Jone's Senate Bill 321

[hofner67]

I really don't understand what personal protection insurance is and I don't understand what affect disallowing expenses for the medical use of marijuana would mean.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2011-SIB-0321.pdf

 

What is he trying to do?

 

 

 

Sec. 3107. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), personal

2 protection insurance benefits are payable for the following:

3 (a) Allowable expenses consisting of all reasonable charges

4 incurred for reasonably necessary products, services and

5 accommodations for an injured person's care, recovery, or

6 rehabilitation. Allowable expenses within personal protection

7 insurance coverage shall not include charges ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

8 (i) CHARGES for a hospital room in excess of a reasonable and

9 customary charge for semiprivate accommodations except if the

10 injured person requires special or intensive care. , or for funeral 2

01645'11 * DKH

1 (ii) FUNERAL and burial expenses in EXCESS OF the amount set

2 forth in the policy which shall not be less than $1,750.00 or more

3 than $5,000.00.

4 (iii) THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIHUANA.

5 (b) Work loss consisting of loss of i

[Ms Chocolate]

This looks like changes to auto policy law. With SB 321, Jones crossed out the word “charges”, and added “any of the following”; instead of the excluded charges being listed in a continuous sentence, he enumerated them; he added a clause the excluded the medical use of marihuana; he raised the daily amount that one could collect; he backdated the date for which the raised amount could be collected.

 

The first two changes are unneeded; the forth is overdue, the last was thoughtful & considerate. The third change was not thought out at all. If you name one name, you name them all. He should have said Schedule 1 drugs. By stating marihuana he leaves the accident victim the option to request and receive heroin for pain relief. Besides, if he had read the MMMAct, he would have since that marihuana and insurance coverage is already addressed. Maybe there’s a minimum number of changes needed to call for a change in a law.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2011-SIB-0321.pdf

[hofner67]

Unnecessary addition of medical marijuana to the law. thanks. Well....At least he doesn't use well contemplated thought when he lashes out against medical marijuana. He appears susceptible to irrational actions. This is our advantage.

 

This looks like changes to auto policy law. With SB 321, Jones crossed out the word “charges”, and added “any of the following”; instead of the excluded charges being listed in a continuous sentence, he enumerated them; he added a clause the excluded the medical use of marihuana; he raised the daily amount that one could collect; he backdated the date for which the raised amount could be collected.

 

The first two changes are unneeded; the forth is overdue, the last was thoughtful & considerate. The third change was not thought out at all. If you name one name, you name them all. He should have said Schedule 1 drugs. By stating marihuana he leaves the accident victim the option to request and receive heroin for pain relief. Besides, if he had read the MMMAct, he would have since that marihuana and insurance coverage is already addressed. Maybe there’s a minimum number of changes needed to call for a change in a law.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2011-SIB-0321.pdf

[+EdwardGlen]

Jones is nothing more than a school yard bully who is protected by his girlfriend 'Nerdina" He doesn't care for anything or anybody who cannot further his career in politics or fill his bank with money.

=========================================================================================================================

http://blogpublic.lib.msu.edu/index.php/2011/02/09/sen-rick-jones-fights-workplace-ergonomics-rules?blog=5

Sen. Rick Jones Fights Workplace Ergonomics Rules

 

“Governor Rick Snyder called for this in his State of the State address. When this bill is signed by the governor it will send a strong message that Michigan is developing a better business climate so our children and grandchildren have jobs,” said Jones

 

But at what cost to their safety and long term health while they slave away at $7.50 an hr! He makes all these grandiose claims about how much this will cost or that will cost but I never see any links to anything to back up his claims.

[MORE COWBELL]

DEATH CAMPS ARE COMING FOR THE DREGS OF SOCIETY-we are the Burden-too many bodies feeding off of the welfare system they created for their generation to live off of -we are late to the party and uninvited-our bodies are not wanted for workers because producing things of real value is gone(for now)-wars are high tech and manageable from NORAD or bunkers around the world.

