Pubdate: Thu, 29 Jan 2015
Source: Boulder Weekly (CO)
Copyright: 2015 Boulder Weekly
Contact:  http://www.boulderweekly.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/57
Author: Leland Rucker

WYOMING KEEPS CANNABIS POSSESSION CRIMINAL

Even if they don't support legalization, more and more states are 
changing or considering changing marijuana possession laws from 
criminal to ticket offenses.

But not all state legislators are ready to make that move. In a floor 
vote last week, the Wyoming house killed Bill 49. Sponsor Jim Byrd, a 
Cheyenne Democrat, wanted the state to turn cannabis possession cases 
into civil offenses: Fine anybody with up to a half ounce $50 and 
anybody with a half ounce to an ounce $100.

Currently, in Wyoming, a person caught with up to three ounces of pot 
faces a misdemeanor conviction with a penalty of up to a year in jail 
and a fine of $1,000. A third conviction can carry a five-year prison 
sentence and a $5,000 fine.

Byrd reminded his colleagues that the state is filling courtrooms and 
jails with young people on possession offenses while wasting the 
state's money, he told his fellow legislators. It costs $10,000 to 
prosecute each possession case, and even more to incarcerate 
offenders. It was enough to convince the House Judiciary Committee to 
pass the bill 7-2 to send to the full house.

In a floor vote last week, lawmakers voted 38-22 to kill the bill. 
Another one that would have allowed medical marijuana for patients 
suffering from long-term pain, glaucoma or migraines was voted down 
at the same time. And lawmakers are now considering House Bill 187, 
which would prohibit any new bills or discussion of marijuana policy 
while the state spends $15,000 on a study of the drug's impacts on 
the criminal justice system, public health and state revenue.

On a national level, on Jan. 8, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 
2015 was introduced in the Senate as S. 134 by a coalition of 
bipartisan senators, including Republicans Mitch McConnell and Rand 
Paul and Democrats Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden. In the House, H.R. 525 
was introduced by Republican Thomas Massie and our own Jared Polis, 
who has been working on this issue for years. It has a staggering 47 
co-sponsors.

The bills would build on the landmark legislation enacted in last 
year's farm bill. Section 7606 of that act, the Legitimacy of 
Industrial Hemp Research, made industrial hemp distinct from 
marijuana and allows colleges and research facilities in states where 
hemp is legal to begin research and pilot programs to develop hemp 
varieties. Since hemp hasn't been grown in the U.S. for many decades, 
new varieties and strains are desperately needed for production to resume.

"The federal ban on hemp has been a waste of taxpayer dollars that 
ignores science, suppresses innovation and subverts the will of 
states that have chosen to incorporate this versatile crop into their 
economies," Polis said in a press release. "I am hopeful that 
Congress will build on last year's progress on hemp research and 
pilot programs by passing the Industrial Hemp Farming Act to allow 
this historical American crop to once again thrive on our farmlands."

The Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2015 would simply amend the 
Controlled Substances Act to exclude industrial hemp from marihuana 
(yes, the government still officially spells it this way) and allow 
production to begin again. America imports most of its hemp from 
China and Canada and is the only industrialized nation that doesn't 
allow hemp production.

Currently, three states - Kentucky, Colorado and Vermont - have begun 
planting research hemp crops, and another 18 - California, Delaware, 
Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, 
Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, 
Utah, Washington and West Virginia - can do so.

Here's how simple the amendment really is. Basically, it would change 
a few words in the Controlled Substances Act. "Section 102 of the 
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802) is amended - in paragraph 
16 by adding at the end: 'The term marihuana does not include 
industrial hemp,' and by adding at the end the following: 'The term 
industrial hemp means the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of 
such plant, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 
tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a 
dry weight basis.'

"Industrial hemp determination by States Section 201 of the 
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 811) is amended by adding at the 
end the following: 'If a person grows or processes Cannabis sativa L. 
for purposes of making industrial hemp in accordance with State law, 
the Cannabis sativa L. shall be deemed to meet the concentration 
limitation under section 102, unless the Attorney General determines 
that the State law is not reasonably calculated to comply with section 102.'"

That's it. That's all it would take to get industrial hemp, which 
should never have been on a list of controlled substances in the 
first place, back in U.S. fields, where it once was and should be. A 
couple of punctuation changes and a couple of sentences. (That's all 
it would really take to amend the Controlled Substances Act to take 
marihuana off its Schedule 1 designation, too.)

However, the first time I checked S. 134 on Govtrack.us, which allows 
citizens to track the progress of bills, the Senate version, which is 
in the Judicial Committee, was given an 11 percent chance of becoming 
law. When I checked again, those odds were down to 5 percent.

You can hear Leland discuss his most recent column and Colorado 
cannibis each Thursday morning on KGNU. http:// news.kgnu.org/weed
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom