March 16Th Nrpa Invite

[roadworkahead]

Did anyone attend this? It was in Ann Arbor on the 16th

Any comments? OOPs think it's the NPRA

Edited March 18, 2013 by roadworkahead

[cristinew]

I guess the price they charged patients did not go,,

[+Malamute]

Here is their press release for sake of information.:

 

 

 

NPRA benefit draws standing-room-only crowd; lobbyist Kevin McKinney provides direction to medical marijuana community

 

by Rick Thompson

 

 

Lansing lobbyist Kevin McKinney was the featured speaker at a benefit for the National Patients Rights Association (NPRA) at the Ann Arbor Art Center on Saturday, March 16. His message was focused on the passage of House Bill 4271, The Provisioning Centers Act (PCA), and his message from the legislature was clear: “The momentum is changing.”

The crowds of well-heeled cannabusiness entrepreneurs were swathed in culture as they browsed through the Art Center before the speeches, enjoying cocktails and hors d’oeuvres while being entertained by the George Bennett Trio. Those speakers included emcee Denise Pollicella of Cannabis Attorneys of Mid-Michigan and a NPRA board member. NPRA spokesperson Drew Driver was featured between PCA sponsor Rep. Michael Callton, R-Nashville, and the event’s keynote speech from McKinney.

During that speech McKinney underscored the need for people to connect with their legislators, through public appearances and local ‘coffee hours’, through visits in the offical’s Lansing office or by handwriting letters and mailing them. McKinney described this as the “most effective” means of communicating with legislators. He charged those in attendance to “find those patients that are willing to tell their story, that are willing to write letters to the editor. “ He asked that letter writers refer to the NPRA analysis of the PCA, which can be found on their website.

McKinney added: “If you are writing letters to your local papers and if you are ready when we have the hearing, you will make it extremely difficult for (legislators) to say no. I’m convinced that if we get it scheduled… and force the vote at some point… the time frame is probably late spring… we will get it out of Committee.” McKinney gave his rough estimate of a House vote as early fall, but cautioned that this is all highly speculative.

“I really think the momentum is changing… and I really strongly urge you to work with the NPRA so that we have the same messaging, we have one voice and we are all together collectively pushing this issue.”

His words reached an influential group of patient advocates from around the state- and beyond. Mediswipe CEO B. Michael Friedman swept into Michigan to show off his newly-appointed COO and Board Member Amish Parikh from the Downriver Compassion Club. Attendees from the Upper Peninsula rubbed elbows with members of the Ann Arbor Guild while embattled advocates from Port Huron, Battle Creek and Traverse City shared stories and strategies. Attorneys Dennis Hayes, Matthew Abel and Tom Lavigne spoke with Safer Michigan Coalition founders Chuck Ream and Tim Beck. Om of Medicine’s Mark Passerini and the NPRA’s Robin Schneider were the host and hostess of the benefit.

[roadworkahead]

Here is their press release for sake of information.:

 

 

 

NPRA benefit draws standing-room-only crowd; lobbyist Kevin McKinney provides direction to medical marijuana community

 

by Rick Thompson

 

 

Lansing lobbyist Kevin McKinney was the featured speaker at a benefit for the National Patients Rights Association (NPRA) at the Ann Arbor Art Center on Saturday, March 16. His message was focused on the passage of House Bill 4271, The Provisioning Centers Act (PCA), and his message from the legislature was clear: “The momentum is changing.”

The crowds of well-heeled cannabusiness entrepreneurs were swathed in culture as they browsed through the Art Center before the speeches, enjoying cocktails and hors d’oeuvres while being entertained by the George Bennett Trio. Those speakers included emcee Denise Pollicella of Cannabis Attorneys of Mid-Michigan and a NPRA board member. NPRA spokesperson Drew Driver was featured between PCA sponsor Rep. Michael Callton, R-Nashville, and the event’s keynote speech from McKinney.

During that speech McKinney underscored the need for people to connect with their legislators, through public appearances and local ‘coffee hours’, through visits in the offical’s Lansing office or by handwriting letters and mailing them. McKinney described this as the “most effective” means of communicating with legislators. He charged those in attendance to “find those patients that are willing to tell their story, that are willing to write letters to the editor. “ He asked that letter writers refer to the NPRA analysis of the PCA, which can be found on their website.

McKinney added: “If you are writing letters to your local papers and if you are ready when we have the hearing, you will make it extremely difficult for (legislators) to say no. I’m convinced that if we get it scheduled… and force the vote at some point… the time frame is probably late spring… we will get it out of Committee.” McKinney gave his rough estimate of a House vote as early fall, but cautioned that this is all highly speculative.

“I really think the momentum is changing… and I really strongly urge you to work with the NPRA so that we have the same messaging, we have one voice and we are all together collectively pushing this issue.”

His words reached an influential group of patient advocates from around the state- and beyond. Mediswipe CEO B. Michael Friedman swept into Michigan to show off his newly-appointed COO and Board Member Amish Parikh from the Downriver Compassion Club. Attendees from the Upper Peninsula rubbed elbows with members of the Ann Arbor Guild while embattled advocates from Port Huron, Battle Creek and Traverse City shared stories and strategies. Attorneys Dennis Hayes, Matthew Abel and Tom Lavigne spoke with Safer Michigan Coalition founders Chuck Ream and Tim Beck. Om of Medicine’s Mark Passerini and the NPRA’s Robin Schneider were the host and hostess of the benefit.

wow rubbing elbows!

