The liquid inside the test tube is neon green, the color of lime Kool-Aid or the mad-scientist potions found only in comic books. Perhaps it's fitting, then, that the contents come with a whiff of danger. They are a mixture of marijuana and solvents, stirred together in a furious swirl by a lab technician wearing protective goggles and latex gloves.
Running the concoction through a $70,000 machine, the technician can learn with scientific precision the plant's unique chemical makeup, its potency, even its growing method.
The ultimate goal? Find out how good it is.
"We're not going to be taken seriously unless we have proof," said Michael Lee, the owner of the lab and its adjacent medical-marijuana dispensary, Cannabis Therapeutics.
This is the new science of pot, part of a fresh wave of study and innovation among scientists and cannabis advocates all seeking to solve a central dilemma: In Colorado and other states, first came the approval of marijuana as medicine. Next comes the challenge of proving its effectiveness.
The newest research leaves little doubt that marijuana — or at least its chemical components — has promise in alleviating symptoms of some ailments, while also making clear that the drug is not without its drawbacks, some potentially serious.
What is less certain is whether Colorado's medical-marijuana system of dispensaries and caregivers — where commitment to scientific rigor and compassionate patient care is largely voluntary — can maximize that treatment potential for the benefit of patients.
Some dispensaries keep detailed patient records and embrace scientific testing in the hopes of providing patients with what works best. But medical-marijuana users report other dispensaries seem interested in just slinging snazzy weed, regardless of a patient's needs or ailments. (One ad on Craigslist: "Licensed caregiver looking to trade for Widespread Panic tickets.")
The mainstream medical community, meanwhile, questions whether any system that uses a raw plant as medicine can be optimally effective. Instead, conventional drug researchers see promise mostly in harvesting marijuana's ingredients for more traditional medicines and avoiding consumption methods like smoking that can hurt patients' health.
"If there is any future for marijuana as a medicine," a panel of experts wrote in a landmark 1999 report for the National Academy of Science's Institute of Medicine, "it lies in its isolated components."
Most marijuana advocates enthusiastically embrace a future in which pot is as much an accepted medicine as penicillin. But that future might not come without significant changes to the way medical marijuana is handled. New medicines require new tests and government approvals. Those lead to new regulations and new oversight. There is a focus on standardization, sterility, precision, discipline.
If there were ever a world where marijuana was available behind the counter at the corner pharmacy, the do-it-yourself independence of Colorado's — and many other states' — medical-marijuana system might not have a place. The bud could become obsolete, and dispensaries — both medically inclined and not — could go extinct with it.
Indeed, not every marijuana supporter is watching the development of cannabis-based pharmaceuticals enthusiastically.
"When they get through the FDA with their cannabis-based drugs, no legislature in the country will allow doctors and patients access to whole, smoked marijuana," said Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML.
Medical mystery
Medical marijuana hasn't always been a strictly on-your-own endeavor.
Historians have found references to the use of cannabis by healers in China and India dating back to at least 2000 B.C. The Irish physician William O'Shaughnessy wrote about the medical uses of cannabis in the mid-1800s. Cannabis-based treatments were commonly prescribed in the early 1900s in America before marijuana prohibition, which came about in the 1930s because of concerns over the drug's psychoactive effects and fears they could lead to criminal behavior.
What was missing, though, was an understanding of how marijuana provided its touted medical benefits — or, for that matter, even a basic understanding of how marijuana gets people stoned.
"We knew marijuana has effects," said Bob Melamede, a biology professor at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs and a prominent marijuana activist. "So the question was, 'How does it have them?' "
Answers arrived starting in the late 1980s with the discovery in the body of something called the endocannabinoid system. The system acts much like a traffic-control network, with receptors spread out across the brain, the organs, the immune system and various other areas to regulate functions as diverse as appetite, mood and pain. Using chemicals produced in the body called cannabinoids as traffic cops, the body turns on or off those receptors and controls the different functions.
Sending certain cannabinoids to one receptor and flipping it on, for instance, stimulates appetite. Tripping another dampens the body's inflammatory response.
Marijuana also contains cannabinoids that can fit into the endocannabinoid system's receptors — purely "pot luck," Melamede cracks. Ingesting marijuana unleashes into the bloodstream swarms of new cannabinoid molecules that quickly begin linking into the system and flipping switches. This explains both the medical and recreational effects of the drug — which in many cases are one and the same.
By jiggering with the receptors that control appetite, for instance, marijuana creates the much-joked-about munchies. But it is that same effect that spurs the appetites and calms the stomachs of cancer and AIDS patients. In the same way marijuana impairs the motor skills of some users, it can also calm the painful muscle spasticity of multiple sclerosis patients.
Highs and lows
There is no scientific consensus that marijuana cures any disease or ailment. But research generally suggests smoking marijuana has pain-killing, muscle-calming, nausea-controlling and appetite-boosting effects in many patients. That means studies have shown marijuana can provide benefits to patients suffering from each of the eight different medical conditions specified in the state's medical-marijuana constitutional amendment.
Scientists, though, disagree to what extent marijuana is beneficial and whether marijuana is more effective in those areas than existing treatments. Medical-marijuana supporters, meanwhile, cite other studies hinting at benefits in treating anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder and many other conditions.
The effects also vary from user to user, and using marijuana is not without its risks. Studies have shown smoking marijuana may be more harmful to the lungs than smoking cigarettes. Other studies suggest marijuana could lead to increased anxiety or more severe mental-health problems in some people and dependence in others. Marijuana is the most commonly cited drug for people seeking treatment for illicit drug abuse, according to the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
Mostly, though, mainstream medical-marijuana studies and research reviews conclude that more thorough clinical trials of the drug are needed. Those follow-up studies are made difficult by federal drug-control laws, which place tight restrictions on marijuana research.
The proliferation of state medical-marijuana programs has been of little use to researchers, said Cecilia Hillard, a neuroscience professor at the Medical College of Wisconsin and a past president of the International Cannabinoid Research Society. Participants in those programs are self-selected, she said. That means those patients are pre-disposed to thinking marijuana will help, further muddying the scientific analysis of raw marijuana's benefits and drawbacks.
"It's hard to say how much people are really using it medicinally versus recreationally," Hillard said. "Right now we're sort of to a point where the claims of medical benefit are so numerous and so over-the-top that you tend to get into the realm of, 'Well, I just don't believe any of this.' People are saying it's good for everything."
A handful of recent clinical trials — the first clinical trials of smoked marijuana in this country in 20 years — have provided some clarity. After being tasked by the California state legislature, the University of California at San Diego's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research sponsored about a half-dozen placebo-controlled trials to assess whether marijuana is effective as a painkiller for HIV and multiple sclerosis patients and for people suffering from nerve damage.
Across the board, the trials found some promise in marijuana as a treatment option.
"I was a little bit surprised, to tell the truth," said Igor Grant, the center's director. "I somewhat expected that what we would get is a mixed result . . . which would not be so unusual. But the fact that all of them came up with a consistent result makes me feel a little more comfortable in saying we could have something here."
That does not mean, however, that Grant is ready to proclaim marijuana as a miracle treatment. For starters, patients in the trials generally continued on the drugs they were already taking for their conditions and used marijuana to supplement. Second, Grant said, smoking marijuana is just too impractical a delivery method for medicine. Among the questions: How do you control the dosage?
"Would you prescribe smoking cannabis cigarettes in a hospital room where oxygen tanks may be present?" Grant asked. "The great likelihood is that we need alternative systems."
And that is exactly where marijuana's pharmaceutical gold rush is taking place.
Separating help from high
Sitting at lunch one day recently in a restaurant near his UCCS office, Melamede, the biology professor, reaches into his jeans pocket and pulls out two small vials containing inky green liquid. They are marijuana extracts, he explains, formulas carefully measured for potency and chemical makeup that can be taken under the tongue in a predictable dosage. He also has ideas for marijuana skin patches, tongue strips and lozenges, all part of a new publicly traded pharmaceutical venture he has embarked on called Cannabis Science.
"The key thing is," he said, "we're addressing the government's concern that smoked marijuana is not medicine."
Cannabis Science recently hired a company to help it negotiate the Food and Drug Administration approval process, and Melamede said he is hopeful it won't be long before the company can begin clinical trials targeting veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder and chronic pain patients.
But Melamede knows he is already behind in the race. GW Pharmaceuticals, a British firm, is currently preparing for its final clinical trials in the United States on a drug called Sativex, a marijuana-derived mouth spray the company intends as a treatment for cancer pain. The drug has already won approval in Canada and Great Britain and is in the last stages of approval in Spain.
What makes Sativex unique among current pharmaceuticals is that it is a blend of natural cannabinoids made directly from marijuana plants — grown in southern England — rather than synthetic re-creations of marijuana components, like drugs such as Marinol.
GW believes such an approach will yield better medicine, and it is already experimenting with other cannabinoid combinations for new drugs.
"There are more than 60 cannabinoids in the cannabis plant, so we believe that leaves plenty of scope for future development," GW spokesman Mark Rogerson wrote in an e-mail.
Most exciting to those looking to establish marijuana's potential benefits as medicine in a more socially accepted form is a cannabinoid called cannabidiol, or CBD. A batch of new studies suggest it may have medical effects like THC — the chemical in marijuana that gets a user stoned. But it eliminates the psychoactivity produced by THC. In other words, it's medical pot that won't get you high.
Colorado dispensaries have begun to stock marijuana strains high in CBD. But to tout a strain as being CBD-rich, it helps inspire consumer confidence to prove that it is, which is where laboratory testing comes in. Using pricey machines called high-performance liquid chromatography systems, medical-marijuana labs can detail the percentages of THC, CBD and a handful of other cannabinoids in the plant. The lab work is unchecked by the government and is performed only by labs either connected to or hired by dispensaries.
A number of dispensaries across the state now routinely place little cards detailing the test results next to each strain in their display cases. Patients can use the cards to pick marijuana suited to their need based on the numbers and not the strain names, which aren't always descriptive of a strain's effects.
"We hope to take the mystery out of the names and put in more science," said Frank Quattrone, the owner of Pure Medical Dispensary in Denver. ". . . The names, hopefully, will become irrelevant."
Dispensaries have also used the laboratory analysis as a guide in developing more potent product. Cannabis Therapeutics in Colorado Springs has developed a hash oil — essentially concentrated marijuana — that it touts as 86 percent THC. (Even the most knock-out marijuana buds are usually no more than 20 percent THC.)
Andreas Rivera, Cannabis Therapeutics' manager, says the oil will only be sold to terminally ill patients as a form of palliative care.
"It's really about pain management instead of getting people super stoned," he said.
But the availability — and marketability — of such products raises a question: Are patients actually using the analyses to find the best medicine or the best high?
Inside Cannabis Therapeutics, it is clear most patients currently see only limited value in the new data. Some ask about the numbers, but their eyes quickly glaze over during the explanation. Others skip the numbers entirely, instead choosing by past experience or the much cruder ratio of how much "upper" versus "downer" the strain contains.
Most patients rely to some extent on the advice of the woman working behind the counter, Julie Anderson.
"I usually ask Julie what the best she's got is," said patient Frederick Ross, who suffers from such severe appetite loss because of various medical conditions that he eats only once a day. "I don't play the numbers."
But some patients have taken an interest in the new data. One woman with kinky, waist-length, brown hair crouched in front of the counter to study the numbers for several minutes before making her selection. She said she has been writing down the THC and CBD ratios of the strains she's tried and has used the data to guide her decisions.
"I'm trying to apply some analysis to it and some logic based on the information I have," explained the woman, who asked that her name not be used because she didn't want her co-workers to know she is a medical-marijuana patient. "Hopefully I can make a more-educated decision."
Whatever the efforts by dispensaries to put more science behind their products, though, they're likely to be met with a sniff from the pharmaceutical industry, which believes most people will never accept taking medicine by smoking a raw plant.
"The current system of distribution may actually prevent cannabis from ever being accepted as a mainstream medicine by most patients and physicians," GW's Rogerson said.
People in the medical-marijuana business naturally bristle at such talk. But among some there is a sense that wider acceptability of marijuana by the medical world might actually restrict marijuana access.
State medical-marijuana programs, NORML's St. Pierre explained, function as relative oases for cannabis access — bypassing a whole set of federal rules because the federal government simply refuses to participate. Right now, marijuana is legally a Schedule I controlled substance because the federal government sees no accepted medical use for it and considers it to have a high potential for abuse. That classification means doctors can't prescribe it and pharmacists can't distribute it.
