There was an interesting paradox in the news about the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) this week. As Arizoneout reported in a June 7, 2012 post, Tuesday, August 7, 2012 was the day the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) conducted a lottery to determine who would get the chance to open dispensaries in areas where there were multiple qualified applicants.
The Arizona Republic ran a piece on August 7 under the headline, "Big day for medical pot," featuring a photo of a 30-year-old Qualified Patient (QP), Scott, hanging long stems of cannabis on a line like laundry. Scott and his girlfriend, Jody, 44, also a QP, invested $5,000 to turn a spare bedroom of their "nondescript, tan stucco home in a booming Maricopa neighborhood" into a grow-room for marijuana.
Scott and Jody smoke marijuana throughout the day to ease chronic pain caused by vehicle and other accidents. Scott apparently is employed as an ironworker. (Sounds safety-sensitive, donʼt you think?) He and Jody were complaining to the Republic that the opening of dispensaries would be a financial hardship to them, because then they would lose their cultivation privileges when they next renewed their QP ID cards.
Thatʼs because the AMMA was designed to restrict dispersed urban cultivation of the kind that is going on all over Phoenix, Tempe, Scottsdale, Tucson, Flagstaff, and Prescott today. The drafters of the AMMA crafted it so that QPs who live within 25 miles of a dispensary must buy their pot from a dispensary. The folks who put the AMMA on the ballot thought it was better to have the cultivation and sale of marijuana tightly controlled and strictly regulated.
Governor Jan Brewer and Attorney General Tom Horne delayed the implementation of the dispensaries envisioned by the act for a year by suing on the eve of the original "go" date, and ultimately had their lawsuit dismissed. On Monday, August 6, 2012, the eve of the dispensary lottery, Horne issued a formal "Attorney Generalʼs Opinion," declaring that the AMMA provisions authorizing dispensaries were preempted by federal law. The other parts of the AMMA, such as those giving QPs and their caregivers the right to possess and use marijuana and making it a violation of Arizona law for employers to hold that against them, are not preempted, however, according to Horneʼs formal opinion.
The dispensary lottery went forward as scheduled, with AG Horneʼs blessing, because having a dispensary registration certificate is not state permission to open and start selling pot. There are other steps that have to be completed, including a state inspection, and dispensaries must have an operating certificate to open.
So now there are 68 folks who are the proud holders of dispensary certificates, thanks to the bounce of the bingo ball. Another 29 have certificates because they were the only qualified applicants in the areas. (Two areas have would-be dispensaries, but the issue is tied up in litigation. Naturally.)
ADHS Director Will Humble at one point was predicting there could be dispensaries open by September. But who knows now how long the legal wrangling will block them. Horne ended his press release about the formal legal opinion by advising dispensary certificate holders "that it would be prudent to delay additional work and expenditures pending resolution of the preemption issue by a court."
So once again the stateʼs top lawyer has moved to block the full implementation of the AMMA and put the dispensaries in limbo. And all the while, ADHS will continue to license QPs, and they will be working for you and buying from criminal drug dealers or growing their own in homes scattered across the state. Because Horne thinks thatʼs better?
Showing posts with label breaking news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label breaking news. Show all posts
Friday, August 10, 2012
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Federal Judge Won't Give State Guidance on AMMA
The federal lawsuit that Governor Jan Brewer filed in May 2011 at the same time she stopped full implementation of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) was tossed out yesterday. But don’t expect the state to start licensing medical marijuana dispensaries any time soon.
Arizoneout has reported from time to time on the political and legal maneuvers that have created a worst-case scenario in which thousands of Arizonans have a state permit to use marijuana for medical purposes, but no legal way to obtain it other than growing their own.
At the same time she sued, Governor Brewer halted the dispensary licensing process. The gist of the State’s claim was that state workers implementing the dispensaries could be in jeopardy of federal prosecution, because marijuana is illegal for all purposes under federal law. Governor Brewer tried to stay neutral, asking the federal court to decide whether the AMMA and federal law could co-exist.
In an ironic twist, the AMMA case landed before U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, the same judge who struck down provisions of S.B. 1070, Arizona’s controversial immigration law, ruling that it was pre-empted by federal law. The S.B. 1070 case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court.
At a hearing last month, Judge Bolton told the State that it could not sit on the fence but would have to take a position in the lawsuit on whether federal law trumped the AMMA. A few days later, the State filed a notice that it would be amending the suit by January 9, 2012, and asked Judge Bolton to wait until then to rule on the various pending motions to throw out the case.
The State’s court papers did not indicate what position Governor Brewer would be taking, but her spokesman reportedly said that Arizona would argue that federal law trumped the dispensary provisions of the AMMA.
Many commentators have skewered Governor Brewer for what they perceive as hypocrisy in the different positions she has taken on the two laws. A good recent example is E.J. Montini’s New Year’s Day column in the Arizona Republic.
