All posts tagged: Medicinal Marijuana

The Cannabis Chronicles: A Brief Legal History of Cannabis

The Cannabis Chronicles

1906:
Congress passes the Pure Food and Drug Act. Cannabis is regulated as a drug.
1910:
Congress lists cannabis as a narcotic and regulates it as a poisonous substance. Various states begin regulating marijuana in the following years, adding it to a list of “habit forming drugs”.
1930’s:
In 1930, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics is formed, headed by Harry J. Anslinger, causing increased scrutiny of cannabis use.
Anslinger was a virulent racist who saw marijuana regulation as a weapon to use against African Americans, Hispanics and other groups he deemed undesirable, including certain entertainers like Jazz musicians. His agency churned out most of the “Reefer Madness” propaganda we now find laughably outrageous.
The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 made possession and transfer of cannabis illegal except for medical and industrial uses. Cannabis was now being regulated and taxed, putting the United States in the weed business.
In 1938, Congress passes the Pure Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act, resulting in the creation of the Food and Drug Administration. Marijuana remains listed as a “dangerous drug”.
1940’s
During World War II, the need for hemp saw the government encouraging farmers to cultivate more hemp than ever before. Yet the medical efficacy of cannabis was still ignored.
In 1947, the DuPont corporation invented nylon, which competed with hemp as a fiber material, resulting in an end to hemp cultivation by the mid-1950’s.
1950’s
Things got much worse for cannabis in the 1950’s when Congress instituted severe mandatory sentences for a variety of drugs, including cannabis. The penalty for cannabis possession as of 1956 became a minimum 2-10 years in prison and a $20,000 fine.
1960’s
The decade most associated with drug use is ironically the decade of virtually no anti-drug legislation. This would all change after the election of Richard Nixon in 1968.
1970’s
In 1970, the Nixon administration went to war on drugs beginning with the Controlled Substances Act and the creation of the Schedule List for drugs, which identified cannabis as Schedule 1– along with drugs like Heroin– as having the greatest potential for abuse and no medicinal value. In 1973, the DEADrug Enforcement Administration— was formed, and the War on Drugs was truly on.
1980’s
The 1980’s saw the criminal penalties associated with drugs become much harsher under the Reagan administration with the institution of mandatory minimum sentences and the “Three Strikes Rule”. First Lady Nancy Reagan led an anti-drug crusade with increased propaganda– primarily aimed at children and teens– flooding the airwaves. Remember the egg frying while a somber voice intoned, “This is your brain on drugs” commercials?
1990’s
California Proposition 215, passed in 1996, changed everything by legalizing medicinal cannabis in that state. Over the next two decades, other states followed suit, bringing us to the present.
The Present
Currently, there are 29 states with some form of medical and/or recreational use protections for cannabis. States like Colorado are generating huge tax benefits from legal weed while experiencing a net decline in opioid abuse and teen drug use overall. Unfortunately, the appointment of Attorney General Jeff Sessions has cast a cloud of concern on cannabis legalization.

The fight goes on.

No comments
Vinni BelfioreThe Cannabis Chronicles: A Brief Legal History of Cannabis
read more

Legalization: The Fight Goes On

Since Pennsylvania passed Act 16, the state medicinal cannabis program has been in the news with regularity.

On the one hand, the coverage has been a plus in terms of raising awareness and ‘normalizing’ the idea of marijuana as medicine.  It has opened the door to frank discussion.

On the other hand, the victory in getting Act 16 passed seems to have lulled the public into the idea that marijuana is legal– that the work of legalization is done.

This is of course not the case at all.

Marijuana remains on the Federal Schedule 1 list (meaning it has no medical benefits and a high potential for abuse), despite the overwhelming body of evidence showing it does in fact have medicinal efficacy.

The conflicting positions of the Federal government and States where it is legal in some form– either medicinal or recreational– has opened a proverbial legal can of worms.

The are still many questions that have no clear answers.

Questions like, how does having a medical marijuana card impact an individual’s rights? For example, does having a medical marijuana card affect gun ownership? How does it affect the right to privacy regarding medical records?  What is the role of the IRS and tax laws regarding profits and/or income from a Schedule 1 substance being deposited in banks?

What about potential criminal penalties when taking medicine into a State that does not have a medicinal cannabis law on the books?

How about DUI laws and medicinal cannabis, or possessing an otherwise legal medication on Federal property?

