Mysterious Marijuana Monopoly Man
Ferndale pot shop ballot issues shows consequences of MJ proposal
LANSING – With just two weeks before voters go to the polls, a ballot issue in the City of Ferndale is demonstrating the potential for abuse and profiteering already sought by some under Proposal 1, the statewide ballot question legalizing smoked marijuana for so-called “medical” purposes on the ballot in Michigan this November.
As reported Sunday (Oct. 19) in the Daily Tribune:
“Mayor Craig Covey and other city leaders are questioning the motives of a man who is asking city voters to give him the right to distribute medical marijuana in Ferndale.
“Carl M. Swanson heads a group called the National Organization for Positive Medicine, which has no discernable mailing address or phone number.”
In response to the report, Judge Bill Schuette, co-chair of Citizens Protecting Michigan’s Kids, said: “When doctors, law enforcement officials and parents talk about the loopholes and unintended consequences of Proposal 1, these are exactly the kind of problems they worry about. By all accounts, here we have the case of a guy who looks at Michigan and its pending marijuana law and sees a cash cow. Now, he’s trying to come here, set up shop, sell pot and make money.”
The Tribune goes on to recount the mysterious steps around which Mr. Swanson has gone to keep his identity and intentions a secret while using a local resident to collect the signatures needed to place his proposal on the city ballot and a local attorney to act as his spokesman while Swanson remains out of state.
As quoted in the Tribune, Ferndale City Councilman T. Scott Galloway said:
"I think what is really happening is that (Swanson) is an entrepreneur who is betting that Michigan will pass Proposal 1 to permit the use of medical marijuana and then he'll be able to set up shop in Ferndale to sell it. It doesn't leave a very good of a taste in my mouth. I think it's an abuse of the democratic process for commercial gain by someone from out of town without any regard for what's good for the community."
There is no language in Proposal 1 that specifically prohibits so-called caregivers from coming together to collectively store, grow and supply marijuana. A similar law passed in California has led to an explosion of pot shops and smoking in neighborhoods around the state.
“California gives Michigan reason after reason to vote “No” on Proposal 1,” Schuette concluded. “In this case, however, voters don’t even need to look to California. They can see the potential consequences in a community right here in Michigan.”
Proposal 1 needs more safeguards
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Grand Rapids Press
Should Michigan residents approve the medical marijuana proposal on the Nov. 4 ballot? We say NO. Not because we are unconvinced about the medical benefits the drug could provide some sick and dying people. There is a growing body of research and patient testimonials about marijuana's medical properties, despite federal drug laws that say it has no accepted medical use. Our concern is that there are not enough safeguards in the ballot proposal to ensure proper regulation and controlled distribution of personally grown pot.
Proposal 1 would allow people with debilitating medical conditions to grow and use marijuana to relieve pain and suffering -- if they have a doctor's approval. The Department of Community Health would set up a medical marijuana registry and issue ID cards to approved users and growers after receiving written confirmation from patients' doctors. Authorized users could grow up to a dozen plants and possess up to 2.5 ounces for personal use.
Medical marijuana has been used by cancer patients on chemotherapy to control severe nausea; to restore the appetites of AIDS patients and others with wasting diseases; and to improve muscle control for people with multiple sclerosis. Twelve states have laws that permit the use of marijuana as a pain reliever, if recommended by a physician.
Opponents of the Michigan measure, particularly law enforcement officials, say letting people grow and use marijuana is not only against the law, but could increase accessibility to teenagers and increase the number of people driving under the influence. Those are legitimate concerns.
Figures from the Drug Free Schools Coalition indicate that one marijuana plant can yield
28,000 joints in one year. More than 300,000 joints could be made from 12 plants. The potential for a lot more of the drug circulating in the state is real, especially when up to 50,000 residents could qualify for medical marijuana. That would be one-half of one percent of Michigan's population. That is the percentage of Oregon's population approved to use medical marijuana since that state passed legislation in 1998.
Law officials may be concerned about legal issues, but there are other issues, such as the quality and potency of individual crops. Medicine should be regulated for dosage and strength to make sure people are not over- or under-medicating. Furthermore, sick people should not have to manufacture their own medicine. If marijuana is going to be the used for medical purposes in Michigan, we should figure out a better way to produce and distribute it safely. A proposal introduced in Minnesota did not allow patients to grow their own marijuana. They had to buy it from a registered non-profit outlet.
