When will small to moderate operations have a chance?

[Space Toker]

I don't know where to post this, indeed no forum I think is appropriate, need a new forum called "proposals to sensible new laws" or something similar. We need cannabis laws that not only let you grow 4-12 personal plants, or invest huge capital to grow many plants (that only favors rich investors that opposed cannabis in the past, or established big medical corporations founded in Cal or Colorado that think only of profits). We need allowance for small to mid size businesses to flourish with special consideration to those that suffered under full prohibition (you me most of us other than big illegal ventures that didn't get caught). So what is the solution? Why is no one drafting legalization laws that allow us all to grow 100 to 10,000 plants or grow as legally as if it were tomatoes? what can be done to level the playing field for those that deserve most to reap the rewards?

 

[NzGreenWhanau]

Interesting topic im currently in a country where cannabis is still illegal. We are having a binding referendum next year on this issue. Id love to grow full time but i see what is happening in your part of the world as very large issue. Where companies with large financial backing will take the cake. From my personal experience people that grow an dont use there product usually have sub par stuff. I think good weed will sell itself.

 

[White Beard]

This has been much on my mind.

I agree that the fundamental task is to return to a state of ‘ordinary agricultural use’, which we have not had since prohibition in the US.

Like it or not (and I don’t), legislation in Congress these days is drafted largely by interest groups made up of companies and multi-company lobbying groups: the very definition of “special interests”, and campaign donations accrue to those who shepherd those bills to the president’s desk unchanged.

The problem for small and moderate growers is that we don’t have the money, individually, to buy a seat at the table (and that seems to literally be the situation), and so there is no voice there who will speak for us - unless we take some steps on our own.

Back in the 60s there was a group (or myth) referred to as ‘the Rainbow Brotherhood’. Real or not, they were the good guys, they made sure the acid, hash, and grass kept moving, kept showing up, kept getting better.

I think we need our own association, whereby we might force the issue or other voices with a stake in the outcome of cannabis reformation. Beyond our individual efforts to make legislators aware of our views on the matter, I think we need to also present a united front, with solid priorities and keystone issues, and as an association, we can more effectively push for inclusion when matters are being discussed.

And now that I’m on a roll, I think it would be smart and effective to have a “citizens’ advocacy” group as well, representing the actual views of the public on what is and is not acceptable regarding public policy toward cannabis.

We can also craft model legislation, like the radical “conservatives” working with ALEC to make each state its own little confederacy. SB 420 is a perfect example of what the cannabis community at large *does* *not* *want* - but it’s exactly what we’ll get if we don’t show them and tell them what should be different.

I whipped this up last night, I don’t think it’s all that great, but I think it covers the big bases fairly well, but kick it around, pull it apart, see if we can make into something.

Thanks for the thread!

 

[White Beard]

# The Cannabis Restoration Act
Preamble:
WHEREAS the plant species known collectively as /Cannabis sativa/ has provided humankind with paper, cloth, rope, medicines, glues balms, and benefits of every sort for centuries; and

WHEREAS /Cannabis/ has made these gifts freely available to all people without injury, harm, or ill-effects to the user, the farmer, the processor, the purveyor for the entire history of human knowledge and utility thereof; and

WHEREAS the prohibition of Cannabis has deprived industries of all kinds of important raw materials, to their impoverishment; the medical profession of an important aid in tending human health and well-being inexpensively and effectively; farmers of an important crop of many uses to field and livestock; and the people of a ready source of ease, comfort, and enjoyment to their detriment;

IT IS THE INTENT OF CONGRESS to right these wrongs by overturning the improper and unwise removal of Cannabis and all its products from human activity and commerce, in spite of the best advice of business, medicine, industry and the public and in contravention of the norms of productive human activity; and in doing so, restore cannabis to the fields and farms and homes and hospitals of the Citizens of these United States, where it was once of the greatest value and utility for many purposes great and small.

To this end, the honorable Men and Women representing the nation hereby declare the removal, effective immediately, of cannabis in whole and in part, from the Schedule of Controlled Substances; the elimination of all federal laws, regulations, and penalties heretofore enforced against the plant cannabis, its parts and products, and against those who have produced, provided, and / or made use of any part or portion thereof; the abrogation and nullification of all laws and regulations, at the State, the County, and the Municipal levels, that have been instituted for the purpose of governing, controlling, limiting, prohibiting, and / or punishing the cultivation, processing, and / or distribution of said plants, parts, and portions, and the customary uses thereof; the immediate release of all persons tried and convicted and sentenced, in consequence of the laws and regulations abrogated by this Act; the expungement of criminal records for all those of all those individuals so released, the termination of any and all interdictions, disqualifications, and ineligibilities suffered by said persons described herein.

FURTHER, we entreat the President to negotiate with our treaty partners an end to any and all such provisions of any treaty, to which our Nation is Signatory, as may violate the expressed purpose and intent of this Act.

CONSEQUENT to these purposes, and in acknowledgement of the fact that certain Cannabis products may be rightly intended for consumption, we direct and empower the Department of Agriculture to institute systems whereby such consumable products may be certified as free from toxic additives and unwholesome admixtures, and further, free of inert additions, so that the availability of honest weights and measures, and truthful and accurate representation of such, may be assured to commerce and the public.

 

[therevverend]

It won't happen too much money involved. Washington state has been a sad example of what happens with these new laws. For many years medical was legal, recreational was not. Medical licenses were easy to get, you could grow up to 15 plants and you could designate someone a caretaker if you were unable to grow your own. So one person could grow up to 60 plants. You could also buy and sell clones.

It was the golden age of cannabis in Washington state for growers. Prices dropped considerably but you could still make a worthwhile profit. The consumers had a wide selection of excellent cannabis to choose from. It was easy for the middlemen to set up a store front and sell the growers' products so their were medical cannabis shops all over the city. It was easy for Rec users to get a good product because everybody knew someone with a license who was growing.

The state didn't like this situation because it didn't have control. There was a vote for legalizing recreational. The voters were led to believe that medical would be allowed to exist side by side with recreational but if you looked closely you could tell that wouldn't happen.

I didn't like it, voted against it because it didn't allow homegrows and was in fact very restrictive about who would be allowed to get a license to grow. The state would be allowed to combine recreational and medical. The new plant limit would be 4 plants for medical patients, if they wanted 15 they'd have to register with the state. On the local news there were reports of people opening storefronts without medical licenses and other violations, the news people and state blamed the medical law and said it needed to be replaced.

This was not true, they were breaking the medical rules. The 'problem' was that the state was not enforcing the medical regulations. The state and media talked about how bad the medical system was, that the feds would step in soon to 'clean it up'. They needed to set an example for the rest of the country, how to run a clean safe cannabis industry.

The taxpayers voted in the rec bill despite the strong medical lobby. Immediately the state closed down all the medical shops, farmers markets, and clone shops. The medical lobby tried to get a vote to save medical but the taxpayers had decided the war was over, rec shops were legal so who cares. The old medical shop owners and growers applied for the new 502 Rec licenses, many of them got them.

But the rules had changed. The ridiculously high tax rates, regulations, packaging rules, etc all doomed the small time growers. The big Rec growers that moved in grew huge numbers and sold their product below market value. The wholesale price plummeted to ridiculous levels. This drove all the small medical groups out of business the old time growers all lost thousands and hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Now only a few grows supply all the cannabis for Washington state. People who don't know how to grow or care about cannabis own these businesses reaping their profit. The old illegal and medical growers have all had to quit. Prices are lower then ever and it's easy for the consumers to go to the Rec shops and get their packaged branded product. The packages are sealed, no more smelling your ganja

However people that are sick have a hard time getting medicine. Which ironically is much more expensive now because few growers bother to supply the medical products which are now heavily taxed. Of course the majority of consumers like this situation, they can visit their friendly Rec shop and get the pleasure of choosing between dozens of strains. They're taught there's two types of cannabis, sativa and indica. One makes you sleepy, one doesn't. This leads them to believe they're knowledgeable consumers...

 

[Sign]

They don't want you to be able to compete. This is real world capitalism. Your only value under capitalism is as an economic unit that consumes.

Preferably on credit.

 

[Spaventa]

I don't know where to post this, indeed no forum I think is appropriate, need a new forum

The “Security and legal” sub forum would have been entirely appropriate I think.

https://www.icmag.com/ic/forumdisplay.php?f=45

 

[Weird]

bit late now

 

[shaggyballs]

This is the exact reason I said you must vote no to legalization or else!
Now you have to deal with the or else part.

Don't vote to legalize cannabis if you dont like the language in the bill.
In other words if they ain't offering you what you want don't just settle for the first deal thrown out.

Just wait they are coming for your 4 plants too.
Washington is not allowing personal grows for rec. cannabis.

Check out some of my theads in the legal section for more info on this subject.

 

[EsterEssence]

Like Weird said, we had it for years, I'm afraid it is gone now...

 

[George]

Honestly, we just need simple laws to stop lobbying.

 

[Easy7]

Nobody will ever agree. Too many people in weed and the price goes gown. Small farms are already hard to make money in.

Light pollution and robbers is a big deal with weed. Our drive goes along the field. They don't want convicts using weed either. Even if we are disabled. So I could burn down weed plants and get away with it. That is why they hide their illegal state grows from the feds.

It's bad collusion not designed to help anyone but themself.

 

[CowboyTed]

Honestly, we just need simple laws to stop lobbying.

Either that, or we need to elect honest politicians.



Sadly, honest people usually won't run for office, because the liars, cheaters and thieves have made American politics into a contact sport. The only people who are willing to endure the battle and endless attacks on their reputation, both by their political enemies and by the press, are the ones who are attracted by the filthy lucre that so many crooked politicians enjoy.