If marijuana were to be placed in a less-restrictive classification — as a petition currently pending with the Drug Enforcement Administration requests — doctors potentially would be able to prescribe it. That ability, though, would bring with it Food and Drug Administration oversight, production controls, inventory caps, distribution limits, security rules and more. Plus, with a federally blessed system to get patients cannabis in the same way they get cholesterol drugs, why would most state governments continue with their jury-rigged medical-marijuana systems?
"We see this as a boxed canyon," St. Pierre said.
Limitless learning
Back at Cannabis Therapeutics' lab, John Kopta — a Colorado State University biochemistry grad who runs the facility — is more optimistic. Only a few other labs in the country, mostly connected to the medical-marijuana industry, are doing what his does. The more study they do, the more proof they have. The more proof they have, the more they can lead the way forward.
"There's dozens of different cannabinoids in the plant, and we know of 10 of them and what they do," he said. "It's really limitless."
Source: Denver Post
If you know of an event that you feel should be listed on our calendar, please send details to info@mjdispensaries.com ~Thank You
Latest Headlines and Information
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Saturday, July 3, 2010
NEWS: Long Beach officials want to tax marijuana sales, crops
LONG BEACH - In an attempt to bring new revenue into the city coffers, Long Beach officials are proposing a tax on marijuana.
Director of Financial Management Lori Ann Farrell is asking the City Council on Tuesday to set a date for a public hearing to approve putting a marijuana tax measure on the November ballot. The proposal was added to the council's agenda Friday this afternoon.
Under Farrell's proposal, medical marijuana collectives would be charged a 5 percent gross receipts tax. A tax of 0.75 cents per square foot would be charged for sites that are used exclusively to cultivate marijuana.
California voters legalized medical marijuana in 1996, but recreational marijuana use is illegal. That could change with Proposition 19, a measure on the November ballot that would legalize marijuana in California for people 21 and older.
Considering this possibility, Farrell's proposal also includes a 5 percent to 10 percent gross receipts tax on other marijuana businesses.
If the council OKs the plan Tuesday, a public hearing would take place Aug. 3, when the council would vote on whether to place the tax on the ballot. Long Beach voters would have to approve the tax in November for it to go into effect.
Because no Long Beach elected positions are on the ballot in November, the council would have to declare a fiscal emergency in order to place the measure on the ballot.
The idea of taxing medical marijuana collectives has been bandied about since the council approved regulations in March that require collectives to register with the city, pay permit fees - which marijuana advocates say are exorbitant already - and run through a gamut of other requirements.
The law severely restricts where collectives can be located, keeping them out of residential areas, away from schools and 1,000 feet away from one anothereach other.
The ordinance also requires that Long Beach collectives grow their marijuana within the city limits and allows them to grow the plant on-site or to set up a separate cultivation location.
City officials have estimated that there are up to 85 collectives in Long Beach, but that number is expected to be reduced to 30 once the new restrictions are fully implemented, according to Farrell's report. The last day for collectives to apply for a permit was June 18, and on Sept.
20 a lottery will take place to determine which among those that are too close together will be allowed to operate.
If voters pass the marijuana tax, Farrell said in her report that she doesn't yet know how much money the city could raise.
Oakland, which was the first U.S. city to tax medical marijuana collectives, raised $23,608 in 2008 with a tax rate of 0.12 percent, according to Farrell. Voters there approved increasing the tax rate to 1.8 percent in July 2009, which it was estimated would raise $294,000, Farrell said.
Any extra revenue would be welcomed by Long Beach officials as the city faces an $18.5 million budget deficit in the next fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 and more shortfalls for at least the next two years.
Other cities, including Berkeley and Sacramento, are considering marijuana taxes as well.
However, Kris Hermes, spokesman for Americans for Safe Access, the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy group, said Long Beach's proposed 5 percent tax is "pretty steep."
He said the tax could just get passed on to medical marijuana patients who may not be able to afford it. Ideally, no marijuana tax would be placed on the ballot, he said.
"We don't believe that patients should be taxed at all for their medication," Hermes said.
The organization considers marijuana to be the equivalent of prescription drugs, which aren't taxed, Hermes said. On the other hand, cannabis is in a gray area - it isn't recognized as a legal drug by the federal government, and doctors don't give actual prescriptions for it.
Hermes said it is still much closer to a prescription medication than to an aspirin.
"You can't just go into the pharmacy and get it over the counter," he said. "You need to go to a physician and get a recommendation."
The council meets at 5 p.m. Tuesday in City Hall, 333 W. Ocean Blvd. The meeting can be viewed live in Long Beach on Charter Communications Channel 3, Verizon FiOS channel 21, and online at www.longbeach.gov.
Video clips from past city council meetings on the topic of medical marijuana can be found broken down by speaker on our YouTube Channel.
Source: Contra Costa Times
Director of Financial Management Lori Ann Farrell is asking the City Council on Tuesday to set a date for a public hearing to approve putting a marijuana tax measure on the November ballot. The proposal was added to the council's agenda Friday this afternoon.
Under Farrell's proposal, medical marijuana collectives would be charged a 5 percent gross receipts tax. A tax of 0.75 cents per square foot would be charged for sites that are used exclusively to cultivate marijuana.
California voters legalized medical marijuana in 1996, but recreational marijuana use is illegal. That could change with Proposition 19, a measure on the November ballot that would legalize marijuana in California for people 21 and older.
Considering this possibility, Farrell's proposal also includes a 5 percent to 10 percent gross receipts tax on other marijuana businesses.
If the council OKs the plan Tuesday, a public hearing would take place Aug. 3, when the council would vote on whether to place the tax on the ballot. Long Beach voters would have to approve the tax in November for it to go into effect.
Because no Long Beach elected positions are on the ballot in November, the council would have to declare a fiscal emergency in order to place the measure on the ballot.
The idea of taxing medical marijuana collectives has been bandied about since the council approved regulations in March that require collectives to register with the city, pay permit fees - which marijuana advocates say are exorbitant already - and run through a gamut of other requirements.
The law severely restricts where collectives can be located, keeping them out of residential areas, away from schools and 1,000 feet away from one anothereach other.
The ordinance also requires that Long Beach collectives grow their marijuana within the city limits and allows them to grow the plant on-site or to set up a separate cultivation location.