Drugs such as morphine, steroids, Valium and others are illegal without a doctor's prescription, and their production and use are regulated by the government. Medical marijuana should get the same treatment.
The National Marijuana Policy Project provided the funds to get Proposal 1 on the ballot in Michigan. Helping sick people feel better is an admirable goal. But this measure doesn't have adequate safeguards that would keep medical marijuana in the hands of the intended users -- and out of the hands of those who shouldn't have it.
California shows why medical marijuana is dangerous
By Bill Schuette and Daniel Michael
October 10, 2008
Detroit Free Press
A decade ago, voters in California approved a proposal to legalize marijuana smoking for so-called “medical” purposes. Today, even the proposal’s most vocal supporters admit the California law has resulted in “chaos,” “pot dealers in storefronts” and millions of dollars being dumped “into the criminal black market.”
Proposal 1 on the Nov. 4 ballot in Michigan is just like the California law. While its stated intent, to help people in serious pain, is well meaning, Proposal 1’s vague language, careless loopholes and dangerous consequences place Michigan communities and kids at risk. Michigan voters should reject it.
Proposal 1 allows one person to grow and provide marijuana for a number of other people, as long as the marijuana is kept in a locked facility.
What happens when that locked facility is your neighbor’s garage or a strip mall storefront, as they have in California? Maybe you think this can’t happen in Michigan, but consider this: In North Hollywood, there are now more pot shops than Starbucks stores, and last week a security guard was gunned down outside a Los Angeles pot shop.
Everyday, diligent parents and teachers fight a difficult battle to protect teens from drugs and their influences. Law enforcement officials in California point to their state’s marijuana law as a cause for the dramatic increase in drug use among high school students. That’s a major reason why groups such as the Michigan Sheriffs’ Association and the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police are opposed to Proposal 1.
For doctors and hospitals, those on the front lines of medical care, Proposal 1 is “bad medicine.” For one thing, Proposal 1 doesn’t require a prescription. It not only relies on but promotes smoking as a delivery mechanism. And, Proposal 1 could result in costly lawsuits over such things as whether doctors and hospitals must allow patients to smoke marijuana in a doctor’s office or hospital room, despite every other law banning smoking.
The Michigan State Medical Society, the Michigan Health and Hospital Association and the Michigan Osteopathic Association all oppose Proposal 1 because smoking marijuana is not the answer to the important scientific questions surrounding the effective care of patients.
A legal analysis of Proposal 1 outlines a situation where the worker next to you on the assembly line or the driver of a delivery van could smoke marijuana on the job and your employer could do nothing about it. In fact, if that delivery van driver, or any other driver under the influence of “medical” marijuana for that matter, hits another car and injures someone, Proposal 1 may allow marijuana use as a defense in court.
Lastly, Proposal 1 would leave the regulation of a “medical” marijuana program up to Lansing to figure out. With Michigan facing such tough economic times, taxpayers can’t afford a new government bureaucracy to keep track of marijuana users.
Proposal 1 is many things, but above all else it is a law of unintended consequences. The dangerous implications of its flaws and loopholes have brought together Michigan’s doctors, hospitals, sheriffs, police chiefs, prosecutors, family groups, and taxpayer advocates to urge voters to say “No” to Proposal 1.
California’s “medical” marijuana proposal brought chaos; Michigan’s proposal brings an opportunity to learn from California’s mistake.
Judge Bill Schuette is a member of the Michigan Court of Appeals. Dr. Daniel Michael is a Detroit neurosurgeon and speaker of the Michigan State Medical Society’s House of Delegates.
Proposal I - 'high' stakes
By JESSICA SIEFF / Niles Daily Star
Saturday, October 11, 2008 12:23 AM EDT
When voters hit the booths in just a few short weeks, they will find themselves voting on two very controversial statewide proposals.
Michigan ballots will ask voters to let their voices be heard on Proposal 1, legislation to be known as the "Michigan Medical Marihuana Act" and Proposal II - a proposed constitutional amendment to Article I addressing human embryo and embryonic stem cell research within the state.
The Star will take a look at both proposals - starting with Proposal I.
