Marijuana bills to implement Amendment 64 face first tests today: Read them here

cannabis 205x205.jpg
Last month, the Amendment 64 Task Force issued its recommendations about how best to implement the measure, which allows adults 21 and over in Colorado to use and possess small amounts of marijuana. The legislature's aptly named A64 joint committee followed suit, and it didn't simply rubber-stamp the task force's advice. Then, last week, actual bills were introduced -- but their language is reportedly still shifting even as they're scheduled to begin their path toward passage at the State Capitol today. Read the latest versions below.

The first of the proposals, known as House Bill 13-1317, is getting by far the most attention, and at least as written, it adopts the majority of A64 implementation suggestions offered by the task force. Among the exceptions in the legislation, sponsored by Representative Dan Pabon: The measure rejects the concept of vertical integration -- requiring that retail shops grow the majority of their own cannabis -- that's currently in place for the medical marijuana industry.

Thumbnail image for dan pabon twitter.jpg
Dan Pabon.
But with the MMJ industry fighting against this concept, a change in this area is certainly within the realm of possibility. And according to 7News, assorted lawmakers were fiddling with the bill's language late last night in advance of a first House committee appearance slated for later today.

Another piece of legislation -- Senate Bill 13-283 -- will be heard today by the Senate's Business, Labor and Technology Committee, says activist Robert Chase of the Colorado Coalition for Patients and Caregivers. And in his view, it's more problematic than HB 13-1317. Via e-mail, he maintains that 1317 is the "least significant" of the bills about to be presented "despite the industry's obsession with it and legislators' misunderstanding." In his view, its most problematic element is "a special sales tax not contemplated under the amendment," which he sees as "out of all proportion to any costs associated with the regulation of cannabis."

In contrast, Chase considers SB 13-283 to be "a direct declaration of war against cannabis-users and a monumental gesture of contempt for the express will of the people of Colorado that cannabis be regulated like alcohol."

Look below to see the 7News report on the first measure, followed by the latest versions of the two bills.

House Bill 13-1317: Recreation Marijuana Regulation

Senate Bill 13-283: Implementation of Amendment 64

More from our Marijuana archive: "Marijuana retailers may not have to grow their own -- and that's great, attorney says."

My Voice Nation Help
128 comments
DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

"I am not even a registered patient"
-- Robert Chase

"Granting the DOR regulatory authority over retail sales of cannabis is not bad at all
-- Robert Chase


stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotayLoser

@DonkeyHotay And yet here you are, sexless, unemployed, pathetic, trolling the site every day on every article with your worthless vitriol and ignorance. Its no wonder why you dont have a partner- youre obviously obsessive, obtuse, and have a lack of intelligence surpassed by few. Why are you complaining about the site when you practically live on here, day after day after day? Dont shit where you eat, little troll. Maybe go outside once in awhile, get a hobby, maybe try growing a brain. Try finding something that you can actually offer, because you clearly have nothing to offer here- or in any other capacity in life. In short- get a life, you pathetic, cowardly, moronic loser.

QFTMFT.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

"Granting the DOR regulatory authority over retail sales of cannabis is not bad at all

"Granting the DOR regulatory authority over retail sales of cannabis is not bad at all

"Granting the DOR regulatory authority over retail sales of cannabis is not bad at all

-- Robert Chase 

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

"Of course I do not trust them ... I do not like the MMED" 

-- Robert Chase

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

"I agree that [Amendment 64 ] should not be called a 'legalization initiative'"

 -- Robert Chase

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

"Clearly what I write about Amendment 64 does not gibe exactly with what the campaign for the Amendment does. " 

-- Robert Chase

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

"[A64 is full of] unnecessary limitations and regulations" 

-- Robert Chase

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

" I acknowledge the fact that plenty of scope will remain [under A64] for people to be imprisoned for cannabis "

-- Robert Chase

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

"Amendment 64 would not stop unjust imprisonment for offenses related to cannabis, legalize cannabis, or regulate it like alcohol "

 -- Robert Chase 



RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

Representatives and Senators of the Colorado General Assembly et alia:

I write with regard to the implementation of Amendment 64, generally supposed to have been considered in good faith by a broad array of concerned parties constituted as the Amendment 64 Task Force.Consider the text of what is now Article XVIII, Section 16 of our Constitution.It begins:

(1) Purpose and findings.
… the people of the state of Colorado find and declare that the use of marijuana should be legal for persons twenty-one years of age or older … In the interest of the health and public safety of our citizenry, the people of the state of Colorado further find and declare that marijuana should be regulated in a manner similar to alcohol …

We regulate alcohol by licensing its production, distribution, and sale, and by limiting its use, and when individuals violate the provisions of the Liquor Code (C.R.S. Title 12, Article 47) they are subject to a modest penalty – it is a Class 2 misdemeanor to break our laws restricting alcohol under the Liquor Code (with the sole exception that it is a Class 1 misdemeanor under the Liquor Code to give alcohol to a minor).The People have ordained that cannabis should be treated like alcohol (despite the fact that cannabis is far less harmful).

The lawyers, however, take a different view:the unequivocal statement of the will of the People in our Constitution quoted above has no direct legal effect, and so they consider that its import can, may, and (in the interests of expedience) should be ignored.Amendment 64 provides for the licensure of general sales of cannabis to adults, and the obsessive greed engendered by the prospect has fixated attention on its least significant aspect, i.e. the details of regulating the commerce in cannabis embodied in HB13-1317.Of greater significance is our tax policy; Amendment 64 contemplates legal, controlled commerce in cannabis that displaces illicit trade, and to that end it allows the General Assembly to propose a special excise tax on cannabis of no more than fifteen percent to voters.Our criminal laws are of overarching importance, and the People just told you to conciliate the draconian anti-cannabis statutes with the provisions of the Liquor Code, which is incomparably less prohibitive than the Uniform Controlled Substances Act (C.R.S. Title 18, Article 18).How do the most important parts of Amendment 64 fare in the legislation proposed?

With regard to taxation, HB13-1318 advances the principle that, because prohibitionists confabulate untold costs and unimaginable liabilities associated with not wasting public funds suppressing cannabis and persecuting its users, it is necessary to assess not only the maximum fifteen percent excise tax allowed under the Constitution, but a special sales tax over five times that applied to alcohol – no; this will not fly.There is no rational basis whatsoever for claiming that there is any need for so excessive a tax, which would drive consumers to the black market and thwart the intent of the Amendment.Even though cannabis is far less harmful than alcohol, Article XVIII, Section 16 provides for a special tax, intended for the express purpose of paying you off – do not dare to ask us to pay an extraordinary sales tax of fifteen percent on top of the special excise tax authorized by the Constitution, or voters will rightly reject your request for our money.

With regard to the criminal law, the lawyers are telling you that Title 18, Article 18 need only be tweaked to deal with the explicit provisions for legal cultivation and use detailed in the body of the Amendment, and to reinstitute almost all the dire penalties for cannabis; these are the provisions of SB13-283. This bill constitutes a declaration of war against those who use cannabis and it is a monumental expression of contempt for the express will of the People of Colorado – the bill does represent the consensus of the Amendment 64 Task Force (and demonstrates the unfitness of that group to undertake the task assigned to it), but it blatantly disregards the opening declaration of the purpose of the Amendment which the People have enshrined in the Constitution.Violating the laws regulating the use, cultivation, sales or distribution of cannabis must be made a Class 2 misdemeanor, just as violating the Liquor Code is now, not the Class 4, Class 3, and Class 2 felonies the sponsors have the temerity to propose.Giving cannabis to minors should be a Class 1 misdemeanor under Colorado’s Uniform Controlled Substances Act (and a felony under the statute against contributing to the delinquency of minors, just as giving alcohol to them is) – how dare the sponsors compare this with killing someone in a rage or sexual assault by proposing to make this offense a Class 2 felony?I demand that the sponsors of this outrageously offensive and unconstitutional bill withdraw it now.If you assent to SB13-283, you flout the most important principle enunciated in Amendment 64, and you betray your constituents.

The spectacle of Colorado rushing to license conduct for which it will still be making felons of its citizens come next January is nauseating.The People have directed you to regulate the use of cannabis, not to re-criminalize it.Remove references to cannabis being any sort of felony from Title 18, Article 18, and do so immediately.The perfidy of those who have pretended to criminalize innocuous personal conduct has been repudiated by fifty-seven percent of the voters -- it is our will that cannabis be treated no more severely than alcohol, and we have said as much in the Constitution.If any felony penalties for cannabis remain in the Colorado Revised Statutes after June 1 of this year, you will have failed to do your clear duty, and all Colorado should act to halt investigations, arrests, prosecutions, trials, and incarcerations for any offenses related to cannabis, until the statutes are made consistent with the supreme law of Colorado.No one associated with this unconstitutional, maleficent, and shameful bill should ever hold office in Colorado again.

Sincerely,

Robert Chase, Colorado Coalition for Patients and Caregivers, (720) 213-6497









stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotayLoser

@DonkeyHotay And yet here you are, sexless, unemployed, pathetic, trolling the site every day on every article with your worthless vitriol and ignorance. Its no wonder why you dont have a partner- youre obviously obsessive, obtuse, and have a lack of intelligence surpassed by few. Why are you complaining about the site when you practically live on here, day after day after day? Dont shit where you eat, little troll. Maybe go outside once in awhile, get a hobby, maybe try growing a brain. Try finding something that you can actually offer, because you clearly have nothing to offer here- or in any other capacity in life. In short- get a life, you pathetic, cowardly, moronic loser.

