Thank you, Dr. Bearman!
We don’t need a 62-page long initiative — UNLESS we are trying to hide its actual impact on people in a bunch of legalese.
In fact, if it is adopted, A.U.M.A. will completely wipe out Prop. 215 as well as the good legal decisions interpreting it, like People v. Kelly.
The for-profit MEDICAL marijuana would-be industry is why we are getting M.M.R.S.A. and now A.U.M.A. M.M.R.S.A. lets people who are not patients themselves, or even lawful caregivers, cultivate MEDICAL marijuana for profit — instead of for sufficient reimbursement to cover a fair return for skill, labor and materials. In other words, M.M.R.S.A. allows people to pay dividends to those who invest in corporations growing MEDICAL marijuana.
And who, ultimately, is the source of such dividends? The chronically ill, those in chronic pain, the dying. “Adult” — the new word for “recreational” users are in a better position to pay those kinds of costs; they generally don’t NEED the same amount of marijuana as do the very sick, and they generally have better incomes than do people who are disabled or chronically sick.
And that is why our state and local governments, influenced by lobbyist groups like the California Cannabis Industry Association, and probably paid off by the money collected by people like Dan Rush by shaking down dispensary owners, have adopted the unconstitutional Medical Marijuana Regulation & Safety Act that blatantly violates Prop. 215, and why people like Gavin Newsom, and people being “sponsored” (i.e., paid) by the D.P.A., like Mikki Norris, are pushing for the passage of A.U.M.A.,
M.M.R.S.A. is unconstitutional, and so it can be attacked with lawsuits, like the lawsuit in People v. Kelly, which held that the quantity limits in SB 420 were unconstitutional. But if A.U.M.A. is adopted, then A.U.M.A. will be adopted by a vote of the People of California, which is what it takes to replace Prop. 215 with all the nasty provisions in M.M.R.S.A. A.U.M.A. is the magic wand that the profiteers need to wipe out not-for-profit MEDICAL marijuana with for-profit “adult” marijuana, and which law enforcement will love because it creates an even larger police state, one armed with drones to look for now-illicit-under-A.U.M.A. home gardens,
You ask, does A.U.M.A. spell things out so that it insures that a normal person is entitled to grow their own medicine? What A.U.M.A. does is to turn all adults’ (that includes patients, too) right to grow into a revocable privilege, one which the State Legislature can revoke with a simple majority vote. And the Legislature WILL revoke the right of individuals to grow, to increase its tax revenues and to satisfy the for-profit lobbyists.
Dr. Bearman, you also asked about how these initiatives affect patient/physician relationships. I can tell you that A.U.M.A. is designed to keep M.M.R.S.A.’s terrible provisions about that relationship in place. Here is an excerpt from my annotated text of A.U.M.A. (which people can find in full as a pdf file at 4pepper
SECTION 3. PURPOSE AND INTENT. The purpose of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act is to establish a comprehensive system to legalize, control and regulate the cultivation, processing, manufacture, distribution, testing, and sale of non medical marijuana, including marijuana products, for use by adults 21 years and older, and to tax the commercial growth and retail sale of marijuana. [Note the use of two different terms: “nonmedical marijuana“ and “marijuana.” In other words, as has already been indicated elsewhere, A.U.M.A. is clearly intended to tax and control the sale of both “nonmedical“ and “medical marijuana.”] It is the intent of the People in enacting this Act to accomplish the following:
, , , , ,
“(k) Strengthen the state’s existing medical marijuana system by requiring patients to obtain by January 1, 2018, a new recommendation from their physician that meets the strict standards signed into law by the Governor in 2015, and by providing new privacy protections for patients who obtain medical marijuana identification cards as set forth in this Act.[WARNING! This is how A.U.M.A. takes away patients’ Prop. 215 rights! What “strict” standards did Brown sign into law in 2015? He signed the Medical Marijuana and Safety Act that unconstitutionally attempts to change Prop. 215’s provisions. The M.M.R.S.A. says that only a patient’s primary care physician can give recommendations to use marijuana. It also therefore purports (unlawfully) to keep doctors who specialize in cannabinoids medicine from recommending whole herbal marijuana. 5 Furthermore, just as the Legislature could adopt this unconstitutional legislation, they can CHANGE legislation and make it worse. So, for example, the Compassionate Use Act says that people who have “any serious illness” that marijuana might help have a right to use it. That is how we’ve discovered that marijuana helps a lot of conditions. But the Legislature, if A.U.M.A. is adopted by the voters, could enact legislation that states that whole herbal marijuana could be used to treat only certain enumerated conditions (which is what some states have done). Or, as has happened elsewhere, the Legislature could adopt a law that patients must rely on PRESCRIPTION drugs, rather than on whole herbal cannabis. The Legislature could thereby turn marijuana, for purposes of making lots of money, into a purely recreational drug, and force patients back into the arms of waiting Big Pharma, This is also how the State can collect even more money from citizens: by requiring patients to get a medical marijuana ID card — which until M.M.R.S.A. passed, has been voluntary. Why voluntary? Because otherwise making people get these cards is a violation of their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. And why do people need an ID card to protect their right to privacy? A right is something you already have, so why should you need to buy a card to protect an existing right?
By the way, this attempt to limit communication between doctors & patients looks unconstitutional to me — so that means MORE lawsuits! Here’s an excerpt from another section of my annotated text:
[The “comprehensive regulatory scheme contained in M.M.R.S.A. is not yet that “comprehensive,” in part because it is unconstitutional because it conflicts with The Compassionate Use Act. It is trying to limit patients’ rights to consult with doctors of their choice to get a recommendation, and to limit doctors’ rights to recommend marijuana — all in violation of the First Amendment and of the Ninth Circuit opinion in Conant v. Walters (9th Cir. 2002) 309 F.3d 629, cert. denied Oct. 14, 2003.] The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (hereafter called the Adult Use of Marijuana Act) will consolidate and streamline regulation and taxation for both nonmedical and medical marijuana. [The proponents admit that this initiative will consolidate medical and “nonmedical marijuana” into a single system. When that happened in Washington State, medical marijuana got a lot more expensive for patients.]
Having answered these questions, I’d like to add that I do not consider calling into question the honesty of “movement heroes” like Lynette Shaw to be a tangential issue. People like Shaw and Chris Conrad & Mikki Norris have been, and will be, used to mislead pro-marijuana voters into voting for a Trojan Horse like Prop. 19 and now A.U.M.A. We cannot let that happen. Medical marijuana patients and their friends and relatives and supporters are the swing vote. Their support will enable A.U.M.A. to pass, while their united rejection of Sean Parker’s POS initiative will defeat it.
Thank you for letting me share!