the Colorado Futures Center report mentioned by Anderson. That's followed by our previous coverage.

[runawayjimbo]

Some anti-marijuana group is submitting a proposal to repeal Amendment 64 in CO.

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2013/04/amendment_64_repeal_unconstitutional_draft.php

Thankfully, this seems to have been beaten back (for now).

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_23149615/colorado-marijuana-legalization-repeal-talks-lose-momentum-at

Colorado marijuana legalization repeal talks lose momentum at Capitol

Plans for a measure that could repeal marijuana legalization in Colorado have lost momentum at the state Capitol, according to lawmakers and advocates involved in the debate.

Last week, several legislators confirmed they were working on a proposal that could overturn marijuana legalization if voters do not approve new taxes on legal pot this November. Supporters of the idea said, without the tax money, the state can't adequately pay for enforcement of forthcoming recreational marijuana stores.

But talks on the plan have proved difficult, throwing into question whether it will even be officially introduced.

"I think people are counting their votes," said House Speaker Mark Ferrandino, a Denver Democrat who didn't endorse the repeal proposal but previously said he was open to the discussion. "I think there are people on both sides who have concerns about it."

Ferrandino said proponents have now scaled back the plan. Under the latest draft proposal, commercial marijuana sales in Colorado would be put on hold until voters approve extra taxes on the sales, Ferrandino said.

Rep. Frank McNulty, a Highlands Ranch Republican who supports the repeal idea, said lawmakers may not have the time to pass the possible measure.

Opponents of the idea, he said, "could drag the (proposal) out to the point where they make it difficult to pass."

This year's legislative session ends next Wednesday, and any measure would have to be introduced by Monday morning to have even a glimmer of hope of passage.

In November, Colorado voters approved a constitutional measure that legalizes use and possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for people 21 and older. The measure also allows for marijuana to be sold in specially licensed stores.

At the Capitol, lawmakers have proposed a bill that places a 15 percent excise tax and an initial 10 percent extra sales tax on marijuana. The bill, House Bill 1318, is on-track for passage, but voters in November would ultimately have to OK the new taxes.

The marijuana legalization repeal — or suspension — proposal would also have to be approved by voters. But, before it could reach the ballot, it would need two-thirds support in the Capitol because it would change a provision of Colorado's constitution.

Rep. Dan Pabon, a Denver Democrat opposed to the plan, said many lawmakers have lost interest in the repeal idea.

"There was a pretty strong grassroots response that I think every member received that said, 'Don't threaten us,'" Pabon said.

A legal analysis released this week by proponents of marijuana legalization also raises more possible problems for the repeal plan. The analysis, by attorney Edward Ramey, says the Colorado constitution allows only fiscal measures to go before voters statewide in odd-year elections.

Ferrandino, though, said the legislature's attorneys concluded it would be constitutional to put the idea before voters this year.

[Undermind]

http://www.theweedblog.com/doj-files-forfeiture-lawsuit-against-one-of-californias-oldest-medical-marijuana-dispensaries/

[emay]

DUID law is going to pass in CO any day. They were trying to get it as a 5 ng limit of THC means your intoxicated, but after research they found out a lot of everyday smokers watch up with 2-3 times that amount, before they even smoke for the first time in a day. So, seems like this law has a lot of grey areas that the police will use against a lot of people that blaze and drive. Wonder how it will turn out.

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2013/05/thc_driving_limit_passes_william_breathes.php

[Undermind]

DUID law is going to pass in CO any day. They were trying to get it as a 5 ng limit of THC means your intoxicated, but after research they found out a lot of everyday smokers watch up with 2-3 times that amount, before they even smoke for the first time in a day. So, seems like this law has a lot of grey areas that the police will use against a lot of people that blaze and drive. Wonder how it will turn out.

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2013/05/thc_driving_limit_passes_william_breathes.php

That's what really scares me about legalization.  The current laws in Maine work well for me and the price/quality is amazing here.  I do however think prohibition is ridiculous and a giant waste of money.

[Mr. Natural]

DUID law is going to pass in CO any day. They were trying to get it as a 5 ng limit of THC means your intoxicated, but after research they found out a lot of everyday smokers watch up with 2-3 times that amount, before they even smoke for the first time in a day. So, seems like this law has a lot of grey areas that the police will use against a lot of people that blaze and drive. Wonder how it will turn out.

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2013/05/thc_driving_limit_passes_william_breathes.php

Blood tests which distinguish between 'active' and 'inactive' THC in blood?    :?

[runawayjimbo]

http://www.theweedblog.com/doj-files-forfeiture-lawsuit-against-one-of-californias-oldest-medical-marijuana-dispensaries/

I despise Melinda Haag. It would be nice if her boss told her to back the fuck off, but his silence tells me all I need to know about the administration's priorities.

DUID law is going to pass in CO any day. They were trying to get it as a 5 ng limit of THC means your intoxicated, but after research they found out a lot of everyday smokers watch up with 2-3 times that amount, before they even smoke for the first time in a day. So, seems like this law has a lot of grey areas that the police will use against a lot of people that blaze and drive. Wonder how it will turn out.

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2013/05/thc_driving_limit_passes_william_breathes.php

It's definitely a tricky situation. On one hand, I understand (support, even) the desire to prevent impaired drivers from getting behind the wheel in the name of public safety. How you define impairment given the longer detection lifetime of THC vs. alcohol is where it falls apart. I also have a huge problem with forced blood draws, which are obviously far more invasive than a breathalyzer. And to your point, to the extent that regular users driving unimpaired get prosecuted, that's a big fucking deal. This issue will definitely be one of the more difficult ones to address in the ongoing and inevitable march toward legalization. Also, developing a more accurate, less invasive detection method seems like a pretty goddamn good thing to be looking into. So get on that, science.

That's what really scares me about legalization.  The current laws in Maine work well for me and the price/quality is amazing here.

What are the ME laws?

I do however think prohibition is ridiculous and a giant waste of money.

Not to mention locking nonviolent criminals in cages and destroying families is morally reprehensible.

/obvious

[Undermind]

Maine is super decriminalized for possession.  It is a citation (same as a speeding ticket) for 2 oz or under.  For medical it is a little more strict for conditions than California, but I know a ton of people with cards.  There are care givers who can grow for up to 10 patients I believe and also 1 dispensary in every county.  If you have a card your can grow up to 6 plants too I think.