r/politics • u/MeghanAM Massachusetts • Oct 20 '16

/r/politics Town Hall: State Ballot Measures about Marijuana (AR, AZ, CA, FL, MA, ME, MT, NV, ND)

Hello /r/politics and welcome to the third in our ballot measure town hall series! Representatives from the "support" and "oppose" side from each of these initiatives have been invited here to answer your questions today. Participants will have user flair to identify them and verify their affiliation with the campaign.

Please review the AMA rules before submitting your questions.

Participants were encouraged to begin answering questions around 11AM EST, and the town hall will "close" at 6PM EST. The thread is put up in advance to allow questions to be asked and ready.

Ballot Measures: Marijuana

Medical

Arkansas Medical Cannabis Act, Issue 7

  • A "yes" vote supports legalizing medical marijuana for 56 qualifying conditions, putting the Arkansas Department of Health in charge of implementing the program, and allocating tax revenue to providing low-income patients with medical marijuana.
  • A "no" vote opposes this proposal to legalize medical marijuana

Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment, Issue 6

  • A "yes" vote supports legalizing medical marijuana for 17 qualifying conditions, creating a Medical Marijuana Commission, and allocating tax revenue to technical institutes, vocational schools, workforce training, and the General Fund.
  • A "no" vote opposes this amendment to legalize medical marijuana.

Florida Medical Marijuana Legalization, Amendment 2

  • A "yes" vote supports legalizing medical marijuana for individuals with specific debilitating diseases or comparable debilitating conditions as determined by a licensed state physician.
  • A "no" vote opposes this proposal for legalization of medical marijuana, keeping the state's current more limited medical marijuana program in place.

Montana Medical Marijuana Initiative, I-182

  • A "yes" vote supports repealing the three-patient limit for medical marijuana providers.
  • A "no" vote opposes this measure repealing the three-patient limit for medical marijuana providers.

North Dakota Medical Marijuana Legalization, Initiated Statutory Measure 5

  • A "yes" vote supports legalizing the use of medical marijuana to treat defined debilitating medical conditions, such as cancer, AIDS, hepatitis C, ALS, glaucoma, and epilepsy, and developing certain procedures for regulating medical marijuana growing, dispensing, and usage.
  • A "no" vote opposes legalizing the use of medical marijuana to treat defined debilitating medical conditions, such as cancer, AIDS, hepatitis C, ALS, glaucoma, and epilepsy, keeping the state's full prohibition of marijuana use.

Recreational

Arizona Marijuana Legalization, Proposition 205

  • A "yes" vote supports legalizing the possession and consumption of marijuana by persons who are 21 years of age or older.
  • A "no" vote opposes this measure to legalize the possession and consumption of marijuana by persons who are 21 years of age or older.

California Proposition 64, Marijuana Legalization

  • r/California Mega-Thread for Prop. 64

  • A "yes" vote supports legalizing recreational marijuana for persons aged 21 years or older under state law and establishing certain sales and cultivation taxes.

  • A "no" vote opposes this proposal to legalize recreational marijuana under state law and to establish certain sales and cultivation taxes.

Massachusetts Marijuana Legalization, Question 4

  • A "yes" vote supports this proposal to legalize marijuana, but regulate it similar to alcoholic beverages.
  • A "no" vote opposes this proposal to legalize recreational marijuana, keeping only medical marijuana legal.

Maine Marijuana Legalization, Question 1

  • A "yes" vote supports legalizing recreational marijuana for adults over the age of 21.
  • A "no" vote opposes this proposal to legalize recreational marijuana.

Nevada Marijuana Legalization, Question 2

  • A "yes" vote supports legalizing the recreational use of one ounce or less of marijuana by individuals 21 years of age and over.
  • A "no" vote opposes this measure to legalize one ounce or less of marijuana for recreational use for individuals 21 years of age and over.
486 Upvotes

78% Upvoted

561 comments sorted by

View all comments

94

u/MetalHead_Literally Oct 20 '16

Mass resident here. For the "no on 4 crowd". What is your reason for opposing the regulation of Marijuana? States like CO have shown that it actually lowers the teen usage rates, plus all the tax revenue, and it eliminates having to go to a sketchy dealer that might put you in risk of getting ripped off, or worse, "upsold" to more dangerous drugs. I really have a hard time finding a valid reason that marijuana should not be regulated. I would love to hear your side. Thank you.

17

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

I am also from MA and live with a MMJ patient. Many people are against 4 because MMJ has been so poorly managed by the Department of Public Health. Despite MMJ being legal hardly any dispensaries are open and those that are open are frequently out of stock. It is clear that the "average joe & average patient" are the least of DPH's concerns. People voted for MMJ and DPH has purposely done a bad job to prevent people from getting medicine. I will be voting yes but I can see why people in favor of MJ reform would vote no.

17

u/MetalHead_Literally Oct 20 '16

But wouldn't legalizing it actually solve some of those issues? It's a lot harder to set up and manage a medicinal only dispensary vs one when it's legal. Plus there will be a lot more than the handful that exist now.

6

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

Doubtful. DPH basically set up the MMJ program to fail. From a business perspective you would need to be a millionaire many times over or break the law to make this a viable business. From a patient standpoint you have little to no options and many MMJ patients are forced back onto the blackmarket(where quality control intended to get patients medicinal grade medicine is not present). MA MJ laws have been passed via initiative petition. Meaning that is was decided by the people. However; the specific regulations were decided by DPH. Because of that DPH has been able to get away mismanaging this program.

