R76 was filed against sections of SB5052 because it is detrimental to cannabis patients. The Bill effectively ends the safe access model that has developed through the lack of attention from the Washington legislature to properly codify best practices and legitimize Medical access and instead places it under the 502 recreational stores.
This is unacceptable to medical cannabis patients for many reasons. Well people consuming cannabis for recreational use may be able to tolerate the pesticides which are allowed on the recreational market supply. People who are not well may not be able to tolerate those substances with the conditions they suffer from.
Patients are also concerned that by being joined with the recreational demand a situation will be created where patients may not be able to obtain their medicine at any price simply because someone else has bought it to get high.
We believe that in the best interests of patients, the medical cannabis system and the recreational cannabis system must remain separate.
_____
Section 1 of 5052 this Act may be known and cited as a cannabis Patient Protection Act. We disagree that this legislation protects cannabis patients. In fact we find it does the opposite.
_____
Section 2 of 5052 is the intent section of Senate Bill 5052. It proposes that in times gone by there was no legal and safe source for cannabis patients to obtain their medicine. It proposes that now that the 502 system is in place patients should be able to access their medicine there. It goes on to remove patients ability to work alone in sufficient quantity to produce their own medicine, to work with others in efficient ways to produce medicine for common access and eliminates the existing safe, affordable access that patients who are not able to grow for themselves.
We believe that people with ill health may be harmed by pesticides which are allowed in the 502 system and by having them compete for the medicine they need to be well with consumers that want the products simply to get high will create conditions where patients may not be able to obtain their medicine at any price.
_____
Section 17 of 5052 is the definitions section. This would change the designated provider from an adult, to an adult 21 years of age or older and require they be added to the registry database.
The section limits qualifying conditions to those only that can be objectively assessed and evaluated. It also limits qualifying conditions.
While we know that cannabis does have positive medical benefit, we do not know the extent of its benefits on all conditions.
We do not agree that it is proper to limit or exclude any conditions that may be alleviated.
_____
Section 18 of 5052 requires that an authorization for the medical use of cannabis must be obtained from a health care professional that is a patients principal care provider or a specialist with a documented relationship relating to the ongoing treatment of the patient’s condition. The section prohibits authorizations at any location other than the practices permanent physical location. It allows a healthcare professional to discuss with a patient after giving an authorization how to use marijuana and the types of products the patients should seek from a retail outlet and requires they specify an amount of marijuana recommended for a qualifying patient.
We do not agree that it is proper to limit patients access to obtaining an authorization only to those doctors with which they have a primary relationship. We do not agree that requiring physicians who may not have detailed knowledge of cannabis , its forms or the way it is used to advise patients is in anyone’s best interests.
We believe the voters will agree that it is an unreasonable burden to deny those without the ability or resources to travel to established offices to obtain an authorization and thereby be subject to criminal charges.
_____
Section 19 requires that an authorizer detail dosage and that a patient not participating in the registry be denied relief from taxation.
A NO vote will preserve the protections authorizers have from prescribing dosage in conflict with Federal law and not require that patients be registered to obtain equitable consideration under the law.
We believe that the voters would not endanger authorizers in such a way or deny patients relief if not participating in the registry.
_____
Section 23 of 5052 makes it a Class 3 felony to transfer cannabis they produce to any other person, including another qualifying patient.
A NO vote on R76 will not expose patients to felony arrest and prosecution simply for helping another patient in need.
We believe the voters will agree that this is a move backward in the reform of cannabis laws.
_____
Section 24 of 5052 grants arrest protection only if participating in the Registry. It would also prohibit Compassion, the giving of cannabis to another qualifying patient without charge.
A NO vote on R76 will not require participation in the registry or make it a crime to help another patient free of charge.
We believe the voters will find this not in the best interests of patients or the greater good of the People of Washington State.
_____
Section 27 of 5052 limits non Collective grows to 15 plants. People living together on the same property could not provide for themselves individually beyond the 15 plant limit. It is unreasonable to force cooperation between patients when their needs and/or growing styles and preferences may differ.
A NO vote on R76 would return the law to the present limits.
We believe the voters will agree that it is not reasonable to restrict patients ability to provide for themselves or insist they work together if living together if that is not their choice.
_____
Section 29 of 5052 changes peace officer to law enforcement officer. This would allow LCB agents to enforce limits on non commercial grows by individual patients.
A NO vote on R76 would retain that authority to police with probable cause.
It is important that private citizens not be intruded upon, searched or their property seized without a warrant issued by a judge.
We believe the voters will agree.
_____
Section 48 of 5052 repeals affirmative defense. Affirmative Defense could not apply retroactively to those not recognized by valid authorization even if they have qualifying conditions.
A NO vote on R76 would retain the current law regarding Affirmative Defense.
In the case of Referendum sponsor Kurtz, he was aware the MUCA existed and he had qualifying conditions for years before his arrest, but did not obtain an authorization. Had this been the law then, he would remain convicted as a felon today.
We believe the voters will agree that patients with qualifying conditions should not be arrested and prosecuted out of ignorance of law of which they are otherwise in compliance.
_____
Section 49 of 5052 repeals collective gardens as they now exist.
A NO vote on R-76 would retain the current law regarding Collective Gardens.
