|
|
Site feed:
Blogroll
Archives
|
Monday, October 30, 2006
Posted
4:50 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
 Showdown at the CapitolAs you likely know by now, there was a showdown at the State Capitol Building on Friday, as Gov. Bill Owens held a press conference along with Attorney General John Suthers and a number of state law enforcement officials in opposition to Amendment 44. The news that came out regarding this incident was incredibly misleading and suggested Gov. Owens was unable to speak due to the chanting of the crowd. This is entirely not true, as the crowd did not begin chanting until after Owens and all the sheriffs gave their speeches. While members of the crowd certainly yelled one-liners and booed particular statements (such as Park County Sheriff Waggener's claim that making marijuana legal would lead to unexpected horrors that could rival the Bailey school shooting), these men were certainly allowed to say what they wanted. However, the chants began as Attorney General John Suthers took to the podium. The proponents and supporters of Amendment 44 simply had no interest in hearing the distortions and lies of this government official, who has been traveling the state peddling such nonsense as the false statement about marijuana and minors from the blue book. Clearly the governor, sheriffs and attorney general did not expect to see such heavy opposition at their press conference at 10 a.m. on a weekday. And they really did not expect to see people speak out against them so vocally. Was this the "right" thing to do? Some have called it a "disgrace," such as the editors at the Rocky Mountain News. Others, like Gov. Owens, called it fascism, suggesting that the peaceful protesters in green campaign shirts "might as well have been wearing brown shirts," referring to Nazis. But the fact remains, these government officials have been stacking the deck and doing everything in their power to derail this measure and ensure the voters do not get to consider Amendment 44 on their own without being preyed upon by fear-mongering politicians and self-serving law enforcers. Many people who support our side have been intimidated, fined, arrested, and have lost jobs because of the societal prejudice against marijuana. (We even had a supporter stopped by a police officer recently, and the "probable cause" was the fact that he was wearing one of our campaign t-shirts.) Many of these acts have been carried out by law enforcement officials, like those assembled Friday, and have been sanctioned by elected officials, like those assembled Friday. These policies have been supported by 70 years of lies and exaggerations by the government. Our campaign faces obstacles like virtually no other. We have the federal government coming into Colorado to oppose us. This same federal government has spent more than $1 billion over the past seven years "educating" the public about how harmful marijuana is so that local police can continue to arrest marijuana users. We have just about every elected official opposing us (because they think they have to politically). We had the bi-partisan Legislative Council send a blue book to every voter in the state saying our initiative would make it legal to give marijuana to minors -- a charge called "false" by the Rocky Mountain News. When just one member of the Denver City Council simply said that he was going to vote for our initiative, he was called "reprehensible" by one of our opponents -- and the Rocky Mountain News printed it! Finally, we have newspapers like the Denver Post urging readers to vote No on our initiative, while calling our message that marijuana is less harmful than alcohol "disingenuous." Yet they fail to raise the fact that their paper is filled with liquor advertisements. Perhaps the most egregious act carried out by opponents to our campaign was a massive DEA bust of 38 individuals for marijuana that the DEA virtually admitted was a political stunt to "send a message" to the people of Colorado before they vote on Amendment 44. On Friday, for one of the first times ever, a large and energetic group of these people had a chance to express their frustration and send a message back. Instead of allowing the government to continue its lies and exaggerations, they shouted some chants. Rude? Perhaps. Human? Undoubtedly. Coverage of Friday's press conference: ABC 7 CBS 4 FOX 31 NBC 9 Pueblo Chieftain (PLEASE send a letter to the editor) Rocky Mountain News story Rocky Mountain News editorial (PLEASE send a letter to the editor) Sunday, October 29, 2006
Posted
10:51 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
This Halloween season, we ask you to forward this video to your friends, family and coworkers and encourage them to ask themselves: just what is so scary about an adult using marijuana? As this on-line campaign video points out, it isn't marijuana use that you ought to be frightened of, but rather the laws against it that should send a chill down your spine. ..
Posted
2:41 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert will debate DEA field office head Jeffrey Sweetin tomorrow, Monday, Oct. 30, from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m. on the Mike Rosen Show. You can listen to the live debate on-line or you can tune in to the program on KOA 850 AM in Denver. As you might recall, the show's host, Mike Rosen -- a conservative icon in Colorado -- endorsed a YES vote on Amendment 44 in the Rocky Mountain News earlier this month. Friday, October 27, 2006
Posted
2:07 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
MEDIA ADVISORY For Immediate Release -- Oct. 27, 2006 Retired Police Chief Expresses Support for Amendment 44 as Gov. Owens Trots Out Law Enforcers to Defend Continued Punishing of Adult Marijuana Users Mason Tvert challenges Gov. Owens to debate on Amendment 44 and honor his public promise of a "statewide marijuana showdown" DENVER - On Friday, Oct. 27, at 10:30 a.m., immediately following an anti-Amendment 44 press conference hosted by Gov. Bill Owens, supporters of Amendment 44 will hold a press conference of their own in front of the State Capitol. Included among the Amendment 44 supporters will be former Seattle (WA) Police Chief Norman Stamper. Chief Stamper will be available for one-on-one interviews immediately following the press conference and later in the day. Amendment 44 supporters will point out the societal harms of alcohol and will question why Gov. Owens, Attorney General John Suthers, and leaders of the law enforcement community all want the citizens of Colorado to drink alcohol instead of using marijuana, which is far less likely to lead to sexual assault, domestic abuse, and other acts of violence. The lead proponent of Amendment 44, Mason Tvert, will also challenge Gov. Owens to a debate on the initiative anytime over the coming week. A December story in the Rocky Mountain News ("Pro-pot group aims at state law in '06, Opposition ready to give legalization debate center stage," 12/28/05) reported that Governor Owens wanted to see a "statewide marijuana showdown." Yet the Governor has been completely silent about the initiative up until this time. "We are pleased to see Gov. Owens has finally engaged in this debate," said Tvert. "We hope that he will not just make a few statements to generate some press and then go back and hide in his office. He wanted a 'marijuana showdown' and so do we. We are prepared to debate him on this topic at the time and place of his choosing next week. We'll do it in Denver, Colorado Springs, or any other city or town in the state, and we'll do it at any time that suits his schedule. If he thinks the public will benefit from his wisdom on this subject and that voters need to hear his opinion, there is no reason he wouldn't take us up on the offer." *** PHOTO OPPORTUNITY AVAILABLE *** Press Conference details What: Press conference in response to Gov. Owens's anti-Amendment 44 press conference When: Friday, Oct. 27, 10:30 a.m. (or immediately following the Governor's press conference) Where: West steps of the Colorado State Capitol Building, Denver Who: Norman Stamper, retired Seattle Police Chief Mason Tvert, lead proponent of Amendment 44 Amendment 44 volunteers and supporters # # #
Posted
1:53 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
This very fascinating article in today's Colorado Springs Business Journal (regardless of whether it meant to) makes a pretty strong case for making marijuana legal, taxing it and regulating it like alcohol. Thursday, October 26, 2006
Posted
1:03 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Just one hour before pro-Amendment 44 forces converge at the University of Denver, the Boulder/Denver public community radio station, KGNU 88.5 FM 1390 AM, will host a live debate between SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert and Federal Narc Tom Gorman. Listen live at 6 p.m. MST! Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Posted
4:20 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
We will be holding one final fundraiser for this last push across the finish line. And what's more is we're doing it in style! Please join us Friday night from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. at Mayor Hickenlooper's Wynkoop Brewing Company at 1634 18th Street in downtown Denver. This event is being hosted by NORML's Allen St. Pierre and SAFER's Mason Tvert, and confirmed guests include Norm Stamper, George Rohrbacher and Dr. Robert Melamede. There will be a cash cocktail service and we will have delicious appetizers available. The recommended donation for this event is $50 ($25 for students) and all proceeds will go to the SAFER Voter Education Fund, of which the Amendment 44 campaign is a project. This event is FREE for all elected officials and candidates! We really need your help to keep funds coming in so we can keep getting materials out. We must maintain this momentum into Election Day on Nov. 7, so please come out and help give this campaign one final boost! Checks and cash are acceptable at the door, otherwise please visit our donate page today to make your payment and then contact us to let us know you will be attending. ** Important - The use of marijuana will not be tolerated at this venue. Our opponents and law enforcement will be watching for this, so please do not do anything to put yourself or the campaign in jeopardy **
Posted
4:02 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
