Med. marijuana patient red card wait: 60 days & counting even though check cashed a month ago

• renewal

• There is nothing in case law, statute, or constitution that supports your claim that having a "red card" -- which is merely the registration of a Physician Referral -- offers any more legal protection than simply having the underlying Physician Referral without registering it. There is NO requirement under Amendment 20 that mandates the registration of a Physician Referral with the State -- merely having the Physician Referral provides the full protection of Amendment 20.

• Was it a new application or renewal?

• Sent in my paperwork on Oct 24.....CDPHE cashed my check on Nov 11....Just got my card in the mail yesterday 11/17

• I live in CSprings.  The clinic is called Trinity Wellness.  I just got new info today that the holdup was because MMR wanted a copy of the doc's DEA license.  But MMR sat on hundreds of applications from his clinic for 60 days before requesting the information.  Now that MMR has the info, they are still going to wait until Dec 1, before starting to process those applications.  Moreover, I was able to verify the doctor's DEA license for free on the internet in about 2 minutes.  Moreover, it's the duty of another state agency (DORA) to verify the doc's DEA license as part of his state medical licensing process, so they could have checked with DORA, This is bureaucratic abuse.  The people at MMR are using technicalities to justify the existence of their jobs, at the expense of sick patients. We are literally seeing how red-tape is created as part of the genesis of a new government agency.

• Donkey, your first statement is simply untrue.  Your second statement is true. Your third statement, while true, lacks the most important factor - perspective. I spend time with many criminal and mmj attorneys and I can assure you that possession of a Red Card is much more likely to keep you out of court, and failure to keep one in your pocket creates a greater possibility. I agree that it isn't necessary, and that each person should decide, we are not sheeple (or shouldn't be), but clear honesty when giving advice is always best.

• Jake, I couldn't agree more.  My brother started KindReviews in early 2009 and I can't tell you how hard it was for him to get information from an MMC (then a dispensary) on the strain, growing medium, or anything else.  The flowers were from caregivers and no information passed hands.  Additionally, MOST of the medicine reviewed through mid 2010 had one of the issues you mention above. I was also around a LOT of caregiver patient drives through doctors at that time.  The major complaint was that their caregivers never called them back, never had a consistent supply of the same strain, and still charged the old street prices.  I'm not saying that all caregivers were that way, because I personally met many that were not.  I had the pleasure of finding many caregivers that grew the best" medicine in the state and for very fair prices - it was in fact high quality and safe. The most interesting aspect of the issue, in my opinion, is the education of new patients totally unfamiliar with the medicine.  Caregivers didn't provide "Drop Its" or similar products at that time (all of the tinctures and similar items I tried at the time were terrible), nor did most of them spend the time educating that some of the better MMCs do today.  Pros and cons to each side of this, but blanket statements about the intelligence (or ethics) of a group of people or businesses you can't begin to pigeonhole clearly demonstrates the intelligence of the one very specific individual making such claims.

• Legislation cannot circumvent or overrule Constitutional Rights, any provisions in 1284, 1043, etc that attempt to infringe upon Amendment 20 would be tossed upon challenge. You can thank Rob Corry for bringing the now precedent expanded definition/requirements of "Primary Caregiver" to Colorado. He's the fool who pushed the loser Clendenin case to the Colorado Supreme Court, which predictably adopted the California Supreme Court standard and definition.

• -- but it doesn't!  The effect of any number of provisions in SB10-109, HB10-1284, HB11-1043, and the decisive reversal of the position of the BOH (discrediting caregivers' knowledge and counsel, and pretending to require them to perform menial labor for their patients) has been to contradict the letter and spirit of Article XVIII, Section 14 -- it remains to be seen whether any of the unconstitutional provisions of statute or regulation will be repudiated by the courts, which likely share the same BS assumption implanted in the heads of legislators by the silly propagandists at the Post, i.e. that some sort of emergency was posed by caregivers selling cannabis to patients retail.  I am not apprised of the status of the PCRLP's action, but there has been a dearth of challenges made so far.

• Which clinic was this gianna?

• Legal FAIL! Red cards are no more "proof" of a Physician Referral than the Physician Referral itself. Ipso Facto.

• That's disingenuous at best. Red cards are much more likely to be seen by law enforcement as proof. A rec can stand up in court, but at that point you've lost the war to win the battle.

• I worked in the industry when caregivers still came in off the street and I can guarantee you that not everything they grow turns to gold. We turned away so much mold, mite and pm infested bud we had to put out a primer for novice users on how to spot them. There is a difference between a medical user and a pot snob. Herb grown at dispensaries helps people manage their conditions without the huge sticker price. 

• Quality vs. Quantity Do you do all your shopping at Walmart ?

• You're entirely mistaken if you think registering your Doctor referral will keep you out of court any more than simply having the referral. Under Amendment 20, the ONLY thing you need is the Doctor Referral. Registration is entirely optional, and gains no more rights than the referral itself. HTH.

• I received some new information on this today: "Thank you for following-up on your application. It is here at the Registry.  Currently it is delayed in review for verification of your Physician Certification.  The physician has been contacted.  We anticipate resolution within the next few weeks. If you have not received your card or a letter from us by December 1, please contact us again...." So I called my physician's office, and was told that they were notified yesterday that ALL of their patients, for the last 60 days, have been held up in review.  Except of course that new patient applicant people can buy meds, and only renewal people are left out in the cold.

• if the application hasnt been approved yet the check should of never been cashed thats just common sense

• Spoken like a long-time, law-breaking marijuana smoker and activist, you mean.

• Right, you don't need a card, just go to court and present your affirmative defense. Then your neighbors, co-workers and family can know all about your medical condition and your use of cannabis. Sounds completely worth $90.

• The idea that MMC's are overpriced is hilarious, even for you Donkey Hotay. The cost of an 1/8th has only dropped since retail establishments opened three years ago, something caregivers couldn't do in the seven years preceding.

• hope we deleted the right one; you posted several last night.

• <i> A dispensary that sells to someone whose renewal has not been approved in a timely matter has a plausible legal defense, ... </i> No, they have no defense, neither under Colorado Statute -- HB1284 -- nor under Amendment 20. <i>... would be likely to win,</i> No they wouldn't. They would likely lose their MMC license for willful violation of DOR regulations.  <i>... and would set an important precedent. </i> No, it wouldn't.  They'd be as successful as a Liquor store arguing they had a right to sell alcohol to someone under 21 years old. HTH.

• The $90 registration (extortion) is for suckers. Registration is entirely voluntary, it is not needed to be covered by the protections of Amendment 20. The ONLY thing you need to be protected by Amendment 20 is your Physician's recommendation. Period.

• You can legally obtain your "meds" from any of the 18,000+ Private Primary Caregivers in the State, even without a card.  No need to shop at Retail Dispensaries.

• <i>  It's at everybody's discretion what laws to follow and which to ignore. ...A person can break any law that they can get away with breaking </i> Spoken line a true criminal sociopath. So noted.

• I was told by MMR to send a written complaint, that there is a review board specifically to review such complaints. I emailed mine: The validity of my medical condition is indisputable.  I have a twenty year history of chronic pain from a spinal disc problem.  It is a permanent problem.  It only gets worse over time.  Since this is a renewal, you have already determined that I am medically eligible.  This delay must be because of some technical or procedural issue relating to my renewal, most likely having to do with my indigency waiver. It has been six full weeks since you received my renewal application.  Now Carla tells me it could be until December 5th before you resolve my application?  You received it September 26.  That is way more than two months, and you won't accept any applications more than two months out.  So I am denied access to my medicine.  That's the point.  This is not like a delay in unemployment delaying payments that are eventually paid.  When you finally straighten this out, you can't undo the pain I am suffering as a result.  Bureaucratic issues do not justify causing people to suffer.  If I had cancer, a delay like this could cause my death. I also think it's absurd that you think you can tell me that my application is delayed, and not tell me why.  No other state agency would try that, no other government agency, no business, nobody.  You can't just tell somebody, "Yours is a special case that will take longer than usual, but we have no explanation why." Moreover, it's wrong that after 35 days, a new applicant can buy meds, but not a renewal patient.  The presumption should be that the renewal patient has an established right to use the medicine, unless and until such is revoked.  The renewal patient should be able to purchase meds from the day that they have proof the renewal application was mailed.

• This was supposed to be a reply to another comment. Please delete.

• Wo sind Ihre Papiere? 

• Aspergers ?

• So don't file a "renewal" ... file a "new" application each and every year.

• The vast majority of Patients in Colorado either grow their own, or use Private Primary Caregivers. Overpriced, Privacy Infringing MMC's are for suckers and newbies.

• Exactly !! Amendment 20 rules the day -- HB1284 and 1043 cannot restrict, limit or infringe upon the  rights granted by the Constitution.

• Registration with CDPHE is entirely optional, not required to be covered by the protections of Amendment 20. Save your $$ and boycott the entire Colorado Government grab of patient money.

• It isn't the dispensary's discretion as to which Colorado laws they may follow and which they can ignore. HTH.

• You should take your cancelled check to your dispensary and tell them it proves you are entitled to buy meds.  Tell them that if they won't help you, they'll never see you again, as there are plenty of dispensaries.