[roadworkahead]

So they want patients to write letters? Yet they made it cost prohibitive for many patients to attend this gala!! Do patients really need groups like these to speak for them ? They make it seem like there is something wrong with the act that Mi voters voted for. Just wasn't enough for some... Have the A2 dispensaries received their licenses to operate under the city's ordinance? If they have not been licensed as required they have no business speaking for anyone IMHO... They should have had this Gala in the car wash where they give blow jobs referenced by Robin Schneider LOL Okay enough smart alec remarks from here on out....

[cristinew]

So they want patients to write letters? Yet they made it cost prohibitive for many patients to attend this gala!!

 

how nice of them..

[GregS]

Ooooo! Music and dancing.

[cristinew]

enjoying cocktails and hors d’oeuvres

Edited March 19, 2013 by cristinew

[solabeirtan]

à quoi s'attendre, mais la bite et le cul. Comme dans les jusqu'a vôtres!

[SFC]

Í lok við öll fá helvíti ..

[semicaregiver]

I think we need to put this in perspective. As a "Patients Rights" organization, they are dedicated to protecting the rights of patients to pay $400/oz. It is expensive to protect that category of patients so it is reasonable to charge $250/head for a fundraiser.

[Hayduke]

lol....

 

eggs

 

actly

[GregS]

Hey. Madamoizel. Parlay voo a hubba hubba?

Edited March 19, 2013 by GregS

[mediswipe]

mediswipe wants to ensure patients are protected by using biometric security data to store private information via a retinal scan or fingerprint.

Edited March 19, 2013 by mediswipe

[+Malamute]

Why not a colorectal exam too!!!!.....

[mediswipe]

this medicine has the opportunity to be legitimized by allowing people's use to be tracked and recorded via biometric security requirements that will most likely become legal requirments in future amendments to the act.

[Wild Bill]

Who, besides the police, would be helped by tracking my use? Mediswipe is nothing but a vampire feeding off the sick. An unnecessary expense, bleeding money from those who can least afford it. Worthless scum if you ask me.

Edited March 19, 2013 by Wild Bill

[Bisharoo]

I hope we are never subjected to this. "Give up more of your rights so we can protect you" stuff again. Nobody needs to track anyone using a harmless herb and not harming any others, period. I hope this never happens here, we will all suffer more.

Peace...

[ozzrokk]

this medicine has the opportunity to be legitimized by allowing people's use to be tracked and recorded via biometric security requirements that will most likely become legal requirments in future amendments to the act.

 

 

So will this be your goal? To get the act amended to make this legal requirment? Yet ANOTHER hoop to jump through?

 

I got news for you this medicine is already legitamized NOW. It has just yet to be acknowledged by those who do not WANT to acknowledge it.........

 

No one needs this...... I sure as hell don't.

[GregS]

mediswipe wants to ensure patients are protected by using biometric security data to store private information via a retinal scan or fingerprint.

 

Because...? This protects patients how...?

Edited March 20, 2013 by GregS

[roadworkahead]

Funny stuff thanks for the laughs. Much needed this week.. Medi swipe what a farce... leave our info alone...

Edited March 20, 2013 by roadworkahead

[ozzrokk]

I think there should be retenal security on this website..... .... Errrrrrrrrr .....ohhh wait...... I read somewhere that sarcasm doesnt translate well on the internet...... Uhhhhhh ...... Nevermind.

[SFC]

If this is really them they must not have gotten the memo....

[semicaregiver]

Good question SFC! Seems unlikely they would go off their talking points. Then again, maybe the poster was confused and posted the talking points they use for Schuette and company here.

 

While I guess I could be accused of taking a "glass is half empty" view on the "provisioning center" issue, I think the average caregiver/pt. may be deluding themselves.

 

On the surface one can look at the bill and the claims of its supporters and say, "I have no problem with someone paying $400/oz if that is what they want to do as long as I am not affected. And, if they do really amend the wording to permit the centers to only source their supply from registered pts/cgs then I am in." The downside is this is almost certainly a very naive and superficial analysis of the issue.

 

To understand the issue one needs to look at how alcoholic beverages are sold/regulated as well as how other states, i.e. Colorado and Washington, are approaching sales. Alcoholic beverage producers are heavily inspected and regulated. To assume that as a caregiver/pt you will be able to just stop in to your neigborhood "center", show your card and off load overages is naive at best. More likely you will need your "new" provisioning center supplier card and copies of the inspection reports of your grow by the State. I could be wrong, but then again you could stop over at your local party store and see if they will sell that wine you just made.

 

In Colorado the legalization mandate has now turned into a 160 page document for the state to use as a framework to use to write the rules on how it should work. Does anyone think that 160 page document will be distilled into a 20 page set of rules? More likely a 320 page set of rules.

 

Personally I am still on the fence regarding this issue. My concern at this point is I am not seeing any real discussion about what this "new and better" idea might really mean.

[SFC]

+1 Semi. And I would also add that their side has not said one word about fixing the problems in this bill. Quite the contrary, Robin Snyder has been steadfast in her rhetoric. We aren't going to war just yet, but everyone should be paying very close attention, it is likely coming..

Edited March 20, 2013 by SFC