United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Governor who called legalization 'reckless' now says Colorado's pot industry is working
Source:
L.A. Times
URL Source: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na ... 60516-20160516-snap-story.html
Published: May 17, 2016
Author: David Kelly
Post Date: 2016-05-17 12:55:09 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 12033
Comments: 97
When Colorado voted to legalize recreational marijuana four years ago, one of the move's chief critics was Gov. John Hickenlooper. The moderate Democrat said that if he could "wave a magic wand" to reverse the decision, he would. Then he called voters "reckless" for approving it in the first place, a remark he later downgraded to "risky." “Colorado is known for many great things,” Hickenlooper said. “Marijuana should not be one of them.” But the governor’s views have softened. During a recent panel discussion at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles, he said that despite opposing the legalization of pot, his job was to “deliver on the will of the people of Colorado.” “If I had that magic wand now, I don’t know if I would wave it,” he said. “It’s beginning to look like it might work.” It was the latest in a series of comments Hickenlooper has made signaling what looks like an evolution of his views on marijuana. In April last year, during an interview with Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo, Hickenlooper said legal weed was “not as vexing as we thought it was going to be.” And during an appearance on "60 Minutes," he predicted that Colorado might “actually create a system that could work” in successfully regulating marijuana. Why the change? “The predictions of fire and brimstone have failed to materialize,” said Mason Tvert, spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, a national group working to reform pot laws. “Most Coloradoans, including the governor, recognize that the law is working.” From the start, Hickenlooper saw the legalization of marijuana as a great national experiment, something utterly new in this country and fraught with potential public health and safety issues. He fretted about a potential rise in drug use among children and was clearly uncomfortable with an amendment directly conflicting with federal law, which considers pot an illegal drug on par with cocaine. There were plenty of snags at first. Marijuana edibles proved especially problematic because few people had experience with them. High-profile overdoses made national news. Just last week a lawsuit was filed against the maker of a marijuana-laced candy, alleging the product triggered a "psychotic episode" that caused a man to kill his wife in 2014. Still, none of Hickenlooper’s worst fears were realized. Colorado is booming. The state has a 4.2% unemployment rate, one of the best in the country. High-tech companies are moving in. Small towns across the state, some once teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, have been saved by tax revenues from pot dispensaries. And the $1-billion-a-year cannabis business will pump $100 million in taxes into state coffers this year. Andrew Freedman, director of marijuana coordination for Colorado, said the governor’s views reflect a growing sense of optimism about how the industry is regulated. “In the short run, there have been a lot fewer public safety and health issues than the governor feared in the beginning,” said Freedman, who is often referred to as the state’s marijuana czar. “In the beginning, we had problems with edibles and hash oil fires but now, for the most part, Colorado looks a lot like it did before legalization.” Marijuana consumption has not changed much from pre-legalization levels and there has been no significant increase in public health and safety problems, he said. As for the $100 million in tax revenue, Freedman noted, that's out of a $27-billion state budget. Some 70% of the money is earmarked for school construction, public health initiatives and other projects. The rest goes back into regulating the industry. “The governor has called this a grand experiment from the beginning. He looks at data points as he goes along and I think he’s pleasantly surprised that there were not as many challenges as he thought,” Freedman said. “He would say the jury is still out on this experiment but he’s optimistic.” Some are less circumspect. “The state’s image is actually rising. We were just ranked as the best place to live in America,” Tvert said. “The idea that businesses would not relocate here or conferences wouldn’t be held here was untrue. In fact, attendees at conferences are now offered pot tours as day trips.” Kelly is a special correspondent based in Denver.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-7) not displayed.
.
.
.
#8. To: Gatlin, Deckard (#7)
Potheads were spending $1 billion on “something” and the taxes on that “something” resulted in $100 million in taxes before pot was legalized.. Now after pot is legalized, the potheads take the same $1 billion and transfer that same money into buying pot That's publik skool math. Potheads were spending on black-market pot on which no taxes were paid; now many are spending their pot money in legal stores and paying taxes. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. You'really not conservative or Christian. The Soviet Union wanted us on drugs to make us stupid. You are a stupid person. It is also understand christian. You're a libtard.
I find nowhere in the New Testament that we should cage those who inebriate themselves. The drug alcohol makes those of us who use it to excess stupid - but trying to ban it was even stupider, as is the ban on other drugs. Sorry, I don't speak whatever language that is. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. That language is android autocorrect which i just disabled. Un christian.
I find nowhere in the New Testament that we should cage those who inebriate themselves. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. I find no where in the new testament that we should jail murderers. Dumb ass.
Acting against murder is in defense of its potential victims; what victimization do you act against with drug bans? A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. You're too stupid to waste my time on right now. Remain stupid for all I care.
Oh, snap.
A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Now after pot is legalized, the potheads take the same $1 billion and transfer that same money into buying pot That's publik skool math. Potheads were spending on black-market pot on which no taxes were paid; now many are spending their pot money in legal stores and paying taxes. Well, of course … sure … naturally. Ah, such an amazingly simple deduction. So simple that even I should have thought of it. But, wait … Let’s consider your hypothesis closely and then do some more of that “publik skool math.” First, we need to ask: What were the drug dealers doing with the money they received from selling black-market pot? Were the burning it, flushing it down the toilet or disposing it in any other way … so that taxes would never be paid on it? Of course they were not. Then what were they doing with the money? The drug dealers were spending the money they received from selling black-market pot on fancy cars, flashy clothes and numerous other lavish items … on which they PAID taxes. While the money can change hands a few times in the “underground economy” … it however does eventually come back into “lawful” circulation, being spent on legit purchases and taxes are paid. Ergo, for this old country boy equipped with “publik skool math”… that is STILL called, a “wash.” Est-ce pas droit … is this not right ?
When someone sells your kids some heroin and ruins their life. Give them a medal and tell them thank you. As for me I think Heroin dealers should be shot and killed. Then stepped on and thrown into the landfill. Or fed to the birds. Comprende piss ant?
OMG! Where is the SWAT to erradicate the obvious evil-doers and save us from ourselves?
OMG! Where is the SWAT to erradicate the obvious evil-doers and save us from ourselves? Not to fear, they are near. SWAT juat captured and charged two suspects in the death of two Oklahoma men found dead in a burning pickup last year in northeast Weld County, Colorado. And Experts praise the SWAT response to Planned Parenthood shooting in Colorado Springs. Oh, don’t get started pouring on the accolades … for I can go on all night. I leave you with with this, for your listening pleasure: S.W.A.T theme song. You just have to Click, then sit back and enjoy.
And legal dealers will also spend their proceeds in taxable ways - leaving the legal market still taxed one more time than the illegal market. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. This thread is about pot - but I'll take this opportunity to note that only in a legal regulated market can age restrictions be effectively enforced, which is why as a national average kids for years have reported that they can get pot more easily than beer or cigarettes. I think the right way to go is to first legalize only pot, and see if that leaves us with a war on drugs we can actually win. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. sarge, is that one of yukon's wrong links, again?
And legal dealers will also spend their proceeds in taxable ways - leaving the legal market still taxed one more time than the illegal market. But that does NOT create more money ... the same amount of money is still changing hands in circulation. It has been a couple years now since Colorado started to allow people to sell and buy pot legally. Last year, Colorado brought in $53 million in taxes as a result. Nowhere is it stated that $53 million is above and beyond the taxes they normally receive. It is to be noted that the state fell far short of it $70 projection. “Publik skool math” shows that even if the $70 million projection is met, that's still mere drop in the bucket when considering the state's total budget of $27 billion. Yet the potheads are still promoting what a wonderful windfall pot sales are producing in taxes. Shameful … just shameful. Est-ce pas droit … is this not right ?
Who said it did? It creates one more opportunity to tax. Feel free to present evidence that there was a corresponding drop in other tax revenues. All irrelevant to your stupid and rebutted claim that it was a wash. Poor you. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. I thank you for your time, and I wish you a most pleasant evening …
People shouldn't be treated kindly or equally... people should be treated FAIRLY. Kindness and equality causes DEPENDENCY.... something your bleeding heart doesn't understand. Ask yourself what is fair towards someone that willingly puts a needle in their arm? What is fair towards a lazy able bodied person who wants what the other guy has but doesn't want to put the work or RISK forward. life is about choices... FREE WILL God gave us free will... but is it really free will when free will doesn't come with punative results for poor free will choices? Now, this is where a libtard like you does what libtards do... make conservatives out to Be heartless and psychotic. Oldest libtard trick in the book I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Now THIS is a theme song:
They paid taxes on the purchase, correct. PLUS, some of that money goes to pay for the wages (and taxes) of the people who work at the store. And some of that money goes to pay corporate taxes. People fail to realize that the consumer pays all the taxes the government receives. They're just hidden.
lol ...