Judge Bolton did not wait for the State’s promised filing, finding that the “scant detail” in the State’s notice was insufficient. She gave the State until February 3, 2012 to file an amended lawsuit, but signaled that she doubted there was any basis to “substantiate a credible, specific warning or threat to initiate criminal proceedings against state employees in Arizona if they were to enforce the AMMA.”
Governor Brewer’s spokesman told the Republic yesterday that she was consulting with Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne on whether to appeal. Arizoneout is predicting the state officials will decide to appeal, and that the AMMA’s dispensary licensing program will remain in limbo for many more months.
Arizoneout has reported from time to time on the political and legal maneuvers that have created a worst-case scenario in which thousands of Arizonans have a state permit to use marijuana for medical purposes, but no legal way to obtain it other than growing their own.
At the same time she sued, Governor Brewer halted the dispensary licensing process. The gist of the State’s claim was that state workers implementing the dispensaries could be in jeopardy of federal prosecution, because marijuana is illegal for all purposes under federal law. Governor Brewer tried to stay neutral, asking the federal court to decide whether the AMMA and federal law could co-exist.
In an ironic twist, the AMMA case landed before U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, the same judge who struck down provisions of S.B. 1070, Arizona’s controversial immigration law, ruling that it was pre-empted by federal law. The S.B. 1070 case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court.
At a hearing last month, Judge Bolton told the State that it could not sit on the fence but would have to take a position in the lawsuit on whether federal law trumped the AMMA. A few days later, the State filed a notice that it would be amending the suit by January 9, 2012, and asked Judge Bolton to wait until then to rule on the various pending motions to throw out the case.
The State’s court papers did not indicate what position Governor Brewer would be taking, but her spokesman reportedly said that Arizona would argue that federal law trumped the dispensary provisions of the AMMA.
Many commentators have skewered Governor Brewer for what they perceive as hypocrisy in the different positions she has taken on the two laws. A good recent example is E.J. Montini’s New Year’s Day column in the Arizona Republic.
Judge Bolton did not wait for the State’s promised filing, finding that the “scant detail” in the State’s notice was insufficient. She gave the State until February 3, 2012 to file an amended lawsuit, but signaled that she doubted there was any basis to “substantiate a credible, specific warning or threat to initiate criminal proceedings against state employees in Arizona if they were to enforce the AMMA.”
Governor Brewer’s spokesman told the Republic yesterday that she was consulting with Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne on whether to appeal. Arizoneout is predicting the state officials will decide to appeal, and that the AMMA’s dispensary licensing program will remain in limbo for many more months.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
AMMA After A Year -- Just As Confusing As Last Year
As November 3, 2010 dawned, the electoral fate of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) was officially too close to call. The "No" side on Proposition 203, the voter initiative that made the AMMA law, held a 6,000-vote lead. More than a week later, when all the votes were counted, the "Yes" side led by fewer than 5,000 votes.
By November 29, just 27 days after the last vote was cast, the Prop 203 victory was certified as official. Marijuana would be legal for medical purposes in the state.
Upon the anniversary of the AMMA's passage, the AMMA's fate is just as much up in the air, and it does not appear that a resolution will come anywhere nearly as quickly as the 27 days it took to tally the vote with finality.
In the October 27, 2011 issue of the monthly Phoenix New Times, Ray Stern offers a fine summary of the recent federal attacks on the medical marijuana industry in an article titled, "Obama's War on Weed: In a strange about-face, the President tries to hack medical marijuana off at the knees." As this post was written, it was the most popular story on the Phoenix New Times website.
Phoenix New Times sells ads to the medical marijuana industry, and discloses that fact in the article. It is a Village Voice publication, and its perspective is decidedly liberal. The article's take on the politics -- partisan and not -- rolled up in the medical marijuana debate makes it an entertaining read no matter your political stripe.
By November 29, just 27 days after the last vote was cast, the Prop 203 victory was certified as official. Marijuana would be legal for medical purposes in the state.
Upon the anniversary of the AMMA's passage, the AMMA's fate is just as much up in the air, and it does not appear that a resolution will come anywhere nearly as quickly as the 27 days it took to tally the vote with finality.
In the October 27, 2011 issue of the monthly Phoenix New Times, Ray Stern offers a fine summary of the recent federal attacks on the medical marijuana industry in an article titled, "Obama's War on Weed: In a strange about-face, the President tries to hack medical marijuana off at the knees." As this post was written, it was the most popular story on the Phoenix New Times website.
Phoenix New Times sells ads to the medical marijuana industry, and discloses that fact in the article. It is a Village Voice publication, and its perspective is decidedly liberal. The article's take on the politics -- partisan and not -- rolled up in the medical marijuana debate makes it an entertaining read no matter your political stripe.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Two Sides Of Prop 203 Debate Hold Diametrically Opposed Views On Future Of AMMA
The Arizona Republic published an interesting point-counterpoint on Sunday about the half-way implementation of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA). In Q and A format, the Republic polled two of the leaders of the groups that supported and opposed Proposition 203 in the run up to the November 2010 election.
Representing the victorious Arizona Medical Marijuana Association was Joe Yuhas. For its victory, his Association finds itself a defendant in the federal lawsuit that Governor Jan Brewer filed in April that brought a halt to implementing the dispensary system that is an integral part of the AMMA.