City officials have estimated that there are up to 85 collectives in Long Beach, but that number is expected to be reduced to 30 once the new restrictions are fully implemented, according to Farrell's report. The last day for collectives to apply for a permit was June 18, and on Sept.
20 a lottery will take place to determine which among those that are too close together will be allowed to operate.
If voters pass the marijuana tax, Farrell said in her report that she doesn't yet know how much money the city could raise.
Oakland, which was the first U.S. city to tax medical marijuana collectives, raised $23,608 in 2008 with a tax rate of 0.12 percent, according to Farrell. Voters there approved increasing the tax rate to 1.8 percent in July 2009, which it was estimated would raise $294,000, Farrell said.
Any extra revenue would be welcomed by Long Beach officials as the city faces an $18.5 million budget deficit in the next fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 and more shortfalls for at least the next two years.
Other cities, including Berkeley and Sacramento, are considering marijuana taxes as well.
However, Kris Hermes, spokesman for Americans for Safe Access, the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy group, said Long Beach's proposed 5 percent tax is "pretty steep."
He said the tax could just get passed on to medical marijuana patients who may not be able to afford it. Ideally, no marijuana tax would be placed on the ballot, he said.
"We don't believe that patients should be taxed at all for their medication," Hermes said.
The organization considers marijuana to be the equivalent of prescription drugs, which aren't taxed, Hermes said. On the other hand, cannabis is in a gray area - it isn't recognized as a legal drug by the federal government, and doctors don't give actual prescriptions for it.
Hermes said it is still much closer to a prescription medication than to an aspirin.
"You can't just go into the pharmacy and get it over the counter," he said. "You need to go to a physician and get a recommendation."
The council meets at 5 p.m. Tuesday in City Hall, 333 W. Ocean Blvd. The meeting can be viewed live in Long Beach on Charter Communications Channel 3, Verizon FiOS channel 21, and online at www.longbeach.gov.
Video clips from past city council meetings on the topic of medical marijuana can be found broken down by speaker on our YouTube Channel.
Source: Contra Costa Times
NEWS: Decision Due in Challenge to California Dispensary Bans
A California appeals court is due to issue a decision this month in a case with far-reaching implications for safe access in the state.
ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford argued before the Fourth Court of Appeals that the state legislature barred local governments from using nuisance statutes to ban medical cannabis dispensaries.
"Local governments cannot simply ban an activity that has been deemed lawful by the state," said Elford. "Dispensaries aren't nuisances, they're providers of essential health services."
That argument was bolstered when the court requested additional briefing, and Senator Mark Leno, one of the principal co-authors of California's Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB 420), filed papers telling the court that the legislature's express intention was to facilitate safe access and block such bans.
The case, Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, was brought by attorney Anthony Curiale on behalf of a dispensary that had been in operation for five months prior to Anaheim instituting a ban in July 2007. The appeal was filed in March 2008 after a Superior Court ruled that Anaheim could prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries from operating within its city limits.
Source: Americans for Safe Access (ASA)
ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford argued before the Fourth Court of Appeals that the state legislature barred local governments from using nuisance statutes to ban medical cannabis dispensaries.
"Local governments cannot simply ban an activity that has been deemed lawful by the state," said Elford. "Dispensaries aren't nuisances, they're providers of essential health services."
That argument was bolstered when the court requested additional briefing, and Senator Mark Leno, one of the principal co-authors of California's Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB 420), filed papers telling the court that the legislature's express intention was to facilitate safe access and block such bans.
The case, Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim, was brought by attorney Anthony Curiale on behalf of a dispensary that had been in operation for five months prior to Anaheim instituting a ban in July 2007. The appeal was filed in March 2008 after a Superior Court ruled that Anaheim could prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries from operating within its city limits.
Source: Americans for Safe Access (ASA)
NEWS: California Assembly to Vote on Joint Resolution. Bill Urges New Federal Policy on Medical Cannabis
A bill sponsored by ASA that urges federal officials to adopt a new national policy ensuring safe access is now before the California Assembly. Following testimony by California Director Don Duncan last month, the Assembly's Committee on Health voted 10-3 to pass the non-binding resolution to the full Assembly.
"This legislation is needed now more than ever," said Duncan in his testimony to the committee. "Lest federal officials think their job is done, they need to know their work addressing medical marijuana as a public health issue has only just begun."
Originally introduced by State Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) in June 2009, Senate Joint Resolution 14 urges the federal government to end medical marijuana raids and to "create a comprehensive federal medical marijuana policy that ensures safe and legal access to any patient that would benefit from it." The full Senate passed the bill last August by a vote of 23-15.
"Patients and providers in California remain at risk of arrest and prosecution by federal law enforcement," said Senator Leno in a statement on the resolution. "And legally established medical marijuana cooperatives continue to be the subjects of federal raids and prosecutions."
The Department of Justice issued a memo to US Attorneys in October 2009, discouraging them from prosecuting individuals who comply with state medical cannabis laws. But raids, arrests and prosecutions have occurred since then in California, Colorado and New Mexico. More than two-dozen patients and providers are currently being prosecuted under federal law and face decades in prison.
In California, medical marijuana provider James Stacy, whose dispensary was raided by the DEA in September 2009, a month before the Justice Department policy was issued, is scheduled to go to trial next month.
"No one should go to federal prison for treating illness or injury with a safe, effective medicine," said Duncan. "Suffering patients across the country will benefit from a sensible, comprehensive federal medical cannabis policy."
In addition to urging President Obama and Congress to "move quickly to end federal raids, intimidation, and interference with state medical marijuana law," SJR 14 asks them to establish "an affirmative defense to medical marijuana charges in federal court and establish federal legal protection for individuals authorized by state and local law."
Under federal rules of evidence, defendants facing federal marijuana charges cannot use their medical condition or compliance with state law as a defense in court. A bill to change that, the Truth in Trials Act (HR 3939), is currently pending before Congress.
If passed by the Assembly, the resolution will then be sent to President Obama, Vice President Biden, the Speaker of the House and each member of the California Congressional delegation.
Further information:
Senate Joint Resolution on medical marijuana
ASA fact sheet on SJR 14
Source: Americans for Safe Access (ASA)
"This legislation is needed now more than ever," said Duncan in his testimony to the committee. "Lest federal officials think their job is done, they need to know their work addressing medical marijuana as a public health issue has only just begun."
