The Colorado Statesman, 26 Oct 2012 – Smith: Coloradans Should Pass Amendment 64 What do Hector and Yeira Beltran, Enrique and Bethsaida Cisneros, and Ivan and Claudia Vasquez have in common? They are victims of our drug war. They live on the Mexican side of the U.S. border in the pathway of the billions of dollars in drugs that come northward to meet the demand in this country. In all the debates about legalization – marijuana and Amendment 64 in Colorado – their story is the one you never hear, the story of those who have to survive in countries that we have destabilized by our desire for drugs.

Pueblo Chieftain, 28 Oct 2012 – Re: Amendment 64 (Ideas, Oct. 21) From my personal experience, Colorado voters should approve Amendment 64, which would regulate marijuana in the state. For someone with suicidal depression, alcohol will result in fatal overdose, sclerosis and the like. Tobacco is mild in potency, but a slow form of suicide.

The Daily Sentinel, 26 Oct 2012 – As many as three Western Slope doctors who indicated to supporters of a ballot measure to legalize marijuana that they agreed with the idea later told those supporters they never really did. While backers of Amendment 64 say those doctors are only upset because their opinions became known, at least one said it was all a misunderstanding from the beginning.

Colorado Springs Independent, 24 Oct 2012 – Local Parkinson’s patients start to benefit from a new test using the party drug If you hear "cocaine" and think of junkies smoking crack in squalid apartments, or of downward-spiraling rock stars, this may come as a shocker.

Colorado Springs Independent, 24 Oct 2012 – Colorado’s close-up, Part 1 On Sunday night, 60 Minutes reported on the medical marijuana industry in Colorado with a piece titled – you guessed it – "Rocky Mountain High." The CBS report comes out two weeks before voters here and in Oregon and Washington state vote on whether to legalize marijuana use in general. And with reporter Steve Kroft marveling that there are 204 medical marijuana dispensaries in the Denver area – three times the number of Starbucks and McDonalds combined – the segment highlights how mainstream the plant’s presence has become in Colorado.

The Cortez Journal, 27 Oct 2012 – As voters statewide prepare to cast their ballots to legalize or to not legalize marijuana proponents and opponents are looking at the federal law as well as what the proposed regulation would mean. Amendment 64, if approved by voters, would allow the sale and purchase of small amounts of marijuana, though the state law would not apply to the federal law, which would still consider the acts to be against the law.

The Steamboat Today, 27 Oct 2012 – In 1932, Colorado voters passed a constitutional amendment to overturn the failed experiment of alcohol prohibition. This fall, Colorado voters will vote on a similar amendment which will end the similarly irrational policy of adult marijuana prohibition. The similarities between alcohol prohibition and marijuana prohibition are striking: Both policies were devised to control the behavior of adults, but neither reduced consumption of marijuana nor alcohol. In both cases, prohibition has enriched cartels, empowered gangs and made criminals out of otherwise law-abiding adults.

The Aspen Times, 26 Oct 2012 – Dear Editor: As a member of the Board of Trustees for the town of Carbondale, I believe it is my responsibility to carefully consider how each ballot measure affects our community. After reading and reflecting on the failures of our nation’s drug policy, I am announcing my endorsement of Amendment 64. I also am speaking for myself and as the father of a teenage girl and not for the Carbondale Board of Trustees.

DrugSense

Denver Post, 24 Oct 2012 – It may be that laws dealing with marijuana should be modified, but Amendment 64, if approved, will do great harm. It is a fact that marijuana possession and use are prohibited by federal law. Established federal law, according to Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, is the "supreme law of the land." So those who put Amendment 64 on the ballot and those who vote for it do so in total disregard of federal law and the Constitution. The proponents of Amendment 64 ignore federal law, so why not ignore any state law when it suits you? Since Amendment 64 is predicated on breaking the law, why should anyone respect its restrictions on the use, possession or distribution of marijuana?