There are a few BIG names in marijuana law reform stepping up and speaking out in favor of Amendment 44, the measure to make marijuana legal for adults in Colorado. Thursday, Oct. 26 UPDATE: This press conference has been canceled due to the pending blizzard. 11:15 a.m. - noon -- Press conference (w/ special guests) Denver City-County Building* - 1437 Bannock Street, Denver *possibly going to be relocated due to weather If you support Amendment 44, please come out to the press conference on Thursday to show your support -- we could use all the help we can get for these final two weeks and the bigger presence we can make at this event, the better. 7 p.m. - 9 p.m. -- "Marijuana: The Unnecessary War" University of Denver - Boettcher Hall - 2050 E. Iliff Avenue, Denver *** FREE & open to the public *** A panel discussion hosted by NORML Board Member and former Washington State Senator George Rohrbacher (DU, '70) featuring: Norman Stamper, former Seattle Police Chief State Rep. Gary Lindstrom, former law enforcement officer and coroner Dr. Robert Melamede, cannabinoid researcher, biology professor and former department chair at the University of Colorado-Colorado Springs Jeralyn Merritt, prominent Colorado criminal defense attorney and legal analyst Allen St. Pierre, national director of NORML Mason Tvert, campaign director of SAFER If you or anyone you know is still on the fence about the issue of marijuana and Amendment 44, we strongly encourage you to attend the panel discussion at DU on Thursday where you can hear some very prominent folks discuss marijuana in an honest and open environment so that you can make an informed decision when you vote. Supporters are also welcome to attend this FREE event and encouraged to bring friends, family and coworkers. ** Important - The use of marijuana will not be tolerated at these venues. Our opponents and law enforcement will be watching for this, so please do not do anything to put yourself or the campaign in jeopardy **
Posted
3:52 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
But rather than selling alcohol, we're selling a much-needed change to our marijuana laws. Below is the press release we sent out yesterday. PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release - October 24, 2006 Colorado Marijuana Legalization Campaign Unveils Billboards Featuring Bikini-Clad Woman Touting Relative Benefits of Marijuana Over Alcohol Billboard reads, "MARIJUANA: No Hangovers, No Violence, No Carbs!" DENVER – At a press conference attended by local and national media today, the Amendment 44 campaign unveiled its latest billboard in support of its initiative to make the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana legal for adults under Colorado state law. This billboard, which appears at two locations in Denver, features a bikini-clad woman and touts the relative benefits of marijuana over alcohol. The text of the billboard – see image below – reads, "MARIJUANA: No Hangovers, No Violence, No Carbs!" The press conference was held beneath one of the billboards, which is located at 1381 W. Alameda Ave. in Denver, just next door to the Great American Beer Store. The large sign for the store and the billboard appear adjacent to each other to motorists, creating a stark and appropriate contrast. The billboard is consistent with the primary message of the campaign, as well as the organization behind it, which is that marijuana is a safer alternative to alcohol and, therefore, it makes no sense to punish adults for making the rational choice to use marijuana instead of alcohol. "We will continue to do everything in our power to make people think about the fact that our laws irrationally drive people to drink and prohibit the use of marijuana," said SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert. "Many members of the public seem willing to accept the fact that laws pushing people toward alcohol increase the likelihood of family and community violence and even death. Maybe the fact that Americans are being driven to higher carbohydrate intake will finally cause people to reconsider the value of our current laws." # # #
 The full billboard image appeared in color in yesterday's Rocky Mountain News. An intriguing and sexy photo for them...free advertising for us!
Posted
3:26 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Despite the fact that Amendment 44 only pertains to adults and not kids, and that it will remain illegal for minors to possess marijuana and illegal to give marijuana to a minor, the Denver Post does not think adults over 21 should be allowed to possess a small amount of marijuana for private use. Why? [W]e worry about the message to young people if Colorado passes 44...Ahhhh...the sweet smell of bullshit. Just what "message" do they think they're sending to young people with their "Beer of the Week" feature? I guess it's OK to push deadly drugs on the public, so long as they're from "those friendly folks at brewing giant Anheuser-Busch." Can't you just smell the hypocrisy? The profits being made by the beer company? The ad sales in the Post? Perhaps it's time our newspapers stop worrying about the message we MIGHT send young people by making marijuana legal for adults and start worrying about the message they are sending young people right now. We have yet to hear why it's OK for adults to drink and not OK for them to use marijuana, an undoubtedlly less harmful drug. And just in case you were wondering, this week's Denver Post "Beer of the Week" was Michelob Porter.