Should it go nowhere? Don't the citizens of Nebraska and Oklahoma have a valid point? Don't they have a right to protect their children from drugs crossing from an adjacent state? If noxious smoke was drifting from Colorado to other states, must that be allowed also? What about factories dumping pollutants into rivers that flow to other states? We can stop that behavior but not drugs?
Great movie.
Another point … One article touts that Colorado had a $53 million dollar increase in taxes off the sale of legalize marijuana. Legalization proponents consider that to be “found money.” To that, I say … bullshit. They fail to consider that hospitalizations involving patients with marijuana exposures and diagnoses increased from approximately 803 per 100,000 to 2,413 per 100,000. So what Colorado is really doing, it is “stealing” $53 million from insurance companies, Medicare and Medicate for their increased costs to cover the radical increase in those hospitalizations. Money is not being created, it is just changing hands … robbing Peter to pay Paul.
"Even though SCOTUS declined to hear Oklahoma and Nebraska's pot suit against Colorado, the plaintiff states can still take their case to U.S. District Court" The dullard didn't even read the article he posted. And the two states are already moving to join a pending suit in the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.
The U.S. aims to stop the flow of illegal drugs from Mexico into this country. Nebraska and Oklahoma should be able to stop the flow of an illegal drug from Colorado into their states.
Continue to hammer Colorado with lawsuits ... fire with both barrels.
Dr. Andrew Monte, a toxicologist at the Department of Emergency Medicine at the University of Colorado, said he's not surprised to see an increase of hospital and ER visits related to marijuana use. "When the availability of any drug goes up," you see more hospital visits, said Monte, who was not involved in the new study. "That goes for a new high blood pressure drug to marijuana." Monte, who co-wrote a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine on marijuana tourism in February, said there are usually three reasons people come to the ER after using marijuana. He said in his experience, people come in for treatment if they exacerbate underlying symptoms with the drug, for example, irritating their lungs if they have asthma, for cyclic vomiting related to high concentrations of THC ingestion and general intoxication from marijuana. The smallest group is made up of "people who come in intoxicated," Monte said. "We only see one or two for marijuana intoxication. I would say disproportionately we see edible agents lead to more intoxication." From above :“In the short run, there have been a lot fewer public safety and health issues than the governor feared in the beginning,” said Freedman, who is often referred to as the state’s marijuana czar. “In the beginning, we had problems with edibles and hash oil fires but now, for the most part, Colorado looks a lot like it did before legalization.” The dullard didn't even read the article he posted. Did I say "has reached the end of the road" or did I say "is going nowhere", dullard and coward? A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. "determine if the visit indicated possible marijuana exposure or used a diagnosis /billing code indicating marijuana. Use of these codes does not mean that the visit is motivated by marijuana exposure but simply that it is a possibility." [emphasis added] - cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/...rts/2016-SB13-283-Rpt.pdf A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Yes: "A decision in the Plaintiff States’ favor will hinder Colorado’s ability to channel demand for recreational marijuana into a regulated and monitored market. This is more likely to aggravate, rather than subdue, the cross-border trafficking on which the Plaintiff States’ allegations of injury rest. The Plaintiff States seek to invalidate only those laws that enable Colorado to regulate the supply side of its recreational marijuana market. Compl. at 28–29 (seeking invalidation of only COLO. CONST. art. XVIII, §§ 16(4) and (5) and related statutes and regulations, which authorize marijuana-related facilities and empower the State to strictly regulate them). They do not challenge Colorado’s authority to legalize marijuana generally, nor do they seek an order compelling Colorado law enforcement officials to take any particular actions against marijuana traffickers. They in fact disclaim any intent to do so: “Plaintiff States are not suggesting the CSA requires Colorado to criminalize marijuana or to strip Colorado authorities of prosecutorial discretion.” Br. in Supp. at 15." - coag.gov/sites/default/fi...usbriefoppositionneok.pdf A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Are you saying there's a difference between those two expressions?
Of course - one can be in motion without getting any closer to one's desired destination. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. That's the problem. Colorado is NOT channeling demand for recreational marijuana into a regulated and monitored market. If Colorado is unable, or unwilling, to regulate it's own industries to the point where it's negatively impacting other states, then that right to regulate should be removed.
I agree. Now, back to my question. What's the difference between "has reached the end of the road" and "is going nowhere"?
Right. (Wink...Wink) It more of a POSSIBLITY they all had ingrown toenails. (Snicker).
Being in motion means one hasn't reached the end of the road; not getting any closer to one's desired destination means one is going nowhere. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Marijuana "exposure" doesn't mean the visit was in any way caused by marijuana - oxygen "exposure" is at 100% for hospital/ER visits.