On behalf of the losing political action group in the Prop. 203 fight, Keep AZ Drug Free, was Carolyn Short.
On this Q, their respective answers definitely showed their political stripes:
Q. Will Arizonans ever see full implementation of Prop. 203?
Yuhas' A: Yes. . . . The pace of it is debatable.
Short's A: Not a chance. Pretty much everybody thinks that.
Yuhas' message is one that Arizoneout has delivered a few times. The current situation is the worst of all worlds. In Yuhas' words, "At some point the piecemeal implementation of Prop. 203 is going to be recognized as adverse to the overall interest of patients and the community."
Most of the 13,000-plus Arizonans who have been granted a state license to use marijuana to treat a debilitating medical condition or symptom also have been granted permission to grow their own. The AMMA would permit 126 dispensaries, which would be required to have security, inventory control, and otherwise be subject to state monitoring.
According to Yuhas: "Arizonans would prefer to have a dispensary in their community that's regulated than to have an unlimited number of people growing it themselves."
Short does not argue to the contrary. Instead, she sees medical marijuana as a ruse that uses physicians and sick people to facilitate recreational use. "If people want to have marijuana in this country for recreational use, then they're going to have to change federal law. And I don't think that's going to happen," she says.
Short may want to be a little less certain of the future of federal legislation. On October 17, 2011, the Gallup organization announced that according to its annual data, 50% of Americans now say that the use of marijuana should be made legal.
Gallup has asked the question every year since 1969, when the polling was 84% against legalization. The trend in favor of legalization has picked up speed over the years, hitting 30% in 2000, and 40 percent in 2009. In 2010, Gallup's data showed 46 percent of Americans favored legalization.
Another Gallup survey in 2010 found that fully 70 percent of Americans support the medical use of marijuana if recommended by a doctor.
What that says to Arizoneout is that legal medical marijuana is here to stay in workplaces all around the state. The dispensary skirmish is likely to play out for months or years, but Arizona employers need to come to grips now with the fact that legal marijuana users exist in their current or future workforce, and they are not going anywhere.
Representing the victorious Arizona Medical Marijuana Association was Joe Yuhas. For its victory, his Association finds itself a defendant in the federal lawsuit that Governor Jan Brewer filed in April that brought a halt to implementing the dispensary system that is an integral part of the AMMA.
On behalf of the losing political action group in the Prop. 203 fight, Keep AZ Drug Free, was Carolyn Short.
On this Q, their respective answers definitely showed their political stripes:
Q. Will Arizonans ever see full implementation of Prop. 203?
Yuhas' A: Yes. . . . The pace of it is debatable.
Short's A: Not a chance. Pretty much everybody thinks that.
Yuhas' message is one that Arizoneout has delivered a few times. The current situation is the worst of all worlds. In Yuhas' words, "At some point the piecemeal implementation of Prop. 203 is going to be recognized as adverse to the overall interest of patients and the community."
Most of the 13,000-plus Arizonans who have been granted a state license to use marijuana to treat a debilitating medical condition or symptom also have been granted permission to grow their own. The AMMA would permit 126 dispensaries, which would be required to have security, inventory control, and otherwise be subject to state monitoring.
According to Yuhas: "Arizonans would prefer to have a dispensary in their community that's regulated than to have an unlimited number of people growing it themselves."
Short does not argue to the contrary. Instead, she sees medical marijuana as a ruse that uses physicians and sick people to facilitate recreational use. "If people want to have marijuana in this country for recreational use, then they're going to have to change federal law. And I don't think that's going to happen," she says.
Short may want to be a little less certain of the future of federal legislation. On October 17, 2011, the Gallup organization announced that according to its annual data, 50% of Americans now say that the use of marijuana should be made legal.
Gallup has asked the question every year since 1969, when the polling was 84% against legalization. The trend in favor of legalization has picked up speed over the years, hitting 30% in 2000, and 40 percent in 2009. In 2010, Gallup's data showed 46 percent of Americans favored legalization.
Another Gallup survey in 2010 found that fully 70 percent of Americans support the medical use of marijuana if recommended by a doctor.
What that says to Arizoneout is that legal medical marijuana is here to stay in workplaces all around the state. The dispensary skirmish is likely to play out for months or years, but Arizona employers need to come to grips now with the fact that legal marijuana users exist in their current or future workforce, and they are not going anywhere.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Arizona Republic Editorial Writer Advocates Legalization Of Marijuana
Linda Valdez, an editorial writer for the Arizona Republic, has drawn an interesting conclusion from watching Ken Burns' latest miniseries on Prohibition, which is now showing on PBS affiliate stations.
In a short item on Friday, under the headline "Learn from that disaster Prohibition," she starts with the assertion that medical marijuana is a sham. Then she concludes with the question, "Why don't we legalize and tax marijuana?"
Don't expect the entire editorial board of the Republic to join in that opinion anytime soon. Still, it is surprising to find that position expressed on the Republic's usually very conservative editorial pages
In a short item on Friday, under the headline "Learn from that disaster Prohibition," she starts with the assertion that medical marijuana is a sham. Then she concludes with the question, "Why don't we legalize and tax marijuana?"
Don't expect the entire editorial board of the Republic to join in that opinion anytime soon. Still, it is surprising to find that position expressed on the Republic's usually very conservative editorial pages
Monday, October 10, 2011
California Federal Prosecutors Taking Aim At Pot Business, Scattershot In Approach
What was always an uneasy truce between federal drug enforcement authorities and the thriving medical marijuana industry in the 16 states that have some version of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) now appears completely shattered.
The U.S. Attorneys for the four California federal districts held a joint press conference in Sacramento on October 6, 2011 to announce a crackdown on the state's medical marijuana industry, which the prosecutors claim has corrupted the intent of the 1996 compassionate use voter referendum, the first such law in the nation.
The prosecutors are using a variety of tactics. In Orange County, prosecutors have brought a criminal indictment against a strip mall operator who leased 11 suites to marijuana stores. In Sacramento, prosecutors have filed criminal charges against operators of a large-scale dispensary that allegedly took in $30,000 to $50,000 a day from marijuana sales and had nearly $600,000 and more than 250 pounds of pot on hand.
Also indicted was a Los Angeles attorney who allegedly has pocketed millions of dollars by organizing growing schemes for marijuana dispensaries. The attorney formed a management company and hired two prize-winning tomato growers to convert their greenhouses to cultivating thousands of marijuana plants.
Federal prosecutors around the state also have sent letters to landlords of major dispensaries and cultivators, ordering them to evict their tenants within 45 days or face 40 years in prison, forfeiture of the property, and any rents paid. A recent Bloomberg.com report quotes a San Francisco woman who claims to be the first dispensary operator in the United States describing the letter her landlord received as "very ominous."
The top federal prosecutor for Los Angeles, Andre Birotte, stated at the press confernce that the California law did not permit the types of businesses the feds were targeting. "While California law permits collective cultivation of marijuana in limited circumstances, it does not allow commercial distribution through the store-front model we see across California,” he said.
One big difference between the Arizona and California laws is that the AMMA expressly permits and regulates non-profit dispensaries and cultivation sites. Of course, those are not yet up and running because of litigation Governor Jan Brewer filed back in June.
Arizona citizens are left to wonder whether the higher degree of state regulation would make a difference to federal prosecutors here. That likely would depend on whether Arizona's detailed regulatory scheme achieves its aim of keeping the focus on medical use, as opposed to recreational use. But with the AMMA only partly implemented, the efficacy of that scheme has yet to get a fair test.
The U.S. Attorneys for the four California federal districts held a joint press conference in Sacramento on October 6, 2011 to announce a crackdown on the state's medical marijuana industry, which the prosecutors claim has corrupted the intent of the 1996 compassionate use voter referendum, the first such law in the nation.
The prosecutors are using a variety of tactics. In Orange County, prosecutors have brought a criminal indictment against a strip mall operator who leased 11 suites to marijuana stores. In Sacramento, prosecutors have filed criminal charges against operators of a large-scale dispensary that allegedly took in $30,000 to $50,000 a day from marijuana sales and had nearly $600,000 and more than 250 pounds of pot on hand.
Also indicted was a Los Angeles attorney who allegedly has pocketed millions of dollars by organizing growing schemes for marijuana dispensaries. The attorney formed a management company and hired two prize-winning tomato growers to convert their greenhouses to cultivating thousands of marijuana plants.
Federal prosecutors around the state also have sent letters to landlords of major dispensaries and cultivators, ordering them to evict their tenants within 45 days or face 40 years in prison, forfeiture of the property, and any rents paid. A recent Bloomberg.com report quotes a San Francisco woman who claims to be the first dispensary operator in the United States describing the letter her landlord received as "very ominous."
The top federal prosecutor for Los Angeles, Andre Birotte, stated at the press confernce that the California law did not permit the types of businesses the feds were targeting. "While California law permits collective cultivation of marijuana in limited circumstances, it does not allow commercial distribution through the store-front model we see across California,” he said.
One big difference between the Arizona and California laws is that the AMMA expressly permits and regulates non-profit dispensaries and cultivation sites. Of course, those are not yet up and running because of litigation Governor Jan Brewer filed back in June.
Arizona citizens are left to wonder whether the higher degree of state regulation would make a difference to federal prosecutors here. That likely would depend on whether Arizona's detailed regulatory scheme achieves its aim of keeping the focus on medical use, as opposed to recreational use. But with the AMMA only partly implemented, the efficacy of that scheme has yet to get a fair test.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Feds Open Another Front In Conflict With State Medical Marijuana Law
The Internal Revenue Service has joined the fray in the ongoing conflict between state compassionate use laws, such as the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA), and federal law classifying marijuana as an illegal drug for all purposes. The ruling invokes a little-known provision of the tax code, enacted at the height of the Reagan Administration War on Drugs to target drug kingpins.
