Jump to content


Photo

Email Reply From Representative Rick Olson


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 washtenaut

washtenaut

    Advanced Member

  • +Authors
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,291 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 10:12 AM

Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 4:12 PM
To: RickOlson@house.mi.gov; Rep. Rick Olson
Subject: Message to All Senators and Representatives


Dear Rep. Rick Olson,
How would you feel if you watched a loved one suffer and pass on only to learn later that you could have helped ease their pain, or possibly even saved their life? Firsthand I can tell you there is sadness, regret, pain, anger, and a lot of guilt. Guilt because I didn’t do all that I should have done. The problem was that I just didn’t know that the medicine existed.

Because of prohibitionary policies, there has been almost no study of the potential benefits of cannabis since the 1930’s. It saddens me deeply to think that, for political reasons, our society has kept this medicine from so many that have suffered and died as a result.

Today there are hundreds of thousands of Americans using medical cannabis to effectively treat a whole host of serious diseases, including cancer. This is a very fast moving field and you’ll not find news of these positive developments in any of Bill Schuette’s press releases.

If you would like to learn more about the many new medical benefits emerging from cannabis, the patient community would like to help. Please contact Joe Cain at the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association ( jcain1369@yahoo.com ). Joe is the president of the MMMA, the state’s largest patient advocacy group. Another great information resource is the MMMA website:

www.michiganmedicalmarijuana.org

Thank you for your interest in protecting the rights of Michigan’s legitimate cannabis patients. We appreciate it.


-----------------------------------------------------------


RE: Message to All Senators and Representatives
From:
Rep. Rick Olson <district055@house.mi.gov>
To: xxxxx
Thanks for your message.

The people of the State of Michigan enacted the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, and I certainly intend to abide by the people’s wishes. However, most people that I have talked to voted for the Act as an act of compassion for those in pain, and few of us want to deny something that will help alleviate the pain for those suffering. Most did not intend to legalize marijuana.

Nonetheless, to the extent that stores selling supplies to grow marijuana have proliferated throughout the state, people have the perception (whether or not it is a reality) that the law has opened the door for marijuana use far beyond the intent of the people who voted for the Act. Numerous provisions of the act are very ambiguous, leading to unequal enforcement of the Act throughout the state. More clarity is needed.

The entire issue of providing more clarity while maintaining the intent of the Act (as well as staying within the legal wording of the Act) is before the Judiciary Committee in the House of Representatives, chaired by Representative John Walsh. John is a very bright and fair chairman, and I feel confident whatever he and his committee comes up with will be of high quality.

I have visited a dispensary, and witnessed for myself what appeared to be a service that is needed for both caregivers and patients, in matching them up and recommending appropriate marijuana based substances in a multitude of forms. I believe there is a place for these dispensaries, properly regulated, and I would support such recommendations if they come out of committee. I have talked with Representative Walsh about these, and I sense he agrees with my conclusion. So, stay tuned on that.

On a broader note, I am significantly rethinking my opposition to the legalization of marijuana. For my full blog posting on that, please see “Medical Marijuana Law Needs Clarification, But Should We Decriminalize Marijuana?” at http://repolson.blog...-law-needs.html

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

Rick Olson, State Representative, 55th Legislative District
989 Anderson House Office Bldg.
517-373-1792
rickolson@house.mi.gov
http://repolson.com


Following is the text of his blog......

Representative Rick Olson Reports from Lansing

Saturday, February 18, 2012
Medical Marijuana Law Needs Clarification, But Should We Decriminalize Marijuana?

The people of the State of Michigan enacted the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, and I certainly intend to abide by the people’s wishes. However, most people that I have talked to voted for the Act as an act of compassion for those in pain, and few of us want to deny something that will help alleviate the pain for those suffering. Most did not intend to legalize marijuana.

Nonetheless, to the extent that stores selling supplies to grow marijuana have proliferated throughout the state, people have the perception (whether or not it is a reality) that the law has opened the door for marijuana use far beyond the intent of the people who voted for the Act. Numerous provisions of the act are very ambiguous, leading to unequal enforcement of the Act throughout the state. More clarity is needed.

The entire issue of providing more clarity while maintaining the intent of the Act (as well as staying within the legal wording of the Act) is before the Judiciary Committee in the House of Representatives, chaired by Representative John Walsh. John is a very bright and fair chairman, and I feel confident whatever he and his committee comes up with will be of high quality.

I have visited a dispensary, and witnessed for myself what appeared to be a service that is needed for both caregivers and patients, in matching them up and recommending appropriate marijuana based substances in a multitude of forms. I believe there is a place for these dispensaries, properly regulated, and I would support such recommendations if they come out of committee. I have talked with Representative Walsh about these, and I sense he agrees with my conclusion. So, stay tuned on that.

On a broader note, I am significantly rethinking my opposition to the legalization of marijuana. Recently I attended a luncheon sponsored by the Legislative Black Caucus, at which Michelle Alexander spoke. Michelle is a graduate of Stanford Law School (my alma mater), a former Associate Professor at Stanford Law School and currently a professor at the Law School at Ohio State – and thus, in my opinion, is a credible source. She has written a book entitled, “The New Jim Crow”, about which she spoke that day.

The theses of her book is that the mass incarceration of black males that stems from the “drug war” causes far more problems than the drugs would themselves. I had never before connected the dots as follows:

(1) marijuana use and possession is illegal,

(2) police attempts to enforce the law fall disproportionately on the poor and especially the urban blacks, (Alexander’s research indicates that this is not just a problem for blacks, but also for the poor of any race or national origin. Nonetheless, the “color blindness” with which we consider the issue contributes to the failure to objectively look at the unintended consequences of our policies.)

(3) young blacks are taken out of their communities and put into prison and labeled “a criminal”,

(4) once released from prison, the now “ex con” finds difficulty in finding employment, and in desperation to survive, commits further crimes of drug distribution, burglary, etc. and all too often re-arrested and sent back to prison,

(5) the absence of employed black males in the urban black population contributes to poverty among the urban blacks,

(6) single parent families in poverty contribute to poor student performance among school age children, contributing to struggling students academically and a high drop out rate, particularly among black males who have few successful black male role models and among whom it is not culturally “cool” to be smart, and

(7) this contributes to the continuation of the cycle. This results in not only a dysfunctional black community in the urban areas, but also enormous costs of maintaining our prisons. Michelle.

Michelle Alexander’s presentation caused me to wonder if the hazards of marijuana use (of which there are clearly some) come close to the damage the criminalization of marijuana use has caused. Looking at the issue as an economist does, weighing the costs vs. the benefits, has it been worth it? To me, it now appears not.

I will be exploring this issue further, looking at the difference between “legalizing the use of marijuana” vs. “decriminalizing the use of marijuana”, or if there is any difference at all. Then I intend to work with others interested in this issue to craft a solution. I do not support a people’s referendum on this issue, as once enacted, any tweaks found to be beneficial in the future would require a ¾ vote in both houses of the legislature, which is always very difficult to get. I perceive this may be an issue for which a coalition of groups may form, as there is the perception that the approximately $2 billion spent in Michigan each year on corrections surely could be used in other areas, such as education. A preliminary study suggests that perhaps about $300 million per year could be saved in police protection, judicial and legal services and corrections combined if marijuana use and possession were decriminalized. If marijuana convictions lead to later crimes, the savings may be more.

A study of the Michigan inmate population shows that, as of 2007, about 9% of the inmates were there because of “drug crimes”, plus an indeterminate number of drug related crimes within the 23% whose most serious crime was nonviolent. So, the racial disparity in impact of marijuana laws may be a much more important impetus in revisiting such laws, although there may be more political support for reducing the costs of corrections as the motivation.

P.S. Response to questionnaire from michiganmedicalmarijuana.org in the 2010 campaign:

Oh, by the way, I looked up my answer to the michiganmedicalmarijuana.org questionnaire in the 2010 campaign, and it appears I am being consistent, other than my recent wondering about legalizing marijuana.

