C-Span TV: Marijuana Legalization and California Ballot Initiative Prop. 19 To Be Debated and Discussed

C-Span TV: Marijuana Legalization and California Ballot Initiative Prop. 19 To Be Debated and Discussed This Saturday; NORML Director Allen St. Pierre vs. Former DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson

Update: Watch today’s program here. The 45 minute discussion on legalizing cannabis starts at the 2:19:30 mark. Like the many current commentators’ lament, I too wish more questions were directed to the reform side and/or allowed some rebuttal to any number of Mr. Hutchinson’s misdirections and contradictions. However, unlike AM radio or cable TV news shows, guests on C-Span are encouraged not to talk over each other, keeping answers short, and to try to take as many calls as possible from viewers.

As noted, as has been the case every single time I’ve appeared on C-Span, most of the callers are critical of the current policies and favor law reform.

I’ve been invited back to C-Span to debate and discuss the topics of cannabis legalization, and specifically California’s upcoming vote on Prop. 19, a measure that if approved by the voters will effectively legalize cannabis in America’s most important state politically and economically.

Former Drug Enforcement Administration chief and Republican congressman from Arkansas Asa Hutchinson has stepped up to argue in favor of the status quo and continuing into a ninth decade of Cannabis Prohibition.

The live interview is scheduled to broadcast Saturday morning (10/9/10) on C-Span TV, 9:15am – 10:00am (eastern…sorry west coasters!).  Like most C-Span shows, the public is invited to ask questions or make short commentary.

This C-Span interview is likely the result of the Wall Street Journal publishing an unprecedented jointly signed letter earlier this week by every previous DEA administrator predictably calling for the Obama administration to actively oppose politically viable cannabis legalization voter initiatives in places like California  (just the way they did).

Is the body politic (and the mainstream media that has so aptly aided and abetted these technocrats’ blatant disregard for democracy, science, compassion and common sense) really, really nervous about the cataclysmic blow that California voters are about to level on a self-evidently failed federal government public policy—another ‘war’ lost by government?

As one overexposed, former half governor is known for saying all too frequently: Youbetcha!

See you on the Groove Tube!

115 thoughts

  1. The data collected clearly shows that in thse Countries that made all or most drugs legal did not see a large rise in Cannabis use. The DEA guy mis-spoke the data again, check RAND report. CA is engaged in a much bigger fights that involves the peoples rights to use or abuse this plant is their liberty, it is their constitutional right under liberty that this vote, this fught must go forth. Medical Cannabis is not going away, freedom is return to your land and mine. Liberty is in our hearts, it is us who must express that liberty upon our government, thank god it is in the form of a vote and not blood shed, this is the peaceful way to gain these lost liberties. The bottom line is this, If what i do does not harm you, then it is not a crime and I can be at my liberty to do so, no government, no law is going to move me from my liberty. If I, if we give up the liberty then those who have died for this country, do die in vain. So VOTE, I say vote Yes, but I believe in the vote of the people, so vote no if that your heart. I would beg you to vote yes and make this a land slide vote that tells this government who is boss.

  2. @ Everyone who wants to watch the entire thing, Go to Youtube and type in: C-SPAN Prop19 . You’ll see the 3 part videos there. Good job Allen!!! And good job America for calling in and standing up to the tyranny!!!

  3. Hutchinson sold his own point when he said that law enforcement capabilities would go down. Of course they would go up. Thinking about just local law enforcement, if they weren’t concentrated on arresting marijuana users, and less so marijuana dealers they would be able to concentrate on harder more devastating drugs.
    What do you think the percentage of marijuana arrests is for the DEA? If they weren’t concentrated on marijuana illegalities as much, they too would be able to concentrate more on harder drugs. Obviously they don’t want to take the hit on quota and also pride, but even the stupidest person, government or otherwise, can see the social impact of focusing on more harmful drugs. No?

  4. Good job st pierre, your a perfect example of a speaker for the legalization movement.

    I would like the opponents of legalization to explain why they want to turn this country into a dictatorship by suggesting the feds do something about voters voting on prop 19.

  5. Excellent job on CSpan Pierre for what it’s worth. It’s ridiculous that this issue has even come to this point. When it’s 40% of the voters saying yes or 49% saying yes, it’s still a ton of people that are saying yes!!!!!!!!! IT’S TIME TO PULL OUR ANTIQUATED IDEALS OUT OF OUR ASSES & MOVE ON TO BIGGER & BETTER THINGS!!! For instance, taking the easy $$$ out of dealer’s hands (marijuana) and arresting the junkies that peddle meth, speed, oxycontin, crack, etc… I’m all for the DEA. They just need a much more focused direction. Marijuana is the “dogfish” of ocean fishing or the easy A. Our towns are being overrun by so many other problems & a lot of them seem to be funded by such an easy crop. These insignificant @$$holes wouldn’t make it if they didn’t have marijuana (the bread & butter) funding them & keeping them alive. I looked into becoming a police officer but I enjoy my marijuana more than their criteria would allow. Better wishes for the future & for my growing family.

  6. I was a little disappointed that no one talked about how industrial hemp could boost the economy and quite possibly save the country.

  7. I know you would liked more time to tear him apart but I think the callers did a pretty good job of balancing out the Pro-Reform side. It seemed the only one defending the current policies was Hutchison. There was the one guy who called and complained about his friends all turning into druggies but you did a great job countering that. Perfect repsone.

    I kept wishing you or the callers would bring up the point that ‘DRUG DEALERS DO NOT CARD” when talking about marijuana access to kids. Still, you got your point across with statistics!

  8. What the Govt has to look at is the waste of money, time and energy that has been spent on 70 years of WAR. The DEA man, spoke often of looking at History. His history books are different from mine, i guess. Prohibition has never worked.

  9. Great job Allen. Hutchinson got more speaking time, but only because his side has got so much more explaining to do. Of course it still didn’t stop him from dodging some of those caller questions.

  10. What I want to know is why no one is bringing up the point..Who cares if use of marijuana goes up, it’s been proven that it can help detour people from other drugs, such as tobacco and alcohol.. and I’d much rather have a very high cannabis use rate, for a lower tobacco and alcohol use. I’m all for use going up, who cares! I’m mad at myself for missing this and not being able to call in.

  11. Watched it. No time to comment right away.

    Item: Rise in use after legalization compared to under prohibition is at least in part attributable to people coming out of the shadows and honestly reporting usage on surveys.

    Item: Direction federal government is going as current law exists is wrong direction. Asa is flat out wrong about it going in right direction. The direction is from sourcers to the retail consumer. That is the direction to control things on the supply and demand chain. Can’t do that if everything is underground and intended to be invisible.

    Item: Federal law still puts the brakes on people like the woman from Nebraska who uses marijuana medically for glaucoma and must procure it as an illegal commodity, although Asa acknowledged 14 states and experts have realized legislatively medical value. They want the market to be visible for quality control of the product, the environment and in the society.

    Item: Cannabis is a part of the culture now. It has been for decades now. There is no effective way to remove it from the culture without revising history. That is not likely. It’s too popular. A bunch of people in D.C. thinking they can create a document and sign off on it themselves, then think the rest of the culture will sign off on it too is just too good to ever be true. People who don’t agree with you prohibitionists are not going to change for you. Just worry about running your own lives.

  12. You are right about that mark, no one can successfully prohibit peoples appetites, has never worked and never will, with all the things we could do with hemp in addition to smoking it we ought to have a world economy based on that wonderful little plant, if we did that we could have plastic cars that are more structurally sound then if they were made of steel, sounds like a pretty good reason for legalization, I must say if George Washington were alive to see what we have let happen he would weep.

    p.s. I like how the DEA guy just tried to use fear by saying that it would be in conflict with federal law, what are they going to do arrest everyone in California?

  13. I think the reason Obama has not come out and said he’ll do anything if prop 19 passes is because he will let it be a test state. I mean, on AZ, he quickly threatened to sue the state but he hasn’t said anything about this prop. Lets HOPE. If he decides to let it slide, he has won my vote for the next election (unless Ron Paul runs again).

  14. hahahaha, like everyone is waiting to smoke marijuana till it’s legal… is this guy for real? how can you understand so little and be the head of something based on the subject.

  15. Piece o’ cake, eh Allen? I actually wondered if Asa even wanted to be there. Poor guy didn’t stand a chance, especially after the calls started coming in. (giggle)

  16. 3 weeks 2 days till voting time. 3 weeks 2 days till I move to Cali lol Please pass Prop 19! And set an example for the rest of the nation!

  17. Hutchinson is a fear mongerer at best. He beats his “use will go up” drum in a painfully contrived manner. Great job Pierre, but wish you would have mentioned the extraordinary amount of violence taking place in Mexico fighting over the rights of providing the United States its hierba. 28,000 people have been killed in Mexico alone since Calderon was elected in 2006. Eventually that violence is going to spill over into the United States and I’m afraid that’s what it’s going to take for a national change.

