Now that initiative 502, or New Approach Washington, has made its way onto November’s ballot, I would like to propose a follow-up piece to Dominic Holden’s January 3rd article, ‘Stoner Clash,’ in which he briefly detailed the ironic internal struggle between medicinal marijuana patients and casual users just looking to stay out of court. The purpose of this follow-up article would be to focus on the legislative nature of the initiative as well as the controversy it initially stirred, and offer an informed take on what is sure to be a heated debate between now and November.
Much like California’s prop 19 -- which appeared on that state’s midterm ballot in 2010 -- I-502 is an initiative that if passed, would be the first of its kind in the country, and consequently carries with it a historic precedent as far as federal intervention in the matter is concerned. Furthermore, what makes I-502’s appearance in Washington particularly interesting is the fact that the regulation of marijuana would be overseen by the state’s Liquor Control Board (LBC), a system that currently imposes, comparatively speaking, stricter rules on the distribution of liquor than some states in the U.S.
The authors of I-502 have already laid out plans for the revenues collected via the distribution and taxing of marijuana, and these plans include, but are not limited to, public education programs and research projects, both of which would be conducted through the University of Washington and Washington State University, as well as funding for Healthy Youth Survey and roughly $80 million to be put into the general state fund. The measure would allow individuals over the age of twenty-one to possess and ingest marijuana for personal use, however it also imposes a new type of DUI, in which someone could be arrested for operating a vehicle with 5 ng/mL of THC concentrate in their blood. As it happens, it is this last point about DUIs that medicinal users oppose.
New Approach Washington is officially sponsored by a host of lawyers, professors, and public health officials, and endorsed by Democrats across the state, as well as the Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans and the Peace and Justice Action League of Spokane, to name a few. Conversely, the measure is staunchly opposed by the group Patients Against I-502, who has the backing of David G. Arganian, a lawyer that specializes in DUI defense, and Jeffery Steinborn of the legal committee and board of directors for the National Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), amongst others.
It’s always sort of assumed that in the battle to legalize marijuana, smokers are united across the board, however the current divide between medicinal users and casual users poses an interesting twist. Furthermore, regulation under the LBC, and the grouping of marijuana with alcohol, poses an equally interesting twist. Through investigating both these pot legislation anomalies, I believe a compelling look at marijuana reform, a topic that is spreading rapidly across the nation, is sure to arise, and by doing both sides of the argument equal justice, Washington’s citizens will be left with an informed, unbiased view of New Approach Washington.
Much like California’s prop 19 -- which appeared on that state’s midterm ballot in 2010 -- I-502 is an initiative that if passed, would be the first of its kind in the country, and consequently carries with it a historic precedent as far as federal intervention in the matter is concerned. Furthermore, what makes I-502’s appearance in Washington particularly interesting is the fact that the regulation of marijuana would be overseen by the state’s Liquor Control Board (LBC), a system that currently imposes, comparatively speaking, stricter rules on the distribution of liquor than some states in the U.S.
The authors of I-502 have already laid out plans for the revenues collected via the distribution and taxing of marijuana, and these plans include, but are not limited to, public education programs and research projects, both of which would be conducted through the University of Washington and Washington State University, as well as funding for Healthy Youth Survey and roughly $80 million to be put into the general state fund. The measure would allow individuals over the age of twenty-one to possess and ingest marijuana for personal use, however it also imposes a new type of DUI, in which someone could be arrested for operating a vehicle with 5 ng/mL of THC concentrate in their blood. As it happens, it is this last point about DUIs that medicinal users oppose.
New Approach Washington is officially sponsored by a host of lawyers, professors, and public health officials, and endorsed by Democrats across the state, as well as the Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans and the Peace and Justice Action League of Spokane, to name a few. Conversely, the measure is staunchly opposed by the group Patients Against I-502, who has the backing of David G. Arganian, a lawyer that specializes in DUI defense, and Jeffery Steinborn of the legal committee and board of directors for the National Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), amongst others.
It’s always sort of assumed that in the battle to legalize marijuana, smokers are united across the board, however the current divide between medicinal users and casual users poses an interesting twist. Furthermore, regulation under the LBC, and the grouping of marijuana with alcohol, poses an equally interesting twist. Through investigating both these pot legislation anomalies, I believe a compelling look at marijuana reform, a topic that is spreading rapidly across the nation, is sure to arise, and by doing both sides of the argument equal justice, Washington’s citizens will be left with an informed, unbiased view of New Approach Washington.
No comments:
Post a Comment