Will health insurance cover treatment in the future?  Will companies continue to drug test employees for marijuana in States where it legal for recreational use?

And the big question, what is the position of the Federal government on all this?

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been ambiguous when asked whether or not the Justice Department will work to curtail the legalization process or respect the will of the people.

Of course, actions speak louder than words and so far, the AG is quietly pushing an agenda that appears unfriendly to the legalization movement.  His is a process of incrementalism, which includes what could be called, ‘vaguely stated, thinly veiled threats’ to roll back the progress legalization has made.

During the Presidential campaign, Sessions’ boss, President Trump, was quoted as saying he would not interfere with the legalization process,  but has since been silent on the subject.

Sessions was in Pittsburgh about a week ago, speaking at the Federal courthouse downtown. Pittsburgh NORML and other groups gathered to protest the AG, but to be candid, the turnout was exceptionally small.

A large turnout would have made a strong statement to the AG, which is why we’re concerned that people may think our work is done.

With an Attorney General in office who is openly hostile to marijuana law reform, it is more important than ever for people to make their voices heard.

Call your representatives. Let them know it’s time for a change at the Federal level. Marijuana should be rescheduled.

 

No comments
Vinni BelfioreLegalization: The Fight Goes On
read more

AG Sessions and the Emerging Cannabis Industry

With today’s bombshell announcement from Attorney General Sessions, what is the future for the medicinal and recreational cannabis industry?

To be candid, we just don’t know.

On January 4, 2018, AG Sessions announced he was rescinding the Cole Memorandum drafted by former Deputy Attorney General James Cole in 2013.  The Cole Memo directed United States Attorneys to weigh a number of factors before exercising federal jurisdiction in states with medicinal or recreational cannabis programs.  The Cole Memo directed federal prosecutors to consider whether there is an increase in overall criminality, cannabis related DUI, increased use by minors and other factors.  In a recent federal prosecution the Court held that the United States must make a prima facie showing that the factors in the Cole Memo justified prosecution.

With the rescission of the Cole Memo, individual United States Attorneys are free to utilize their resources however they see fit without considering whether a state cannabis program was actually harmful.  The Department of Justice does not have unlimited funding, and issues such as the opioid crisis and wire fraud command significant federal law enforcement resources.

In addition to the Cole Memo, Congress attached the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment to the federal budget restricting the Department of Justice from utilizing Congressionally authorized funding to prosecute state cannabis programs.  AG Sessions sought relief from these restrictions in May, 2017, but was rebuffed.  Rohrabacher-Farr’s future is tenuous at best.  If it is not included in the final federal budget then there will be nothing stopping the Department of Justice from using its full weight against the emerging cannabis industry.

With over 60% of Americans polled supporting full legalization, it is difficult to understand why the Administration is on the apparent verge of a crackdown.  The cannabis industry is projected to be a 20 billion dollar industry employing tens of thousands.  Critically needed tax revenue is repairing Colorado’s schools and Washington’s infrastructure.  Countless Americans are no longer faced with arrest and prosecution for possession of a simple non-toxic plant.

What is the path forward?

Federal legalization is the only answer that will solve the push-pull between conflicting state and federal jurisdiction.  Rescheduling cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II may go far in protecting personal medicinal use, but cultivation facilities and dispensaries could still easily be targeted.  The “hands off” approach of the Obama Administration may not have been perfect, but it allowed the emerging industry to demonstrate it was a net benefit for the communities and state in which it operated.

Here in Pennsylvania we do not believe that the United States Attorney for any of our three federal districts will shift resources from investigating large scale heroin trafficking organizations to focus on our highly regulated medicinal cannabis program.  We expect our United States Representatives and Senators here in Pennsylvania to respect the will of 88% of Pennsylvanians who support medicinal cannabis.

Once, not too long ago, we were assured that the President is “a businessman.”  He had no intention of killing the goose that laid the green egg.  The President respected state’s rights and supported limited government.  Well, with the announcement by AG Sessions, that has apparently been proven false.

Patrick K. Nightingale, Esquire

Partner, Cannabis Legal Solutions

Executive Director, Pennsylvania Medical Cannabis Society.