Under the legislation, officially referred to as the 'Michigan Medical Marihuana Act," the drug marijuana would be legal under state law for medical use. The legislation states it would "provide for a system of registry identification cards for qualifying patients and primary caregivers; to impose a fee for registry application and renewal; to provide for the promulgation of rules; to provide for the administration of this act; provide for enforcement of this act; to provide for affirmative defenses; and to provide for penalties for violations of this act."
That's a lot of provisions - and some say they are not enough to ensure that the medical use of marijuana won't be taken advantage of. Others find the relief the drug gives to those suffering from certain illnesses - worth the risk.
The drug has been found, according to the state's text on the proposal to give relief to sufferers of "debilitating medical conditions." Cancer, glaucoma, Chron's disease acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) and hepatitis C are just a few listed by the state as such conditions. Chronic conditions that require treatments that lead to severe nausea, chronic pain and seizures are also defined as a "debilitating medical condition" within the proposal.
A recent poll released by Denno Noor Research, The Rossman Group and Michigan Information and Research Service claimed "58 percent of Michigan's voters favor the ballot initiative while 33 percent do not."
One percent of voters, according to that press release, refused to answer the poll.
"Law enforcement wise, we fear it is going to increase marijuana in our communities...our schools," said Milton Abraham Agay, chief of police of the Berrien Springs Oronoko Township Police Department and president of the West Michigan Association of Chief's of Police.
Agay said under the proposal, he feels there is no way to "control the worker or the student" who may have permission to use the drug. "There's nothing to prevent the school bus driver from getting high and going to pick up our children," he said.
The act happens to list operating a school bus under its list of tasks that qualified patients would not be permitted to do under the act.
Under the legislation, any "qualified patient" would be permitted to keep 12 marijuana plants in "an enclosed, locked facility." The patient may also keep up to 2.5 ounces of "usable marijuana."
Another fear that stems from this proposal, Agay said, is the possibility of a sudden presence of "pot shops." Stores, Agay said, which would allow people to go in and purchase marijuana as well as smoke it on the premises.
The legislation seems to rest on the use of identification and registry cards as a means of regulating who would be permitted to be in possession of the drug and who would not. But it seems as though ensuring the drug doesn't end up in the wrong hands might be tough.
Still - "with less than a month to go, it's clear that legalizing medical marijuana is high on voters minds," Kelly Rossman-McKinney, CEO of The Rossman Group said in the release.
"Michigan voters are not going to let the medical marijuana proposal go up in smoke."
One organization that supports Proposal I is the Michigan Coalition for Compassionate Care, which provides information about the initiative as well as stories of patients and relatives of patients whose lives have benefited from the use of medical marijuana.
"Support for medical marijuana is more than 60 percent in every geographic region of the state, with the exception of the Upper Peninsula and West Michigan," said Dennis Denno, President of Denno Noor Research in the press release.
Agay - who said he sympathizes with patients suffering from painful illnesses and treatments, at the age of 18 he lost his mother to cancer and suffers from cancer himself - said "it's going to be devastating," when asked what it would mean to statewide and local law enforcement agencies should the proposal pass on Nov. 4.
October 6, 2008
Don't fall for medical marijuana
The state of Michigan is currently under attack by the pro-drug lobby in its attempts to legalize marijuana as a so-called medicine ("In Our Opinion: Yes on Prop 1: Allow seriously ill people the relief marijuana may offer," Oct. 2).
"Medical" marijuana is a Trojan horse for legalizing the drug itself and for making it available without regard to medical science. The real issue is public safety and the staggering effect this initiative could have on children and families residing in Michigan.
As parents struggle to keep their children drug-free, it is important that they arm themselves with the facts. This dangerous initiative is loaded with unintended negative consequences.
According to the Office of Applied Studies report titled "State Estimates of Substance Use from the 1999-2006 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health," the states that have legalized marijuana as a so-called medicine continuously rank in the top 10 for the highest recorded marijuana use for adolescents in the 12-17 age category. Do not condemn the youths of Michigan to the same statistics.
The passage of Proposal 1 would also have other direct and significant unintended consequences to the citizens of Michigan. The amount of marijuana this proposal would allow individuals to possess would create disastrous public safety issues, such as an increase in drugged driving, marijuana in the workplace, and the creation of neighborhood pot clubs.
