Vote NO to legalizing the marijuana industry

In Case You Missed It!

______________________________________

September 23, 2016

ICYMI: Will Legalizing Marijuana Create Modern Bootleggers?
Black Market From Home Grow Provision is "Probably Our Number One Concern" According to CO Guv Marijuana Policy Director

Will Legalizing Marijuana Create Modern Bootleggers?
Maine Public Radio
By Fred Bever
September 21, 2016

States that have legalized marijuana are contending with a new criminal tactic — smugglers who grow and process it for export to states where it’s illegal and worth a lot more.

Colorado is the epicenter of the phenomenon, although it’s popping up in Oregon and Washington too. Now as Maine, Massachusetts and Canada consider legalizing recreational marijuana, the question arises — will the Northeast see a wave of new-age bootleggers?

During the Prohibition era, it was whiskey being run from Canada or Mexico to the U.S. Now it’s marijuana that’s being smuggled — from Colorado, where it has been fully legal since 2014, to neighboring states and beyond.

“It’s probably our No. 1 concern.” says Andrew Freedman, who directs marijuana policy for Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper.

Freedman says organized criminals are exploiting legal loopholes by collecting home-grow licenses that allow for as many as 99 marijuana plants each. And more generally, he says, criminals are using the state’s fully legalized pot economy as cover.

“Different ways you can use Amendment 20 and 64, the medical and the recreational, to kind of cloak yourself in legitimate growing. Unfortunately there are a lot of people who want to do that in order to sell out of state because there’s a huge economic incentive to want to sell out of state right now,” he says.

As in, a pound of pot, worth, say, $1,500 at the counter of a legal Colorado marijuana shop is worth $3,000 or more when it crosses the state border, instantly transmuted into a prized black-market commodity. And criminal gangs are moving in, creating a headache for Colorado law enforcement, danger to public safety and a field day for the media.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration says last year, state highway patrols intercepted more than 3,500 pounds of marijuana that was destined for states beyond Colorado’s border. That’s just a tenth, they estimate, of the actual cross-border market, making it, conservatively, a $100 million-plus proposition.

Those numbers do not include busts of some pretty big syndicates, many of them recently involving Cuban nationals shipping product to Florida. And for Colorado’s neighboring states, it’s a doubly-frustrating problem, because it’s not of their own making.

“In Nebraska, Colorado’s become ground zero for marijuana production and trafficking,” says Jon Bruning, Nebraska’s attorney general, who with his counterpart in Oklahoma is trying to sue Colorado and force it to overturn its marijuana laws. “This contraband has been heavily trafficked in our state. While Colorado reaps millions from the production and sale of pot, Nebraska taxpayers have to bear the cost. Virtually every aspect of Nebraska’s criminal justice system has experienced increased expense to deal with the interdiction and prosecution of Colorado marijuana trafficking.”

One Nebraska study found that border counties saw gradual increases in pot-related arrests, jailings and costs since medicinal marijuana was legalized in Colorado, and a surge in 2014, when the recreational pot law went into effect. But the U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to review the complaint by Colorado’s neighbors, which are looking for other venues to pursue their case.

Meanwhile, here on the East Coast, voters in Massachusetts and Maine are considering full legalization on the November ballot, and Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is calling for legalization there. If those measures are all approved, police in New Hampshire are wondering what it would be like to be nearly surrounded by legal pot territory.

Andrew Shagoury is Tuftonboro’s chief of police, and the New Hampshire Chiefs of Police Association’s point-man on pot. If Maine or Massachusetts does go for legalization, he expects that at the least, problems such as small-scale smuggling and intoxicated driving will spill over the border.

“If more does spill over, the direct effect I suspect will be more accidents with people under the influence — obviously that would be a public safety concern. And I think politically you’d see more pressure for it to pass here too,” he says.

And Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healy expects organized crime to open up new fields of operation.

“What’s going to stop a drug cartel from purchasing property, renting property here and running an operation at the property? And that’s something that could be situated next to a school, next to a hospital, in a suburban neighborhood. That’s a real problem,” she says.

For full story, click here.

______________________________________

 

September 22, 2016

 

Kennedy Forum: Question 4 Will Lead To Promotion and Sale Of Edibles, Increased Drugged Driving, Proliferation Of Pot Shops in Communities Across Massachusetts
Safe and Healthy Massachusetts Campaign Urges Voters to Consider Question 4 As a Specific Proposal Written By and For The Marijuana Industry, Not Legalization "In Concept"

BOSTON – The promotion and sale of edibles, increased drugged driving, and a proliferation of pot shops in communities across the state are the inevitable results of passing Question 4, the Safe and Healthy Massachusetts campaign stressed in last night’s forum at the Kennedy Institute for the Senate.

Senator Jason Lewis (D-Winchester) highlighted these issues throughout the debate.  The No on 4 Campaign urged voters to consider Question 4 not as a marijuana legalization “concept,” but rather a specific proposal written by the marijuana industry for the marijuana industry. The Yes on 4 campaign has been almost entirely funded by an out-of-state pro-marijuana PAC and the industry-backed Marijuana Policy Project.

To view Senator Lewis’ opening statement outlining the issues, please click here.

Among the specific issues that will result from passing the marijuana industry’s proposal include:

• The creation of the dangerous edibles market, which will allow the advertising and sale of the highly potent cookies, candies, and sodas. Reports indicate that edibles account for as much as 50% of the marijuana sales in Colorado. Question 4 sets no limits on the potency of these products.
• An inevitable increase in drugged driving fatalities. In Washington State, they saw a doubling of the number of marijuana-impaired fatalities in the first year after legalization alone.
• The authorization of people to grow up to 12 marijuana plants worth tens of thousands of dollars at their homes, even over the objection of neighbors. Neighbors and communities have no ability to restrict these home grows, even if the homes are close to schools.
• There are no limits set on the number of pot shops in Massachusetts. In Colorado, there are already more pot shops than McDonalds and Starbucks combined.

______________________________________

 

September 22, 2016

 

Colorado Seeing Dramatic Rise In Opioid Use

Drug Overdoes Deaths Up In Almost Every County, Higher Than National Average; Runs Counter To Yes on 4 Claims That Legalization Will Combat Opiate Crisis

 

BOSTON – Despite claims from the Yes on 4 campaign that commercial marijuana legalization is a solution to the opioid crisis, Colorado is seeing a dramatic rise in opioid use. In fact, the state has seen a dramatic increase in overdose deaths that is higher than the national average and even rural counties have been significantly impacted.

 

Also, according to a 2016 study by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Colorado ranks #1 for use of intoxicating substances. It was the only state in the country that ranked as a top consumer of alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, and opioid painkillers.

 

“Yes on 4 is now trying to sell this ballot question as a way to address the opiate crisis, when we know it the question is really about establishing a commercial marijuana industry that will promote pot edibles and allow your neighbors to grow marijuana next door,” Safe and Healthy Massachusetts Campaign Manager Nick Bayer said. “Since legalization of medical and commercial marijuana, Colorado has seen a dramatic increase in opiate abuse and now is the only state that ranks as a heavy user of marijuana, alcohol, cocaine, and opioid painkillers. Question 4 is not a solution to the opiate crisis, it contributes to the problem.”

______________________________________

September 21, 2016

 

More Outside Marijuana Industry Money Flows Into Massachusetts
97% of Contributions This Period Came From An Out-Of-State PAC and National Marijuana Industry; Marijuana Policy Project Has Contributed $188,000 In In-Kind Contributions Alone To Fund Legal And Staff Time In 2016

BOSTON – The Yes on 4 campaign remains almost entirely bought and paid for by the national marijuana industry and out-of-state PACs, according to campaign finance reports filed yesterday.

Of the $140,800 in contributions (including in-kind contributions) that came in over the past two weeks, $136,000 (or 96%) of it came from a Washington PAC funded by out-of-state billionaires, marijuana corporate investors, and the Marijuana Policy Project which is funded by marijuana industry executives. Those executives run businesses that include the manufacturing of dangerous edibles products and stand to make millions if Question 4 passes in Massachusetts.

The Marijuana Policy Project, out of Washington DC, has contributed $188,323 in in-kind contributions alone to fund much of the campaign’s legal work and staff time throughout the campaign. The Marijuana Policy Project is the industry backed organization to promote commercial marijuana throughout the country. Its funders include the CEOs of companies that promote and sell dangerous edibles and other products, including:

• CEO of Dixie Elixirs (a manufacturer of edibles like chocolate covered pretzels and wild berry lemonade)
• CEO of Med-West (a manufacturer of marijuana edibles)
• CEO of ArcView Group (a marijuana investment firm)

Statement from Safe and Healthy Massachusetts Campaign Manager Nick Bayer

“The people of Massachusetts are being asked to give a blank check to the Marijuana industry - that’s because the proposed law was written by the industry, and now we know the campaign is being paid for by the industry. They have written a law that allows unchecked edible products and takes control away from homeowners and communities. Voters should reject Question 4 because it will benefit Industry and not the families of Massachusetts.”

The Safe and Healthy Massachusetts campaign is an unprecedented coalition of Massachusetts doctors, nurses, health care, child protection, and community leaders opposing Question 4.  Among those opposing Question 4 includes:  Massachusetts Hospital Association, Massachusetts Medical Society, Massachusetts Municipal Association, Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, Retailers Association of Massachusetts, Association of School Superintendents, Construction Industries of Massachusetts, Action for Boston Community Development, Association for Behavioral Healthcare, National Alliance on Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter), Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, Massachusetts Sheriffs Association and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

Question 4 is also opposed by elected leaders such as Governor Charlie Baker, Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, Speaker Robert DeLeo, Attorney General Maura Healey, Sheriff Steve Thompkins, and 120 state senators and representatives from across the Commonwealth

______________________________________

 

September 16, 2016

 

Four Members of Mass. Congressional Delegation Oppose Question 4

BOSTON, MA – Highlighting concerns for public safety, law enforcement, and public health, Congressman Bill Keating, Congressman Joe Kennedy III, Congressman Stephen F. Lynch, and Congresswoman Niki Tsongas today voiced opposition to Ballot Question 4 that would legalize commercial marijuana in the state.

“I have been involved in the recovery community for a long time; I helped to establish an adolescent drug rehab facility, the Cushing House, in South Boston. I've spoken with hundreds of men and women on the road to recovery and I have not met a young addict yet that didn’t start with marijuana. I am opposed to Question Four because I do not think flooding the streets with another drug is good for our young people or good for society. Legalizing commercial marijuana is a move in the wrong direction, we will live to regret it,” said Congressman Lynch (D – 8th District).

"The legalization of marijuana is a contentious issue, and there are valid points on both sides. While I firmly support decriminalization for minor possession and the use of marijuana for medical purposes, I have serious concerns with going so far as full legalization. Many unanswered questions remain about the financial costs, law enforcement implications and broader social impact, and my concerns echo those of the many medical, law enforcement and substance abuse experts in our region opposed to the measure," said Congresswoman Tsongas (D – 3rd District).

"For the past several years, the troubling consequences of patchwork marijuana legalization have played out across the country. Most critically, the research has remained clear -- short-term and long-term use of marijuana has serious health impacts for young people in particular. At a time when Massachusetts is facing a crippling addiction crisis, increasing access to yet another controlled substance undermines the families, individuals, communities, law enforcement officials and health care workers on the front lines of this epidemic every single day," said Congressman Kennedy (D – 4th District).

“Given that there has been a 62% increase in marijuana-related traffic deaths since the 2013 legalization of recreational marijuana in Colorado, I have some serious concerns with legalization in Massachusetts. Additionally, a growing number of studies indicate frequent use of marijuana at an early age can disrupt brain development.  According to Dr. Nora Volkow, the Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, there is yet to be any research produced on the potential effects of secondhand marijuana smoke on children.  As such, I am a no on question 4,” said Congressman Keating (D – 9th District).

These members of the Massachusetts Congressional delegation join an unprecedented, bipartisan group of doctors, nurses, health care professionals, child protection advocates, and community leaders opposing Question 4.  Among those opposing Question 4 are:  the Massachusetts Hospital Association, Massachusetts Medical Society, Massachusetts Municipal Association, Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, Retailers Association of Massachusetts, Association of School Superintendents, Construction Industries of Massachusetts, Action for Boston Community Development, Association for Behavioral Healthcare, National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter), Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, Massachusetts Sheriffs Association, and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

Question 4 is also opposed by elected leaders such as Governor Charlie Baker, Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, Speaker Robert DeLeo, Attorney General Maura Healey, Sheriff Steve Tompkins, and 120 state senators and representatives from across the Commonwealth.

______________________________________

September 15, 2016

 

ICYMI: Sobriety Tests for Marijuana a Concern as Voters Weigh Legalization

 

Sobriety Tests for Marijuana a Concern as Voters Weigh Legalization

Statehouse News Service

By: Colin Young

September 14, 2016

 

With less than eight weeks until voters decide whether to legalize the adult use of marijuana in Massachusetts, Transportation Secretary Stephanie Pollack said Wednesday she is concerned that there is currently no way for police to test if a driver is under the influence of marijuana.

 

“One of the concerns with marijuana is, it is clear at some point, you are impaired … but we don’t have a test like we do for alcohol,” Pollack said on Boston Herald Radio. “If the initiative passes, how are we going to be able to enforce the under the influence law?”

 

She added, “If we don’t have a way of measuring it, the concern is that we may have more impaired driving. And between impaired driving and distracted driving these days, safety is a real concern for all of us.”

 

Pollack said MassDOT will work with law enforcement, primarily the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, to create “the equivalent of a field sobriety test” so officers suspicious that a driver may have been using marijuana can determine whether someone is too impaired to be driving.

 

“We absolutely have a drinking and driving problem. We absolutely need to do more about it,” Pollack said. “But at least when it comes to drinking and driving we have a very simple tool. You use a breathalyzer, you set a number and if your blood alcohol is above that number we can at least prosecute that person.”

 

Supporters of Question 4, which would establish a regulatory and taxation structure for legal marijuana, have said that such concerns are not reason enough to oppose the ballot question.

 

“The concern about (operating under the influence) is unfounded because by the time this becomes fully implemented there will be a roadside device to test impairment,” Will Luzier, a former assistant attorney general who now serves as campaign manager for the Yes on 4 ballot drive, told the News Service on Tuesday.

 

Researchers at Stanford University last week announced that they have developed and are testing a “potalyzer” — a device that could detect THC molecules in saliva and report the level of THC in the saliva within three minutes.

 

Jim Borghesani, communications director for the Yes on 4 campaign, said Tuesday night during a debate hosted by WBZ-TV that such a device is expected to be available to police departments in 2017.

 

Borghesani argued that legalizing marijuana would actually hasten the development of such technology, and that defeating the November ballot question could stall its progress.

 

“Right now the only thing driving this technology forward is the fact that society is moving legalization forward,” he said. “That is the exact kind of disruptive technology we need to give law enforcement the power they need to determine if anybody is driving intoxicated.”

 

Sen. Jason Lewis, who headed up the Special Senate Committee on Marijuana and now is campaigning to defeat the ballot question, said he sees “no reason Massachusetts has to be a guinea pig” for marijuana impairment tests.

 

“There are people working on that technology. I say let them continue working on it,” Lewis said during the WBZ debate. “Let Colorado figure this out and there’s plenty of time for us to then learn from it.”

 

But developing a test is only half of the issue. Once there is a way to test for marijuana impairment, the Legislature will have to determine what the legal limit for marijuana will be.

 

To read full article, click here.

______________________________________

September 14, 2016

HEALTHY MASSACHUSETTS CAMPAIGN CALLS ON YES ON 4 CAMPAIGN TO CORRECT FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT EDIBLE PRODUCTS
In Last Night's Debate, Yes On 4 Spokesman Falsely Stated That Other States Have Banned Pot Candy; Websites such as "Dixie Elixirs" and "Hashish House" Clearly Disagree

BOSTON - The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts today called on the Yes on 4 campaign to correct the false statements their spokesperson made last night regarding highly potent marijuana candy edibles.

In last night’s debate’s debate on WBZ TV, the Yes on 4 campaign spokesperson responded to No on 4 Steering Committee member Jason Lewis’ comments regarding the danger of marijuana edible candies and other edible products.

Borghesani used Colorado as an example of how much states can regulate these edibles, claiming that Colorado recently “banned candies.”

“And when he talks about candies. Already in Colorado they have banned candies. In the other states, they are banning candies.” – Jim Borghesani, WBZ Debate, 9/13/16

That, in fact, is not true. Colorado recently specifically banned only gummies candies in the shape or animals, humans, or fruit. That has left for sale all other potent THC candies such as chocolates, gumballs, lollipops, popcorn, and sour gums (not to mention all non animal, human, or fruit-shaped gummies.)

As proof, for a quick viewing of many of the candies still for sale in Colorado, one only needs to visit any number of marijuana retailer websites. For instance:

Hashish House
(http://www.pueblodispensary.com/products/edibles)

• Among the catalogs offered include “Canyon Cultivation – Suckit, Dropit, Doseit, weed-infused candy,” “Incredibles Edibles” and “Edipure” with a hashtag of #milehighcandy
• Among the candies offered in the catalogs include:
  • THC-infused grapefruit hard candy, chocolate bars, and gummy belts

Dixie Elixirs
(http://dixieelixirs.com)

• Among the candies offered on this site include chocolate bars, chocolate cherry pretzels, and mints.

Many online retailers also have delivery services to bring the highly potent THC candies right to your home.

“Pot candies are highly potent, a danger for accidental use by kids and pets, and the marijuana industry is selling them in huge quantities in Colorado,” said Safe and Healthy Massachusetts campaign manager Nick Bayer. “The Yes on 4 campaign should correct their false statements from last night and make clear that these other states have not banned marijuana candies. In fact, edible sales are a huge part of the marijuana profit model and we will see the same thing in Massachusetts if Question 4 passes.”

Some facts on pot edibles:

• Reports show that marijuana edibles may account for nearly 50% of marijuana sales in Colorado.
• There is no limit on the potency of edible products in Colorado, nor are limits written into the proposed law in Massachusetts.
• Edible products have been known to have THC levels reaching as high as 95%. That compares to the THC in current marijuana plants that average 17-18% THC, and marijuana THC levels of 3-4% that existed back in the 1980s.
• Marijuana infused products such as candy bars, cookies, and “cannabis cola” are often indistinguishable from traditional products and attractive to children.
• Doctors at Children’s Hospital Denver reported that, after legalization, the ER began treating one to two kids a month for accidental marijuana ingestion, mostly in the form of edibles. Prior to legalization, they reported none.
• For example, in 2014, a two-year old girl from Longmont, Colorado was sent to the hospital after accidentally eating a marijuana cookie she found in front of her apartment building.

The campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts coalition includes an unprecedented, bi-partisan group of doctors, nurses, health care, child protection, and community leaders opposing Question 4.  Among those opposing Question 4 includes:  Massachusetts Hospital Association, Massachusetts Medical Society, Massachusetts Municipal Association, Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, Retailers Association of Massachusetts, Association of School Superintendents, Construction Industries of Massachusetts, Action for Boston Community Development, Association for Behavioral Healthcare, National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter), Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, Massachusetts Sheriffs Association and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

Question 4 is also opposed by a group of bi-partisan elected leaders such as Governor Charlie Baker, Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, Speaker Robert DeLeo, Attorney General Maura Healey, Sheriff Steve Thompkins, and 120 state senators and representatives from across the Commonwealth.

______________________________________

September 8, 2016

ICYMI: Mass. Congressman Stephen Lynch says he’s against marijuana legalization

Mass Congressman Stephen Lynch says he’s against marijuana legalization
By Gintautas Dumcius
Masslive
September 7, 2016

BOSTON – Congressman Stephen Lynch is joining other top elected officials in Massachusetts in voicing opposition to the ballot question that would legalize marijuana for recreational use in Massachusetts.

Question 4, which will be on the November ballot, seeks to legalize marijuana for adults 21 and over and create a regulated and taxed system under the aegis of a brand new Cannabis Control Commission.

Lynch, a recovering alcoholic, said he helped set up the Cushing House, an addiction recovery home for teens. Anecdotally, he said many young people he has met started with marijuana before moving on to harder substances.

"Now we're going to put these drugs on the street, legally, and push them out there," said Lynch, D-South Boston. "I just don't think that flooding the streets with drugs, another drug, is good for society, is good for our country, is good for our young people."

Lynch, D-South Boston, made the comments while appearing on WBUR's "Radio Boston."

Gov. Charlie Baker, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh and Attorney General Maura Healey are among the other elected officials who have voiced opposition to legalizing marijuana for recreational use.

But others, including Boston City Council President Michelle Wu and Holyoke Mayor Alex Morse, back the ballot question. US Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Cambridge, has said she is open to legalization.

For full story, click here.

______________________________________

September 7, 2016

 

Health Foundation of Central Massachusetts Joins Growing Coalition Opposing Ballot Question 4

 

Says Massachusetts Would Be Wise To Wait And Learn Further From Other States’ Experiences; Contributes $100,000 to Campaign Against Commercial Legalization of Marijuana

 

BOSTON – A foundation with a mission of improving the health and well-being of the people of Central Massachusetts has voted to oppose the ballot question that would legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

 

The Health Foundation of Central Massachusetts, located in Worcester, formally voted to oppose Ballot Question 4 and chose to contribute $100,000 to the campaign to defeat it. The Foundation believes that Massachusetts should wait to learn more from the experience of other states before moving forward as the first state on the east coast to legalize the marijuana industry.

 

The Health Foundation also cited the health impact of allowing the billion-dollar commercial marijuana industry to promote and sell marijuana products, including pot edibles, in central Massachusetts. Pot edibles account for 50% of the sales in Colorado and include highly potent products like candy, chocolates, cookies, and sodas that are particularly attractive to kids.

 

Question 4 was written by the marijuana industry, so it sets no limits on the number of pot shops statewide. In Colorado, that has resulted in more pot shops than McDonalds and Starbucks combined.

 

“The Foundation maintains that Massachusetts would be wise to wait for further evidence from research and other states’ experiences regarding the impact of the use of marijuana on health status, employee performance and public safety, before voting to allow recreational use.  This position is consistent with the Foundation’s practice of advocating for public policy that is based on evidence,” said Foundation President Jan Yost, Ed.D.  “In addition, the Foundation is concerned that sanctioning marijuana as a legal substance will likely normalize its use and create a commercial industry intent on spreading the use, like the tobacco industry.”

 

“We want to thank the Foundation for their leadership and their support,” Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts Steering Committee Member Jason Lewis said. “Now is simply not the time to risk allowing the billion dollar marijuana industry into Massachusetts, and we are so thankful for leaders like The Health Foundation of Central Massachusetts for lending their voices to reject Question 4.”

 

Massachusetts has already taken major steps to address concerns around this issue. Massachusetts has decriminalized the possession of marijuana -  since 2008 people are not being jailed for marijuana use nor are they receiving a criminal record for such activity. Massachusetts also legalized the use of marijuana for health purposes in 2012.

 

The Foundation is able to support advocacy and grassroots lobbying because of its federal tax status as a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization and its authorization by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to conduct such lobbying activities as are allowable for public charities.

 

The Foundation joins an unprecedented, bi-partisan coalition of elected leaders as well as health care, public safety, business, anti-addiction, and child protection advocates who are opposing Question 4. Governor Charlie Baker, Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, Speaker Robert DeLeo, Attorney General Maura Healey, Sheriff Steve Tompkins, 120 legislators and many other elected leaders have come out in opposition to Question 4.

 

Other groups who are opposing Question 4 include:

 

• Massachusetts Hospital Association
• Massachusetts Medical Society
• Massachusetts Municipal Association
• Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals
• Associated Industries of Massachusetts
• Retailers Association of Massachusetts
• Association of School Superintendents
• Construction Industries of Massachusetts
• Action for Boston Community Development
• Association for Behavioral Healthcare
• National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter)
• Massachusetts Chiefs of Police
• Massachusetts Sheriffs Association
• all Massachusetts District Attorneys

______________________________________

 

September 6, 2016

 

Statement on today’s Boston Globe report on marijuana legalization

 

“In Colorado, a county revolts against legalized marijuana.”

 

“As I saw myself when I was there, it is clear that many families and businesses in Colorado are having buyer’s remorse after legalizing commercial marijuana. The report today highlights that, despite the promises of the marijuana industry, the black market does not go away with legalization, it in many ways gets worse. Pueblo county residents also are seeing an uptick in homelessness, notably including younger people. The experiences of these families at the very least should give us pause to learn more about the Colorado experience before we rush forward with legalizing commercial marijuana. Because as we can see in Colorado, once we allow the marijuana industry into Massachusetts, it’s very difficult to put the genie back in the bottle if we don’t like the results.”

 

-Senator Jason Lewis, Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts steering committee member

 

Notable viewpoints from Colorado officials and residents in today’s Globe report:

 

Pueblo County Sheriff Kirk Taylor

 

“It’s almost the perfect storm. Inviting the industry here brings with it the collateral issues that we’re seeing now in Pueblo. Whether it be increased emergency room visits, increasing crime, nuisance crimes.”

 

Sheriff Taylor on the black market

 

Predictions that legalization would kill the black market, Taylor noted, were false. Criminals from everywhere, he said, are attracted to Pueblo because they think it is a good place to grow cannabis. Just recently, Taylor said, he arrested more than 17 Cuban-Americans from Florida, two Russians, and an Argentinian.

“They’re not coming for any other reason than to grow marijuana to take out of state,” he said.

Jason White, 44, owner of a property management company

“We’ve got more crime. We’ve got more people on the street. Our hospitals are filled with people,” he said. And what of the economic benefits? It’s a net negative, he insisted. The extra revenue that comes in, “all it’s doing is going to the overwhelmed homeless shelters, hospitals, and the police.”

 

Paula McPheeters, a budget manager at the local community college who is leading the ballot effort. (On what she saw as a sharp uptick in homelessness):

 

“I don’t mean your typical down-and-out guy in his 60s with a bottle,” she said. “I’m talking 20-somethings. And that’s what really struck me: What are they doing here?”

 

For the full Globe story, click here.

______________________________________

September 5, 2016

WTAS: Herald Editorial – Sleazy Pitch on Pot

 

“Supporters of Question 4 ought to make their case without exploiting a public health crisis that has nothing to do with their cause, other than perhaps making that crisis worse.”

Sleazy Pitch on Pot
Boston Herald Editorial
September 5, 2016

Misleading the public and condescending to grieving parents is one approach to win supporters to your cause, but we can’t imagine it’s a winning one for the supporters of Question 4.

Organizers of the campaign to legalize the recreational use of marijuana sent out a fundraising email last week in which they blurred the lines between general pot use, which the ballot question would legalize, and use of marijuana for medical purposes, which of course is already legal.

“If you think people in our state deserve a safer alternative to prescription painkillers, please help end marijuana prohibition on November 8 by donating today,” wrote campaign manager Will Luzier, who cites the opioid crisis and deaths from overdoses as an incentive to vote yes.

“If our initiative passes,” he added, “medical marijuana patients will be able to seek help for debilitating diseases and chronic pain without committing a crime.” Again, they can do that today — but Luzier wouldn’t want to confuse anyone with the facts.

The letter also cited the need to expand access to marijuana “for veterans and other patients.” Of course, it’s all about helping veterans! What’s that Samuel Johnson said about patriotism being the last refuge of a scoundrel?

Forty-six people, including health care CEOs, recovery specialists and parents who have lost children to opioid addiction, wrote to Luzier to complain that using those who have died of overdoses as a hook for a fundraising pitch was “deeply troubling.”

“We are far too familiar with the devastating impact of the opioid crisis on our families and families across the Commonwealth,” they wrote. “While the causes of this crisis are many, we believe that legalizing recreational marijuana would only make it worse, not better.”

In response a spokesman for the campaign called the critics — who again include grieving parents — “props” of the opposition campaign.

Supporters of Question 4 ought to make their case without exploiting a public health crisis that has nothing to do with their cause, other than perhaps making that crisis worse.

Click here for editorial.

______________________________________

September 1, 2016

ICYMI – Pot Campaign Knocked for $$$ Appeal That Cited Opioid Overdoses

State House News Service
By Matt Murphy
September 1, 2016

A fundraising appeal from the marijuana legalization campaign has drawn the ire of health care professionals and parents of children who died from opioid addiction after the group pitched legal marijuana as an alternative to prescription pain drugs in spite of the state's medical marijuana program.

Will Luzier, the campaign manager for the Yes on 4 ballot drive, sent an email to supporters on Monday highlighting the latest opioid overdose-related death statistics that he said could make 2016 "the deadliest year for opioid overdoses in our state's history."

"If you think people in our state deserve a safer alternative to prescription painkillers, please help end marijuana prohibition on November 8 by donating today," Luzier wrote in the email. "Voting 'Yes on 4' will help address the opioid crisis by allowing adults 21 and older to use marijuana responsibly, without needing approval from a physician or the government."

The email prompted a letter to Luzier by 45 health care CEOs, recovery specialists and parents calling for a "legitimate debate" about the pros and cons of legalizing adult use marijuana without conflating the ballot proposal with medical marijuana, which is already legal.

"We found your use of those who have lost their lives to opioids as a hook for raising money for the commercial marijuana industry's ballot measure to be deeply troubling," the opponents wrote in the letter obtained by the News Service. "We are far too familiar with the devastating impact of the opioid crisis on our families and families across the Commonwealth. While the causes of this crisis are many, we believe that legalizing recreational marijuana would only make it worse, not better."

While Luzier called the state's medical marijuana program "barely functional" nearly four years after it was approved by voters, the letter writers said the answer is to "improve the system" and not just legalize the drug for all.

"We also found your effort to repackage your recreational pot ballot measure as medical marijuana to be deceptive to voters," they wrote, calling the email "cynical and misleading."

Jim Borghesani, communications director for the Yes on 4 campaign, challenged the opponents, who he called "props" of the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts, which organized to fight the ballot question.

