This is the second time the Arkansas attorney general has rejected the proposed constitutional amendment submitted by University of Arkansas NORML’s Ryan Denham.  The problem, you see, is that its title says it would make medical marijuana legal in Arkansas, and the title doesn’t accurately summarize the intent of the legislation to voters.

(Arkansas News) In a letter to campaign director Ryan Denham, [Arkansas State Attorney General Dustin] McDaniel wrote that federal law bans marijuana and would supersede a state amendment.

“Your use of the word ‘legal’ fails to acknowledge that your proposed measure cannot completely legalize marijuana in Arkansas for medical purposes because the drug remains illegal under federal law,” the opinion said.

McDaniel wrote it’s difficult to fully summarize a document of nearly 8,700-words in a ballot title without being so long that it causes voters to violate voting-booth time limitations.

For your reference, here is the official ballot title that AG McDaniel rejected:

AN ACT MAKING THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA LEGAL AND ESTABLISHING A SYSTEM FOR THE CULTIVATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF MARIJUANA FOR PATIENTS THROUGH NONPROFIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES; PROVIDING THAT QUALIFYING MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS, THEIR CAREGIVERS AND NONPROFIT DISPENSARY OPERATORS SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL OR CIVIL PENALTIES OR OTHER FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION FOR ENGAGING IN OR ASSISTING WITH THE PATIENTS’ MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA; AUTHORIZING  LIMITED CULTIVATION OF MARIJUANA BY PATIENTS OR CAREGIVERS IF A PATIENT LIVES MORE THAN FIVE MILES FROM THE NEAREST NONPROFIT DISPENSARY; DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO ESTABLISH RULES RELATED TO THE PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTRY IDENTIFICATION CARDS AND TO THE OPERATIONS OF NONPROFIT DISPENSARIES; SETTING MAXIMUM REGISTRATION FEES FOR NONPROFIT DISPENSARIES; ESTABLISHING QUAIFICATIONS [SIC] FOR REGISTRY IDENTIFICATION CARDS; ESTABLISHING STANDARDS TO ENSURE THAT PATIENT AND CAREGIVER REGISTRATION INFORMATION IS TREATED AS CONFIDENTIAL; DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO PROVIDE THE LEGISLATURE ANNUAL QUANTITATIVE REPORTS ABOUT THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAM; SETTING CERTAIN LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA BY PATIENTS; ESTABLISHING AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE FOR THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA; ESTABLISHING REGISTRATION AND OPERATION REQUIREMENTS FOR NONPROFIT DISPENSARIES; SETTING LIMITS ON THE AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA A NONPROFIT DISPENSARY MAY CULTIVATE AND THE AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA A NONPROFIT DISPENSARY MAY DISPENSE TO A PATIENT; PROHIBITING CERTAIN CONDUCT BY PHYSICIANS; ALLOWING LOCALITIES TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF NONPROFIT DISPENSARIES AND TO ENACT REASONABLE REGULATIONS GOVERNING THEIR OPERATIONS.

On the one hand, AG McDaniel insists the law requires Denham to summarize every major portion of the act.  On the other hand, the summary can’t be so long or convoluted as to confuse voters or require them to stay in the voting booth too long.

In addition to telling Denham he can’t use the word “legal” in a constitutional amendment making medical marijuana legal in the state, Denham can’t in one section refer to someone who is registered as a “designated patient” or “designated caregiver” and in another section can’t refer to them as “registered designated patient” and “registered designated caregiver”, because that is misleading.

Section 2(10) defines “designated caregiver” as a person who, among other things, “has agreed to  assist with a qualifying patient’s medical use of marijuana . . . .” Section 2(13) defines “registered designated caregiver” as a designated  caregiver “who is registered with the department . . . .” The registration aspect of the latter definition means that these two defined terms, unlike  the ones discussed in the previous paragraph, actually do have different meanings.

Section 2(11) defines “qualifying patient” as “a person who has been diagnosed by a physician as having a debilitating medical condition. Section 2(14) defines “registered  qualifying patient” as a qualifying patient who is registered with the department. Once again, the definitions make clear that these two defined terms denote different things. … [S]ection 9(2)(k) prohibits a dispensary from providing more than 2.5 ounces of marijuana to a “qualifying patient” in a 15-day period, possibly implying that a dispensary could provide 2.5 ounces or less to an (unregistered) qualifying patient.

There is also a problem with numbering and alphabetization.

Your proposal designates each section by two different numbers, a one-digit number like “8” and a three-digit number like “108.” It uses a section and subsection designation scheme in the form “108(2)(a)(ii)(B)” while the Arkansas Code Annotated uses a form that would designate the same subsection “-108(b)(i)(B)(2).” And the definitions in  sections 2(10) and 2(13) are not in alphabetical order as are the other definitions.

Denham’s amendment would protect medical marijuana patients from discrimination.  Attorney General McDaniel has a concern that patients whose cards expire could be discriminated against, which is encouraging.

It is my understanding that evidence of marijuana use is detectible for a number of days or weeks following a person’s last use of marijuana. If that understanding is correct, your proposal is ambiguous and unclear in apparently depriving of the protections of section 3(7) a person who used marijuana lawfully (at least insofar as the act is concerned) before her registration expired, and thereafter showed evidence of prior marijuana  use (as was completely foreseeable). The act’s apparent allowance of discrimination against (unregistered) qualifying patients does  not, in my view,  square with the act’s general approach, raising the possibility that the consequence is unintended and creating ambiguity.

The attorney general may be correct in some of his assessments.  I don’t agree with his assessment of the word “legal” as a problem because federal law would still define it as illegal.  This is an Arkansas constitutional amendment, not a federal constitutional amendment.  What this story should illustrate is that it is not an easy battle to get any sort of marijuana legislation on the ballot.

Download the NORML Daily Audio Stash for 2008-11-03

Download audio file (NORML_Daily_AudioStash_2008-11-03.mp3)

It’s our special election roundup here on the Stash.  We’ve got the experts here to give their take on state and local initiatives to be decided tomorrow:

• Dianne Byrum, Coalition for Compassionate Care, on Michigan’s Proposal 1 to legalize medical marijuana;
• Whitney Taylor, Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, on Massachusetts Question 2 to decriminalize personal possession of marijuana;
• Ethan Nadelmann, Drug Policy Alliance, on California’s Proposition 5 to move non-violent drug offenders to treatment instead of jail and decriminalize personal possession of marijuana;
• Ryan Denham, Sensible Fayetteville, on Fayetteville, Arkansas municipal measure to make enforcement of personal marijuana possession crimes the lowest law enforcement priority.

VOTE!

I know some of you think it doesn’t matter, they’re all the same, it’s hopeless, I hate ‘em all, whatever, but a cannabis consumer who doesn’t vote is like a battered spouse who keeps forgiving the batterer.  Your voice matters!  If people didn’t think voting mattered, California would never have passed Prop 215 and all the positive gains of the past dozen years may not have happened.

We can do this.  There are literally millions of us.  We’ve got the public mostly on our side; now it’s the politicians who need education.  The winds of change are blowing and we may have the best political atmosphere for drug law reform yet – the perfect storm of progressive leadership, popular will, and fiscal need.  Vote as if your freedom depends on it… because it does.

Download the NORML Daily Audio Stash for 2008-10-29

Download audio file (NORML_Daily_AudioStash_2008-10-29.mp3)

Today we continue talking initiatives – Ryan Denham of Sensible Fayetteville (Arkansas) will tell us about his lowest law enforcement priority initiative for the city.  While it may or may not help reduce marijuana arrests in Fayetteville (Arkansas is not a ‘home-rule’ state, so the city police might just ignore the initiative), it does require the city to send letters to the state and federal governments to end their war on marijuana.  I just love the idea of a pot-hating mayor being forced to sign that.

