For Petition Drives To Legalize Marijuana, Three May Not Be A Crowd

[bobandtorey]

If you had three groups dedicated to legalizing grass, wouldn't you think they would get their act together and decide on one ballot proposal for 2016 rather than maybe three?

There are no signs that any of the pro-grassers are talking or even want to start the conversation. 

As one insider source confided the other day, it's a "standoff" at this read.

Somebody who will talk about this is Tim Beck, a veteran of many marijuana wars, including co-authoring the medical marijuana ballot plan. It laid the groundwork for the current effort to offer pot to any adult who wants it without fear of ending up in the slammer.

Mr. Beck is rather laid back about the competition between three groups including his own Michigan Responsibility Coalition. "Let things play out. We have the money" and it will come down to which group can win the ground game or, if you prefer, "grass" roots campaign. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

"It doesn't bother me ... it would be nice, but not required" that everyone be on the same page, united behind one ballot question.

But instead of three groups spending money to collect petition signatures, they could reduce the cost, and get the job done with the money left over earmarked for the advertising campaign to sell it to the voters, 88 percent of whom did not toke.

His own group has not launched its drive as it went back "to the drawing board" to tweak the petition language with an emphasis on how to distribute legalized pot if the voters say yes. Mr. Beck is watching the same debate unfold in nearby Ohio, where backers want to write this into the state constitution.

"No way we could do that," he observes. A constitutional amendment is "political suicide" because "you lose 4 percent of the vote" by going that route. Apparently voters are reticent about writing this in cement, making it almost impossible to change the law if legalization turns out to be a bust, as some warn it will be.

Either way, if there are competing plans, voters have the power to resolve it. Even if all three get more than 50 percent of the vote, the one with the highest percentage will win.

 

 

http://www.mlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/08/for_petition_drives_to_legaliz.html

[Restorium2]

Tim Beck, a veteran of many marijuana wars, including co-authoring the medical marijuana ballot plan.

"It doesn't bother me ... it would be nice, but not required" that everyone be on the same page, united behind one ballot question.

 

Tim Beck lying through his teeth again. He wouldn't have written this clause (below) to kill the other ballot proposal if he wanted to cooperate at all. He has built a reputation of being the biggest liar ever involved with marijuana. A pathological liar. Nice rep their Tim. You deserve it.

*Biggest Cannabis Liar* Tim Beck.           

 

 

 

except as authorized by this act and the medical marihuana act, it shall be unlawful to possess, sell, distribute or purchase marihuana or marihuana-infused products.

 

 

That's the "poison pill" clause that would show conflict with any other like proposal that should pass at the same time. 

[Restorium2]

Somebody who will talk about this is Tim Beck, a veteran of many marijuana wars, including co-authoring the medical marijuana ballot plan. 

 

MPP wrote the Medical Marihuana Act after they kicked Tim to the curb for being a pot douchebag. lol

[trichcycler]

but this one time, many here fanned his flame ?  I see this all the time.

[trichcycler]

I thought we had a working Act, the one I voted for passed. It works, it works well. I thought only law enforcement and their courts didn't understand it. Why change it at all? Why not educate LEO and their courts? Why not enforce the laws that are on the books, and stop trying to create new ones?   these jokers can all suck golf balls