Originally introduced by State Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) in June 2009, Senate Joint Resolution 14 urges the federal government to end medical marijuana raids and to "create a comprehensive federal medical marijuana policy that ensures safe and legal access to any patient that would benefit from it." The full Senate passed the bill last August by a vote of 23-15.
"Patients and providers in California remain at risk of arrest and prosecution by federal law enforcement," said Senator Leno in a statement on the resolution. "And legally established medical marijuana cooperatives continue to be the subjects of federal raids and prosecutions."
The Department of Justice issued a memo to US Attorneys in October 2009, discouraging them from prosecuting individuals who comply with state medical cannabis laws. But raids, arrests and prosecutions have occurred since then in California, Colorado and New Mexico. More than two-dozen patients and providers are currently being prosecuted under federal law and face decades in prison.
In California, medical marijuana provider James Stacy, whose dispensary was raided by the DEA in September 2009, a month before the Justice Department policy was issued, is scheduled to go to trial next month.
"No one should go to federal prison for treating illness or injury with a safe, effective medicine," said Duncan. "Suffering patients across the country will benefit from a sensible, comprehensive federal medical cannabis policy."
In addition to urging President Obama and Congress to "move quickly to end federal raids, intimidation, and interference with state medical marijuana law," SJR 14 asks them to establish "an affirmative defense to medical marijuana charges in federal court and establish federal legal protection for individuals authorized by state and local law."
Under federal rules of evidence, defendants facing federal marijuana charges cannot use their medical condition or compliance with state law as a defense in court. A bill to change that, the Truth in Trials Act (HR 3939), is currently pending before Congress.
If passed by the Assembly, the resolution will then be sent to President Obama, Vice President Biden, the Speaker of the House and each member of the California Congressional delegation.
Further information:
Senate Joint Resolution on medical marijuana
ASA fact sheet on SJR 14
Source: Americans for Safe Access (ASA)
Thursday, July 1, 2010
NEWS: Grand Jury says government could benefit from legal pot: County could see $7.5 million gain from new taxes and decreased costs
SANTA CRUZ - Local governments could cash in on legal pot to the tune of $7.5 million, a new Santa Cruz County Grand Jury report concludes.
The analysis of the financial impact of Proposition 19, a measure on the Nov. 2 statewide ballot, which seeks to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, is one of several reports released Tuesday by the Grand Jury - and no doubt the most unusual.
As is typical, the Grand Jury spent the past year studying various government agencies, and in its final report raises issues and makes recommendations for the studied programs and groups, including the County Jail, the public defender's contract, a drug treatment website and the Watsonville Personnel Commission, as well as for public libraries and the Lompico Water District, sections that were previously released.
But the pot report aimed to scrutinize the finances without weighing in on the issue.
"At the end of the day it's up to the voters," said Patrick Henderson, who chaired the marijuana committee. "We didn't look into the morality of it, just the dollars and cents impact on Santa Cruz."
The report, which opens with a light-hearted preamble titled "Getting the Dope on Dope: The Grand Jury Attempts to Clear the Smoke in the Joint from the Numbers," derives some of its data from statewide estimates of marijuana use and enforcement costs. It also looked at local crime statistics.
Santa Cruz Police spokesman Zach Friend questioned one piece of data.
He said department figures from 2008 show 315 adult arrests/citations, while the Grand Jury report says there were 724. Friend said adults are the "overwhelming" majority when it comes to arrests and citations for marijuana.
Henderson said all the numbers came from the agencies themselves.
"If the data's wrong, it's because they gave us the wrong data," he said.
The report assumes pot would cost $100 an ounce, that 19 million ounces would be sold statewide, and that the county would impose a $50-per-ounce tax. Under that scenario the county would collect $129,200 in sales taxes and $6.46 million from its pot tax.
The county also would lose about $400,000 in fines, seized property and enforcement grants, but would save $1.36 million in arrest, prosecution and incarceration costs, the report says.
What's unknown, Henderson said, are the potential costs of legalizing the drug, lost productivity and addiction treatment, for example.
Supervisor Tony Campos, who is serving as board chair, hasn't taken a position on Proposition 19, but he said he's seen a huge change in attitudes about marijuana, even among some in law enforcement, during his 12 years in office. His "gut feeling" is that the measure will pass. If it does, he's willing to tax sales.
"We sure could use it ... to help our county pay for law enforcement, mental health services, health care for our elderly, to make sure there's child care, and probably No. 1, to make sure our schools have money," he said.
Santa Cruz Mayor Mike Rotkin, who favors legalizing pot with "reasonable regulation," said his city can't go it alone, but if state voters approve the measure, "it would be a good thing."
Marijuana is not more dangerous than alcohol, he said, and much of the problem revolves around its status as an illegal substance, violent turf wars, for example.
"We certainly would tax the hell out of it," Rotkin said. "Certainly, it's not a necessity. It's a luxury."
Source: Mercury News
The analysis of the financial impact of Proposition 19, a measure on the Nov. 2 statewide ballot, which seeks to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, is one of several reports released Tuesday by the Grand Jury - and no doubt the most unusual.
As is typical, the Grand Jury spent the past year studying various government agencies, and in its final report raises issues and makes recommendations for the studied programs and groups, including the County Jail, the public defender's contract, a drug treatment website and the Watsonville Personnel Commission, as well as for public libraries and the Lompico Water District, sections that were previously released.
But the pot report aimed to scrutinize the finances without weighing in on the issue.
"At the end of the day it's up to the voters," said Patrick Henderson, who chaired the marijuana committee. "We didn't look into the morality of it, just the dollars and cents impact on Santa Cruz."
The report, which opens with a light-hearted preamble titled "Getting the Dope on Dope: The Grand Jury Attempts to Clear the Smoke in the Joint from the Numbers," derives some of its data from statewide estimates of marijuana use and enforcement costs. It also looked at local crime statistics.
Santa Cruz Police spokesman Zach Friend questioned one piece of data.
He said department figures from 2008 show 315 adult arrests/citations, while the Grand Jury report says there were 724. Friend said adults are the "overwhelming" majority when it comes to arrests and citations for marijuana.
Henderson said all the numbers came from the agencies themselves.
"If the data's wrong, it's because they gave us the wrong data," he said.