If passed, this proposal would allow a so-called caregiver to supply up to five "patients" at any given time, allowing them to possess 60 plants and 12.5 ounces of usable marijuana. An environment that has this amount of marijuana available is known as a grow house or pot dispensary. Dispensaries and grow houses have led to increased crime and violence in communities.
Marijuana is an illegal drug, and, admittedly, it makes some people "feel good." That is what drugs do -- make you feel good. That does not make legitimate medicine.
If Michigan makes an exception for those who claim smoked marijuana is medicine, it will open the door to widespread marijuana use and fraudulent claims of illness for all drug users.
This would have devastating effects on the state as a whole -- especially the millions of families struggling to raise children in a drug-free environment and addicts battling to break free of the deadly grip of drug addiction.
Ann Comiskey
Executive Director
Troy Community Coalition
Group opposes medical-marijuana ballot measure
10/2/2008, 1:33 p.m. EDT
By BEN LEUBSDORF
The Associated Press
SOUTHFIELD, Mich. (AP) — If Michigan voters approve a medical-marijuana ballot initiative next month, the state will enter a minefield of unintended consequences, according to a newly formed group opposing the measure.
Citizens Protecting Michigan's Kids made its debut Thursday with a morning press conference at a hospital in Southfield. Similar kickoff events were set for later in the day in Lansing and Grand Rapids and on Friday in Saginaw and Traverse City.
The coalition includes more than two dozen medical, law enforcement, anti-drug and other organizations, including the Michigan State Medical Society, the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan and Citizens for Traditional Values.
If approved on Nov. 4, Proposal 1 would allow patients with a variety of conditions, including cancer and AIDS, to grow and use a limited amount of marijuana with a doctor's recommendation to treat pain, nausea and other symptoms.
Opponents of the measure "are keenly sensitive to the challenges and problems that people have who are undergoing severe pain problems," Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Bill Schuette said Thursday. "But this proposal, Proposal 1, is so deeply flawed and carelessly and loosely written that as a judge I would say the problem here is the law of unintended consequences that provides deep pitfalls for Michigan voters in November."
Despite its intentions, Schuette said, the bill would make it easier for children and teenagers to obtain marijuana for recreational use as well as raise a number of legal questions about where and how patients could smoke marijuana.
Schuette is a former congressman, state senator and Michigan agriculture director.
Dianne Byrum, also a former state legislator and spokeswoman for the Michigan Coalition for Compassionate Care, which is spearheading the measure, called Schuette's criticisms "red herrings." She said the dozen states that have enacted medical-marijuana laws largely have not encountered the problems cited by the opposition group.
"They're trying to manufacture issues to distract from the compassion that this law represents," she said, adding that the opposition group "is conducting a campaign of misinformation and scare tactics."
George Basar, chief of police in Howell and president of the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police, said the initiative, if approved, will make it more difficult for local law enforcement agencies to fight illegal drug use.
Basar, who appeared at the Thursday press conference, said police would have trouble making sure registered patients don't abuse their legal protection to grow more marijuana than allowed or distribute it to others.
"If I go to a doctor and he gives me a prescription for Vicodin, I don't go home and manufacture as much Vicodin as I need," Basar said.
Dan Michael, a medical doctor at William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, said a medical-marijuana law isn't necessary because there are other medications that more effectively treat patients' symptoms.
"Simply stated, it's bad medicine," he said.
© 2008 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Bad Buzz: Proposal 1 Puts Kids, Communities at RiskMedical, law enforcement and family groups join forces to urge 'No' on Proposal 1
LANSING, Mich, Oct 02, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/
Warning of wide open loopholes and errors in a proposal that will lead to unintended and dangerous consequences for Michigan and its kids, a broad-based coalition of medical professionals, law enforcement officials, parents and taxpayer groups joined forces today to urge voters to vote "NO" on Proposal 1.
At events across Michigan, the diverse membership of Citizens Protecting Michigan's Kids said that the so-called "medical" marijuana proposal on the November ballot is filled with the kind of loopholes and vague provisions that could undermine efforts to limit smoking in public places, allow marijuana use as a defense in court and make pot shops a staple in every community.
