A64 Title Board Hearing Transcripts Exposes Lies

Proponents Admit A64 is NOT Legalization

Fraudulent Marketing Practices Continue

by Kathleen Chippi on Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 12:55pm ·

Do you feel you were mislead to believe A64 would as Mason Tvert said on the Peter Bolyes show:
1.  regulate marijuana like alcohol
2.  legalize hemp
3.  give $40 million to schools

Below are quotes from the original A64 title board hearing for A64  that prove the proponents know their language will NOT legalize marijuana like alcohol but more like medical marijuana (over regulated) and to put it in the title would be confusing to voters.

They also prove that the proponents know that hemp can be immediately banned by the general assembly.

And if you listen to the hearing yourself, you will hear how the 40 million in taxes for schools will not happen if this passes.  The proponents explain how A64 is not TABOR compliant now because the tax will have to be another campaign altogether that would have to be TABOR compliant and NO they do not say they intend to fund or run this , sometime in the future, but not before 2017, campaign.  The title board is clear —  THERE IS NO GUARANTEE excise tax will EVER be collected for schools or anything else, just like there is no guarantee hemp will be legal.

The language is too GREY.  The sad thing is it is intentional and you will see that as you read the quotes below.  The other sad thing is that they then LIED to the VOTERS to get them to sign.  Now everyone thinks it will be legal like alcohol, hemp will be legal and schools will get 40 million in taxes–NONE of which is guaranteed by the language.  Did anyone hear ANY TRUTHFUL marketing of this language–and if so please get in touch with me.

Partial Transcript

Original Title Board Hearing for “Regulate Marijuana”

6-15-11  2:02pm

Bill Hobbs-Deputy Sec of State
Dan Dominico- Attorney Generals Office
Jason Gelender- Senior Attorney Office of Legal Counsel
Mason Tvert- Proponent
Steve Fox-Director of Public Relations Marijuana Policy Project, DC (on behalf of proponent Brian Vicente)
Mr. Ramie-Proponents Attorney

minute 11:30 seconds

Mr. Hobbs, per industrial hemp, “They have to act but it doesn’t give them any guidance on what to do so I suppose the

General Assembly can enact a law that says there will be no regulation of cultivation, processing or sale of industrial hemp.  Is that accurate?”

Mr. Fox, “If that interpretation is there, than yeah, that would be an option for them.  Yeah.  We would hope the interpretation of this would be a directive that they should affirmatively regulate it. But if they chose to do otherwise, we will be stuck with it.”

minute 50:55 seconds

Mr. Ramie, “I think it would work if we deleted the word, starting on line 1, with legalization.”

1 hour, 15 minutes, 46 seconds

Mr. Fox, “Tomatoes are legal.  You can buy them anywhere.  Tomatoes have been legalized.  But as you’ve seen with the medical marijuana system, it is a highly regulated (emphasis added) system by a regulatory agency and that is what we’re proposing.  I appreciate that you prefer marijuana over legalization because legalization would be truly misleading as a part of the title.”

1 hour, 18 minutes, 11 seconds

Mason Tvert, “This notion of using the term legalization, which is incredibly subjective, in fact is highly debated.”

1 hour, 18 minutes, 42 seconds

Mason Tvert, ” If the point here is to be accurate and to make this as accurate and objective as possible, it would seem that  simply saying legalization, which could mean a broad variety of things, compared with regulation and personal use was more specific in our opinion.”

1 hour, 21 minutes, 48 seconds

Steve Fox (on behalf of Brian Vicente), “I mean she made our point better than we have, which is legalization is not what this is.  She said it clearly and they are going to propose an initiative regarding the legalization of marijuana.  What we are doing is regulating marijuana.  It’s a significant legal difference and it would be inaccurate to call it legalization.”

1 hour, 31 minutes, 28 seconds

Mr. Hobbs (about adding “like alcohol” to the title) “I would be troubled by that…strictly speaking there are some deviations.  It’s similar to alcohol but it is not the same.” “I agree with you that it may be misleading.”

response from either Galenger or Dominco.

1 hour, 37minutes, 15 seconds

Mr. Hobbs “For me personally, when I was looking at this, I thought the most important thing, if I am interpreting the measure correctly, is that local governments can prohibit all of these things within their jurisdiction.  Um. And I thought that was really a significant thing.”

1 hour, 53 minutes, 40 seconds

Mr. Ramie, “It seemed important for us……and then employers may place restrictions on the use of marijuana by employee’s. ”

1 hour, 56 minutes, 6 seconds

Mr. Fox, “We, based on experience, know during the campaign, that there will be exaggerations about what our initiative will and won’t do on the driving side and the employer side and so on.  And we wanted to have this language in there so that people know…… that employers still have the right to do things.”  (FIRE YOU and you will get no UN-employment check from the state)

2 hour, 3 minutes, 38 seconds

Mr. Dominico, ” I just wanted to raise the fact that even if this passes, we’re not technically permitting a person 21 or older to consume or possess limited amounts of marijuana.  We’re just saying the state won’t prosecute you.”

2 hours, 6 minutes, 44 seconds

Mr. Ramie, “We are requiring the implementation of a licensing facility, if you will, a process to get a license.  We’re not requiring the granting of a license.”

7-6-2011  Title Board Re-Hearing I30

 July 6, 2011 Rehearing

minute 19, 58 seconds,

Kathleen Chippi, “I think that saying to the average voter, the average citizen of the state that we are regulating it like alcohol is deceitful….  Mason has publicly announced that since we already have a medical marijuana program set up by the state and an enforcement division by the state that we would just use that medical marijuana model.”

minute 23, 48 seconds

“It’s a catch phrase and the proponents admit it’s a catch phrase.  Where the confusion to the voters would come in is and it’s really hard to understand unless you’ve been through the whole medical marijuana thing where medical marijuana was sold to us as the state of Colorado as being legal, and that it was going to help patients and since the General Assembly has gotten a hold of it over the past  2 years, we’ve seen incredible restrictions and incredible laws that were never foreseen before because everybody thought , oh, this is liberalizing it, this is legalizing it.  Well you heard the proponents here on June 15 arguing yourself that this is not liberalizing or legalizing it, this is restricting it.

And anything other than that in the ballot title will be misleading to the voters.”

minute 26,  26 seconds

Mr. Ramie, “The last thing the proponents want to do ……is to do anything that would mislead anybody or have anything in the title that might arguably be misleading to any of the voters.”

minute 29, 10 seconds

Mr. Ramie, “If there is a concern “in a manner similar to alcohol” suggests it would be legal at all levels, a, we don’t want to have that concern out there…from our prospective, a, we would, it would be acceptable to us in all 8 of the titles to drop the words “in a manner similar to alcohol.”

minute 32, 10 seconds

Mr. Ramie, “I’m hearing allot of objection and I can’t honestly say that the objections that I’m hearing are completely crazy or off the wall and I know Mr. Hobbs has heard me for many years that the objections are without merit, I really can’t say that for these…So lets take the phrase out.  And if we want to present the message in campaigning, where we can do that, we’ll do it-but we absolutely do not want to have something floating around in the title that could either be characterized as a catch phrase and tilt the argument one way or the other in the official title or have anything in there that can mislead the voters.”

Mr. Ramie, “Exactly, and if we’re suggesting “in a manner similar to alcohol”, if that phrase, and I see how it could, carry the suggestion that we’re now wholey legal on all levels, we don’t want to suggest that because we’re not.”

Mr Hobbs, “And I agree with you, it’s a good faith argument that they have made here.”

This entry was posted in A64 - Arguments Against, A64 - General, A64 - Lies and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s