“I support the patient’s right to access marijuana for pain control purposes. Some friends have related to me the relief they have experienced, and I am for that.
I do not favor the widespread use of marijuana, however. I understand the arguments that people should be free to do whatever they wish with their bodies. I have also heard the arguments that marijuana use does not cause health problems despite long-term use. (I don’t know if I am completely convinced, but be that as it may.) Nonetheless, I see any non-prescription drug use as counterproductive to an individual’s success in life and do not support its promotion. I fought to keep my college fraternity free of drugs and have never used an illegal drug, and don’t wish to encourage their use.

To the extent that a patient can get the equivalent of a doctor’s prescription (I understand they don’t “prescribe” marijuana, just opine that marijuana may enhance their pain control.) with a patient simply saying they experience pain (a subjective thing that doctor cannot objectively document), that feels more open to what I feel comfortable with. Nonetheless, that is what the people of the state have approved, and I will not seek to repeal the law. Thus, that means I would not seek to impair the care-giver-patient relationship provided for within the MMMA.”

Resources:

“Marijuana Laws in Michigan” at http://www.legalmatc...n-michigan.html
“Michigan Marijuana Laws: Is Marijuana Legal in Michigan?” at http://criminal-law....in-michigan.htm
“Marijuana in Michigan: Arrests, Usage, and Related Data” by Jon Gettman, at http://www.drugscien...tates/MI/MI.pdf
“Frequently Asked Questions” from the Marijuana Policy Project, at http://www.mpp.org/reports/faq-mj.html
For a 2012 update on what different states are doing with regard to their marijuana laws, see “2012 State Legislation To Fine — Not Jail — For Marijuana Possession“ at http://www.mpp.org/a...DecrimBills.pdf
“Decriminalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States” at http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States
“Cannabis laws in Ann Arbor, Michigan” at http://en.wikipedia....Arbor,_Michigan
“Growth in Michigan’s Correction System: Historical and Comparitive Perspectives”, Citizen’s Research Council of Michigan, June, 2008, Report 350. http://www.crcmich.o...2008/rpt350.pdf

Posted by Rick Olson at 4:58 AM

#2 Herb Cannabis

Herb Cannabis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • LocationDowntown Beautiful Central Michigan

Posted 18 February 2012 - 11:31 AM

Great post! It tells me that there is hope. Even though he isn't my rep, I will send this guy a small contribution, he is the type we need to support.

#3 anonymousgrower?

anonymousgrower?

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 203 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 11:49 AM

Great post! It tells me that there is hope. Even though he isn't my rep, I will send this guy a small contribution, he is the type we need to support.


:thumbsu:

#4 washtenaut

washtenaut

    Advanced Member

  • +Authors
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,291 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 01:38 PM

I sent off the following reply to Rep Olson. I also copied the members of the House Judiciary Committee and my own State Senator and Representative.

-----------------------------------

Dear Representative Olson,

Thank you for your reply. As a legitimate cannabis patient that finds significant relief with this medicine, I am grateful that your mind appears to be open to these ideas. Many of your co-workers are just unable or unwilling to view this, even for a moment, as a real medicine.

I would ask that you please keep the dispensary legislation totally separate from the MMMA of 2008. The small patient-caregiver model MUST NOT be replaced by a dispensary system. Adding a dispensary option for those that can afford it would be helpful, but not as a replacement to today's functioning patient-caregiver model.

With respect to total legalization, it is time. How many more need to be put through our prison systems before our society will see the futility? The punishment needs to better fit the 'crime'. Largely due to political ambitions, the punishments for drug use have spiraled completely out of control. If you happened to find yourself in prison, would you rather share your cell with a violent criminal or a marijuana grower? That answer should tell you that there really is little need to incarcerate marijuana users/growers.

The crux of the problem is jobs, I believe. The DEA does not want the 'marijuana problem' to go away. In spite of what you might hear, I believe that many police departments like the option of apprehending marijuana growers. They will seize the assets of many they arrest and sell the booty for their future operations. Secondly, they know that marijuana arrests are safe and that they will get credit from their superiors for the arrest, just as if they apprehended a real criminal. Those trying to 'privatize and fill up our prisons' don't want the marijuana threat to go away either. There is a whole network of probationary officers and drug testers that want this all to continue too.

Thank you. I sincerely appreciate your willingness to learn all that you can about this medicine before voting on any legislation. Hopefully, someday soon our Legislature will be able to resist the special interest groups and do what is truly right for the citizens of Michigan.

Regards,

#5 washtenaut

washtenaut

    Advanced Member

  • +Authors
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,291 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 04:37 PM

Rep Olson replied...on a Saturday! Imagine that......

---------------------------------------

RE: Message to All Senators and Representatives
From:
Rep. Rick Olson <district055@house.mi.gov>
To: xxxxx

Thanks for the kind comments. I find it interesting that you describe some of the actions of the law enforcement establishment that Michelle Alexander highlights in her book, "The New Jim Crow".

As concerning your comments about not having dispensaries replace the caregiver - patient relationship, we could not do that without a 3/4 vote in both houses of the legislature because the act was enacted by a voter initiative, so I am expecting that the dispensary option will likely be in addition to the caregiver-patient relationship. In other words, we can make the law less restrictive as a legislature, but not more restrictive.

Rick

#6 washtenaut

washtenaut

    Advanced Member

  • +Authors
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,291 posts

Posted 19 February 2012 - 06:49 PM

bump...Mr Olson is a Republican, btw

#7 cristinew

cristinew

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,559 posts

Posted 19 February 2012 - 07:56 PM

and one of the sponsor of house bill 4853 (2011) He should rethink,,, Criminal procedure; sentencing guidelines; sentencing guidelines for crime of selling or providing medical marihuana to unprescribed user;

#8 washtenaut

washtenaut

    Advanced Member

  • +Authors
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,291 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 07:02 PM

I sent out the following via email-o-matic the other day and got a response from Rep Olson.


Feel free to use any or all of the email if you wish to send it out to your own rep.


The House Judiciary Committee has heard from law enforcement and they heard the testimonials from the medical cannabis patients. In spite of strong patient objections, 4 bills were passed out of Committee.

Here’s what we learned from the hearings:

- There has been no real increase in crime due to the MMMAct. Our children and our highways are still safe.

- The MMMAct of 2008 has not yet been implemented as intended by the voters. The personal feelings of a powerful few have conspired to work against the people’s will.

- The MMMAct is not a poorly written law. It was intended to allow broad protections to qualifying patients and caregivers while protecting physicians from federal scrutiny.

- These protections frustrate law enforcement. They still wish to treat cannabis patients as criminals. Their resistance to change is also counter to the will of the voters. The people want protections but our law enforcement agencies still push hard for prosecutions.


When the time comes to vote on these bills please remember that the vast majority of patients want no changes to this law. We would simply like the law to be implemented as intended by the voters.

I just wanted to let you know that there are a whole lot of voters watching your actions on this issue. Please vote against these bills. Thank you for your interest in protecting the sick and disabled in our state.

Sincerely,
---------------------------



Rep Olson then responded with this unfortunate opinion.


From: Rep. Rick Olson <district055@house.mi.gov>
To:

I expect I will follow the lead of the Judiciary Committee and its Chair John Walsh who have studied the issues more thoroughly than I have. I expect their recommended changes will adequately provide for the patients that are truly in pain or otherwise afflicted.

Rick
-----------------




I replied with the following and copied lots of folks.



