Hipple, Long, Ware, & Peete

marijuana winning big at the polls. CO/MASS/wash pass

2,344 posts in this topic

My big question...is this the excuse Obama needs to tell the DEA to back off of raids? Politically I think he could now make the case that with some many states passing legal marijuana laws that the DEA's time and money could better spent elsewhere.

I know this is a contrarian position, but I would rather have Romney in the White House than Obama on this issue. A Republican can have a going-to-China moment on this, but Obama has been wretched on marijuana policy so far, and I'm not sure he has the political freedom to do the right thing on this topic like a Republican would. Of course I hope I'm wrong and I'll give Obama nothing but praise if can get the feds to come around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So only members of the Denver Broncos can get high now and Goddell cannot suspend them?

I'm giddy at the prospect of some Broncos player telling the commish to gfh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My big question...is this the excuse Obama needs to tell the DEA to back off of raids? Politically I think he could now make the case that with some many states passing legal marijuana laws that the DEA's time and money could better spent elsewhere.

I know this is a contrarian position, but I would rather have Romney in the White House than Obama on this issue. A Republican can have a going-to-China moment on this, but Obama has been wretched on marijuana policy so far, and I'm not sure he has the political freedom to do the right thing on this topic like a Republican would. Of course I hope I'm wrong and I'll give Obama nothing but praise if can get the feds to come around.
I think your position is a very reasonable one. Another alternative, however, would be for the president to act quickly and call off the DEA right away. By the time the next election rolls around, recreational use may be far more extensively accepted and impossible for the 2016 candidates to successfully oppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My big question...is this the excuse Obama needs to tell the DEA to back off of raids? Politically I think he could now make the case that with some many states passing legal marijuana laws that the DEA's time and money could better spent elsewhere.

I know this is a contrarian position, but I would rather have Romney in the White House than Obama on this issue. A Republican can have a going-to-China moment on this, but Obama has been wretched on marijuana policy so far, and I'm not sure he has the political freedom to do the right thing on this topic like a Republican would. Of course I hope I'm wrong and I'll give Obama nothing but praise if can get the feds to come around.
He has significantly less risk in play now. Let's hope it makes a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My big question...is this the excuse Obama needs to tell the DEA to back off of raids? Politically I think he could now make the case that with some many states passing legal marijuana laws that the DEA's time and money could better spent elsewhere.

I know this is a contrarian position, but I would rather have Romney in the White House than Obama on this issue. A Republican can have a going-to-China moment on this, but Obama has been wretched on marijuana policy so far, and I'm not sure he has the political freedom to do the right thing on this topic like a Republican would. Of course I hope I'm wrong and I'll give Obama nothing but praise if can get the feds to come around.
I think your position is a very reasonable one. Another alternative, however, would be for the president to act quickly and call off the DEA right away. By the time the next election rolls around, recreational use may be far more extensively accepted and impossible for the 2016 candidates to successfully oppose.
That would be excellent. Benign neglect by the federal government would be a great response IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So only members of the Denver Broncos can get high now and Goddell cannot suspend them?

Seahawks too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now the Nuggets can go out and compete for free agent with ease.

Actually, No it doesn't. Employers can still have drug testing of their employees.

My Link

The initiative does not change the ability of employers to maintain their current employment policies, nor does it prevent them from creating whatever policies they see fit. If employers do not currently allow off-site marijuana use by employees, they can continue to prohibit it if Amendment 64 is adopted.

Exactly. The employer can still do it, unless doing so would violate a CBA or something. PS the NBA doesn't want large scale testing. 60-80% of guys in the NBA smoke weed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peyton Manning is still the smartest athlete. He bought a bunch of Papa John’s Pizza franchises [21, all in the Denver area] just before Colorado legalized marijuana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If only there was another drug which was legal and produces over 10,000 driving fatalities (over 32% of all driving fatalities). The one thing that is concerning is how to test for a DUI if the person is "potted up on weed"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maryland Senator Bobby Zirkin just introduced a bill to decriminalize personal possession of less than 10 grams. It would become a civil violation subject to a fine not greater than $100. Which means no one will bother.I wonder how our governor will take this. He seems pretty intent on running for president in 2016 or 2020; running from a Colorado- or Washington-type state may cost him a few votes in the swing states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maryland Senator Bobby Zirkin just introduced a bill to decriminalize personal possession of less than 10 grams. It would become a civil violation subject to a fine not greater than $100.

:thumbup: Good thing my dealer uses the metric system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If only there was another drug which was legal and produces over 10,000 driving fatalities (over 32% of all driving fatalities). The one thing that is concerning is how to test for a DUI if the person is "potted up on weed"
First we will need one of those super smart lawmakers to define what "potted up on weed" is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

link: Marijuana dealers getting slammed by taxes

Thanks to a decades-old law targeting drug runners, entrepreneurs in the nascent medical marijuana industry face a unique burden: an effective federal income tax rate that can soar as high as 75%.

The hefty levy is the result of a 1982 provision to the tax code, known as 280E, that stemmed from a successful attempt by a convicted drug trafficker to claim his yacht, weapons and bribes as businesses expenses, according to 280E Reform, a group working to overturn the statute.

Enacted in the wake of that PR debacle, the rule bars those selling illegal substances from deducting related expenses on their federal income taxes.

It may have been effective against cocaine dealers and smugglers of other hard drugs, but the law now means purveyors of medical marijuana in the 18 states that have legalized the drug can't can't take typical things like rent or payroll as a business expense. That's taking a heavy toll on this new field.

Jim Marty, an accountant in Colorado specializing in medicinal marijuana tax law, said he has one client that didn't turn a profit in 2009, 2010 or 2011. In 2012, though, she was handed a $300,000 tax bill from the IRS for those three proceeding years.

Entrepreneurs whose businesses are legal under state laws are getting hammered by outdated federal tax rules.

"If you have a license from the state hanging on your wall, that doesn't fit the definition of trafficking," Marty said. "Yet the IRS is aggressively auditing this industry."

He said he often sees clients facing effective tax bills of 65% to 75%. That compares to 15% to 30% for businesses in general.

The Internal Revenue Service did not respond to a request for comment. In a letter to a congressman in 2011, the agency said it was merely enforcing the law, and that Congress needs to change the law if it does not want medicinal marijuana dealers caught up in the provision.

Several groups are working on just that, though it's unclear if the law will be changed anytime soon. The Obama administration has so far not expressed much interest in weighing in on the matter.

Until then, those in the industry will keep looking for crafty ways to minimize their tax bill, and pay the tax man when they can't.

"An emerging industry that can provide hundreds of thousands of jobs is being held back by these crazy tax rates," said Betty Aldworth, deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association. "We're like any other small businesses, that just happens to be illegal in some states." To top of page

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go Pennsylvania! (figured they'd be the last state to consider it)

Pennsylvania: Marijuana Legalization Legislation Introduced

Legislation that seeks to make Pennsylvania the third state to legalize and regulate the adult use of marijuana, Senate Bill 528, has been introduced in the Pennsylvania Senate. Senator Daylin Leach (D-Montgomery County) has pre-filed legislation to be debated by lawmakers this spring. States Sen. Lynch: “Demographics and exposure will in time defeat irrational fears, old wives tales and bad science. This bill furthers the discussion, which hastens the day."

Approximately 25,000 citizens are arrested annually in Pennsylvania for marijuana-related offenses, at a cost of some $325 million dollars.

Pennsylvania is one of a growing number of states where lawmakers are considering full cannabis legalization.

Edited by E-Z Glider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres talk of Florida possibly becoming the first southern state to legalize medicinal marijuana in 2014. A local big shot attorney is spearheading the campaign to get the 680k signatures to get it on the ballot.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/20/florida-medical-marijuana_n_2915919.html

Florida Medical Marijuana Campaign Gets Backing From Top Democratic Fundraisers

ORLANDO, Fla., March 20 (Reuters) - Two top Democratic fundraisers in Florida have committed to providing the money and know-how to get the question of legalizing medical marijuana on the state ballot in 2014.

"I'm prepared to keep raising money and writing checks until I get the signatures to put it on the ballot," attorney John Morgan said late on Tuesday.

Morgan, who routinely hosts presidents and national political figures at his Orlando-area home, recently signed on as chairman of People United for Medical Marijuana-Florida, a grassroots campaign that operated on a shoestring until now.

Morgan was recruited by Ben Pollara, a lobbyist and fundraiser for President Barack Obama's 2012 re-election campaign. Pollara recently became treasurer of the medical marijuana campaign.

By law, the campaign needs to collect signatures of almost 700,000 registered voters to get a constitutional amendment legalizing medical marijuana on the ballot in November 2014.

Pollara estimated the campaign will cost $10 million.

Morgan, who put his money behind a successful 2004 constitutional amendment raising Florida's minimum wage, said he thinks he can recruit an "army of angels" to help gather the necessary signatures for the ballot initiative.

"I believe there is going to be kind of an uprising of people who have needed it in the past or had a loved one who needed it who are going to say I don't want this to happen to someone else," Morgan said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A proposal that could lead to the repeal of marijuana legalization in Colorado has gained momentum at the state Capitol.

The repeal would be linked to a measure on marijuana taxes that is expected to go before voters in November, according to legislators and advocacy groups involved in the discussions. The premise is that, if voters do not approve the taxes, then Amendment 64, the initiative passed just months ago to legalize marijuana, would be repealed. It's also possible that voters would be given a choice of repealing marijuana legalization if the taxes don't pass.

After only a few days of behind-the-scenes talks, the proposal emerged publicly Friday. The leaders of both chambers are receptive to the plan.

House Speaker Mark Ferrandino, D-Denver, called the plan "worth the conversation."

"I'm open to it," he said.

Senate President John Morse, D-Colorado Springs, went even further.

"I am absolutely supportive of the idea," he said.

The leaders' backing is significant since the measure faces a tough road out of the legislature. Because it could repeal a constitutional amendment, the proposal needs two-thirds support to go before voters. It must also navigate through an increasingly acrimonious atmosphere at the Capitol with only 12 days left in the session.

Just about everything surrounding the measure is, for now, uncertain and disputed.

Rep. Frank McNulty, a Highlands Ranch Republican who is involved in the repeal talks, said lawmakers who support the idea haven't agreed on final language for a repeal proposal. The plan hasn't been officially introduced, either.

Rep. Dan Pabon, a Denver Democrat who has been involved in many of the discussions on marijuana at the Capitol this year, said the repeal idea would undermine good-faith efforts to regulate marijuana.

"I'd hate to see all the hard work we've done to protect public safety go to waste," Pabon said.

Tensions over the proposal are also high between supporters of marijuana legalization and a group working to restrict pot in Colorado. Back-to-back news conferences by the groups outside the Capitol on Friday devolved into direct exchanges of heated words between advocates on both sides.

"What this comes down to is extortion," Mason Tvert, one of Amendment 64's authors, said during his news conference. "The proposal to repeal Amendment 64 is extortion."

"If the taxes are passed in the fall," said Diane Carlson, a member of the marijuana-critical group Smart Colorado, "there should be no concern about the repeal. ... I don't see why everybody is so scared about being held accountable."

Amendment 64 legalized use and possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for people 21 and older in Colorado. It also allows marijuana to be sold in specially licensed stores, which could open at the start of 2014. Voters approved Amendment 64 in November with 55 percent support. It garnered more votes in the state than did President Barack Obama.

The amendment allows lawmakers to propose up to a 15 percent excise tax on marijuana to generate money for school construction, and lawmakers have also proposed a 15 percent special sales tax on pot to pay for regulation of marijuana stores. The tax proposals, contained in House Bill 1318, passed the House Appropriations Committee on Friday morning.

Lawmakers have publicly worried about how the tax plan, which could generate tens of millions of dollars annually, would fare with voters. If voters don't pass the plan, the fear goes, marijuana regulations will be underfunded and ineffective.