  18. @ Redspit: I think the reason Obama has not come out and said anything regarding prop 19 is because he’s hoping it doesn’t pass so he won’t have to deal with it. I suspect he sees himself losing political capital no matter which side he takes on the issue, so he’s keeping quiet and hoping it doesn’t pass, so he won’t have to take any side.

  19. @68 – I’m not signing the petition since I don’t like the way it’s written! When you click the petition tab the first thing it says is: “The reason that marijuana is, and should remain, illegal is that the drug itself is harmful to the individual and to the community.”

    This is not a good start. Reading further, it is full of spelling and grammar errors. I’m all for legalizing marijuana like most Americans, but I can’t see our Congressmen taking this seriously even if we got 10 million signatures the way it’s written.

    I suggest getting someone with a law degree to rewrite it and then let us all take another look at it.

  20. If I smoke weed, and I do just about every day, it is no one’s business but mine. Then there is the economy. If it were legal I would be putting the $150 I spend on weed every month and grow my own. What about all the uses there are for hemp? People are stupid. They just sit back and let some corrupt jackass tell them what they can do in their own home and then either say we can’t do that it’s illegal or live their lives, many times hiding their personal habits from family, employers, and sometimes non-using friends. I live my life how I choose according to what God’s word says is right and wrong not what some jackass who votes the way he is paid to vote not by what is right or wrong or even according to what we want. I don’t hide my habits from anyone. If anyone asks me I tell them straight out I smoke.

  21. he kept going to the arguement usage will go up usage will go up usage will go up…number one yes it will BUT its only because the people who grew up with prohibition will be able to “reach the cookie jar” so to speak think of it like this when your a kid and you see that cookie jar you know whats in it you want whats in it but you cant reach.. once you can reach you probably will eat a lot of cookies but eventually its not so exciting anymore its there everyday all the time and the excitment is gone and thats how our future generations will look at marijuana there will not be a forbidden fruit effect to where some ppl may decide to use it while others dont.. but it wont be something that illegal and makes you want it more because you shouldnt have it.. in the netherlands they have a lower usage rate than we do and the shit is legal there really open your eyes at first usage will go up but i think eventually will go down and stabalize. marijuana is a victimless crime when used responsibly keep in mind. and in that aspect no matter what you do there will be somebody who uses irresponsibly but that is human nature.. usa wake the fuck up

  22. Clearly, all Mr. Hutchinson had to rely on was old, fear-based reasoning, as one of the latter callers pointed out. The real issue that is of interest to me – since the actual debate is clearly over – is how the federal government is going to deal with the will of the CA voters. It is an interesting time! Also, it was great to see Mr. St Pierre on video, putting a face to his reasoned and sensible words. Good job on the debate.

    I also think Mr. Hutchinson is a pretty nice guy, after watching him talk. I have a lot of compassion for him and those of his generation who have tried to make a square peg fit in a round hole for a long time.



    Tobacco 435,000
    Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,000
    Alcohol 85,000
    Microbial Agents 75,000
    Toxic Agents 55,000
    Motor Vehicle Crashes 26,347
    Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,000
    Suicide 30,622
    Incidents Involving Firearms 29,000
    Homicide 20,308
    Sexual Behaviors 20,000
    All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,000
    Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,600
    Marijuana 0


  24. I absolutely love how he cites the supremacy clause over and over again.. I would really like to know when “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” was twisted to mean the ‘federal government’ and not the citizens.

    The people in these government organizations don’t seem to realize that the Constitution was made for US the CITIZENS and not for THEM the GOVERNMENT! It really makes no sense how these people can twist what our constitution means to suit their needs whenever they’d like… It makes me sick to think that these people can act all high and mighty while at the same time purposely turning a blind eye towards the big picture.

    Legalization of cannabis WILL increase revenue to the local/state governments, it WILL reduce the amount of tax dollars that WE have to spend on enforcing these ludicrous laws, it WILL cause the current law enforcement organizations to focus on the ‘harder’ drugs and it WILL allow citizens to make their own choices. If the government was truly worried about the social impacts of cannabis and other ‘drugs’, they wouldn’t allow the multitudes of alcohol and pharmaceutical ads on television that are played EVERY DAY during PRIME TIME when CHILDREN are sitting there watching TV.

    Until they decide to crack down on alcohol and big pharma indoctrination much like they did to tobacco, they have no reason nor right to continue arguing against the legalization of cannabis.

  25. Sorry I forgot to call in I would of loved to nail a DEA guy they pick such odd balls. Someone needs to ask how pot can be act 1 schedule 1 w/o science infact science is in favor of reclassification. Also its less harmful than alcohol everyone who doesnt belive in also banning alcohol is an oppressive and hypocritical

  26. I personally am not democrat or republican. More of an independant or will vote for the one that I have an idea that will do the USA the best job while in office.
    I have tried marijuana myself in highschool; however, I was allergic to it, and am unable to use it. I later went to alcohol, cocaine, and harder drug usage like opiates, prescribed by doctors, that are supposed to be a highly controlled substance. Thus through gov’t paid for rehab, after jail time, through a program called “Drug Court” in Tennessee, led me to decide on my carreer. I went to school to become a nurse.
    I have worked as a nurse in the drug/alcohol/behavorial health hospital setting. The gov’t dumps tons of money each year in the mental health program for drug addiction and behavorial health issues. In this type of setting it is the gateway to the use of other illicit street drugs because it can have certain other drugs mixed with it, or the person will go on to a “bigger high”. I have also worked in geriatrics where the canibis pill has been issued for certain medicinal uses. In this type of setting the gov’t is still dumping money into the care of those people, which they need. Still another program that seniors can’t help in nursing homes, but the gov’t still dumps tons of American dollars into in order for these seniors to obtain the proper treatment and healthcare. Also working part-time as a home health/homemaker, I had patients that would slip and buy off the streets, from the persons that the DEA Associate hunts, enough canibus to give them appetite for certain medical conditions they had. Under the HIPPA ACT, I will not mention any names. If these seniors/patients get caught with possession, they are not only charged with possession, but possession of paraphenilia, intent to manufacture for resail, jailed, fined, probated (under supervision) which is very costly, and if unable to afford or meet the probation rules are violated and re-jailed, thus taking away from their best interest of medical care and starting a cycle of them entering the system. All because of “self-medicating” was the best choice that they had found to help them along with their medical condition, but couldn’t find a doctor to enforce the canibus for medicinal purposes for them. All of which having there good effects and bad effects on a person’s life.
    As watching the debate on CSPAN, I understand that it is a matter of putting certain stipulations on it if legalized, and controlling it to keep the under-aged community from having a way of getting a hold on the drug itself. Then having a way for the gov’t to make money off of the legalization of it.
    After hearing the callers comments and questions towards each administrator, it raised certain doubts in my mind, but at the same time sounds like a good idea as long as it is properly introduced and controlled. However prescription drugs, alcohol, caffeine, and nicotine are legal, controlled, taxed, and if sold/distributed, and/or used while driving under the influence (excluding caffeine and nicotine), the person/persons are lawed and fined with some jail time and lossage of driver’s license. Plus the pharmaceutical companies. alcohol companies, and tobacco companies dumps a lot of money into elections to keep it legalized.
    Getting to my points, if it had the proper growing techniques to help out the American farmers like the tobacco industry, and not imported to help out another country (OK). if it is controlled like tobacco and taxed like tobacco (OK), if it is controlled like alcohol and prescription drugs while driving or operating machinery at work, due to it’s potential of lack of cordination and reflexes (OK), etc, etc…, but if it is just thrown out on the table with a few stipulations against it, and not taxed like these other products that we buy everyday, THEN (NO).
    Lastly, it has been proven that alcohol causes more recks and deaths due to recks, and that alcohol and Xanax (a benzodiazepine) prescribed by psychiatric doctors or controlled by primary care physicians or pain management specialist, is the only drug that can actually cause death while in DT’s/withdrawls. They are legal, and questionaires have also showed that canibus helps to slow a persons thoughts down enough to help them through the DT’s/withdrawl effects. So I would have to vote YES if it had the proper stipulations for medicinal purposes and to help boost the American economy.

  27. Mr DEA still never made his point visa vi, why is alcohol ok, but not pot. Why is the DEA not involved in the billions of dollars the alcohol industry brings in LEGALLY, and why didn’t alcohol prohibition work, and what is the difference that alcohol gets a pass? They can’t make any argument and we should have pushed that point mo betta Allen…save your seeds, hide your weed

  28. also..I wonder if Mr DEA enjoys a cold refreshing beer now and again? …is he an alcoholic, probably not point made. Can we get him back and ask him?

  29. That petition is horrible. It doesn’t even agree with itself. What kind of six year-old wrote that?

    Would I be able to find a transcript of the debate somewhere? I have no sound.