 

they are going after MM patients because they see us as the burden/cause of collapse to society.............. as the dregs(not just jews) were rounded up in pre-war Germany and put to work, then exterminated when no longer needed.

 

scary mindset these supposedly Christian leaders have

 

-I see NO CHRIST in their actions ONLY FEAR

 

you will know them by their fruit-

you will know them by their LOVE for one ANOTHER

[+Silverblue]

ALL I SEE IS THEIR HATRED, I know it well. What will the do when we're all gone? They'd be BORED!!! Then they'll go after EACHOTHER!!! GGOOODDDDYYYYYYY!!!!!

 

Sb

[Croppled1]

I really don't understand what personal protection insurance is and I don't understand what affect disallowing expenses for the medical use of marijuana would mean.

 

http://www.legislatu...11-SIB-0321.pdf

 

What is he trying to do?

 

 

 

Sec. 3107. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), personal

2 protection insurance benefits are payable for the following:

3 (a) Allowable expenses consisting of all reasonable charges

4 incurred for reasonably necessary products, services and

5 accommodations for an injured person's care, recovery, or

6 rehabilitation. Allowable expenses within personal protection

7 insurance coverage shall not include charges ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

8 (i) CHARGES for a hospital room in excess of a reasonable and

9 customary charge for semiprivate accommodations except if the

10 injured person requires special or intensive care. , or for funeral 2

01645'11 * DKH

1 (ii) FUNERAL and burial expenses in EXCESS OF the amount set

2 forth in the policy which shall not be less than $1,750.00 or more

3 than $5,000.00.

4 (iii) THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIHUANA.

5 (b) Work loss consisting of loss of i

 

 

I tried to find the original wording of the act on our State site and couldn't . I found all sorts of new MDCH interpreted writing now including this PDF presentation showing a huge increase in training expense and buildup for blood testing of drivers even without evidence of " bad driving " .

 

http://www.michigan....ed_350341_7.pdf

 

I think the best thing to do is if your concerned with the reasoning behind this inclusion into the Insurance statutes is to contact Mr Jones or his staff . If done with politeness and courtesy both sides may benefit . It is true like many are stating we have morphed from just having proponents and opponents in our State to having sub groups on both sides strongly influenced not by patient welfare but monetary gain . As I say many times I just cannot see how criminal activity is done away with unless the price is driven down through lack of regulation and enforcement . Yet people on both sides proponents and opponents alike never can even envision this as a component of workable policy .PTP is a huge component of bring down price because most sick patients will bend over backward to help other's in need .

 

http://www.senate.michigan.gov/gop/senators/contact.asp?District=24

My only worry is they prohibitionists will exploit language that was put into appease voters who didn't want to see insurance companies or the Government bear any of the actual expense of medical marihuana itself ( the actual flower ) .I would be worried some may start using this part of the act to start disallowing costs to transport patients to Doctors who are specialists in determining if there would be medical benefit . Or use it to prevent institutional budgets at State and Private Hospitals from funding for areas for use etc to catch up with the needs of patients . I think it would be wise to suggest to Mr Jones office this be defined as the actual " herb " or flower itself as the law act was intending . Sadly the number of words allowed by law at the time confined the act from always being specific though it always intended to protect and provide for the patients . It for sure didn't desire to see in discriminant felonies created by grey areas for them like has been occurring . .

 

Having read some other new material at the MDCH or that was linked to it I further saw instead of amending in State law to include med ables and oils some expert sources are referring to them as not marihuana often . The law does include them under mixtures and preperations of dried flowers and leaves . Yet some experts write with language that states they are " not marihuana " So then what are these two important items cannabis patients need ? Obviously it creates a area of possible arrest that was not intended if their not considered the same in the minds of enforcement along with the weight problem that worries so many of us who do not believe a quarter of a ounce of cannabis mixed with a pound of muffin mix should be considered a pound and a quarter of marihuana . I should of highlighted and gave the links here but I am not doing well enough and lost them . If I see them again i will if I can at the time and remember where to put it .