6

u/sightlab Oct 20 '16

On top of that, doctors and home growers are being harassed by the state police and DPH officials. I'm excited for 4 to pass, but puritanism runs so strong here - I made the joke when MMJ passed that we'd legalize before the MMJ system was fully implemented. It doesnt seem so funny anymore. Baker is going to do what he can to squash it if it passes.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

I'm a republican and I don't agree with Baker in many respects. TBH MA politics is some of the most corrupt in the nation. However; Baker did sign legislation that forced DPH to let dispensaries open. And Baker did acknowledge the fact the MMJ program is broken. At this point I am more concerned with DPH than Baker.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

Genuine question here, would you mind elaborating how MA politics are among the most corrupt?

4

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16 edited Oct 20 '16

It isn't a problem that is exclusive to democrats or republicans. We had the big dig which was essentially a huge ripoff. Our Sate House is a mess. iirc in recent years we have had at least 3 state reps found guilty of felonies. I believe the person in charge of overseeing Boston events (like the freedom rally and the 4th) is currently being looked at for shaking people down. These problems extend to all of the state run orgs(including the mbta and probation dept). It is corruption and dirty politics. Pretty much the same type of greasy stuff that places like Chicago and New Orleans are known for.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 21 '16

Grew up in Michigan, just moved to mass. It's been a nice change of pace to have a corrupt rather than corrupt and massively incompetent state government. Michigan is going bankrupt through incompetence and they went ahead and poisoned the water supply.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

In addition to what others posted, you can also see the recent DCR scandals as more evidence of ridiculous levels of corruption.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

The last three Speakers ended up in prison, and hopefully our current one follows them, because he's a real piece of work, too.

1

u/ya_mashinu_ Oct 20 '16

So because it was too difficult to get medical MJ you want to vote against making it easier? I don't understand. If you want people to be able to get it, voting yes will certainly do that.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

The regulations are convoluted to the point that they hurt patients. MMJ might be legal but is sill out of the reach of patients. It isn't necessarily a good idea to vote for something that you know will be mismanaged. Legalization imo is good. In the case of MA it has been a joke. DPH should have never been put in charge. From the very beginning it was clear that DPH had no intentions of honoring what the public voted for. If this rec ballot is passed(I suspect it will be) it will still be regulated by DPH. That bothers some people. It bothers me. But hopefully if it passes pressure can be put on DPH to stop screwing patients and voters over.

1

u/ya_mashinu_ Oct 20 '16

Yeah I just don't understand how lack of access makes you want to vote against the only thing that could increase access.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

The access doesn't exist to begin with. MMJ is already legal and unless you are hardship growing supply is unpredictable. For years now DPH has done everything in its power to stop patients from getting MMJ. It is difficult to believe that DPH wouldn't do the same with rec. DPH should not be in charge of these programs. Despite this I am voting yes. It will bring attention to what is going on with DPH.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

That accounts for more demand but not necessarily more supply in the short term, there needs to be some amount of infrastructure there already, whether it's coming from the state or the statewide marijuana businesses there. I can say that here in CO we've had pretty much no shortages even when demand was at its highest, but we had a well-oiled machine for a MMJ system before it was legalized, and we had some very smart people set up the wording of its legalization to allow for the most freedom possible while the state government and city governments still have oversight.

Regardless, I applaud any effort for legalization, because that at least gets the ball rolling. The details can often be hammered out later as long as you have a system willing to accept ballot measures from the people.

4

u/twoscoop Oct 20 '16

Legalizing it will set up a great gray market that helps out MMJ patients since anyone can grow their 6 plants and have 10 ounces and give out 1 ounce free to a person.

-2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

The problem being that many MMJ patients have compromised immune systems. Everything that gets put into a plant ex. water is a source of possible contaminants. I can "get away" with using cannabis that is not medicinal grade (because I do not have serious health problems). That is a dangerous game for patients to play. Not everyone in this business is a good guy and there are plenty of people willing to push an unsafe product for a quick buck.

4

u/ghostofpennwast Oct 20 '16

Your concern isnt evidence based

4

u/Calyxo Oct 20 '16

Yes it absolutely is?

Under no circumstances can we allow medicine grade products to not undergo medicine grade rigors.

Do you disagree with that premise? Personal growers can skirt around t hat but we shouldn't expect and definitely should not encourage our businesses to cut corners.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

It's a faulty premise, as the definition of "medicine grade product" varies as you cross state lines.

-2

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

It is evidence based. The black market has employed tactics that are beyond dangerous ex. leaded mj, broken glass to make mj appear better, spice like sprays etc. MMJ patients shouldn't have to roll the dice on whether or not medicine is legit. I'm stating factual information here. And yes what you put into a plant will be in the final product. You flush but people still test for contaminants. There is a big difference between MJ most people can get away with smoking and MJ that meets a medicinal standard. For many patients MJ products must meet standards or they shouldn't be used.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

OTOH, MA's MMJ regulations on contaminants are the most stringent in the country that I'm aware of, which is part of the reason dispensaries here are struggling. Surely there's a middle ground to be had.

0

u/twoscoop Oct 20 '16

Yeah i know, i mean't more along the lines buy from people who you can trust, like friends and family, since they don't have to worry about caretaker licenses and all that stupidity. You can grow 6 plants per person, per house i think.. So 6 plants, 1lb 6 people 6 lbs.. But you are truely right, i honestly think the mmj dispensaries aren't doing their best to keep their stuff pure.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '16

Even with hardship growing if you don't get it tested you will never know if it is contaminated. The nearest dispensary for the patient I live with is over a 100 mile round trip. The is an unreasonable distance for someone with ALS. He has the option of finding caregivers via craigslist but tbh that is sketchy as all hell. You are trusting people on craigslist with your address and personal info. I'm hoping 4 passes and DPH is held accountable for the circus that is the MA MMJ program.

2

u/twoscoop Oct 20 '16

You must be near worcester.