Massachusetts

[palmspringsbum]

On the ballot: Non-binding questions

By Arthur Katz/ Correspondent
Thursday, November 2, 2006 - Updated: 08:40 AM EST
The Lexington Minuteman

A non-binding question appears as Question 4 on the ballots in Precincts 3, 8 and 9, which are part of the Third Middlesex Senatorial District, represented by Susan Fargo, D-Lincoln.

The question asks, "Shall the state senator from this district be instructed to vote in favor of allowing seriously ill patients, with their doctor’s written recommendation, to possess and grow small amounts of marijuana for their personal medical use?"

In 2005, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that people whose doctors have prescribed marijuana for medical purposes can be arrested and prosecuted based on federal law, overriding statutes in ten states that allowed the practice. The justices said specifically that their ruling did not judge whether marijuana is an effective pain reliever.

However, some members of the medical profession continue to call for the availability of marijuana to relieve suffering in patients, with such illnesses as cancer, AIDS and multiple sclerosis.

Drug control agencies uniformly dismiss the use of marijuana medicinally as unjustified by research and carrying the potential for addiction.

There are a number of Web sites which discuss the issue at length, including http://www.medicalmarijuanaprocon.org/pop/conflicts.htm.

Attempts to reach Fargo for comment were unsuccessful.

Appearing as Question 4 in Precincts 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7, and as Question 5 in Precincts 3, 8 and 9, voters are asked, "Shall the state representative from this district be instructed to vote in favor of a resolution calling upon the President and Congress of the United States to end the war in Iraq immediately, and bring all United States military forces home from Iraq?"

Similar questions are on the ballot in as many as 138 communities across Massachusetts and in several other states.

Rep. Jay Kaufman said this week, "We have lost our way as a country. We have lost the respect of other nations. We have lost our civil rights. We have lost our budget surplus. We have lost our men and women to this war. It must come to an end."

Rep. Tom Stanley said, "I am inclined to support this resolution, but I would want to hear from veterans’ groups before deciding. I wouldn’t want to do anything that would hurt the morale of our troops in the field.

"Since I have never served in the armed forces, I want to get the perspective of those who have before making up my mind."

[palmspringsbum]

The Drug War Chronicle - world’s leading drug policy newsletter

Marijuana: Massachusetts Gubernatorial Candidate Favors Legalization, Just Not During His Term

from Drug War Chronicle, Issue #460, 11/3/06

Democratic Massachusetts gubernatorial candidate Deval Patrick has, according to recent polling, a huge lead on his opponent, Republican Lt. Gov. Kerry Kealey. It isn't because of the clarity of his position on marijuana policy.

At the fourth and final gubernatorial debate October 26, both major party candidates and two minor party candidates were asked the following question by the debate moderator: "Since the 1970s at least a dozen states have decriminalized the possession by adults of small amounts of marijuana for personal use. Massachusetts is not one of them. In a 2003 Boston University study estimated that the thousands of arrests for pot possession each year cost more than $24 million in law enforcement resources. There's a bill before the legislature that would reduce the penalty for possession of less than an ounce to a $100 civil fine. Would you sign it if it reached your desk?"

After saying that he hoped the bill never reached his desk because that was not his priority, Patrick added that law enforcement should emphasize large drug traffickers and that the same person who provided marijuana to his drug addict uncle also provided him with heroin. He concluded his initial response by saying, "I'm very comfortable with the idea of legalizing marijuana. I just don't think it ought to be our priority."

The moderator was reduced to asking Patrick directly if he would veto the bill. "I would veto that," he responded.

Republican candidate Healey didn't dance around in her response. "I would veto that proposal," she said, citing the cost of drug addiction and the "tragedy" of kids in the social service system because of drug-addicted parents. "Anything that leads to drug addiction should be absolutely off the table and I would never legalize drugs."

Independent gubernatorial candidate Christy Mihos joined the consensus, saying that he supported medical marijuana, but would veto a decrim bill. Only Green-Rainbow candidate Grace Ross gave any positive indication about the decrim bill, but that was vague too. "I'm not big for throwing people in prison for small amounts of marijuana but what the real issue is -- drug addiction, and every other industrialized nation doesn't have as many people in prison and there's a reason because when someone's addicted to something they can get treatment on demand, they can get treatment immediately because universal health care means when you know you need treatment you go in and you get it. So I think if we're going to talk about drugs lets catch the big folks who have the big amounts of money who bring them into communities, not the small fish."

