They’ll next be in hearings before the Senate Health and Human Services Committee.
The members are:
Sen. Luz Escamilla firstname.lastname@example.org
Sen. Jim Dabakis email@example.com
Sen. Brian Zehnder firstname.lastname@example.org
Sen. Lincoln Fillmore email@example.com
Sen. Peter Knudson firstname.lastname@example.org
Sen. Allen Christensen email@example.com
Sen. Kevin Van Tassell firstname.lastname@example.org
Sen. Evan Vickers email@example.com
Legislators benefit from citizen feedback. So if you’re of a mind to express your own takes, we want to muchly encourage you. With reasons and stories. Fuming generally isn’t helpful in our experience.
TRUCE’s analysis of the 2018 bills is in the linked article and here: http://ift.tt/2C3IBC8
Assuming these bills would ever bring any medicine to the terminally ill patients specified in HB195 – which there’s real reason to doubt – and even if so, to no more than a tiny handful – they are being positioned as an “prop” since opponents are anticipating that the initiative is indeed going to be certified for the November ballot.
That is, we predict we’ll be told this is a reasonable compromise between “dug in” opponents and patients, i.e., that it’s a “fair, half-way measure.”
But make no mistake about where this lies on the spectrum. We’ll allow that it’s closer to 2% of the distance between where we are and where an actual program as outlined in the initiative would take us. At best.
Further, any terminally ill patients served will also be props since the medicine’s dosages and blends will not be what’s optimal for many, and beyond that, should any improve during the course of treatment under HB195, it might be taken away from them.
There are also “vendor bill”-like aspects in HB197. I.e., we’re not lawyers, but the language, to the extent it’s clear (and again, it doesn’t seem to be totally complete or well thought out to our eyes), seems to call for creating what could become close to a monopoly on cannabis production, processing, payment processing, via a, yes, State-run dispensary – and with well-connected parties possibly in a position to have seats at a very limited table.
And all this for a program which really doesn’t seem to be in the best interests of nearly anyone – except 1) opponents of the initiative and 2) those who stand to have fiscally remunerative roles in whatever is set up.
The structural problems identified in the bill by TRUCE’s board are covered in the linked document below
And from the source…. ….A little light reading…
1. Here’s HB195: http://ift.tt/2ECHsQ8
2. Here’s HB197: http://ift.tt/2EIDvvY
#MMJ #HB195 #HB197 #UTleg #UTSen #UTpol #AllTheWay #TRUCE
See full article – s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com