"Proposal 1 is flawed and full of unintended consequences which will be devastating to Michigan's kids and their families," said Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Bill Schuette. "While the need to help people burdened with chronic pain symptoms is real, Proposal 1, which advocates legalizing marijuana, is carelessly written and opens the door to greater access to drugs for teenagers across Michigan."
Among many of the potential consequences that could result from passage of this flawed proposal, Citizens Protecting Michigan's Kids point to loopholes that would:
-- Allow use of marijuana without a doctor's prescription;
-- Allow a person arrested on any offense to use marijuana use as a "medical" defense in court;
-- Allow a flood of lawsuits over things such as whether doctors and hospitals must allow patients to smoke marijuana in a doctor's office or hospital room, despite every other law banning smoking;
-- Allow the opening of pot shops and smoking clubs in neighborhood strip malls, like has happened in California under a similar proposal; and,
-- Cost taxpayers by requiring the funding of a new Lansing bureaucracy to license marijuana users along with the regulatory expenses that follow.
"Physicians oppose the ballot proposal because of many unintended consequences including the fact that smoking anything, including marijuana, is harmful for the patient and anyone around them," said Daniel B. Michael, MD, a Detroit neurosurgeon and speaker of the Michigan State Medical Society's House of Delegates. "It's also impossible to set uniform dosages and establish purity of a street drug. We have scientifically tested pharmaceuticals that are proven effective. Patients in pain or with intolerable symptoms should have access to appropriate medications."
A decade ago, voters in the State of California adopted a proposal similar to Michigan's Proposal 1. The rise in crime, increased non-medical drug use and the creation of a new industry of pot shops have led even the proposal's original backers to say the California effort led to dangerous and unintended consequences.
"California's marijuana proposal offers lessons for Michigan voters that just can't be ignored," said Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard. "In Los Angles alone, there are more than 400 pot shops, and where located, information shows a rise in serious crimes such as robberies, burglaries and aggravated assaults have followed. On top of the 'marijuana defense' allowed in court under Proposal 1, this law is a dangerous step backwards in efforts to keep our communities and our streets safe."
Jim Barrett, business consultant and retired president of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, asked: "With Michigan's economy and taxpayers facing such tough times right now, is this really the time to add to the taxpayer's tab a new government bureaucracy to keep track of marijuana users? Proposal 1 is a horribly written proposal with dangerous consequences for Michigan. We urge voters to say 'No.'"
Brad Snavely of the Michigan Family Forum said: "For Michigan parents working hard to keep drugs and drug dealers away from their kids, Proposal 1 makes that job even harder. The daily influences that kids face are challenging enough, but imagine how much harder that job becomes when a pot shop opens in the shopping center next to your grocery store and immediately becomes a magnet for criminals looking for the drugs or money inside? It's a scary thought, but a reality in places where laws like this have passed before."
The growing list of members of Citizens Protecting Michigan's Kids include:
Michigan State Medical Society
Michigan Osteopathic Association
Michigan Sheriffs' Association
Michigan Assoc. of Chiefs of Police
Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan
Michigan Fraternal Order of Police
West Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police
Southeastern Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police
Citizens for Traditional Values
Michigan Family Forum
Drug-Free Schools Coalition
National Drug-Free Workplace Alliance
Drug Prevention Network of the Americas
International Scientific and Medical Forum on Drug Abuse
Institute on Global Drug Policy
International Task Force on Strategic Drug Policy
Students Taking Action Not Drugs (S.T.A.N.D.)
Drug Free America Foundation
Save Our Society From Drugs (S.O.S.)
The Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks
Drug-Free Workplace Network, Jerome L. Houfek, President
Drug-Free Projects Coalition, Inc. Elizabeth Edwards, Managing Director
The Student Drug-Testing Coalition, Chairman Malcolm K. Beyer, Jr.
NJ Federation for Drug-Free Communities, Geraldine Silverman, Treasurer
Michigan Prevention Association
PREVCO (Prevention Coalition of Southeast Michigan)
Citizens Protecting Michigan's Kids is launching this campaign at events in Southfield, Lansing, Grand Rapids, Traverse City and Saginaw.
SOURCE Citizens Protecting Michigan's Kids
Copyright (C) 2008 PR Newswire. All rights reserved