Still, Ross refused to say whether she would sign or veto a decrim bill, saying she would want to see the context of other "much more important" policy changes. She did, however, obliquely attack Healey's comments about drug-addicted parents. "I think we have got to be real here because it's not about what's legal and what's not legal completely because a lot of those kids in DSS their parents are addicted to alcohol, not to illegal substances and I think that the one piece about this kind of question that's legitimate is that addiction is not connected with which substances are legal or not. And so we need to be honest here. I think the question of where marijuana sits in comparison to alcohol is a legitimate question and we need to deal with addiction as addiction and not about criminalizing people who are addicted. We need to deal with it as addiction."

In local ballot questions in the 2000, 2002, and 2004 general elections, more than 410,000 Massachusetts residents have voted for marijuana law reform.

[palmspringsbum]

Concord heavily supports Patrick

By Maureen O’Connell/ Staff Writer
Thursday, November 9, 2006 - Updated: 08:03 AM EST
The Concord Journal

In Concord - and Massachusetts - it was all Deval Tuesday.

Governor-elect Deval Patrick and his running mate Tim Murray received 5,320 votes in Concord, while Republican opponent Kerry Healey received just 2,613. Independent Christy Mihos received 289 votes, and Green-Rainbow candidate Grace Ross garnered 180 Concord votes.

In all, almost 72 percent of voters came out to the polls Tuesday, said Town Clerk Anita Tekle.

"We thought it was going to be higher, because we had an unusually high number of absentee ballot requests," said Tekle. In all, 90 absentee ballots were cast. Tekle said the high number may have come from the gubernatorial candidates, who encouraged those who could not vote on Nov. 7 to apply for the absentee ballot.

At the polls Tuesday, it was consistently busy, said Tekle. Small lines - with three or four people at the most - formed at certain times of the day, but "for the most part, it was steady," said Tekle.

Voting slowed in the last hour, Tekle said, but even then, there were still a handful of people voting at each of the five precincts.

"Every precinct was busy, but not as busy as during the day," she said.

State Sen. Susan Fargo defeated Republican challenger Sandi Martinez Tuesday. See story this page.

Current District Attorney Martha Coakley had Concord’s support in her bid for attorney general, getting 5,870 votes. Her opponent, Republican Larry Frisoli of Belmont, received 2,262 votes.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, easy beat Republican challenger Kenneth G. Chase in Concord, getting 5,920 votes, compared to Chase’s 2,312. Secretary of State William Galvin handily defeated Green-Rainbow candidate Jill Stein, 5,570 to 1,835.

Treasurer Tim Cahill won re-election over challenger James O’Keefe, 5,925 to 1,281. State Auditor A. Joseph DeNucci defeated Working Families candidate Rand Wilson, 5,927 to 1,032.

Congressman Marty Meehan and state Rep. Cory Atkins faced no challengers in the race, and were re-elected. Other unopposed winners were Gerard T. Leone for district attorney, Michael A. Sullivan for clerk of courts, Eugene C. Brune for register of deeds and Marilyn Petitto Devaney for governor’s council.


<center><span class=postbold>Ballot questions</span></center>


On Tuesday’s ballot, Concord voters faced three statewide ballot questions: Sale of wine at grocery stores, nomination of candidates for public office, and the ability for family child care providers to unionize. All three were defeated statewide, and in Concord.

The fourth ballot question, posed to residents of the 3rd Middlesex District, asked if the state legislator in the district should be instructed to vote to allow the legal use of marijuana for medical purposes. Concord voters overwhelmingly approved Question 4, 5,327 to 2,028.

[palmspringsbum]

<span class=postbold>Drug War Chronicle - world’s leading drug policy newsletter</span>

Election 2006: Massachusetts Voters in Four More Districts Continue the Clamor for Marijuana Law Reform

from Drug War Chronicle, Issue #461, 11/10/06

Since 2000, marijuana reform activists associated with MassCann, the Bay State NORML affiliate, and the Drug Policy Forum of Massachusetts have sponsored advisory marijuana reform questions in state representative and senate districts and have won every one. The trend continued this year, with reform questions in four more districts being approved by voters.

According to DPFMA board member John Leonard, a question asking whether representatives in the 1st and 12th Plymouth Representative Districts should be instructed to support marijuana decriminalization passed in both, with margins of 61% and 60% respectively. In the 3rd Middlesex Senate District and the 7th Norfolk Representative District, voters were asked to vote on questions asking whether to instruct their representatives to support medical marijuana legislation. Those questions won with 67% in Middlesex and 64% in Norfolk.

According to MassCann, more than 420,000 Massachusetts residents in 110 communities had voted to urge their legislators to embrace either decriminalization or medical marijuana before Election Day. We can now add another 63,000 pro-reform votes and four more communities to the tally.

In a debate last month, newly elected Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick said he's "very comfortable" with the idea of marijuana legalization but would veto a decriminalization bill if it came to his desk because "I just don't think it ought to be our priority." Hopefully the legislature will give him the opportunity to change his mind.

