Cannabis is legal in two states, but the metropolis of Los Angeles has yet to regulate medical access to the plant.

Hoping to exit the quagmire, a coalition of medical cannabis
patients, providers and organized labor filed 70,000 signatures to
regulate pot clubs Friday.

According to Americans for Safe Access

As of Monday, marijuana is legal in the state of Colorado. Governor John Hickenlooper has signed
an official proclamation making Amendment 64, the voter-passed
amendment that legalizes possession of up to an ounce of marijuana, part
of the state

A lawsuit challenging Arizona’s medical marijuana law was rejected last week, when Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Gordon rejected arguments by Attorney General Tom Horne and Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery and refused to declare the law invalid.

This is great news for patients, but wait, there’s more! Last week, the Phoenix FOX affiliate reported that a dispensary in Tucson became the first to open its doors in Arizona. However, that dispensary does not yet have medical marijuana available for patients, so the honor of being the first state-licensed dispensary actually goes to Arizona Organix in Glendale, which began supplying patients Thursday, December 6.

Prop. 203 has overcome several obstacles since it was approved by voters in 2010, and the law now appears to be well on its way to being fully implemented. However, advocates must remain vigilant, as we know the program’s opponents will continue trying to challenge the rights of patients in court and in the legislature. Montgomery has already announced he will appeal Judge Gordon’s ruling, so it’s clear the effort to preserve and protect Arizona’s medical marijuana law must continue.

A medical marijuana dispensary in California expresses evangelical Christian views and is known to hand out Bibles along with the controversial drug.

Canna
Care of Sacramento, a family owned dispensary known for supplying
medical marijuana and advocating for decriminalization, evangelizes and
prays with its customers. Canna Care oversees group prayers in a typical
day around 6:00 p.m. and has handed out an estimated 3,000 Bibles to
those who come for their services.

Kris Hermes, spokesperson for
the nationwide pro-marijuana legalization group Americans for Safe
Access, told The Christian Post about its ties to Canna Care.

"Canna
Care has been a supporter of Americans for Safe Access as have scores
of dispensaries across the country," said Hermes. "We have also worked
with the operators of Canna Care on a number of political campaigns over
the years, given their active involvement in advancing medical
marijuana policy."

Hermes also told CP about the building of
bridges between ASA and faith communities in the United States in the
effort to decriminalize the drug.

"As an advocacy organization, we
try to build bridges with many different communities, including those
organized around faith, labor rights, healthcare reform, and many
others," said Hermes.

"The
relationship between faith-based groups and medical marijuana is
certainly healthier and more focused on compassion than the relationship
between medical marijuana and law enforcement."

Hermes also added
that ASA "has also worked with the Universal Life Church on various
political campaigns. The ULC is promoting us and our efforts to bring
medical marijuana access to patients nationwide."

The debate over
marijuana legalization has not only come to mainstream American society,
but also before public Christian leaders.

Pat Robertson, founder
of the Christian Coalition and host of "The 700 Club," gained headlines
when he expressed his support for decriminalizing pot.

"I really believe we should treat marijuana the way we treat beverage alcohol," said Robertson to The New York Times.

"If
people can go into a liquor store and buy a bottle of alcohol and drink
it at home legally, then why do we say that the use of this other
substance is somehow criminal?"

However, Mark Driscoll, lead pastor of the Seattle-based megachurch Mars Hill, recently published an e-book wherein he found the practice to be an example of immature foolishness.

"Young
men are the most likely to smoke weed and, by seemingly all measurable
variables, are immature, irresponsible, and getting worse," wrote
Driscoll. "There is nothing wrong with being a boy, so long as you are a
boy. But when a man acts like a boy, that’s a real problem."

Last month, Washington
State and Colorado voted by popular referendum to decriminalize
recreational pot; these measures go contrary to present federal
government drug enforcement law.

When voters in Colorado and Washington state legalized recreational marijuana in November, they thought they were declaring a cease-fire in the War on Drugs. Thanks to ballot initiatives that passed by wide margins on Election Day, adults 21 or older in both states can now legally possess up to an ounce of marijuana. The new laws also compel Colorado and Washington to license private businesses to cultivate and sell pot, and to levy taxes on the proceeds. Together, the two states expect to reap some $600 million annually in marijuana revenues for schools, roads and other projects. The only losers, in fact, will be the Mexican drug lords, who currently supply as much as two-thirds of America’s pot.