The provision bans any tax deductions related to trafficking in controlled substances. The IRS applied the provision to disallow deductions for such ordinary business expenses as employee wages and rents taken by a not-for-profit California marijuana dispensary. The effect of disallowing the deductions means that the dispensary owed federal taxes on its gross profits.
Arizoneout commends readers to a very interesting report on the ruling posted yesterday on the Bottom Line business blog on msnbc.com. The msnbc.com report contains an interview with the dispensary operator, who says he could not continue in business if the ruling stands. He says he will appeal.
What Arizona employers should take away from the ruling is that it makes it even less likely that the dispensaries permitted by the AMMA will ever get off the ground. That part of the law is stalled now because of a lawusuit filed by the state. But that doesn't mean employees won't be using medical marijuana. Instead, the current situation is likely to continue indefinitely, when most Qualified Patients (QPs) and their Designated Caregivers (DCs) are forced to grow their own.
The provision bans any tax deductions related to trafficking in controlled substances. The IRS applied the provision to disallow deductions for such ordinary business expenses as employee wages and rents taken by a not-for-profit California marijuana dispensary. The effect of disallowing the deductions means that the dispensary owed federal taxes on its gross profits.
Arizoneout commends readers to a very interesting report on the ruling posted yesterday on the Bottom Line business blog on msnbc.com. The msnbc.com report contains an interview with the dispensary operator, who says he could not continue in business if the ruling stands. He says he will appeal.
What Arizona employers should take away from the ruling is that it makes it even less likely that the dispensaries permitted by the AMMA will ever get off the ground. That part of the law is stalled now because of a lawusuit filed by the state. But that doesn't mean employees won't be using medical marijuana. Instead, the current situation is likely to continue indefinitely, when most Qualified Patients (QPs) and their Designated Caregivers (DCs) are forced to grow their own.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Adult Entertainment Event Taints Medical Focus Of AMMA
I have deliberated for a couple of weeks whether even to mention this upcoming event. It came to my attention when my husband brought home a slick postcard from a stack that was set out at a neighborhood diner. The promo certainly caught my eye, featuring several logos incorporating a cannabis leaf and silhouettes of shapely women in exotic dancer poses, the largest of which is wearing a green, cannabis leaf string bikini.
Because I believe that employer concern about medical marijuana is fueled by its frequent connection to the adult entertainment world, I decided it was worth mentioning, although I will try not to say so much that I will be promoting the event.
It is billed as a "girl contest" and medical marijuana expo, and promoted by an organization with the title Campaign Against Marijuana Prohibition in Arizona. The Arizona Corporation Commission does not list that as a registered state entity, although there is an expired fictitious name registration for its acronym, CAMP 420, the number being a drug culture reference to the time (4:20 p.m.) when cognoscenti gather at a designated location to smoke pot.
The event will be held next Saturday at an outdoor entertainment venue in north Tempe, AZ, 910 Live, which opened in March 2010. The party and concert venue's opening was noted in the Arizona Republic, and its operator stressed that it was not a strip club.
It is billed as a "classy, fun, adult event," which will focus on the Arizona medical marijuana "industry, its patients and its advocates." In addition to the "girl contest," the expo supposedly will have music, vendors, beauty and fashion, and bills itself as a fundraiser for CAMP 420's mission to educate and make a change to current legislation. What change to the newly effective Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) that might be cannot be discerned from the postcard or the organization's website.
Arizoneout's view, for what it's worth, is that medical marijuana patients and their advocates hurt their cause when they connect themselves with adult entertainment activities that are far removed from the compassion toward those suffering debilitating medical conditions that likely prompted Arizona voters to adopt the AMMA in the first place.
Because I believe that employer concern about medical marijuana is fueled by its frequent connection to the adult entertainment world, I decided it was worth mentioning, although I will try not to say so much that I will be promoting the event.
It is billed as a "girl contest" and medical marijuana expo, and promoted by an organization with the title Campaign Against Marijuana Prohibition in Arizona. The Arizona Corporation Commission does not list that as a registered state entity, although there is an expired fictitious name registration for its acronym, CAMP 420, the number being a drug culture reference to the time (4:20 p.m.) when cognoscenti gather at a designated location to smoke pot.
The event will be held next Saturday at an outdoor entertainment venue in north Tempe, AZ, 910 Live, which opened in March 2010. The party and concert venue's opening was noted in the Arizona Republic, and its operator stressed that it was not a strip club.
It is billed as a "classy, fun, adult event," which will focus on the Arizona medical marijuana "industry, its patients and its advocates." In addition to the "girl contest," the expo supposedly will have music, vendors, beauty and fashion, and bills itself as a fundraiser for CAMP 420's mission to educate and make a change to current legislation. What change to the newly effective Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) that might be cannot be discerned from the postcard or the organization's website.
Arizoneout's view, for what it's worth, is that medical marijuana patients and their advocates hurt their cause when they connect themselves with adult entertainment activities that are far removed from the compassion toward those suffering debilitating medical conditions that likely prompted Arizona voters to adopt the AMMA in the first place.