[palmspringsbum]

Medical marijuana question passes

By Ben Aaronson/ Staff Writer
Thursday, November 16, 2006
The Bedford Minuteman

Supporters of Question 4 on last week's election ballot gave new meaning to the concept of grassroots campaigning.

Nearly 70 percent of Bedford voters cast their ballots in favor of the nonbinding initiative, which calls for legislation that would allow seriously ill patients to possess and grow small amounts of marijuana for medical use.

The Public Policy Question appeared on ballots in the nine communities that make up the 3rd Middlesex Senatorial District, represented by Sen. Susan Fargo, D-Lincoln, who heads the Joint Committee on Public Health. The ballot initiative also appeared in parts of Milton and Randolph, which comprise the 7th Norfolk Representative District, represented by Rep. Linda Dorcena Forry. The question was passed in all 11 communities by an average margin of 67 percent.

Bill Downing, director of the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition (MASS CANN), said the showing of public support did not surprise him. According to Downing, more than 110 communities across the state have voted in favor of various marijuana reform questions since 2000.

"The election results matched exactly with the results we've been seeing on all of our ballot questions in the past. Almost half the state has voted on these issues now," said Downing.

MASS CANN, the state affiliate of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), worked directly with the Drug Policy Forum of Massachusetts, which sponsored two marijuana-related ballot questions in this year's elections, Downing said. A question regarding the decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana appeared on ballots in the 1st and 12th Plymouth Representative Districts, passing by a margin of 61 and 60 percent, respectively.

Downing said he is hopeful the passing of the nonbinding initiative at the polls will soon translate into the passing of binding legislation at the State House. Downing said previous marijuana reform bills have been tied up in committee and never reached the House or Senate floors, but that pressure is building on legislators to act on what seems to be a public mandate.

"Politicians are reticent to take stands on issues unless they have to. The goal of these ballot initiatives was to force the politicians to take a stand and represent their constituents," Downing said.

While legislators have largely ignored past proposals for the decriminalization of marijuana, Downing said MASS CANN and other marijuana reform groups have had some success in pushing medical marijuana bills.

In 1993, then Gov. Bill Weld signed a bill establishing a state therapeutic research program to perform studies on the medicinal benefits of marijuana, Downing said. The program never got off the ground, however, as the federal Drug Enforcement Agency refused to supply marijuana to the state Department of Public Health, he said. This year's ballot question supports legislation that would circumvent the DEA supply ban by allowing medical marijuana patients to grow small amounts of the drug for personal use, Downing said.

According to the American Medical Association, the main psychoactive substance in marijuana, THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol), may have medical applications in treating many diseases. According to the AMA, studies have shown that THC may be effective in reducing malnutrition and weight loss in HIV/AIDS patients, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients, intraocular pressure in glaucoma patients, and spasticity in patients with multiple sclerosis and other movement disorders.

Doctors are telling their patients that marijuana could help their symptoms, Downing said, but they can't get it for them because it is a controlled substance.

"You've got people who are suffering from serious diseases who are being forced out into the black market to buy it from heroin dealers on the street. Politicians always talk about not wanting to send the wrong message to our kids, but what kind of message does that send?" Downing said.

Detective Lt. Scott Jones of the Bedford Police Department said legalizing the medicinal use of marijuana would not have a big impact from a law enforcement point of view. If such legislation were to pass, Jones said, police officers would treat cases of marijuana possession like any other prescription drug

"I don't know that it would make things any harder for us. The way it is now with drug possession cases, we have to prove that it is a controlled substance and that it was possessed illegally," Jones said. "If someone claimed it was for a medical reason, it would be up to us to prove that they didn't have a legitimate right to the drug."

Selectman Sheldon Moll said he does not support the distribution of drugs in general, but that he is in favor of it if there is a clear medical benefit. Moll said he had a friend many years ago who was suffering from Hodgkin's Disease, a form of lymphatic cancer. Moll said the only way his friend could relieve the pain from his treatments was to take marijuana.

"I don't like the idea of drugs in our society. But if something helps somebody and it's not being abused, how can you be against it?" Moll said.

[palmspringsbum]

The Cape Codder
February 1, 2007

POLICE PRIORITIES ARE MIXED UP


To the Editor:


This letter is in response to the story “Drug bust in Bourne linked to string of crimes.” (The Upper Cape Codder online Jan 25, page 4 this edition.)

Six months of surveillance by local police of a 17-year-old pot dealer after complaints from local citizens?

Six months to catch a 17-year-old with less than $5,000 of high grade on him? And how much did that six months of surveillance cost taxpayers of Bourne? That's the information I would like to see disclosed, the questions newspaper reporters should ask but don't.