Posted
3:02 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
 Saturday Night Live's Weekend Update Covers Marijuana InitiativesThis past weekend the anchors of Weekend Update on Saturday Night Live discussed the efforts in Colorado and Nevada to make marijuana legal for adults. After announcing the news, the male anchor (Seth Meyers) turned to the female anchor (Amy Poehler) to get her perspective on the story. However, she was gone and in her chair was a sign that read, "Colorado or Bust." There was then a voice-over of Poehler as Meyers reads the note she left behind. My Dearest Seth: It pains me that I did not get a chance to say goodbye. But you've known since you met me that I would gladly trade our friendship for an ounce of hassle-free weed. Sincerely yours, Amy
Posted
2:54 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The following letter from Howard Wooldridge of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) appeared in the Boulder Daily Camera last week that somehow squeaked by under our radar (we've given up on the Camera...). We appreciate it being brought to our attention, though, as it is a perspective on this issue that the public should be hearing. COPS KNOW POT NOT THE PROBLEM
Posted
2:47 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The Summit Daily News ran an editorial endorsing a "YES" vote on Amendment 44 this week. Their reasoning: Marijuana is proven to be less dangerous than alcohol, which is already tolerated, and we believe our police have more important jobs to do than jailing folks for a small-time recreational habit.As you might recall, State Rep. Gary Lindstrom (D-Breckenridge) -- a longtime police officer and coroner -- also endorsed a "YES" vote on Amendment 44 in the Summit Daily a few weeks back. Monday, October 23, 2006
Posted
3:19 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
There is a feature story regarding Amendment 44 and a large info-graphic regarding the effects of marijuana on the brain in today's Denver Post. Perhaps the most interesting part of the entire piece is the headline: Pot issue's fate at polls hazy"So you're telling me there's a chance..." In all seriousness, though, that is what the Post is conceding. There is a decent enough chance Amendment 44 is going to pass on November 7, that they couldn't say it is has no chance. In fact, whereas most commentators have said the measure is "likely" or "probably" going to fail, they have all made it quite clear that it is not impossible that voters will see through all the bullshit and approve it.
Posted
3:12 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
A column in favor of Amendment 44 from SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert and a column against Amendment 44 from Attorney General John Suthers appeared side-by-side in this past weekend's Rocky Mountain News.
Posted
2:50 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The Denver Post editorialized a "NO" vote on Amendment 44 this past weekend. We're sorry to say that this comes as more of a disappointment than a surprise. And as we expected, they used the same ass-backward reasoning they used when they opposed Initiative 100 in Denver last year, which they summed up in the sub-headline. It's a national issue, not a state oneWe can't say we blame the Post for being fooled by our opponents (the federal government) into thinking this was a national issue, when it is actually a STATE BALLOT MEASURE! But more frustrating is the fact that this argument is a total smokescreen for the Post's decision to be a mouthpiece of the establishment rather than of the people it serves. And by establishment, we do not necessarily mean the government. After all, the Post endorsed medical marijuana (an ongoing state-versus-federal battle) and -- as we already pointed out -- consistently opposed the War on Drugs in general. That is, consistently with the exception of opposing actual efforts at reforming current drug policy. It would seem the Post is worried what its readers -- more likely its advertisers -- might think if they actually (gasp!) did the right thing. There's plenty more we could say about this piece of crap, but we really don't have any more time or energy to waste on people like this who would prefer to tell Americans how to live their lives rather than standing up for the American way of life. We STRONGLY encourage you to contact the editors at the Post and let them know you are really pissed at their cowardliness, hyopocrisy and lack of intellectual and journalistic integrity.
Posted
2:39 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that the coverage of Amendment 44 in the state's two major newspapers, the Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News, has been slanted toward our opponents. But it does take some solid research and real journalism to prove it. That is just Independence Institute Research Director Dave Kopel did. And what did the conservative think tank's study find? You can call the Rocky Mountain News and The Denver Post a lot of things, but one thing you can't call them is "fair and balanced." When the Colorado establishment lines up on one side of an issue, the News and the Post go along. Consider, for example, how the Denver dailies have covered this year's marijuana initiative (Amendment 44)... In other words, not only are our opponents in Colorado so incompetent that they need federal law enforcment officials and national anti-drug groups to fight their battle for them. But they are also getting a taller platform to stand on and a louder microphone to speak through, despite the fact nobody came to hear them talk.