The signers include 20 parents as well as the heads of Spectra Health Systems, Lahey Health Behavioral Services, Hope House, Gosnold on Cape Cod, the Association for Behavioral Health and Learn to Cope.

"We wonder if the folks being used as props by our opponents are actually aware of the veterans, federal employees and other individuals who could benefit from therapeutic marijuana but who for many reasons cannot access marijuana under the existing system," Borghesani said.

For the full story, click here.

______________________________________

August 16, 2016

ICYMI – SLATE: The Pot Industry Is Taking Over Pro-Pot Efforts

“Drug policy is all about reducing demand, and a company that has a profit motive is only going to increase demand. Having a big commercial marijuana industry runs counter to public health goals.” – former Marijuana Policy Project Lobbyist

The Pot Industry Is Taking Over Pro-Pot Efforts
Slate Magazine
By Liz Essley Whyte
August 12, 2016

When Secretary of State Michele Reagan put her stamp of approval on petitions bearing 177,000 signatures in Phoenix on Thursday, Arizona became the fifth state to schedule a ballot measure for November on legalizing recreational marijuana—joining California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada.

Each of the measures calls for making it legal for people older than 21 to possess small amounts of pot, taxing the drug and allowing regulated stores to sell it. Arkansas, Florida, and North Dakota will vote this fall on legalizing medical marijuana. And Oklahoma may yet join the fray.

The activity is a sign of just how much momentum the movement has picked up in only a few years. In 2012, Colorado and Washington became the first states to pass ballot measures making the sale and use of pot legal. Alaska, Oregon, and the District of Columbia followed in 2014. Twenty-five states and D.C. have medical marijuana laws, and others have decriminalized small amounts of the drug.

As the movement has grown, the politics behind marijuana are also undergoing a subtle shift. Though traditional pro-pot activists have given the bulk of the money supporting the five recreational pot ballot measure campaigns—roughly $7 million of the $11.6 million raised so far—more and more of the backers are coming from the new but growing marijuana industry. Two-thirds of the big donors—those giving at least $5,000 to the campaigns for this fall’s measures—have direct financial stakes in the weed business, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis of state records.

Indeed, as legalized pot grows in state after state, so has the industrial complex around it. This year, though, marks the first time this new legal pot industry has significantly contributed to making itself bigger. Now the movement’s campaigns are starting to resemble most other big-money ballot measure fights, with business-minded donors looking to protect or enhance their profits.

“It has gone from an activist influence and is in transition to an industry influence,” said Joe Brezny, who is directing Nevada’s legalization campaign and also co-founded the Nevada Cannabis Industry Association. “The industry is required to step up more now.”

In Nevada, for example, at least 39 out of 47 major donors—who gave at least $5,000 each to the campaign supporting legal weed—have financial interests in expanding the legal marijuana market. They contributed $625,000 of the more than $1 million that the pro-pot political committee has raised so far. Among them: more than a dozen existing medical marijuana dispensaries and five beer distributors, which would have the first shot at being the state’s recreational pot dispensaries and distributors, respectively.

Similarly, in Arizona, where a pending court case could complicate marijuana advocates’ path to the ballot, at least 26 of the 35 top donors potentially stand to make a profit if recreational marijuana is legalized there. The campaign so far has raised $2.2 million.

In Massachusetts, 11 out of 18 major donors came from the marijuana industry, though they accounted for only $80,000 of the nearly $500,000 supporters raised.

In contrast, only two of the 17 major donors to the measure that legalized weed in Colorado in 2012 had ties to the marijuana industry. They raised just $42,000 of the $3.3 million total raised by supporters.

Likewise in Washington that year, the list of donors who raised $6.2 million was dominated by activist groups and philanthropists, such as Phil Harvey, the multimillionaire who made his fortune on sex toys, and Rick Steves, of travel book fame. The George Soros–backed Drug Policy Alliance and billionaire Peter Lewis of Progressive Insurance also gave to legalize marijuana there, as they did in Colorado and in other states. (Disclosure: The Center for Public Integrity receives funding from the Open Society Foundations, which Soros funds. A complete list of Center for Public Integrity funders is found here.)

“We’re starting to see the industry get to a level of maturity where they’re getting involved in the political sphere, as they have the right to.”

Ellen Komp, National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws

In other states voting this year, the funding is more of a mixed bag. In California, where campaign supporters have raised more than $7.1 million, Napster and Facebook investor Sean Parker has bankrolled the campaign to the tune of $1.5 million. But Weedmaps, a company that helps customers locate pot shops, contributed $1 million. The Werc Shop, a laboratory that tests marijuana for potency and pesticides, pitched in $5,000, as did several other weed-related businesses.

Jeffrey Raber, a California chemist who founded the Werc Shop, acknowledged his company would benefit from the measure’s passage, since it requires legal marijuana to be tested at facilities like his. But he and his clients mostly want the state to regulate their business so they can “be recognized as responsible citizens who are legitimate actors,” he said.

In Maine, only one of the major pro-marijuana contributors is closely related to the pot industry. The initiative there is in part led by a group representing small marijuana farms, which has donated $10,000 of the $692,000 raised by the committees supporting the measure.

Those interested in legalizing marijuana are trying to adjust to the new funding dynamics.

“Marijuana legalization in the past has depended on a few kind of eccentric old white guys who had money, and some of them are literally dying off,” said Ellen Komp, deputy director of the California chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

“We’re starting to see the industry get to a level of maturity where they’re getting involved in the political sphere, as they have the right to.”

Twenty-six states allow residents to put measures on the ballot. The efforts are notoriously expensive, often requiring generous donors to pay workers to gather enough signatures to allow the measures to go before voters and then promote them with pricey ads. So major ballot measure fights are often dominated by corporations spending to support or block measures that would affect their bottom lines.

The contributions are flowing in even though marijuana remains illegal under federal law, forcing pot companies to operate outside the banking system and run all-cash operations.

The Marijuana Policy Project, a nonprofit known for its major influence in making marijuana legal in Colorado and Alaska, acknowledges that the industry is more involved in bankrolling the political movement now—and sees potential for even more funding.

“This is really the first major election cycle where there’s actually a business community already up and running in the states that are considering these broader reforms,” said Mason Tvert, MPP’s spokesman. “We’d still like the industry to step in and contribute a little more. … The vast majority of marijuana businesses are not getting involved or contributing.”

Others are dismayed at the legalization movement’s new corporate friends.

Dan Riffle quit his job as a lobbyist at the Marijuana Policy Project because he said he was uncomfortable with how closely tied the advocacy group had become to industry.

“Drug policy is all about reducing demand, and a company that has a profit motive is only going to increase demand,” Riffle said. “Having a big commercial marijuana industry runs counter to public health goals.”

To read the full article, click here.

______________________________________

August 15, 2016

ICYMI – Sentinel & Enterprise Editorial: Feds Make Compelling Anti-Marijuana Case

Feds Make Compelling Anti-Marijuana Case
Fitchburg Sentinel and Enterprise
Editorial
August 13, 2016

What's wrong with this picture? While some states have approved the everyday use of marijuana and many more allow it to be used for medicinal purposes, the federal government still considers it a Schedule 1 substance under the Controlled Substances Act.

That means as far as the Food and Drug Administration is concerned, marijuana -- along with heroin and peyote -- has no medical benefits. Also, states that allow marijuana for medical use or legalize it for recreational purposes remain in defiance of federal law.

This position was affirmed Thursday by the Drug Enforcement Agency, which said a Health and Human Services evaluation shows marijuana has no ''currently accepted medical use'' for a variety of reasons, including "a high potential for abuse."

The federal government in its decision did say it would allow more research into marijuana's benefits, which might ultimately move pot out of its current classification.

So far, according to the FDA, the available research that meets its testing standards hasn't demonstrated "an accepted medical use." That conclusion comes after a review of more than 500 studies.

Confused? You should be.

By referendum, Massachusetts approved medical marijuana in 2012, and now voters can extend that to recreational pot if that ballot question passes in the 2016 general election.

Pot backers say marijuana's medical benefits are too numerous to mention, while the federal government can't identify a single one.

As far as regulation, while federal law usually prevails when it conflicts with a state statute, our current president instructed federal prosecutors in 2009 not to go after individuals who distribute marijuana for medical purposes in accordance with state law. This was reinforced in 2013 when the Justice Department notified Colorado and Washington, the first states to legalize recreational pot, that it wouldn't interfere with state laws, under certain conditions.

So an uneasy alliance currently prevails that gives those who adhere to their state's marijuana law a free pass, or just a civil penalty, when it comes to possession of less than an ounce, as is the case here.

So for any Massachusetts voter still undecided on whether recreational marijuana should be legalized, here's some food for "pot": the federal government has reviewed far more data on this subject than anyone else.

So why should we dispute its findings?

To read the full editorial, click here.

______________________________________

August 10, 2016

ICYMI – Marijuana candy sickens 19 at quinceanera in California
(Follows incident in which 24 people sent to hospital in Ohio)

Marijuana candy sickens 19 at quinceañera in California
CNN
By Susanna Capelouto
August 9, 2016

Story highlights

• Gummy ring candy at party contains THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana
• Candy with THC also leads to hospitalization for 24 people at a music festival in Ohio

(CNN) Edible marijuana offered at a quinceañera celebration is suspected of sickening 19 people Saturday night in San Francisco's Mission District, according to the city's Department of Public Health.

Preliminary lab tests showed that gummy ring candy from the party contained THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana.

"Anyone who attended the quinceañera and may have taken home some of the gummy rings is urged to discard them immediately," said Dr. Tomas Aragon, health officer for the city and county of San Francisco.

The 19 people were taken to the hospital Saturday with symptoms ranging from a rapid heart rate and dilated pupils to nausea, lethargy and confusion. All were released by Monday morning.

Health officials are investigating the origin of the candy, including the catering company, which is from Oakland, officials said.

"The question remains, where did the candies come from?" said Aragon.

He warned of the dangers of edible marijuana at parties where it can be hard to control the dosage.

"A situation like this, where they were consumed by unsuspecting people, and many children, is greatly concerning," Aragon said.

A quinceañera is a celebration of a girl's 15th birthday in some Latin American cultures.

24 sent to hospital in Ohio

THC in candies also sent 24 music festival attendees to the hospital in Richland County, Ohio, on Saturday, according to the county sheriff's office. No one lost consciousness and everyone seems to be OK, Sheriff's Capt. Donald Zehner said.

A 28-years-old man from Michigan was arrested in connection with the overdoses, the sheriff's office said Monday.

Paramedics initially believed the overdoses were caused by opiates, but when victims did not respond to the antidote Narcan, the candies were tested and came back positive for a high dosage of THC, CNN affiliate WEWS reported.

The overdose victims Saturday were attending the EST FEST music festival in Butler, Zehner said.

(To read the full article, click here)

______________________________________

August 3, 2016

Bi-Partisan Coalition Of 120 Lawmakers Urge Rejection of Ballot Question 4 To Legalize Commercial Marijuana Industry in Massachusetts
Leaders From Every Region Join Together To Say That Question 4 is Wrong Path For Their Communities

BOSTON – A bi-partisan coalition of 120 legislators from every region of the Commonwealth today voiced their opposition to ballot question 4 to legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

The elected leaders said allowing the billion-dollar marijuana industry into Massachusetts to market highly potent edible products, particularly during an addiction crisis, is the wrong path for the state. Edibles like this account for 50% of the sales in Colorado, and the Massachusetts ballot question specifically authorizes these products and places no potency limit on them. A study released last week found that the number of children aged 0-9 who suffered from marijuana exposure has increased by 150% in Colorado since the state legalized commercial marijuana, including edibles.

The Massachusetts ballot question, which was written by and for the Marijuana industry, sets no limits on the number of producers and sellers, allows people to grow tens of thousands of dollars of marijuana at their homes, even over neighbors’ objections, and has been shown to dramatically increase impaired driving in other states that have legalized commercial marijuana.

Massachusetts has already taken major steps to address concerns around this issue. Massachusetts has decriminalized the possession of marijuana -  people are not being jailed for marijuana use nor are they receiving a criminal record for such activity. Massachusetts also legalized the use of marijuana for health purposes.

The legislators join elected leaders such as Governor Charlie Baker, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, Speaker Robert DeLeo, and Attorney General Maura Healey who have come out in opposition to Question 4. The Massachusetts Municipal Association also has opposed this ballot question after a unanimous vote by their board of directors.

Among the group of health care, public safety, business, and child protection experts who have already come out in opposition to this ballot question include:  Massachusetts Hospital Association, Massachusetts Medical Society, Massachusetts Municipal Association, Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, Retailers Association of Massachusetts, Association of School Superintendents, Construction Industries of Massachusetts, Action for Boston Community Development, Association for Behavioral Healthcare, National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter), Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, Massachusetts Sheriffs Association and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

Senators

(D) Senator Joseph Boncore - 1st Suffolk and Middlesex District

(D) Senator Michael Brady - 2nd Plymouth & Bristol District

(D) Senator Harriette Chandler - 1st Worcester District

(R) Senator Vinny deMacedo - Plymouth and Barnstable District

(D) Senator Sal DiDomenico - Middlesex and Suffolk District

(D) Senator Eileen Donoghue - 1st Middlesex District

(R) Senator Ryan Fattman - Worcester and Norfolk District

(D) Senator Jennifer Flanagan - Worcester and Middlesex District

(D) Senator Anne Gobi - Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire, and Middlesex District

(R) Senator Donald Humason - 2nd Hampden and Hampshire District

(D) Senator John Keenan - Norfolk and Plymouth District

(D) Senator Barbara L'Italien - 2nd Essex and Middlesex District

(D) Senator Jason Lewis - 5th Middlesex District

(D) Senator Joan Lovely - 2nd Essex District

(D) Senator Mike Moore - 2nd Worcester District

(R) Senator Patrick O'Connor - Plymouth and Norfolk District

(D) Senator Kathleen O'Connor Ives - 1st Essex District

(D) Senator Michael Rodrigues - 1st Bristol and Plymouth District

(R) Senator Richard Ross - Norfolk, Bristol and Middlesex District

(D) Senator Michael Rush - Norfolk and Suffolk District

(R) Senator Bruce Tarr - 1st Essex and Middlesex District

(D) Senator Daniel Wolf - Cape and Islands District

Representatives

(D) Representative James Arciero - 2nd Middlesex District

(D) Representative Brian Ashe - 2nd Hampden District

(D) Representative Cory Atkins - 14th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Bruce Ayers - 1st Norfolk District

(R) Representative Jay Barrows - 1rst Bristol District

(D) Representative Jennifer Benson - 37th Middlesex District

(R) Representative Donnie Berthiaume - 5th Worcester District

(D) Representative Daniel Cahill - 10th Essex District

(D) Representative Thomas Calter - 12th Plymouth District

(R) Representative Kate Campanale - 17th Worcester District

(D) Representative James Cantwell - 4th Plymouth District

(D) Representative Gerard Cassidy - 9th Plymouth District

(D) Representative Tackey Chan - 2nd Norfolk District

(D) Representative Edward Coppinger - 10th Suffolk District

(D) Representative Claire Cronin - 11th Plymouth District

(D) Representative Josh Cutler - 6th Plymouth District

(R) Representative Angelo D'Emilia - 8th Plymouth District

(D) Representative Michael Day - 31st Middlesex District

(R) Representative David Decoste - 5th Plymouth District

(D) Speaker Robert Deleo - 19th Suffolk District

(D) Representative Brian Dempsey - 3rd Essex District

(D) Representative Marcos Devers - 16th Essex District

(R) Representative Geoff Diehl - 7th Plymouth District

(D) Representative Diana DiZoglio - 14th Essex District

(D) Representative Paul Donato - 35th Middlesex District

(R) Representative Shawn Dooley - 9th Norfolk District

(R) Representative Peter Durant - 6th Worcester District

(D) Representative Jim Dwyer - 30th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Carolyn Dykema - 8th Middlesex District

(R) Representative Kimberly Ferguson - 1st Worcester District

(D) Representative John Fernandes - 10th Worcester District

(D) Representative Ann-Margaret Ferrante - 5th Essex District

(D) Representative Michael Finn - 6th Hampden District

(D) Representative Carole Fiola - 6th Bristol District

(R) Representative Paul Frost - 7th Worcester District

(D) Representative Denise Garlick - 13th Norfolk District

(D) Representative Colleen Garry - 36th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Carmine Gentile - 13th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Thomas Golden - 16th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Patricia Haddad - 5th Bristol District

(R) Representative Sheila Harrington - 1st Middlesex District

(D) Representative Stephen Hay - 3rd Worcester District

(D) Representative Russell Holmes - 6th Suffolk District

(R) Representative Steve Howitt - 4th Bristol District

(D) Representative Daniel Hunt - 13th Suffolk District

(R) Representative Randy Hunt - 5th Barnstable District

(R) Minority Leader Brad Jones - 20th Middlesex District

(R) Representative Hannah Kane - 11th Worcester District

(D) Representative Kay Khan - 11th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Robert Koczera - 11th Bristol District

(R) Representative Kevin Kuros - 8th Worcester District

(D) Representative John Lawn - 10th Middlesex District

(R) Representative Marc Lombardo - 22nd Middlesex District

(R) Representative Jim Lyons - 18th Essex District

(D) Representative Elizabeth Malia - 11th Suffolk District

(D) Representative Ronald Mariano - 3rd Norfolk District

(D) Representative Christopher Markey - 9th Bristol District

(D) Representative Joe McGonagle - 28th Middlesex District

(R) Representative Joe McKenna - 18th Worcester District

(D) Representative Paul McMurtry - 11th Norfolk District

(D) Representative James Miceli - 19th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Frank Moran - 17th Essex District

(R) Representative David Muradian - 9th Worcester District

(R) Representative Mathew Muratore - 1st Plymouth District

(D) Representative James Murphy - 4th Norfolk District

(D) Representative Dave Nangle - 17th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Harold Naughton - 12th Worcester District

(R) Representative Shaunna O'Connell - 3rd Bristol District

(R) Representative Keiko Orrall - 12th Bristol District

(D) Representative Jerald Parisella - 6th Essex District

(D) Representative Thomas Petrolati - 7th Hampden District

(D) Representative William Pignatelli - 4th Berkshire District

(R) Representative Elizabeth Poirier - 14th Bristol District

(D) Representative Angelo Pupollo - 12th Hampden District

(D) Representative John Rogers - 12th Norfolk District

(D) Representative Dennis Rosa - 4th Worcester District

(D) Representative Jeffrey Roy - 10th Norfolk District

(D) Representative Daniel Ryan - 2nd Suffolk District

(D) Representative Jeffrey Sanchez - 15th Suffolk District

(D) Representative Angelo Scaccia - 14th Suffolk District

(D) Representative Paul Schimd - 8th Bristol District

(D) Representative John Scibak - 2nd Hampshire District

(D) Representative Alan Silva - 7th Bristol District

(R) Representative Todd Smola - 1st Hampden District

(D) Representative Theodore Speliotis - 13th Essex District

(D) Representative Thomas Stanley - 9th Middlesex District

(D) Representative Ellen Story - 3rd Hampshire District

(D) Representative Walter Timilty - 7th Norfolk District

(D) Representative Paul Tucker - 7th Essex District

(D) Representative Steven Ultrino - 33rd Middlesex District

(D) Representative John Velis - 4th Hampden District

(R) Representative David Vieira - 3rd Barnstable District

(D) Representative RoseLee Vincent - 16th Suffolk District

(D) Representative Thomas Walsh - 12th Essex District

(R) Representative Timothy Whelan - 1st Barnstable District

(R) Representative Susannah Whipps-Lee - 2nd Franklin District

(R) Representative Donald Wong - 9th Essex District

(D) Representative Jonathan Zlotnik - 2nd Worcester District

______________________________________

July 27, 2016

In Light Of New Study On Child Marijuana Poisoning, Marijuana Industry Urged To Answer Why They Specifically Authorized Marijuana Edibles In Ballot Question
New Study Shows Edibles, Commercialized Marijuana Have Led To 150% Increase In Accidental Marijuana Exposure For Young Children, Toddlers In Colorado

BOSTON - A new study published Monday has shown that reports of accidental marijuana poisoning by young children and toddlers has risen by 150% since commercial marijuana was legalized in Colorado in 2014. Half of the child poisoning cases involved the accidental ingestion of marijuana edible products (including brownies, cookies and candies) that are being marketed and sold in Colorado. The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts urged the marijuana industry to answer why they would specifically authorize these products in Massachusetts under their 2016 ballot proposal.

The study, conducted by the JAMA Pediatrics Journal, was released Monday and studied the number of marijuana poison-control cases for children aged 0-9, and showed the 150% increase since 2014. The average stay in the hospital for the children was about 11 hours. Marijuana Edibles now account for approximately 50% of marijuana product sales in Colorado since legalization, and that number is growing.

Under the Massachusetts ballot question, written by the Marijuana Industry, edible pot products would be specifically authorized under the law. Edible products are such an essential part of the Massachusetts ballot question that the state’s Supreme Judicial Court, in a rare ruling, ordered that the ballot question summary be re-written to include reference to edibles. In Colorado, the marijuana industry has vigorously fought against marketing restrictions once recreational marijuana was legalized.

“It is becoming increasingly clear that the pot edibles market is dangerous for our kids, and a huge part of the profit model for the marijuana industry,” Safe and Healthy Massachusetts campaign manager Nick Bayer said. “The marijuana industry chose to specifically authorize these dangerous edible products under their proposed law. The marijuana industry put their profits over the interests of Massachusetts families, and we believe the edibles issue alone is a reason to reject this ballot question in Massachusetts.”

Among the facts about marijuana edibles include:

• There is no limit on the potency of edible products in Colorado, nor are limits written into the proposed law in Massachusetts.
• Edible products have been known to have THC levels reaching as high as 95%. That compares to the THC in current marijuana plants that average 17-18% THC, and marijuana THC levels of 3-4% that existed back in the 1980s.
• Marijuana infused products such as gummy bears, candy bars, cookies, and “cannabis cola” are often indistinguishable from traditional products and attractive to children.
• Doctors at Children’s Hospital Denver reported that, after legalization, the ER began treating one to two kids a month for accidental marijuana ingestion, mostly in the form of edibles. Prior to legalization, they reported none.
• For example, in 2014, a two-year old girl from Longmont, Colorado was sent to the hospital after accidentally eating a marijuana cookie she found in front of her apartment building.

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts represents a growing coalition of health care and community leaders, anti-addiction advocates, educators, business groups, first responders, and families who are opposing this proposed legalization of the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

Among the groups that have already come out in opposition to this initiative include: the Massachusetts Hospital Association, the Massachusetts Medical Society, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals, the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, Association of School Superintendents, the Association for Behavioral Healthcare, the National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter), the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, the Massachusetts Sheriffs Association, and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

______________________________________

July 25, 2016

Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals (COBTH) Opposes Marijuana Legalization Ballot Question

BOSTON - The Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals (COBTH) today joined the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts, a coalition of community leaders, law enforcement agencies, legislators, members of the business community and health care organizations opposed to passage Question 4 on the November ballot seeking to legalize marijuana in the Commonwealth.

“The health and safety of Massachusetts residents and the communities we serve has always been a priority for our hospitals,” said John Fernandez, President and CEO of Mass. Eye and Ear and Chair of COBTH.  “Legalizing the recreational use of marijuana carries with it dangerous public health consequences.”

Evidence of the negative effects of legalized marijuana is documented in states that have made the drug legal.  In the year after Colorado legalized marijuana, the number of marijuana-related emergency visits increased nearly 30 percent as did the number of traffic deaths related to marijuana.  Colorado now ranks first in the nation for teen marijuana use where after a 12% increase in use by those between age 12 and 17.  In Washington, the number of fatal car crashes involving marijuana doubled in the one year since legalization.

"Massachusetts has made great strides in addressing the opioid epidemic, our focus should be on continuing that critical work and legalization of marijuana and the proven adverse public health impacts will only make that job harder," said John Erwin, COBTH's Executive Director.

Among the groups that have come out in opposition to Question 4 include:

• Massachusetts Hospital Association
• Massachusetts Medical Society
• Massachusetts Municipal Association
• Associated Industries of Massachusetts
• Retailers Association of Massachusetts
• Association of School Superintendents
• Construction Industries of Massachusetts
• Action for Boston Community Development
• Association for Behavioral Healthcare
• National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter)
• Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, Massachusetts Sheriffs Association and all Massachusetts District Attorneys

About COBTH: The Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals exists to maximize the Boston-area teaching hospitals' visibility on the issues that are fundamental to their unique missions of teaching and research. COBTH educates opinion leaders at all levels about the contributions of its members to the area's health and economy. Members include Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston Medical Center, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Brigham and Women’s Faulkner Hospital, Cambridge Health Alliance, Carney Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Massachusetts General Hospital, St. Elizabeth Medical Center, Tufts Medical Center, VA Boston Healthcare System.

______________________________________

July 20, 2016

New Poll Shows Majority of Voters Opposing Ballot Question 4 to Legalize Commercial Marijuana Industry in MA
Second Poll To Show Opposition Rising to Commercial Marijuana Industry

BOSTON – As reported in today’s Boston Globe, a second consecutive poll has shown opposition rising to Ballot Question 4 that would legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts. This poll reported on today shows a majority of Massachusetts voters opposing the measure.

According to the Globe, the survey found that 51 percent of Massachusetts voters plan to vote against the commercial marijuana ballot measure, while 41 percent support it. Nine percent were undecided. The poll was conducted on July 12 – July 13 by Gravis Marketing for Jobs First, and surveyed 901 registered voters. It had a margin of error of +/- 3.3 points.

This poll follows a Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll conducted in May that showed 46% of likely voters opposing the commercial marijuana ballot question, with 43% supporting it, and 11% undecided.

“These polls show that as more people learn about Question 4 – a proposal written by and for the commercial marijuana industry – the more concerns they have,” said Safe and Healthy Massachusetts Campaign Manager Nick Bayer. “Question 4 would usher in the dangerous marijuana edibles industry, allow people to grow pot in their homes and apartments even over objections by neighbors, and undermine our work combatting the addiction crisis. As more people learn these facts, the more they understand that this giveaway to the marijuana industry is the wrong proposal at the wrong time for Massachusetts.”

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts is a growing, bi-partisan coalition of health care and community leaders, anti-addiction advocates, educators, business groups, first responders, and families who are opposing this proposed legalization of the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

Among the groups that have already come out in opposition to this ballot question include:

• Massachusetts Hospital Association
• Massachusetts Medical Society
• Massachusetts Municipal Association
• Associated Industries of Massachusetts
• Retailers Association of Massachusetts
• Association of School Superintendents
• Construction Industries of Massachusetts
• Action for Boston Community Development
• Association for Behavioral Healthcare
• National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter)
• Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, Massachusetts Sheriffs Association and all Massachusetts District Attorneys

To read the full Boston Globe story, as reported by Jim O’Sullivan, click here.

______________________________________

July 11, 2016

ICYMI - Edible Marijuana Emerges As Key Issue In Legalization Debate

Associated Press
By Bob Salsberg
July 9, 2016

If recreational marijuana becomes legal in Massachusetts, it won't be just for smoking.

Edible marijuana products - a broad category that could include such treats as cookies and candy - would also be permitted under the ballot question nearly certain to go before voters in November. As the legalization debate heats up, the smoke-free forms of the drug are quickly emerging as a central focus of discussion.

Edibles caught the attention of the state Supreme Judicial Court, which this past week pointedly ordered revisions to a summary designed to explain the question to voters. The justices said it was misleading not to specify that legal marijuana could include food products.

A group of state senators who earlier this year visited Colorado - the first state to legalize recreational marijuana - said edibles now comprise roughly half the retail market there and pose among the greatest public health concerns for regulators.

"Many of these products can be mistaken for other products already on the shelves, as the differences in taste, color and smell may be close to undetectable," the senators wrote in a report. "Edibles such as cookies and candy can be particularly appealing to children."

Colorado recently banned pot-infused gummy bears and products that resemble animals and fruits. The state is also considering new limits on the potency of marijuana products, which could make other edibles illegal.

Critics say marijuana-infused food often contains levels of THC, the psychoactive chemical in marijuana, several times more potent than the smokable forms of the drug and pose unique risks of overconsumption. The edibles are often produced by extracting marijuana concentrate from the plant and adding it to food or beverages. Many users report edibles produce a less immediate, though eventually more intense and longer-lasting high.

According to the organization backing the Massachusetts ballot question, lessons learned from states like Colorado warrant a careful approach toward smoke-free marijuana products. A 15-member regulatory board would be created to oversee all aspects of the proposed law.

To read the full story, click here.

______________________________________

July 8, 2016

Broad-based Bi-partisan Coalition Urges Rejection of Ballot Question to Legalize Commercial Marijuana Industry in Massachusetts
As Commonwealth Confronts Addiction Crisis, Coalition Leaders Believe Allowing Billion-Dollar Industry to Market Edible Products, increase Access to Young People Is Wrong Path for Massachusetts

BOSTON – A broad-based, bi-partisan coalition of community leaders and experts joined together today to urge voters to reject the proposed ballot question to legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts. Particularly in the context of the addiction crisis we are currently facing, the leaders said allowing the billion-dollar marijuana industry into Massachusetts to market highly potent edible products and increase access to young people is the wrong path for the state.

The press conference, held today at the William J. Ostiguy Recovery High School in Boston, was the official kick off of the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts. Participating in the event included Governor Charlie Baker, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, House Speaker Robert DeLeo, Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito, Suffolk County Sheriff Steve Tompkins, health and anti-addiction advocates, doctors and educators, and business and public safety leaders.

"This ballot measure would create a billion dollar, for-profit marijuana industry and introduce highly potent marijuana edible products in the form of candies, sweets and sodas to our main-street shops," Governor Baker said. "As our work to bend the trend on the opioid epidemic is just beginning, the last thing we need is to add yet another challenge for our young people and our addiction community. I'm honored to be part of a broad-based and bipartisan coalition that will make sure voters understand the honest and practical implications of this proposal."

"This question is a reminder of calls from parents who are terrified of what is happening to their teenage child who is using marijuana," Mayor Walsh said. "It's a reminder of bright, happy kids taken down by pot in their teenage years, and a reminder of families crushed by sadness when it happens. The data tells a clear story of the dangers behind commercial marijuana, but it's the suffering behind the data that really matters. This question only raises that risk, and I'm not going to stand by and watch it happen."

"I’m so proud we took strong action in combatting opioid addiction with our substance addiction legislation this year. I wouldn’t want to do anything to jeopardize that progress," House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo said. "At a time when we are dealing with an addiction crisis, it is reckless and unwise to increase access to another drug that we know is harmful to our kids and families."

Massachusetts has already taken major steps to address concerns around this issue. Massachusetts has decriminalized the possession of marijuana -  people are not being jailed for marijuana use nor are they receiving a criminal record for such activity. Massachusetts also legalized the use of marijuana for health purposes.

This proposed law is written by and for the Marijuana Industry. Among the concerns raised about the ballot question included:

• It specifically authorizes the promotion and sale of highly potent marijuana edible products like candy, gummy bears, soda and other products that appeal to children. Edibles like this account for 50% of the sales in Colorado, and the Massachusetts ballot question places no potency limit on the products.
• Since becoming the first state to legalize, Colorado has become the number one state in the nation for teen marijuana use.
• The ballot measure sets no limit on the number of marijuana producers and sellers, leading to more pot shops being opened in CO than Starbucks and McDonalds combined.
• It allows people to home-grow tens of thousands of dollars worth of marijuana in their households, even over objections by neighbors, which criminals are exploiting to create an entirely new black market in Colorado.
• The measure is written by and for the marijuana industry, severely limiting the ability of cities and towns to set their own rules about the issue and giving preferential treatment to existing medical marijuana.
• The ballot measure would increase drugged driving fatalities, with the number of traffic deaths due to marijuana impaired driving doubling in Washington state since legalization.

This week, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court allowed the proposed ballot question to go forward and proponents submitted the signatures required to get the ballot question before voters.

Among the groups that have already come out in opposition to this ballot question include:

• Massachusetts Hospital Association
• Massachusetts Medical Society
• Massachusetts Municipal Association
• Associated Industries of Massachusetts
• Retailers Association of Massachusetts
• Association of School Superintendents
• Construction Industries of Massachusetts
• Action for Boston Community Development
• Association for Behavioral Healthcare
• National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter)
• Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, Massachusetts Sheriffs Association and all Massachusetts District Attorneys

The bi-partisan members of the campaign’s steering committee include: Senator Jason Lewis (D), Senator Vincent DeMacedo (R), Cape and Islands District Attorney Michael O’Keefe (R), Representative Paul Donato (D), Representative Hannah Kane (R), Heidi Heilman (President of the Massachusetts Prevention Alliance), former Senator Steven Baddour, Jim Conroy (former Senior Advisor to Governor Baker), Corey Welford (former Chief of Staff to Attorney General Maura Healey) and David Stone (political advisor to Mayor Walsh).

______________________________________

July 6, 2016

STATEMENT OF SAFE AND HEALTHY MASSACHUSETTS CAMPAIGN ON TODAY'S SJC DECISION ON MARIJUANA BALLOT QUESTION

SJC Revises One Sentence Description To Include Reference to Marijuana Edibles Market

BOSTON – Today, the Supreme Judicial Court, while allowing the ballot question that would legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts to move forward, has  revised the one-sentence ballot description of a yes vote to make explicit that marijuana edibles would be legalized.

Marijuana edibles account for approximately 50% of marijuana product sales in Colorado since legalization. The ballot question places no restriction on the potency of these products, which have THC levels as high as 90% in Colorado. Edible products include candies like gummy bears and swedish fish, chocolate bars, cookies, and sodas.

Statement from Corey Welford, Spokesperson for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts Campaign

"We are pleased the SJC has recognized that this ballot question would usher in an entirely new marijuana edibles market and that voters must be informed of that fact. Under this proposal, the Marijuana Industry would be allowed to promote and sell these highly potent products, in the form of gummy bears and other candies, that are a particular risk for accidental use by kids."

Fact Sheet on Marijuana Edibles

A major part of the Marijuana Industry’s profit goals

• Marijuana Edibles now account for approximately 50% of marijuana product sales in Colorado since legalization, and that number is growing.

Highly potent products

• There is no limit on the potency of edible products in Colorado, nor are limits written into the proposed law in Massachusetts
• Edible products have been known to have THC levels reaching as high as 50 to 95%. That compares to the THC in current marijuana joints that average 17-18% THC, and typical marijuana THC levels of 3-4% that existed back in the 1980s.

A danger for kids

• Marijuana infused products such as gummy bears, candy bars, cookies, and “cannabis cola” are often indistinguishable from traditional products.
• These products are attractive to children, placing them at risk of accidental use.
• Doctors at Children’s Hospital Denver reported that, after legalization, the ER began treating one to two kids a month for accidental marijuana ingestion, mostly in the form of edibles. Prior to legalization, they reported none.[1]
• For example, in 2014, a two-year old girl from Longmont, Colorado was sent to the hospital after accidentally eating a marijuana cookie she found in front of her apartment building.

[1] USA Today, “Kids Getting into parents’ pot-laced goodies,” April 2, 2014. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/02/marijuana-pot-edibles-colorado/7154651/)

______________________________________

July 5, 2016

WTAS: Herald Editorial - Pot Camp Gets Petty

"Don't like the message? Well, for the folks behind the campaign to legalize recreational use of marijuana the answer is just to shoot the messenger"

Pot Camp Gets Petty
Boston Herald Editorial
July 5, 2016

Don’t like the message? Well, for the folks behind a campaign to legalize the recreational use of marijuana the answer is just to shoot the messenger.

The Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol has filed a petty complaint with state campaign finance regulators, alleging that Walpole Police Chief John Carmichael violated state rules by appearing at an event sponsored by a group opposed to the pro-pot ballot question, in uniform and during work hours.

The group alleges Carmichael broke the rules by engaging in political advocacy. And had he shown up at the June 23 event and explicitly called on voters to reject the November ballot question, maybe they’d have an argument.

But Carmichael says his role at the event was limited to educating the public about the danger of edible products containing marijuana, based in part on a recent fact-finding visit to Colorado.

And he understands the difference.

“I’m not here to tell anybody how to vote. That’s not up to me,” Carmichael told MassLive.

For the full editorial, click here.

______________________________________

June 30, 2016

ICYMI: Advice From CO Guv On Pot Legalization – “Wait a Year Or Two And See How It Goes”

Fortune Magazine Article: “Is Pot Losing Its Buzz In Colorado?”
Is Pot Losing Its Buzz in Colorado?: A backlash is growing in a state where marijuana has quickly become a $1 billion legal business

Fortune Magazine
By Jennifer Alsever
July 1, 2016 Issue

For months, Paula McPheeters and a handful of like-minded volunteers have spent their weekends in grocery-store parking lots, even in 95° F heat. Sitting around a folding table draped with an American flag, they asked passing shoppers to sign a petition. Inevitably a few sign-wielding young protesters would show up to argue that McPheeters’s group was dead wrong. With the two sides often just yards away from each other, shouting matches erupted. “We’re peaceful people,” one woman yelled. “You’re drugged out,” countered an angry man. Threats and phone calls to police became the norm.

The wedge dividing the people of this small blue-collar city of Pueblo, Colo.? Legal marijuana.

Colorado gave the green light to recreational marijuana back in 2012, when it passed a law to make nonmedical pot sales legal starting Jan. 1, 2014. But now opposition is rising in communities across the state. Colorado has become a great social experiment, the results of which are still not clear. “The jury is still out as to whether this was a good idea,” says Colorado attorney general Cynthia Coffman.

What’s undeniable is this: Legal marijuana is in high demand in Colorado. Only three other states—Alaska, Washington, and Oregon—plus the District of Columbia currently permit recreational adult use of cannabis. (It’s legal for medical use in ­another 19 states.) Of that group, Colorado led the way in 2015 with $996.5 million in licensed pot sales—a 41.7% jump over 2014 and nearly three times the figure in Washington State. Recreational sales made up nearly two-thirds of the total.

Now, as citizen groups attempt to put the brakes on the growing industry, a heated debate has emerged about the drug’s societal impact. Doctors report a spike in pot-related emergency room visits—mostly due to people accidentally consuming too much of potent edible pot products. Police face new cartel-related drug operations. Parents worry about marijuana being sold near their homes and schools. And less affluent communities like Pueblo struggle with the unintended consequences of becoming home to this emerging and controversial industry.

Amendment 64 decriminalized marijuana statewide, but Colorado’s cities and counties still decide if the drug can be grown and sold locally. At least 70% of the municipalities in the state have banned commercial operations, either by popular vote or board decisions.

Many other communities have begun pushing back. Last fall, controversy arose in the small western Colorado town of Parachute when an antipot group attempted to recall members of the town council who had welcomed pot shops. (Voters defeated the recall 3 to 1.) Debate has since emerged in Aspen, Carbondale, Glenwood Springs, Grand Junction, Littleton, and Rifle over the number, location, smell, and mere existence of retail and cultivation facilities. Citizens in the San Luis Valley, in the southern part of the state, say their schools and social services have been overwhelmed by a flood of newcomers coming to grow cannabis on cheap land, despite limited water. And just this spring officials in Colorado Springs and Englewood opted to ban pot social clubs, which are akin to lounges in which people can legally smoke weed in public.

“I’m getting calls now from people who voted for legalization thinking it wouldn’t affect them,” says Kevin Sabet, co-founder of national antimarijuana legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana. “They’re surprised to see these are sophisticated businesses opening up next to their schools selling things like marijuana gummy bears. And they’re angry.”

Officials in Denver, which is home to one-third of the state’s cannabis market, moved this spring to rein in pot capitalism. The city passed an ordinance capping the number of dispensaries and grow facilities at the present level. But discontent continues to fester in poorer communities, where many of these operations inevitably land. “We were told that legalization would take drugs out of our community,” says Candi CdeBaca, a community activist who grew up in the mostly Latino and poor Denver neighborhood of Elyria-Swansea. “The drugs stayed—and the drug dealers changed.”

CdeBaca points to, for example, an increase in school suspensions related to marijuana. And unlike the meatpacking plants and refineries that once dotted the area, CdeBaca says, this new industry hasn’t brought her neighbors jobs. Instead, the money is flowing to outsiders.

“It’s the Wild West, and the well-funded marijuana industry has dominated the regulatory process, and people are finally speaking up,” says Frank McNulty, a lawyer for Healthy Colorado, which plans to put a measure on the November state ballot—an easier task in Colorado than in many other states—that would limit the active drug ingredient THC in cannabis candy and concentrates and require health warnings on packaging. The marijuana industry has objected to the proposal, and the issue is now before the Colorado Supreme Court.

Cannabis backers bristle at the pushback, calling it a back-door effort by prohibitionists who simply disagree with the legalization of the drug. Mason Tvert, director of the Marijuana Policy Project, which leads legalization efforts nationwide, cites studies showing minimal impact on society and no harm to Colorado’s growing economy. Says Tvert: “Anyone who says it’s caused an increase in this or that [problem] is full of shit.”

What plays out in Colorado may influence what happens across the nation. Pot remains illegal under federal law. But legalization of recreational marijuana for adult use will be on the November ballot in California, Massachusetts, and Nevada, and likely in Arizona and Maine too. Voters in Arkansas, Florida, and Missouri will be voting on whether to approve it for medical use. The growth of the cannabis industry has begun to attract the interest of big companies. Microsoft announced in mid-June that it has developed a software product to help states track marijuana growth and sales.

In a recent appearance on CNBC, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper offered this advice to other states considering legalization: “I would suggest wait a year or two and see how it goes.”

To read complete article, click here.

______________________________________

June 27, 2016

Construction Industries of Massachusetts Opposes Ballot Question To Legalize Commercial Marijuana
Association Cites Concerns Around Worker Safety, Impact on Communities; Joins Coalition Of Workers, Businesses, And Others Opposing Ballot Question

BOSTON – One of the state’s largest construction associations today voiced its opposition to the ballot question to legalize commercial marijuana in Massachusetts. The Construction Industries of Massachusetts (CIM) cited concerns around worker safety on projects and the overall impact of commercial legalization on families and communities.

CIM is an association representing all aspects of the transportation and public works construction industry in Massachusetts. Members are general contractors, subcontractors, material suppliers, equipment dealers, engineers, consultants, insurance and bonding companies, law firms and accounting firms and many other companies interested in furthering the progress of the industry.

One of CIM’s major concerns is the impact of increased use of marijuana on the worksite, particularly based on the influx of legal edible products that would come with commercial legalization. Employees who test positive for marijuana have significantly higher rates of workplace accidents.

CIM also expressed concerns about the negative impact commercial legalization will have on families and communities. At a time that many families are dealing with the impact of the opiate crisis, CIM believes that now is not the time to allow an industry into Massachusetts whose profit model is based on the promotion and sale of another addictive drug.

“Our members spend their days on worksites across the Commonwealth, and we believe increasing the availability of marijuana will undermine the safety of our workers,” CIM Executive Director John Pourbaix said. “The marijuana industry is a big business focused on the marketing and sale of an addictive drug, and we simply believe allowing this industry into Massachusetts is a bad idea for our workers and their families.”

CIM joins a growing coalition of workers, businesses, health care and community leaders, anti-addiction advocates, educators, first responders, and families who are opposing the legalization of commercial marijuana in Massachusetts.

Among the groups that have already come out in opposition to this initiative are: the Massachusetts Hospital Association, the Massachusetts Medical Society, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, the Association of School Superintendents, the Association for Behavioral Healthcare, the National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter), the Action for Boston Community Development (ABCD), the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

______________________________________

June 24, 2016

Statement Of Campaign For Safe and Healthy Massachusetts On Marijuana Industry’s Failed Commitment To Protecting Massachusetts Consumers and Communities
Campaign Responds To Yesterday’s Statement By Industry’s Spokesperson; 24-Page Ballot Question Protects Industry, Fails To Protect Consumers

BOSTON - The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts (SHMA) issued the following statement regarding the Marijuana Industry’s commitment to protecting kids and communities. The statement is in response to quotes from the industry’s Massachusetts spokesperson following a SHMA press conference regarding the edibles market that would be established under commercial legalization.

The SHMA press conference highlighted the prevalence of the edibles market under commercial legalization and the fact that there would be no potency limits placed on those products. In response, the industry’s spokesperson offered a familiar refrain – pushing it to the Cannabis Control Commission, which would be formed after the question was passed.

“I find it very difficult to believe that the Cannabis Control Commission, who has full authority to exercise what type of products can be sold -- what shape, what manner, how they’re packaged, how they’re marketed -- would allow anything to be sold that would pose any sort of a threat to children,” said spokesperson Jim Borghesani. (WBUR  - http://www.wbur.org/news/2016/06/23/recreational-marijuana-edibles-dangers)

The following is a statement from Safe and Healthy Massachusetts Campaign Manager Nick Bayer:

“Every time concerns come up about protecting consumers or limiting the harmful impact of edibles, the Marijuana Industry has the same response – let the Cannabis Control Commission deal with it. Their constant referencing of the Cannabis Control Commission is just a head fake from the real issue. Because if the Marijuana Industry really was concerned with protecting consumers or addressing the edibles problem, they would have written meaningful protections into their own ballot question. Instead, their ballot proposal specifically authorizes edibles, places no restrictions on potencies, authorizes the marketing of these products, and does nothing to address impaired driving. And we know in Colorado, once the ballot question passed, the Industry then fought regulations every step of the way.

The Marijuana Industry devoted twenty-four pages of this ballot question to protect their interests, but failed to protect Massachusetts consumers and communities. That is why this ballot question – written by and for the Big Marijuana Industry – is the wrong path for Massachusetts.”

Background

The ballot question written by the marijuana industry is twenty-four pages. Among the provisions written INTO the ballot question include:

• SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZES marijuana edibles (products like candy bars, gummy bears, “cannabis cola,” etc.), oils and concentrates
• SEVERELY RESTRICTS municipalities’ (and the state’s) ability to limit the nature and presence of the marijuana industry in their communities.
• BARS communities from restricting “home grows.”
• GUARANTEES PREFERENTIAL LICENSING for existing industry insiders
• SETS tax rate very low, meaning little or no net revenue benefit

Among the protections NOT included into the ballot question:

• NO limits on THC percentage
• NO protections against drugged driving
• NO provisions for data collection and research
• NO LIMIT on the number of stores that can sell marijuana statewide or number of operations to grow or manufacture marijuana and marijuana products.

______________________________________

June 23, 2016

PROLIFERATION OF POT EDIBLES UNDER COMMERCIAL LEGALIZATION HIGHLIGHTED IN EVENT HELD TODAY
Pot-Infused Edibles Like Candy And Soda Are Highly Potent, A Danger For Accidental Overdoses, and Represent 50% Of Retail Sales In Colorado

FRAMINGHAM – Highlighting the marketing and sale of pot-infused edibles as a major part of the Marijuana Industry’s profit model under commercial legalization, the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts held a press conference today to discuss the impact these edibles would have on Massachusetts. Edibles have a much higher potency than marijuana plants, have no potency limits placed on them under the pending ballot question, and are a significant risk for accidental use by kids.

Walpole Police Chief John Carmichael and Representative Hannah Kane held the press availability to show examples of the kinds of candies, sodas, patches, and other products that have been marketed and sold under commercial legalization. Edibles account for 50% of the sales in Colorado since commercial legalization and will be a major part of the market in Massachusetts if the ballot question is passed.

“Our goal is simply to make sure voters know what they are voting on before they go to the ballot in November,” Kane said. “A vote for commercial legalization is a vote to allow the marketing and retail sale of marijuana-laced products like gummy bears, cookies, and soda. These products are highly potent, look like regular candy, and are a significant risk for accidental use by our kids and overdoses by adults”

Among the facts highlighted in today’s press event included:

• Marijuana Edibles now account for approximately 50% of marijuana product sales in Colorado since legalization, and that number is growing.

• There is no limit on the potency of edible products in Colorado, nor are limits written into the proposed law in Massachusetts.
• Edible products have been known to have THC levels reaching as high as 95%. That compares to the THC in current marijuana plants that average 17-18% THC, and marijuana THC levels of 3-4% that existed back in the 1980s.
• Marijuana infused products such as gummy bears, candy bars, cookies, and “cannabis cola” are often indistinguishable from traditional products and attractive to children.
• Doctors at Children’s Hospital Denver reported that, after legalization, the ER began treating one to two kids a month for accidental marijuana ingestion, mostly in the form of edibles. Prior to legalization, they reported none.
• For example, in 2014, a two-year old girl from Longmont, Colorado was sent to the hospital after accidentally eating a marijuana cookie she found in front of her apartment building.

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts represents a growing coalition of health care and community leaders, anti-addiction advocates, educators, business groups, first responders, and families who are opposing this proposed legalization of the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

Among the groups that have already come out in opposition to this initiative include: the Massachusetts Hospital Association, the Massachusetts Medical Society, the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, Association of School Superintendents, the Association for Behavioral Healthcare, the National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter), the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

Photos from event included below. Please click to enlarge.

​              

______________________________________

June 8, 2016

ICYMI: Sheriff Concerned By Reports On Marijuana’s Impacts In Colorado

Sheriff Concerned By Reports On Marijuana’s Impacts In Colorado
By Matt Murphy
STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE

STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, JUNE 7, 2016...Reports about the disproportionate impact of the legal marijuana industry on minority and low-income neighborhoods and families deserve a closer look, according to Suffolk County Sheriff Steve Tompkins, who so far has focused his opposition to the legalization ballot question on its health impacts.

A recent Politico Magazine cover story and Denver Post investigations have explored how the marijuana industry has proliferated in low-income communities in Denver, Colorado, and the impact that has had on economic development.

A separate report published by the Colorado Department of Public Health earlier this year found that juvenile arrests for marijuana-related crimes such as possession rose 5 percent since legalization took effect in that state, driven wholly by a spike in arrests of black and Latino teens. While white juvenile arrests declined 8 percent between 2012 and 2014, black juvenile arrests increased 58 percent and Latino juvenile arrests climbed 29 percent.

Tompkins, a leading voice for criminal justice reform in Massachusetts, said he is reticent to discuss how law enforcement in other states operate without knowing all the facts, but has read the reports and is concerned.

"If that is in fact the case, then that speaks to the larger picture of not only the use of marijuana being able to harm one physically, but also if this does break down with black and Latino and low income individuals being singled out that has to be looked at," Tompkins told the News Service.

Jim Borghesani, the spokesman for the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol, said Massachusetts and Colorado criminal laws concerning juvenile possession are markedly different, making the comparison a difficult one.

"I'm sure that Sheriff Tomkins is aware that juvenile possession in Massachusetts is a civil offense, unlike Colorado's criminal offense, so his statement is perplexing. Equally perplexing is his lack of comment on the historic racial arrest disparity under the current prohibition system, which we seek to change," Borghesani said.

He also touted the local control, through zoning, allowed for by the ballot question.

"Our initiative provides significant local control over the location, hours and manner of marijuana businesses, and provides an opt-out measure for communities. Results show that legalization is working in Colorado and it will work in Massachusetts," Borghesani said.

In March, the Massachusetts Sheriffs Association came out in opposition to the ballot question to legalize marijuana for anyone aged 21 and older. At the time, the sheriffs focused on the health implications of making marijuana more accessible to people.

Tompkins, who was appointed sheriff in 2013, said he supported the 2008 ballot initiative to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana, but believes the dangers of full legalization outweigh any criminal justice benefits from incarcerating fewer people on minor drug crimes.

"I do not want to see all of these folks in jail if there's another way for them to provide for themselves, but I really have to go back to the health issues," Tompkins said.

To read full report, click here.

______________________________________

June 7, 2016

As Legal Case Goes To SJC, Anti-Legalization Campaign Re-iterates Call For Marijuana Industry To Come Clean About Reliance on Highly Potent Products In Massachusetts

BOSTON – As a legal case challenging the ballot question to legalize commercial marijuana in Massachusetts heads to the Supreme Judicial Court on Wednesday, the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts reiterated its call on the marijuana industry to discuss the fact that it will rely on highly potent products in Massachusetts.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Judicial Court will hear arguments in the case (Hensley vs. Attorney General) challenging the initiative petition to establish the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts. While the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts is not a party to the suit and ultimately the Court will decide the case, the campaign believes the legal challenge raises important issues, particularly as it focuses on the high THC levels of today’s marijuana products.

One Marijuana Industry representative in Colorado admitted that efforts to cap THC levels at a rate above what the Dutch government has moved to classify as a prohibited hard drug would “gut the industry” in that state.

Statement from Nick Bayer, campaign manager for a Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts:

“As this case is heard before the SJC, we believe the Marijuana Industry should acknowledge what we all know, that it will need to rely on highly potent products in Massachusetts to make a profit. This ballot question would open the door to the selling of a drug that is 400% more potent than the marijuana of even a generation ago, and edible products that have no restrictions placed on THC levels. People deserve to know what they are voting on, and this more powerful drug will have a great impact on families and young people. “

Some additional facts include:

• Today’s commercial marijuana industry is producing and pushing products with average THC levels multiple times higher than found in the 1970s—frequently at or above the 15% THC level that the Dutch government has moved to classify as a prohibited “hard drug.”
• Edible products, which the ballot measure specifically authorizes, make up about half the marijuana market in Colorado and would likely do the same here. Edibles use extracts with THC content that can rise as high as 90%.
• In a recent interview, the head of Colorado’s marijuana trade association told a news outlet that an effort in his state to cap THC levels at 16% “literally would gut” his industry. Marijuana Business Daily quoted Mike Elliot, executive director of The Marijuana Industry Group, as saying the proposed THC cap would “would probably ban all the concentrates and most of the edibles and most of the flowers that people grow, too. Most of the flower that our industry is growing is above 16% THC.”

______________________________________

June 1, 2016

Retailers Association Of Massachusetts Opposes Ballot Question To Legalize Commercial Marijuana
Business Association Raises Concerns About Negative Impact On Companies And Communities

BOSTON – One of the state’s most prominent business associations today announced its opposition to the ballot question to legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts. The Retailers Association of Massachusetts (RAM) cited numerous concerns, including the increased risks around job safety and the overall impact on Massachusetts communities.

RAM has been the voice of the Commonwealth’s retailers for almost 100 years, representing small and medium-sized businesses across Massachusetts. Among the business concerns that it cited included issues around worker safety and reports of higher absenteeism rates for employees who test positive for marijuana.

Local retailers are also active members of their communities, and RAM cited numerous concerns about the impact of marijuana legalization on families and neighborhoods. For instance, RAM raised concerns about the promotion and sale of edible marijuana products, and their impact on children. The small business community also is focused on maintaining a main streets environment featuring a mix of family-oriented business to continue to attract viable consumer traffic.

“The Retailers Association believes the legalization of the marijuana industry in Massachusetts is the wrong path for businesses and our communities,” RAM President Jon Hurst said. “The increased accessibility of marijuana will negatively impact worker safety and productivity in many companies across the state. Retailers also have a major stake in promoting safe, healthy communities, and the introduction of the marijuana industry runs counter to that goal.”

RAM joins the Associated Industries of Massachusetts as major business associations opposing this ballot question. It also joins a growing coalition of health care and community leaders, anti-addiction advocates, educators, first responders, and families who are opposing the legalization of commercial marijuana in Massachusetts.

Among the groups that have already come out in opposition to this initiative include: the Massachusetts Hospital Association, the Massachusetts Medical Society, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Association of School Superintendents, the Association for Behavioral Healthcare, the National Association of Mental Illness (Massachusetts Chapter), the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police, and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts is the Committee formed to oppose this ballot question. It has launched a website at www.safeandhealthyma.com and twitter account at @safehealthyma.

______________________________________

May 26, 2016

ICYMI – Medical Pot Dispensaries Can Cash In With Ballot Question

Medical pot dispensaries can cash in with ballot question
Commonwealth Magazine
Jack Sullivan
May 24, 2016

THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA INDUSTRY in Massachusetts, which has been struggling to get off the ground, could hit the jackpot if voters this fall approve a ballot question legalizing the commercial sale and recreational use of the drug.

The ballot question gives the operators of medical marijuana dispensaries, even those who have only filed applications for a dispensary license, the first shot at retail marijuana licenses. Marijuana advocates say it makes sense to give the initial retail licenses to firms with some experience growing and selling medical marijuana, but critics say the language of the ballot question shows how the industry’s profit motive is driving public policy.

Walpole Police Chief John Carmichael, who was a member of the commission that reviewed and approved the first round of applicants for medical marijuana dispensary and cultivation licenses, said Massachusetts voters are being victimized by “the old bait and switch.” He said voters approved medical marijuana in 2012 out of a sense of compassion, but it now looks as if that whole initiative was designed to set the stage for legalizing retail sales at medical marijuana establishments. “It’s about making a profit,” he said.

According to the proposed ballot initiative, the state during the first year after passage would issue as many as 75 licenses to retail establishments, as well as a similar number of licenses to product manufacturers and to cultivators. The referendum allows medical marijuana operators to go to the front of the line, even if they’ve never opened a dispensary, before any new applicants are considered.

“The commission shall issue licenses first to qualified applicants who submitted applications for registrations to operate medical marijuana treatment centers to the Department of Public Health by October 1, 2015, and then by lottery among qualified applicants,” according to one section of the referendum.

Six medical marijuana dispensaries are currently operating in Massachusetts and another 16 have received provisional certificates to open, according to the Department of Public Health. There are also at least 80 organizations with nearly 150 pending applications that would be eligible to open retail marijuana operations under the ballot question. Of the 225 retail, manufacturer, and cultivator licenses that could be awarded in the first year, 75 percent could theoretically go to medical marijuana operators or applicants.

When the medical marijuana bill was passed, organizations looking to operate dispensaries and cultivation facilities were required to form nonprofits, with revenues strictly regulated and profits limited. The referendum legalizing marijuana sales would allow those companies to switch to for-profit status with the approval of two-thirds of their directors.

Kris Krane, president and cofounder of 4Front Ventures of Arizona, which advises, manages, and invests in medical and legal marijuana operators around the country, was part of the group that wrote the Massachusetts ballot initiative and said the wording is based on the laws passed in Colorado and Oregon.

“This is the formula that has been followed in every state that has legalized marijuana use,” said Krane, who now lives in Roslindale. “I’m not going to hide the fact there’s going to be a short-term business benefit for [medical dispensary operators.] There is certainly some truth to cthe laim the medical marijuana business will see a business boon if this thing passes. Those existing businesses in the state are going to have a competitive advantage no matter what.”

Krane’s company has a medical marijuana arm called Mission Partners, which operates Mission Massachusetts with an office on State Street in Boston.

The group running the push for the ballot question, the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol, operates out of office space donated by 4Front and the rent is listed as an in-kind campaign contribution. Mission Massachusetts has also donated $2,500 to the campaign and 4Front has donated $3,500.

Mission Massachusetts, which records show was started with $2 million in seed money from 4Front Ventures, has three applications pending before the Department of Public Health to operate medical marijuana dispensaries in the state. Because Mission Massachusetts has yet to be awarded a license, the organization has not identified where it plans to site the dispensaries.

Krane said he’s been advocating for changing marijuana laws for years, long before states began passing laws allowing the sale of medical marijuana and decriminalizing personal possession. “My involvement in this goes way beyond the industry, way before there was an industry,” he said.

A DPH spokesman said the agency is aware of the wording in the referendum but declined comment.

Will Luzier, a former assistant attorney general who is the campaign manager for the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol, said it’s “theoretically possible” all 75 retail licenses could be gobbled up by the medical marijuana applicants before any other commercial ventures get a chance to apply.

Luzier said the referendum calls for the creation of a Cannabis Board that would issue the 75 “transitional” licenses for operating in 2018, the first year pot would be able to be sold legally if the ballot question passes. Dispensaries that are already operating or have been issued provisional licenses would be the first, followed by groups that have applications pending before the DEP that were submitted before October 1, 2015. The medical marijuana law states that groups can submit up to three applications for dispensaries and Luzier said one commercial license could be issued for each application.

“They would certainly get preference,” said Luzier. “It’s also important to remember there’s only three [applications.] It’s not like there’s six or eight. And there’s hundreds of thousands of people buying from the criminal market. Right now, it’s commercialization by criminals. This way, it’s tested and safe, not tainted or contaminated with whatever.”

The referendum would also prevent cities and towns from restricting medical dispensaries from adding a retail component to their existing operations, although side deals with individual dispensaries can be negotiated. Boston, for example, is finalizing a host agreement with Patriot Care Corp. for a medical marijuana dispensary on Milk Street. That agreement is likely to contain a clause barring the company from launching retail sales at the site.

Norwood Selectman William Plasko was in the majority on the board when members gave the thumbs-up to two medical marijuana dispensaries in the town. Plasko, who opposes legalizing marijuana, said he was not aware the medical marijuana dispensaries could add for-profit retail operations if the ballot question passes.

Plasko also said the agreements have not been finalized and he may ask colleagues to redraft it.

“We haven’t signed final agreements so maybe we’ll stick that in there,” he said. “We’re still working on the final wording.”

Norwood Police Chief William Brooks, president of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, warned officials that this was a potential result if medical marijuana dispensaries were allowed to open even as nonprofits.

“I think the whole thing is ludicrous,” he said. “To have a large-scale shop in town, that would be one of the first in the state, selling medical and commercially, I think it will draw a lot of people into town… Medical marijuana is supposed to be nonprofit but there’s an awful lot of money going into this.”

To read the rest of the story, please click here.

______________________________________

May 25, 2016

WTAS – The Marijuana Industry’s War On The Poor
“Big Tobacco takes a disproportionate toll on the working class and poor, but thrives on image of upscale glamor. Expect more of the same from Big Marijuana.”

Big Marijuana’s “War on the Poor”
Colorado Springs Gazette Editorial
May 24, 2016

Big Tobacco takes a disproportionate toll on the working class and poor, but thrives on an image of upscale glamor. Expect more of the same from Big Marijuana.

Media have glamorized the drug since Colorado legalized it for recreational use, but a new story by Politico highlights what seems obvious to anyone in Colorado's most economically challenged neighborhoods. The headline sums it up: "The Marijuana Industry's War on the Poor - Denver's booming pot industry may be trendy, but it's giving poorer neighborhoods a headache."

The "headache" is literal and figurative. The stench of pot is so pungent in some struggling neighborhoods it causes genuine headaches. In a figurative sense, the marijuana gold rush is causing an array of grievances no more welcome than a migraine.

North Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood hosts one marijuana business for every 91 residents. In addition to smelling up the place, the businesses are in the way of economic development and opportunity.

"We have people who have tried to start businesses, and they weren't able to lease the spaces because the marijuana industry came in and could make a higher offer - and do it instantly," explained a neighborhood activist at a conference in April, as quoted by Politico. "We've borne the burden of the state and city's growth at the cost of our residents."

Residents of Northeast Park Hill and Globeville neighborhoods express similar concerns.

Drew Dutcher, an architect and activist in an area inundated with pot businesses, told Politico the industry's negative consequences may undermine a slate of neighborhood plans that were intended to improve the quality of life.

The smell of pot has become so intense, the story explains, it often overpowers the odor of north Denver's notoriously smelly pet food factory.

"When you can't smell Purina, it's the 'headache' marijuana smell that gets you more than anything," said Albus Brooks, the city councilman who represents Elyria-Swansea and Globeville,

To read the full editorial, click here.

______________________________________

May 20, 2016

ICYMI – After medical marijuana linked to Mass. Pike fatality, police speak out against legalizing pot

After medical marijuana linked to Mass. Pike fatality, police speak out against legalizing pot
Worcester Telegram and Gazette
Brian Lee
May 19, 2016

After details emerged that a Webster motorist allegedly had smoked medical marijuana before the car crash that killed a state trooper, the executive director of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association said his organization had “expressed these concerns right along.”

A. Wayne Sampson, executive director of the police chiefs organization, spoke Thursday about the continuing liberalization of marijuana laws and how that plays out on roads and highways.

In 2009, a state law took effect decriminalizing possession of an ounce or less of marijuana. Four years later, medical marijuana became legal in Massachusetts.

In November, voters will decide a ballot petition aimed at making recreational use of marijuana legal. Four states and the District of Columbia have already legalized marijuana for recreational use.

But in the wake of the crash March 16 on the Massachusetts Turnpike in Charlton that killed Trooper Thomas Clardy of Hudson, and the indictment of motorist David Njuguna, Mr. Sampson said the fatal crash could ignite a better dialogue about the current petition. Mr. Njuguna was held on $500,000 bail Wednesday in Worcester Superior Court.

Jim Borghesani, spokesman for the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol, said the campaign declined to comment.

In Mr. Njuguna's hometown, Webster Police Lt. Michael D. Shaw said the news that THC, the mind-altering ingredient in marijuana, was in Mr. Njuguna's system after the crash was "a huge concern going forward, especially with the ballot initiative" to legalize marijuana.

Noting that he knew of middle-school-age children who believe that it's not wrong to smoke marijuana, and that most of Webster's violent crimes involved marijuana, Lt. Shaw suggested that legalization would send the wrong message and "create more problems than we are ready for."

Mr. Sampson of the chief's association said, “One of the arguments that we’ve been making is, for every effort that public safety makes now to keep drunk drivers off the road, we’re not successful there. The number of people killed every year in drunk driving accidents is very high. Certainly by making marijuana available legally, it’s only going to put an additional burden on public safety.”

He said Mr. Njuguna's case also exposes that there is no valid test for police to determine if somebody is under the influence of marijuana at the time that they’re being stopped, placing “a tremendous burden on law enforcement” and creating “a tremendous public safety issue.”

Mr. Sampson went on to say that advocates for the legalization of marijuana were misinforming the public "every single step of the way," including about medicinal uses.

“Let’s be serious,” he said. “They’re buying a drug legally, and that’s all it is. There is no prescriptive value to it. It may make them feel better temporarily. … But does it help them get better? Does it medically cure them? Absolutely not. All it does is it gives them a high, to temporarily relieve the pain. That’s the reality of it. The public is being misled.”

Mr. Sampson said one would like to think that the public “would be smart enough to understand that you can’t drive down the road smoking a blunt,” but added, “we’re never going to be able to stop that” now that medical marijuana is here.

That close to 25,000 people already possess medical marijuana cards in the state, or as Mr. Sampson said, had “paid a doctor to give them a prescription so they can use it,” was concerning with respect to the volume “of people that are potentially out there using it and driving.”

Citing a drug addiction crisis and other concerns, the Houses of Representatives in both New Hampshire and Vermont recently defeated legislation that would have legalized the recreational use of marijuana. Mr. Sampson said, “I think a lot of states are looking at the data that’s coming out of other states (where recreational use is legal), and they’re getting very concerned about it.

When told details of Mr. Njuguna’s case, Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws in Washington, D.C., mentioned his organization's codification of “principles of responsible marijuana use.” One is not to drive under the influence.

Asked if there needed to be greater awareness about responsible use of medicinal marijuana, Mr. Armentano said, “Certainly one could argue that any time there is a shift in marijuana policy, there should be a parallel campaign that educates the public as to what the changes in law mean, and what behavior is now allowed, and what behavior remains impermissible.”

Regarding whether it was the patient's, the retailer's or the state’s responsibility to provide that education, Mr. Armentano said: “All parties need to take responsibility for this, including the state. Whenever there is a significant change in law, one would like to see some sort of public education campaign to educate the general public.

“Obviously, the consumers themselves need to take responsibility if they’re going to engage in the act or purchasing or consuming cannabis. The retailers that provide those products also obviously bear responsibility when it comes to educating the consumers, to make sure that they act in a responsible manner.

To read the complete article, click here.

______________________________________

May 10, 2016

ICYMI – AAA: Fatal Crashes Involving Drivers Who Used Marijuana Doubled In One Year After Marijuana Legalization

One in six drivers involved in a fatal crash in Washington in 2014 ad recently used the drug

 

Report ties pot use to uptick in fatal crashes in Washington state
State House News Service
Matt Murphy
May 10, 2016

A new report analyzing vehicular accidents in Washington found that the number of fatal crashes involving drivers who recently used marijuana doubled after the state legalized the drug in 2012.

The finding is giving new ammunition to legalization opponents in Massachusetts, where a recent poll showed voters split on the issue.

The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety released its research Tuesday showing that the percentage of drivers involved in fatal crashes who recently used marijuana more than doubled from 8 percent to 17 percent between 2013 and 2014. One in six drivers involved in a fatal crash in Washington in 2014 had recently used the drug, according to the foundation.

"We are still learning the impact of legalization in other states, but these troubling numbers should give everyone pause about allowing an industry into Massachusetts that will so dramatically impact the health and safety of so many families," said Corey Welford, spokesman for the Campaign for Safe and Healthy Massachusetts, in a statement.

AAA researchers also examined lab results of drivers arrested for impaired driving, and concluded that legal limits for marijuana and driving are "problematic" because of the lack of science around a specific level of marijuana in the blood that can reliably be used to judge impairment.

To read the full article, click here.

______________________________________

May 9, 2016

WTAS: Walker Column – “Personally, I can be counted among those uncomfortable with legalization.”

Column follows Suffolk University/Boston Globe Poll That Shows Public Evenly Divided Over Ballot Question To Legalize Commercial Marijuana Industry

Mass. more ambivalent about legal marijuana than you might think
By Adrian Walker
Boston Globe
May 8, 2016

Everyone attuned to state politics has heard the same cry for months: The ballot question legalizing marijuana is nearly certain to pass. The politicians leading a fight against it are wasting their breath.

Not so fast.

A new Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll shows that voters are almost evenly divided on the question, with those polled leaning, by a slight margin — 46 percent to 43 — against legalization. In a state that has already decriminalized marijuana, and approved it for medical use, many voters see little reason to go farther.

Personally, I can be counted among those uncomfortable with legalization. I had no problem with decriminalization. No one should be arrested for smoking a joint. Medical marijuana? Of course people suffering with crippling illnesses should have access to regulated medication that will help to alleviate their suffering. That strikes me as a matter of basic humanity.

But I’m not sure that means we want to become Colorado.

A spokesman for one of the groups advocating for passage of the ballot question told me his group wasn’t surprised by the poll. “We never had any illusions that this would be an easy battle,” said Jim Borghesani of The Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol. “As far as we’re concerned, it’s always going to be an uphill battle.”

The arguments for legalization are familiar. Marijuana would be regulated, supposedly improving the quality and safety of the product. The state can tax it. Criminals will be driven out of the industry — replaced, I suppose, by the chemists in fancy suits who have reinvented themselves as medical marijuana entrepreneurs. Marijuana is no more dangerous than booze. I find the last argument especially unpersuasive, given the wreckage often left by alcohol. But there’s no question that the legal stigma of marijuana has fallen precipitously in recent years, as the acceptance of medical marijuana reflects.

The state’s most popular elected officials have mobilized to oppose the question. Governor Charlie Baker, Mayor Marty Walsh and Attorney General Maura Healey have joined forces in a bipartisan effort to stop the question. They have framed their objections in the context of the heartbreaking opioid epidemic that is claiming lives by the week. Given their collective popularity, they would seem to be formidable adversaries.

Central to their argument is that legalizing marijuana makes little sense in a state battling a tragic and terrifying drug epidemic. Whether marijuana is or isn’t a contributor to the opioid crisis, they believe the state should err of the side of caution. That argument may be gaining traction. Certainly, this is not an ideal political environment to advocate for legalizing drugs, no matter how much proponents of the ballot question ridicule the “gateway drug” argument.

To read rest of column, click here.

______________________________________

May 6, 2016

ICYMI - Colorado Marijuana Industry Admits Its Business Model Relies On Highly Potent Products, Including Edibles
Admits Proposed Ban On Products With THC Over 16% Would “Gut” Industry

 

“It would probably ban all the concentrates and most of the edibles and most of the flowers that people grow, too. Most of the flower that our industry is growing is above 16% THC.”
-Executive Director of the Colorado-based Marijuana Industry Group

 

Colorado’s Cannabis Industry Under Attack on Several Fronts
Marijuana Business Daily
By John Schroyer
May 3, 2016

On the surface, it might appear that Colorado’s $1 billion marijuana industry has been unencumbered by legal roadblocks or political opposition, given its speedy growth in recent years.

Nothing is further from the truth, however, particularly for the state’s recreational cannabis sector.

Nearly three out of every four municipalities in Colorado have banned recreational marijuana businesses since voters in the state approved adult-use cannabis more than three years ago.

Business owners also continually must confront new regulations and attempts by citizens and local lawmakers to trim the industry’s wings.

In fact, the pushback against the industry has reached new levels in the past few months, creating a highly uncertain climate for cannabis businesses in the state, threatening future growth, and making it difficult for companies to expand or even just plan for the future.

Just last week, for example, Denver City Council members approved strict caps on the number of marijuana retail stores and cultivation sites that can operate inside the Mile High City.

“It’d be nice just to have six months or a year where we don’t have to fear for our lives, but it doesn’t seem to happen in this industry,” said Bob Eschino, owner and founder of Medically Correct, a Denver producer of the popular Incredibles line of infused products.

“We are under attack, and the attacks are getting worse,” he added. “I don’t think people understand that this industry fights for its life every couple of months.”

Effort to ‘Gut’ Rec Industry

To be sure, Colorado’s marijuana industry is thriving.

Medical and recreational cannabis sales hit nearly $1 billion in the state last year, and revenues are on track to rise substantially in 2016 as well.

As of April 1, the state’s recreational marijuana industry boasted 426 retail stores and 530 cultivators, according to the latest data, while its MMJ industry counted 523 dispensaries and 774 licensed growers.

But there are efforts underway – and some that have already succeeded – to reign in future growth and change the landscape.

Perhaps the biggest potential threat this year to Colorado’s marijuana industry, both recreational and medical, is a proposed statewide ballot initiative to ban any marijuana products with a potency of more than 16% THC.

“It literally would gut Amendment 64,” said Mike Elliott, executive director of the Colorado-based trade association the Marijuana Industry Group, referring to the 2012 ballot measure creating the state’s rec industry. “It would probably ban all the concentrates and most of the edibles and most of the flowers that people grow, too. Most of the flower that our industry is growing is above 16% THC.”

It’s not clear yet if the measure stands a chance of making the ballot, however.

There’s no sign the two proponents – a retired high school principal named Ron Castagna and a person named Ali Pruitts – have serious money behind their effort. The initiative’s supporters must submit at least 98,492 signatures to the secretary of state’s office by Aug. 8 to make the ballot.

Smart Colorado, one of the state’s more prominent cannabis industry opponents, hasn’t taken a formal position on the measure, spokeswoman Henny Lasley said Monday. She said the group may or may not become involved in the campaign.

Smart Colorado did, however, support a similar cap that was proposed as an amendment to a bill at the state legislature in March.

“We’re not trying to shut down the marijuana industry,” Lasley said. “What we’re trying to do is raise awareness, specifically around high-potency products.”

Smart Colorado has spent more than $60,000 on lobbying efforts at the state capitol since 2014, according to data on the secretary of state’s website.

To read the complete article, visit here.

______________________________________

May 5, 2016

In Response to Lawsuit, Anti-Legalization Campaign Calls On Marijuana Industry To Come Clean With Voters And Acknowledge Industry's Reliance On Higher Potency of Drug
Marijuana Industry in Colorado Openly Admits Its Profits Depend on High Potency Products

BOSTON – Today, the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts called on backers of the ballot measure to legalize commercial marijuana in Massachusetts to come clean with voters and acknowledge a reality their own industry insiders elsewhere openly admit: the drug they want to produce and sell is vastly more potent and powerful than the marijuana around a few decades back.

Last week, a lawsuit (Hensley vs. Attorney General) was filed with the Supreme Judicial Court challenging the initiative petition to legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts, including on grounds the measure and certain descriptive materials about it don’t properly reflect how much higher THC levels are nowadays than in the drug traditionally termed marijuana.

While the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts is not affiliated with this lawsuit and views its substance as a matter for the court to decide, the campaign believes the legal challenge highlights very real issues:

• Today’s commercial marijuana industry is producing and pushing products with average THC levels multiple times higher than found in the 1970s—frequently at or above the 15% THC level that the Dutch government has moved to classify as a prohibited “hard drug.”
• Edible products, which the ballot measure specifically authorizes, make up about half the marijuana market in Colorado and would likely do the same here. Edibles use extracts with THC content that can rise as high as 90%.
• In an interview published two days ago, the head of Colorado’s marijuana trade association told a news outlet that an effort in his state to cap THC levels at 16% “literally would gut” his industry. Marijuana Business Daily quoted Mike Elliot, executive director of The Marijuana Industry Group, as saying the proposed THC cap would “would probably ban all the concentrates and most of the edibles and most of the flowers that people grow, too. Most of the flower that our industry is growing is above 16% THC.” (http://mjbizdaily.com/colorado-cannabis-industry-still-must-fight-stay-alive/)

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts issued the following statement in response to the legal challenge:

“The would-be marijuana industry in Massachusetts is trying to play hide the ball with the real issue people are voting on. People deserve to know that this ballot question would allow the industry to market and sell a drug that is much more potent than what existed even a generation ago. It will also unlock the door for the sale of dangerous edible products that are a risk for accidental use by children. People deserve to know what they are voting on, and the marijuana industry should acknowledge what it openly admits in Colorado – that its profits depend on high potency products.”

A hearing on the legal challenge will be argued in a special session of the SJC on June 8.

Additional Background:

• The ballot question imposes no limits or restrictions on potency and expressly authorizes edible products.
• Commercialized marijuana in Colorado has an average potency of approximately 18%. (The Massachusetts legal challenge seeks to reference the drug that would be legalized by the ballot measure as “hashish” to reflect the higher potency.) Genetically modified products have THC levels of up to 80-90%.
• Marijuana potency in the 1970s and 1980s was approximately 2-4%.

______________________________________

May 4, 2016

Behavioral Health Association Opposes Commercial Legalization of Marijuana
During Opiate Crisis, Urges Voters To Reject Effort To Commercialize Another Addictive Drug

BOSTON – A statewide association of organizations committed to providing behavioral healthcare in Massachusetts has voiced its opposition to the proposed initiative to legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

The Association for Behavioral Healthcare (ABH) voted to oppose the ballot referendum last week. ABH represents more than eighty community-based mental health and addiction provider organizations across Massachusetts. Its members serve approximately 81,000 Massachusetts residents daily and 1.5 million annually.

“We have seen a dramatic increase in the number of families struggling with addiction during this devastating opiate crisis,” Vicker DiGravio, CEO of ABH said. “We do not believe now is the time to increase access to another addictive drug in our state. We hope as people learn more about this ballot question, they will vote against commercializing a drug that we see impact far too many young people and families.”

ABH’s Board also urged public officials to address addiction as a public health concern by expanding access to treatment as an alternative to prosecution and incarceration.

ABH joins a growing coalition of health care and community leaders, anti-addiction advocates, educators, business groups, first responders, and families who are opposing this proposed legalization of the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

Among the groups that have already come out in opposition to this initiative include: the Massachusetts Hospital Association, the Massachusetts Medical Society, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Association of School Superintendents, and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts is the Committee formed to oppose this ballot question. It has launched a website at www.safeandhealthyma.com and twitter account at @safehealthyma.

______________________________________

April 28, 2016

ICYMI: Recovery High School Principal Takes Stand Against Legalizing Pot
"Why would we even tinker with the thought (of legalization) knowing what's happening to this generation right now?"

By Arianna MacNeill, as published in The Salem News

BEVERLY — While voters will decide whether to legalize recreational marijuana use this fall, the highest rate of users right now is a population that wouldn't legally be able to buy it, according to the principal of a high school for teens in substance abuse recovery.

Northshore Recovery High School Principal Michelle Lipinski, along with Dr. Sion Harris of Boston Children's Hospital, wrote a letter to Will Luzier of the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol, dated April 20, accusing him of "trying to misdirect voters."

The campaign is the "driving force" behind a ballot question, which will appear before voters in November, that aims to legalize recreational use of marijuana in Massachusetts.

According to the campaign's "The Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act," people 21 or older would be able to buy marijuana and keep 10 ounces or less in their homes.

"On Friday (April 15), your campaign staged a press conference in which you labelled marijuana a relatively 'benign plant,'" Lipinski and Harris wrote. "We can tell you first-hand that marijuana is not benign."

In the letter, the pair describes how marijuana is 300 percent more toxic than it was two decades ago. They said scientific research has proven that the drug also negatively affects many aspects of an adolescent's development, from IQ to brain development.

In a later interview, Lipinski, an educator for 20 years, said she can't speak of the drug's negative effects on other age groups; however, the top reason adolescents age 12 to 17 enter substance abuse treatment in Massachusetts is for marijuana use, she explained. The rate of dependency drops dramatically after age 21, research has shown, she said.

In addition, research conducted by Dr. Nathaniel Katz, president of Analgesic Solutions, has shown marijuana use can lead to opioid use, said Lipinski.

"Why would we even tinker with the thought (of legalization) knowing what's happening to this generation right now?" she said.

Lipinski has met with educators in Colorado Springs, Colorado, where marijuana has been legal statewide for several years. There, marijuana use is much more complicated, she said — students don't necessarily smoke it, but may eat brownies, gummy bears or other foods containing the drug.

One of the problems with marijuana is the perception that it's harmless, according to Lipinski.

"It's not taboo," she said, adding that students at Northshore Recovery High School sometimes come in wearing shirts that include a marijuana leaf in the design. "It's just embedded in the culture."

In the beginning, adolescents may not see the negative effects of marijuana use. But eventually it can lead to interruptions in sleep cycles, eating habits, and other aspects of life, she said.

There isn't enough data yet from Colorado to show the full effects of legalizing pot, Lipinski said, other than it being highly profitable. If, in a few years, studies show it isn't harmful or doesn't have negative consequences, she acknowledged she may change her stance on the issue.

But for now, Lipinski knows from working with her students — and seeing some lose their lives to addiction — just how harmful drugs can be.

______________________________________

April 27, 2016

Massachusetts Superintendents Oppose Ballot Question
To Legalize Commercial Marijuana
Cite Negative Impact On Young People In Their Communities

BOSTON - Raising concerns about the negative impact increased access to marijuana will have on students and young people in their schools and communities, the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents (MASS) announced their opposition to the ballot question that would legalize commercial marijuana in the Commonwealth.

The Association, which represents 277 Superintendents and 148 Assistant Superintendents, cited numerous concerns about the impact on young people, including:

• In states where Marijuana is legal, minors and young adults have seen an increase in use. Since becoming the first state to legalize, Colorado has also become the #1 state in the nation for teen marijuana use. Teen use jumped 20% in Colorado in the two years since legalization, even as that rate has declined nationally.
• Regular marijuana use that starts in adolescence has been shown to impair brain development, shrink school and career outcomes, and even lower IQ.
• According to data from the National Poison Data System, marijuana exposure has been on the rise among children under six, particularly in states where the drug is legal and high potency edible products are more common. These products are rarely labeled properly to reflect their THC content, which is particularly concerning given that edible marijuana products constitute half of the legal marijuana market in Colorado.

“As Superintendents, our primary focus is on helping each and every student reach their full potential, and we believe the commercial legalization of marijuana runs directly counter to that goal,” Tom Scott, Executive Director of MASS said. “Where marijuana is legal, we see increased use and abuse by young people. We urge all parents in our communities to vote against this proposal this fall.”

The Superintendents’ Association joins a growing coalition of health care and community leaders, addiction prevention advocates, educators, business groups, first responders, and families who are opposing this proposed legalization of the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

Among the groups that have already come out in opposition to this initiative include: the Massachusetts Hospital Association, the Massachusetts Medical Society, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, and all Massachusetts District Attorneys.

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts is the Committee formed to oppose this ballot question.

______________________________________

April 25, 2016

ICYMI: Legalized marijuana is too much, too soon

By Renee Loth, as published in The Boston Globe

WHEN I think about the prospect of legalizing marijuana in Massachusetts, I surprise myself by sounding like my father. Cannabis tourism? THC-infused lip balm? “Budz and sudz” crawls? What is the world coming to?

The combination of vice and capitalism is a powerful one, so it might be expected that entrepreneurs are rushing to market these artisanal highs. In Colorado, one of the first states to legalize recreational marijuana, cannabis concierge services are thriving, from ganja yoga retreats to weed weddings. Sales nearly hit $1 billion last year, with the state raking in tax and licensing fees of $135 million…

….But in Massachusetts, at least, the political establishment is arrayed against the proposition. Governor Charlie Baker, Attorney General Maura Healey, and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh all oppose the ballot question voters will likely face this November, on the grounds that it poses a public health and safety threat, and that it sends mixed signals to a populace struggling with opioid addiction.

At the risk of my own anti-establishment cred, I find myself mostly agreeing with them. But for different reasons.

Like most Massachusetts citizens, I voted for legalization of medical marijuana when it was on the ballot in 2012. But the chaotic rollout of that measure is a cautionary tale. Recall that within weeks of the election, implementation of the new law was on its way to becoming a fiasco of falsified license applications, shoddy background checks, allegations of corruption and influence-peddling, voided licenses, and lawsuits galore. Communities objected, and licensing stalled, as dispensaries were sited in residential neighborhoods instead of clinics or pharmacies, where they might have maintained at least the patina of therapeutic purpose…

Part of the problem lies with the ballot process itself, an unsubtle tool for writing complicated public policy. The medical marijuana initiative allowed the state just over a year to establish dispensaries, setting off the gold rush for licenses and all the attendant opportunities for mischief. Similarly, the legalization measure lays out a complex framework for taxes, penalties, packaging, testing, cultivating, inspecting, storage, local approval, and more, and requires an appointed three-member commission to have all the regulations promulgated and to begin issuing licenses by January 2018 – less than 14 months after passage. By bureaucratic standards, that’s head-spinningly fast. State Treasurer Deborah Goldberg, who would oversee the law, has the right idea trying at least to slow down the juggernaut…

…But marijuana revenues, like gambling income and other forms of “voluntary taxation,” are a cheap, fractured way to fund public services. Instead of people contributing equitably to the common good, a smaller subset foots the bill. Sure, some people will smoke pot whether it’s for sale at the 7-11 or not. But does the state need to endorse it, or — worse — come to depend on it?

Possession of small amounts of marijuana has been decriminalized in Massachusetts for seven years. Before we embark on this billion-dollar bender, maybe we should just take a breath.

______________________________________

April 21, 2016

ICYMI: Child Wellness Advocates - When It Comes To Impact
On Kids, Marijuana Is Not “Benign”

BOSTON – Two child wellness and anti-addiction advocates responded to comments made by marijuana legalization proponents that sought to diminish the harmful impact of the drug.

At a press conference on Friday held by the Committee to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol, legalization proponents called marijuana a relatively “benign plant.” In response, a letter was sent by a doctor from Children’s Hospital and the Director of the Northshore Recovery High School objecting to those “unfortunate comments that diminished the harms marijuana imposes on our kids.”

“We can have a healthy debate on the issue of legalization,” wrote Dr. Sion Harris and Director Michelle Lipinski. “But the fact that marijuana is addictive and has a negative impact on young people is not debatable.”

Harris and Lipinski then referenced their work with families and outlined basic facts about the impact of marijuana on youth, including:

• One in six people who start using marijuana as minors become dependent.

• Marijuana products now have THC content that is 300% higher than it was in the 1990s.
• Use of marijuana can have serious impacts on young people’s brain development, career growth, and even their IQ.

They labeled the attempts of the legalization proponents to tie the impact of marijuana to alcohol as a “misdirection.”

“There is one issue before the voters this November, and that is whether to legalize the marijuana industry in Massachusetts and dramatically expand access to a drug that we know is harmful to our kids and communities,” the child advocates said.

For a complete copy of the letter, click here.

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts is a growing, bi-partisan coalition of health care and community leaders, anti-addiction advocates, educators, business groups, first responders, and families who are opposing this proposed legalization of the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

Follow the Committee on Twitter at @safehealthyma.

______________________________________

April 19, 2016

ICYMI: Colorado Becoming Haven For Organized Crime,
Drug Traffickers’ “Pirate Grows” Following Legalization of Marijuana

Arrests In Colorado Last Week The Latest Example In Which
Traffickers Are Moving Into State To Establish New Black Market

COLORADO - The state of Colorado is seeing a new trend in which organized crime and drug traffickers are moving into the state to set up trafficking operations following the legalization of marijuana, according to recent reports.

Last week, police and federal authorities arrested more than 40 people for the illegal growing and trafficking of marijuana. It has been reported that this case involved traffickers who moved into Colorado from out-of-state to establish their drug ring and then ship the drugs out of state. This case followed a bust earlier this month in which 12 people from Florida were arrested after the seizure of 2,400 marijuana plants.

“There’s a lot of people coming from out of state,” said Huerfano County Sheriff Bruce Newman. “It’s getting to be a pretty big trend.”

“We are still learning the impact of commercial legalization on the illegal drug market in Colorado,” said Corey Welford, spokesperson for the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts. “But one thing is clear – it certainly doesn’t eliminate it. And in this case, it is creating an entirely new black market for out-of-state drug traffickers to come in and set up shop.”

The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts is a growing, bi-partisan coalition of health care and community leaders, anti-addiction advocates, educators, business groups, first responders, and families who are opposing this proposed legalization of the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

Follow us on Twitter at @safehealthyma.

______________________________________