Monday, September 19, 2011
A Good Reminder Of The Many Other Legal, But Problematic Drugs In Arizona Workplaces
The lead story on the Arizona Republic Business section on Sunday was headlined "Prolific prescribers face scrutiny as market is flooded with pain pills." While Arizoneout is focused on the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) and its impact on the workplace, the article was a good reminder that employers also must deal with impairing prescription drugs, which are a much larger relative problem than medical marijuana, at least for the time being.
The art accompanying the article showed a PEZ dispenser with the head of a doctor, with stethoscope and headlamp, dispensing pain pills. The article was focused primarily on the actions taken against two physician dispensers of addictive pain medication. One of those physicians accounted for nearly $1 million in prescriptions for narcotics in 2008 and 2009 that were paid for by the state's Medicaid program.
The article also had some statistical data that employers should keep in mind. Arizona pharmacies dispensed enough oxycodone last year to supply an individual for 26 million days. Stated another way, there was enough oxycodone dispensed to supply every adult in the state for 5.2 days.
The most commonly prescribed narcotics in Arizona after oxycodone were hydrocodone (24.8 million days supply), Ambien (24.1 million days supply), and Xanax (17.3 million days supply).
People taking these drugs are in Arizona workplaces. They have prescriptions for the drugs.
The Drug Testing of Employees Act, and particularly the new provisions just adopted by the legislature in response to the AMMA, offer employers some reasonably good tools for dealing with the impairing effects of all legal drugs. If the controversial nature of the AMMA causes employers to examine what kind of drug testing program is best suited to their unique workplace issues, and if that examination causes employers to adopt and tailor their drug testing polices carefully, then that's one good thing the AMMA has done for employers in the state.
The art accompanying the article showed a PEZ dispenser with the head of a doctor, with stethoscope and headlamp, dispensing pain pills. The article was focused primarily on the actions taken against two physician dispensers of addictive pain medication. One of those physicians accounted for nearly $1 million in prescriptions for narcotics in 2008 and 2009 that were paid for by the state's Medicaid program.
The article also had some statistical data that employers should keep in mind. Arizona pharmacies dispensed enough oxycodone last year to supply an individual for 26 million days. Stated another way, there was enough oxycodone dispensed to supply every adult in the state for 5.2 days.
The most commonly prescribed narcotics in Arizona after oxycodone were hydrocodone (24.8 million days supply), Ambien (24.1 million days supply), and Xanax (17.3 million days supply).
People taking these drugs are in Arizona workplaces. They have prescriptions for the drugs.
The Drug Testing of Employees Act, and particularly the new provisions just adopted by the legislature in response to the AMMA, offer employers some reasonably good tools for dealing with the impairing effects of all legal drugs. If the controversial nature of the AMMA causes employers to examine what kind of drug testing program is best suited to their unique workplace issues, and if that examination causes employers to adopt and tailor their drug testing polices carefully, then that's one good thing the AMMA has done for employers in the state.
Friday, August 5, 2011
Ads for Pot Docs Proliferate
I am a fan of Phoenix New Times. The alternative weekly has some hard-hitting reporting and covers stories that the mainstream local media sometimes ignores or gives superficial coverage. So it is no criticism of the editorial content of that publication when I say I turned to its ad pages to see how Arizona physicians were handling their responsibilities under the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA).
A couple of recent issues had two full pages of ads for medical marijuana related products and services. Most of those ads promoted medical marijuana evaluations. The going rate seems to be about $100 for certifications.
The ads feature clever phrases such as "Get Legal Now," and "Chronic pain qualifies you!"
Other ads feature smiling, attractive and predominantly female health care providers in white lab coats with stethoscopes draped around their necks. The ads assure that services are "100% Privacy Guaranteed!!!" There's even one ad offering a "compassionate special" -- refer five people and the renewal is 50% off.
Arizona employers need to know that it does not appear difficult for workers who want a medical marijuana ID card to find a doctor who will certify their need for one.
A couple of recent issues had two full pages of ads for medical marijuana related products and services. Most of those ads promoted medical marijuana evaluations. The going rate seems to be about $100 for certifications.
The ads feature clever phrases such as "Get Legal Now," and "Chronic pain qualifies you!"
Other ads feature smiling, attractive and predominantly female health care providers in white lab coats with stethoscopes draped around their necks. The ads assure that services are "100% Privacy Guaranteed!!!" There's even one ad offering a "compassionate special" -- refer five people and the renewal is 50% off.
Arizona employers need to know that it does not appear difficult for workers who want a medical marijuana ID card to find a doctor who will certify their need for one.
Monday, August 1, 2011
New York Times Endorses State Trend Toward Legal Medical Pot
On July 26, 2011, the Gray Lady herself, the New York Times, urged New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to champion a sensible and humane system for the medical use of marijuana by New York citizens. This is a sharply different direction from that of the Obama Administration, as we reported in a July 21, 2011 post.