To: Rep. Rick Olson <district055@house.mi.gov>
Cc: bobconstan@house.mi.gov; BradJacobsen@house.mi.gov; jeffirwin@house.mi.gov; johnolumba@house.mi.gov; JohnWalsh@house.mi.gov; JudGilbert@house.mi.gov; KurtDamrow@house.mi.gov; KurtHeise@house.mi.gov; lisabrown@house.mi.gov; markmeadows@house.mi.gov; patsomerville@house.mi.gov; PaulMuxlow@house.mi.gov; PeterPettalia@house.mi.gov; philcavanagh@house.mi.gov; ppetitpren@senate.michigan.gov; RyanStanton@annarbor.com; senrwarren@senate.michigan.gov; stacyerwinoakes@house.mi.gov; suggestions@propublica.org; Bill Laitner <blaitner@freepress.com>; Emily Arents <earents@house.mi.gov>; Joe Cain <jcain1369@yahoo.com>; Lester Graham <llgraham@umich.edu>; Michael Komorn <michael@komornlaw.com>; Nicole Haley <NHaley@senate.michigan.gov>; Representative Rutledge <District054@house.mi.gov>


Representative Olson,

I appreciate your honest response though I am disappointed in your conclusions. The Judiciary Committee listened very well to the patients' testimonies and then essentially ignored the pleas of these people. It was pretty disgusting to see politics trump the well being of the sick and disabled. They felt that the patients were all lying or perhaps they were just following orders to pass the bills.

Before the MMMAct of 2008, were there sufficient laws to prosecute illegal marijuana growers and users? I think you'd agree that there were given that nearly three quarters of a million people were arrested for marijuana charges in 2008 in the USA.

Now, given the people's initiative to protect patients and caregivers, shouldn't those arrest statistics go down in Michigan? Well, they've not gone down at all. The patients are not getting the protections promised to them by this law. They haven't been protected largely because of Mr Schuette's conspiracy to undermine and to basically undo the law. These bills passed out of Judiciary are largely a gift to this man who has so blatantly overstepped his authority. He deserves no rewards for his actions, or do you feel otherwise?

How do any of those bills protect the patients or give us easier or less expensive access to our medicine? Those bills focus on allowing more arrests of patients and caregivers that have tried very hard to comply, even in Schuette's police state. You are certainly intelligent and so must see that more arrests are not what the MMMAct was designed to do. Passing these bills along with equally prejudicial last minute amendments that will likely be slipped in, will do nothing to help patients. The patients want no changes, simply implementation as intended by the plain language of the MMMAct.

Let me ask you, is every policeman and government official completely trustworthy? Would you trust every one of them with your confidential information? Look in any newspaper and stories of misconduct by police officers and other government officials are there nearly every day. It cannot be a good idea to allow access by any officer or government official to the supposed 'protected' healthcare information of every patient? That 'protected' information would essentially become public due to improper use, completely violating the trust promised by the law. Only after a search warrant is issued by a judge, should the patient database be queried? Allowing this registry information to be widely available borders on criminal in my mind.

Here's another question... who should be liable if your doctor prescribed you a powerful drug without going through all of the recommended procedures of the DEA? Obviously not you, right? Well, if you pass these bills thousands of patients could be arrested and their protections thrown out.....if their cannabis recommendation comes from a doctor that is later found to have violated the program rules. That seems unjust to me.

Last question, I promise. Say you or your spouse has a chronic pain problem and must take strong narcotic medicine to function. If you pass these bills, patients that use cannabis to dull pain in order to function will be singled out and will have to act differently than patients that use any other prescription or over-the counter medicine known to man. They will need to keep their medicine in the trunk of their vehicle rather than their pocket whenever traveling. How long do think it will be before my neighbor's teenage son figures things out and breaks into my car, house, or the top of my head? I am disabled and could easily become a target because my actions will give me away to anyone living nearby.

Again, I appreciate the response and look forward to discussing things further if you'd like. Thank you.

Regards,

#9 solabeirtan

solabeirtan

    Real Person

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,343 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 07:20 PM

Thanks for your efforts on our behalf Washtenaught... maybe he'll reconsider...

their an awful pack of thiefs...

#10 bobandtorey

bobandtorey

    The First To Be Raided and legal

  • Supporters
  • PipPipPip
  • 10,780 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 07:27 PM

I sent out the following via email-o-matic the other day and got a response from Rep Olson.


Feel free to use any or all of the email if you wish to send it out to your own rep.


The House Judiciary Committee has heard from law enforcement and they heard the testimonials from the medical cannabis patients. In spite of strong patient objections, 4 bills were passed out of Committee.