Drug reformers can scarcely believe their landslide victories at the polls. “People expected this day would come, but most didn’t expect it to come this soon,” says Norm Stamper, a former Seattle police chief who campaigned for legalization. “This is the beginning of the end of prohibition.”

But the war over pot may be far from over. Legalization has set Colorado and Washington on a collision course with the Obama administration, which has shown no sign of backing down on its full-scale assault on pot growers and distributors. Although the president pledged to go easy on medical marijuana – now legal in 18 states – he has actually launched more raids on state-sanctioned pot dispensaries than George W. Bush, and has threatened to prosecute state officials who oversee medical marijuana as if they were drug lords. And while the administration has yet to issue a definitive response to the two new laws, the Justice Department was quick to signal that it has no plans to heed the will of voters. “Enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act,” the department announced in November, “remains unchanged.”

A big reason for the get-tough stance, say White House insiders, is that federal agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration are staffed with hard-liners who have built their careers on going after pot. Michele Leonhart, a holdover from the Bush administration whom Obama has appointed to head the DEA, continues to maintain that pot is as dangerous as heroin – a position unsupported by either science or experience. When pressed on the point at a congressional hearing, Leonhart refused to concede any distinction between the two substances, lamely insisting that “all illegal drugs are bad.”

“There are not many friends to legalization in this administration,” says Kevin Sabet, director of the Drug Policy Institute at the University of Florida who served the White House as a top adviser on marijuana policy. In fact, the politician who coined the term “drug czar” – Joe Biden – continues to guide the administration’s hard-line drug policy. “The vice president has a special interest in this issue,” Sabet says. “As long as he is vice president, we’re very far off from legalization being a reality.”

There’s no question that the votes in Colorado and Washington represent a historic shift in the War on Drugs. “This is a watershed moment,” says Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance. “People are standing up and saying that the drug war has gone too far.” And drug reformers achieved the landmark victory with a creative new marketing blitz – one that sold legalization not to stoners, but to soccer moms.

The man behind Colorado’s legalization campaign was Mason Tvert, a Denver activist who was radicalized against the drug war by two experiences as a teenager. First, in high school, a bout of binge drinking landed him in the hospital. Then, as a college freshman, he made what he believed was a healthier choice to smoke pot – only to get subpoenaed by a grand jury and grilled by campus police about his drug use. “It was ridiculous,” Tvert recalls, “to be spending these law-enforcement resources worrying about whether a college student might or might not be using pot in his dorm room on the weekend.”

In 2005, at age 22, Tvert founded Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER) to prompt a public conversation about the relative dangers of pot and booze. “We’re punishing adults for making the rational, safer decision to use marijuana rather than alcohol, if that’s what they prefer,” says Tvert. “We’re driving people to drink.” That same year, fueled by support on college campuses, SAFER launched a ballot initiative to make Denver the world’s first city to remove all criminal penalties for possession of marijuana by adults. Tvert cheekily branded then-mayor and now Colorado governor John Hickenlooper a “drug dealer” for owning a brew pub. The shoestring campaign, Tvert says, was only intended to raise awareness. “We just happened to win.”

This year, Tvert and other drug reformers drew an even more explicit link between the two recreational drugs, naming their ballot initiative the “Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act of 2012.” Instead of simply urging people to vote against prohibition, the measure gave Coloradans a concrete reason to vote for legalization: Taxing pot would provide more money for schools, while freeing up cops from senseless pot busts would enable them to go after real criminals. “The public does not like marijuana,” explains Brian Vicente, a Denver attorney who co-wrote the law. “What they like is community safety, tax revenue and better use of law enforcement.”

Equally important to winning over mainstream voters was the plan to treat pot like alcohol. While the feds continue to view marijuana as contraband to be ferreted out by drug dogs and SWAT teams, Colorado and Washington will now entrust pot to the same regulators who keep tabs on Jameson and Jägermeister. The new laws charge the Washington State Liquor Control Board and the Colorado Department of Revenue – which already oversees medical marijuana – with issuing licenses for recreational marijuana to be sold in private, stand-alone stores. The Colorado law also gives local communities the right to prohibit commercial pot sales, much like a few “dry” counties across the country still ban liquor sales. “These will be specifically licensed marijuana retail stores,” says Tvert. “It’s not going to be popping up at Walmart. This is not going to force a marijuana store into a community that does not want it.”

