Pubdate: Fri, 22 Jul 2016
Source: Arizona Republic (Phoenix, AZ)
Copyright: 2016 The Arizona Republic
Contact: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/sendaletter.html
Website: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/24
Author: Jean Nelson
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v16/n484/a02.html

FOES OF LEGALIZED MARIJUANA EITHER MISREADING OR MISLEADING?

The Leibsohn/Polk Op-Ed column ("Recreational marijuana? The price is 
too high") states in part that under the initiative to legalize 
marijuana "showing up for work impaired by marijuana would be 
shielded from discipline until the commission of an act of negligence 
or malpractice" and "any driver with a blood alcohol content over 
0.08 percent is legally drunk. The Arizona law would prohibit a THC 
limit from ever being set."

The petition text published on the initiative website states, "This 
chapter does not require an employer to allow or accommodate the 
possession or consumption of marijuana or marijuana products in the 
workplace and does not affect the ability of employers to ... enforce 
workplace policies restricting the consumption of marijuana ... by employees."

And "This chapter does not authorize any person to engage in and does 
not prevent the imposition of any civil, criminal or other penalty on 
a person for: ...operating, navigating or being in actual physical 
control of any motor vehicle ... while impaired by marijuana or a 
marijuana product."

Are Leibsohn and Polk perhaps referring to a different initiative, or 
am I misreading the text?

- - Jean Nelson, Scottsdale
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom