High times ahead for California? ( Ziggy on MSNBC)

Reggae star and political activist Ziggy Marley explains how the legalization of marijuana could change California and the rest of the country.

Source MSNBC

He's a Train Wreck Behind The Wheel

California -- The man in the uniform had a question for me. "How do you feel?" CHP Sgt. David Nelms asked. His interest in my health was probably prompted by the fact that I was at that moment toking a joint stuffed with a bud called Train Wreck. Pretty good, I said, already buzzed enough to wonder if this was really happening.
In my youth, I spent more than a few evenings hoping the police weren't keeping close tabs on my activities. So it felt a bit strange last week to have a group of cops paw my marijuana stash and then ask me to get high.

"There you go, Cheech," said KABC radio host Peter Tilden, a fellow volunteer. Tilden was smoking something called Blockhead, which I presume is a standard choice among talk show hosts.

As reported in my first installment of the Cannabis Chronicles on Sunday, I had been asked by Los Angeles City Atty. Carmen Trutanich to help determine whether, and how, marijuana impairs driving. He recruited more than two dozen police officers from various Southern California agencies and the CHP to bear witness and study the differences between driving while high and driving while drunk.

"Probably nowhere in America is what we're doing today occurring," Trutanich's chief of investigation, Gary Schram, announced after I arrived at the LAPD training center in Granada Hills.

I think that was probably true.

I was invited to participate in part because I had been cleared to use medical marijuana legally last year by a gynecologist who said he knew nothing about back trouble but believed cannabis might just be the best cure for my pain. I'm not really a smoker, though, so I was concerned that I might get knocked on my heels and skew the results.

But Trutanich and many cops believe that if Proposition 19 passes next month and marijuana is as legal as potato chips and nearly as cheap, more new users will be driving under the influence, so the experiment would be worthwhile. Trutanich also noted that users often have no clue as to the potency of the grass they buy, and it varies wildly. Some of it can even make you feel like you've been in, let's say, a train wreck.

"OK," said Trutanich, "let's go."

Before I sampled the meds, the cops wanted to get a baseline on how I drove unimpaired, so I got behind the wheel of a marked CHP cruiser and was put through a series of tests involving a slalom course and various tight parking maneuvers.

For the trickiest part of the test, I drove toward a three-lane fork in the road, with a green traffic light above each lane. At the last second, two of the lights turned red and I had to swerve into the green lane. I pulled it off just fine, but in jerking the car, my bag of dope slid onto the floor.

Next, Tilden and I were escorted to a bluff at the edge of the training center where we could light up without risking a contact high for the assembled peace officers.

Two brave representatives of the CHP accompanied us, Nelms and officer J. Leffert. Well, here we go, I thought, lighting a stick of Train Wreck with the cops looking on. From the bluff, I could see "Nooch" Trutanich and company assembled in the distance, with an L.A. Fire Department paramedic unit waiting in case something went horribly wrong.

A few hits later, I suggested to Tilden that we roll a vehicle, come out holding our necks, sue everyone and retire, but that was the dope talking. Tilden had forgotten his rolling papers, so I gave him my Bob Marley wrappers and Officer Leffert expertly rolled a fat one for him.

"What are you, Rastafarian?" Tilden asked the officer. "Look at the size of that blunt."

One of us, after several strong hits on a second joint, was now giggling like a high school sophomore, and it wasn't Tilden or the cops. I believe Train Wreck may be from the sativa rather than indica species of pot. Sativa is said to give you a spacey surge instead of a drowsy body buzz. This could explain why, when I saw southern division CHP commander Kevin Gordon approaching to see if we were ripped yet, I stood on one foot for him, as if taking a sobriety test while puffing away and laughing like a hyena.

"Are you having fun?" asked Nelms, the drug recognition expert.

What, is that a crime, officer?

When we were driven back down the hill and I slid into an unmarked Crown Vic for my driving test, I couldn't resist the urge to play a little prank. I revved the engine, shifted into forward and jerked forward in the direction of the gathering, honking the horn like a lunatic as Trutanich and the others prepared to scatter.

But despite behaving like a doofus, I thought I could drive pretty well. For several minutes I concentrated on slaloming, parking and then finally the dreaded traffic signal.

It didn't seem to me that I was as impaired as I would have been after a few beers or glasses of wine or if I was one of the morons who drive while texting and yakking on cellphones.

But when I finished, Sgt. Nelms said I was less confident than I had been before smoking. He had to admit I hadn't bombed on the slalom and parking challenges, wobbling only a few traffic cones.

Getting through the traffic signal was another matter. Having to process a lot of information and make a quick decision, on Train Wreck, was a challenge. I swerved radically before getting into the correct lane, and if I were a cop, I'd have pulled me over.

Tilden, meanwhile, parked like a blind man. He ended up so far from the curb after parallel parking that he would have needed a search party to find it. But he had enough Blockhead in him to think he'd done just fine.

"They both show impairment across the board," Sgt. Nelms announced after we were put through another round of field sobriety tests.

Trutanich seemed pleased with the findings, but I think more research could be useful. Dude, I didn't even get a chance to dip into my bag of Skywalker.

Call me any time, Nooch. I'll do it for science.


Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Author: Steve Lopez
Website: LAtimes

LA Sheriff Pledges To Bust People for Pot

California -- Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca said on Friday that the voters don’t matter. His deputies’ enforcement of marijuana laws would not change even if voters approved Proposition 19, which would legalize cannabis in California, on November 2, according to the Sheriff.
“Proposition 19 is not going to pass, even if it passes,” Baca said in a news conference Friday at sheriff’s headquarters in Monterey Park, reports Robert Faturechi in The Los Angeles Times.

The department run by Sheriff Baca polices 75 percent of Los Angeles County. His staunch opposition to marijuana -- even if it is legalized -- was echoed Friday by an announcement from Attorney General Eric Holder that federal officials would continue to “vigorously enforce” cannabis laws in California, even if state voters pass the measure.

Baca, who is sworn to uphold California state law, claimed Prop 19 was superseded by federal law and if passed, would be found unconstitutional.

Standing onstage with other prominent opponents of marijuana legalization, including Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley, Sheriff Baca colorfully assailed marijuana use, users and sales.

Asked if he had ever experimented with pot, Baca left no room for doubt. “Hell, no,” he said.

Baca claimed legalizing cannabis would have far-reaching effects, including increasing the costs of drug rehabilitation (although most people in rehab for marijuana have been forced there by court order), causing traffic accidents (although marijuana is not a significant factor in auto wrecks), prompting labor disputes with employees getting high on the job (although Prop 19 gives employers the right “to address consumption that actually impairs job performance“), and providing a safe cover for drug cartels selling hard drugs.

California’s laws for pot smokers are already lenient enough, Baca claimed.

“If you a need for an ounce or less… then use your marijuana, but use it privately,” Baca said. “If you want to do a joint in your house, do it. Leave the rest of us alone.”

Baca claimed personal users smoking at home were already a non-priority for police agencies, including the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. His department does target pot dealers, he said.

The sheriff came out against Prop 19 early on, joining with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to try to prevent its passage.

Polls have shown California voters are almost evenly split on legalization.

Incredibly, Baca claimed on Friday that local law enforcement agencies -- which, again, are sworn to uphold state laws -- should abide by federal drug laws prohibiting marijuana, even if Prop 19 passes.

“[Prop] 19 has no effect on what we’re going to do,” Baca said.


Source: AlterNet (US)
Author: Steve Elliot
Website: http://www.alternet.org/
URL: http://www.alternet.org

California's Prop 19: Dead on Arrival?

Attorney General Eric Holder says he will fight recreational marijuana use in California even if it becomes legal. Critics say he doesn't have the resources.

WATCH:

Multisource political news, world news, and entertainment news analysis by Newsy.com

Many states have a November ballot or measure regarding medical cannabis

Here’s a roundup of the latest political news from around the United States as we move closer toward the elections in November.  Many states have ballots or measures to approve medicinal cannabis in some form or another.    

Not only is it important to stay informed, but vote! 

Jack Pot

 Poll: 52% of likely voters support medical marijuana

PHOENIX — Arizonans appear to be ready to approve medical marijuana for the third time.

A new statewide poll shows 52 percent of likely voters in support of Proposition 203. Only 33 percent are opposed, with the balance undecided.

Pollster Earl de Berge also found the 405 likely voters he questioned earlier this month leaning in favor of Proposition 106. Billed as a constitutional guarantee of the right to control health care, one of its main goals is to undermine the mandate in the new federal health law that every person obtain insurance coverage.

But the race is still up in the air over Proposition 109 to provide state constitutional protections for the right to hunt and fish.

Proposition 203 would allow anyone with a doctor’s recommendation to get up to 2 1/2 ounces of marijuana every two weeks. The measure lists specific ailments for which the drug could be recommended. 

Legalizing Pot Would Hardly Dent Cartels' Revenue

California -- Proposition 19, which would partially legalize marijuana in California, would do little to curtail the violent Mexican organizations that smuggle it across the border, according to a new study by drug policy researchers that takes aim at one of the main arguments proponents have made for the initiative.

The report released Tuesday by Rand Corp., the nonpartisan research institute in Santa Monica, estimates that legalized marijuana could displace the Mexican marijuana sold in California, but concludes that would erase no more than 2% to 4% of the revenues the gangs receive from drug exports.

"It's hard to imagine a scenario where Prop. 19 has a dramatic influence on their revenues. We just don't see that happening," said Beau Kilmer, co-director of Rand's Drug Policy Research Center.
The researchers said the only way California's legal pot could cut significantly into cartel revenues is if it were sold across the country. They were skeptical that would happen. "It's very hard to imagine that the feds would sit idly by and just let California marijuana dominate the country," Kilmer said.
Much of the analysis rests on the conclusion that drug organizations earn far less from marijuana exported to the United States than previously estimated. Researchers put that income at about $1.5 billion, while federal government reports have set it as high as $14.3 billion.
Proposition 19 would allow cities and counties to authorize the cultivation and sales of marijuana. It's unclear how many would do that, but some cities, such as Oakland, are already poised to approve it. It's also unclear whether the Obama administration would allow it, since marijuana is illegal under federal law. The researchers do not address those issues.
The initiative would also allow people 21 and older to possess as much as an ounce and grow up to 25 square feet of marijuana.

The initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot has triggered a serious debate south of the border, where a four-year campaign against drug gangs has left about 30,000 people dead. Last week, Mexican President Felipe Calderon stressed his opposition, saying that the U.S. has done too little to suppress consumption. But Calderon's predecessor, Vicente Fox, supports the initiative and has called for legalization in Mexico.
Stephen Gutwillig, California director of the Drug Policy Alliance and an advocate of the initiative, said marijuana prohibition has failed because it has created a massive underground economy controlled by violent criminals. "Ending marijuana prohibition, bringing the multibillion-dollar marijuana market into the light of day and under the rule of law, will deal a major blow to criminal syndicates on both sides of the border," he said. "California can't put these cartels out of business by itself, but Prop. 19 is a crucial first step."

President Obama's drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, embraced the report's conclusion that Proposition 19 would not put the cartels out of business. "When you're a thug and a criminal and a killer, you're not going to get your MBA and work for a company in Mexico," he said. Kerlikowske, a former Seattle police chief, said that with drug use increasing, more emphasis should be placed on protecting young people from illegal drugs, including marijuana.
The Rand analysis dismissed a frequently cited U.S. government estimate that marijuana sales make up about 60% of cartel export revenues. Marijuana revenues fall between 15% and 26%, according to the report.The researchers could find no documentation to support the higher estimate.

"This 60% figure is a truly mythical number, one that appeared out of nowhere and that has acquired great authority," they wrote. "This figure should not be taken seriously."
Kerlikowske said it was based on outdated information and said he is pressing for better data collection. "It's pretty hard to foster support for public policy if your numbers are soft," he said.
The report notes that U.S. government estimates of marijuana production "have long been inconsistent and sometimes implausible." To illustrate the absurdity of one production estimate, the researchers calculated that regular users would have to smoke a joint every two hours they are awake.
As part of their study, which they acknowledge is replete with uncertainties that could alter the results, the researchers made numerous calculations such as determining the average weight of a joint: 0.46 grams.

The researchers conclude that Mexican marijuana, which is lower in quality and and contains less of the main psychoactive ingredient than California-grown pot, has a U.S. market share between 40% and 67%.
Comparing the Mexican drug gangs to the American Mafia, the researchers said that they would find other businesses to replace pot, just as the Mafia replaced bootlegging when alcohol prohibition ended. In the short term, they concluded, violence might even increase as gangs fight over smaller revenues.


Source: Los Angeles Times
Author: John Hoeffel, Los Angeles Times
Published: October 13, 2010
Website: latimes

Legalizing Pot Won't Hinder Mexican Cartels

Santa Cruz, CA -- Mexico's drug traffickers are likely to lose customers in America's largest pot consuming state if California legalizes marijuana, but they won't lose much money overall because California's residents already prefer to grow their own, according to a study released Tuesday.
That means the proposal on the state's November ballot to legalize marijuana also will do little to quell the drug gangs' violent and sophisticated organizations that generate billions of dollars a year, according to the study by the nonpartisan RAND Drug Policy Research Center.

Californians, who make up one-seventh of the U.S. marijuana market, already are farming marijuana at a much higher rate than in neighboring states and tend to buy domestic rather than smuggled marijuana, the study found.
"We're already growing our own in California, so it's hard to see how we'd impact Mexico's market all that much," agreed Valerie Corral, a Santa Cruz, Calif., pot grower whose farm north of the city provides medical marijuana to members of a cooperative she helped found.

California voters will decide next month whether to legalize and tax their own recreational use of marijuana. The measure is closely watched in Mexico, where more than 28,000 people have died in drug violence since Mexico's President Felipe Calderon launched his crackdown on organized crime in late 2006. Both Calderon and President Barack Obama agree the vast profits cartels collect in the U.S. - estimated between $18 billion and $35 billion a year - fuel drug wars south of the border.
RAND found that less than $2 billion of those profits come from marijuana, though, and only about 3 percent of Mexican marijuana sales are in California.

Proponents of the proposition say they want to lower prison costs and find new revenue from marijuana taxes, and that the measure could reduce violence associated with the illegal drug trade in California and Mexico.

The Obama administration disagrees, and U.S. drug czar Gil Kerlikowske told The Associated Press that the new study backs them up.
"This report shows that despite the millions spent on marketing the idea, legalized marijuana won't reduce the revenue or violence generated by Mexican drug trafficking organizations," said Kerlikowske, head of the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy. "The bottom line is that increased access and availability to marijuana jeopardizes the health and safety of our citizens."
Some former law enforcement officials, however, said it's hard to imagine there wouldn't be major cartel profits at stake.

"It's ridiculous to claim that ending prohibition won't have a big financial impact on these violent criminals' bottom lines," said Stephen Downing, a supporter of Prop. 19 and a former Los Angeles Police Department deputy chief of police.

But the RAND study concludes the only way to cut into the cartels' profits would be the unlikely scenario of legal marijuana growers taking over cartel distribution elsewhere in the U.S. Under that scenario, Mexican drug trafficking organizations, currently providing at least half the marijuana in the U.S., would lose roughly 20 percent of their total drug export revenues. Their remaining profits from more lucrative drugs like cocaine and heroin would continue to flow.

"If that happens, then legalization could reduce some of the Mexican drug violence in the long run," said Beau Kilmer, the study's lead author and co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Research Center.
But the study authors said they don't believe the federal government will stand idly by if home-grown smugglers were to capture the entire national market now held by Mexico-sourced marijuana.

"It would be difficult not to notice that the quantities produced and perhaps even taxed were vastly larger than what is needed to supply the California market alone," said the study.
But some say it's already beginning to happen.

"Smuggling in the U.S will be easy, as marijuana can be shipped to consumers in other states through our mail system, said economist John Carnevale, a drug policy expert who has worked with the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy for three administrations. "There is anecdotal information that this is already occurring."

Former San Jose, Calif., police chief Joseph McNamara says the proposed law's key goal isn't aimed at resolving Mexico's drug violence, and questioned RAND's assumptions about marijuana use and sales.
"Can a state facing a $19 billion dollar deficit casually pass up a chance to tax a product that escapes taxation only because it is illegal?" he asked.


Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Martha Mendoza, Associated Press 

Cannabis should be sold in shops alongside beer and cigarettes, doctors' journal says

An editorial in the British Medical Journal suggested that the sale of cannabis should be licensed like cigarettes because banning it had not worked. Photo: PA

An editorial in the British Medical Journal suggested that the sale of cannabis should be licensed like alcohol because banning it had not worked.

Banning cannabis had increased drug-related violence because enforcement made “the illicit market a richer prize for criminal groups to fight over”.

An 18-fold increase in the anti-drugs budget in the US to $18billion between 1981 and 2002 had failed to stem the market for the drug.

In fact cannabis related drugs arrests in the US increased from 350,000 in 1990 to more than 800,000 a year by 2006, with seizures quintupling to 1.1million kilogrammes.

The editorial, written by Professor Robin Room of Melbourne University, said: “In some places, state controlled instruments - such as licensing regimes, inspectors, and sales outlets run by the Government - are still in place for alcohol and these could be extended to cover cannabis.”

Prof Room suggested that state-run off licences from Canada and some Nordic countries could provide “workable and well controlled retail outlets for cannabis”.

Prof Room suggested the current ban on cannabis could come to alcohol prohibition, which was adopted by 11 countries between 1914 and 1920.

Eventually it was replaced with “restrictive regulatory regimes, which restrained alcohol consumption and problems related to alcohol until these constraints were eroded by the neo-liberal free market ideologies of recent decades”.

The editorial concluded: “The challenge for researchers and policy analysts now is to flesh out the details of effective regulatory regimes, as was done at the brink of repeal of US alcohol prohibition.”

Campaigners criticised the editorial. Mary Brett, a retired biology teacher, said: “The whole truth about the damaging effects of cannabis, especially to our children with their still-developing brains, has never been properly publicised.

“The message received by children were it to be legalised would be, ‘It can't be too bad or the Government wouldn't have done this’.

“I know - I taught biology to teenage boys for 30 years. So usage will inevitably go up - it always does when laws are relaxed.

“Why add to the misery caused by our existing two legal drugs, alcohol and tobacco?”

Earlier this year, Fiona Godlee, an editor of the Journal, which is run by the British Medical Association, endorsed an article by Steve Rolles, head of research at Transform, the drugs foundation, which called for an end to the war on drugs and its replacement by a legal system of regulation.

Dr Godlee said: “Rolles calls on us to envisage an alternative to the hopelessly failed war on drugs. He says, and I agree, that we must regulate drug use, not criminalise it.”


Source telegraph..co.uk

A Dopey Measure on Marijuana

From Sacramento -- The state Capitol is pathetically dysfunctional. One in eight workers statewide is out of a job. UC Berkeley is arrogantly eliminating baseball. Things are not going well in California. What can we do?

Well, if Proposition 19 passes on the Nov. 2 ballot, we can all go get stoned. Legally. Buy some joints down at the corner convenience store. We can become an even bigger laughingstock to the nation.

It was tempting here to write again about the Capitol's broken governing system that resulted in another bumbling, bleary-eyed, all-night legislative session needed to pass a 100-day-late budget Friday.
But there's little left to say about this never-ending clown act. Besides, the adopted budget wasn't all that important. The hard decisions were left for the next governor and Legislature.
Prop. 19 is more interesting and would have a greater long-term impact on California.

The ballot initiative, bankrolled primarily by a prospering entrepreneur of the pot industry, would permit local governments to regulate and tax commercial cultivation and retail sales of marijuana. And it would permit all Californians at least 21 to grow and possess their own weed for personal use.
Such activity, however, still would violate federal law.

In California, selling marijuana for non-medicinal use is a felony. But possessing less than one ounce — about a sandwich baggie-full — is a low misdemeanor punishable by a fine.
Starting Jan. 1, pot smoking will be even less of a state crime. Under a bill recently signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, it will be deemed an infraction, equivalent to a traffic ticket.
Since 1996, when voters approved Prop. 215, it has been legal in California to grow, sell and smoke marijuana for medical purposes, subject to local control. A "patient" needs only a doctor's "recommendation," not a prescription.

Merely a quarter of buyers at medicinal pot shops "are truly in need of it because of a medical condition," says attorney George Mull, president of the California Cannabis Assn., which advocates "reasonable regulation of medical marijuana."
Mull opposes Prop. 19, illustrating a split in the marijuana community.
"We think it's kind of goofy to jump ahead to recreational marijuana when we haven't done medical marijuana correctly yet," he says.

"We'd like to see medical marijuana truly made legal. In many areas, you can grow your own but can't sell it. There should be a more incremental approach."
He adds that "this whole [initiative] was set up by folks trying to make millions."
That would be primarily Richard Lee of Oakland, founder of "Oaksterdam University," the nation's first marijuana trade school. Lee says his medical marijuana dispensary, nursery and other pot-related merchandising generate up to $7 million a year, according to a Times article by reporter John Hoeffel.
Lee is in a good position to make a bundle off marijuana legalization. So far, he has spent $1.5 million to qualify Prop. 19 for the ballot and pitch it to voters.
The pitch basically is this: Cops currently waste many millions chasing down nonviolent pot smokers. There's a $14-billion industry that could be taxed to help the debt-ridden state. And marijuana "prohibition" has created killer drug cartels.

Opponents counter that relatively little, in fact, is spent nabbing or prosecuting marijuana users. "There's nobody in jail for possessing less than one ounce of marijuana," says Fontana Police Chief Rod Jones.
State prison data show that fewer than 1% of inmates have been sentenced for marijuana crimes of any kind.
"Long, long ago in the John Lennon era, people got thrown in prison for possession of marijuana," says Cassandra Hockenson, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

"Not so much today."
Opponents also point out that there's no marijuana regulation or taxing provisions in the initiative. That would be left to local governments, and there'd be a confusing hodgepodge from county to county.
But Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) last week introduced legislation to create a uniform statewide regulatory system. "If 19 passes, we'll be ready," he asserts.
Prop. 19 supporters are united behind the belief that what someone inhales or ingests in the form of muffins or brownies ought to be his business only.
"Let the criminal justice system control people's actions, but not what they put into their bodies," says James P. Gray, a retired Orange County Superior Court judge, who describes himself as a libertarian "flame thrower."

And he adds: "Along those lines, it makes sense to me to strictly regulate and control heroin. It makes as much sense to put Robert Downey Jr. in jail for heroin addiction as it would have putting Betty Ford in jail for alcohol addiction."
Gray has long advocated the legalization of all drugs. "But let's start with marijuana," he says. "Each drug should be decided on its own merit."
Such talk scares Dr. David Sack, a psychiatrist and chief executive of Promises celebrity rehab centers. "Drugs cause tremendous hardships to children and families, and the risk of addiction goes up with exposure," he says.
"Marijuana is clearly addictive, impairs judgment and increases the risk of motor vehicle accidents and interferes with brain development, particularly in adolescents….
"The biggest concern I have is that legalization will create a societal validation that marijuana is not harmful."

Legalizing "recreational" dope would create yet another problem for the state.
Prop. 19 is a crackpot idea. Therefore, California voters just might pass it.
Note: California has enough problems without legalizing pot.


Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Author: George Skelton, Capitol Journal
Copyright: 2010 Los Angeles Times
Contact: letters@latimes.com
Website: latimes.com

Future of Legalized Pot Hazy in California

Laytonville, Calif. -- The man in brightly colored tie-dye frowns when he grabs a pruner from his work shed and heads to his garden. James Taylor Jones approaches a bushy marijuana plant, 6 feet tall and almost as wide. The pruner's blade grabs hold of the stalk, and Jones squeezes the handles together. Snap.

He walks to another plant and does the same. "This one is Headband," Jones says, naming the variety. "Don't tell me that as you're cutting it," his wife, Fran Harris, pleads. Thus ends the Peace and Love Medical Marijuana Collective.

Here in Mendocino County — where generations of mom-and-pop outlaws have made a living growing pot and dodging the cops — who could have predicted that legality would be more uncertain than illegality?
For the first time in their lives, Jones and Harris expected to be completely legit pot entrepreneurs this year. But spooked by federal raids of other northern California growers, scared about the risks even though they said they followed state and local laws, they decided to shut the collective down midway through the growing season.
"We don't want to go to jail," Jones says. "It's that simple."
"It's such a huge gray area right now," Harris says. "What appears to be legal now might not be legal next year."
Stories like Jones and Harris' offer a reminder that marijuana legalization — if ever it comes — likely won't be a smooth process. Predictions of what a world of legalized marijuana would look like are based on assumptions that can't be verified and expectations that may prove slippery.
Pundits and some politicians extol the tax money legal marijuana could bring in. But if legalization sends prices plunging, so, too, would the revenue.
Others argue legalizing marijuana would cripple the black market. But if new regulations and taxes encourage growers and users to remain underground, the black market — and the drug cartels that feast on it — would continue to thrive.
Individual states may legalize marijuana first — California voters will decide this year on limited legalization. But if the federal government doesn't go along, does any of it really matter?
In short, all the things that make medical marijuana such a complicated and contentious issue would likely only intensify with full legalization.

Snipped


Complete Article: http://denverpost.com/
Source: Denver Post (CO)
Author: John Ingold, The Denver Post
Published: October 10, 2010
Copyright: 2010 The Denver Post Corp
Website: http://www.denverpost.com/
Contact: openforum@denverpost.com

'High' Lights of New NJ Medical Marijuana Rules

By Brian Thompson / Source nbc

Advocates have been waiting overtime for the rules and regs to come out on the Garden State's new Medical Marijuana law, and now, finally, the draft rules are out.

So what bureaucrat decided there should be three grades of medical pot, categorized as "Low," "Medium" and yes, "High?"