The outcome of the many experiments going on around the world, as various state and national governments relax cannabis prohibitions, will be interesting to watch. I fear (because of the dishonest politicians and the "big-monopoly" money behind them) that we will NOT ultimately adopt the best or the most sensible model for cannabis cultivation laws.



In the U.S., at least, I expect the federal government to step in at some point and pass a nationwide regulatory system to regulate the plant and its uses. When that happens, you can rest assured that the law will have been written by the big-money interests who are hoping to dominate a very lucrative market. That law will not favor the home grower or small commercial grower: it will probably effectively ban them. The crooked politicians will adopt some system that requires licenses that are wildly expensive, and electronic inventory tracking equipment that growers must purchase and use. That will ensure that only the biggest wannabe-monopolists can afford the cost of entering the market.

 

[Weird]

Like Weird said, we had it for years, I'm afraid it is gone now...

When I spoke publicly about the current culture of legalization being a negative consequence and how we should consider a different route for equal access many argued they just wanted legalization at any cost because of their experience with persecution or access



I made the argument for it really undermining a good segment of the American lower and middle class by shifting existing income to already deep and privileged pockets



maybe 1 in 10 understood and gave a fuck



personally I am over it big shwill can push out everyone it isn't changing how I live my life or my relationship with the plant

 

[Oliver Pantsoff]

Listen to Shaggy. He knows what's up....

OP

 

[armedoldhippy]

Either that, or we need to elect honest politicians.
TRUER WORDS WERE NEVER SPOKEN!

 

[Plastic]

Honest politicians? No such animal, puke bags all of them.

 

[art.spliff]

So many examples on this site, I would call personal or home growers, who produce much better product by any measure than commercial grows. This first point deserves careful attention.


How many home growers could contribute one or more plants per year with financial reimbursement? (Free of any financial string to a lender, owner, investor. Specify sole owner or employee owners for rule purposes?)


Testing isn't necessarily corrupt or flawed; blind after harvest with adequate warning and options for failed pesticide harvests. I'm not sure pesticide is even really a problem, unless you are listening to shill pesticide salesman associated with petro-agrochemical? (also pharmaceutical - linked.)


In other words, if there is a required lab test for a harmful chemical then show me the logic of the lab test, and show communication with the specific manufacturers of these chemicals and their response?


Print the up to date list of what to use (free of cost and organic, first, if at all possible) and what not to use ahead of time so that there is no confusion later in the season.


Simply using "nothing" or "spraying only water" is approved but pests can damage crops which is why environmental intervention may prove helpful (hoop house, beneficial insects, companion planting, row covers, crop rotation, biodiversity).


When you put on your PI or lawyer hat and follow the money, the association or collusion if you will highlights itself, becomes evident, at least more apparent.


Blanket statements can spark debate although thoughts shared in this thread ring true for recreational cannabis production. Separating an advertising campaign with accompanying propaganda and shills from the truth can be intuitive or it may take some time.


Grow style and philosophy may vary for producers, but does consumer motive vary? Is is possible reasonable or a fallacy to attempt to separate discernable uses, or indications, for cannabis?


In other words, can we argue that recreational medical pain relief fun enjoyment are all the same use?


Like the girl who cried wolf if a medical indication for cannabis list hundreds of different ailments, the value or separating each and every one diminishes, and it becomes more logical and reasonable to recommend cannabis for general use for everyone for everything.


The same cannot be said of statin blood pressure blood sugar add antidepressant antipsychotic synthetic opiate pain pharmaceuticals given the name medicine.


There is some irony, I'm not sure I have a lengthier explanation now, the idea of a potency number or test report, along with seed pricing above $5-10 per plant, likely contribute to incoherent unfounded or disruptive propaganda. Disruptive to openly sharing the plant at a fair (reasonable, real, unsubsidized, uninterfered unmanipulated) value.


Some of us can see the beauty in the plant which has been around forever. Some appear to have a notion they reinvented the wheel in the last year or two, because of growing one clone for example. With no intention to single anyone out, some of the loudest voices reveal their own skill and experience.


Take no offense if consumers prefer a breeder or seed source with decades of recorded experience. Personal preference also allows variety.


More or less a universal truth, we can learn something new every day, however the knowledge of this plant's benefits is ancient. Misinformation or suppression of knowledge in recent history is not sound reasoning or justification for claiming any discovery or patent related to cannabis. To reiterate a patent or claimed invention following/upon a foundation of suppression and misinformation is invalid.

 

[Gry]

Neat responses.

 

[f-e]

It won't be as normal as a tomato for a long time. There is too much money in it, which drives people to use controlled substances. Making poisonous products.

I want the products I buy to come from licenced establishments that have regular health inspections. That is how many have been caught selling poisonous products. It's impossible to police thousands of tiny grow rooms though. That is not how your shop gets it's tomato's either. There are a few large market sellers, that are easy to police, and set up long term associations with as a buyer. There are lots of people grow veg in their gardens, but you don't find it in the shops, no matter how much spare they have.