No comments
Vinni BelfioreAG Sessions and the Emerging Cannabis Industry
read more

Medicinal Cannabis: Frequently Asked Questions, Part 2

Now that Pennsylvania has begun issuing Medicinal Cannabis Cards to Pennsylvania patients, we thought we’d revisit some of the frequently asked questions we often field here at Cannabis Legal Solutions.

Q: Can I grow my own marijuana?

A: Absolutely not. Cultivation of marijuana is a felony offense.  Depending on the circumstances, Manufacturing with Intent to Distribute can carry penalties of ten years or more. A medicinal cannabis card is no defense.

Q: Can I use my medicinal card in other states?

A: Yes and No, depending on the state in question.

Q: Can someone with a medicinal card issued by another state use their card in Pennsylvania?

A: No. Currently Pennsylvania has no reciprocal agreement with any other state allowing for out of state medicinal cards.

Q: If I have a medicinal cannabis card and get caught with marijuana, will I get charged with a crime?

A: Yes. Possession of marijuana is illegal even if you have a medicinal cannabis card. Only products certified by the Pennsylvania Department of Health will be available to patients and they must be purchased through a licensed dispensary.

Q: What does it cost to be registered with the program?

A: Compassionate Certification Centers charges $200 for the registration process. The Pennsylvania Department of Health also charges a non-refundable fee of $50 for the actual registration card. Charges may vary from other providers.

Q: Can my doctor give me a certification?

A: Only doctors registered with the PA Dept of Health can make a recommendation. You will need a diagnosis for your medical condition from your primary care physician no matter where you go to get registered.

No comments
Vinni BelfioreMedicinal Cannabis: Frequently Asked Questions, Part 2
read more

Compassionate Certification Centers Begins Issuing Recommendations for Patients

Ken Shultz, Dr. Bryan Doner (CCC) and Patrick Nightingale

Our client, Compassionate Certification Centers opened its Downtown Pittsburgh office December 8 and is accepting patients seeking a medical cannabis recommendation.

Act 16 does not require a prior physician patient relationship. If you have a qualifying condition and your doctor is not registered you may seek a recommendation from ANY physician registered with the Department (provided said physician is accepting new patients.)

Theresa Nightingale, wife of Cannabis Legal Solutions founding partner Patrick Nightingale, is a cancer survivor. She was one of the first patients to get registered.

It was an emotional moment for Theresa, who was diagnosed with Non Hodgkins Lymphoma at age 13.

“It feels like a dream” said Theresa. “We worked so hard to make this happen. I’m almost in tears!”

Theresa has in fact worked very hard for legalization, petitioning lawmakers, making speeches, and she is the founder of the Pittsburgh NORML Women’s Alliance.

Theresa is herself the mother of a nine year daughter, so medicinal cannabis is something she works for not just for herself, but for all patients, young and old.

An estimated 10,000 patients were registered this week so far, and those numbers will continue to grow.

The Pennsylvania Department of Health is already issuing the cards for some of those certifications and they expect to send out quite a few over the next couple weeks.

Compassionate Certification Centers has locations throughout Pennsylvania and can assist patients wanting to register for a medicinal cannabis card.

Visit their website at www.compassionatecertificationcenters.com for information on costs, the process of getting registered and a complete list of qualifying medical conditions

It is important to note there is also a $50 fee for getting a medical card from the Department of Health.

No comments
Vinni BelfioreCompassionate Certification Centers Begins Issuing Recommendations for Patients
read more

Medicinal Marijuana: Side Effects May Include Drowsiness and the Munchies

Watching TV last night.

A commercial comes on for some new wonder drug “which may be right for you”.

The list of potential unwanted side effects of this drug was long and ended with, “… and in rare cases, death”.

Wow. A medication which even in rare cases could result in death… Must be a serious medical condition, right?

Wrong.

It’s a drug that helps you maintain clear skin.

Yep, it must really be better to look good than to feel good.

About ten minutes later, another commercial about prescription medications comes on, but this one is from a law firm.

“If you or someone you love was prescribed blood thinning medications Xcelroco or Prodaxa…”

Yep, big lawsuit.

Now bear in mind, all these medications were approved by the FDA.

How many of these drugs have been recalled over the years? How many serious side effects have these medications been traced to?

These medications come about because a pharmaceutical company gets a patent on a new drug. They then do clinical studies and present that information to the FDA, which in turns decides whether or not to approve said drug.

Which brings us to medicinal marijuana.