• I've been a card holder since 07' and have it for fybromyalgia, migraines, herniated disk throughout neck and back, ptds/ anxiety, and degenerative disk disorder. I found all of this out when I was injuered in an auto accident. The mmj help with most problems and helps on certain days for my sleep. But 'what the hell' is up with this? My card expired first of oct 7, 11' I sent out my renewl on spet 22, 11'. They have cashed my check but no license and we are past the whole 35days that my dispensory has told me. The problem I have is the fact that if your on a renewl you have to wait till you receive a red card in order to buy again. To me this is bulls**t! I think new patients should be the ones who have to wait and not us renewls for we have already had owr card; we are already practically approved cause we have had our license before. I think that they should make the new patients wait till they have their red card and renewls wait the 35days and or make the rules the same for all. They just need to quit taking peoples money if they aren't sending out their licenses the same time.

• This is how they treat the taxpayers that pay their salaries. My renewal was received 9/26 and this was their email response to my inquiry, sent 10/31: "The Registry has received your application. It is currently delayed in the review process.  Until the review is completed, we have no additional information to provide.  If you have not heard from the Registry in the next 30 days, please contact us again." When I got through on the phone, they told me not to bother them again until 12/5, and still could not (or would not) provide a reason for the delay.  In the meantime, a friend of mine who went to the same clinic and mailed the same paperwork got his renewal 10/17. I sent a food-stamp letter for a fee waiver, and my friend sent a check.  If they had cashed my check, and not sent my card, like the person in the article; I would be livid.  However, I think that legally, a cashed check should be proof of renewal, card or not.

• delete please

• thanks Robert. Just trying to keep things clear to patients so they don't try and show up at MMCs with renewal paperwork and be denied by folks trying to keep up with the ever-changing medical marijuana laws.

• Renewals are applications (and note the Department's statement that "The renewal process is the same as for new applicants"). There are the explicit requirements of our Constitution, and then there are the evasions, circumlocutions, and contradictions of it in recent enactments by the General Assembly and regulations promulgated by the State's bureaucrats.  I do not want to mislead anyone as to the magnitude of the gulf between the two, which is vast. By all means, if you want to shop in MMCs and/or be able to offer a red card if challenged, pay attention to what the CDPHE says.  It would be great if more people were willing and able to litigate in favor of our Constitution over the machinations of the General Assembly and the bureaucrats, but most consumers (as opposed to politically aware patients) think that this pact with the Devil will stave off the Feds -- despite Federal raids since the enactment of HB10-1284, the issue remains unresolved, and a slew of industry apologists are poised to decry each successive victim as non-compliant with State law (even as they are arrested or their assets seized for being non-compliant with Federal law).

• Insult to injury: the CDPHE knew there would be a backlog but didn't release any information to warn patients they couldn't use temporary paperwork for renewal applications until October 27th, when it was clearly too late. When they did, it was a single line that the average person missed. This agency has taken millions of dollars from sick people it still treats as second class citizens.  Disgusting.

• This is where it gets tricky. That's true, but there is this part of HB1043 that precludes purchases from MMCs: "A purchaser may not provide a copy of a renewal application in order to make a purchase at a medical marijuana center." Patients who have grown accustomed to using an MMC are left waiting, which I believe is a calculated move by the CDPHE. Logically, renewals should be easier to process than new applicants. 

• thanks for the comments everyone. Lets hope they speed things up.

• Yes, but for applications not renewals. Of course, it doesn't specifically not include renewals in the Amendment 20 language, but then again it doesn't include them either. Therein lies the problem with interpretation - and according to the CDPHE's interpretation: "The Registry is anticipating a high volume of annual renewals in the next few months.  The renewal process is the same as for new applicants. Applicants are encouraged to begin the process 45 – 60 days before their card’s expiration date.  Renewal applications cannot be used as evidence of registration for medical marijuana purchases." http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hs/medicalmarijuana

• Perhaps this is a tactic to show why the cdphe couldn't operate with a smaller fee. I call bullshit on the cdphe for the delay in processing apps. A private agency could do what the cdphe does for the medical marijuana program for a fraction of the cost. Government bloat programs have ruined this fine nation.

• This leads me to believe that lowering the state fee may be a huge mistake.  If this is the best they can do for $90 what's going to happen when the fee is only $35? At least the question needs to be asked. The CDPHE's hostility to this program is all to apparent.

• The Constitution explicitly requires that the CDPHE verify patients' information within thirty days and issue a card within five more days (Colorado Constitution, Article XVIII, Section 14(3)(c)), and it also provides that when the Department fails to do so  that "the patient's application for such card will be deemed to have been approved" (Colorado Constitution, Article XVIII, Section 14(3)(d)) -- nothing in any statute of the General Assembly can compromise these requirements.

