With legalization efforts poppinge up around the country, it might seem like recreational marijuana is certainly on its way to being a national norm. However, current medical and recreational marijuana policies only exist by the grace of the federal government.
The Obama administration has been lenient in persecuting states that have enacted medical and recreational marijuana plans, but that mostly stems from a hands-off approach to the states’ prerogative in deciding their own policies.
Though, the lack of federal approval has not gone unnoticed. Last year, the Federal Reserve refused to accept any money connected to dispensaries in Arizona, Oregon, Washington and Colorado, creating a problem for the budding industry.
Since marijuana is still considered illegal under federal law, banks are legally barred from storing the billions of dollars generated by the industry.
The industry has found some ways around the issue with some credit unions operating under state approval deciding to cater to marijuana businesses. Though a few have been unable to open without the approval from the Fed for a master account necessary for their type of business.
Some see it as ludicrous that the Federal Reserve is able to regulate the industry in this way, but the Obama administration has been making strides in other areas.
Until recently, the University of Mississippi was the only institution allowed to grow pot for scientific research. But the Drug Enforcement Agency opened up license applications to other universities in August.
Now with the presidency in contention, candidates have the potential to shake up federal marijuana policy.
With many predicting Hillary Clinton to be a slightly less effective version of Obama, we can probably expect things to say relatively the same if she ends up in the White House. The Marijuana Policy Project gave her a grade of B+ for legalization efforts.
For many years, Clinton has been an advocate of medical marijuana research, but in true Hillary fashion, switched up her stance on recreational marijuana around 2014 to be more open to the idea of decriminalization. She took a page from Obama’s playbook stating that “states are the laboratory for democracy,” seemingly taking a similar hands-off approach to the subject.
As for Donald Trump, like most of his policies not involving a wall, his stance is anyone’s guess. The MPP gave him a grade of C+ for potential legalization.
Bill O’Reilly pushed Trump on the subject during an interview in February in which Trump vaguely referred to issues in Colorado, said there were good and bad things about marijuana and ultimately told O’Reilly that he “really want[s] to think about that one.” He is, however, “a 100 percent” in favor of medical marijuana.
Though this could be one of the things Trump folds on to appeal to the traditional republican demographic, he did tell the Miami Herald in 1990 that in order to win the war on drugs, we have to legalize drugs. To his credit, that is some real free market advocacy.
The two “wild cards,” Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and the Green Party’s Jill Stein, both received unsurprising grades of A+ from the MPP.
Stein has been very vocal in her support for marijuana, both recreational and medical. On her website, she uses her doctor’s credentials to profess that the only danger marijuana possess is legal.
Johnson received an endorsement from the MPP for his 17-year battle for legalization. He’s also touted his own use of the substance as a medical patient and even ran a medical marijuana business.
His support for legalization predates his designation as a libertarian having first advocated for marijuana in 1999 as New Mexico’s Republican governor.
Of course, there is one thing that may wrest control of federal marijuana policy away from our next president. As Johnson predicts, Obama could attempt to decriminalize marijuana before leaving office.
Under the 1970 Controlled Substances Act, the Attorney General—currently Loretta Lynch—has the power reclassify drugs scheduled by the DEA.
As far as Arizona is concerned, with Gov. Doug Ducey’s involvement with the Arizonans for Responsible Drug Policy campaign consistent with his anti-pot agenda, any shift away from legalization could make the road to end prohibition just that much longer.
This article appears in Oct 6-12, 2016.
My concern about approving this new law is that there are pages of “legalese” I don’t understand, especially about the opponents to this change in law. The proposed law seems to involve creating two new agencies in state government. Is this an opportunity to add an additional layer of law enforcement that Ducey could turn into his much wanted “Border Police?”
let’s take a minute just to ponder some of the ramifications to prop 205. I will take the easiest single one the 6 plant rules to be made. With some of the provisions in the prop allowing some areas to restrict home growing. Just how would that come to be regulated ?
1- To grow your own regulations would mean accounting for people that are growing a registration of sorts.
2- This would include a license/fee for a tag.
3- Registering for a tag you will sign an affidavit stating that you are growing and have it in a concealed/contained.
4- Following regulations you will state no minor children
5- Will have to list all occupants of the home.
6-Will open information on license holders and occupants of the home. To third party vendors mortgage/ins companies zoning authorities etc. etc. No medical protections of privacy are gone.
7- Will ask that all compliance officers be licensed in good standing with the Department of Public Safety be law enforcement.
8- When signing this affidavit you will be forfeiting your right of warrant search.
9- Board can and will deputize all DPS Law enforcement to access it’s data base like DMV. I needed can call a compliance officer and gain entry any time of day or night no warrant no nothing.