Posted
2:32 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Colorado Confidential featured a story on how the opponents of Amendment 44 are almost entirely federal law enforcement officials. While the direct involvement of the ONDCP, DEA, RMHIDTA and others does (and has) not come as a surprise to us, their shadiness when it comes to disclosing how much of our federal tax money they're spending on it does. But whatever the ONDCP’s plans are, there are at least no physical records on the Colorado ballot issue.The folks over at popular Colorado political blog, ColoradoLib, also weighed in on just how stupid these guys are.
Posted
2:26 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The column by Reason Magazine Editor Jacob Sullum appeared in the Washington Times and the Colorado Springs Gazette on Sunday.
Posted
2:11 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The CU Campus Press ran an article on Amendment 38, which is known as the petitioner's rights amendment, which included a pretty funny quote from SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert. He made the following quote in response to House Speaker Andrew Romanoff's lead role in using the state voter guide to scare voters into thinking Amendment 44 would make it legal to give marijuana to kids (which it will not...). "Andrew Romanoff is the Stephen King of the horror novel that is this year's Blue Book."If 38 is adopted in November, there would no longer be any involvement in the drafting of the language that appears in the state-sponsored voting guide known as the blue book. Instead, there would solely be arguments for the measure by the proponents and arguments against by the opponents. Had this been the case for this past year's blue book, we never would have had to deal with false and otherwise misleading statements being included in the blue book by legislators as if they were fact.
Posted
1:39 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The Aspen Times ran a barrage of stories on Amendment 44 in the past few days, most of which discussed how the people there (including the current sheriff and his opponent in the sheriff's race) will vote YES on Amendment 44. We particularly enjoyed this one, not necessarily because of it's content, but rather it's ambiguous headline. Do you think a pun was intended? Marijuana vote in the bag?We don't know if passage of Amendment 44 is currently "in the bag," but should we find it to be come Nov. 7, there will surely be many who follow suit. Other pieces in the same paper included this letter of endorsement from NORML founder Keith Stroup, and this one from NORML Senior Policy Analyst Paul Armentano. And apparently Aspen isn't the only mountain community to support Amendment 44. The Summit Daily News did this man-on-the-street piece, which found the bulk of those they asked will vote for Amendment 44. Finally, there have also been multiple pieces in Aspen-area papers about the sheriff's race between current Pitkin County Sheriff Bob Braudis and Aspen public safety officer Rick Magnuson. Both the sheriff and his opponent, who's a real jerk-off (no, really), say they support Amendment 44 and will vote for it. It's nice to see some mountain-town law enforcers who don't want to go busting in on people with debilitating diseases and arresting them for using their doctor-recommended medicine (a la GRAMNET).
Posted
1:14 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The Steamboat Pilot endorsed a "NO" vote on Amendment 44 last week and did so because...well...we actually don't know why. While acknowledging that the current war on marijuana is a failure, the editorial noted that they simply couldn't bring themselves to amending the state constitution to end it. We pointed out to the editors that Amendment 44 is a statute change and NOT a constitutional amendment, as did a whole lot of our supporters. As you can see, they have quietly corrected the piece. But rather than sack up and admit they made a boo-boo, they decided they would be babies instead of journalists and refused to reconsider their endorsement, let alone apologize for the egregious error that could have very well cost us votes. Consider this E-mail, which one of our supporters received from Pilot editor Scott Stanford: Thanks for your response. I see your points. However, we have already seenWell, first of all the Don Nord case involved cultivation of marijuana and not simple adult possession. Hence the feds felt the need to get involved. As federal and state officials have made very clear, there would be no federal-state conflict in terms of private adult possession because the feds simply don't have the power to enforce or prosecute when it comes to such small potatoes. Did we mention Mr. Nord was our most productive signature collector in the Steamboat area? Perhaps the people there are now aware of the extremes to which our government will go -- arresting a sick person following state medical marijuana laws -- and decided they're fed up with such a system. Second of all, if Scott is so concerned about GRAMNET, why didn't his newspaper even mention the fact that the group possibly (cough...cough...probably) broke state campaign laws in actively opposing Amendment 44. Apparently he'd rather kiss these narcs' asses rather than report on their potentially illegal activities. Perhaps when he comes up for air he could ask them why they haven't responded with the information we officially requested and the state organization is required by law to provide. Then the best part. Scott makes it clear that not only will they NOT reconsider this editorial that was based on false pretenses, but they will not even say their sorry! We encourage you to take Scott up on his invitation to write him a note and let him know you think he needs to play nicer with the other kids...er...initiatives. Friday, October 20, 2006