• I reject your repeated attempts to make my intelligence the topic of discussion. I am literal-minded myself, but I understand and use metaphor -- this is one of the primary means by which language extends itself (see "The Origin of Conscousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind", e.g.).  I suppose that you simply cannot take in the idea that "good German" has come to have a meaning generalized from its historical context; perhaps some coursework in English, history, and linguistics would help.

• We'll be sure to note that in our report.

• Welcome to the double edged sword. You could call/write to the CDPHE, but that will only slow them down more. There is a hearing regarding reducing the application fee tomorrow, but it's unlikely they'll want to hear about wait times.  The Board of Health Hearing will be at the Colorado Department of Public Health, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, CO. It would be nice to see a large turnout.

• "it remains true that calling people "good Germans" is not "bringing up Nazi Germany" Either you're nowhere near as intelligent as you think you are, or you think that your fellow citizens are dumb enough to believe you are this ignorant. Either way, it doesn't bode well for you.

• http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/Oreo?region=us http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/racist?region=us -- how many times must I post definitions of English words (or links to them)? I have made reference to IQ, a long time ago, but I sure haven't brought it up lately -- any number of my opponents here do.  Never mind what you think I think -- how dumb is it to abuse the language when all you need to avoid doing so is make occasional reference to a dictionary? P.S. I want to do whatever justice is due what you wrote -- I do think that I usually get the better of these exchanges, even absent evidence that I have succeeded in persuading -- that will be my conceit.

• It stands to reason that good Germans don't want Nazi Germany brought into the discussion, but they are not the entire population using the Internet, and whatever the language comprehension problems you and most of its other denizens have, it remains true that calling people "good Germans" is not "bringing up Nazi Germany".  To lose your attention to what I write is no detriment to the conversation, and your conceit that you have proven something is (barely) amusing.

• No doubt!  Where can I file a complaint? I am expired and waiting for my card.

• The CDPHE can make you wait as long as they want to after a sloppy amendment to HB 1043. There exists no legal timetable in which they are required to approve your renewal. If ever there was a need for an emergency hearing, this is it.

• The dictionary definition of oreo is a cookie. You're calling the mayor a cookie? No. You're calling him a white-acting black man. You claim to be a master of the English language, but you fail to see how words and phrases can have meanings besides what is mentioned in Miriam/Webster? While you're at it, why not start calling gay people faggots. After all, the literal definition is just a  bundle of sticks. Just because you think you're smarter than the rest of us doesn't mean we are all dumb enough to buy into your bullshit.

• Hancock is an Oreo  -- your (false) claim that I "had to get schooled by some black people" is rather racist; no one identified their race in that discussion.  You are welcome to believe that my use of the word demonstrates a "low Social Quotient", but I use it advisedly, and if many readers reject what the dictionary indicates words mean, it only demonstrates the kind of know-nothing attitude toward the use of English which has led to the necessity of enrolling a third of incoming freshmen at Colorado colleges in remedial classes. "Today he bringing up Hitler" -- "he" being "Department OfThe Internetz"?  I have ample opportunity to speak to people, both those who agree and those who disagree with me, and you may be confusing me for someone else, because the Latest Word is the only board on which I post much.  What is pathetic are many of the comments here, the semantic content of which is mostly to telegraph that they are unworthy of a response.

• I don't seek to trivialize your argument. Your argument was already trivial, which is actually why Godwin's Law is so very appropriate here. The silly distraction is calling everyone a nazi who doesn't agree with you. As Godwin's Law shows, even if you have a shred of a valid point or comparison -- you've already lost the argument by bringing up Nazi Germany. You can accept this or not, but it's not going to change the fact that it is how things work on the internet.

• Thanks for sharing your experiences, instantkrma, and please keep us up to date.

• Robert called the Mayor an Oreo yesterday and had to get schooled by some black people that said  they would kici his ass if they use that term in front of them.  He continued to make an ass out of himself by defining the term Oreo that made it sound even more racist than the orginal comment.  Today he bringing up Hitler.  Whatever Rpbert's points, they are missed becuase of his childish play with words that border on hateful, ignorant and just plain old mis informed.  Robert has a High IQ (Intelliegnece Quotient) and low Social Quotient.  This board is his only opportunity to speak to people that respond to him.  As a matter of fact, i am not sure he has job since he is all over almost every board i pull up.  I feel sorry for him, he is quite pathetic when you think about it.

