Massachusetts Marijuana Legalization Proposal Draws Support And Opposition

[Robert Celt]

Supporters and foes of legalizing marijuana gathered at the State House on Monday to weigh in on a proposal that would allow the recreational use and possession of marijuana up to an ounce for those 21 and older.

The proposal was the focus of a public hearing before the Legislature's Judiciary Committee.

Supporters have collected enough signatures to move the proposal to the November ballot if lawmakers opt against debating and voting on it.

The question faces a tough slog in the Legislature, increasing the chances that it will be left to voters to decide. Democratic House Speaker Robert DeLeo opposes the measure.

Will Luzier, of the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol, called on lawmakers to embrace what he called "a far more sensible marijuana policy" for the state.

Luzier said laws against marijuana haven't stopped marijuana use.

"It only ensures that marijuana is unregulated, untested, untaxed, and sold by gangs and criminals," Luzier said. "It is time to regulate marijuana and stop punishing adults for consuming a substance that is less dangerous than alcohol."

The measure would also allow individuals to possess up to 10 ounces of marijuana in their homes.

Massachusetts voters have already approved two earlier ballot questions that decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana and authorized patients with certain medical conditions to use the drug.

The new proposal would also create a 3.75 percent state excise tax on retail marijuana sales that would be assessed on top of the state's 6.25 percent sales tax. The question would also give cities and towns the option to add an additional 2 percent sales tax on top of the state taxes.

Republican Gov. Charlie Baker, Democratic Attorney General Maura Healey, and Democratic Boston Mayor Marty Walsh wrote a letter in The Boston Globe opposing the ballot question and arguing that young people are more likely to use marijuana when it is legal.

"Kids in states that have legalized marijuana have easier access to the drug. And many believe that, since the drug is legal for adults, it must be safe to use," the three wrote.

They said that edible marijuana products – often in the form of brownies, candy or soda – pose a particular threat for children, who can mistake them for regular treats.

The three also portrayed the backers of the ballot question as "big businesses and investors, who are spending millions on campaigns across the country because they will profit from the legalization of marijuana."

They linked the question to the state's ongoing ballot with opioid overdoses, saying the state "should not be expanding access to a drug that will further drain our health and safety resources."

On Tuesday, Massachusetts senators who visited Colorado in January to learn more about that state's experience with the legalized use of recreational marijuana are expected to release their findings.

The Senate Special Committee on Marijuana was created last year by Democratic Senate President Stan Rosenberg in response to the proposed ballot question.

Three other states – Washington, Alaska and Oregon – have legalized recreational pot.

News Moderator: Robert Celt 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Massachusetts Marijuana Legalization Proposal Draws Support And Opposition
Author: AP
Contact: 22News
Photo Credit: None found
Website: 22News

 

[Radogast]

You can tell they know they are in the wrong by how they phrase their statements.

Republican Gov. Charlie Baker, Democratic Attorney General Maura Healey, and Democratic Boston Mayor Marty Walsh wrote a letter in The Boston Globe opposing the ballot question and arguing that young people are more likely to use marijuana when it is legal.

“Kids in states that have legalized marijuana have easier access to the drug. And many believe that, since the drug is legal for adults, it must be safe to use,” the three wrote.

They would love to have said, “Kids in states that have legalized marijuana smoke more marijuana." - but they don't because the kids don't. And really,.... we aren't talking about kids here, we are talking about teenagers.

They said that edible marijuana products — often in the form of brownies, candy or soda — pose a particular threat for children, who can mistake them for regular treats.

I don't know any parents who partake that accidentally leave out their special treats for their children to eat, but again ...

They would love to have said, "...can cause permanent injury and even death to children who mistake them for regular treats", but they don't because the treats don't cause permanent injury or death. The poisons already under the sink do that.

They said "pose a particular threat" - what a vague and scary phrase that sounds like they said something important. The largest physical threat posed by marijuana edibles is that their parents will panic and take them to the emergency room. The largest social threat posed by marijuana edibles is the same one as in 'The Emperor's New Clothes' - people will discover the empty lie that marijuana is dangerous.

They linked the question to the state’s ongoing ballot with opioid overdoses, saying the state “should not be expanding access to a drug that will further drain our health and safety resources.”

and finally...

In truth, the phrase should be: [the state] "should be aware that expanded access to marijuana has coincided with reduced opiod overdoses in states that increased access to medical marijuana."


Governor, Attorney General, Mayor - those were well crafted weasel words that ignore the will of the people. Shame on you.