The legalization campaign in Colorado was a grassroots, low-budget affair that triumphed in the face of strong opposition from Gov. Hickenlooper and the Denver Chamber of Commerce. The reform effort in Washington, by contrast, received more than half its $6.2 million in funding from billionaire drug reformers Peter Lewis and George Soros – and enjoyed mainstream support. The public face for legalization was Rick Steves, the avuncular PBS travel journalist – and dedicated pothead – who chipped in $450,000 to the cause. In Seattle, the mayor, city attorney and every member of the city council supported the measure. Unlike past efforts to turn back pot prohibition at the ballot box, which saw public support crater at the 11th hour, support for the measures in Colorado and Washington actually increased through Election Day: Both laws passed by at least 10 points. In Colorado, marijuana proved more popular than the president, trumping Obama’s winning tally by more than 50,000 votes.

Regardless of how the federal government responds to the initiatives, many of their greatest benefits have already taken hold. In November, more than 200 Washington residents who had been charged with pot possession saw their cases dropped even before the new law went into effect. “There is no point in continuing to seek criminal penalties for conduct that will be legal next month,” said Seattle prosecutor Dan Satterberg. Local police are now free to focus their resources on crimes of violence, and cops can no longer use the pretext of smelling dope as a license for unwarranted searches. “That gets us into so many cars and pockets and homes – illegally, inappropriately,” says Neill Franklin, a retired narcotics officer who now directs Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. “That ends in Colorado and Washington – it ends.”

A hilarious FAQ called “Marijwhatnow?” – issued by the Seattle police department – underscores the official shift in tactics:

Q: What happens if I get pulled over and I’m sober, but an officer or his K-9 buddy smells the ounce of Super Skunk I’ve got in my trunk? A: Each case stands on its own, but the smell of pot alone will not be reason to search a vehicle.

Despite the immediate benefits of the new laws, the question remains: What will the federal government do in response? Advocates of legalization are hoping the Obama administration will recognize that it’s on the wrong side of history. “Everybody’s predicting there’s going to be a backlash, and that’s a good bet,” concedes Nadelmann. “But there’s some reason to be optimistic that the feds won’t jump – at least not right away.”

The administration, he points out, has yet to make its intentions clear – and that, by itself, is a sign of progress. In 2010, Attorney General Eric Holder strongly denounced California’s bid to regulate and tax marijuana before voters even had a chance to weigh in at the polls. This year, by contrast, the administration said nothing about the legalization bids in Colorado and Washington – even after nine former heads of the DEA issued a public letter decrying the administration’s silence as “a tacit acceptance of these dangerous initiatives.”

In addition, the provisions that directly flout the federal government’s authority to regulate marijuana don’t take effect right away – leaving time for state and federal authorities to negotiate a truce. In Colorado, the state isn’t required to begin regulating and taxing pot until next July, while officials in Washington have until next December to unveil a regulatory plan. “There’s no inherent need for a knee-jerk federal response,” says Nadelmann.

Most important, the governors of both Colorado and Washington have vowed to respect the will of the voters – even though they personally opposed the new laws. Gov. Hickenlooper pledged that “we intend to follow through” with regulating and taxing marijuana. But he also sounded a note of caution to potheads. “Federal law still says marijuana is an illegal drug,” he warned, “so don’t break out the Cheetos or Goldfish too quickly.”

If Obama were committed to drug reform – or simply to states’ rights – he could immediately end DEA raids on those who grow and sell pot according to state law, and immediately order the Justice Department to make enforcement of federal marijuana laws the lowest priority of U.S. attorneys in states that choose to tax and regulate pot. He could also champion a bipartisan bill introduced by Rep. Diana DeGette, a Democrat from Colorado, that would give state marijuana regulation precedence over federal law – an approach that even anti-marijuana hard-liners have endorsed. As George W. Bush’s former U.S. attorney for Colorado wrote in a post-election op-ed in the Denver Post: “Letting states ‘opt out’ of the Controlled Substances Act’s prohibition against marijuana ought to be seriously considered.”

When it comes to pot, the federal government is both impotent and omnipotent. What the feds cannot do is force either Colorado or Washington to impose criminal sanctions on pot possession. “They cannot say to states: You must keep arresting or throwing people in jail for simple use,” says Sabet, the former White House adviser. “And they cannot compel the states to impose penalties on use.” Individual pot smokers in Colorado and Washington will technically be in violation of federal law, but as a practical matter the DEA only has the resources to pursue high-level traffickers.

Where the federal government has great power to act is in shutting down state taxation and regulation of marijuana. Privately, both drug reformers and drug warriors believe the Obama administration is likely to take Colorado and Washington to court to keep them out of the pot business. “I would put money on it,” says Sabet.

Unfortunately for drug reformers, the administration appears to have an open-and-shut case: Federal law trumps state law when the two contradict. What’s more, the Supreme Court has spoken on marijuana law: In the 2005 case Gonzales v. Raich contesting medical marijuana in California, the court ruled that the federal government can regulate even tiny quantities of pot – including those grown and sold purely within state borders – because the drug is ultimately connected to interstate commerce. If the courts side with the administration, a judge could issue an immediate injunction blocking Washington and Colorado from regulating or taxing the growing and selling of pot – actions that would be considered trafficking under the Controlled Substances Act. The feds could also threaten to prosecute state employees tasked with implementing the new regulations – a hardball tactic the administration deployed last year to shut down state regulation of medical marijuana in Washington and Rhode Island.

Such draconian measures would do nothing to curb marijuana use – particularly in Colorado, where the new law empowers citizens to grow up to six plants and share up to an ounce of their weed with other adults. “Thanks to homegrow,” says Vicente, who coauthored the law, “we will still have legal adult access” – no matter how hard the feds crack down on commercial growers and retailers. But denying states the ability to regulate marijuana would eliminate the tax revenues that reformers promised voters. “If they want to act cynically,” says Nadelmann, “the federal gambit would be to block regulation to make this as messy as possible” – in the hopes that the public would sour on pervasive, unregulated weed.

Ironically, if Obama succeeds in gutting the new state laws, he will essentially be serving the interests of foreign drug cartels. A study by the nonpartisan think tank Instituto Mexicano Para la Competitividad found that legalization in Colorado and Washington would deal a devastating blow to the cartels, depriving them of nearly a quarter of their annual drug revenues – unless the federal government decides to launch a “vigorous intervention.” If that happens, pot profits would continue to flow to the cartels instead of to hard-hit state budgets. “Something’s wrong,” says Stamper, the former Seattle police chief, “when the lawbreakers and the law enforcers are on the same side.”

In the end, the best defense against federal intervention may be other states standing up against prohibition. While pro-pot sentiment is strongest in the West, recent polls show that legalization is now beginning to enjoy majority support nationwide. “We’re beyond the tipping point,” says Stamper. Spurred by the victories in Colorado and Washington, legislators are already moving to legalize pot in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine and Iowa. “It’s time for the Justice Department to recognize the sovereignty of the states,” Gov. Jerry Brown of California declared. “We don’t need some federal gendarme to come and tell us what to do.”

Obama, the former constitutional-law professor, has relied on the expansive powers of the chief executive when it serves him politically – providing amnesty to a generation of Dream Act immigrants, or refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court. A one-time pothead who gave a shout-out to his dealer in his high school yearbook, Obama could single-handedly end the insanity of marijuana being treated like heroin under the Controlled Substances Act with nothing more than an executive order.

What the president needs to act boldly, reform advocates believe, is for the rising tide of public opinion to swamp the outdated bureaucracy of the War on Drugs. “The citizens have become more savvy about the drug war,” says Franklin, the former narcotics cop. “They know this is not just a failed policy – they understand it’s also a very destructive policy.” With an eye on his legacy, Franklin says, Obama should treat pot prohibition like the costly misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan: “This is another war for the president to end.”

This story is from the December 20th, 2012 – January 3rd, 2013 issue of Rolling Stone.

Source: Rolling Stone (US)
Author: Tim Dickinson
Published: December 7, 2012
Copyright: 2012 Straight Arrow Publishers Company, L.P.
Contact: letters@rollingstone.com
Website: http://www.rollingstone.com/

A strange gap year in Washington’s grand experiment with marijuana legalization begins Thursday, when personal possession of pot becomes legal, but criminal laws banning marijuana growing and sales remain in effect.

That year gives the state Liquor Control Board time to create first-in-the-nation licenses for marijuana growers, processors and retailers. Until then, the only clearly legal way — at least, under state law — is for a medical marijuana patient to get medicine from a collective garden.

Jenny Durkan, the U.S. Attorney for Western Washington, sent out a statement Wednesday that regardless of legalization measures in Washington and Colorado, the federal ban on marijuana remains unchanged. But the statement did not come with any legal action by the U.S. Department of Justice to block the new law from taking effect on Thursday.

The statement:

The Department of Justice is reviewing the legalization initiatives recently passed in Colorado and Washington state. The Department’s responsibility to enforce the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged. Neither States nor the Executive branch can nullify a statute passed by Congress. In enacting the Controlled Substances Act, Congress determined that marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance.

Regardless of any changes in state law, including the change that will go into effect on December 6th in Washington state, growing, selling or possessing any amount of marijuana remains illegal under federal law. Members of the public are also advised to remember that it remains against federal law to bring any amount of marijuana onto federal property, including all federal buildings, national parks and forests, military installations, and courthouses.

At a morning news conference, Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes acknowledged that Washington is in uncharted waters.

“We are trying to substitute a legal, licensed system for what is nearly a wholly illegal system. That is going to take time. What we’re doing under I-502, beginning at midnight, we’re at least not doing any more harm. We’re not enforcing an extremely unpopular law against adults who choose to consume marijuana. But unless they are an authorized medical marijuana patient, they are already obtaining marijuana from illegal sources. Washington state is awash, as are most states, in marijuana, which is one of the points about what prohibition has failed in its purpose.”

A public celebration of the new law is planned at Seattle Center, beginning at 7 p.m. on Thursday. Holmes reminded party-goers that public consumption of marijuana is now treated like alcohol, equivalent to about a $50 fine.

Holmes stopped enforcing marijuana possession cases when he took office, but he said Thursday he would enforce public consumption fines, should Seattle police issue them.

“I think the SPD will see how well people comply. If there’s unfortunate flaunting, and (people) want to test and see if the law will be enforced, well, I have better things to do with my time than to test the limits of the law. But we will enforce the law.”

From The Seattle Times Blog

Source: Seattle Times (WA)
Author: Jonathan Martin, Seattle Times Staff Reporter
Published: December 5, 2012
Copyright: 2012 The Seattle Times Company
Contact: opinion@seatimes.com
Website: http://www.seattletimes.com/

On this day in 1933, Congress responded to the growing number of states and citizens who decried the failed war on alcohol by ratifying the 21^st Amendment. By effectively repealing federal alcohol prohibition, this historic event allowed states to determine the best way to deal with alcohol without interference from the federal government.

Tomorrow, history will begin to repeat itself as the ballot measure approved by voters in Washington officially goes into effect, making it the first state to remove all penalties for marijuana possession by adults. The federal government would be wise to learn from history and do what it did 79 years ago: get out of the way.

When it comes down to it, marijuana prohibition and alcohol prohibition are nearly identical, both in their intentions and in their failings. Both products are popular, and both prohibitions cause great harm to society. The laws that put non-violent alcohol users in prison and enriched violent gangsters like Al Capone are eerily similar to those that have destroyed the lives of millions of otherwise law-abiding marijuana consumers and propped up the cartels responsible for the daily violence south of the border.

Despite the glaring similarities with alcohol prohibition, there are still many government officials who simply do not see the parallels and insist that we cannot let responsible adults purchase marijuana – a far safer product than alcohol – from legitimate businesses instead of in the underground market.

Unfortunately, this seems to be the position of the U.S. Department of Justice, but we have yet to learn how, or if, they will push this position in states that choose a different, more rational path.

Washington’s new law will allow individuals 21 and older to possess up to one ounce of marijuana without penalty, fine, or arrest. Therefore, as of tomorrow, adults will no longer be persecuted simply for choosing to consume marijuana. It is now up to the state to create a system to tax and regulate the cultivation and sale of marijuana so that this lucrative market can be properly managed, instead of being left in the hands of criminals without quality control or oversight.

The federal government should not interfere. It made that mistake when it tried to enforce federal law in states that had removed alcohol penalties, and the result was unnecessary suffering at the expense of states’ rights, vast amounts of money, and individual liberties.

The Obama Administration should not make the same mistake.