QFTMFT.


DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

             *** REGULATION WORKS!! ... Get REGULATED, Bitches! ***

DUI Limit on Stoned Driving revived in Colorado legislature

A committee of Colorado lawmakers revived a limit on stoned driving Wednesday, just two days after a different committee killed the proposal
.

The limit's resurrection came Wednesday in a hearing of the House state affairs committee, which heard a major bill on marijuana regulations. The sponsor of that bill, Denver Democratic Rep. Dan Pabon, proposed amending the stoned-driving limit into his bill, House Bill 1317.

"If we're going to allow marijuana to be legalized, we must have some standard," Pabon said.

The amendment drew support from several state officials. Deputy Attorney General David Blake told the committee his office wouldn't support the marijuana regulations in their entirety if a stoned-driving limit wasn't part of them.

Later, Gov. John Hickenlooper posted on Twitter that he supports placing the stoned-driving provision in the regulatory bill.



stuka1
stuka1

Oh, look, the Jackass and its many sock puppets are trolling in force. 

<yawn>

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase

"I am not even a registered patient" -- Robert Chase

"I am not even a registered patient" -- Robert Chase

"I am not even a registered patient" -- Robert Chase



DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase  = idiot who SURRENDERED TOTAL CONTROL of Marijuana via A64 to the Prohibitionist Politicians, Insatiable Dept. of Revenue and Law Enforcement Goons who've been running the Drug War for the past 40+ years ... now wants to whine and cry that the Government REGULATION and massive TAXATION be begged and voted for aren't lubricated enough for his tender anus.

Boooo fucking hoooo!


stuka1
stuka1

@RobertChase  

In addition to your remarks, the addition of an "open container" offense as delineated in SB 13-283 is impractical, idiotic, and reflects an utter lack of understanding and yet another attempt to implement legislation that interferes with the will of the People as expressed in Amendment 64.

The purpose of an open alcohol container law is to prevent persons from actively consuming alcohol while driving. This is easy to comply with, since the alcohol that one might be tempted to consume in a vehicle while driving usually comes in measured quantities or "single doses", for example, a 12-oz can or bottle of beer. Most alcohol consumers would not be drinking out of a gallon bottle of whiskey, or a tapped keg of beer.  

A person who uses or consumes cannabis for any purpose -- be it medical or recreational -- does not normally carry it (and in almost all cases cannot obtain it) in comparably-packaged quantities or "single doses".  It is not practical for a medical facility or a retail outlet to package cannabis in "single-dose" containers that a recreational consumer OR MEDICAL PATIENT can carry on their person, consume legally and safely in responsible,comfortable, and safe quantities, and use the entirety of a "single-dose-packaged" quantity and thus be able to carry only unopened, sealed quantities of cannabis that he or she has not consumed and does not intend to consume. Under this law, a person who buys a packaged ounce of cannabis and consumes the smallest amount of that cannabis after opening the package is forced to choose between consuming ALL of that ounce of cannabis or throwing it away. The only other alternative is placing the unused portion of cannabis in the trunk of the vehicle, which is problematic as well, not only because anyone watching a person place it in the trunk can figure out what it is, inviting robbery attempts, but also because it is an open invitation for police to watch for drivers and passengers of vehicles placing items (which might or might not be cannabis) in the trunk -- whether any cannabis has been recently consumed or not -- and claim probable cause to stop the vehicle, harass its occupants, and -- even worse now that the prohibitionists are attempting to force the failed 5 ng/ml limit once again -- force a blood draw on the driver.

This provision is entirely unacceptable, impractical, not thought out AL ALL, and flies in the face of the People's will as expressed in Amendment 64, and needs to be killed.

stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay 

@DonkeyHotayLoser

@DonkeyHotay And yet here you are, sexless, unemployed, pathetic, trolling the site every day on every article with your worthless vitriol and ignorance. Its no wonder why you dont have a partner- youre obviously obsessive, obtuse, and have a lack of intelligence surpassed by few. Why are you complaining about the site when you practically live on here, day after day after day? Dont shit where you eat, little troll. Maybe go outside once in awhile, get a hobby, maybe try growing a brain. Try finding something that you can actually offer, because you clearly have nothing to offer here- or in any other capacity in life. In short- get a life, you pathetic, cowardly, moronic loser.

QFTMFT.


stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay  <==== Has nothing to do in life but troll an entertainment blog endlessly all day every day for a year.