The report assumes pot would cost $100 an ounce, that 19 million ounces would be sold statewide, and that the county would impose a $50-per-ounce tax. Under that scenario the county would collect $129,200 in sales taxes and $6.46 million from its pot tax.
The county also would lose about $400,000 in fines, seized property and enforcement grants, but would save $1.36 million in arrest, prosecution and incarceration costs, the report says.
What's unknown, Henderson said, are the potential costs of legalizing the drug, lost productivity and addiction treatment, for example.
Supervisor Tony Campos, who is serving as board chair, hasn't taken a position on Proposition 19, but he said he's seen a huge change in attitudes about marijuana, even among some in law enforcement, during his 12 years in office. His "gut feeling" is that the measure will pass. If it does, he's willing to tax sales.
"We sure could use it ... to help our county pay for law enforcement, mental health services, health care for our elderly, to make sure there's child care, and probably No. 1, to make sure our schools have money," he said.
Santa Cruz Mayor Mike Rotkin, who favors legalizing pot with "reasonable regulation," said his city can't go it alone, but if state voters approve the measure, "it would be a good thing."
Marijuana is not more dangerous than alcohol, he said, and much of the problem revolves around its status as an illegal substance, violent turf wars, for example.
"We certainly would tax the hell out of it," Rotkin said. "Certainly, it's not a necessity. It's a luxury."
Source: Mercury News
NEWS: Transitioning from fighting to farming
SANTA MONICA, CA — Phil Northcutt's path to agricultural work was a self-described "wild story" and "spiritual journey."
Northcutt joined the U.S. Marine Corps after finding work in the music industry unsatisfying. He came back from Iraq a few years ago injured and in pain and became addicted to prescription drugs and alcohol. He then got a doctor's recommendation to take medical marijuana for his pain. But aside from using the medical marijuana, he began growing and running a co-op himself. For his marijuana activities, he found himself spending a year in jail.
Though growing marijuana got Northcutt in trouble, it ultimately led him to his real passion: agriculture. Northcutt is now studying organic farming at Santa Rose Junior College and works at a horse stable at the college's Shone Farm. His dream is to own a 4,000-acre sustainable ranch where he can train other veterans in agriculture and farming.
"I realized working with plants I got a level of satisfaction that I couldn't get doing other things," he said.
As a sign of his support for veterans going into the agricultural industry, Northcutt attended a career fair Wednesday at the Santa Monica Civic Center hosted by the Farmer Veteran Coalition (FVC), a nonprofit organization that connects veteran farmers and helps veterans seeking employment in the farming industry.
"There's [a lot of these] organizations, 'Veterans this' and 'Veterans that,' and they're not all really helping us. A lot of them are just out there advertising and taking money," Northcutt said. "But what Michael [O'Gorman, the executive director and founder of FVC,] is doing here is really one of these organizations where he's got a good group of people out here doing their stuff, and they're doing real [stuff] to help veterans. They're really taking a personal interest."
Approximately 100 veterans and 75 exhibitors gathered at the Civic Center for FVC's second career fair, the first in Santa Monica. Tables from farms and agricultural businesses run by veterans, as well as organizations that support veterans, were set up throughout the auditorium for attendees to learn about and express interest in volunteer or career opportunities.
After getting the FVC fully up and running in February, 2009, O'Gorman said he would get calls from individual veterans looking for work on a farm in July, August or September, times farmers do not need farmhands. Instead of fielding one veteran's request at a time, O'Gorman decided to hold a career fair in Santa Rosa in March, the beginning of the farming season, to help more veterans at once and educate them on farming needs and practices.
"These guys aren't your normal farmers. They're going to be the leaders in the next generation of farming," O'Gorman said of a group of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans standing behind him during an introductory speech Wednesday. "They're proactive, they're ingenious, they're creative, they got hardcore stamina."
Bringing the fair to Los Angeles, an area not typically recognized for its agriculture, presented difficulties in finding groups to participate, O'Gorman said. So the FVC expanded the fair to include all stages of food production, such as produce distribution and retail.
The unemployment rate for veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars ages 18 to 24 is approximately 30 percent, or 250,000 people, according to the FVC. Farming provides a growing and necessary field for veterans to find employment in, one that will also help curb the rate and effects of post traumatic stress disorder, said Shad Meshad, the founder and president of the National Veterans Foundation, who attended the fair.
"It's like a domino effect," Meshad said. "People go, 'What do jobs have to do with PTSD?' Well, it could play a part, particularly if you have readjustment issues, and you can't find a job, and you have a wife, and you have a child, and you have a house to pay for. I don't know of any other way you can solve that. We have to have jobs."
Aside from helping veterans find careers, the fair provided an opportunity for veterans already in agriculture to build a community and learn from each other, said Jason Rich, a Navy veteran who works with Hungry Mother Organics, an organic produce company in Carson City, Nev. At the fair, Rich met Colin Archipley, a Marine Corps veteran who founded Veteran's Sustainable Agriculture Training, and learned about his use of bio-hydroponics as a sustainable farming practice, which he said he will try to use in his work now.
Tom Schoettler came to the career fair as a veteran friend of Northcutt's. He grew up on a farm, and although he did not originally want to work on his family's farm, he said he now hopes to take over the operation one day. In the meantime, Schoettler wants to learn about other opportunities in agriculture.
"There should be a thousand more of these everywhere around here," he said. "It's good for me to know there's other people out there that are in the same position I'm in and that are looking to do the same things that I'm interested in."
Source: Santa Monica Daily Press
Northcutt joined the U.S. Marine Corps after finding work in the music industry unsatisfying. He came back from Iraq a few years ago injured and in pain and became addicted to prescription drugs and alcohol. He then got a doctor's recommendation to take medical marijuana for his pain. But aside from using the medical marijuana, he began growing and running a co-op himself. For his marijuana activities, he found himself spending a year in jail.
Though growing marijuana got Northcutt in trouble, it ultimately led him to his real passion: agriculture. Northcutt is now studying organic farming at Santa Rose Junior College and works at a horse stable at the college's Shone Farm. His dream is to own a 4,000-acre sustainable ranch where he can train other veterans in agriculture and farming.
"I realized working with plants I got a level of satisfaction that I couldn't get doing other things," he said.
As a sign of his support for veterans going into the agricultural industry, Northcutt attended a career fair Wednesday at the Santa Monica Civic Center hosted by the Farmer Veteran Coalition (FVC), a nonprofit organization that connects veteran farmers and helps veterans seeking employment in the farming industry.