Six months of paying detectives big money for one small-time pot dealer sounds like a real bad deal to me. If they would just hire me I'd have that wrapped up in 24 hours without breaking any civil liberties.

A real serious crime reduction person would go right to the source and say “end it now or you are going down.” And that would likely be an end to small-time hydro man without the big tax bill!

Or better yet just legalize adult sales and the problem goes away entirely.

Detective Doble throws in propaganda that marijuana is addictive.

Addictive like sugar, sex, gambling, yes. Mental addiction however is not what medical professionals go with.

Marijuana, unlike heroin, alcohol, steroids, nicotine is not physically addictive.

Doble would be well served by attending a training with LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) or NORML to get his science right in regards to marijuana. Looks like he is halfway there in joining LEAP with his statement that with the demand being so high and the risk of getting caught still low, somebody else will just step in to fill the demand left by this one bust. Sounds like a war that can't be won. He knows it, and he still prefers his career over helping people.

Blaming this one pot dealer on rising crime in Bourne also seems to be propaganda stretching the reality of the crime situation in Bourne, especially since they busted a crack house mentioned in this same story.

It's time for police to stop acting like politicians and time to stop using busts to justify failed drug policy.

Join LEAP; it's the right thing to do Detectives Doble and Silvestro.


Michael Collins
Boston

[palmspringsbum]

Marijuana could be decriminalized in Mass.

The Daily Free Press
By: Rachel Leamon
Posted: 1/29/08

Massachusetts lawmakers may end up passing more than legislation if three proposed bills reducing punishment for marijuana possession from jail time to a small fine are voted into law.

Proposed Senate bills no. 1121 and no. 1011 would replace criminal penalties for possession of less than one ounce of marijuana with a civil fine. House bill no. 2247 will create a program to make it legal for people to grow, smoke or possess marijuana with a doctor's written certification.

Under current Massachusetts law, people arrested for possession of any amount of marijuana can face up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $500, according to the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy.

"Creating a civil penalty system instead of a criminal one would save Massachusetts millions of dollars in law enforcement resources, and it's been proven that decriminalization does not increase marijuana use," said Sensible Marijuana Policy chairwoman Whitney Taylor.

Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition President Keith Saunders said previous polls show voters in the commonwealth support the bills. He said the proposed legislation is based on public policy questions MassCann and the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws have asked since 2000.

"Massachusetts voters have made it clear that they do not consider the 10 percent of the state's populace who uses marijuana each month to be acting in a criminal manner just for smoking pot," he said.

Some in the medical field say reducing the punishment of marijuana may cause people to abuse it or other drugs.

"In its current state, it has been noted that marijuana can serve as a 'gateway' drug, sometimes leading to the use of more dangerous drugs," said Boston University Student Health Services Director Dr. David McBride.

He said marijuana smoke has the same carcinogens as tobacco smoke, causing similar health defects. Long-term smoking of any kind can lead to mouth and lung cancer and emphysema, McBride said.

BU School of Hospitality senior Sara Shein said marijuana has an unfair stigma attached to it and its misperceptions make it seem more harmful than it is.

"Many people use it to help with anxiety and I think it can help people in a way that prescription medications can't," she said.

BU College of Communication freshman Sadaf Ayub said she has noticed in her home state of California a smaller punishment for marijuana possession would have few negative effects.

"I think people are more responsible about smoking in [California] because the laws are less strict there," she said.

[palmspringsbum]

Changes sought in marijuana laws

<span class=postbigbold>But police warn that marijuana use isn't harmless</span>

The Boston Globe
By Taryn Plumb, Globe Correspondent | February 10, 2008

It's not an easy question to answer.

Although Georgetown lawyer Steven Epstein is an emphatic and public supporter of legalizing marijuana, he gets a little evasive when asked about his own recreational use of the drug.

"I have used marijuana in the past," he said. "And I have liked it."

A boisterous man with a pile of wild brown curls, the 51-year-old Epstein noted that, if he answered any other way, he'd be declaring himself a criminal.

"It doesn't seem logical to me," he said. Possessing marijuana "should be a matter of choice."

It may very well be - at least in Massachusetts - if three initiatives backed by local reform groups make it onto this year's ballot.

Now being mulled by the Legislature, two of the measures propose that marijuana in amounts of less than an ounce be decriminalized, so that people found in possession face just a civil fine. The third recommends that the drug be allowed for medical use.

Members of the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy and the Georgetown-based Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition - the latter of which Epstein and roughly 200 other members are actively involved in - collected 80,372 signatures in 350 of the state's 351 cities and towns to get the questions on the ballot. At least 66,593 were required for the initiatives to be considered.