This is important that patients retain the ability to work together including financial contributions in place of actual physical participation. We believe the voters will be agreeable that someone without physical ability not be required to and instead provide financial assistance, or even nothing at all to receive their medicine.
http://r76no.org/about-the-referendum/
This is unacceptable to medical cannabis patients for many reasons. Well people consuming cannabis for recreational use may be able to tolerate the pesticides which are allowed on the recreational market supply. People who are not well may not be able to tolerate those substances with the conditions they suffer from.
Patients are also concerned that by being joined with the recreational demand a situation will be created where patients may not be able to obtain their medicine at any price simply because someone else has bought it to get high.
We believe that in the best interests of patients, the medical cannabis system and the recreational cannabis system must remain separate.
_____
Section 1 of 5052 this Act may be known and cited as a cannabis Patient Protection Act. We disagree that this legislation protects cannabis patients. In fact we find it does the opposite.
_____
Section 2 of 5052 is the intent section of Senate Bill 5052. It proposes that in times gone by there was no legal and safe source for cannabis patients to obtain their medicine. It proposes that now that the 502 system is in place patients should be able to access their medicine there. It goes on to remove patients ability to work alone in sufficient quantity to produce their own medicine, to work with others in efficient ways to produce medicine for common access and eliminates the existing safe, affordable access that patients who are not able to grow for themselves.
We believe that people with ill health may be harmed by pesticides which are allowed in the 502 system and by having them compete for the medicine they need to be well with consumers that want the products simply to get high will create conditions where patients may not be able to obtain their medicine at any price.
_____
Section 17 of 5052 is the definitions section. This would change the designated provider from an adult, to an adult 21 years of age or older and require they be added to the registry database.
The section limits qualifying conditions to those only that can be objectively assessed and evaluated. It also limits qualifying conditions.
While we know that cannabis does have positive medical benefit, we do not know the extent of its benefits on all conditions.
We do not agree that it is proper to limit or exclude any conditions that may be alleviated.
_____
Section 18 of 5052 requires that an authorization for the medical use of cannabis must be obtained from a health care professional that is a patients principal care provider or a specialist with a documented relationship relating to the ongoing treatment of the patient’s condition. The section prohibits authorizations at any location other than the practices permanent physical location. It allows a healthcare professional to discuss with a patient after giving an authorization how to use marijuana and the types of products the patients should seek from a retail outlet and requires they specify an amount of marijuana recommended for a qualifying patient.
We do not agree that it is proper to limit patients access to obtaining an authorization only to those doctors with which they have a primary relationship. We do not agree that requiring physicians who may not have detailed knowledge of cannabis , its forms or the way it is used to advise patients is in anyone’s best interests.
We believe the voters will agree that it is an unreasonable burden to deny those without the ability or resources to travel to established offices to obtain an authorization and thereby be subject to criminal charges.
_____
Section 19 requires that an authorizer detail dosage and that a patient not participating in the registry be denied relief from taxation.
A NO vote will preserve the protections authorizers have from prescribing dosage in conflict with Federal law and not require that patients be registered to obtain equitable consideration under the law.
We believe that the voters would not endanger authorizers in such a way or deny patients relief if not participating in the registry.
_____
Section 23 of 5052 makes it a Class 3 felony to transfer cannabis they produce to any other person, including another qualifying patient.
A NO vote on R76 will not expose patients to felony arrest and prosecution simply for helping another patient in need.
We believe the voters will agree that this is a move backward in the reform of cannabis laws.
_____
Section 24 of 5052 grants arrest protection only if participating in the Registry. It would also prohibit Compassion, the giving of cannabis to another qualifying patient without charge.
A NO vote on R76 will not require participation in the registry or make it a crime to help another patient free of charge.
We believe the voters will find this not in the best interests of patients or the greater good of the People of Washington State.
_____
Section 27 of 5052 limits non Collective grows to 15 plants. People living together on the same property could not provide for themselves individually beyond the 15 plant limit. It is unreasonable to force cooperation between patients when their needs and/or growing styles and preferences may differ.
A NO vote on R76 would return the law to the present limits.
We believe the voters will agree that it is not reasonable to restrict patients ability to provide for themselves or insist they work together if living together if that is not their choice.
_____
Section 29 of 5052 changes peace officer to law enforcement officer. This would allow LCB agents to enforce limits on non commercial grows by individual patients.
A NO vote on R76 would retain that authority to police with probable cause.
It is important that private citizens not be intruded upon, searched or their property seized without a warrant issued by a judge.
We believe the voters will agree.
_____
Section 48 of 5052 repeals affirmative defense. Affirmative Defense could not apply retroactively to those not recognized by valid authorization even if they have qualifying conditions.
A NO vote on R76 would retain the current law regarding Affirmative Defense.
In the case of Referendum sponsor Kurtz, he was aware the MUCA existed and he had qualifying conditions for years before his arrest, but did not obtain an authorization. Had this been the law then, he would remain convicted as a felon today.
We believe the voters will agree that patients with qualifying conditions should not be arrested and prosecuted out of ignorance of law of which they are otherwise in compliance.
_____
Section 49 of 5052 repeals collective gardens as they now exist.
A NO vote on R-76 would retain the current law regarding Collective Gardens.
This is important that patients retain the ability to work together including financial contributions in place of actual physical participation. We believe the voters will be agreeable that someone without physical ability not be required to and instead provide financial assistance, or even nothing at all to receive their medicine.
http://r76no.org/about-the-referendum/