10- Upon entry for compliance accompanied by a LEO. Might notice a grandchild while grandma as a few plants in the basement under lock and key. BOOM INSTANT 3 FELONIES AND 1 A CLASS 3
11- A home growing has a acquaintance arranged to visit by LEO goes inside and bang here is compliance with a warrantless search.
12- If other LEO agencies they will be able to bill the MDLC for service to assist.
13- One can be fined by the administrative div of MDLC like DMV. Following non compliance with agreement when obtaining a license/tag
14 -Tag will have a date and time limit if it dies to bad you should go to the dispensary in the first place. won’t be allowed to clone
With all of this is why they threw in the 6 plant rule at the 11 hr. Who would want to jeopardize themselves to all that by admitting they grow. So they do it without registration then that is way past simple posession manufacturing posession weight. This just all promotes not to grow not worth the risk and costs
This is the kind of stink that has been going on for years.
Voting for prop 205 just says yea we need more stigmatize citizens.
With Arizona being a laboratory of experimental study and to do it they are now second class citizens not covered by Bill of Rights. today’s “Jim Crow Law”
Just why are MPP and Holyoak so obtuse on what rules are ?
Sorta of like there are parts of this contract that will be filled out later. And to think some think this is good for the people and sign that.
And to give up all of those rights of a citizen so you can grow 6 plants. The board can even limit strains and check for compliance if caught growing out of permitted strain felonies.
If you ask or listen to any of these questions asked to Arizona Political Director for the Marijuana Policy Project, Carlos Alfaro. His response is
“That”s up to the rules committee but I doubt that is the intent”
Vote for this a sucker, living in a suckers reality, talking about being suckered, and what being suckered for decades has done, talking about what a sucker needs to exist. Can’t figure that not all hands are helpings
Does anyone understand if you sign up to grow at your residence it is quite possible that with today’s visual maps. On all LEO computers when looking at a map that the addresses that have licenses appear in green strips. Well watching a child go into one of these highlighted addresses would constitute a possible felony?
Would that Be a wrong analogy? One is to think just what are we voting for with existing agencies they have in place rules and restrictions that would apply across the board.
WHY ARE WE REINVENTING THE WHEEL. NO PROP 205
No to 205, No to Carbon Taxes, No to Democrats, No to Colo-Californication of Arizona. Yes to 1st and 2nd Amendment Rights Preservation and No to Illegal Aliens, inadequately vetted Refugees that AZ Taxpayers are stuck paying for !!!!
According to section 36-2856 3. Localities could only restrict smoking or production if it was “injurious to the environment or otherwise is a nuisance to a considerable number or persons” I don’t see how a localotie could make people register to grow their 6 personal plants with that.
Hillary for Orange Suit. I couldn’t have put it better if I tried. Well done!!
Growing plants for personal use should be anonymous.
There should be no reason to register a plant unless prior mishandlings and one loses the privilege to grow at home or any home that you occupy/residence that has growing in that residence.
The Marijuana Regulating Authority will keep a database on restricted persons are not allowed plants or seeds just like Alcohol the campaign slogan right!
None read the initiative where it states that the
ARIZONA STATE DEPARTMENT of MARIJUANA LICENSE AND CONTROLS.
It is this department that will issue the tag from a city jees’
In obtaining a plant clone a person will sign an agreement that the vendor supplies and returns to the department of Marijuana License and Controls the form maybe an application waiting for confirmation to allow the sale .
Vendor that will need a special license to sell plant clone as well. A piece of paper no unlike a hunting license. This will be an agreement with the purchaser and the State Department of Marijuana License and Controls.
This document that a purchaser signs is an agreement that you dont live in a restricted area ie; cities, won’t have children under 21 in the residence. Won’t clone sell or transfer any of the product purchased for propagation. Only certain STRAINS WILL BE ALLOWED FOR RETAIL, LEAVING THE RETAILER AND GROWER WITH STRONGER PRODUCTS. In this agreement you will give up all civil and criminal rights when signing. Open the door for the new LEO to kick down the door to check compliance just just signed away your rights if you want to grow 6 plants
Would be best to do it illegally rather than sign an agreement. Even Montgomery in his debate stated what this would change in enforcement and can’t believe some would be so blind to vote for this. so if prop 205 passes dont sign an agreement to grow or you just fucked yourself got it
^ This is pure speculation. Nowhere in the prop does it say that this is how sales of clones will go. Why would live plant material be sold any differently than dead plant material? Keep spreading your fear to those too dumb or lazy to read the whole prop. I never thought I’d see the day when real life cannabis consumers would get in bed with big pharma, the gambling and alcohol industies and the far right moral crusaders against a reasonable regulation policy.