~ INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY ~
Analysis of Amendment 64
Amendment 64 (Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol Act of 2012): This constitutional amendment provides for a person 21-years-of-age or older to legally consume or possess 1 ounce or less of marijuana. The amendment also provides for government licensing, regulation and taxing of marijuana retail stores, cultivation facilities, product manufacturing facilities and testing facilities. For more information from those in favor of Amendment 64, see www.regulatemarijuana.org. For more information from those opposing Amendment 64, see www.votenoon64.com.
· This is a constitutional amendment providing certain rights with few restrictions. Since it is a constitutional amendment, the Colorado legislature is limited in implementing regulations.
· Colorado's marijuana laws would be more liberal than the Netherlands which has become more restrictive by shutting down 37% of its "coffee" houses (marijuana clubs), restricting them in "red light" areas and prohibiting tourists from visiting "coffee" houses. Preliminary research indicates that Colorado's marijuana laws would be the most liberal in the world.
o There are no limits on how much a marijuana retail store could stock or how many marijuana plants a cultivation facility could grow.
o There are no residency requirements so out-of-state dealers and users could buy their marijuana legally from Colorado.
o The amendment does not prohibit opening private marijuana clubs where people could use marijuana in a club-type setting.
o Organized crime and drug cartels could use front people in order to cultivate unlimited amounts of marijuana and then distribute it from Colorado rather than across the border.
o There is no way to control the diversion of marijuana out of state or to the youth. Colorado would most likely become the primary source state for the other forty-nine states in our country where it is illegal.
o There are no limits on the potency of the marijuana sold or grown.
o Even if cities or counties pass an ordinance banning licensed facilities, individuals could join together and form a co-op to exceed the six plant limit per individual. They could even grow in a residential area as a constitutional right.
· Colorado's constitution would allow for the violation of federal law on a state level. This would create a significant conflict with not only the federal government but neighboring states in which marijuana remains illegal.
· There would be a spike in federal crime (trafficking and cultivation) in Colorado to unprecedented levels and take valuable resources to try to investigate the diversion of marijuana and dismantle the illegal criminal enterprises.
· State and/or local employees helping to license these federally-illegal operations would technically be aiding and abetting criminal acts and subject to prosecution.
· Property and any assets would be subject to federal asset seizure laws, including any tax revenue raised.
· The way the amendment is written, including the term "unreasonably impractical," as well as potential impact on businesses, drug-free workplace, drug tests, medical facilities, transportation, universities, detention facilities etc. could lead to endless litigation which will be very costly to the state and local jurisdictions.
· According to the Legislative Council's preliminary report, the tax revenue has been grossly over-estimated. There is no funding to create a regulatory body to oversee provisions of the amendment for retail stores, cultivation sites, testing facilities, or infusion centers, much less unregulated grow operations or the separately-regulated hemp industry called for in the amendment.
· There are not sufficient police officers in the state to effectively prevent the diversion of marijuana to youth, other states or to prevent organized crime from getting a foothold in Colorado because of the potential profits involved.
~ INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY ~