There is a suggestion that the growers and dispensers can label their weed as "organic."

That's because no pesticides will be allowed at the two indoor Alternative Treatment Centers that will be authorized for plant cultivation only.

However, you won't see "organic" advertised on the outside of the 4 to 8 Alternative Treatment Centers designated as  "dispensaries."

The rules  prohibit outside advertising.

As a matter of fact, they ban advertising of the price of medical marijuana, so don't expect any price wars.

Not that it will be cheap for non-profit organizations to get into the Alternative Treatment Center (ATC) business.

Applicants must pony up $20,000 for an application (although $18,000 is refundable if your application is rejected).

It is unlikely the two ounces a month that can be sold to qualified individuals will be cheap.

One example, if you sign up for residential home delivery, the Alternative Treatment Center must put two employees in the delivery vehicle, with separate lock boxes for the drug and the cash.

Oh, and did we mention no advertising? The vehicles must be unmarked -- no "pot mobiles" rolling down Garden State roads.

If you go to an ATC to buy your product, you can't smoke it there.

In fact, it doesn't sound like the ATC's will be much of a gathering place because they will be banned from selling food or beverages (as in no coffee house atmosphere -- Starbucks should be pleased).

Nor will they be allowed to sell marijuana-themed T-shirts and other paraphernalia -- at least not to the general public.

However, they can sell the same to their state-approved customers. Go figure.

Three kinds of marijuana can be sold: dried leaves, oral lozenges, or topical formulations to put on your skin.

One more item of note, "The ATC shall establish, implement and adhere to a written... drug-free... workplace."

For patients looking for pain relief, it appears they'll have to wait a lot longer than the legislative authors intended.

The rules say the first sale won't be allowed til next summer as the ATC's are allowed to ramp up.

All 97 pages of the proposed rules are on-line at the NJ Department of Health and Senior Services website -- there still has to be a public hearing before they become final.

New poll shows California tilting against legalized marijuana

The latest poll on Proposition 19, the ballot measure on legalized marijuana in California, found more opposition than previous polls. Prop. 19 backers dismiss the poll. Opponents say it is a sign.

Lanette Davies, co-owner of CannaCare, a medical marijuana shop, looks at some young marijuana plants at their facility in Sacramento, Calif.

By Daniel B. Wood I Los Angeles

As the nation’s first state vote on whether to legalize marijuana for recreational use nears, a new poll has introduced fresh uncertainty into the race.

After weeks of riding a wave of positive poll results, supporters of Proposition 19 were handed a head-scratcher on Tuesday when a Reuters/lpsos poll found 53 percent of California voters opposed to the measure. The same polling company found voters nearly deadlocked on the issue in June. Also troubling for the "Yes on 19" side are media reports that it is out of money.

Opponents of marijuana legalization say the poll shows that Californians are turning against Prop. 19 as they learn more about it. Prop. 19 backers are painting the poll as an anomaly.

Future polls should offer more insight into whether the Reuters/Ipsos poll is off base or whether it is picking up a shift in the race.

“Either this poll is way off, or they are picking up something that no one else has so far," says Ethan Nadelmann, founder and executive director of Drug Policy Alliance, a national organization that backs legalizing and regulating marijuana.

New poll: outlier or indicator?

He notes that a Sept. 21 California Field Poll, a Sept. 26 PPIC poll, and an Oct. 3 SurveyUSA poll all found more support than opposition for Prop. 19 among California voters.

Proponents of Prop. 19 point out that the questions in the Reuters/Ipsos poll use different descriptions than the wording in the initiative itself. Moreover, they suggest that the small sample size of the poll may also have accounted for why the results differ from several others.

"All of the evidence points to this latest poll as being an outlier compared to all the others showing us ahead,” says Yes On 19 spokesman Tom Angell.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll's findings on the two major political races in the election – for Senate and governor – also don’t square with the other polls, say backers.

But opponents of legalization say the new poll results reflect the fact that 24 state newspapers have come out against Prop. 19 in recent weeks.

“We feel these editorial positions are getting to the undecided voters,” says Roger Salazar, spokesman for the No On Proposition 19 campaign. “[Voters] held off making their decisions until they weighed the pros and cons and now have made up their minds.”

As to the cash-flow question, Prop. 19 hasn't drawn the kind of heavy money that usually infuses issues campaigns. Just $2.5 million has been raised on both sides, according to Kim Alexander of the California Voter Foundation, with the “yes” campaign raising nearly $10 for every $1 brought in by the opposition.

Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz recently gave $50,000 to the pro-legalization campaign, but otherwise it is relying on an animated force of volunteers and hundreds of smaller donations.

Can Prop. 19 work?

Meanwhile, both sides are trying to address the issue of how the proposition might be implemented if it passes.

On Wednesday Assemblyman Tom Ammiano introduced legislation that would establish a uniform statewide regulatory system for marijuana under the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The bill would leave cities and counties the option to regulate marijuana sales themselves.

The bill undercuts several assertions by Prop. 19 opponents, says Mr. Angell of Yes On 19. First, “that the money generated by marijuana sales won’t make it to the state,” he says. And second, that "this is a regulatory nightmare, because it creates so many different regulatory bodies.”

Cities have already begun to take up these questions. In anticipation of Prop. 19 passing, nine California cities – including San Jose, Stockton, Oakland, and Sacramento – have initiatives on the Nov. 2 ballot asking voters to decide about specific taxation rates for marijuana.

But opponents of legalization aren't placated by those arguments. “They’re trying to tell the people, ‘Don’t worry, we’ll fix this later,’ ” says No On 19's Mr. Salazar. “They know the public isn’t buying their regulatory scheme."

While supporters of Prop. 19 claim the measure will generate $1.4 billion for state coffers, Salazer points to the California State Board of Equalization’s updated analysis of Prop. 19, which refutes those claims. The study concludes: “It is not possible to estimate the potential revenue gain” of Prop. 19.

Those findings have provided the “no” forces with the confidence they say they need down the stretch.

“We are ... talking to the public up and down the state because we feel that if they get the right information about this initiative, they will vote no,” says Salazar.

The Buzz About Proposition 19

California -- Under current state law, the possession, cultivation, or distribution of marijuana generally is illegal in California. Possession of less than one ounce of marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine, while selling marijuana is a felony and may result in a prison sentence. In November 1996, voters approved Proposition 215, which legalized the cultivation and possession of marijuana in California for medical purposes.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005, however, that federal authorities could continue to prosecute California patients and providers engaged in the cultivation and use of marijuana for medical purposes.

Despite having this authority, the U.S. Department of Justice announced in March 2009 that the current administration would not prosecute marijuana patients and providers whose actions are consistent with state medical marijuana laws.

Proposition 19 changes state law by legalizing the possession and cultivation of limited amounts of marijuana for personal use by individuals age 21 or older, and authorizing various commercial marijuana related activities under certain conditions. Nonetheless, these marijuana related activities would continue to be prohibited under federal law and it is not known to what extent the federal government would continue to enforce them. Currently, no other state permits commercial marijuana- related activities for non-medical purposes.
Under the measure, persons age 21 or older generally may possess, process, share or transport up to one ounce of marijuana; cultivate marijuana on private property in an area up to 25 square feet per private residence or parcel; possess harvested and living marijuana plants cultivated in such an area; and possess any items or equipment associated with the above activities. 


The possession and cultivation of marijuana must be solely for an individual's personal consumption and not for sale to others, and consumption of marijuana would only be permitted in a residence or other "non public place."
The smoking of marijuana in the presence of minors is prohibited.
The measure also sustains existing laws that prohibit driving under the influence of drugs or that prohibit possessing marijuana on school grounds. Any person age 21 or older who knowingly gives marijuana to a person age 18 through 20 could be sent to county jail for up to six months and fined up to $1,000 per offense.


Prop 19 allows local governments to adopt ordinances and regulations regarding commercial marijuana related activities including marijuana cultivation, processing, distribution, transportation, and retail sales.
However it does not permit the transportation of marijuana between California and another state or country nor permit sales to persons under 21.
Whether or not local governments engaged in this regulation, the state could, on a statewide basis, regulate the commercial production of marijuana.
The state could also authorize the production of hemp, a type of marijuana plant that can be used to make products such as fabric and paper.


Prop 19 requires that licensed marijuana establishments pay all applicable federal, state, and local taxes and fees currently imposed on other similar businesses.
In addition, the measure permits local governments to impose new general, excise, or transfer taxes, as well as benefit assessments and fees, on authorized marijuana related activities.
The purpose of such charges would be to raise revenue for local governments and/or to offset any costs associated with marijuana regulation.
In addition, the state could impose similar charges.


Prop 19 could result in savings to the state and local governments by reducing the number of marijuana offenders incarcerated in state prisons and county jails, as well as the number placed under county probation or state parole supervision. These savings could reach several tens of millions of dollars annually.


The measure would result in a reduction in costs for enforcement of marijuana related offenses and the handling of related criminal cases in the court system.
Proposition 19 is carefully crafted to decriminalize personal marijuana use and production so those over 21 years of age may decide if it is something they wish to consume.
By so doing it enhances freedom of choice, engenders respect for the law, protects children, regulates marijuana use and production, and significantly reduces burdens on our police, justice, and correctional systems.


Vote YES on Prop 19 to halt victimless crimes.

Source: Red Bluff Daily News (CA)
Author: Richard Mazzucchi
Website: redbluffdailynews

Growing demand for herb

Oregon -- If Melanie Barniskis doesn't take her medicine each night, chances are she won't be able to walk the next day. "Without it, I can't get out of bed to get the day started," said Barniskis, 54, of Phoenix. "When there is a pain flare, it's as if someone is driving two red-hot pokers into my feet and lower calves."

To ease the pain, Barniskis, a former 9-1-1 emergency dispatcher for the Bethel Police Department in Alaska, drinks a tincture of marijuana or munches a "medible" — a baked goodie containing pot.


Barniskis is one of more than 36,000 medical marijuana cardholders in Oregon and 4,000 in Jackson County who use marijuana to treat pain, nausea, cancer symptoms and other ailments.


But Barniskis, who has been diagnosed with bilateral peripheral neuropathy, a condition that fills her lower extremities with acute pain, said the limitations in the current system make it difficult for her to meet her medical marijuana needs.


That's why she supports Measure 74 on the Nov. 2 ballot, which would create a state-regulated supply system for adults through nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries. It would provide a backup in the event she runs out of her legal stash, she said.


"Last year I had a grower and harvested a pound and a half of usable marijuana in November — I've been eking it out to last until this year's harvest," she said, noting she's tried numerous other medicines with no relief and too many negative side effects.
She's been using medical marijuana since moving to Southern Oregon two years ago. Her husband, Roger Blakesley, 58, who also has a medical marijuana card, is growing it for both of them this year.
"At least 30 percent of the people who have gotten (medical marijuana) cards are out of luck when they need to buy legal cannabis," she said. "So they get it off the street — the black market."


Under Measure 74, medical marijuana dispensaries would be regulated by the Department of Human Services. Growers and dispensaries would pay a 10 percent fee on all income plus a $1,000 and $2,000 annual licensing fee, respectively, to fund the program. It also would provide assistance for low-income cardholders to obtain medical marijuana.
Opponents worry the measure is too vague, leaving it up to administrators to decide the maximum number of dispensaries, penalties for infractions and record-keeping requirements. Nearly half the members of a state Citizens' Initiative Review panel worried the increased availability of marijuana would invite illegal activity and concluded that Measure 74 is a "thinly veiled attempt to legalize marijuana (and) has a high probability of being abused."


To see the full report, go to: mailtribune.com/measuringmarijuana
Proponents say the measure might not be perfect, but it addresses the major problem with the current system: lack of a reliable supply.


"Measure 74 is the only thing that is going to keep our medical marijuana law functioning as it should," Barniskis said. "Passage would ease up on that constant fear of running out of medicine. It would provide safe, reliable places for people to go for their medicine."
Bob Wolfe of Oregon Healthcare Consulting, a patient advocacy group based in Portland, said the number of patients seeking legal marijuana for medicinal purposes in Oregon far exceeds the legal supply.


"This measure will definitely help patients who can't get medical marijuana now except through the black market," he said. "The last thing you want is grandma stricken with cancer buying from a gang member."
Measure 74 proponents say the amount of legal weed being grown in the state is about 30 percent less than the demand by cardholders.


Under the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act, approved by voters in 1998, cardholders must grow their own medical marijuana or have it grown for them by a licensed grower. A legal grower may provide six mature marijuana plants, 18 starts or seedlings and 24 ounces of usable marijuana each for up to four people.
With Measure 74, each dispensary or grower may possess 24 mature marijuana plants, 72 starts or seedlings and 6 pounds of usable marijuana. However, those amounts could be changed by administrative rule.


Unlike a law enacted in California in 1996 that left licensing to local governments, Measure 74 specifically instructs the state to license and monitor dispensaries.
The measure has been endorsed by the likes of former Oregon Supreme Court Justice and Gov. Betty Roberts, former Portland Police Chief and Mayor Tom Potter, and former federal prosecutor Kristine Olson, who was the U.S. attorney for the District of Oregon.
It is supported by the Oregon chapter of National Organization of the Reform of Marijuana Laws, Voter Power, Oregon Green Free and Pro-Oregon, all nonprofit marijuana advocacy groups.


Anthony Johnson, a co-chief petitioner and co-author of the measure, says the central goal is to improve the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act.
"Having to turn to the black market is risky business for anyone, let alone a sick patient," he said. "Too many patients now are being forced to go without medical care.
"The program would also be self-funding, and it would generate millions in revenue for Oregon health programs," he added.


The state agency would closely monitor and regulate the program, he said, adding that administrative adjustments would be made as needed with input from legislators and others.
Back in Phoenix, Melanie Barniskis said she didn't ever anticipate she would be using marijuana for pain relief. Before moving to Alaska, she had been a high school English teacher in New Jersey.


The problems with her lower extremities began in 2005 in Alaska when she developed deep sores that opened up on both feet, causing nerve damage, she said. The cause of the ailment was never specifically diagnosed, she said.
"They had me on all the regular narcotics available," she said. "But none of it was effective. And the side effects of some were worse than the actual pain."


As the 9-1-1 operator for Bethel police for four years, she had to be alert, she said, noting that at night the emergency dispatcher did double duty, serving the Alaska state troopers. Bethel is a remote town about 400 air miles west of Anchorage at the mouth of the Yukon River.
"I couldn't work if my mind was fogged out," she said, referring to the side effects of pain pills prescribed by medical doctors. "At night, we covered an area about the size of Oregon."
Because of health reasons, the couple moved to Southern Oregon, where she began researching the medicinal properties of marijuana. It provided the relief she sought, she said.
Now they have a dozen marijuana plants growing in their backyard. Each one is tagged appropriately.


"We wanted to make sure everything is totally legal," she stressed, adding, "I never thought I'd be doing this. But the pain limits my mobility. The medicinal marijuana is extremely effective to stop the pain."


The administrative assistant at Ashland Alternative Health said she consumes the medical pot each evening when she gets home from work.
"The evening is when the pain is at its worst," she said.
Unless she takes her marijuana medication, the pain keeps her awake nights, making it impossible for her to work the next day, she said.
"I've gone from law enforcement to becoming a medicinal cannabis user," she said. "I've seen both sides. I can't deny there is abuse.
"But I've been converted into a complete believer because I know it alleviates my pain," she added.


Source: Mail Tribune
Author: Paul Fattig
Website: mailtribune.com