Here’s what we learned from the hearings:

- There has been no real increase in crime due to the MMMAct. Our children and our highways are still safe.

- The MMMAct of 2008 has not yet been implemented as intended by the voters. The personal feelings of a powerful few have conspired to work against the people’s will.

- The MMMAct is not a poorly written law. It was intended to allow broad protections to qualifying patients and caregivers while protecting physicians from federal scrutiny.

- These protections frustrate law enforcement. They still wish to treat cannabis patients as criminals. Their resistance to change is also counter to the will of the voters. The people want protections but our law enforcement agencies still push hard for prosecutions.


When the time comes to vote on these bills please remember that the vast majority of patients want no changes to this law. We would simply like the law to be implemented as intended by the voters.

I just wanted to let you know that there are a whole lot of voters watching your actions on this issue. Please vote against these bills. Thank you for your interest in protecting the sick and disabled in our state.

Sincerely,
---------------------------



Rep Olson then responded with this unfortunate opinion.


From: Rep. Rick Olson <district055@house.mi.gov>
To:

I expect I will follow the lead of the Judiciary Committee and its Chair John Walsh who have studied the issues more thoroughly than I have. I expect their recommended changes will adequately provide for the patients that are truly in pain or otherwise afflicted.

Rick
-----------------




I replied with the following and copied lots of folks.



To: Rep. Rick Olson <district055@house.mi.gov>
Cc: bobconstan@house.mi.gov; BradJacobsen@house.mi.gov; jeffirwin@house.mi.gov; johnolumba@house.mi.gov; JohnWalsh@house.mi.gov; JudGilbert@house.mi.gov; KurtDamrow@house.mi.gov; KurtHeise@house.mi.gov; lisabrown@house.mi.gov; markmeadows@house.mi.gov; patsomerville@house.mi.gov; PaulMuxlow@house.mi.gov; PeterPettalia@house.mi.gov; philcavanagh@house.mi.gov; ppetitpren@senate.michigan.gov; RyanStanton@annarbor.com; senrwarren@senate.michigan.gov; stacyerwinoakes@house.mi.gov; suggestions@propublica.org; Bill Laitner <blaitner@freepress.com>; Emily Arents <earents@house.mi.gov>; Joe Cain <jcain1369@yahoo.com>; Lester Graham <llgraham@umich.edu>; Michael Komorn <michael@komornlaw.com>; Nicole Haley <NHaley@senate.michigan.gov>; Representative Rutledge <District054@house.mi.gov>


Representative Olson,

I appreciate your honest response though I am disappointed in your conclusions. The Judiciary Committee listened very well to the patients' testimonies and then essentially ignored the pleas of these people. It was pretty disgusting to see politics trump the well being of the sick and disabled. They felt that the patients were all lying or perhaps they were just following orders to pass the bills.

Before the MMMAct of 2008, were there sufficient laws to prosecute illegal marijuana growers and users? I think you'd agree that there were given that nearly three quarters of a million people were arrested for marijuana charges in 2008 in the USA.

Now, given the people's initiative to protect patients and caregivers, shouldn't those arrest statistics go down in Michigan? Well, they've not gone down at all. The patients are not getting the protections promised to them by this law. They haven't been protected largely because of Mr Schuette's conspiracy to undermine and to basically undo the law. These bills passed out of Judiciary are largely a gift to this man who has so blatantly overstepped his authority. He deserves no rewards for his actions, or do you feel otherwise?

How do any of those bills protect the patients or give us easier or less expensive access to our medicine? Those bills focus on allowing more arrests of patients and caregivers that have tried very hard to comply, even in Schuette's police state. You are certainly intelligent and so must see that more arrests are not what the MMMAct was designed to do. Passing these bills along with equally prejudicial last minute amendments that will likely be slipped in, will do nothing to help patients. The patients want no changes, simply implementation as intended by the plain language of the MMMAct.