Then for Cannabis Science, Dr. Mitch Earleywine is here to tell us about European health authorities pulling the weight loss drug Accomplia from the market.  The drug works by blocking the CB1 receptors,the same receptors that react to THC.

And my brother Josh is on the podcast, bringing your musical break for the day.  It’s two Belvilles for the price of one!

Click here to view the embedded video.

Marijuana law reformers continue to take the phrase “all politics is local” to heart.

Over the past decade, grassroots activists in numerous towns and municipalities — including Seattle, Washington; Columbia, Missouri;Santa Cruz, Oakland, San Francisco, and Santa Barbara, California; and Denver, Colorado — have successfully campaigned for local ordinances making the enforcement of pot possession laws their city’s lowest law enforcement priority.

This year, a coalition of activists — led by the University of Arkansas chapter of NORML and the Alliance for Drug Reform Policy — have placed a similar proposal on the ballot in Fayetteville, Arkansas (population: 67,000).

If passed, the city will become the second Arkansas municipality in recent years to enact marijuana ‘deprioritization.’ (NORML’s state affiliate championed a similar measure in Eureka Springs in 2006.)

In the days leading up to November 4th, most Americans attention will be directed toward Washington, DC and the Presidential election race. But while we remain focused on national politics let’s not forget about the significant changes taking place locally — one community at a time.

NORML applauds the work of Sensible Fayetteville and the efforts of other local — and often unrecognized activists — not only what they’ve already achieved, but also (and especially) for what they will accomplish in the future.

Ryan Denham of Sensible Fayetteville will be my guest today on the Daily Audio Stash.

Click here to view the embedded video.

This was the opening panel on Friday morning of the NORML Conference in Berkeley, October 17, 2008.

Pot Politics 2008 and Beyond
Moderator: Keith Stroup, Esq., NORML, New Federal Decriminalization Legislation
Rob Kampia, MPP, Massachusetts and Michigan Initiatives
Madeline Martinez, Oregon NORML, Oregon Cannabis Tax Act 2010
Joe Elford, Esq., Americans for Safe Access, CA Attorney General Guidelines
Ethan Nadelmann, Drug Policy Alliance, CA Proposition 5 (NORA)
Becky DeKeuster, Berkeley Patients Group, Measure JJ in Berkeley
Ryan Denham, Sensible Fayetteville, Fayetteville Initiative
Sudi Pebbles Trippet, Mendocino, CA Initiative

Allen St. Pierre, NORML’s Executive Director, outlined the facts behind our battles – that we have record numbers of arrests in America and that we have many successful initiatives in the works for this election, including medmj in Michigan and decrim in Massachusetts.

NORML’s Legal Counsel, Keith Stroup, is moderating the Pot & Politics panel.  MPP’s Rob Kampia described the efforts in Michigan and Massachusetts.  Oregon NORML’s Madeline Martinez outlined the 2010 Oregon Cannabis Tax Act proposal.  Joe Elford from Americans for Safe Access talked about the new California Attorney General guidelines on medmj.  Drug Policy Alliance’s Ethan Nadelmann talked about California’s Prop 5 (NORA) which would decriminalize marijuana in that state and fix much of the prison sentencing issues.  Finally, Ryan Denham of Arkansas NORML and Sensible Fayetteville explains his lowest priority initiative for Fayetteville.

Audio and video to come later this weekend…

Download audio file (NORML_Daily_AudioStash_2008-09-22.mp3)

Today for our Pot & Politics segment we’re joined by Ryan Denham from Sensible Fayetteville, an organization that has qualified a “lowest law enforcement priority” initiative on the ballot in Fayetteville, Arkansas, similar to measures passed in Seattle, Oakland, Missoula, Denver, and many other American cities.

Then Ken Wolski from the Coalition for Medical Marijuana in New Jersey brings us the tragic story of Mike Miceli, a man who has to choose between miserable death and breaking the law, like so many in the 38 states without medical marijuana protections.