Residents of Maine voted to legalize marijuana in 2016.
But their governor on Friday vetoed a bill that would regulate and tax the sale of recreational marijuana, dealing a set back to the state's effort to implement retail markets.
Paul LePage said one reason he vetoed the bill is because the federal government prohibits cannabis.
"Until I clearly understand how the federal government intends to treat states that seek to legalize marijuana, I cannot in good conscience support any scheme in state law to implement expansion of legal marijuana in Maine," he said, in a letter to state lawmakers. "We need assurances that a change in policy or administration at the federal level will not nullify those investments."
The bill passed the Maine Senate with a veto-proof majority, but not the House. Lawmakers will meet on Monday and have an opportunity to override LePage's veto. Friday was the last day for LePage to veto bills to regulate the sale of marijuana.
Erik Altieri, spokesman for the pro-legalization organization NORML, said LePage's veto "is just the latest in a line of anti-democratic attacks coming from his office and his stonewalling will only ensure the prolonged existence of a criminal black market in Maine and deny the state coffers of needed tax revenue."
"Maine should be looking at ways to expeditiously implement a robust legalization program that represents what state voters approved at the ballot box," said Altieri.
LePage pointed to what he called "the failing of the medical marijuana program" and "the exploitation of loopholes" which he said has led to an increase in medical marijuana patients in the last year. He also said Maine lawmakers are dealing with "unrealistic deadlines" to establish regulations.
Maine is scheduled to start up legal retail sales of recreational marijuana on July 1, 2018, the same month that Massachusetts and Canada are scheduled to begin legal sales. Medical marijuana is already legal in Maine.
Eight states have legalized the sale of recreational marijuana. The five other states are Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Nevada and Alaska. In Washington, D.C., voters legalized the possession, cultivation and use of recreational marijuana, but not the sale.
LePage is the second governor to veto a legalization bill.
Vermont became the first and only state earlier this year to pass a recreational legalization bill through legislative means. Governor Phil Scott, a Republican, vetoed the bill and said he was not satisfied it adequately protected public safety. But he would consider a bill that toughened penalties for stoned driving and providing marijuana to children.
The movement toward legalization has been growing in recent years, and medical marijuana is now legal in 29 states.
New Frontier Data, a company that analyzes the marijuana industry, says the legal cannabis market was worth in $6.6 billion in 2016 and forecasts that the industry could grow to $21 billion by 2020.
Poster Comment:
Paul LePage said one reason he vetoed the bill is because the federal government prohibits cannabis.
#1: buckeroo To: Gatlin (#0)
buckeroo posted on 2017-11-03 21:07:07 Reply Private Reply
#2: tpaine To: Gatlin (#0)
He hides behind the bozo function like a little girl.
tpaine posted on 2017-11-03 22:02:35 Reply Private Reply
#3: Pinguinite To: Gatlin (#0)
.... and he's afraid that if the signs the bill, the federal law prohibiting cannabis would be struck down.
Makes sense.
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-03 22:15:17 Reply Private Reply
#4: GrandIsland To: buckeroo (#1)
GrandIsland posted on 2017-11-04 00:38:11 Reply Private Reply
#5: Hondo68 To: GrandIsland, Canukastani crossdressers, Le Page, yukie, tater, libtards (#4)
Your viewpoint as a cheese eating French Canadian anchor baby, Pennsylvania crosswalk guard is of zero value.
President Trump needs to deport all of you Canuck anchor babies, including Le Page, tater, and Ted Cruz.
And.... Make Alaska Great Again, by deporting yukie to the Yukon Territories, Canader!
Hondo68 posted on 2017-11-04 02:09:48 Reply Private Reply
#6: A K A Stone To: Pinguinite (#3)
Would you rather live in a society where everyone was sober, or everyone was stoned constantly?
A K A Stone posted on 2017-11-04 07:27:12 Reply Private Reply
#7: Pinguinite To: A K A Stone (#6)
If he believes that signing a state bill into law would violate federal law, then he lacks sufficient civics knowledge to qualify for public office.
Sober. But your question is completely different from asking if cannabis should be legal or not. The law would not, after all, require everyone consume cannabis daily. And anyone who has a good faith belief that cannabis is medicine that aids them with a medical condition should be allowed to use it.
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-04 09:23:34 Reply Private Reply
#8: misterwhite To: Pinguinite (#3)
Struck down by who? The courts? They already ruled on the matter and said the federal laws prohibiting marijuana are constitutional.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 11:11:21 Reply Private Reply
#9: Pinguinite To: misterwhite (#8)
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-04 11:27:34 Reply Private Reply
#10: misterwhite To: Pinguinite (#9)
No need. He understands that constitutional federal law trumps state law to the contrary. Too bad his legislature doesn't.
They should be tried and hanged for sedition.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 11:41:40 Reply Private Reply
#11: Pinguinite To: misterwhite (#10)
Obviously you don't know anything about basic civics either, if you believe elected officials should be executed for exercising their legitimate legislative duties. It is their sovereign right to pass any laws they want, whether contrary to federal law or not. No, the crime of sedition would instead be applicable to you, if you were to seriously advocate what you stated above.
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-04 11:51:00 Reply Private Reply
#12: misterwhite To: Pinguinite (#11)
Even Jim Crow laws? Or a state law confiscating all guns? Give me a break.
"Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. It establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions."
"Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontention (or resistance) to lawful authority."
Hang 'em high.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 12:13:30 Reply Private Reply
#13: Pinguinite To: misterwhite (#12)
Absolutely. States enacting laws do not violate any federal laws. At worst they are unconstitutional and unenforceable.
... which in no way criminalizes any legislative activity carried out by any state legislature.
I.e. calling for the hanging of legislative representatives.
Be the man and go first!
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-04 12:35:39 Reply Private Reply
#14: misterwhite To: Pinguinite (#13)
If the state law legalizes marijuana it does.
"I.e. calling for the hanging of legislative representatives ..."
... who committed sedition against the federal government.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 12:46:28 Reply Private Reply
#15: tpaine To: Pinguinite, Y'ALL (#13)
Whatta hypocrite. It wasn't that long ago that misterwhite approved of California socialists writing any anti-gun laws they could dream up..
Whitey needs no breaks, -- he needs a keeper.
tpaine posted on 2017-11-04 13:05:29 Reply Private Reply
#16: Pinguinite To: misterwhite (#14)
In which case, majority legislatures of some 29 states are overdue for the gallows. Care to cite a single one that's on death row?
Oh, no forget that.
Care to cite a single one that's been arrested?
Oh, forget that too. Just name a single one that's had an indictment or arrest warrant issued.
Well, no, let's back up one more. Cite me a single instance of a federal prosecutor simply **seeking** to obtain an arrest warrant or indictment of a state legislator for passing marijuana legalization.
There. That should be easy for you.
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-04 13:11:31 Reply Private Reply
#17: misterwhite To: Pinguinite (#16)
I agree.
"Cite me a single instance of a federal prosecutor simply **seeking** to obtain an arrest warrant or indictment of a state legislator for passing marijuana legalization."
It will only take one indictment and the other 28 will fold like a cheap suit.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 13:21:24 Reply Private Reply
#18: Pinguinite To: misterwhite (#17)
Maybe. But it hasn't happened, has it.
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-04 14:34:19 Reply Private Reply
#19: misterwhite To: Pinguinite (#18)
No. But when it does I bet you'll squeal like a pig. As will the 29 state legislatures.
Hang 'em high.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 14:50:30 Reply Private Reply
#20: Pinguinite To: misterwhite (#19)
That's it. Keep changing the subject.
It hasn't happened because passing laws is a sovereign right of state legislatures.
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-04 15:01:39 Reply Private Reply
#21: misterwhite To: Pinguinite (#20)
Not when there is a federal law to the contrary. I cited the constitution. Can't read?
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 15:16:54 Reply Private Reply
#22: Pinguinite To: misterwhite (#21)
Not only can I read, but I can also think. Reading is useless without the ability to think to go along with it. Try it sometime.
Pinguinite posted on 2017-11-04 15:26:51 Reply Private Reply
#23: buckeroo To: misterwhite (#21)
buckeroo posted on 2017-11-04 15:28:11 Reply Private Reply
#24: Hondo68 To: buckeroo, misterwhite (#23)
Whitey is a Lincoln Log Cabin Illinois Republican, they don't believe in States rights!
Hondo68 posted on 2017-11-04 15:38:29 Reply Private Reply
#25: buckeroo To: hondo68, misterwhite (#24)
buckeroo posted on 2017-11-04 15:46:49 Reply Private Reply
#26: misterwhite To: buckeroo (#23)
Of course there are state's rights -- unless the federal government has passed a law which is contrary to state law. Then, federal law prevails. According to the U.S. Constitution.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 18:35:45 Reply Private Reply
#27: buckeroo To: misterwhite (#26)
buckeroo posted on 2017-11-04 18:48:07 Reply Private Reply
#28: Hondo68 To: misterwhite, Gatlins Big Gulp o Hash Oil, Medicinal Maryjane (#26)
Reserved to the States, or to the People ~10th
Hondo68 posted on 2017-11-04 19:47:03 Reply Private Reply
#29: misterwhite To: buckeroo (#27)
It's not in any government document. It's in the Bible.
1 Espesians 13 -- Yay though the law is written, do thy brother misterwhite speaketh. He who opines thusly, it shall be law.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-04 19:57:22 Reply Private Reply
#30: buckeroo To: misterwhite (#29)
buckeroo posted on 2017-11-04 20:01:22 Reply Private Reply
#31: misterwhite To: hondo68 (#28)
Then maybe we should ask the U.S. Supreme Court to make that determination. Oh wait. They already did.
misterwhite posted on 2017-11-05 09:28:06 Reply Private Reply