Once certified by the secretary of state, the measures were passed on to the Legislature, which has until May 6 to act on them.

If lawmakers reject the initiatives or fail to act, the groups will try to gather another 20,000 signatures by June 18 to get the initiatives on the November ballot. Opponents can petition the Supreme Judicial Court to disqualify the questions.

If the questions make it onto the ballot, they would require approval from a majority of voters and, if passed, would go into effect on Dec. 4, 30 days after the election.

Epstein and other proponents are confident the questions will become law. They say legalization is long overdue. Nonbinding questions dealing with decriminalization and medical marijuana have appeared on the ballot more than a dozen times in various districts since 2000, and House and Senate bills dealing with those same topics have cropped up at least three times since 2005.

"I shouldn't be considered a criminal to have my choice," said 44-year-old Bill Bohns of Salem, a member of MassCann who admitted to smoking regularly since 1989, the year he says he was diagnosed with testicular cancer. "As long as I'm not harming others, I should be able to do it."

Many who take the other side of the argument, however, say legalizing the drug could foster a dangerous, chaotic environment.

Although marijuana might seem harmless, it can impair users' coordination, balance, and sense of time and distance, thus creating a "direct link" between use and car crashes, according to the Essex district attorney's office.

Workplace safety could also be compromised: The rate of industrial accidents among marijuana users is more than 50 percent higher than among nonusers, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

"If you see an increase in marijuana use, you're going to see an increase in incidents, particularly accidents," said Everett Police Chief Steven Mazzie.

But cannabis proponents say its use doesn't rise with decriminalization; they point to studies published in the British Journal of Psychiatry and by the National Academy of Sciences that have found little evidence to support that.

In fact, many backers of legalization say the state could save substantial money by decriminalizing. According to a report compiled by Harvard University economics lecturer Jeffrey Miron, doing so would save millions in police and court costs.

Over the past few decades, 12 states, including Maine, New York, Ohio, North Carolina, Mississippi, California and Alaska, have opted for decriminalization, according to the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. Legislators in New Hampshire and Vermont are also mulling that option.

Epstein, who has been behind legalization efforts for 35 years, argues that the drug is already "de facto decriminalized" in the Massachusetts. The attorney, who occasionally represents clients who have been charged with marijuana possession, said most of them end up with minimal fines and short probation sentences.

"Marijuana arrests [involving] handcuffs and a trip to the station are less frequent," he said.

Mazzie confirmed that. Officers in Everett encounter marijuana users and sellers on a regular basis, but they don't always arrest them. Most times, the officers use their discretion, especially when dealing with juveniles and people possessing small amounts.

Still, legalization is a different matter, he said, especially because it could set a precedent. "I'd be concerned that it may be a slippery slope," he said, noting that proponents might eventually try to legalize cocaine or heroin.

But hold the Cheech and Chong references, Epstein said.

"I've seen people who were totally, totally blasted out of their minds 24/7 and, for whatever reason, couldn't keep their lives together," he said, noting those people need help. However, he added, "The people I know whose marijuana use is their downfall is nil."

He pointed to movies such as "The Big Chill" or "Dazed and Confused," as providing accurate portrayals of typical marijuana use: normal people having a good time.

During the Cannabis Reform Coalition's recent board of directors meeting at TGI Fridays in Newton, he motioned around the room to note the varied ages and socioeconomic statuses of attendees.

Most of the 17 members were men - some with gray hair, some balding, some aging hippies with ponytails, some younger guys with baseball caps and piercings. Tall flasks of beer lined the table at which they sat; at one point, they raised their drinks in a toast "to liberty, my friend."

This is a "war on people's choice of altering their consciousness," said Epstein, a father of three who is as apt to quote John Adams as song lyrics by The Kinks.

Still, he insists, his support isn't just so people can legally bend reality. He believes the government could benefit from regulating and taxing the drug - at $3.50 a gram - and allowing scientists to further study hemp as it pertains to bio-fuel and medicine.

Bohns says he's a testament to the medicinal benefits of marijuana, saying it helped him "get up and get going" after radiation therapy for his cancer.

And since then, smoking marijuana has helped improve his mood. With a smile, he said, "I've been told my outlook on life is right up there."



© Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[palmspringsbum]

Marijuana on panel agenda

<span class=postbigbold>Senate health committee to discuss medical conditions as defense</span>

By James Carlson
The Capital-Journal
Published Monday, February 11, 2008

A Senate health committee will hear testimony today on a bill that would allow certain medical conditions as a defense against prosecution for marijuana possession.

Under the Kansas Medical Marijuana Act, people with a debilitating disease could present to the judge a "written certification" from their doctor attesting to the relief marijuana provides.

"(This bill) doesn't legalize marijuana, it doesn't decriminalize it," said Laura Green, director of Kansas Compassionate Care Coalition. "It just allows a person who has a serious debilitating medical condition who gets arrested for marijuana to bring it up to a court."

Jon Hauxwell, a physician from Hays, will testify in favor of the bill. He used to work on a reservation in Montana where he dealt with substance abuse issues. He said he understands the opposition to this bill, but he added that the medical community has never allowed those who abuse a drug to deter doctors from prescribing it to patients in need. He listed morphine and Ritalin as other legally prescribed drugs to which patients can get addicted.

"We shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater," Hauxwell said.

Former Attorney General Robert Stephan, a cancer survivor himself, also will testify in favor of the bill. In August, he came out in favor of legalizing the drug for medical use.

He said at the time he believes "the state should not pre-empt the role of the physician when it comes to deciding what is best for ill Kansans."

The legislation defines a debilitating condition as "cancer, glaucoma, positive status for human immunodeficiency virus, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, hepatitis C, amyotrophic" or any other condition that causes a host of debilitating symptoms.

Current law doesn't allow judges or juries to consider a medical condition when prescribing punishment for possession of the drug.

"You can't even mention it," Hauxwell said.

The bill faces an uphill battle in a state wary of legislation that even smells like marijuana legalization. Senate Health Care Strategies Committee member Sen. Vicki Schmidt, R-Topeka, opposed the introduction of the bill. She said there was no way of standardizing dosages of marijuana.

And committee chairwoman Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, who is in remission from stage four non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and whose son survived leukemia, said in a recent article about medical marijuana that there are other drugs on the market that work.

James Carlson can be reached at (785) 233-7470 or james.carlson@cjonline.com.

[palmspringsbum]

March 24, 2009

Massachusetts Looks to Legalize Pot: Eyeing Millions in Tax Revenue

(ChattahBox)—The state of Massachusetts, the bastion of the Kennedy dynasty and all things democratic, is looking into the massive revenue the state can bring in from legalizing and taxing the commercial cultivation and sale of marijuana. Massachusetts, like many states in this deep economic recession, are scrambling to find additional sources of revenue to keep state services afloat. This is good news for the many people who oppose the criminalization of marijuana use, believing law enforcement efforts to stop people from smoking pot have been a complete failure.

The Cannabis Regulation and Taxation Act, contained in house Bill 2929 and Senate Bill 1801, was just introduced in the state legislature. The bills seek to regulate marijuana the same way it controls alcohol: by legalizing its use for those over 21. The language of the bills make it clear what many already know: “The governor and the representatives of the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging that previous efforts have not succeeded in eliminating or curtailing marijuana use and abuse…”

If these two bills pass, it will no longer be a crime to grow and smoke pot for those over 21 years of age. The state would impose licensing requirements and excise taxes on the retail sale of pot, adding as much as $100 million in annual state revenue. The sales tax would not apply to adults who possess or grow marijuana for personal use or who transfer non-profit marijuana.

The Massachusetts bills are similar to the recent bills introduced in the California state legislature to get its hands on tax revenue from marijuana sales. California already has a large-scale commercial production of medical marijuana that is distributed in storefronts called marijuana dispensaries. The medical guidelines for marijuana prescriptions are quite lax and just about anyone can get one.

Attorney General Eric Holder, recently announced that the federal government will allow local distribution of medical marijuana in the US, if in compliance with local and state laws. Holder also announced the federal government will no longer raid state marijuana dispensaries.

States like Massachusetts and California responded to these announcements, by quickly introducing legislation legalizing and taxing the retail sale of marijuana. Stay tuned for further updates of this groundbreaking change in the nation’s treatment of marijuana use.

[palmspringsbum]

Mass weighs pros and cons of legal marijuana

Sam Butterfield, Collegian Staff
The Daily Collegian | Wednesday, April 1, 2009


Two Massachusetts legislators have introduced a bill that would make the sale of marijuana by licensed distributors legal in the state.

House Bill 2929 and Senate Bill 1801, introduced in the statehouse March 23, was sponsored by Amherst Rep. Ellen Story, Northampton state Sen. Stan Rosenberg and petitioned for by Northampton attorney Richard Evans. The bills seek to tax and regulate the cannabis industry, stating that “previous efforts have not succeeded in eliminating or curtailing marijuana use and abuse.”

The bills would also create a regulatory board, the Cannabis Control Authority, to supervise the distribution and sale of marijuana in Massachusetts.

Under the new bill, officials would place marijuana into one of three tax classes, depending on quality. The Control Authority would be charged with testing the quality of the marijuana to determine its tax bracket, collecting excise taxes on the sale of marijuana, issuing licenses to farmers, importers and commercial distributers.

Also, the rule would apply to retailers who could potentially sell the marijuana in a store. The law would create tax stamps to issue to these purveyors to verify that the marijuana had been legally obtained. Driving under the influence of marijuana and public consumption would remain a crime.

Marijuana under the new bill would be moved from its origin point to consumers in several stages.

A farmer would hold a cultivation license, which would cost $500 annually, and could sell marijuana to a processor, who could “possess, process, package, box and crate cannabis,” into one ounce sealed bags, selling those to someone with a trade license, which would cost $3,000 a year. From there, the processor could sell the marijuana in any form to someone with a retail license, who would essentially be operating a marijuana storefront, selling marijuana to any person over 21 years-old who is not clearly intoxicated.

No one convicted of a felony, except a marijuana-related felony, within the last 10 years would be able to hold a license.

Rep. Story and Sen. Rosenberg cautioned that the bill was likely to be met with incredulousness from lawmakers, but said they hope the bill will open the door to dialogue on the potential benefits of marijuana legalization.

Rosenberg said he hopes the bill will stimulate discussion on the issue of legalizing, though he said he doubts the bill will pass for the present.

“It will take a while to get the legislature and the public’s attention on the subject,” he said. “It is not likely to move very far in this legislative term.”

Rep. Story said that she would like to see the bill pass and that she feels it could at some point in the future, but that the present political climate in Boston indicates otherwise.

“If there ever was a time that this bill should pass because of the tax revenues this would bring in, this is the time,” she said. However, she noted “the legislature will not vote for it because it does not want to be seen as soft on drugs.”

Story said lawmakers would probably like to take some time to observe the effects of the recent decriminalization plan.

“People who might even be in favor of this say ‘we just decriminalized it, let’s wait and see what that does, and then we can consider whether we can just make it altogether legal,’ but right now the mood in the legislature is not to do that, legislators are still very nervous about the legalization of currently illegal drugs,” said Story.

Though she feels the bill will not pass at this time, she said she is hopeful that this legislation will generate open discussion about legalization and its potential for revenue. She also feels that opinions on all morality issues change over time, as new generations view once shunned behaviors more tolerantly.

“The older generation, for the most part, were the ones who had such trouble with same sex marriage, and the younger generation will come along and find it astonishing that that was ever a controversial issue,” she said, “so the same thing may happen with marijuana.”

Evans said he took the initiative to introduce this legislation because “no one else was going to do it, somebody has to.”

Like the two legislators sponsoring the bill, Evans said he hopes it will create serious discussion about legalization.

“I’m trying to prompt constructive discussion,” he said.

Evans said he feels current marijuana legislation is anachronistic and represents government being out of touch with its citizens, adding that marijuana prohibition is no longer financially viable in an economic downturn.

“It’s a legacy of past generations,” he said of current laws, “we don’t need the prohibition laws, we certainly can’t afford the luxury of the prohibition laws, we’re foolish to deny ourselves the tax revenue we could be generating; it’s a question of sensible government.”

National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Law (NORML) Director and University of Massachusetts alumnus Allen St. Pierre said the legalization plan would put Massachusetts at the forefront of marijuana reform and would help save taxpayer money and extend civil rights in ways other than merely ceasing the arrest and prosecution of users and dealers.

“It would cease the arrest of approximately 10,000 people a year on cannabis charges,” he said. “But worse than that, it would stop the databases the government keeps of the DNA of marijuana users,” he explained.

“In most states, if you’re caught smoking marijuana you have your DNA swabbed and put in databases, which are expensive to keep, and hand our government our genetic code.”

St. Pierre, an Amherst native, said that prohibition has not worked to end the abuse of marijuana and that research suggests an effective way to curtail marijuana use would be to treat it in much the same way tobacco has been dealt with recently.

“We have to use public education that is credible,” he said, explaining that the Partnership for a Drug-Free America’s anti-marijuana campaign, the largest ever advertising campaign, has not been seen as credible by young people, its target audience.

By making smoking appear less desirable and by using hard statistics showing its dangers authorities have proved that it is an addictive, deadly substance, said St. Pierre.

Further, by raising taxes on it, legislators have been able to create an introductory price which makes tobacco difficult to access for first time smokers, who are presumed to be younger and therefore have less income. If the same plan were to be implemented for marijuana, St. Pierre said, authorities would have a workable recipe for reducing the instances of marijuana use but still not clogging the criminal justice system or persecuting users.

St. Pierre also explained that demography will play a role in shaping marijuana policy as the discussion on how to regulate marijuana continues.

“The baby boom generation, like them or not, their mores and values – which decidedly intersect with marijuana – are essentially leading this nation, and the generation behind them, the 40-year-olds, you can call them, are behind marijuana more, and the people behind them, the 20-year-olds, are even more behind it,” he said.

“When this gets vetted around the Commonwealth, places like Lowell, parts of Cape Cod and the islands, Cambridge, good parts of the whole Boston area and the suburbs, places in Western Mass. like Williamstown, Amherst – anywhere there’s a college – their politicians will be more inclined to support it than the bigger industrial cities like Worcester and Springfield that are more heavily swayed by the archdiocese and the Catholic church,” said St. Pierre.

“But there will be a medical marijuana bill on the ballot in 2010 or 2012 and that will likely pass by the same margin as the decriminalization bill, so Massachusetts is going to be in play on the issue of marijuana,” he added.

“Prohibition might have lasted had a major economic crisis not have confronted America,” he said. “And that is what is on the table now that is making this issue palpable.”

Sam Butterfield can be reached at sjb09@hampshire.edu.

[palmspringsbum]

With New Fed. Policy, Mass. Patients Want Medical Marijuana Bill


By Marijuana Policy Project , Reforming U.S. Marijuana Laws - 4 Hours Ago


BOSTON — The Obama administration’s directive to federal prosecutors not to prosecute medical marijuana activities that are in accord with state laws gives new impetus to the drive to pass a medical marijuana bill in Massachusetts, patients who have benefited from marijuana said today.

Pending legislation, HB 2160 would make Massachusetts the 14th state with such a law. The bill is largely modeled on the successful medical marijuana law in Rhode Island, which has been in force since 2006.

“I’m excited about this news from the Obama administration, which shows that the government is now willing to acknowledge that marijuana has legitimate medical uses,” said Marcy Duda of Ware, who suffers from chronic pain and debilitating nerve damage due to brain surgery. “I hope this sends a signal to our legislators that there is no reason not to move ahead with legislation to help seriously ill patients. I’ve tried prescription painkillers that are very addictive and just knock me out. Medical marijuana helps me get by.”

A Suffolk University poll released in September found that 81 percent of Massachusetts voters support medical marijuana legislation. Full poll results are available at http://www.suffolk.edu/research/38128.html

“Hopefully this will help reduce the needless stigma associated with medical marijuana use,” said Don from the South Shore, who suffers from a rare condition called cyclic vomiting syndrome and who asked that his full name not be used for fear of legal consequences. “It’s not about an excuse to use an illegal drug, it’s about people with cancer, pain, or other illnesses who don’t respond to other available medications. I suffered for years before I had any idea about medical marijuana. I’ve considered moving to Rhode Island so I could have safe access to my medicine and never have to miss work while bedridden with nausea and vomiting.”

[palmspringsbum]

Editorial: Marijuana and tax revenue

The Stoneham Sun
Thu Oct 22, 2009, 09:32 AM EDT


Stoneham - A threshold was quietly crossed last week on Beacon Hill: Marijuana legalization was discussed with barely a giggle.

Thirty years after a trend toward liberalizing marijuana laws was reversed by Nixon’s “war on drugs,” we’re seeing a shift in attitudes and laws. In California, a medical marijuana initiative approved by voters has changed the facts on the ground. Pot shops are everywhere, operating on the tissue of legality provided by medical professionals with the broadest possible interpretation of the ills cannabis may be presumed to treat. But there are no signs of great damage done by making the drug more openly available, and no sign of a serious movement to recriminalize it.

Instead, California is moving toward the next obvious step: legalizing, regulating and taxing cannabis. Two referendum questions are being proposed for the 2010 ballot.

The opponents of medical marijuana were right when they predicted it was a slippery slope to legalization. If they had just taken it off the drug schedule, let it be legally produced and sold only with a prescription, things might have been different. But Californians are now being forced to admit the people purchasing pot from licensed distributors aren’t all that sick.

The alternative to the medical model of marijuana regulation is the alcohol model. That’s what the Joint Committee on Revenue of the Massachusetts Legislature heard testimony on last Wednesday. House 2929, submitted at the request of a Northampton attorney, is modeled on the state’s alcohol law. It wouldn’t just legalize marijuana, it would provide for the regulation of its potency, set rules for its distribution and — of particular note to a Legislature struggling with enormous revenue shortfalls — heavily tax it.

No one is predicting this bill will make it to the floor for a vote any time soon. California will likely lead the way on this issue, and no state can effectively legalize a controlled substance until Congress changes federal law. But the Revenue Committee gave a respectful hearing to about 20 supporters and one opponent who testified on the bill. Neither the lawmakers nor the media tried to turn a serious topic into a joke. That itself is progress.