Although there is a lot of research out there about the efficacy of medical marijuana, the patent is not owned by a pharmaceutical corporation that can do clinical trials and submit those results to the FDA.

The legal status of marijuana actually inhibits clinical trials as does the fact that the patent on THC is actually owned by the United States Government.

That’s right. The same government that keeps marijuana listed as a Schedule 1 narcotic (no medical efficacy) also owns the patent on THC for it’s medical efficacy in treating cancer and brain trauma.

Hence, no clinical trials are possible.

Sounds like the fox is guarding the hen house.

Meanwhile, the FDA is approving drugs based on clinical studies they actually have no hand in administering, and many of these drugs are wreaking havoc on patients.

Contrast that with medicinal marijuana.

Zero cases of overdose.

Zero cases of death due to toxicity.

Zero dangerous side effects– unless you consider passing out in front of the TV following a Doritos binge dangerous.

One thing seems certain; We’re likely going to see many more of these lawsuit commercials regarding prescription drugs.

Fortunately, it’s highly unlikely we’ll ever see a wrongful death medicinal marijuana lawsuit.

Maybe if someone gets too high and chokes on a Dorito…

 

No comments
Vinni BelfioreMedicinal Marijuana: Side Effects May Include Drowsiness and the Munchies
read more

AG Jeff Sessions Hints at Marijuana Crackdown

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is back in the news as he makes threats against legalized marijuana.

Sessions won’t disclose what his plans are, but he has indicated his strong opposition to any form of legalization, medicinal or otherwise.
This news came on the heels of a statement from President Trump addressing the opioid crisis sweeping the country.

Sessions’ comments were wreathed in a smoke screen of scare tactics and outright misinformation. Despite a growing mountain of evidence showing that marijuana actually reduces opioid use in states where it is legal, Sessions chose instead to cite outdated reefer madness hyperbole such as, “It’s a gateway drug”, and the old tried and true fear mongering of, “What about the children?”

Meanwhile, states like Colorado have seen a 25% reduction in opioid use since legalizing marijuana and, equally significant, a drop in teen use of marijuana.

As far as the children are concerned, apparently Mr. Sessions has never witnessed the dramatic results of cannabis in treating seizure disorders in children. I guess he doesn’t care about those children.

The evidence being accumulated since the legalization of medicinal and recreational cannabis in over half the States in the U.S. is impossible to ignore.

Unless you’re a 70 year old Attorney General who places personal feelings over actual justice, or a grotesquely overweight Chris Christie.

The Governor of New Jersey is Chairman of the White House’s Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis.

Governor Christie last week called upon the President to reject any efforts to acknowledge marijuana’s promising role in mitigating opioid abuse and dependency, and ignoring peer reviewed studies showing marijuana has efficacy in combating opioid addiction.

The commission released the following statement:

“The Commission acknowledges that there is an active movement to promote the use of marijuana as an alternative medication for chronic pain and as a treatment for opioid addiction. … There is a lack of sophisticated outcome data on dose, potency, and abuse potential for marijuana. This mirrors the lack of data in the 1990’s and early 2000’s when opioid prescribing multiplied across health care settings and led to the current epidemic of abuse, misuse and addiction. The Commission urges that the same mistake is not made with the uninformed rush to put another drug legally on the market in the midst of an overdose epidemic.”

Reality Check:

“K” is a paramedic in the city of Pittsburgh. Because of the nature of her work, she asked we don’t use her real name.

“K” has 10 years of experience and has never encountered a single instance of a marijuana overdose. Her biggest concern is marijuana being laced with other drugs.

“We sometimes see marijuana laced with embalming fluid or PCP” said K. “Often the person smoking doesn’t know what they’re being given.”

The fact that 29 States have legalized some form of medicinal cannabis means there is a wealth of evidence being accumulated showing the efficacy of medicinal cannabis. Instances like “K” talked about shows the need for regulation, so consumers don’t end up with tainted marijuana.

Ironically, it is the commission itself using outdated information to support an untenable position in the light of the many peer reviewed studies that are currently available.

NORML has assembled a list of studies here:
http://norml.org/marijuana/fact-sheets/item/relationship-between-marijuana-and-opioids

We urge President Trump to reject the advice of his commission and allow States and the medical community to continue providing this valuable medicine to patients who need it.

As of last week, a new poll shows a record number of Americans now favor legalization of marijuana (62%) and it’s no wonder the public is coming around. In States where it’s legal, business is booming, bringing those States desperately needed revenue, much of which ironically goes to fight and treat opioid abuse.

President Trump is pro business and anti-crime. Marijuana legalization addresses both those concerns while providing medicine to people who need it.

Perhaps the President’s commission chair, Governor Christie, should check out the U.S. patent office, where tucked away in a file is a patent on THC for treatment of cancer and brain trauma.

The patent is owned by the United States of America.

No comments
Vinni BelfioreAG Jeff Sessions Hints at Marijuana Crackdown
read more

Medical Cannabis and the Second Amendment – What are a patient’s firearms rights?

Patrick Nightingale testifying at the Pennsylvania State House.

Medical Cannabis and the Second Amendment – what are a patient’s firearms rights?
By Patrick K. Nightingale, partner Cannabis Legal Solutions

The issue of a medical cannabis patient’s Second Amendment rights is of great concern here in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania where we have a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen.  Now that physicians are registered and patients can seek recommendations many are wondering whether they will lose their Second Amendment rights or be required to surrender their firearms.

The answers are not entirely straightforward.  Under PA law a medical cannabis patient is not prejudiced relative to firearms ownership.  Under federal law, however, that same patient risks a felony prosecution under federal firearms law.  Any patient purchasing a firearm from a licensed firearms dealer is required to execute ATF Form 4473 which, as will be discussed below, does not acknowledge medical cannabis.

Does Pennsylvania law prohibit a registered Pennsylvania patient from owning a firearm?

No.  Pennsylvania’s medical cannabis law is silent on the issue of firearm possession.  Title 18, section 6105 of the Pennsylvania Criminal Code sets forth that certain persons may not possess a firearm.  Section 6105 requires a criminal conviction.  Simple possession does not trigger the prohibitions under section 6105 unless the individual has a prior drug possession conviction.  The majority of the offenses that are set forth in section 6105 are felony level offenses.  Certain misdemeanors are also included such as second or subsequent drug possession conviction, Prohibited Offensive Weapon, Corruption of the Morals of a Minor and three or more DUI convictions.  A person subject to a Protection From Abuse order or an individual with a prior mental health commitment is also prohibited.

Does Federal law prohibit a registered Pennsylvania patient from owning a firearm?

Yes.  Title 18, section 922(g)(3) of the United States Code prohibits any individual who is an unlawful user of controlled substances from possessing a firearm.  Cannabis remains a Schedule I controlled substance and the DEA and ATF have made clear that federal law does not recognize an exception for state medicinal cannabis patients.  A violation of section 922(g)(3) is a felony with a maximum period of incarceration of 10 years.  At present the Rohrbacher-Blumenaeur budget amendment prohibits the Department of Justice from using its Congressionally authorized budget to prosecute state cannabis programs.  Even if the amendment is not included in the final budget it is highly unlikely that the Department of Justice will utilize its limited resources to prosecute individual patients under this section unless the patient is otherwise involved in a more significant violation of federal law.

Can I apply for my Concealed Carry Permit/Must I surrender my Concealed Carry Permit?

No/No.  The right to carry a concealed firearm in Pennsylvania is regulated by Pennsylvania state law.  The authority to issue a Concealed Carry Permit is vested in the County Sheriff of the county in which the individual resides.  18 Pa.C.S.A. §6109 sets forth the process for a concealed carry application and the responsibilities of the County Sheriff in reviewing applications.

One of the criteria is whether the applicant is an “unlawful user of marijuana.”  A registered patient would be a lawful user of marijuana under PA law.  Section 6109(e)(xiv) however, acts as a “catch all” and prohibits issuing a concealed carry permit to anyone otherwise prohibited under federal law from possessing a firearm.  Since any user of cannabis, whether pursuant to state law or not, violates 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(3) an application for a concealed carry permit will be denied.

At the time of writing I am unaware of any mechanism to try and revoke concealed carry permits merely because a patient is registered with the Department of Health.

Can I purchase a firearm lawfully if I am a registered PA patient?

No.  Any firearm purchase from a federally licensed firearms dealer involves the execution of ATF Form 4473. In 2016 the ATF modified the form to include the following language in question 11(e):

“Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any other depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?  Warning:  the use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under federal law regardless or whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.”  (Emphasis in original).