West Sacramento may join a string of cities across the region in
at least temporarily banning outdoor plantings of medicinal marijuana.

A
decision on a proposed 45-day moratorium could come at the City
Council’s meeting today following a public hearing on the issue starting
at 7 p.m. at West Sacramento City Hall, 1110 W. Capitol Ave.

The proposed ban could be extended for as long as two years.

If the moratorium is adopted at the meeting, it goes into effect
immediately and runs to Jan. 19. Primary caregivers and their patients
would still be able to grow cannabis under a roof if the temporary ban
goes into effect, said city officials.

If council members do not
adopt the moratorium, city staff will return in the spring with draft
regulations for city leaders to consider.

West Sacramento
officials last year passed a ban on outdoor cultivation associated with
marijuana dispensaries, but left alone provisions on growing for
personal medical use.

But city staffers say they have since become aware of rising burglaries and thefts of marijuana plants that they say are connected to cultivation.

That and the nuisance the plants’ strong odor creates in the city’s neighborhoods led to the push for a temporary ban.

Staff members cite police statistics that show a dramatic rise in marijuana-related complaints.

West Sacramento police have received 112 such complaints to date this year, department statistics show.

That’s
more than twice the 60 complaints filed last year, nearly as many as
during the previous four years combined and 43 percent of all narcotics
complaints filed so far this year.

"It seems to be more
prevalent," said Charline Hamilton, the city’s community development
director. "Plants are stolen. Homes are burglarized. Each year, it’s
getting worse."

But medical marijuana advocates say moving
cultivation indoors would be too costly for patients who would have to
rely on hydroponics and other equipment and that cities are too hasty in
imposing outdoor growing bans.

"By forcing (growing) inside, it
can be prohibitive for many patients. We believe patients need the
option to grow outdoors," said Kris Hermes, a spokesman for Oakland-based medical cannabis advocate Americans for Safe Access.

Hermes added that cities’ bans are a "knee-jerk reaction to complaints received from people in the community."

"They’re using a blunt instrument to make the lives of thousands of people more complicated," Hermes said.

West Sacramento is just the latest city in the greater Sacramento region to look at outdoor cultivation of medical marijuana.

Sacramento
leaders enacted a ban last month that went into effect Nov. 20.
Roseville imposed a ban Nov. 1. Elk Grove banned outdoor growing in
April, and Lodi considered a similar ban in October.

According to a national poll conducted by Public Policy Polling (PPP) from Nov. 30 to Dec. 2, a record high 58% of American voters said they think marijuana should be made legal, compared to only 39% who do not. In addition, 50% of respondents said they think marijuana will become legal under federal law within the next 10 years.

A strong plurality (47%) of respondents said they think President Obama should allow Colorado and Washington to implement the ballot measures approved by voters last month to regulate and tax marijuana like alcohol. Just 33% said they approve of President Obama using federal resources to prevent them from going into effect. Interestingly, support for the rights of states could be higher, but 46% of Republicans surveyed support the federal government asserting its power over the states.

Download the full poll results here.

Marijuana possession by adults is scheduled to become legal in Washington on Thursday when Initiative 502 officially goes into effect. A similar measure adopted by Colorado voters, Amendment 64, will go into effect no later than January 6. The new laws in Colorado and Washington make it legal for adults 21 and older to possess up to one ounce of marijuana for personal use. They also direct the legislatures of both states to create regulations in order to establish a legal market for businesses to cultivate and sell marijuana to adults. So far, the federal government has not stated whether it intends to use any resources to interfere with the implementation of the new state laws.

The poll of 1,325 voters asked the same question that has been used by Gallup since 1970 to measure support for marijuana legalization in the country. In October 2011 Gallup found, for the first time, a majority (50%) of Americans supported making marijuana legal. Election results and pre-election polls in Colorado suggest PPP’s automated telephone survey might be a more accurate gauge of support for marijuana legalization, perhaps due to a hesitancy of voters to express their pro-marijuana sentiments to live operators, such as those utilized by Gallup.

Americans for Safe Access has scheduled a Washington, D.C. town hall
meeting to answer questions about implementation of the law passed 15
years ago that allows for cannabis use medicinally.

While the use
of marijuana for medical purposes has been approved, it remains a
Schedule 1 drug and therefore not covered by health insurance.

The