Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Transitions
Next Post: Question of the day: Golden Horseshoe Awards
Posted in:
* Pantagraph…
Jason Barickman is confident recreational marijuana use will be legal in Illinois in two years — but a lot of details remain undecided.
“It’s rather inevitable that Illinois will (act to) legalize cannabis next year,” said Barickman, a Republican state senator from Bloomington, “and I think it’s incredibly important that, if that be the case, we sit at the table and make sure it’s done in an appropriate way.”
Barickman hopes to let local areas opt out of legalizing marijuana; allow employers to impose zero-tolerance policies for use; direct some sales proceeds to law enforcement; and use revoking driver’s licenses as a deterrent for underage violators under a recreational marijuana law if passed.
The way that local opt-out part is written isn’t what’s actually being discussed, from what I’m told. Local communities will be allowed to opt out of siting dispensaries and grow centers. But if they don’t want those facilities in their areas they won’t qualify for any grants that will come out of legalization. Private use and possession will be legalized throughout the state. You just might have to travel to another town to purchase the products. That’s basically the same route the state took immediately after Prohibition. Those “blue laws” have faded over time.
It’s still somewhat up in the air, but regulated public use ought to be allowed, in my opinion. It should be treated more like alcohol. If you ban it in all public accommodations, people will smoke it in the street and then we’ll have another law enforcement problem. Plus, allowing regulated use in some public accommodations will create more business opportunities and, therefore, more jobs. We need more of both in this state, so let’s not get too nannyish over this.
Also, I have no problem with allowing zero-tolerance rules at places of employment, but the federal courts might have something to say about that.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:20 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Transitions
Next Post: Question of the day: Golden Horseshoe Awards
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
===But if they don’t want those facilities in their areas they won’t qualify for any grants that will come out of legalization.====
They tried doing that with Video Gaming. I get that its a way to put votes on the bill and grant them cover but just because a town opts out doesn’t mean the residents in those towns are not crossing the borders and spending their money there. They shouldn’t be punished just because their town is stuck in a time warp.
Comment by Been There Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:28 pm
===They tried doing that with Video Gaming===
No, they did not. Video gaming funds stuff like capital projects and all communities are eligible regardless of opt-out.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:30 pm
I’m really really hoping for this to happen soon. totally appropriate, needed financially, and makes no sense for it to be illegal.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:31 pm
–Plus, allowing regulated use in some public accommodations will create more business opportunities and, therefore, more jobs. We need more of both in this state, so let’s not get too nannyish over this.–
Agreed.
This is an opportunity for those who always sing the praises of entrepreneurs and small biz to walk it like they talk it.
This new industry should be open to the little guy from production to purchase to on-site consumption.
As this goes forward, let’s look out for the interests of the budding bud purveyor. Because you know the wannabe monopolists are going to buy every lobster under the dome to try to shut them out of the action.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:31 pm
Portable “hot boxes” at the airports to get tourism dollars?
With video poker and slots inside each pod?
Who wants to invest?
Comment by Ok Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:32 pm
Whatever Colorado did - don’t do that. Once you let that genii out of the bottle legally, you will struggle to do anything to control it.
There’s twice more places to buy pot than there are McDonalds.
Legalization is no free lunch, based upon the Rocky Mountain Stoned state’s experience.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:32 pm
With edibles and other nonsmoking options I think public use is somewhat moot. Who is going to notice that you just ate a gummy bear?
Comment by Pyrman Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:34 pm
===There’s twice more places to buy pot than there are McDonalds. ===
So, are you a Communist or something? How about letting the markets decide? I mean, maybe more people want to buy weed than a Big Mac, fries and a large shake. It’s not as bad for them, either way.
OK, now I’m hungry.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:34 pm
===Because you know the wannabe monopolists are going to buy every lobster under the dome to try to shut them out of the action.===
Already happening. Wall Street is muscling in as we speak.
There’s a lot of money in that green plant, Pop.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:35 pm
**It’s not as bad for them, either way.**
THIS.
Comment by SaulGoodman Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:36 pm
===other nonsmoking options===
Not everyone will choose those options, it’s why they’re called options.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:40 pm
A friend in Denver was telling me about a condo board fight in her building over smoking on their balconies/patios. They have an indoor smoking ban, and teachers in the building want to ban pot smoking outdoors because they get drug screened and are afraid of what the 2nd hand pot smoke will do to their test results.
That’s the kind of thing that needs thinking about until the feds give up and legalize it.
Comment by Cheryl44 Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:41 pm
===That’s the kind of thing that needs thinking about===
That’s a condo board decision, not a legislative one, and rightfully so.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:44 pm
“If you ban it in all public accommodations, people will smoke it in the street and then we’ll have another law enforcement problem. Plus, allowing regulated use in some public accommodations will create more business opportunities and, therefore, more jobs.”
I agree very much with this. There are practically no places to smoke weed for tourists in legal states (except private residences that rent and allow it). Going to the middle of some park to partake is just cumbersome and inconvenient. There were or still are two major hotels with smoking rooms—very hard to find. There are canna-tour kinds of things, on buses. There was a club in Portland that was real nice and laid back, with an outdoor patio.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:45 pm
“public accommodation”
So, you can smoke pot where you can’t smoke tobacco??
Comment by Fav human Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:47 pm
Fav human, yes. Deal with it.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:50 pm
One benefit of legalization is that it will make it substantially easier for people who need it for medical reasons to obtain it.
Right now, it remains difficult for cancer patients to get it. It often can take 30 days or more, which is a shame for terminal cancer patients, for whom marijuana is one of the most effective drugs at reducing pain.
Note that people joke about getting the munchies from marijuana, but for cancer patients who are losing their appetite, that is a positive.
Legalizing it will make it far easier for those patients. Rather than jumping through all the hoops now, the doctor simply can make a recommendation and the patients can just go get it. (or more likely, the patient’s friends or family).
For that reason alone, this is such a good idea.
Comment by Gooner Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:50 pm
Please Congress, fix this (https://www.dea.gov/drug-scheduling):
Schedule I
Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:
heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote
Absurd to have marijuana listed as Schedule 1 when recognized medical uses are documented, in conflict with the Schedule definition. Senators Durbin and Duckworth, how about some leadership on this one?
Comment by Someone Like Me Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:51 pm
===No, they did not. Video gaming funds stuff like capital projects and all communities are eligible regardless of opt-out. ====
I didn’t say it happened but there was talk early in the sausage making to attempt that. Obviously didn’t make any sense since the bill also had other revenues sources and nobody knew for sure at the time who would opt out.
Either way the argument that because you town opts out doesn’t mean the residents from that town are not contributing to the cause by purchasing in nearby towns.
Comment by Been There Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:53 pm
–There’s twice more places to buy pot than there are McDonalds.–
You know what they call a quarter pounder with cheese in Paris?
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:54 pm
Legalizing marijuana will not be a social, fiscal or economic panacea. I don’t think we should see it as a cure-all but as something that will bring lots of gains. Now all the money is going to the black market, and it’s been easy to get for decades. The path of life always brings stoners at some point or another. Those who seek shall find. It’s time we divert much this into legitimate enterprises.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 12:57 pm
Jason Barickman is the mold of the future republican in Illinois. He understand this is an issue where republicans needs to be at the table - even though the dem supermajorities can pass it without a single one of them.
Business needs to understand they can either be at the table or have it jammed down their throat
Comment by Otown Beatdown Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:03 pm
Let people grow it and establish different licenses for different size grow operations like California did. Allow for delivery services, ancillary product producers and public consumption lounges or private clubs that would allow on site consumption.
Get UIUC studying all the ways to grow hemp and cannabis and hopefully more students will stay in state for higher education (pun intended).
Don’t tax it to the point of keeping a vibrant illegal industry. Until the rules and regulations are approved and new licenses issued let the current MMJ folks sell recreationally that should be a big enough bone to throw them.
Comment by frisbee Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:05 pm
I would argue against being able to smoke weed in public buildings. I’m fairly ambivalent about the whole thing in general, but mucking up the air for other people in an enclosed place like a building is a bad idea, even if it’s not (proven to be) anywhere near as bad for you as tobacco. And yeah, I’m showing my age a bit.
The rest sounds OK.
Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:06 pm
Secondhand tobacco smoke is harmful, which is why indoor smoking of tobacco is prohibited in public. Is secondhand cannabis smoke harmless? If so, then exempting it from the clean indoor air act would be appropriate.
On the other hand, besides nicotine and cannabinoids, tobacco and marijuana smoke are similar. The California EPA has identified marijuana smoke as a human carcinogen.
Comment by anon2 Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:07 pm
===real estate issues===
Yeah commercial and residential real estate prices go up.
https://www.marijuanamoment.net/nearby-marijuana-shops-make-homes-and-rentals-more-valuable-studies-show/
That is a problem for low income housing but i don’t think that is what you were referring to.
===court battles===
Where do you think the War on Drugs was fought besides on the street corners?
Comment by frisbee Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:10 pm
==That’s a condo board decision, not a legislative one, and rightfully so. ==
Oh I agree. I just think however our legalization law is written, we need to remember it’s still against federal law.
Comment by Cheryl44 Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:10 pm
When Hickenlooper was in town recently he was blowing smoke and testing presidential waters. He admitted to only having taxed pot too high. This is because of the growing black market for pot, partly due to black market pot being cheaper.
Yet, the tax revenue from pot tax in Colorado only meets less than 1% of Colorado’s annual state budget.
Whatever the tax issue, pot isn’t addressing government costs to enforce the laws. They can’t effectively enforce the laws necessary to regulate it as a legal product.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:12 pm
==Let people grow it and establish different licenses for different size grow operations like California did==
Black marketeers have no intentive to meet those laws, unless they are enforced. It’s easy to grow pot. Why do anything the government says?
That’s why it is the blavk market - and it’s booming, not shrinking.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:16 pm
I’m all for legalizing it, but i don’t think we should treat the smoking options differently than a cigarette. Have it in the beer garden at the bar just like a Marlboro.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:17 pm
Wow, there’s a lot of scared people around here. I know the Midwest is more isolated, but boy, many of you sound like Chicken Little.
Cannabis is already here. Legalizing it won’t change your life. It will reduce crime, raise revenue and, more importantly, be the right thing to do in a free society.
Just let people grow it themselves. That’s the best solution. No need to corporations or their lobbies involved.
Take it easy, it’s gonna be alright.
Comment by 33rd Ward Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:19 pm
===don’t think we should treat the smoking options differently than a cigarette===
Meh. There are things called cigar bars. This would be similar.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:20 pm
I’m assuming people won’t be able to grow their own at home.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:21 pm
===no intentive to meet those laws, unless they are enforced===
Dude, you can say that about EVERY law. Calm down already.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:21 pm
===I’m assuming===
Don’t assume.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:22 pm
Vanilla Man,
Funny how you never cite the reduced crime, increased housing values, and decreased youth use is also part of the Colorado experience.
Maybe move to Wisconsin or Iowa so you won’t have to deal with this difficult issue for you.
Comment by 33rd Ward Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:22 pm
===They can’t effectively enforce the laws necessary to regulate it as a legal product===
You are a true Pollyanna on this. If we can regulate tobacco and alcohol, we can regulate this.
I mean, seriously, did a dope dealer run over your dog or something?
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:24 pm
The “Amazon effect” has caused the loss of many brick-and-mortor stores in smaller downtown communities. Allowing a coffee house approach to public use gives purpose for visiting main Street again. After a stop in the coffee house many a hungry customer will visit neighboring establishments for food, drink and music, etc . Amsterdam coffee houses are mixed in communities among restaurants and specialty shops. Works well for foot traffic in business districts. This needs to be done in a way that is good for small business owners.
Comment by Johnnie F. Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:24 pm
Rich,
A cigar type bar sounds perfectly fine. With you there.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:26 pm
===There are things called cigar bars.===
No liquor license, so BYOB only, correct? I can live with that.
Although, since booze and bud don’t mix too well, I’d be OK with stronger language like no booze at all where pot is consumed. But that’s just my preference.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:28 pm
===since booze and bud don’t mix too well===
Sez who?
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:29 pm
An other issue to address is drug testing, esp. if zero-tolerance for use at the work place. That can’t be established by testing because pot stays in the system much longer.
Comment by d.p.gumby Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:29 pm
“zero-tolerance rules at places of employment”
The question of legalization of pot has made me think of what will be the impact for CDL holders. CDLs are subject to random drug testing that is regulated by the FMCSA. The testing includes pot as a prohibited substance with the cut off level of 50ng/ml.
Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:31 pm
personally, in my opinion, legalization will result in an increase in use and, in my opinion,that’s not a good thing.
Comment by sonny chiss Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:31 pm
“Colorado shows us that the black market gets larger as customers avoid taxes. It also expands to accommodate illigal weed markets.”
That’s why we need to legalize weed in Illinois and other states—and nationally. Of course there’s going to be a black market in Colorado with so much illegal demand elsewhere.
How the alcohol black market doing these days, or for the last 80 years?
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:32 pm
===since booze and bud don’t mix too well===
Oh no. I’ve been doing it wrong all these decades? Seemed to mix well.
Can you listen to tunes, catch a flick or watch a ballgame? That seemed to work swell, too.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:36 pm
===all these decades===
Key phrase. Experience helps. Like with anything new, some people are going to have a rough ride until they get their sea legs. Lol.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:40 pm
==. If we can regulate tobacco and alcohol, we can regulate this.==
So do it with your eyes open instead of pretending it’ll bring in rainbows and unicorns and a pot of gold.
It’s oversold as a cure-all it will never be.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:40 pm
===So do it with your eyes open===
That’s what the drafters are doing. What you’re doing is objecting with your mind completely closed and you look ridiculous.
Also, people don’t negotiate with 100 percent opponents. If you want your voice heard, you’d better open up your mind.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:43 pm
why two years? no reason it cant be done in the spring session
Comment by foster brooks Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:45 pm
As to the locals having the option to opt out, my only advice is to think it through. Saw a story today where Greeley Colorado opted out (population 100,000 and home to University of Northern Colorado). Garden City which abuts Greeley, did not. They have a population of 300 people and prior to legalization, they had revenues of $360,000. Now they collect $1.5 million in sales tax each year and have 4 dispensaries.
Taxes from legalization will not solve the problems of any municipality (unless there is an anomaly like this), but it could allow them to hold the line on tax increases for a couple years or put some extra money into the pension fund.
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/12/04/the-little-town-that-pot-built
Comment by My Button is Broke... Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:46 pm
===no reason it cant be done in the spring session ===
The bill can be passed in the Spring, but implementation will take a bit. Remember, January of 2020 is only 13 months away.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:48 pm
===You know what they call a quarter pounder with cheese in Paris?===
Word, do you mind if I have a bite of your tasty big kahuna burger?
To the post, it is encouraging to see all parties at the table.
Comment by njt Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:49 pm
===Remember, January of 2020 is only 13 months away.===
That makes sense as a target for 1st day of sales, pretty sure CO was on a similar timeline.
Comment by njt Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:51 pm
Greeley Colorado was a dry city until 1972. Garden City was where the bars were. So it’s a natural fit.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 1:52 pm
I’m confused about Rich’s use of the term “grants”, are we talking money to build a community center type of thing, a cut of the licensing fees, or tax revenue being directed to communities with dispensaries/growers? If local authorities who opt out don’t receive the financial benefits, that suggests revenue is going to be directed to certain expenditures, which is fine generally, but somewhat concerned if that means Podunk, IL gets shorted money to combat opioid addiction, or some other worthy use of money, because the town council enacts zoning ordinances prohibiting a dispensary for what could be legitimate reasons.
If part of the incentive to have a dispensary or grow facility is a cut of the tax revenue, then a municipality not permitting one is fair game and they should suffer the loss of tax revenue, but I would have concerns if because a community says no they get no boon from marijuana tax revenue that is otherwise distributed statewide.
Comment by Reserved Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:04 pm
I have been saying this for a long time and it so great to see a Republican taking this position.
Rec. Pot is inevitable in this state. So instead of doing the classic white suburban conservative move of throwing your hands up in the air and saying, well I tried, it is better to have a seat at the table.
The Senator knows there are plenty of moderate dems that would rather be on the right side of legalization than the side that gets blamed for derailing the entire process.
build a coalition, be smart, and get a comprehensive bill that is supported by dems. like Crespo and yingling and not just Ammons and Cassidy onto the Govs. desk.
Comment by Iggy Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:15 pm
Iggy, who do you think Barickman has been working with? Cassidy. Why would you think that she is incapable of that?
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:33 pm
The black market for alcohol did not instantly disappear following the repeal of Prohibition. It took several years of serious enforcement post repeal to pretty much stamp out bootlegging.
Comment by anon2 Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:33 pm
===The black market for alcohol did not instantly disappear===
Um, did someone here say it did?
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:36 pm
I hope no one is playing a “take a drink when Rich comments” game or you’re blacked out.
Comment by Reality Check Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:39 pm
===I hope no one is playing a “take a drink when Rich comments” game or you’re blacked out.===
I think for this thread, it’d be “take a hit when Rich comments,” no? But if you did, you’d be stoned to the bejesus
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:46 pm
I’d disagree about the public place thing. Second hand pot smoke is still harmful. It also seem to me like a provision that is going to antagonize the health lobby. I dont know if smoking it on the street is a paw enforcement problem. People smoke cigarettes on the street now and that not a law enforcement proboem. What would be the difference?
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:48 pm
This is an opportunity to do sonething right. Learn from what other states have done and move forward. I’m not going to use it, but there are enough people who want to do it that should ge able to do so without the fear of prosecution. We can’t even lock up violent repeat offenders as it is, so why waste time on pot users.
This is low hanging fruit. Enact it as quickly as it can be done with appropriate regulation.
Comment by SSL Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:51 pm
===What would be the difference?===
There’d be tiny little biodegradable roaches all over the sidewalk instead of more gross cigarette filters.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:51 pm
“There was a club in Portland that was real nice and laid back, with an outdoor patio.”
Now you see why home values are thru the roof in Portland. Because they let a free society be free.
Imagine if we relaxed here.
Comment by 33rd Ward Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:55 pm
VMan
You really need to get over yourself on this marijuana thing. It’s gonna happen. If you don’t like it, tough. You don’t have to purchase it or smoke it. Get over it, stop with your ridiculous arguments, and move on already.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:56 pm
===Second hand pot smoke is still harmful===
Um, who in their right mind would go into a designated pot smoking room with no intention of smoking any pot?
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:56 pm
===People smoke cigarettes on the street now and that not a law enforcement proboem.===
Um, it’s not currently illegal to smoke cigarettes on the street except near building entrances.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 2:58 pm
Rich is sounding a little too eager for legalization.
Comment by Podunk Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:00 pm
===How (is) the alcohol black market doing these days, or for the last 80 years?===
I don’t think the two are comparable. Pot is fairly easy to grow, and we have a 50-year or so history of it being done on large and small scales in the US, and I think there will always be those who grow it for personal consumption and profit outside the regulated market. Booze is relatively cheap these days, doesn’t pay to make your own swill when you can get a case of off-brand beer or a fifth of cheap whiskey for less than $10 on sale. Depends on where the legal market is priced at.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:01 pm
V-man,
I think you need to review how and why cannabis became illegal in the first place. It certainly wasn’t based on laboratory science. 30,000,000 arrests for possession of small amounts and you never seem to address this travesty. We kill 450,000 a year with tobacco products and 90,000 with alcohol in this country . . . every year and then export and contribute to the deaths of millions. Weed doesn’t kill.
Comment by Neophyte Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:05 pm
I thought the second hand smoke argument was about the wait staff as much as anyone else. They are gonna want to sell food in these places.
Yeah, in a post legalization world, smoking pot on the street would be like smoking cigs on the street. No enforcement problem for either. You can’t do it if you’re underage. If not, toke on.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:05 pm
===sounding a little too eager===
No, I simply despise super-weak arguments.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:05 pm
“Um, who in their right mind would go into a designated pot smoking room with no intention of smoking any pot?”
A very frugal stoner.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:08 pm
===They are gonna want to sell food in these places===
Says who? During my, uh, “fact-finding” mission in San Francisco, there were no workers present in the room. And no food sold except edibles in the next room over.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:08 pm
Our host is going for the Golden Horseshoe for Commenter of the Year in a single post.
Comment by Reality Check Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:08 pm
Two years is misleading. Beginning of 2020 is just over one year. Said that, my understanding is there is a 6 month implementation period. No reason why this can’t happen in late 2019.
Comment by Illinois Resident Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:17 pm
Marijuana better be legal by November 1st, 2019 because we need as much advantage over WI, IA, MO, KY and IN as possible. None of our boarder states are close to getting recreational pot approved. Agree that this needs to be done correctly but dithering hurts our state too.
Comment by Blue Dogs are Blind, Deaf, and Dumb Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:17 pm
“Pot is fairly easy to grow”
It takes a while, from germination to harvest, so it’s not something we can just whip up. Plus people have to learn to do it right. But I do support legal home growing and would enjoy it if I had the space. The female is such a beautiful plant, and successful growing gives gratification and a great sense—or sinse, if you will—of accomplishment.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:18 pm
Barickman’s employer protection suggestion sounds very bad, as are a lot of the DUI cutoffs.
Legalizing pot and taking the money but then letting jobs and cops rake you over the coals and ruin your life over nonrisky use is a scam. Sure, it should be legal and if you’re actually impaired to work or drive there should be consequences. But there isn’t a great test for this yet, and in the meantime employers and police and courts are letting trace amounts from weeks ago use sustain a firing or jailing or denial of worker’s comp benefits.
That’s what I understand Barickman to be suggesting - that Walmart can continue drug testing and firing employees at “random”
Comment by crazybleedingheart Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:24 pm
comment does not appear
Comment by crazybleedingheart Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:24 pm
Agree with Blue Dogs - Cannabis legalization should happen asap. The head start over border states will bring in a lot more revenue and industry that we need. Why can’t this be approved in January or February and implemented in August or September?
Comment by Illinois Resident Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:26 pm
===Why can’t this be approved in January or February and implemented in August or September?===
Bipartisan negotiations take time. And there’s a new governor coming in. Let them do their work.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:28 pm
For the local opt-out/no grants thing, would only municipalities be able to get the grants? So if you SD covers 4 cities if one opts out does that limit or eliminate your ability to get a grant?
As for the on-prem consumption, what is the time between enjoying the product and being good to drive, is it like booze (yeah I am square)
Comment by OneMan Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:35 pm
I get it Rich but I am impatient. It would be nice to beat Michigan on rec sales. I do appreciate your advocacy and common sense on this issue.
Comment by Illinois Resident Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:47 pm
The neat thing about marijuana legalization is its potential to not only help Illinois’ financial troubles but also make them seem really, really funny.
Comment by Peter Torque Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 3:55 pm
A side benefit to legalizing marijuana is that it may have a negative impact on street dealers of more dangerous drugs. Pot is bulky and has an easily detectable odor. Because the cost of illegally transporting it and the increased risk of detection by law enforcement, pot is often used as loss-leader to attract customers in order to sell them harder drugs. Legalizing pot will substantially cut into new customers for drug dealers.
Comment by Lake County Mom Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 4:11 pm
A thought in addition to Rich’s note about the Bill negotiations taking time - once legalized at the state level, if it is to be regulated in the manner of alcohol and tobacco, it will take a bit of time for the counties and municipalities to get their regulatory mechanism in place (i.e. the local analogs to the liquor licensing ordinance, liquor commission, etc.).
Comment by titan Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 4:29 pm
=Oh no. I’ve been doing it wrong all these decades? Seemed to mix well.=
Ohh.. that’s gnarly Dude.#-)
Comment by Duopoly Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 4:43 pm
I don’t know if I like this local control stuff either. I think there will be a lot of NIMBY movements if there is local control. Look at Forest Park and the video gaming vote just recently.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 5:25 pm
I think as far as public use goes it probably should mainly follow the public use of alcohol. The exception being is if there is the potential for underage persons to be present. In that case there has to be an enclosed area designed for pot use.
Comment by A Jack Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 6:01 pm
I was born in the late 50’s and raised in the 60’s and 70’s. I think I first partook in 1971. Very young. I did it somewhat through High School but gave it up before I even went to college. Obviously wasn’t much of a gateway drug. Still drink which says something.
But to the post. I amazes me that this hasn’t happened sooner. Not just here. In the whole country. We all thought back then that it would be legalized once “our” generation started getting elected. Probably in the 90’s but at least by the 2000 era. But it’s amazing how many people became conservative on the issue. Even though they also participated and they turned out OK
Comment by Been There A Few Times Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 6:07 pm
So I think if a public event requires a wristband to prove you are 21 to drink, then pot should be restricted to a designated area. And that is because pot smoke can travel as anyone who has been to an outdoor rock concert knows.
Comment by A Jack Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 6:24 pm
=== And that is because pot smoke can travel as anyone who has been to an outdoor rock concert knows.===
Actually, that “contact high” you experienced at the rock concert was all in your head. Psychosomatic.
A d the idea you might test positive for THC because your neighbors were smoking pot on their balcony is absurd.
Unless you are impaired at work, I am not sure I. understnd why your employer ought to be able to fire you for testing positive.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 7:37 pm
>As for the on-prem consumption, what is the time between enjoying the product and being good to drive, is it like booze (yeah I am square)
Pretty much when you stop being high; maybe 60-90 minutes after smoking.
Comment by Timmeh Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 7:39 pm
I oppose giving this person a seat at the table.
Comment by Biker Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 9:30 pm
Yellow Dog Democrat — Try convincing the general public that second hand pot smoke is okay around kids. I am not convinced and I have been smoking it for about 40 years.
I think for legalization to occur, boundaries will need to be respected. And if boundaries can’t be respected, then maybe we aren’t ready for general public area use at this time, just private use or specialized establishments.
Comment by A Jack Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 9:45 pm
–The question of legalization of pot has made me think of what will be the impact for CDL holders. CDLs are subject to random drug testing that is regulated by the FMCSA. The testing includes pot as a prohibited substance with the cut off level of 50ng/ml.–
I don’t think weed is the drug of choice for cross-country high-ballers. Those cats are trying to stay awake. Bennies, I think, are the issue.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 11:10 pm
Although my maryjeewanna smoking days were left behind in Asia, I will be adding this to my garden right next to my broccoli. For the grandkids.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Wednesday, Dec 5, 18 @ 11:33 pm
jB from Bloomington, giving law enforcement proceeds and using them as a deterrent is what we have now
Comment by Rabid Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 5:55 am
A lot of references to Colorado, but another state legalized via referendum at the same time—Washington.
Their regulatory regime is rather simple and straightforward: place marijuana with the existing liquor control board (https://lcb.wa.gov). They are not attempting to re-invent the regulatory wheel, and it places marijuana use at the same level as alcohol.
Comment by Abu Iskandr Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 7:19 am
Imagine being a teenager and losing your driver’s license because you got caught with pot…
We have like three details about this bill so far, and I can already tell they’re going to botch this horribly.
Comment by An American Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 7:51 am
when we have pot legal for recreational use in 2019, all crimianal records for “possession” should be expunge and any one in jail or prison for it, be immediately released with their record expunged.
Comment by truthteller Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 7:53 am
My understanding is that proponents are looking to make a responsible legal system. I greatly appreciate Sen. Barickman’s input and concerns. What was bleak a month ago is sunny today, with the prospect of legalization. Godspeed, ladies and gentlemen.
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 8:13 am
I definitely have problems with zero-tolerance policies by employers for their employees. Why is it ok for an employer to discriminate based on what someone chooses to ingest in their free time? Alcohol is much more dangerous than marijuana - should we allow employers to fire and refuse to hire alcohol users?
Comment by Techie Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 8:38 am
==I definitely have problems with zero-tolerance policies by employers for their employees.==
It depends on the profession. My brother is a truck driver. A lot of zero tolerance policies in that field.
And, beyond that, your employer has a right to set the rules for employment.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 8:57 am
The MJ Freeway seed to sale marijuana racket has led to all types of compliance issues. There system continues to be hacked and Washington State has discounted their contract. Illinois should beware and mindful. Although I suspect Illinois will come up short when it comes to protecting the youth from the trauma associated with marijuana commercialization and legalization.
Comment by LEVELUP Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 2:02 pm
oh..yeah MJ Freeway the company granted the marijuana contracts from state governments owned & operated by Joby Pritzker one of the leaders of the vaping epedmic company targeting children JUUL.
Comment by Redbird Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 2:09 pm
===owned & operated by Joby Pritzker===
And I have a brother who imports equipment from China. Your point?
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 6, 18 @ 2:11 pm