Marijuana: Governor's counsel sees alleged Amendment 64 conflicts of interest as diversity

By Michael Roberts Mon., Feb. 4 2013 at 4:20 PM

Dr. Christian Thurstone.

This time, Slaugh was worried about Dr. Christian Thurstone, an addiction specialist who sees dire consequences for Colorado's youth if marijuana becomes more available to an adult population.

Thurstone is also a principal in Project SAM, a national anti-legalization organization whose best known member is former Congressman Patrick Kennedy. The organization launched in Denver last month.

The Project SAM connection represents "a clear conflict of interest and willful disregard for the principle he's agreed to in sitting on the Task Force," Slaugh wrote in a letter circulated last week. "The People of Colorado deserve productive dialogue, not secret agendas."

Language like that apparently inspired Jack Findlaw, legal counsel for Governor John Hickenlooper, to fire back, albeit in a very polite, very political way.

Findlaw's note to Slaugh doesn't mention Ward or Thurstone by name, but it stresses that Hick had no interest in staffing the task force exclusively with Amendment 64 boosters. The entire note can be seen below, but a key passage reads: "The Governor intentionally assembled a task force with representatives of many diverse perspectives and the working groups also include folks with various viewpoints on how to implement Amendment 64. I think the work of the task force will be enriched by this diversity."

Continue to see Slaugh's most recent letter about conflicts of interest, Jack Findlaw's reply and three letters signed by Tamra Ward calling for a federal crackdown on Amendment 64:

We Recommend

KathleenChippi topcommenter

The Task Farce is non binding. Nothing they recommend has to be adopted or even considered. Hick was anti 64--his task farce is his attempt to LOOK tough on cannabis- but he nor his task farce have authority to do anything.

A64 gives all authority to the DoR and the General Assembly. The CORA requests from the MMED and the Governors Office say the plan is to rewrite hb1284, remove problem language/requirments, and then set up one regulatory model for all cannabis laws.

"...even the head of the Colorado agency charged with tracking the medical pot industry suggests no one should copy its measures..... Even if the agency had all the money it wanted, the state's medical pot rules are "a model of regulatory overreach," too cumbersome and expensive to enforce, Laura Harris said in a statement. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/can-washington-keep-marijuana-in-state-86850.html

tutonehcc

1 Like

@KathleenChippi Nice explanation kathleen Chippi! I really don't think that these pot clowns are going to make much of a difference or change anything. Cannabis is here to stay in Colorado no matter what the Task Force says.

KathleenChippi topcommenter

2 Like

@tutonehcc @KathleenChippi yeah, cannabis is here to stay--but unfortunately so are the criminal charges........post A64.

DonkeyHotay topcommenter

1 Like

@tutonehcc " I really don't think ..."

Obvious nearly every time you post.

JimTom topcommenter

2 Like

Your right the only thing that is going to change is how much it is going to cost you to be a smoker. Wait until you get your first DUIMI!!!

DonkeyHotay topcommenter

2 Like

"a model of regulatory overreach," too cumbersome and expensive to enforce, "

How that "regulatory framework" feel now, eh stoners?

Need more lube?

tutonehcc

@DonkeyHotay OK Darth Sidious I'm sure everyone's really insulted by you. Feel better now little poop pants?

DonkeyHotay topcommenter

2 Like

@tutonehcc ... you don't speak for everyone you ignorant pot punk, never did and never will.

CloudGang

just buy from us http://www.youtube.com/user/N0bitchazznezz?feature=mhee

KathleenChippi topcommenter

2 Like

@CloudGang "buy from us"? your not A64 compliant if your selling anything.

instntkrma

It seems like Hick wants the group to fail. There aren't going to be good workable solutions, but a mess of contradictions. Making Amendment 64 go badly will end up defining Hick as a fool. The voters certainly did want this to move forward, but Hick is going to hand the legislature a mess of a recommendation. I wonder if Chris Romer is under his desk?

DonkeyHotay topcommenter

3 Like

You pathetic ignorant stoners SURRENDERED TOTAL CONTROL -- via A64 -- of marijuana over to the same anti-drug Big Government Law Enforcement goons who've been running the Drug War against you for the last 30+ years. ... all for a pathetic ounce.

You DESERVE all the REGULATION they ram up your collective rectums.

Case

3 Like

@DonkeyHotayYeah, it's funny to hear all these stupid stoners whining, "That's not what we intended when we voted for A64." Whatever their real intentions, we will never know. I guess they intended to vote for "legalization", but were too stupid to actually read the law. Now, when the govt. shoves nut-bags like Thurstone down your throat, have the balls to man-up and take it all in. This is exactly what A64 says and what you voted for -- it lets the government do WHATEVER THEY WANT to pot smokers, including stacking the deck against you. Whatever morons voted for A64 thinking the same "anti-drug Big Government Law Enforcement goons" who had been tormenting pot smokers for all those years would suddenly BEND OVER and cave in to the potheads, well, these morons must've been HIGH or sumthin'! Now that the government has been granted TOTAL CONTROL, what morons think they aren't going to use/abuse this new-found power to stomp on hippies?

Bend over, stoned stoners, your regulation has arrived. Just like you asked, no BEGGED, for!