Let me ask you, is every policeman and government official completely trustworthy? Would you trust every one of them with your confidential information? Look in any newspaper and stories of misconduct by police officers and other government officials are there nearly every day. It cannot be a good idea to allow access by any officer or government official to the supposed 'protected' healthcare information of every patient? That 'protected' information would essentially become public due to improper use, completely violating the trust promised by the law. Only after a search warrant is issued by a judge, should the patient database be queried? Allowing this registry information to be widely available borders on criminal in my mind.

Here's another question... who should be liable if your doctor prescribed you a powerful drug without going through all of the recommended procedures of the DEA? Obviously not you, right? Well, if you pass these bills thousands of patients could be arrested and their protections thrown out.....if their cannabis recommendation comes from a doctor that is later found to have violated the program rules. That seems unjust to me.

Last question, I promise. Say you or your spouse has a chronic pain problem and must take strong narcotic medicine to function. If you pass these bills, patients that use cannabis to dull pain in order to function will be singled out and will have to act differently than patients that use any other prescription or over-the counter medicine known to man. They will need to keep their medicine in the trunk of their vehicle rather than their pocket whenever traveling. How long do think it will be before my neighbor's teenage son figures things out and breaks into my car, house, or the top of my head? I am disabled and could easily become a target because my actions will give me away to anyone living nearby.

Again, I appreciate the response and look forward to discussing things further if you'd like. Thank you.

Regards,


yes very good thanks

#11 DLD420

DLD420

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 235 posts
  • LocationBattle Creek

Posted 13 April 2012 - 08:11 PM

Very nice! Thank You. I totally agree with your points.

#12 Croppled1

Croppled1

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • LocationWashtenaw County

Posted 13 April 2012 - 09:22 PM

I learned in health care to be very careful to understand terms regarding the level of control over ones daily routines . What Mr Olsen considers a dispensary is more then likely very different then what many of us do and would not allow for a Farmers Market with low overhead and personal tax compliance under fair policy . He more then likely envisions a strictly regulated Colorado type model that requires allot of over head , intrusion by Government with control over supply that does not involve caregivers though may be taken from patient plant counts if they want to participate . .

The main problem for all patients and caregivers is how the aspect of criminality is effecting them and their relationships with everyone in their communities . Most important is how it is effecting opportunities involving medical care , socialization , work , education , and driving . People are so full of discrimination all these rules and severe penalties need to be removed and replaced with sensible policy . No patient should be arrested that is within their plant counts and a honest discussion of how to comply with weight needs to be conducted , same with inert ingredients in med ables . Legislators are creating a program not covered by insurance and very expensive from complex rules and expensive user fee's . I don't' know of any other medication where you have to pay $100 a year to the state to regulate it ? How did our community just accept that as part of the Act long term . The State regulates everything else over the counter or otherwise without special fee's and provides some way for the poor to access them including those in Foster Care , nursing homes , and to a limited extent jail . The fact the Judicial system is playing Doctor restricting and dictating medical care and routines is a very dangerous precedent as well as cruel and unusual punishment . This is something that needed changing for decades and only is progressing worse . People are imposing terrible suffering even death sentences under it when disallowing transplant participation or housing to cannabis patients .

Edited by Croppled1, 13 April 2012 - 09:27 PM.


#13 Hayduke

Hayduke

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 735 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 09:31 PM

excellent

#14 trix

trix

    I'm not a lawyer, My words are my own opinion.

  • Forum Leaders
  • 2,119 posts
  • LocationDetroit
Contributor

Posted 13 April 2012 - 09:47 PM

I think this is so awesome on so many levels, I hope this thread gets views cause its proof in the pudding the writing your emails DOES work.

I think you spoke very well and thank you for sharing that with everyone great to hear they are listening.

http://house.michiga...ttees=judiciary <~~~~ Just put in your zip or area code and you have all your Representative contact info right there.

Trix
:bong2

Edited by trix, 13 April 2012 - 09:50 PM.
THAT LINK TAKES YOU TOTHE WALSH BILLS AND VOTING COMMITIES FOR THE UPCOMING VOTE


#15 trix

trix

    I'm not a lawyer, My words are my own opinion.

