http://www.boursorama.com/actualites/le-colorado-va-se-prononcer-sur-la-...

Le Colorado va se prononcer sur la légalisation du cannabis. :

C'est l'un des thèmes les plus controversés de la campagne: la consommation de marijuana doit-elle être légalisée' La question va bien au-delà de l'usage médical. Si la réforme est acceptée, le Colorado se retrouverait à contre-courant de la répression accrue au niveau fédéral. Durée: 01:32

A Colorado Marijuana Legalization Amendment, also known as Amendment 64, will be on the November 6, 2012 ballot in Colorado as an initiated constitutional amendment. The measure would legalize marijuana in the state. A similar measure was on the 2006 ballot in the state, where it was defeated.[1][2]

The initiative was filed eight different times with the Colorado Attorney General around the date of May 20, 2011 in hopes of making the 2012 ballot. All of the initiatives would ask whether or not to legalize the use and possession of, at most, an ounce of marijuana for residents who are 21 and older. In addition, all eight initiatives would allow the state to regulate retail sales of the drug. The proposal was filed eight times, with some differences, in order for supporters to see which one would pass the Title Setting Review Board, and allow for circulation of petitions.[3]

Ballot language

The ballot language of the measure reads as follows:[4]

“ Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning marijuana, and, in connection therewith, providing for the regulation of marijuana; permitting a person twenty-one years of age or older to consume or possess limited amounts of marijuana; providing for the licensing of cultivation facilities, product manufacturing facilities, testing facilities, and retail stores; permitting local governments to regulate or prohibit such facilities; requiring the general assembly to enact an excise tax to be levied upon wholesale sales of marijuana; requiring that the first $40 million in revenue raised annually by such tax be credited to the public school capital construction assistance fund; and requiring the general assembly to enact legislation governing the cultivation, processing, and sale of industrial hemp?

http://www.legalize2012.com/

DON'T BE FOOLED BY COMPETITORS!

Fear not! For those of you who want to see cannabis taken out of the hands of the Department of Revenue armed regulatory agents and end the long compliance nightmare that is making it impossible for anyone but the very rich to participate in Colorado's highly-regulated cannabis industry (oligopoly), the Legalize2012.com campaign is working to write a "true legalization" ballot initiative that will guarantee more reasonable regulations. Time has expired for the 2012 ballot, so we will start working towards the 2014 ballot.

This is Not Amendment 64!

The MPP/DPA/NORML/Sensible/SAFER Regulate Marijuana like "Alcohol" Fake Legalization ballot initiative gives sweeping authority to the Department of Revenue to control marijuana and is not true legalization and is not similar to alcohol. Read the history of how this group tries to divide cannabis supporters.

INITIATIVE LANGUAGE FLAWS

SAFER provided Legalize2012.com with a draft on May 12, 2011. Click here to read it:
http://www.cannabistherapyinstitute.com/inits/mpp.dpa.safer.sensible.may...

Ironically, Denver conservative cannabis group SAFER has always espoused the belief that marijuana should be treated like alcohol. But the MPP/DPA/Sensible/SAFER (MDSS) initiative treats cannabis much stricter than alcohol. By limiting cannabis consumers to one ounce at a time, unlike alcohol with no limits, the MDSS initiative will ensure greater scrutiny on cannabis consumers than any alcohol consumer ever had. Currently, two ounces or less of cannabis is a "petty offense" in Colorado and results in only a ticket and $100 fine. Medical patients are also allowed to have two ounces under Amendment 20. Creating a Constitutional standard that only one ounce is safe will only cause confusion.

A one-ounce standard will also require the Department of Revenue to convert their massive Patient and Medicine Tracking Database and Surveillance System to a massive database for all cannabis and cannabis users, to track how much cannabis is bought and sold. The MDSS initiative does contain some language that attempts to restrict the Department of Revenue from gathering names of cannabis consumers, but this provision is not well-worded, and may be thrown out as unenforceable.

The MDSS Initiative would also allow for and set Constitutional standards for driving discrimination, employment discrimination, and tenant discrimination of marijuana users. The MDSS Initiative makes "Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana" a new Constitutional crime, completely wiping away victories scored by patient advocates to kill a THC/DUI bill in the state legislature this year.

Some of the 8 versions of the MDSS Initiative reportedly also allow a 15% excise tax, which will create more funding for the Department of Revenue marijuana police force. The MMED already has a budget larger than the entire Colorado Bureau of Investigation, all funded by the medical marijuana industry. Do we really want to be handing over a 15% per ounce extra tax to buy more handcuffs?

This initiative exacerbates the situation created by HB 1284: one group of cannabis consumers is now paying to prosecute, harass and discriminate against the other group of cannabis consumers. Good pot users paying to jail bad pot users. We have seen with the bloated MMED budget that all their money is going to investigate, track and harass medical cannabis consumers. Do we really want to unleash this law enforcement force onto all cannabis users? This is not is "legalization".