"There's [a lot of these] organizations, 'Veterans this' and 'Veterans that,' and they're not all really helping us. A lot of them are just out there advertising and taking money," Northcutt said. "But what Michael [O'Gorman, the executive director and founder of FVC,] is doing here is really one of these organizations where he's got a good group of people out here doing their stuff, and they're doing real [stuff] to help veterans. They're really taking a personal interest."
Approximately 100 veterans and 75 exhibitors gathered at the Civic Center for FVC's second career fair, the first in Santa Monica. Tables from farms and agricultural businesses run by veterans, as well as organizations that support veterans, were set up throughout the auditorium for attendees to learn about and express interest in volunteer or career opportunities.
After getting the FVC fully up and running in February, 2009, O'Gorman said he would get calls from individual veterans looking for work on a farm in July, August or September, times farmers do not need farmhands. Instead of fielding one veteran's request at a time, O'Gorman decided to hold a career fair in Santa Rosa in March, the beginning of the farming season, to help more veterans at once and educate them on farming needs and practices.
"These guys aren't your normal farmers. They're going to be the leaders in the next generation of farming," O'Gorman said of a group of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans standing behind him during an introductory speech Wednesday. "They're proactive, they're ingenious, they're creative, they got hardcore stamina."
Bringing the fair to Los Angeles, an area not typically recognized for its agriculture, presented difficulties in finding groups to participate, O'Gorman said. So the FVC expanded the fair to include all stages of food production, such as produce distribution and retail.
The unemployment rate for veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars ages 18 to 24 is approximately 30 percent, or 250,000 people, according to the FVC. Farming provides a growing and necessary field for veterans to find employment in, one that will also help curb the rate and effects of post traumatic stress disorder, said Shad Meshad, the founder and president of the National Veterans Foundation, who attended the fair.
"It's like a domino effect," Meshad said. "People go, 'What do jobs have to do with PTSD?' Well, it could play a part, particularly if you have readjustment issues, and you can't find a job, and you have a wife, and you have a child, and you have a house to pay for. I don't know of any other way you can solve that. We have to have jobs."
Aside from helping veterans find careers, the fair provided an opportunity for veterans already in agriculture to build a community and learn from each other, said Jason Rich, a Navy veteran who works with Hungry Mother Organics, an organic produce company in Carson City, Nev. At the fair, Rich met Colin Archipley, a Marine Corps veteran who founded Veteran's Sustainable Agriculture Training, and learned about his use of bio-hydroponics as a sustainable farming practice, which he said he will try to use in his work now.
Tom Schoettler came to the career fair as a veteran friend of Northcutt's. He grew up on a farm, and although he did not originally want to work on his family's farm, he said he now hopes to take over the operation one day. In the meantime, Schoettler wants to learn about other opportunities in agriculture.
"There should be a thousand more of these everywhere around here," he said. "It's good for me to know there's other people out there that are in the same position I'm in and that are looking to do the same things that I'm interested in."
Source: Santa Monica Daily Press
NEWS:Citing high black arrests, NAACP endorses marijuana legalization
On Monday, the California State Conference of the NAACP announced its “unconditional endorsement” of a November initiative that would legalize the recreational use of marijuana.
On Tuesday, the NAACP said why. According to a just-released study by the Drug Policy Alliance, blacks are far more likely to be arrested for pot possession than whites — even though statistically, blacks use marijuana at lower rates than whites. The Alliance, a national advocacy group, favors treatment rather than arrest or imprisonment for people suffering from drug dependency.
Meanwhile, a prominent African-American opponent of the initiative accused the group’s leader, Alice Huffman, of selling out “to the highest bidder” with the endorsement.
At a press conference at the California NAACP’s Sacramento headquarters, the group’s president, Alice Huffman, portrayed marijuana laws as a means of criminalizing young black men. She was joined by several other African-American leaders, including Aubry Stone, president of the California Black Chamber of Commerce, and Neil Franklin of the group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP).
“It is time for them to stop using my community to fill the prisons,” Huffman said. “Once you get into the system, the next time you get arrested, they bump you up [to more serious charges].”
Defendants are usually given a summons that “looks like a traffic ticket,” the report noted. They’re not given a public defender, and usually end up paying a fine that can add up to hundreds of dollars. But afterwards, these people have officially pleaded guilty to a drug offense. This, in turn, shows up on criminal databases and can come up years later when, for instance, the person applies for a job.
“For young, low-income African Americans and Latinos – who use marijuana less than young whites, and who already face numerous barriers and hurdles – a criminal record for the ‘drug crime’ of marijuana possession can seriously harm their life chances,” the report said.
The study also found that total marijuana arrests have gone up, even while overall crime and arrest rates have been going down. There were more than 60,000 arrests for marijuana possession in California in 2008, according to the report, compared to 20,000 in 1990. These arrest records come from the U.S. Government’s FBI Uniform Crime Report.
Arrests for “youth of color” rose four times faster than that, from 3,100 in 1990 to 16,300 in 2008. The study found that blacks and Latinos make up 44 percent of California’s population, but 56 percent of marijuana possession arrests. This was despite the fact that whites were slightly more likely than blacks to have had used marijuana in the past month; whites were about 50 percent more likely than Latinos to have used the drug in the preceding month.
These statistics held true across California — in rural and urban areas, and in areas with both high and low African-American populations, compared to the state average. In every one of California’s 25 largest counties, blacks were arrested at higher rates than whites. Across these 25 counties, representing 90 percent of the state’s population, blacks represent 7 percent of the population but 20 percent of arrests for marijuana possession. In Los Angeles County, blacks are 10 percent of the population, but represent 30 percent of marijuana arrests. Overall, they’re arrested for pot at 332 percent of the rate of whites.
The marijuana legalization initiative was put on the November ballot by Richard Lee, the founder of Oaksterdam University, an Oakland school that teaches people how to get into the medical marijuana business. On Monday, the Secretary of State’s office gave it the designation of Proposition 19.
The measure’s ultimate fate at the ballot box is uncertain. Polls have shown the measure with support ranging from the high 40s to high 50s - a dangerous place to be for any controversial initiative. Some also charge Proposition 19 is badly drafted.
