Jump to content

“No” Vote On Proposal 1 Creates New Dialog On Legalized Marijuana In Michigan


Recommended Posts

 

As state struggles to fix roads, fund schools, MILegalize proposal offers 40% of legal marijuana tax revenue to schools, 40% to roads, 20% to local governments

 

May 5, 2015

 

Lansing- Attorney Jeffrey Hank, Chairman of the Michigan Comprehensive Cannabis Law Reform Initiative (MILegalize), said the organization’s proposal to legalize marijuana in Michigan is uniquely suited to address the funding shortages created by the failure of Proposal 1 on Tuesday evening. In fact, he’d like to sit down with the Governor and talk about it.

 

“Our Initiative would direct profits from a reasonable excise tax on legalized marijuana to fund road repair, to support schools and to add financial resources to local communities,” Hank said. “But more than that, the MILegalize proposal offers the best plan for small business generation and small businesses are the backbone of the state’s economic growth. Cities keep control, cities set the rules and cities get the reward.”

 

The overwhelming defeat of Proposal 1 indicates the public is not supportive of standard tax-based solutions to financial deficit. Conversely, a local ballot proposal to legalize marijuana was overwhelmingly approved by East Lansing voters on Tuesday with a 65.5% YES vote. Hank led the effort to place the proposal before East Lansing voters; he hopes the sales tax question’s failure, and the success of the local legal question, will prompt Governor Snyder to sit down and discuss the MILegalize plan. 

 

“The MILegalize proposal is a fresh, out-of-the-box opportunity based on successful programs from other states,” Hank said. “It is not the whole solution to Michigan’s financial struggle, but it will give a much-needed boost to fix the roads and support kids, their teachers and schools.”

 

Under the MILegalize ballot proposal, legalized adult use of marijuana would be restricted to adults 21 years of age and older. Distribution and cultivation centers would have to be zoned and approved by the local community before applying to a state agency. Several aspects of the proposal imitate the privileges contained in the state medical marijuana law, including a 12 plant limit on cultivation and protection for minor patients who have a physician’s recommendation for marijuana use. 

 

“Proposal 1‘s failure is just more evidence that the time is now for legalized marijuana in Michigan,” said Jamie Lowell, a MILegalize Director. “The voters are clearly on board for legalization.”

 

For more information regarding the MILegalize proposal, please visit: 

 

www.milegalize.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

grass, the ballot language clearly allows people to caregive.

http://milegalize.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Petition.pdf

 

Sec. 3. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the following acts are not unlawful

or a civil or criminal offense under the laws of this state...

(f) Assisting another consumer in any of the acts described in subdivisions (a) to (d).

 

subdiv a-d:

(a) Acquiring, possessing, using, or transporting marihuana

(b) Cultivating, growing, harvesting, possessing, propagating, processing, or transporting

12 or fewer marihuana plants

(d) Transferring 2.5 ounces or less of marihuana without remuneration to a consumer.

 

what part of that gets rid of caregivers?

i guess taking the ability to grow 12 plants per patient. it will only be 12 total.

 

how many plants do you grow for your patients? guessing less than 72.

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

grass, the ballot language clearly allows people to caregive.

http://milegalize.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Petition.pdf

 

Sec. 3. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the following acts are not unlawful

or a civil or criminal offense under the laws of this state...

(f) Assisting another consumer in any of the acts described in subdivisions (a) to (d).

 

subdiv a-d:

(a) Acquiring, possessing, using, or transporting marihuana

(b) Cultivating, growing, harvesting, possessing, propagating, processing, or transporting

12 or fewer marihuana plants

(d) Transferring 2.5 ounces or less of marihuana without remuneration to a consumer.

 

what part of that gets rid of caregivers?

i guess taking the ability to grow 12 plants per patient. it will only be 12 total.

 

how many plants do you grow for your patients? guessing less than 72.

 

 

 

I typically don't have 5 patients so yes the number is below 72. When I do have five patients though I might grow 72 plants of course. Sometimes genotype hunting, seed making, tissue culture follies, breeding, and pollen collection is enhanced for me with more plants. Recall I grow small plants generally 2 ounces'ish. My bulk of plants is in the vegging room, like a topped cornucopia of several strains to for my patients to choose from. I just keep topping them until needed. So in short, yes, I grow near the maximum I can. Perhaps not to supply my patients with meds, but to hone my craft legally.  

 

I would not register a patient if I could grow only 12 plants. I could not supply strangers with medical cannabis if they were not allowed to compensate me for my power usage, genetic acquisitions, gasoline, and growing supplies.   12 plants indoors would be just enough for me to grow full time in order to have a consistent supply of around 6 strains, exactly what I need.    And of course, these 12 would never be flowered at the same time, rather, the bulk would be vegging full time awaiting a flowering need.

 

I don't know any philanthropist caregivers who do not collect some sort of remuneration occasionally, prohibited by that ballot language.

 

So it seems this language is much of the opposite of our Act. Leaves with the question "what is a caregiver? " at best.   NO need to register patients in that language either.

 

did I miss some part that allows 72 plants, 5 registered patients, legal remuneration, as spelled out in our Act already ? sorry if I did.

 

Don't get me wrong tpain, I don't need to be a caregiver, or to grow more than 12 plants for myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Proposal 1‘s failure is just more evidence that the time is now for legalized marijuana in Michigan,” said Jamie Lowell, a MILegalize Director. “The voters are clearly on board for legalization.”

 

 

What a Joke

 

Prop 1's bitchslapin was a hint of what is to come to the fknrepublicans 2016

 

Where is the money we have been paying for the roads under fknrepublican control for years in Michigan?

 

Hijacking our Law under the guise of legalization aint gonna fly..

 

No Thanks!! We will keep the Care Giver System We the People Voted for.

 

Maybe we should consider A Bill to Fill Potholes with Politicians though.

Edited by beourbud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a Joke

 

Prop 1's bitchslapin was a hint of what is to come to the fknrepublicans 2016

 

Where is the money we have been paying for the roads under fknrepublican control for years in Michigan?

 

Hijacking our Law under the guise of legalization aint gonna fly..

 

No Thanks!! We will keep the Care Giver System We the People Voted for.

 

Maybe we should consider A Bill to Fill Potholes with Politicians though.

 

 

One can only hope. I still believe that the majority of voters in Michigan are too stupid to realize how bad the Republicans are fkn them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or do we? It seems like only yesterday ...

 

   ... The United States presidential election of 2000 was the 54th quadrennial presidential election. It was held on Tuesday, November 7, 2000. The contest was between Republican candidate George W. Bush, the incumbent governor of Texas and son of former presidentGeorge H. W. Bush, and Democratic candidate Al Gore, the incumbent Vice President.

 

    The result of the election hinged on Florida, where the margin of victory triggered a mandatory recount. Litigation in select counties started additional recounts, and this litigation ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court. The Court's contentious decision in Bush v. Gore, announced on December 12, 2000, ended the recounts, effectively awarding Florida's votes to Bush and granting him the victory. This marked the fourth election in U.S. history in which the eventual winner failed to win a plurality of the popular vote (after the elections of 18241876, and 1888). Later studies have reached conflicting opinions on who would have won the recount had it been allowed to proceed.

 

    ... seems as though the job will be filled, one way or another. By the appropriate candidate yet!  

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...
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...