Jump to content

Mmj Bills 5104 And 4271


Recommended Posts

I've been contacting Michigan state senators to find out if bills 4271 and 5104 will get a vote this year.  So far it does not sound that promising.  Arlan Meekhof is in charge of deciding which bill will be put to a vote.  I contacted Arlan's staff, but they were not sure about a vote, saying the bills need more senator support.  I'm hoping you will be interested in contacting Arlan Meekhof and your local senator to ask for a vote on bills 4271 and 5104.

 

Alan Meekhof:  SenAMeekhof@senate.michigan.gov  517-373-6920

List of Senators: http://www.senate.michigan.gov/senatorinfo.html

 

Here is a portion of the letter I'm sending.

 

Arlan,

 

I’ve been watching the Michigan Senate for many months now, expecting a vote on Bill 5104 and 4271.  The Michigan House overwhelmingly passed these bills many months ago.

 

Can you explain why the Senate has not voted on these bills?  Patients in need would be helped by these bills.  Especially patients with serve epilepsy.   If you care about the patients in need, you’ll move these bills to a vote.

 

I would be interested in meeting to discuss future legislation that could further help patients in great need.  Creating a larger medical marijuana cultivation focused on high CBD and low THC medicine is greatly needed.   It’s about getting the right medicine to the people that need it most.  It’s a lifesaving medicine that could help people in your district.   This medicine is currently being used to treat thousands of patients in other states.

 

I invite you to pass along my concerns to your fellow senators in Michigan. 

 

Please let me know if you’d like to discuss how we can work together to help patients in need.

 

Bob

 

Bill 4271

"medical marihuana provisioning center regulation act"

A bill to regulate medical marihuana provisioning centers and

other related entities; to provide for the powers and duties of

certain state and local governmental officers and entities; to

provide immunity for persons engaging in medical marihuana-related

activities in compliance with this act; to prescribe penalties and

sanctions and provide remedies; and to allow the promulgation of

rules.

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2013-2014/billengrossed/House/htm/2013-HEBH-4271.htm

 

Bill 5104

"Michigan medical marihuana act,"

Editables and Extracts

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2013-2014/billengrossed/House/htm/2013-HEBH-5104.htm

 

Thanks for reading.

Robertou812, this is good. Sen. Meekhof needs all the encouragement we can send him. His is my Sen. and I not real happy with him in general. Case in point. I wrote him a very courteous and sincere letter earlier this year when it looked like the Senate might vote on these bills. His response: Nada. Not even a form letter reply. I'm going to try again and call his office. Not holding my breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carruthers was decided by MSC already. They said let it stand.

 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 11, 2013

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

 

thats all they said. that was 6/2014

http://courts.mi.gov/opinions_orders/case_search/pages/default.aspx?SearchType=1&CaseNumber=309987&CourtType_CaseNumber=2

 

heres the application for appeal to msc

https://www.scribd.com/doc/166026513/People-v-Carruthers-Def-SCt-Application-for-Leave-to-Appeal-09-05-13

 

as far as i can tell, this was the only question asked:

 

 

Statement of Questions Involved

1. Are otherwise qualifying Medical Marijuana users and caregivers entitled to assert a Section 4 defense for their marijuana edibles? Defendant-Appellant answers, “Yes.” The People answered, “No.” The Court of Appeals answered, “No.”

 

so mr komorn needs to ask the MSC to rule on concentrates and edibles as usable marihuana or not. not to ask if they are entitled to a defense for them.

 

(dont ask me i just live here)

Edited by t-pain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 11, 2013

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

 

thats all they said. that was 6/2014

http://courts.mi.gov/opinions_orders/case_search/pages/default.aspx?SearchType=1&CaseNumber=309987&CourtType_CaseNumber=2

 

heres the application for appeal to msc

https://www.scribd.com/doc/166026513/People-v-Carruthers-Def-SCt-Application-for-Leave-to-Appeal-09-05-13

 

as far as i can tell, this was the only question asked:

 

 

 

so mr komorn needs to ask the MSC to rule on concentrates and edibles as usable marihuana or not. not to ask if they are entitled to a defense for them.

 

(dont ask me i just live here)

Good point Mr. T-pain 

But mr komorn was or is working for Carruthers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

forgive me but I don't see anywhere in the amendments where labeling has to be in your home? All I see is in a public place.

someone care to enlighten me. All I care about is the ability to not be a criminal for providing edibles for my husband. I just want a law that does that - what are the chances of that happening?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

forgive me but I don't see anywhere in the amendments where labeling has to be in your home? All I see is in a public place.

someone care to enlighten me. All I care about is the ability to not be a criminal for providing edibles for my husband. I just want a law that does that - what are the chances of that happening?

hb 5104 Substitute S-1

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(urs0ojezufy3oe45zdg03m45))/mileg.aspx?page=CurrentVersionAmendment&cvFileName=2013-HCVBS-5104-13752.PDF

 

its pretty clear, this goes right into section 4. it would be sec4n

 

(N) EXCEPT WHEN BEING MANUFACTURED OR CONSUMED, ANY MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT MUST BE INDIVIDUALLY PACKAGED AND CLEARLY LABELED WITH ALL OF THE FOLLOWING:

 

 

(1) THE WEIGHT OF THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IN OUNCES.

THERE SHALL BE A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION THAT THE LISTED WEIGHT OF

THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

(2) THE NAME OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO MANUFACTURED THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT.

(3) THE DATE ON WHICH THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT WAS MANUFACTURED.

(4) IF THE PATIENT RECEIVED THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT FROM

HIS OR HER PRIMARY CAREGIVER OR A MEDICAL MARIHUANA PROVISIONING

CENTER, THE DATE ON WHICH THE TRANSACTION OCCURRED.

(5) IF THE PATIENT RECEIVED THE MARIHUANA-INFUSED PRODUCT FROM

HIS OR HER PRIMARY CAREGIVER OR A MEDICAL MARIHUANA PROVISIONING

CENTER, THE NAME OF THE PRIMARY CAREGIVER OR MEDICAL MARIHUANA

PROVISIONING CENTER.

 

 

 

call your reps now to tell them if this is still in the bill, to vote against it, and to vote for any amendments that change this stupid crap by the michigan state police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes me nauseous is the fact that the Michigan State police have paid lobbyists who lobby for laws in Lansing that will put more people in jail and increase their funding.

 

They are using tax payer money to have paid lobbyists in Lansing.

 

 It just seems so morally wrong...... *spit*

And there are police lobbying legislatures to make rules for grand juries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes me nauseous is the fact that the Michigan State police have paid lobbyists who lobby for laws in Lansing that will put more people in jail and increase their funding.

 

They are using tax payer money to have paid lobbyists in Lansing.

 

 It just seems so morally wrong...... *spit*

Didn't they also use some of our $$ from the MMJ program 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...