• You lack the ability to reason, and your reading comprehension is pretty poor too -- calling people "good Germans" serves the primary purpose I stated -- the reference has been generalized and entered the language as a reference to complacence in the face of extremism.  By citing this as exemplifying "Godwin's Law", you seek to trivialize my argument by rejecting this generalization of the phrase, but you are no arbiter of its meaning.  Go right ahead; every time I call people "good Germans", respond that I am "proving Godwin's Law" -- it is nothing but a silly distraction.

• You can't insinuate over and over again that you have such a high level of intelligence and such a mastery of the English language and then play dumb when you make a reference like that, Robert.

• I'm at 40 days now since they recieved my paperwork, and now expired. If I needed to go buy meds, what would I do? I called last week and was told I'd get a call back, but that call has still not been returned. (they told me they had 4 days to return the call, but they missed that mark too..)

• "You can cite "Godwin's Law" every time anyone makes any reference involving Germany during the period of 1933-1945, but it is inappropriate unless some comparison to Nazi ideology is underway. " the term "Good German" would mean nothing without the context of Nazi Germany behind it. You know it, and so does everyone else with half a brain. keep trying to backpedal and justify what you said. We all know what you meant to imply with your 'good German' reference, despite your pathetic attempts to say otherwise. Again, I'm sorry you are new to the internet and don't understand how you clearly represent Godwin's Law . But the reality is that you do it very well and are proving more and more every time you try and justify the analogy.

• Mike Godwin said:  "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one" -- I made no explicit reference to either Hitler or the Nazis, and I made no implicit reference to them either.  "In other words, Godwin observed that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably criticizes some point made in the discussion by comparing it to beliefs held by Hitler and the Nazis" (Wikipedia); I have not made such a comparison -- it is you who do not understand Godwin's (to my mind, unremarkable) utterance. I use "good Germans" to describe the sort of citizens who imperil the society in which they live by their complacence in the face of extremism, and I consider that an apt way to describe the mass of voters in Colorado.  It also happens to be true that there are many people of German ancestry living in Colorado.  You can cite "Godwin's Law" every time anyone makes any reference involving Germany during the period of 1933-1945, but it is inappropriate unless some comparison to Nazi ideology is underway.

• lmao lmao lmao 

• Probably someone who faked an illness. Thats what they get for corrupting the system!! Jail them!!!

• My Grandma warned me to always be prepared because genocide will occur again in our lifetimes.  They still put people in jail for weed, the alternative being to submit info to a bogus State Registry is exactly like Nazi Germany, I'm with R.C. on that one.

• "Ron Paul can save us" is actually another facet of Godwin's Law that we are researching. Thanks for bringing that up.

• Sending paperwork to the CDPHE is like walking into the police station smoking a joint; if you're really that dumb, then you're really that dumb.  Cannabis is a drug of social rebellion not surrender and give your information to the enemy like was required in Nazi Germany in 1938 and 1939.  What seems like simple information today could mean your life on the line next year.

• I'm sorry that you don't understand Godwin's Law, but I assure you that my reference was most certainly appropriate to you and your constant association of present day Denver with Nazi Germany in the Westword forums. We'll be contacting you when our report is complete.

• maybe this is just another sting tactic by the MMED. let patients cards all expire, then the MMC's that are growing for them are out of compliance because their patient numbers don't match their plant numbers....sit back and wait for the cells to be filled.

• The good people of Amerika trust the government as a whole entirely too much. Everything the government (and the mainstream media) tell us is a lie, wake up folks, it's all a lie. Police state is encroaching and not too many seem to care. We all should care before it's too late....kinda like those Germans found out....the hard way. Ron Paul can save us, otherwise, find an exit strategy.

• You are making a study are you? "Good German" does not refer to ideas that Adolf Hitler or the Nazis had; it refers to the attitude of the mass of the German people who allowed nazism to take over their country. You evidently think that making reference to "Godwin's Law" somehow invalidates arguments with which you disagree -- I don't, and you have cited it inappropriately anyway.

• Thank you for consistently proving Godwin's Law, Robert. Even if you didn'tt mean to do so, you have become a case study in this ongoing internet meme.

• Over the course of the past three years, cannabis activists have learned not to trust what the CDPHE says, and ample evidence of its incompetence has been amassed -- remember the "emergency hearing" a year ago?  I keep waiting for news to break of other errors of the CDPHE impinging on public health (or the economy -- didn't Smalley single-handedly destroy the Rocky Ford cantaloupe industry by saying that the listeria-tainted cantaloupes came from the "Rocky Ford region"?), but I suppose that the agency is covered by the overweening trust that Colorado's Good Germans seem to have in their government.

TotalComments: 76