Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
If voters decide to legalize marijuana for medical purposes, users will have to give some of what they pay to the state.
Without debate the Senate gave preliminary approval Thursday to legislation that says marijuana should be subject to the state sales tax. That would be an exception from existing law which exempts prescription medications from tax.
Sen. Jorge Garcia, D-Tucson, said he supports the initiative to allow doctors to give patients a written ``certification' to purchase and use marijuana. But he said there is no reason to exempt it from taxes.
Legislative staffers estimate the levy could raise $1.3 million a year at the current 5.6 percent sales tax -- more if voters approve a temporary one-cent hike on May 18.
The marijuana initiative will go to voters in November.
---------
What happened to a Wal-Mart worker in Michigan who was fired for testing positive for marijuana probably could not happen in Arizona if voters approve a ballot measure in November.
The initiative would allow doctors to essentially prescribe marijuana to patients who are suffering from any one of a specific set of conditions. It also would allow creation of a network of nonprofit shops that would sell marijuana to those who have those prescriptions and let those not within 25 miles of a shop to grow their own.
But the ballot measure also contains anti-discrimination provisions, including one that says an employer cannot make hiring, firing and disciplinary conditions based on a person's status as the holder of a medical marijuana card. Potentially more significant, that protection extends to someone who tests positive for drugs unless the company could prove the person used or possessed marijuana on the job or was "impaired' during work hours.
Two labor lawyers said that will present significant hurdles for Arizona companies in proving what is impaired.
And Andrew Myers, campaign manager for the Arizona initiative, said it is, in fact, the intent of backers to preclude workers from being fired for testing positive on the job. "I believe that our language is very clear on that point,' he said.
The Michigan case, which came to light Thursday, involves Joseph Casias who has a medical marijuana card under that state's laws to deal with the pain from sinus cancer and a brain tumor.
He told ABC News it was never an issue until he sprained his knee at work last November and, pursuant to company policy, had to take a drug test. Casias said company officials fired him for the positive test, saying it doesn't honor the marijuana cards.
According to ABC, Michigan law says employers do not have to accommodate the ingestion of marijuana in the workplace or employees working while under the influence.
That, however, would not be the case in Arizona if voters approve the version of the law likely to appear on the ballot in November. Backers claim they already have the 153,365 valid signatures necessary to qualify and will file the petitions next month.
Attorney Don Johnsen said current state and federal law does not require companies to make accommodations or provide special treatment for those who are using marijuana.
"This ballot initiative obviously would reverse that,' he said, effectively prohibiting employers from firing those who are registered as medical marijuana users. And Johnson said the escape provision -- showing someone was "impaired' -- probably won't help much.
"Proving something like that is very expensive and very difficult and very risky,' he said.
The problem, according to attorney David Selden, is the nature of the testing.
"Unlike alcohol testing, drug testing doesn't measure the current level of impairment,' he said. In fact, someone who smoked marijuana any time in the past month might register positive.
Johnson said cases would wind up in court, with each side calling medical experts to opine whether the worker was impaired.
"One doctor may say, 'Yeah, based on these facts, in my professional opinion this person was impaired or under the influence,' ' he said. "In another case, a doctor might reach a different conclusion.'
Selden said it probably would take an employer catching someone smoking marijuana on the job, or at least possessing it, to be able to fire someone.
Myers acknowledged that, given the language of the initiative, deciding whether someone is impaired "is going to be a subjective measurement.'
"Ultimately we are not able to draft legislation that is going to account for all the situations that are going to come up,' he said. And Myers agreed with Johnsen that the cases are going to end up in court.
The initiative, modeled after similar laws in other states, requires "written certification' from a doctor to get up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana every two weeks. The drugs would come from nonprofit dispensaries, though the question of where they get their plants or seeds is not addressed.
But Myers said there are differences in this plan designed to make it less subject to abuse than the California model, like distance restrictions of these shops from schools.
There also is a list of medical conditions that could be treated with marijuana, ranging from glaucoma and AIDS to chronic or debilitating conditions that lead to severe and chronic pain, severe nausea, seizures or severe and persistent muscle spasms.
Arizona voters actually approved a measure in 1996 allowing doctors to prescribe otherwise illegal drugs to seriously and terminally ill patients, only to have key provisions repealed by the Legislature.
That repeal was overridden by voters in 1998. But the wording of the measure -- requiring an actual written prescription -- made it useless after the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency threatened to revoke all prescription-writing privileges of any doctor who wrote such an order.
A 2002 measure sought to get around that by making a simple written recommendation by a doctor sufficient. But that initiative failed for several reasons, including a provision that would have made the Department of Public Safety the state's largest marijuana supplier.
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: verdenews.com
Author: Howard Fischer
Copyright: 2010 Western News&Info, Inc.
Contact: Contact
Website: Medical Marijuana Law Returning To Arizona Ballot
• Thanks to MedicalNeed for submitting this article
Without debate the Senate gave preliminary approval Thursday to legislation that says marijuana should be subject to the state sales tax. That would be an exception from existing law which exempts prescription medications from tax.
Sen. Jorge Garcia, D-Tucson, said he supports the initiative to allow doctors to give patients a written ``certification' to purchase and use marijuana. But he said there is no reason to exempt it from taxes.
Legislative staffers estimate the levy could raise $1.3 million a year at the current 5.6 percent sales tax -- more if voters approve a temporary one-cent hike on May 18.
The marijuana initiative will go to voters in November.
---------
What happened to a Wal-Mart worker in Michigan who was fired for testing positive for marijuana probably could not happen in Arizona if voters approve a ballot measure in November.
The initiative would allow doctors to essentially prescribe marijuana to patients who are suffering from any one of a specific set of conditions. It also would allow creation of a network of nonprofit shops that would sell marijuana to those who have those prescriptions and let those not within 25 miles of a shop to grow their own.
But the ballot measure also contains anti-discrimination provisions, including one that says an employer cannot make hiring, firing and disciplinary conditions based on a person's status as the holder of a medical marijuana card. Potentially more significant, that protection extends to someone who tests positive for drugs unless the company could prove the person used or possessed marijuana on the job or was "impaired' during work hours.
Two labor lawyers said that will present significant hurdles for Arizona companies in proving what is impaired.
And Andrew Myers, campaign manager for the Arizona initiative, said it is, in fact, the intent of backers to preclude workers from being fired for testing positive on the job. "I believe that our language is very clear on that point,' he said.
The Michigan case, which came to light Thursday, involves Joseph Casias who has a medical marijuana card under that state's laws to deal with the pain from sinus cancer and a brain tumor.
He told ABC News it was never an issue until he sprained his knee at work last November and, pursuant to company policy, had to take a drug test. Casias said company officials fired him for the positive test, saying it doesn't honor the marijuana cards.
According to ABC, Michigan law says employers do not have to accommodate the ingestion of marijuana in the workplace or employees working while under the influence.
That, however, would not be the case in Arizona if voters approve the version of the law likely to appear on the ballot in November. Backers claim they already have the 153,365 valid signatures necessary to qualify and will file the petitions next month.
Attorney Don Johnsen said current state and federal law does not require companies to make accommodations or provide special treatment for those who are using marijuana.
"This ballot initiative obviously would reverse that,' he said, effectively prohibiting employers from firing those who are registered as medical marijuana users. And Johnson said the escape provision -- showing someone was "impaired' -- probably won't help much.
"Proving something like that is very expensive and very difficult and very risky,' he said.
The problem, according to attorney David Selden, is the nature of the testing.
"Unlike alcohol testing, drug testing doesn't measure the current level of impairment,' he said. In fact, someone who smoked marijuana any time in the past month might register positive.
Johnson said cases would wind up in court, with each side calling medical experts to opine whether the worker was impaired.
"One doctor may say, 'Yeah, based on these facts, in my professional opinion this person was impaired or under the influence,' ' he said. "In another case, a doctor might reach a different conclusion.'
Selden said it probably would take an employer catching someone smoking marijuana on the job, or at least possessing it, to be able to fire someone.
Myers acknowledged that, given the language of the initiative, deciding whether someone is impaired "is going to be a subjective measurement.'
"Ultimately we are not able to draft legislation that is going to account for all the situations that are going to come up,' he said. And Myers agreed with Johnsen that the cases are going to end up in court.
The initiative, modeled after similar laws in other states, requires "written certification' from a doctor to get up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana every two weeks. The drugs would come from nonprofit dispensaries, though the question of where they get their plants or seeds is not addressed.
But Myers said there are differences in this plan designed to make it less subject to abuse than the California model, like distance restrictions of these shops from schools.
There also is a list of medical conditions that could be treated with marijuana, ranging from glaucoma and AIDS to chronic or debilitating conditions that lead to severe and chronic pain, severe nausea, seizures or severe and persistent muscle spasms.
Arizona voters actually approved a measure in 1996 allowing doctors to prescribe otherwise illegal drugs to seriously and terminally ill patients, only to have key provisions repealed by the Legislature.
That repeal was overridden by voters in 1998. But the wording of the measure -- requiring an actual written prescription -- made it useless after the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency threatened to revoke all prescription-writing privileges of any doctor who wrote such an order.
A 2002 measure sought to get around that by making a simple written recommendation by a doctor sufficient. But that initiative failed for several reasons, including a provision that would have made the Department of Public Safety the state's largest marijuana supplier.
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: verdenews.com
Author: Howard Fischer
Copyright: 2010 Western News&Info, Inc.
Contact: Contact
Website: Medical Marijuana Law Returning To Arizona Ballot
• Thanks to MedicalNeed for submitting this article