One major voice opposing Proposition 19 is Bishop Ron Allen, the president of a group called the International Faith Based Coalition. He said marijuana is a gateway drug, and legalizing it would lead to more crime and violence in poor communities. As evidence, he pointed to the murders last week of two workers in separate armed robberies at medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles. Other opponents include the state’s narcotic enforcement officers and other law enforcement groups.
He also claimed that 60 percent of marijuana arrests are of whites.
“These statistics are not correct,” Allen said of the Drug Policy Alliance study.
Allen is a recovering addict himself, having moved from pot to crack in his early years. One of Allen’s colleagues in the cause, Elder Jesse Williams, said his own 14-year-old son is a marijuana addict who has robbed people at gun and knife-point, and even stolen his own mother’s car, to satisfy his fix.
“Legalizing marijuana will never be the solution to stopping black arrests,” Allen said. “She knows that. It’s a smokescreen.”
He also questioned Huffman’s motives to the endorsement, saying, “We are afraid the good name of the NAACP is being sold to the highest bidder.”
A SurveyUSA poll conducted back in April shows that Allen’s message isn’t resonating with African-American voters.
The telephone poll of 500 adults conducted found the idea of legalizing pot leading 56 percent to 42 percent. Among African-Americans surveyed, 67 percent supported the idea, while only 29 percent were opposed. Fifty-nine percent of white voters supported the idea, along with 58 percent of Asians and only 45 percent of Hispanics.
The results were also heavily tilted by gender and age. Men support legalizing marijuana by a 65 percent to 32 percent margin. Women oppose the idea, 46 percent to 51 percent.
Three quarters of voters under 35 support the idea - the only age group that gave it majority support.
Source: Capitol Weekly
On Tuesday, the NAACP said why. According to a just-released study by the Drug Policy Alliance, blacks are far more likely to be arrested for pot possession than whites — even though statistically, blacks use marijuana at lower rates than whites. The Alliance, a national advocacy group, favors treatment rather than arrest or imprisonment for people suffering from drug dependency.
Meanwhile, a prominent African-American opponent of the initiative accused the group’s leader, Alice Huffman, of selling out “to the highest bidder” with the endorsement.
At a press conference at the California NAACP’s Sacramento headquarters, the group’s president, Alice Huffman, portrayed marijuana laws as a means of criminalizing young black men. She was joined by several other African-American leaders, including Aubry Stone, president of the California Black Chamber of Commerce, and Neil Franklin of the group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP).
“It is time for them to stop using my community to fill the prisons,” Huffman said. “Once you get into the system, the next time you get arrested, they bump you up [to more serious charges].”
Defendants are usually given a summons that “looks like a traffic ticket,” the report noted. They’re not given a public defender, and usually end up paying a fine that can add up to hundreds of dollars. But afterwards, these people have officially pleaded guilty to a drug offense. This, in turn, shows up on criminal databases and can come up years later when, for instance, the person applies for a job.
“For young, low-income African Americans and Latinos – who use marijuana less than young whites, and who already face numerous barriers and hurdles – a criminal record for the ‘drug crime’ of marijuana possession can seriously harm their life chances,” the report said.
The study also found that total marijuana arrests have gone up, even while overall crime and arrest rates have been going down. There were more than 60,000 arrests for marijuana possession in California in 2008, according to the report, compared to 20,000 in 1990. These arrest records come from the U.S. Government’s FBI Uniform Crime Report.
Arrests for “youth of color” rose four times faster than that, from 3,100 in 1990 to 16,300 in 2008. The study found that blacks and Latinos make up 44 percent of California’s population, but 56 percent of marijuana possession arrests. This was despite the fact that whites were slightly more likely than blacks to have had used marijuana in the past month; whites were about 50 percent more likely than Latinos to have used the drug in the preceding month.
These statistics held true across California — in rural and urban areas, and in areas with both high and low African-American populations, compared to the state average. In every one of California’s 25 largest counties, blacks were arrested at higher rates than whites. Across these 25 counties, representing 90 percent of the state’s population, blacks represent 7 percent of the population but 20 percent of arrests for marijuana possession. In Los Angeles County, blacks are 10 percent of the population, but represent 30 percent of marijuana arrests. Overall, they’re arrested for pot at 332 percent of the rate of whites.
The marijuana legalization initiative was put on the November ballot by Richard Lee, the founder of Oaksterdam University, an Oakland school that teaches people how to get into the medical marijuana business. On Monday, the Secretary of State’s office gave it the designation of Proposition 19.
The measure’s ultimate fate at the ballot box is uncertain. Polls have shown the measure with support ranging from the high 40s to high 50s - a dangerous place to be for any controversial initiative. Some also charge Proposition 19 is badly drafted.
One major voice opposing Proposition 19 is Bishop Ron Allen, the president of a group called the International Faith Based Coalition. He said marijuana is a gateway drug, and legalizing it would lead to more crime and violence in poor communities. As evidence, he pointed to the murders last week of two workers in separate armed robberies at medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles. Other opponents include the state’s narcotic enforcement officers and other law enforcement groups.
He also claimed that 60 percent of marijuana arrests are of whites.
“These statistics are not correct,” Allen said of the Drug Policy Alliance study.
Allen is a recovering addict himself, having moved from pot to crack in his early years. One of Allen’s colleagues in the cause, Elder Jesse Williams, said his own 14-year-old son is a marijuana addict who has robbed people at gun and knife-point, and even stolen his own mother’s car, to satisfy his fix.
“Legalizing marijuana will never be the solution to stopping black arrests,” Allen said. “She knows that. It’s a smokescreen.”
He also questioned Huffman’s motives to the endorsement, saying, “We are afraid the good name of the NAACP is being sold to the highest bidder.”
A SurveyUSA poll conducted back in April shows that Allen’s message isn’t resonating with African-American voters.
The telephone poll of 500 adults conducted found the idea of legalizing pot leading 56 percent to 42 percent. Among African-Americans surveyed, 67 percent supported the idea, while only 29 percent were opposed. Fifty-nine percent of white voters supported the idea, along with 58 percent of Asians and only 45 percent of Hispanics.
The results were also heavily tilted by gender and age. Men support legalizing marijuana by a 65 percent to 32 percent margin. Women oppose the idea, 46 percent to 51 percent.
Three quarters of voters under 35 support the idea - the only age group that gave it majority support.
Source: Capitol Weekly
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