  • Forum Leaders
  • 2,119 posts
  • LocationDetroit
Contributor

Posted 13 April 2012 - 09:53 PM


Committee Members:

John J. Walsh ®, Committee Chair, 19th District
Kurt Heise ®, Majority Vice-Chair, 20th District
Kenneth B. Horn ®, 94th District
Kurt Damrow ®, 84th District
Paul Muxlow ®, 83rd District
Bradford C. Jacobsen ®, 46th District
Peter Pettalia ®, 106th District
Pat Somerville ®, 23rd District
Kevin Cotter ®, 99th District
Joseph Graves ®, 51st District
Mark S. Meadows (D), Minority Vice-Chair, 69th District
Bob Constan (D), 16th District
Stacy Erwin Oakes (D), 95th District
Lisa Brown (D), 39th District
Jeff Irwin (D), 53rd District
Phil Cavanagh (D), 17th District
John Olumba (D), 5th District Angie Lake, Committee Clerk
517-373-5795
alake@house.mi.gov



These are the reps sitting on this commitee, write them and your local reps.

Trix
:bong2:


#16 wolfgang

wolfgang

    civil rights activist

  • +CC-Organizer
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,317 posts
  • LocationSWM

Posted 13 April 2012 - 10:07 PM

He's a republican huh? wow,well good for him :thumbsu:

#17 CGorganic

CGorganic

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 10:26 PM

Judiciary Committee info including social networking.

#18 washtenaut

washtenaut

    Advanced Member

  • +Authors
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,291 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 08:32 AM

Like most folks, the passage by the House of the cannabis bills frustrated me. Since I had an ongoing conversation with Rep Olson, I decided to follow up with him to see what I could learn


Representative Olson,

As you might guess, the House votes on the cannabis bills were disappointing. I exchanged several emails with you over the weeks and given your views on decriminalization of cannabis, I am trying to understand your voting on the recent cannabis bills.

Rick, like all Michigan Legislators, you received a letter from the state's cannabis patients opposing the 4 bills that came out of the Judicial Committee. (In fact, I forwarded a copy to you too) Those bills, which will no doubt get even worse in the Senate, are not meant to help patients. Sure, they have wording to that effect, but you know and I know that these bills were fashioned largely by law enforcement interests to 'end the confusion'. The part that is confusing to law enforcement is 'how to get around the protections written into the act so we can continue to arrest cannabis users, legitimate or not'. That is it in a nutshell.

Also, who will enforce the supposed patient protections that are in the new legislation? No one enforces violations on the government side now and you know Schuette is not going to help the patients, regardless of the laws.

You have further enabled the punishing of people like myself by Bill Schuette. Punished for believing in the law written by the people. I have trouble understanding why, if you know the pain it will cause to innocents, did you support those bills? I look forward to hearing back from you.

Also, I live in xxxxxxx and I see that you aren't that far away. Would there be any chance to meet up with you sometime for coffee or maybe even a quick lunch. (Please don't worry about any threat of violence as that is not in my nature.) I guess I might be naive but I still think that putting a face with these issues could help you to see the negative impact to patients of the anti cannabis legislation. Thanks.

Regards,

#19 zapatosunidos

zapatosunidos

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 5,017 posts
Contributor

Posted 05 May 2012 - 08:34 AM

Also, I live in xxxxxxx and I see that you aren't that far away. Would there be any chance to meet up with you sometime for coffee or maybe even a quick lunch. (Please don't worry about any threat of violence as that is not in my nature.) I guess I might be naive but I still think that putting a face with these issues could help you to see the negative impact to patients of the anti cannabis legislation. Thanks.


I wouldn't send the part about violence. Why would that even have entered his mind if you hadn't said it?

#20 washtenaut

washtenaut

    Advanced Member

  • +Authors
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,291 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 08:40 AM

I wouldn't send the part about violence. Why would that even have entered his mind if you hadn't said it?


Well, I felt that the legislators might feel that patients were angered by their votes. Some people are less stable than others. I thought I would try to ease any worries he might have had, but maybe you are right and I shouldn't have said that.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users