The editorial in what many regard as America's "newspaper of record" was prompted by the announcement from the Republican Governor of New Jersey and conservative darling, Chris Christie, that he was allowing that state's medical marijuana program to proceed.
New Jersey was the 14th state to legalize medical marijuana, by legislative action signed into law by former Democratic Governor John Corzine on his last day in office. Governor Christie's position during the campaign was that he would not have signed the law into effect.
New Jersey's law is one of the nation's strictest, in part because of the narrow scope of qualifying medical conditions and in part because of the regulations issued after Governor Christie took over. New Jersey also does not have the employment protections that the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act contains.
The state was moving forward with a system in which marijuana would be available to people licensed to use it only at six treatment centers throughout the state when the flurry of letters from federal prosecutors hit. It was that flurry of letters that sent Arizona and our Governor Jan Brewer to federal court that caused Governor Christie to put New Jersey's program on hold and seek specific written guidance from the U.S. Department of Justice earlier this year.
Governor Christie never got his federal guidance. Nevertheless, he decided to move forward based on his own informed judgment from seven years as a federal prosecutor. He said: "I don’t believe the United States Attorney’s Office in New Jersey, given the narrow and medically based nature of our program will expend what are significantly lessening federal law enforcement resources in the context of the federal budget, on going after dispensaries in New Jersey, our Department of Health or other state workers who are helping to implement this program."
The New York Times wants Democratic Governor Cuomo to follow Governor Christie's lead. Governor Cuomo is on record against medical marijuana but is now reviewing the issue. He should change his mind, according to the Gray Lady, because "there is no good reason to deprive patients with cancer or H.I.V. or Lou Gehrig's disease of the relief from pain or extreme nausea that could come from using marijuana."
The editorial in what many regard as America's "newspaper of record" was prompted by the announcement from the Republican Governor of New Jersey and conservative darling, Chris Christie, that he was allowing that state's medical marijuana program to proceed.
New Jersey was the 14th state to legalize medical marijuana, by legislative action signed into law by former Democratic Governor John Corzine on his last day in office. Governor Christie's position during the campaign was that he would not have signed the law into effect.
New Jersey's law is one of the nation's strictest, in part because of the narrow scope of qualifying medical conditions and in part because of the regulations issued after Governor Christie took over. New Jersey also does not have the employment protections that the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act contains.
The state was moving forward with a system in which marijuana would be available to people licensed to use it only at six treatment centers throughout the state when the flurry of letters from federal prosecutors hit. It was that flurry of letters that sent Arizona and our Governor Jan Brewer to federal court that caused Governor Christie to put New Jersey's program on hold and seek specific written guidance from the U.S. Department of Justice earlier this year.
Governor Christie never got his federal guidance. Nevertheless, he decided to move forward based on his own informed judgment from seven years as a federal prosecutor. He said: "I don’t believe the United States Attorney’s Office in New Jersey, given the narrow and medically based nature of our program will expend what are significantly lessening federal law enforcement resources in the context of the federal budget, on going after dispensaries in New Jersey, our Department of Health or other state workers who are helping to implement this program."
The New York Times wants Democratic Governor Cuomo to follow Governor Christie's lead. Governor Cuomo is on record against medical marijuana but is now reviewing the issue. He should change his mind, according to the Gray Lady, because "there is no good reason to deprive patients with cancer or H.I.V. or Lou Gehrig's disease of the relief from pain or extreme nausea that could come from using marijuana."
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Recent Action by Obama Administration Bodes Ill for Medical Marijuana
In a July 14 post [link], I pointed out an opinion piece on CNN.com in which a presidential candidate was advocating legalization of marijuana. According to a recent National Public Radio report, however, President Obama and his administration are strengthening the federal stance against marijuana, medical or otherwise.
The NPR report identifies three distinct ways the Obama administration has lashed out against marijuana in recent weeks:
- The White House on July 11 released its National Drug Control Strategy, which argued that marijuana is unsafe and addictive, while its use is at the highest level in the last eight years.
- The Drug Enforcement Administration in early July concluded a lengthy consideration of whether to reclassify marijuana, and decided against it. Thus, marijuana remains classified as a Schedule I, the category reserved for drugs with no currently accepted medical use.
- The third strike against marijuana that the NPR report attributes to the Obama administration is familiar to Arizonans. The report summarizes the statements by federal prosecutors that large-scale marijuana dispensaries are not immune from federal prosecution.
As Arizoneout readers know, the strong statements by federal prosecutors are what prompted state officials to halt the marijuana dispensary licensing program and file suit in federal court.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Presidential Politics and Pot Policy
I came across an interesting opinion piece that appeared on CNN.com last week by Gary Johnson, former governor of our neighboring state, New Mexico, and a candidate (albeit a long-shot one) for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.
Johnson, also known as "Governor Veto," has been advocating legalization of marijuana since 1999. He came to that stance not because of asserted medical benefits of the substance, but because he concluded that the War on Drugs began by President Richard Nixon 40 years ago actually has not reduced drug use but instead has created a lucrative black market that empowered violent gangs and cartels. In Governor Johnson's words, "it was like alcohol prohibition all over again, with similarly disastrous results."
When a candidate for president is advocating the legalization of marijuana, it makes the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act appear to be a fairly modest measure by comparison.
Johnson, also known as "Governor Veto," has been advocating legalization of marijuana since 1999. He came to that stance not because of asserted medical benefits of the substance, but because he concluded that the War on Drugs began by President Richard Nixon 40 years ago actually has not reduced drug use but instead has created a lucrative black market that empowered violent gangs and cartels. In Governor Johnson's words, "it was like alcohol prohibition all over again, with similarly disastrous results."
When a candidate for president is advocating the legalization of marijuana, it makes the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act appear to be a fairly modest measure by comparison.
Friday, June 3, 2011
Arizona Employees Getting New Resources to Help Them Grow Their Own
CNN - 'Walmart of Weed' to Open in Arizona, Promotes Growing Your Own
This CNN report from earlier this week helps to reinforce my warning from yesterday -- that the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) -- is not on hold for Arizona employers. The report features a new establishment in Phoenix, weGrow, which held its grand opening on June 1, 2011, to coincide with the day the state was scheduled to begin taking dispensary applications. The big-box retailer offers everything a would-be cultivator of medical marijuana would need to grow his or her own supply of cannabis. Following the model of other big-box stores, weGrow is even going to offer how-to classes for hydroponic marijuana growing, and sell all the supplies a neophyte grower would need.
State officials' decision last week to sue federal officials rather than begin taking dispensary applications is going to be a boon for weGrow's business. While only about 4,000 medical marijuana ID cards have been issued since Arizona started issuing them on April 15, 2011, weGrow's business plan anticipates 100,000 Qualified Patient cardholders, a nice, fat potential customer base.
It is likely that some of your employees will be among weGrow's customers.
This CNN report from earlier this week helps to reinforce my warning from yesterday -- that the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA) -- is not on hold for Arizona employers. The report features a new establishment in Phoenix, weGrow, which held its grand opening on June 1, 2011, to coincide with the day the state was scheduled to begin taking dispensary applications. The big-box retailer offers everything a would-be cultivator of medical marijuana would need to grow his or her own supply of cannabis. Following the model of other big-box stores, weGrow is even going to offer how-to classes for hydroponic marijuana growing, and sell all the supplies a neophyte grower would need.
State officials' decision last week to sue federal officials rather than begin taking dispensary applications is going to be a boon for weGrow's business. While only about 4,000 medical marijuana ID cards have been issued since Arizona started issuing them on April 15, 2011, weGrow's business plan anticipates 100,000 Qualified Patient cardholders, a nice, fat potential customer base.
It is likely that some of your employees will be among weGrow's customers.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
No Matter the Headlines, Legal Marijuana Can Still be in Arizona Workplaces
Despite my intention to proceed logically and deliberately through the three possible categories of marijuana cardholders protected by the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA), the bold headlines just won’t let me.
As you probably have heard, the lawsuits are flying as Governor Jan Brewer and other state officials have sued federal government officials in the latest installment of the long-running series of federal-state conflicts over medical marijuana. That lawsuit is spawning others, because Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) Director Will Humble, another plaintiff in the state-federal lawsuit, has decided not to accept applications from folks wanting to open marijuana dispensaries.
Yesterday was the day ADHS was scheduled to begin accepting those applications under the timeline Director Humble and his staff issued at the same time they finalized the regulations to implement AMMA. To lay a foundation for another lawsuit, a prospective dispensary applicant showed up at Humble’s office yesterday to try to submit an application, and he was turned away. The would-be applicant is now going to sue the state officials for failing to implement the will of the people expressed in Proposition 203, the vehicle by which AMMA became law.
To Arizona employers, I say, none of the legal wrangling matters much for you and the challenges AMMA presents for your workplace. Director Humble intends to continue issuing marijuana ID cards to Qualifying Patients and their Designated Caregivers. So regardless of the headlines, the AMMA is not on hold for you.
As you probably have heard, the lawsuits are flying as Governor Jan Brewer and other state officials have sued federal government officials in the latest installment of the long-running series of federal-state conflicts over medical marijuana. That lawsuit is spawning others, because Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) Director Will Humble, another plaintiff in the state-federal lawsuit, has decided not to accept applications from folks wanting to open marijuana dispensaries.
Yesterday was the day ADHS was scheduled to begin accepting those applications under the timeline Director Humble and his staff issued at the same time they finalized the regulations to implement AMMA. To lay a foundation for another lawsuit, a prospective dispensary applicant showed up at Humble’s office yesterday to try to submit an application, and he was turned away. The would-be applicant is now going to sue the state officials for failing to implement the will of the people expressed in Proposition 203, the vehicle by which AMMA became law.
To Arizona employers, I say, none of the legal wrangling matters much for you and the challenges AMMA presents for your workplace. Director Humble intends to continue issuing marijuana ID cards to Qualifying Patients and their Designated Caregivers. So regardless of the headlines, the AMMA is not on hold for you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)