What do Californians (and the rest) think of AUMA?
- Thread starter Magic9
- Start date
Magic9
Plant Enthusiast
If I thought a short legalization bill had a shot at passing, I'd rather it be the California Cannabis Hemp Initiative. Now that's a true legalization bill.
CCHI Summary.
CCHI Summary.
little maggie
Well-Known Member
Right now, you can buy 1/4 ounce of flowers a day in Oregon if you are a recreational user. An ounce seems good.
Magic9
Plant Enthusiast
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/california-marijuana-legalization_us_572a936ae4b096e9f0904dd6
"Supporters of a drive to legalize recreational marijuana for adults in California said on Wednesday they had collected more than enough signatures to qualify the measure for the November ballot, formally launching their campaign to win over voters.
Democratic Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, leading a coalition of supporters that includes billionaire high-tech entrepreneur Sean Parker, said the campaign had gathered some 600,000 petition signatures, well above the 365,880 minimum required.
The signatures must still be officially certified by state election officials, but “you can rest assured this will be on the November ballot,” Newsom told a San Francisco news conference to kick off efforts to build voter support for the initiative.
The initiative, dubbed the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, would allow an individual aged 21 or older to possess and use as much as an ounce of marijuana for private recreational use, and permit personal cultivation of as many as six marijuana plants.
The measure would also establish a system to license, regulate and tax sales of marijuana, while allowing city governments to exercise local control over or disallow commercial distribution within their borders.
Opinion polls show attitudes have shifted more in favor of liberalized marijuana laws since California voters defeated a recreational cannabis initiative in 2010."
California led the way in legalizing marijuana for medical purposes in 1996, with 22 other states and the District of Columbia following suit, although cannabis remains classified as an illegal narcotic under U.S. law.
Voters in four states - Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska - plus the District of Columbia, have gone a step further since 2012 in permitting recreational use for adults.
Opponents of liberalized marijuana laws have argued that such measures carry major public safety risks and would make pot more accessible to youngsters.
But supporters of the California initiative said the measure included a number of provisions aimed at keeping marijuana out of the hands of minors, including a ban on marketing to children, explicit warning labels on cannabis products and safe-packaging restrictions.
They also said hundreds of millions of dollars in state tax revenue from pot sales would be earmarked for substance abuse prevention and treatment, law enforcement and research.
One key organization backing the latest ballot measure is the NAACP civil rights group, which has embraced the argument that current marijuana laws have led to a disproportionate number of minorities being incarcerated for minor drug offenses."
"Supporters of a drive to legalize recreational marijuana for adults in California said on Wednesday they had collected more than enough signatures to qualify the measure for the November ballot, formally launching their campaign to win over voters.
Democratic Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, leading a coalition of supporters that includes billionaire high-tech entrepreneur Sean Parker, said the campaign had gathered some 600,000 petition signatures, well above the 365,880 minimum required.
The signatures must still be officially certified by state election officials, but “you can rest assured this will be on the November ballot,” Newsom told a San Francisco news conference to kick off efforts to build voter support for the initiative.
The initiative, dubbed the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, would allow an individual aged 21 or older to possess and use as much as an ounce of marijuana for private recreational use, and permit personal cultivation of as many as six marijuana plants.
The measure would also establish a system to license, regulate and tax sales of marijuana, while allowing city governments to exercise local control over or disallow commercial distribution within their borders.
Opinion polls show attitudes have shifted more in favor of liberalized marijuana laws since California voters defeated a recreational cannabis initiative in 2010."
California led the way in legalizing marijuana for medical purposes in 1996, with 22 other states and the District of Columbia following suit, although cannabis remains classified as an illegal narcotic under U.S. law.
Voters in four states - Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska - plus the District of Columbia, have gone a step further since 2012 in permitting recreational use for adults.
Opponents of liberalized marijuana laws have argued that such measures carry major public safety risks and would make pot more accessible to youngsters.
But supporters of the California initiative said the measure included a number of provisions aimed at keeping marijuana out of the hands of minors, including a ban on marketing to children, explicit warning labels on cannabis products and safe-packaging restrictions.
They also said hundreds of millions of dollars in state tax revenue from pot sales would be earmarked for substance abuse prevention and treatment, law enforcement and research.
One key organization backing the latest ballot measure is the NAACP civil rights group, which has embraced the argument that current marijuana laws have led to a disproportionate number of minorities being incarcerated for minor drug offenses."
First off, I think you should know that the guy running the NORML blogs is a complete a-hole who send you nasty emails if you criticize the AUMA at all, and deletes any such posts instantly. That's not the NORML I joined in the 70's, and bodes ill for our union, so to speak.
But this illustrates the corporate takeover of the movement; bad "legalization" laws are a real problem, and certainly are nowdays more "over-regulation" than they are "legalization". In CA, the AUMA is a disaster. And, people are mistaken in the claims it will "let you grow your own", when it will really permit local governments to flat out ban outdoor grows, and will permit "reasonable regulation" of your indoor grow (and we all know what THAT will mean - besides, most folks cannot grow indoors for many reasons).
This thing is a huge conglomeration of give-aways of power to storefronts and big farms, as well as litigation-ready employment for cops and lawyers. We can't let the crappy be the enemy of the decent law we know is out there.
The trick seems to be convincing some moneybag like Parker to back something worthwhile, and to convince the "pro pot lobby" to demonstrate a modicum of selectivity with their endorsements. The incremental "is it ANY better than what we have now?" (somewhat subjective, I might add) is threadbare at best, and probably harmful.
We are not beggars. Demographics are shifting fast. We don't need to settle for a crap sandwich.
http://californiacann.org/comp...
http://www.mikedonaldsonlaw.co...
https://www.google.com/url?sa=......
http://reformca.org/.../dear-s...
http://www.thedailychronic.net/2016/52452/marijuana-legalization-2016-is-it-better-than-prohibition/
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
A new BuzzFeed News report highlights some of the hurdles faced in the fight to legalize cannabis in California in November.
Barry Broad, a representative from the California branch of the Teamsters union, tells BuzzFeed that the union was set to oppose legalization in the Golden State because of concerns around how cannabis would be transported and distributed. The Teamsters want it to be handled in much the same tightly regulated way as alcohol is now in California, he added.
The Teamsters union predominantly represents truck drivers and warehouse workers, with around 1.4 million members across the country.
Broad cited logistical concerns with the current proposal, and told BuzzFeed that the union could potentially endorse a legalization proposal if it were restructured. “We could be supportive of an initiative if the regulatory structure was one that we thought appropriate,” he said.
The Teamsters’ opposition joins police and prison guard associations, as well as the California Small Farmers Association, in opposing the legalization proposal and instead donating to John Lovell’s Coalition for Responsible Drug Policies.
So if the truckers get a little piece of the pie, they would be all for it. It comes down to greed.
Barry Broad, a representative from the California branch of the Teamsters union, tells BuzzFeed that the union was set to oppose legalization in the Golden State because of concerns around how cannabis would be transported and distributed. The Teamsters want it to be handled in much the same tightly regulated way as alcohol is now in California, he added.
The Teamsters union predominantly represents truck drivers and warehouse workers, with around 1.4 million members across the country.
Broad cited logistical concerns with the current proposal, and told BuzzFeed that the union could potentially endorse a legalization proposal if it were restructured. “We could be supportive of an initiative if the regulatory structure was one that we thought appropriate,” he said.
The Teamsters’ opposition joins police and prison guard associations, as well as the California Small Farmers Association, in opposing the legalization proposal and instead donating to John Lovell’s Coalition for Responsible Drug Policies.
So if the truckers get a little piece of the pie, they would be all for it. It comes down to greed.
Last edited:
thisperson
Ruler of all things person
Fuck everyone trying to get a bigger piece of the pie, just be happy your members would benefit from Marijuana, Teamster Union.
I remember when I first read of Sean Parker's bill there was a measure that prohibited marijuana be sold at liquor stores, or rather I think it said that marijuana had to be sold at a marijuana only shop. The thoughts I encountered online suggested this was a move to preserve Weedmaps. I didn't see anyone mention it and don't know if it has been removed.
I probably do want weed-only shops, but I also have a dream of seeing weed at a 7-11 in an organically labeled bag for the cheap.
I agree with @Gunky and @CarolKing and @Spook . We should not accept this. It's a crap sandwich.
My biggest fear is it playing out like Carolking said. The recreational being approved only for the medical to be rolled back. I'm a happy medical patient. I grow a few plants outdoor. And buy from local growers when my own supply is low. Dispensaries see me occasionally.
Good thing I'm making the transition to indoor. Sounds like that's protected somewhat. I only have space for three indoor plants, but that's enough for me.
How many signatures does that MCLR bill need to get on the ballot? I think I should collect signatures too. If only I wasn't an avid shut in with anxiety issues when it comes to people. I'll put on my best hat and do that I guess. For weed.
FOR WEED!
I can definitely do the easy part and collect signatures from those around me I've encountered who are weed friendly. All I have to do is convince them. Shouldn't be too hard with this thread as my guidance.
I remember when I first read of Sean Parker's bill there was a measure that prohibited marijuana be sold at liquor stores, or rather I think it said that marijuana had to be sold at a marijuana only shop. The thoughts I encountered online suggested this was a move to preserve Weedmaps. I didn't see anyone mention it and don't know if it has been removed.
I probably do want weed-only shops, but I also have a dream of seeing weed at a 7-11 in an organically labeled bag for the cheap.
I agree with @Gunky and @CarolKing and @Spook . We should not accept this. It's a crap sandwich.
My biggest fear is it playing out like Carolking said. The recreational being approved only for the medical to be rolled back. I'm a happy medical patient. I grow a few plants outdoor. And buy from local growers when my own supply is low. Dispensaries see me occasionally.
Good thing I'm making the transition to indoor. Sounds like that's protected somewhat. I only have space for three indoor plants, but that's enough for me.
How many signatures does that MCLR bill need to get on the ballot? I think I should collect signatures too. If only I wasn't an avid shut in with anxiety issues when it comes to people. I'll put on my best hat and do that I guess. For weed.
FOR WEED!
I can definitely do the easy part and collect signatures from those around me I've encountered who are weed friendly. All I have to do is convince them. Shouldn't be too hard with this thread as my guidance.
Who is saying no to legalization?
A recent report from The Intercept looked at some of the major players trying to stop California's marijuana initiative from going through.
A recent report from The Intercept looked at some of the major players trying to stop California's marijuana initiative from going through.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
Harmful Medical Marijuana Tax Bills Advance In California
Posted by Johnny Green at 9:45 PM on May 31, 2016Marijuana Business News, Medical Marijuana Policy
Marijuana taxes are a two edged sword. On one hand, the tax revenues that the marijuana industry generates (or can generate) are very popular with the public and elected officials. But on the other hand, if taxes are too high, it can really hurt the cannabis consumers that rely on safe access the most. Marijuana can absolutely be taxed too much, and unfortunately that’s exactly how some politicians in California would have it. See the troubling alert that I received below: Two bills that would impose new taxes on medical marijuana patients advanced out of committee on Friday, and will
Read
Posted by Johnny Green at 9:45 PM on May 31, 2016Marijuana Business News, Medical Marijuana Policy
Marijuana taxes are a two edged sword. On one hand, the tax revenues that the marijuana industry generates (or can generate) are very popular with the public and elected officials. But on the other hand, if taxes are too high, it can really hurt the cannabis consumers that rely on safe access the most. Marijuana can absolutely be taxed too much, and unfortunately that’s exactly how some politicians in California would have it. See the troubling alert that I received below: Two bills that would impose new taxes on medical marijuana patients advanced out of committee on Friday, and will
Read
Amoreena
Grown up Flower Child
Thanks. I sent "a message opposing new taxes on sick people" and received a confirmation/no-reply type email from one of the recipients, Assemblymember Sebastian Ridley-Thomas, immediately. The other recipient was Sen. Holly Mitchell.
Can't hurt.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
In WA state there is a 47% tax on recreational cannabis and 37% tax for medical cannabis if you sign into a state registry and have a medical recommendation. Medical patients can grow 6 plants.
Possibly 15 plants if your doctor signs off on that.
Make sure that you medical patients don't get stolen from by the state. Why should medical have anymore than a 10% tax?
I spent a good 2 weeks emailing all the legislative folks in my state. It didn't do any good. The legislature needed to find money and cannabis gave them that. It's the state's cash cow.
