The Marijuana Policy Initiative

Don't Commercialize Marijuana.

A volunteer non-partisan coalition of people from across the US and Canada who have come to understand the negative local-to-global public health and safety implications of an organized, legal, freely-traded, commercialized and industrialized marijuana market.

Marijuana Industry’s Failed Commitment To Protecting Massachusetts Consumers and Communities

Response To Statement By Industry’s Spokesperson; 24-Page Ballot Question Protects Industry, Fails To Protect Consumers

BOSTON – The Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts (SHMA) issued the following statement regarding the Marijuana Industry’s commitment to protecting kids and communities.

The statement is in response to quotes from the industry’s Massachusetts spokesperson following a SHMA press conference regarding the edibles market that would be established under commercial legalization.

The SHMA press conference highlighted the prevalence of the edibles market under commercial legalization and the fact that there would be no potency limits placed on those products. In response, the industry’s spokesperson offered a familiar refrain – pushing it to the Cannabis Control Commission, which would be formed after the question was passed.

“I find it very difficult to believe that the Cannabis Control Commission, who has full authority to exercise what type of products can be sold — what shape, what manner, how they’re packaged, how they’re marketed — would allow anything to be sold that would pose any sort of a threat to children,” said spokesperson Jim Borghesani.

The following is a statement from Safe and Healthy Massachusetts Campaign Manager Nick Bayer:

“Every time concerns come up about protecting consumers or limiting the harmful impact of edibles, the Marijuana Industry has the same response – let the Cannabis Control Commission deal with it. Their constant referencing of the Cannabis Control Commission is just a head fake from the real issue. Because if the Marijuana Industry really was concerned with protecting consumers or addressing the edibles problem, they would have written meaningful protections into their own ballot question. Instead, their ballot proposal specifically authorizes edibles, places no restrictions on potencies, authorizes the marketing of these products, and does nothing to address impaired driving. And we know in Colorado, once the ballot question passed, the Industry then fought regulations every step of the way.

The Marijuana Industry devoted twenty-four pages of this ballot question to protect their interests, but failed to protect Massachusetts consumers and communities. That is why this ballot question – written by and for the Big Marijuana Industry – is the wrong path for Massachusetts.”

Background

The ballot question written by the marijuana industry is twenty-four pages. Among the provisions written INTO the ballot question include:

SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZES marijuana edibles (products like candy bars, gummy bears, “cannabis cola,” etc.), oils and concentrates

SEVERELY RESTRICTS municipalities’ (and the state’s) ability to limit the nature and presence of the marijuana industry in their communities.

BARS communities from restricting “home grows.”

GUARANTEES PREFERENTIAL LICENSING for existing industry insiders

SETS tax rate very low, meaning little or no net revenue benefit

Among the protections NOT included into the ballot question:

NO limits on THC percentage

NO protections against drugged driving

NO provisions for data collection and research

NO LIMIT on the number of stores that can sell marijuana statewide or number of operations to grow or manufacture marijuana and marijuana products.