cannabisnews.com: Detroit Medical Pot Vote Buoys State Advocates Detroit Medical Pot Vote Buoys State Advocates Posted by CN Staff on August 10, 2004 at 07:57:19 PT By Allison Farrell, IR State Bureau Source: Helena Independent Record Helena -- Detroit's vote last week to permit the medical use of marijuana within city limits has ''set the stage'' for a similar outcome in Montana's medical marijuana initiative this November, Montana advocates said Monday. The first in a series of nationwide marijuana measures facing voters this year, Detroit's new law creates exceptions from drug laws for patients smoking marijuana on the advice of their physicians. Montana's Initiative 148 proposes to do the same thing here. The proposed law would protect medical marijuana patients, their doctors and their caregivers from arrest and prosecution.''I think people are afraid to even talk about this because of all the propaganda,'' said Paul Befumo of Missoula, treasurer of the Marijuana Policy Project of Montana. ''But they can see all these other places, and they realize maybe they're not in the minority after all. That kind of thing feeds on itself.''The people of Detroit passed the medical marijuana act by a 51 to 49 percent margin on Aug. 3. Nine states - Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and Washington - already have some kind of medical marijuana law. On November 2, voters in Ann Arbor, Mich., Columbia, Mo. and Montana will cast ballots on medical marijuana initiatives.But Roger Curtiss, an addiction counselor for Anaconda-Deer Lodge County, questions the need for a medical marijuana law in Montana since the effective ingredient in pot can be prescribed by a doctor in pill form.''We have that in a form that anybody can take,'' Curtiss said Monday. ''We don't need a drug law that says we should be taking marijuana.''Helena pharmacist Greg Reasch said the legal prescription form of marijuana, a pill called by the brand name Marinol, is derived from the marijuana plant and is a class three narcotic.While Reasch said he hasn't heard from patients regarding the effectiveness of the prescription drug, he said some Montanans do use the pills to quell nausea and improve appetite. The pills cost $261 for 25 five-milligram capsules, he added.Curtiss, who is formally opposing the marijuana initiative, said Montanans won't be swayed by pot votes in other states.''Montana voters will look at the information presented to them,'' Curtiss said.But supporters of the initiative say that no ballot measure supporting medical marijuana has ever failed at the polls. Befumo said public opinion runs strongly in favor of the use of medical marijuana.''I wouldn't think it's a shoo-in, because I don't want to be overconfident,'' Befumo said Monday. ''But I think it's going to pass.'' Source: Helena Independent Record (MT)Author: Allison Farrell, IR State BureauPublished: August 10, 2004Copyright: 2004 Helena Independent RecordWebsite: http://helenair.com/Contact: irstaff helenair.comRelated Articles & Web Site:Montana Careshttp://montanacares.org/Detroit Pot Law Raises Questionshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19290.shtmlMarijuana Reform To Tap Grassroots http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19284.shtmlMarijuana Initiative Clears Early Hurdle http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18706.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #5 posted by dididadadidit on August 11, 2004 at 09:18:14 PT Marinol versus Closet Costs Seldom mentioned by those who claim we have Marinol out there and therefore don't need medical marijuana, is the lurking in the background, greedy (and big time political contributing) big pharma. Ten milligram twice a day dosage of marinol would cost just over $1000 a month (Drugstore.com) from a reasonably priced pharmacy. On the other hand, an increase of $20 a month to the electric bill can easily grow an ounce a month. If of reasonable quality, say 8% THC, with 28 grams to the ounce, we are looking at about 75 milligrams a day of THC at a cost of on the order of 2% of that which buys 20 synthetic milligrams a day from big politically connected pharma.As with the LEOs and guards, the money trail to big pharma is certainly another hugh factor in the continuing prohibition. Can't have people doing their own self medicating and cut big pharma out of their due, now can we?Cheers? [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by lineman on August 10, 2004 at 23:44:03 PT Price $291 per 125 miligrams is 2.3 cents per miligram for the perscription stuff. If you get good herb on the black market with 10% potency, you will buy an ounce and get 2.8 grams of thc for $291. That is .1 cents per miligram. Compared to the black market, Marinol is a big ripoff! How dare they charge sick people 23 times as much as recreational users?!? [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by The GCW on August 10, 2004 at 19:26:37 PT Batter up. Detroit's vote last week to permit the medical use of marijuana within city limits has continued the PERFECT streak.We are batting a thousand.Initiatives to allow people to use cannabis medically have passed 100%.The ones who dream to cage their family for using a plant, are the losers. 100%Batting zero!0!Nothin' but grand slams. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by kaptinemo on August 10, 2004 at 12:55:45 PT: Got-cha! *''We have that in a form that anybody can take,'' Curtiss said Monday. ''We don't need a drug law that says we should be taking marijuana.''Helena pharmacist Greg Reasch said the legal prescription form of marijuana, a pill called by the brand name Marinol, is derived from the marijuana plant and is a class three narcotic. While Reasch said he hasn't heard from patients regarding the effectiveness of the prescription drug, he said some Montanans do use the pills to quell nausea and improve appetite. The pills cost $261 for 25 five-milligram capsules, he added.