  30. Someone (I don’t remember who) said insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. The U.S. Gov’t’s drug policy is insanity at its finest.

  31. The article that was mentioned on Amsterdam from the Washington Post was stating the problem is not the drug and the coffee shops but the criminal that surround the environment because of it illegal status. Make it legal and no more criminal…problem solved.

  32. i watched it and to be honest i cringed every single time a call was made, after the first few questions, where each opponent got an uninterrupted chance to argue their case i think st. pierre and prop 19 looked very good…after that it became a travesty

    it honestly seemed like somebody intentionally screened all the calls for the most burnt out, paranoid, delusional morons in the bunch!!! every single caller was pro marijuana and 9 out of 10 questions were directed at hutchinson, the dea agent, and they weren’t even questions but wild accusations, barely legible amongst the babbling, stuttering, and stammering. frankly, i have a lot more respect for the man than i did previously for his restraint in not calling the callers out for the fools that they at the very least sounded like.

    st. pierre had science, statistics, common sense, the backing of the majority of the public plus a good deal of charisma but i think from an undecided voters standpoint it was a draw at best.

    had all the questions been directed by the host and each side given time to speak i think it could have been extremely educational and helpful to the movement but having asa hutchinson politely brush off a mob of moronic stoners (3 of which had to be cut off after going off on a tangent/rant!)for an hour while allen st. pierre sat silent off camera didn’t help us at all!

  33. Regarding obviously ” Bribed ” drug Czar’s statement ….” Our opposition to legalizing marijuana is grounded not in ideology but in facts and experience ” .

    Facts & experience in what ? Lies ?

  34. I just wish that Allen St. Pierre had more educated callers to help direct the debate more in his favor! I personally couldn’t stand listening to them any longer.

  35. @ JDuganz: You said everything I have been thinking in my head but not sure how to put down into logical wording… Thank you for being so intelligent & aware. -Michelle, Seattle WA

  36. I watched C-Span as long as I could, until the “professional smuggler” called in, and then I bailed.

    Here’s the way the FED works folks. They (the DEA, etc.) can ONLY send a retired agent (open shirt, no tie allowed) to “debate” on a public forum for one reason, and that is to “sit-in” for the FED as a devil’s advocate FOR Prop. 19. The DEA is FOR Prop. 19, but the retired DEA agent is NOT allowed to comment on anything EXCEPT the Federal position on Pot that was current during his administration. Period.

    Having the retired DEA agent debate NORML is ONLY way the FED can “sell the idea of legalizing pot” to a scared mom and pop who are “sitting on the fence” about this issue, while they’re sitting at home over in Burnt Stump, USA.
    The federal government has to “act the part” of the un-informed buffoon on T.V. and make comments that force NORML to explain their opinions on pot (for mom and pop’s Pot education benefit) and in doing so, the public can then make up their own mind. If enough negative-minds get re-opinionated in mass by education on T.V., and California legalizes pot; then the other 13 states will start feeling left out and begin petitioning their states for legalization.

    And that my friends and voters is how alcohol got repealed and Pot will too.
    You can’t expect the FED to wake up one day and legalize pot. It has to come from the public’s opinion.

    Simple as that. Have more debates and always tell the truth. That’s all the FED expects, but they have to appear as though they are against you.
    Get it?

    We voted absentee last week at home in our pajamas. Yes on 19.

  37. Perhaps we can accept the continuation of keeping the public possession and illegal sale as a civil offense, but if and only if, and we insist only if, the part of the intrusive drug tests, which target the users of marihuana, also be made illegal. It is now a known fact that marihuana does have medical properties, and the minority who see this as necessary medication, do have the right to have their health history and status to be a private matter beyond the scope of employers right to intrude into human privacy, and to protect the few, we have established constituional rights, which the Supreme Court of theUS has distorted to exclude marihuana users, on account of such personnas such as the evil Richard Nixon, i.e., who had some hand in making new laws to target the users of marijuana since war protests also included marihauan usage as an expression of civil disobedience and rebellion against an oppressive governemtn who drafted our loved ones to send awy to die in some cases. This created intense bitterness in some that still exists.

    For many the issue is invasionof privacy and viloation of our fundamental human rights and right to choose our form of stress relief and relaxtion in own home.

    Private users frown upon public drunkeness as well as public irresponsible use. WWe can compromise, but it does not seem the prohibitionist have compromise in their vocabulary. Instead they use zero tolerance and relentless attempts at law enforcement of an unenforceable law. It is well known that marihuana prohibition is a major source of funding support for many law enforcement outfits, since we can see from the numebr of marihauan arrests each year, which simply shold not be that numerous. Such an observation confirms the factt hat marihuana legistlation is in massive need of reform.