The lines have been clearly set now on the division of cannabis reform policy in Colorado. The MPP/DPA/Sensible/SAFER initiative has chosen to ignore any local efforts for a real legalization ballot initiative in favor of writing an initiative that appeals to law enforcement. They have decided that they don't want to work with anyone else in the state and are unwilling to compromise on their language. They have decided that instead of helping to fix the flaws in Amendment 20, which they wrote, they would amend the Colorado Constitution with another unworkable, poorly-written law with little support among long-time activists.

HISTORY OF MPP/DPA IN COLORADO

This unilateral move by MPP/DPA/Sensible/SAFER cast doubts that any cannabis law reform ballot initiative in Colorado would be successful. These conservative groups seem to want to duplicate the strategy of dividing and ignoring the progressive grassroots, as MPP/DPA did in their medical marijuana campaigns of 1997/98 nationwide.

Many people don't know that billionaire currency manipulator George Soros funded Amendment 20 in 1997/98 through the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), headed by Rob Kampia in DC, and the Open Society Institute, headed by Ethan Nadelmann. Nadelmann now works with the Drug Policy Alliance, based in New York and California, but also funded by Soros. Bill Zimmerman and Dave Fratello of Americans for Medical Rights, based in Santa Monica, CA were hired to run the 1997/98 medical marijuana ballot initiative campaigns in 4 states.

DIVIDING GRASSROOTS SUPPORT

Then, their strategy was to ignore and divide grassroots support for cannabis reform by introducing initiatives that competed with initiatives sponsored by local groups in Colorado, Maine, Alaska and Washington, D.C.

In DC, MPP submitted a competing initiative to local ACT/UP medical marijuana initiative, after the locals had already collected thousands of signatures. AIDS activist Steve Michael literally died while fighting MPPs plans to destroy the ACT/UP medical initiative. A few weeks before his death, he was attacking them in the press:
"Over my dead body: California firm admits plans to run own Initiative in DC"
http://www.levellers.org/dc1.htm

The strategy to divide the grassroots was intentional. Read:
"Can we win the war without the troops? An Analysis of the Americans for Medical Rights Medical Marijuana Ballot Initiative Strategies in the 1998 General Election"
http://www.levellers.org/inits98anal.htm

Cannabis activists statewide are shocked by the MPP/DPA/Sensible/SAFER strategy of refusing to work with any of the other activist groups working on statewide cannabis initiatives

MPP/DPA DOES NOT SUPPORT PAST INITIATIVES

After the signatures for Amendment 20 were collected in 1998, Americans for Medical Rights disconnected their phone and took down the website. MPP/DPA has not provided a dime to help support Amendment 20, or any of the other laws they have written in other states. Every attorney in Colorado agrees that Amendment 20 was poorly-written, but MPP/DPA has not supported efforts to fix their law through the legislature or the legal system. They amended the Constitution with what they called a "symbolic" amendment in 2000, despite the concerns of local activists. They will same thing again in 2012. We will be left with another unworkable and poorly-written law in the Colorado Constitution.

Click here to read letters written to Ethan Nadelmann in 1998 and 1999 concerning their divisive strategies:
http://www.levellers.org/cohip/ethan.lets.html

ACTION ALERT

Please email MPP/DPA/SAFER/Sensible and ask them to withdraw their language and participate in the community policy debate, schedule for June 22 at Casselman's, to be moderated by Patricia Calhoun. Tell them that you are appalled that they have chosen not to try to work with other local activists, and that you will not be supporting their organizations.

Ethan Nadelmann
Brian Vicente
Steve Fox
Mason Tvert
Graham Boyd
Art Way
Sean McAllister
Rob Kampia
Rob Corry

Please send copies to info@legalize2012.com

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.A.R.E STATEMENT

A statement by the Colorado Cannabis Alliance (C.A.R.E .) echoes the Legalize2012 Campaigns concerns:

"Regarding the 8 initiatives filed today by SAFER and Sensible Colorado the in state proxies of the Marijuana Policy Project and the Drug Policy Alliance. We find the fact that this language was not presented for public comment disturbing, and the rejection of our many concerns expressed unfortunate. It would appear that a secret panel of attorneys many whom do not even live in Colorado, have deemed themselves worthy of amending our State Constitution which affects us all, to benefit the long term goals of a few. C.A.R.E has deep concerns that Colorado is being used as a petri dish to move a self motivated version of a national dialogue on cannabis law reform forward at the expense of safe patient access. The very same attorneys who supported the most draconian medical laws in Colorado to date, now intend to conveniently provide the solution."

"Do the sponsors even care about the effect this may have on medical marijuana patients? Do they honestly think our Constitutional rights are a national business opportunity? In our opinion the draft initiative we have seen is not progressive enough to risk what little is left of safe patient access and apply yet more negative attention on the burdening MMJ industry. We will reserve our final judgment until we read all initiatives filed, but if it's the same commerce oriented language that does not address the true issues of the drug war complex it will be challenged."

Legalize 2012
Phone: 877-420-4205
Web: www.Legalize2012.com
Email: info@Legalize2012.com

”