Possibly 15 plants if your doctor signs off on that.
Make sure that you medical patients don't get stolen from by the state. Why should medical have anymore than a 10% tax?
I spent a good 2 weeks emailing all the legislative folks in my state. It didn't do any good. The legislature needed to find money and cannabis gave them that. It's the state's cash cow.
Last edited:
Amoreena
Grown up Flower Child
Of course I'd rather not pay a tax in addition to the current donations. In my experience with local MMJ doctors, they don't pay any attention to what you do after as long as you complete the form and pay their fee...think it was $35 for last year's renewal recommendation. I've only seen the actual doctor who signed the letter one time since 2010.
A Marijuana Land Rush Is Underway in Northern California
The Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) would open up the nation's single largest marijuana market, and investors with dollar signs in their eyes are moving fast to snap up rural properties up north, as well as Bay area warehouses and office space.
The Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) would open up the nation's single largest marijuana market, and investors with dollar signs in their eyes are moving fast to snap up rural properties up north, as well as Bay area warehouses and office space.
The way the bill is currently I'm worried that if it passes that things will get worse rather than better for some/many patients. I'm worried that the ailments of some patients will come under more scrutiny when there's a monetary incentive for the state to have more recreational(higher tax paying/tax paying) and less medical(low/no taxes) use. If recreational was taxed with just whatever the sales tax is wherever it is being sold that would be fine, but having absurd taxes on it will just mean only out of state users will ever buy recreational and locals will either get a med card or get their stuff from a med card holding friend. I haven't had time to read all of the bill yet but based on the summary I may be voting no in November having seen what Washington patients have gone through. I'm also concerned that the variety of concentrates and medibles and whatnot on the market will decrease or that prices will increase as less people in the industry are interested in helping people and more become interested in nothing but profit.
thisperson
Ruler of all things person
Scary. 
I think I am voting against AUMA. I don't really like it much at all.
It would be so much better just to simply drop cannabis from classification 100%. No limits, no regulations and no extra taxes. Then people can pick whether they want big money cannabis or high quality medicinal material grown by themselves or by a caretaker.
I don't have a good feeling about this one. People just want it legalized already. The devil is in the details, right?
I think CA has it better than AUMA already as far as medical, no? How many people have been turned down for recommendations in the past ten years?
It would be so much better just to simply drop cannabis from classification 100%. No limits, no regulations and no extra taxes. Then people can pick whether they want big money cannabis or high quality medicinal material grown by themselves or by a caretaker.
I don't have a good feeling about this one. People just want it legalized already. The devil is in the details, right?
I think CA has it better than AUMA already as far as medical, no? How many people have been turned down for recommendations in the past ten years?
turk
turk
...I too am torn....form what I've read (so far) it seems like bullshit....and a opportunity for gavin newsome and his rich friends to "corner" the "market".....this is what we get with dems in charge of everything ....(and there is no other model)....because we have no other "viable" party...,lovely.
And aren't the relevant iniatives that may be on the ballot in November petition driven referendum's that are non-partisan? Either way, isn't the California GOP just entirely opposed to legalization has any GOP legislature even considered legalization anywhere haven't the legislatures in GOP states bordering Colorado mostly been the state's trying to fight legalization in CO? Like I'm all for blaming Gavin Newsom and the California democratic party when he and/or they fuck up but isn't this something that's not really on him or them at all due to how our initiative process can be completely driven by independent citizens with a lot of hard work and a bit of money, or less hard work and a lot of money. Anway not trying to argue here. Just it's my understanding that these fucked up initiatives dont belong to a particular party and that the GOP would get rid of our medical program if they could.
looney2nz
Research Geek, Mad Scientist
argh
Bad 36 hours, fibro flare on top of the rest of it
so I need to get a handle on all of this, see who's abandoned earlier efforts and jumped to AUMA, etc.
From earlier reads I liked things in the ones that seem to have already lost.
Have had an earful of how badly WA screwed medical patients from a friend up there prior to my arrival here, and Carol just emphasizes how important this is. We don't want CA to screw patients, they opened the door for the recreational crowd (and that's fine), but they should never EVER be shoved to the side.
The majority of the patients I know here are SERIOUSLY ill and have lost pretty much everything to medical bills. They are the LAST people who can afford a giant ass new tax JUST for them
Everyone has an agenda it would appear... I just want patients to have easy affordable access to _safe_ medicine... other folks are trying to protect their territory or carve out NEW territory.
There are patients that need large amounts of cannabis to produce their medicine (regardless of the process), so arbitrary limits don't thrill me... the doctor should be able to say the range for the patient.
More importantly, on a federal level, if they do change the Schedule on the CSA, then all federal law should immediately change and NO one should be banned from HUD housing (section 8) or using the medicine that works for them (have a friend they are killing with opiates), Veterans should have unfettered access, and it should have some teeth in it to keep private heath insurance (Kaiser, I'm lookin' at you) from banning cannabis as medicine (which they currently do, they will kick you out of their program last I looked!).
Bad 36 hours, fibro flare on top of the rest of it
so I need to get a handle on all of this, see who's abandoned earlier efforts and jumped to AUMA, etc.
From earlier reads I liked things in the ones that seem to have already lost.
Have had an earful of how badly WA screwed medical patients from a friend up there prior to my arrival here, and Carol just emphasizes how important this is. We don't want CA to screw patients, they opened the door for the recreational crowd (and that's fine), but they should never EVER be shoved to the side.
The majority of the patients I know here are SERIOUSLY ill and have lost pretty much everything to medical bills. They are the LAST people who can afford a giant ass new tax JUST for them
Everyone has an agenda it would appear... I just want patients to have easy affordable access to _safe_ medicine... other folks are trying to protect their territory or carve out NEW territory.
There are patients that need large amounts of cannabis to produce their medicine (regardless of the process), so arbitrary limits don't thrill me... the doctor should be able to say the range for the patient.
More importantly, on a federal level, if they do change the Schedule on the CSA, then all federal law should immediately change and NO one should be banned from HUD housing (section 8) or using the medicine that works for them (have a friend they are killing with opiates), Veterans should have unfettered access, and it should have some teeth in it to keep private heath insurance (Kaiser, I'm lookin' at you) from banning cannabis as medicine (which they currently do, they will kick you out of their program last I looked!).
July 4-20: California Could Make Billions on Legal Marijuana
If state voters approve the California Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Initiative, which qualified for the state November ballot on June 28, the total California market for legal cannabis could reach $6.6 billion by 2018, according to the fourth edition of the “State of Legal Marijuana Markets” report compiled by New Frontier and ArcView Market Research.
.....California would generate about $1 billion in taxes that state politicians could spend on a discretionary basis.
If state voters approve the California Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Initiative, which qualified for the state November ballot on June 28, the total California market for legal cannabis could reach $6.6 billion by 2018, according to the fourth edition of the “State of Legal Marijuana Markets” report compiled by New Frontier and ArcView Market Research.
.....California would generate about $1 billion in taxes that state politicians could spend on a discretionary basis.
lwien
Well-Known Member
Could help to rebuild our infrastructure, schools, etc etc. Help fund housing for our vets, care for our mentally ill, education for our disadvantaged, etc etc. This would be a good thing if the money was spent on things such as these. While the bill may not be ideal for us users, it could very help many others and for that, I'd be all for it.
It wasn't that long ago that our state was on the verge of bankruptcy but not anymore. We're doing quite well now actually other than the fucking drought.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
- Placer County Strong-Armed into Banning Commercial Cannabis Cultivation
June 27 - Placer County, which had been leading the way among rural counties in codifying the new state MMRSA medical marijuana law at the local level, voted last week to restrict cannabis cultivation in its unincorporated areas to 6 plants or 50 square feet (whichever is less), grown indoors.
- Police Task Forces Target California Concentrate Makers
June 16 - Yesterday’s multi-agency raids on Sonoma County cannabis concentrate manufacturers Care by Design and AbsolutExtracts may be part of a pattern targeting such businesses in California.
- Local elections bring mixed returns for marijuana advocates
June 8 - Advocates of liberalized medical marijuana rules fared poorly in local elections last night. The one bright spot was Nevada County, where voters rejected a proposed ban on outdoor cultivation of medical marijuana, Measure W by 58%.