"Without this measure, we won't be able to implement a model that will ensure our communities can be kept safe," Rep. Jonathan Singer, the Longmont Democrat sponsoring HB 1318, said during a committee hearing Thursday.

McNulty said attaching the taxes to a repeal provision would give marijuana advocates "skin in the game" to push for the tax measure. Carlson agreed, calling a repeal threat "the only way of ensuring there will be tax money to fund the regulatory costs."

But representatives for Smart Colorado sent mixed signals as to whether they would urge voters to approve the taxes if they were tied to a repeal.

Tvert, meanwhile, said that if lawmakers are worried voters won't approve 15 percent excise and sales taxes, the tax proposals should be shrunk. He suggested a 10 percent sales tax, and cited a poll Amendment 64 backers commissioned that shows 77 percent support in Colorado for that level.

Several lawmakers have also suggested the proposed tax rates be lowered.

"I don't think the voters will accept that," Rep. Brian DelGrosso, R-Loveland, said during Friday's committee meeting of the 15 percent rate.

Singer, though, said — if voters approve the tax measure — lawmakers can ultimately set the rates at lower levels.

"This is our best educated guess on how to proceed," he said.

Edited by Mile High

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taxing the sale of MJ is extremely popular, especially among non-smokers. Not sure why they think the proposed tax in CO won't pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taxing the sale of MJ is extremely popular, especially among non-smokers. Not sure why they think the proposed tax in CO won't pass.

30%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the tax there on alcohol? Make it the same. Problem solved.

Illinois taxes alcohol by volume not as a % of sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the tax there on alcohol? Make it the same. Problem solved.

Illinois taxes alcohol by volume not as a % of sale.

But it looks like Colorado taxes alcohol at 2.9%. 30% seems a little over the top compared to that. So it's reasonable to think it'll be tough to pass given the fact the voters already approved 15%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While the tax is excessive, smokers should support it , as the alternative is is back to illegal status. The choice is pay 30% more or risk going to jail, it's a pretty clear choice. It may be blackmail by the politicians, but you've got to keep it legal from a smoker's perspective.

Non-smokers should support it regardless, because they aren't paying it.

It would be ironic if anti-tax non-smokers end up voting it down on principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me what the tax on alcohol was when prohibition of alcohol was repealed?

I did a quick search but couldn't find it.

Might be a good jumping off point to see if taxes were high at first and subsequently came down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While the tax is excessive, smokers should support it , as the alternative is is back to illegal status. The choice is pay 30% more or risk going to jail, it's a pretty clear choice. It may be blackmail by the politicians, but you've got to keep it legal from a smoker's perspective. Non-smokers should support it regardless, because they aren't paying it. It would be ironic if anti-tax non-smokers end up voting it down on principle.

I agree. They need to look at the big picture. If MJ legalization takes off, there's the potential of neighboring states having cheaper product. Perhaps forcing CO th rethink the rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't bothered to keep up with a state that is 2k away but are you nto allowed to grow your own there? Why would anybody buy weed if you can grow it yourself. Besides being lazy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't bothered to keep up with a state that is 2k away but are you nto allowed to grow your own there? Why would anybody buy weed if you can grow it yourself. Besides being lazy?

The same reason people buy tomatoes, corn, broccoli.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't bothered to keep up with a state that is 2k away but are you nto allowed to grow your own there? Why would anybody buy weed if you can grow it yourself. Besides being lazy?

The same reason people buy tomatoes, corn, broccoli.

Fair point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't bothered to keep up with a state that is 2k away but are you nto allowed to grow your own there? Why would anybody buy weed if you can grow it yourself. Besides being lazy?

The same reason people buy tomatoes, corn, broccoli.

I grow my own. I call it The Cornic.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't bothered to keep up with a state that is 2k away but are you nto allowed to grow your own there? Why would anybody buy weed if you can grow it yourself. Besides being lazy?

The same reason people buy tomatoes, corn, broccoli.

I grow my own. I call it The Cornic.

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.