If a registered patient answers this truthfully the sale will be denied after a Pennsylvania State Police review of the form.  If the patient lies on the form in order to purchase the firearm the patient risks felony prosecution by the Pennsylvania State Police.

An ATF Form 4473 is not required for the purchase of a rifle or shotgun, but a patient would nonetheless be considered a prohibited person.

A recent Ninth Circuit case addressed the issue of an Arizona patient attempting to purchase a firearm.  The licensed firearm dealer knew the individual was a medical cannabis patient and denied the sale.  The issue went before the federal appellate court and the court held that the Second Amendment does not protect the patient where cannabis remains a Schedule I controlled substance under federal law.  The Ninth Circuit is not law here in the Third Circuit, but I do not anticipate a holding from out Court of Appeals that would grant Second Amendment rights without a change in federal law.

Unfortunately, federal law does not appear to be on the side of Pennsylvania patients.  A patient who owns firearms and/or possesses a concealed carry permit is unaffected by Pennsylvania state law but can easily run afoul of federal law if making a new firearms purchase.

For more information please contact Patrick K. Nightingale of Cannabis Legal Solutions at Patrick@cannabislegalsolutions.net

No comments
Vinni BelfioreMedical Cannabis and the Second Amendment – What are a patient’s firearms rights?
read more

2017 World Medical Cannabis Conference & Expo

October 20, 2017, Pittsburgh

Patient advocacy is the cornerstone of this event, sponsored by Cannabis Certification Centers, Greenhouse Ventures and The Healing Center.

The World Medical Cannabis Conference & Expo was a well attended affair.

Dr. Bryan Doner (right) greets patients at the CCC table.

Ken Shultz, Dr. Bryan Doner (CCC) and Patrick Nightingale

We look forward to working with Compassionate Certification Centers as they help patients get the medicine they need.

No comments
Vinni Belfiore2017 World Medical Cannabis Conference & Expo
read more

Marijuana Arrests on the Rise in Pennsylvania

On October 17, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf announced the first medical marijuana grow facility is ready to start growing marijuana.

The PA Department of Health has approved Cresco Yeltrah to begin growing and processing at their facility in Jefferson County, PA.

Ironically, we currently have a case in Jefferson county which concerns someone who legally purchased a bag of edibles (gummies) in the State of California and is being charged with Possession with Intent to Deliver in Jefferson county– a very serious charge. Unfortunately Jefferson county officials are not as open minded about marijuana use as the location of a professional grow in their county would imply.

A marijuana arrest can follow a person their entire life, negatively affecting their ability to work, find housing and even to travel out of country.

While we see marijuana arrests declining in cities like Philadelphia, which decriminalized marijuana possession last year, and Pittsburgh, which has an unofficial decriminalization policy that results in a citation, the statewide numbers are increasing.

Between 2010 and 2016, marijuana related arrests have risen by 33% in Pennsylvania.

Even more alarming, African Americans are EIGHT times more likely to be arrested for marijuana than whites.

The fact is, usage rates among black and white citizens are about the same, yet the chart below makes it clear black citizens are being  targeted by law enforcement in a disproportionate way.

Source: American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania

Regarding the new facility in Jefferson county, the Governor said the number one priority is getting medicine to the Pennsylvanians who need it.

While we applaud the Governor’s concern for patients, we can’t help but wonder why his concern for the citizens of Pennsylvania seemingly does not extend to citizens who face life long consequences for merely possessing marijuana.

According to Governor Wolf, full decriminalization and or legalization is, “not on the table” at this time.

In light of this new data, and the fact that Governor Wolf has been a vocal proponent of more sensible marijuana policies, we would ask Governor Wolf to reconsider if maybe now is the time to move forward with decriminalization of marijuana.

This is not something he can simply sign into existence, but it is something he can and should take the lead on.

From a strictly financial view, a plan for legalizing marijuana could bring in millions in revenue for Pennsylvania’s empty coffers, creating a budget surplus that would benefit all the citizens of Pennsylvania.

From a humanitarian view, that revenue could be used to help alleviate the increasing opiate crisis here at home, offering treatment options and education for young people to avoid getting hooked on these very dangerous drugs.

When a group of citizens is being singled out for arrest, apparently based on race, there is a problem for all the citizens of Pennsylvania.

Justice is, after all, supposed to be blind.

No comments
Vinni BelfioreMarijuana Arrests on the Rise in Pennsylvania
read more