HipTip: desperate add-ons to dubious failing bills by soon-to-be-ousted blue mutts =/= laws

hth pathetic prohibitionist loser.

stuka1
stuka1

The Jackass has nothing better to do than to troll the WW blog pages, sowing distortions, misrepresentations, disinformation, and outright LIES.

What a pathetic life it leads.

stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay  <=== only in your most pathetic fantasies, pathetic toe-tapping maricon.

stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay <==== Pathetic prohibitionist LOSER who cannot post without resorting to distortions, misrepresentations, DISinformation, and outright LIES. 

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@stuka1  Among its many other lunacies, SB13-283 declares that the label on a container is evidence of the contents.   The first sentence of the bill reads:  "Section 1. The bill permits a local government to prohibit the use of a compressed flammable gas as a solvent in residential marijuana cultivation.".  Senator Baumgardner read it aloud, and neither he, nor any of the senile committee members heard anything amiss -- I told them that compressed, flammable gas is not used in the cultivation of cannabis, but they stared at me blankly.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@stuka1  "I have better things to do than respond to your inane babblings"

Galactic FAIL!

stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay  <-=== Has NOTHING to do but troll the WW blogs all day every day for the past year.  What a pathetic excuse for a human being.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@stuka1 = OCD FAIL!

 sucka1 "I have better things to do than respond to your inane babblings"


stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay  <==== has NOTHING better to do than to troll an entertainment blog all day every day for a year. What a pathetic excuse for a human being.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@stuka1 "I have better things to do than respond to your inane babblings"

Punks himself, again!

stuka1
stuka1

@JimTom<==== Scumbag Votes AGAINST LEGALIZATION, cries and whines because it can't sell for a profit.

stuka1
stuka1

@JimTom  <=== pathetic prohibitionist turncoat who has no clue that politicians answer to the PEOPLE.

JimTom
JimTom topcommenter

@Sucka1 Dream on asshole A64 gave them the right to make the rules "The End"

JimTom
JimTom topcommenter

@RobertChase did I not say "idiot hash maker"? I will put my grow against yours anyday. But then again the stupid A64 rules won't allow me to sell mine legally.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase "A compressed, flanmable gas is  ..."

Well, be a complete tool and notify the Legislature of the error in their proposal so they can change it from the totally irrelevant nonsense it is now to something that actually creates ANOTHER CRIME among thousands of patients/users who do extract with that method.


RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@stuka1  Most do not, and the lawyers just want to swell the C.R.S. with as many crimes as possible.

stuka1
stuka1

@RobertChase  

Do these idiots understand that anyone can carry an unsealed bottle of oxycontin, etc., in their vehicle?

stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay  <==== clueless prohibitionist-voting fuck who thinks flammable gas is used in cultivation of marijuana. 

stuka1
stuka1

@JimTom 

"... politians..."

English isn't your first language, is it?

Strawman much, idiot? I am not referring to PVC pipe/kitchen extractions, and my mention of the Tamisium as an example would make that clear to anyone with more than half a brain. Which is not you.

HipTip: A64 didn't give the GA the "right" to pass all the shit these idiots are trying to pull.

hth fucking moron.

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@JimTom A compressed, flanmable gas is used as a solvent to extract THC from kif, but that has nothing to do with cultivation -- do you not understand the difference between cultivation and extraction?  If so, you are in the same boat as the morons who wrote the bills to thwart the implementation of Article XVIII, Section 16 of our Constitution.

JimTom
JimTom topcommenter

@RobertChase @sucka1 Idiots should be kept from using flammable gases. Any day we will see the story of the idiot hash maker that turns himself into Richard Pryor. Stupid laws from uneducated politians is what you get when you pass admendments that give them the right to make all the laws.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@RobertChase = clueless chemistry fail!

"I wrote that Vick's VapoRub contains methamphetamine, and the statement is true." -- Robert Chase

LOL!

stuka1
stuka1

@RobertChase  

I caught that, too -- this thing is so full of FAIL it's hard to know where to begin in dismantling it.

And this is yet another ill-conceived provision as well.  There are safe methods of butane extraction that do not release flammable gas into the atmosphere, such as a Tamisium extractor, which is used in extraction of all sorts of essential oils besides those in cannabis.

stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay  <=== OCD FAIL!  LOL

Keep flailing and failing, loser!~ It's what you do best!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@stuka1 "I have better things to do than respond to your inane babblings"

Total FAIL!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@stuka1 = admits the bullshit he pukes here is irrelevant.


stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay  <====PWNED and reduced to spamming irrelevant mined quotes. As usual. LOL!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@stuka1 "I have better things to do than respond to your inane babblings"

OCD fail fail.

stuka1
stuka1

@DonkeyHotay  <==== has nothing better to do than troll an obscure entertainment blog 24/7.  How utterly pathetic. LOL!

Now Trending

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...