*Antis make my work so easy.First off, antis, if you are barfing your guts out, how do you expect to keep a pill down? Did The Pope sprinkle holy water on it? A Rabbi pray over it? Come on, this is too easy.And secondly, no, antis, Marinol is a SYNTHETIC. It is NOT an extract, and has only a passing resemblence to it's much *gentler* natural cousin, the Real McCoy.And who in their right minds would pay so much for pills when it would cost pennies on the dollar to grow when RE-legalized? These fools just shoot themselves in the foot every time... [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Jose Melendez on August 10, 2004 at 08:26:34 PT FACT: Drug War IS Crime "Roger Curtiss, an addiction counselor for Anaconda-Deer Lodge County, questions the need for a medical marijuana law in Montana since the effective ingredient in pot can be prescribed by a doctor in pill form.''We have that in a form that anybody can take,'' Curtiss said Monday. ''We don't need a drug law that says we should be taking marijuana.''""The pills cost $261 for 25 five-milligram capsules,"from: http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/misc/antitrust/antitrus.htm Antitrust Enforcement and the Consumer Many consumers have never heard of antitrust laws, but when these laws are effectively and responsibly enforced, they can save consumers millions and even billions of dollars a year in illegal overcharges. Most states have antitrust laws, and so does the federal government. Essentially, these laws prohibit business practices that unreasonably deprive consumers of the benefits of competition, resulting in higher prices for inferior products and services. (snip) 1. What Do The Antitrust Laws Do For The Consumer? Antitrust laws protect competition. Free and open competition benefits consumers by ensuring lower prices and new and better products. In a freely competitive market, each competing business generally will try to attract consumers by cutting its prices and increasing the quality of its product or services. Competition and the profit opportunities it brings also stimulate businesses to find new, innovative and more efficient methods of production. Consumers benefit from competition through lower prices, better products and services. Inefficient firms or companies that fail to understand or react to consumer needs may soon find themselves losing out in the competitive battle. When competitors agree to fix prices, rig bids, or allocate customers, consumers lose the benefits of competition. The prices that result when competitors agree in these ways are artificially high; such prices do not accurately reflect cost and therefore distort the allocation of society's resources. The result is a loss not only to U.S. consumers and taxpayers, but also the U.S. economy. When the competitive system is operating effectively, there is no need for government intrusion. The law recognizes that certain arrangements between firms--such as competitors cooperating to perform joint research and development projects --may benefit consumers by allowing the firms that have reached the agreement to compete more effectively against other firms. The government therefore does not prosecute all agreements between companies, but only those that threaten to raise prices to consumers or to deprive them of new and better products. But when competing firms get together to fix prices, to limit output, to divide business between them, or to make other anticompetitive arrangements that provide no benefits to consumers, the government will act promptly to protect the interest of American consumers and taxpayers. 2. What Are The Federal Antitrust Laws, And What Do They Prohibit? There are three major federal antitrust laws: The Sherman Antitrust Act, the Clayton Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act. The Sherman Antitrust Act has stood since 1890 as the principal law expressing our national commitment to a free market economy in which competition free from private and governmental restraints leads to the best results for the consumers. Congress felt so strongly about this commitment that there was only one dissenting vote to the Act. The Sherman Act outlaws all contracts, combinations, and conspiracies that unreasonably restrain interstate trade. This includes agreements among competitors to fix prices, rig bids and allocate consumers. The Sherman Act also makes it a crime to monopolize any part of interstate commerce. An unlawful monopoly exists when only one firm provides a product or service, and it has become the only supplier not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anticompetitive conduct. The Act is not violated simply when one firm's vigorous competition and lower prices take sales from its less efficient competitors; rather, that is competition working properly. Sherman Act violations are punished as criminal felonies. The Department of Justice alone is empowered to bring criminal prosecutions under the Sherman Act. Individual violators can be fined up to $350,000 and sentenced to up to 3 years in federal prison for each offense; corporations can be fined up to $10 million for each offense. Under some circumstances, the fines can go even higher. The Clayton Act is a civil statute (it carries no criminal penalties) that was passed in 1914 and significantly amended in 1950. The Clayton Act prohibits mergers or acquisitions that are likely to lessen competition. Under the Act, the government challenges those mergers that a careful economic analysis shows are likely to increase prices to consumers. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment