Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Madigan “prepared to support” Chicago casino
Next Post: When Will The House Pass The Reproductive Health Act?
Posted in:
* From the newly introduced cannabis legalization bill in the eligibility for expungement section…
“Minor violation of the Cannabis Control Act” means one or more arrest, charge not initiated by arrest, conviction, order of supervision, or order of qualified probation (as defined in subsection (a)(1)(J)) for a Class 4 felony or misdemeanor violation of Section 4, 5, or 8 of the Cannabis Control Act, provided that (i) the individual did not receive a penalty enhancement under Section 7 of the Cannabis Control Act and (ii) the minor violation of the Cannabis Control Act was the only offense associated with the arrest, charge not initiated by arrest, conviction, order of supervision, or order of qualified probation to be expunged.
* So, keep that in mind when reading this. The House Speaker admits he hasn’t yet been briefed on the bill and the author of this story apparently didn’t realize this goes beyond convictions…
Madigan said there are several issues regarding marijuana legalization that will be “very important” when trying to rack up the 60 votes needed in the House to pass the bill.
That includes expunging criminal records for those with lower-level marijuana-related convictions and who will be entitled to get licenses to grow and process marijuana in Illinois. […]
“The key on that (expungement) issue is how far do you go in terms of the expungement?” Madigan said. “If you’re talking about some teenager who’s doing drugs and who’s only guilty of possession, that’s one thing. If you’re talking about people who are actually in the business, that were dealers, and you want to expunge those records, that’s a different case.”
For his part, Madigan said he is attempting to work with all the participants to see how to resolve the issues.
A little bit of context is required here. If this proposal passes, companies will be legally selling thousands of pounds of cannabis a year. The bill’s expungement language would apply to up to 500 grams (with no additional charges), which is barely over a single pound. That could very well be changed if people get nervous, but it doesn’t seem right to keep people locked up for stuff that others are doing under cover of law.
* Back to Madigan…
Madigan said the decision process for which businesses will receive new licenses would affect the vote as well.
“Among the minorities in the Legislature, they would argue that there oughta be some leg up for minorities in terms of licenses to cultivate or be a dispenser. Here again, language will be important in terms of finding 60 people to vote for the bill,” Madigan said. […]
The governor budgeted for $170 million in new revenues next fiscal year from licensing fees associated with legalization.
…Adding… I forgot about this video…
Speaker Madigan outlined what he sees as "very controversial aspects" of the proposal to legalize marijuana in a closed press event with UIS PAR interns this morning. He also highlights opioid issue, which has actually improved since medical cannabis rollout. pic.twitter.com/muSJNOcP8i
— Mark Maxwell (@WCIA3Mark) May 7, 2019
At the end, he talks about opposition to the bill…
And then you’ll have many people who are concerned about the opioid crisis, who feel that in light of that this is not a good time to be legalizing the use of marijuana.
Um. What? Those sorts of red herring excuses could be dragged out at any time in history and he really should know better.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 9:42 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Madigan “prepared to support” Chicago casino
Next Post: When Will The House Pass The Reproductive Health Act?
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Read the bill then get back to us, Mr. Speaker. Also, “the minorities”? Really?
Comment by LoyalVirus Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 9:44 am
–“Among the minorities in the Legislature,…”
Republicans?
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 9:52 am
Let’s be honest here. If Trump used a phrase like ‘the minorities,’ the outrage would be deafening (as it should be).
Perhaps those ‘minorities’ should present an alternative they can all get behind as Speaker of the House. I’ve always believed that if you run against someone and lose big, you’ll be ostracized, but if you run against someone and almost win, you’ll get promoted.
Surely, someone has enough gravitas to make this happen.
Comment by MG85 Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 9:52 am
MJM has a way of convincing those who don’t support his side of an argument. Its his way or else as past history shows. Just ask around the statehouse.
Comment by Ginhouse Tommy Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 9:53 am
Among “the minorities”…?
Comment by Shytown Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 9:55 am
===the outrage would be deafening===
Oh, please.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/11/04/like-his-lies-trumps-racist-comments-dont-surprise-but-they-should-be-counted/
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 9:59 am
–MJM has a way of convincing those who don’t support his side of an argument. Its his way or else as past history shows. Just ask around the statehouse.–
Past history shows and those who have been around the statehouse for a long time say Madigan only really cares about two votes: Rules and for Speaker.
The cult of the all-powerful Madigan will never be convinced, however.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:01 am
–If Trump used a phrase like ‘the minorities,’ the outrage would be deafening (as it should be).–
Actually, it would be a step up, an uncharacteristic display of civility and decency.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:03 am
Not the greatest phrasing by the Speaker.
I’d like to think the Governor is at least trying to peel a couple GOP votes for cannibis…
Right now, 60 looks iffy?
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:04 am
==And then you’ll have many people who are concerned about the opioid crisis,==
Respectfully, this could very well be an important part of the solution to that crisis.
Comment by A guy Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:14 am
Hopefully Madigan gets a quick education on marijuana. He needs one. Our broken and destructive marijuana prohibition stays alive through yesterday’s ignorance and groundless fears.
The entire nation is watching Illinois, to see if we will be the first state to legalize marijuana via state government. Madigan previously said he’d support legal marijuana. We can’t blow this historic moment.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:15 am
get going, Mr. Madigan. it’s the right thing to do.
Comment by Amalia Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:17 am
===He needs one===
In some ways he’s still stuck in 1995, in the minority party after a “tough on crime” GOP landslide. To his credit, he has moved forward on several things, but it’s a process each and every time with him.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:18 am
Really Rich? Wapo is a left wing rag, but then again, so is your comments section.
Comment by Circling the drain Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:28 am
– In some ways he’s still stuck in 1995, in the minority party after a “tough on crime” GOP landslide. –
I’m all for “tough on crime.” People are killing others like there’s no tomorrow – nowadays, en masse. Re-double efforts to curb that problem and lock them up instead of responsible adults who can grow a plant in their basement that helps them to have a laugh and relax now and then.
Comment by XonXoff Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:33 am
SB0007 is very long. Is it the Grey Goose that can’t fly? Interesting that liquor lobbyist inserted language requiring warning Cannabis is not to be used by pregnant or nursing mother, even though Drug Enforcement Agency Administrative Law Judge Francis Young ruled in 1988 cannabis was not a terotogen, unlike our friend alcohol. Alcohol causes birth defects and cancer, but not cannabis according to Francis Young who had hearing on this 30 years ago.
Also on page 100 I read they are only going to issue 110 distribution licences. I doubt that is even enough for Chicago, let alone the State. It is a start, but it is all a lot to take in. I am surprised they don’t just allow retailers with tobacco licenses pony up a fee and ten business days latter add packs of Illinois Green to their Joe Camel display. I suppose there is a lot of money made under the table and no one wants to stop those 18 wheelers loaded with untaxed product from Mexico rolling into Chicago on I55.
Comment by Al Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:35 am
===Wapo is a left wing rag,===
That says more about you than you realize. Y’all wonder why you have trouble getting through the screens when you post ridic DC-style talking points here?
Try to come up with comments here that you haven’t already heard from some talking head on your teevee.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:38 am
===SB0007 is very long===
So is the budget. Passes every year, or it did until a certain someone came along.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:41 am
Sorry, I’m behind on this. Is the SB0007 vote today or was it pushed back?
Comment by JR Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:48 am
I didn’t realize Mark was a PAR intern.
Comment by Dirty Red Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:49 am
–Really Rich? Wapo is a left wing rag, but then again, so is your comments section.–
What facts presented in the link are you disputing? Be specific.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 10:54 am
“If this proposal passes, companies will be legally selling thousands of pounds of cannabis a year. ….. but it doesn’t seem right to keep people locked up for stuff that others are doing under cover of law.
Limits are generally set for individual versus commercial production of taxed substances. Home brewers have limits as well …
the total quantity of homemade brewed beverages made, in a calendar year, by the person does not exceed 100 gallons if the household has only one person 21 years of age or older or 200 gallons if the household has two or more persons 21 years of age or older.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 11:02 am
I think the Governor needs the Speaker’s skill and experience and his familiarity with most of the personalities, to see what’s possible. His control over his demeanor, and his influence to persuade others and to oversee getting the language right are important. There are others who would get lesser results. These comments apply to cannabis, but also to other controversial items on this year’s agenda.
Comment by James Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 11:39 am
Concern over the opiod disaster derailed the pot bill in NJ
Comment by Annonin' Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 11:42 am
=== derailed the pot bill in NJ ===
It was more than that.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 11:44 am
=== Also on page 100 I read they are only going to issue 110 distribution licences
I read that as well. It seems quite low. Colorado has 509 dispensaries as of 2018.
Comment by LakeCoQ Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 11:48 am
I firmly believe Speaker Madigan will do the right thing…and right on time.
What’s good for business is good for our state.
What’s good for our state is good for our fellow citizens.
What’s good for the citizens of Illinois is… justice… for all.
Comment by Dotnonymous Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 11:54 am
–Concern over the opiod disaster derailed the pot bill in NJ–
What is the connection you’re making betweed opioids and legal weed? I’m at a loss.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 12:02 pm
It is wrong to expunge someone’s criminal record and rewrite history just to cover up their past mistakes. If legalization passes and the governor wants to commute the sentences of those convicted and still in prison for low level offenses that is his right and prerogative. It’s also a defensible position.
However those who have been convicted actively broke existing law as it stands. That’s not anyone’s fault but theirs.
We didn’t expunge records for liquor violations after Prohibition ended or wipe the slate clean for video gambling convictions prior to it being legalized. Giving drug dealers who targeted your children state funds and preferable treatment to get a license to legally deal is ridiculous.
Comment by Downstate Illinois Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 12:29 pm
“It is wrong to expunge someone’s criminal record and rewrite history just to cover up their past mistakes.”
Marijuana criminal penalties for low-level offenses are worse than the crimes of possession and sale of small amounts. Not only that, there’s a racist element that began with marijuana prohibition itself.
“Giving drug dealers who targeted your children state funds and preferable treatment to get a license to legally deal is ridiculous.”
If they get a license they will be selling to adults. In your Reefer Madness world, drug dealers are selling to kids without any restrictions, and without stopping kids from buying it.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 12:43 pm
==It is wrong to expunge someone’s criminal record and rewrite history just to cover up their past mistakes.==
People who can pay for lawyers have been getting their records expunged for a long time. Never heard a peep out of you or others objecting to this when rich people were doing this. Now that poor people can have their records expunged automatically it’s suddenly a problem?
What about people not being able to find work? Isn’t that a moral issue too, or am I missing something?
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 1:24 pm
“I firmly believe Speaker Madigan will do..”
What’s good for him
Comment by Donnie Elgin Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 1:43 pm
“The key on that (expungement) issue is how far do you go in terms of the expungement?” Madigan said. “If you’re talking about some teenager who’s doing drugs and who’s only guilty of possession, that’s one thing. If you’re talking about people who are actually in the business, that were dealers, and you want to expunge those records, that’s a different case.”
Well stated, Mr Speaker.
Comment by Nonbeleiver Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 2:59 pm
It seems it real is up to downstate Democrats and whether they support it.
Should be interesting to see the individual votes.
Comment by Nonbeleiver Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 3:04 pm
===Those sorts of red herring excuses could be dragged out at any time in history and he really should know better.===
Hard to teach an old dog new tricks I guess.
Comment by Boone's is Back Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 4:03 pm
==It is wrong to expunge someone’s criminal record and rewrite history just to cover up their past mistakes.==
Are you high?
Comment by crazybleedingheart Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 4:05 pm
==If you’re talking about some teenager who’s doing drugs and who’s only guilty of possession, that’s one thing. If you’re talking about people who are actually in the business, that were dealers, and you want to expunge those records, that’s a different case.==
Yeah, they’re different. The user is usually just having fun while the dealer is usually trying to figure out how to put food on the table without access to a job.
Shutting people convicted for making money illegally out of the ability to make money legally has been working out so great for the state.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 4:11 pm
Q. - What’s the difference between a legal pot grower/seller and an illegal pot grower/seller?
A. - a criminal record?
Comment by Dotnonymous Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 4:14 pm
–It seems it real is up to downstate Democrats and whether they support it.–
If that’s the case, every Downstate Democrat citizen I’ve ever known smokes weed.
And digs on Willie, Waylon and the boys.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 7, 19 @ 11:46 pm