 

The good news is were better off then we once were but things aren't going to improve by themselves and only the patients who often have severe difficulties are passionate enough to fight for proper change . All the patients know its so wrong to have lost 70 plus years of research into cannabis as medicine and this argument against any medication allowing one to feel better is ridiculous . Isn't that the point ....even if its only reducing the perception of symptoms that are causing anxiety which creates a more rapid decline - isn't that a justifiable outcome ? I know you and other patients understand these things but some prohibitionists don't and read our posts . Here we thought we were free at last but the truth is we earned the right to work on correcting the conflicts in law and attitudes towards Cannabis use in the State of Michigan back in 2008 and the real work just started .

[jimbojinx]

I tried to find the original wording of the act on our State site and couldn't . I found all sorts of new MDCH interpreted writing now including this PDF presentation showing a huge increase in training expense and buildup for blood testing of drivers even without evidence of " bad driving " .

 

http://www.michigan....ed_350341_7.pdf

 

I think the best thing to do is if your concerned with the reasoning behind this inclusion into the Insurance statutes is to contact Mr Jones or his staff . If done with politeness and courtesy both sides may benefit . It is true like many are stating we have morphed from just having proponents and opponents in our State to having sub groups on both sides strongly influenced not by patient welfare but monetary gain . As I say many times I just cannot see how criminal activity is done away with unless the price is driven down through lack of regulation and enforcement . Yet people on both sides proponents and opponents alike never can even envision this as a component of workable policy .PTP is a huge component of bring down price because most sick patients will bend over backward to help other's in need .

 

http://www.senate.michigan.gov/gop/senators/contact.asp?District=24

My only worry is they prohibitionists will exploit language that was put into appease voters who didn't want to see insurance companies or the Government bear any of the actual expense of medical marihuana itself ( the actual flower ) .I would be worried some may start using this part of the act to start disallowing costs to transport patients to Doctors who are specialists in determining if there would be medical benefit . Or use it to prevent institutional budgets at State and Private Hospitals from funding for areas for use etc to catch up with the needs of patients . I think it would be wise to suggest to Mr Jones office this be defined as the actual " herb " or flower itself as the law act was intending . Sadly the number of words allowed by law at the time confined the act from always being specific though it always intended to protect and provide for the patients . It for sure didn't desire to see in discriminant felonies created by grey areas for them like has been occurring . .

 

Having read some other new material at the MDCH or that was linked to it I further saw instead of amending in State law to include med ables and oils they are referring to them as not marihuana often . Really stating it to read " not marihuana " So then what are these two important items cannabis patients need ? Obviously it creates a area of possible arrest that was not intended if their not considered the same in the minds of enforcement along with the weight problem that worries so may of us who do not believe a quarter of a ounce of cannabis mixed with a pound of muffin mix should be considered a pound and a quarter of marihuana . I should of highlighted and gave the links but I am not doing well enough and lost them . If I see them again i will if I can at the time and remember where to put it .

 

The good news is were better off then we were years ago but worse off then we ever should of been . All the patients know its so wrong to have lost 70 plus years of research into cannabis as medicine and this argument against any medication allowing one to feel better is ridiculous . Isn't that the point ....even if its only reducing the perception of symptoms that are causing anxiety which creates a more rapid decline - isn't that a justifiable outcome ? I know you and other patients understand these things but some prohibitionists don't and read our posts .

This is better news than I thought !!!!

 

I was sure that Sen. Jones was out to remove drivers testing positive for THC and its metabolites from No Fault coverage if they were injured while driving...Nullification of No Fault for "Buzzed" Drivers !!

 

This does not appear to be the case...No Fault will not be ever required to cover MMJ !

 

That is NOT a positive but it is a lot better than outright No Fault Nullification...although I would not be surprised if Sen. Jones tries for it with the blessing of the Insurance industry.

 

dr. Jinx