A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.
Comments (49 - 97) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestLet’s do the math.
#9. To: ConservingFreedom (#8)
#10. To: A K A Stone (#9)
You'really not conservative or Christian.
The Soviet Union wanted us on drugs to make us stupid.
It is also understand christian.
#11. To: ConservingFreedom (#10)
#12. To: A K A Stone (#11)
Un christian.
#13. To: ConservingFreedom (#12)
#14. To: A K A Stone (#13)
I find no where in the new testament that we should jail murderers.
#15. To: ConservingFreedom (#14)
(Edited)
#16. To: A K A Stone (#15)
#17. To: ConservingFreedom, Deckard, misterwhite, GrandIsland, A K A stone (#8)
Let’s do the math. Potheads were spending $1 billion on “something” and the taxes on that “something” resulted in $100 million in taxes before pot was legalized..
#18. To: ConservingFreedom (#16)
#19. To: Gatlin, ConservingFreedom, Deckard, misterwhite, GrandIsland, A K A Stone (#17)
black-market
#20. To: buckeroo, ConservingFreedom, Deckard, misterwhite, GrandIsland, A K A Stone (#19)
(Edited)
black-market
#21. To: Gatlin (#17)
The drug dealers were spending the money they received from selling black-market pot on fancy cars, flashy clothes and numerous other lavish items … on which they PAID taxes.
#22. To: A K A Stone (#18)
When someone sells your kids some heroin and ruins their life.
As for me I think Heroin dealers should be shot and killed.
#23. To: Gatlin (#20)
#24. To: ConservingFreedom (#21)
The drug dealers were spending the money they received from selling black-market pot on fancy cars, flashy clothes and numerous other lavish items … on which they PAID taxes.
#25. To: Gatlin (#24)
But that does NOT create more money
Last year, Colorado brought in $53 million in taxes as a result. Nowhere is it stated that $53 million is above and beyond the taxes they normally receive.
It is to be noted that the state fell far short of it $70 projection.
“Publik skool math” shows that even if the $70 million projection is met, that's still mere drop in the bucket when considering the state's total budget of $27 billion.
#26. To: ConservingFreedom (#25)
#27. To: ConservingFreedom, A K A Stone, Gatlin (#10)
I find nowhere in the New Testament that we should cage those who inebriate themselves.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#28. To: Deckard (#27)
(Edited)
#29. To: Gatlin (#20)
"I leave you with with this, for your listening pleasure: S.W.A.T theme song."
#30. To: Gatlin (#17)
"The drug dealers were spending the money they received from selling black-market pot on fancy cars, flashy clothes and numerous other lavish items … on which they PAID taxes."
#31. To: misterwhite (#29)
#32. To: ConservingFreedom (#5)
(Edited)
"The suit is going nowhere"
#33. To: Gatlin (#31)
#34. To: misterwhite (#30)
#35. To: misterwhite (#32)
#36. To: misterwhite (#32)
#37. To: Roscoe, misterwhite (#35)
And the two states are already moving to join a pending suit in the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.
#38. To: Gatlin (#34)
They fail to consider that hospitalizations involving patients with marijuana exposures and diagnoses increased from approximately 803 per 100,000 to 2,413 per 100,000.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#39. To: Roscoe (#35)
"Even though SCOTUS declined to hear Oklahoma and Nebraska's pot suit against Colorado, the plaintiff states can still take their case to U.S. District Court"
#40. To: Gatlin, Deckard, misterwhite (#34)
hospitalizations involving patients with marijuana exposures and diagnoses increased from approximately 803 per 100,000 to 2,413 per 100,000.
#41. To: misterwhite (#32)
Should it go nowhere?
#42. To: ConservingFreedom (#39)
"Did I say "has reached the end of the road" or did I say "is going nowhere",
#43. To: misterwhite (#42)
Are you saying there's a difference between those two expressions?
#44. To: ConservingFreedom (#41)
"A decision in the Plaintiff States’ favor will hinder Colorado’s ability to channel demand for recreational marijuana into a regulated and monitored market."
#45. To: ConservingFreedom (#43)
"one can be in motion without getting any closer to one's desired destination."
#46. To: ConservingFreedom (#40)
Use of these codes does not mean that the visit is motivated by marijuana exposure but simply that it is a possibility."
#47. To: misterwhite (#43)
Of course - one can be in motion without getting any closer to one's desired destination.
#48. To: Gatlin (#46)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]