    In cash strapped cities, the legal sale can produce much needed revenue as well as provide a boost to the entertainment industry. Naturally alcohol will object to such an intrusion to its monopoly on public evening entertainent drink and dining menu.

    To some this is plain common sense, but in an opinionated society where facts seem to be unimportant. there is consideerable resistance from those who have an innate desire to control the lives of others.

    We could go on forever about this, and it seems that the oppositon would love to oppress otheres forever as well. Hence we have a completely unnecessary conflict between “reasonable men, whch needs to be resolved in a reasonable and mutual acceptable manner.

    Lazarus Cain

  38. just so you know the link does not work all it says is.
    bummer as I am a big fan of norml and their efforts Good job guys keep up the good work 🙂
    btw i’m thinking Botany is a great career choice for the developing hemp industry.

    [Paul Armentano responds; The debate is archived on youtube in three parts:

  39. California’s OFFICIAL BALLOT reads ;

    LEGALIZES MARIJUANA UNDER CALIFORNIA BUT NOT FEDERAL LAW . PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMEMENTS TO REGULATE AND TAX COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION , DISTRIBUTION , AND SALE OF MARIJUANA . INITIATIVE STATUTE . Allows people 21 years old or older to possess , cultivate or transport marijuana for personel use . Fiscal impact : Depending on federal , state and local government actions , potential increased tax and fee revenues in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually and potential correctional savings of several tens of millions of dollars annually .

    Seems to favor our side with facts & not fiction , lies or fallacy .

    ” and I just voted ” .

  40. Meanwhile back in California ……

    Recreational Marijuana Ordinance Proposed For Humboldt County Marijuana farmers

    [Press release.]

    Graduated Fees Will Encourage Small Farmers and Boost County Income

    The Humboldt Medical Marijuana Advisory Panel (HuMMAP) is proposing commercial cannabis regulations today to the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors. HuMMAP Chair Syreeta Lux says that “This proposal is designed to stabilize our county’s rural economies with a tax policy that encourages families to stay on their land, while increasing county tax yields. Recognizing that a greater number of small farmers contributes more to our county’s economy and culture than fewer large growers can, our proposal also reduces crime and police concerns.”

    HuMMAP proposes that county licensing fees be levied based on mature plant canopy area. They suggest a yearly fee of $200 to be paid for the first 100 square feet of cultivated area per parcel, with graduated fees increasing for larger cultivation areas up to one acre, as in this table:

    100 square feet, annual fee of $200

    200 sq. ft. ” ” ” $500
    300 $800
    400 $1200
    500 $1500
    1000 $3500
    2000 $8000
    3000 $13,000
    4000 $19,000
    5000 $25,000
    10,000 $60,000
    20,000 $140,000
    40,000 $300,000

    HuMMAP also suggests that a plan for responsible water use accompany all permit applications, with a countywide cannabis trade association and/or Supervisorial Task Force working cooperatively to encourage compliance, and to address enforcement and evolving policy issues. Non-compliance would be punishable by civil fines.

    In her statement to Humboldt Supervisors Tuesday, Lux said “As our elected officials, we ask you to pass a resolution to state officials urging them to adopt these or similar standards statewide, in support of the many small rural counties also dependent upon cannabis farming. We also urge you to work with private industry and county agencies to protect our appellation, and to brand values and practices no less than location, so that Humboldt becomes ever more synonymous with healthy and sustainable small-scale agriculture.”

    In return for program compliance, growers would receive an official Humboldt-Grown tax stamp/certificate of provenance affixed to fee-paid production in various unit sizes. Growers smaller than 1000 square feet could receive a distinctive Humboldt Home-Grown certificate. HuMMAP asked that this permitting structure be put in place by March 1^st , 2011.

    # # #

    /The Humboldt Medical Marijuana Advisory Panel is a community-based nonpartisan policy group created to foster comprehensive approaches to legal marijuana policy, integrating health, safety, economic, and regulatory issues in Humboldt County, California and the United States. Formed by a public meeting process, HuMMAP speaks for the interests of legal marijuana growers, patients, caregivers, distributors and support services across Humboldt County. See more at http://www.HuMMAP.org/

  41. Hell! there’s nothing to debate – we got the numbers. Let’s just push the clock to 11.02.10, and let the prohibs go shit in their hat.

Leave a Reply