Posted
1:40 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The editors at the Steamboat Pilot acknowledged the failure of the war on marijuana and other drugs, calling it a "costly and unproductive failure," in yesterday's paper. Yet they chose to say no to Amendment 44 for all the wrong reasons. No, really, we mean their reasons were actually wrong. Their primary argument: There simply is no justifiable reason for the law, and it certainly has no business in the state’s constitution.Really? Well we agree. That's why we didn't introduce a constitutional amendment, but rather a statuatory change. In fact, Amendment 44 is the only amendment on this year's crowded ballot that is NOT a constitutional amendment. Apparently they didn't even read the ballot language for Amendment 44 before letting loose on it as if they had a clue. Shall there be an amendment to section 18-18-406 (1) of the Colorado revised statutes making legal the possession of one ounce or less of marihuana for any person twenty-one years of age or older?What other reasons did they have to oppose 44? Well, they talked about how federal law would conflict with state law, resulting in federal enforcement of private adult marijuana use in Colorado. And once again, they were WAY off base. Federal and state law enforcement officials have continuously acknowledged that the federal government would not be able to enforce the private use of marijuana by adults 21 and older. "Oh, we have federal law, but it's not going to be enforced. The federal government doesn't have the manpower. The DEA deals with tons and kilos of marijuana. They won't be able to enforce on these smaller amounts.” Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Director Tom Gorman, in the Pueblo Chieftain, 10/2/06 "There aren't enough federal resources on the entire planet to handle ounce size marijuana possession. Your viewers should understand if this passes, we're really legitimately legalizing an ounce of marijuana. They're not going to be prosecuted." DEA spokesman Jeffrey Sweetin, on CBS 4, 9/21/06 "They could write somebody up, but they would have then go to the United States attorney and ask them to prosecute the case. And I'm telling you right now, the United States attorney has a threshold, I used to be the United States attorney, and I think their threshold used to be about 100 plants. They're not going to take possession of an ounce cases." Attorney General John Suthers, on CBS 4, 9/21/06PLEASE contact the Pilot editors and let them know they should either endorse Amendment 44 with a "YES" vote, or -- at the very least -- they should publicly withdraw their frivolous "NO"endorsement.
Posted
1:35 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The following letter to the editor appeared in yesterday's Boulder Daily Camera. Alcohol is the larger threat
Posted
1:30 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Wednesday's debate on KBDI 12 can now be viewed on-line at CBS 4's site. Enjoy!
Posted
1:22 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
 Editorial: Drug Busts as Taxpayer-Funded Media Lobbying/Electioneering CampaignsBy David Borden, Executive Director, DRCnet One of the news items today was a report from Colorado of a major marijuana bust. The Denver DEA office and District Attorney announced they had roped in 38 dealers, and held a press conference to brag about it. The timing was questioned by the group Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER), the sponsors of a marijuana legalization initiative on next month's statewide ballot. SAFER's press release called the press conference "an orchestrated political event," implying that the local drug warriors by staging this bust at this time and publicizing it were really trying to influence an election starting 19 days later with early voting starting only four days later. (SAFER also pointed out that there are listings in Denver for at least 347 dealers of alcohol -- a more dangerous drug than marijuana according to SAFER and according to any reasonable reading of the science on the issue.) In my opinion the timing does indeed cast suspicion on the enforcers' motivation. Did Colorado narcs use the pretext of a drug bust to in reality conduct a media/lobbying/electioneering campaign at the expense of the taxpayer (as well as the expense of the people busted)? If so, it wouldn't be the first time such a thing happened. In 1991, I'm told, the federal courthouse in Charlottesville, Virginia, was in danger of being shut down for budgetary reasons, its operations to be merged into other nearby facilities. Enter "Operation Equinox," which saw 12 fraternity brothers taken down on drug charges. The court got publicity and an apparent reason for being, and is alive and thriving today. In California this summer they actually came right out and said what they were doing. A July press release from Attorney General Lockyer's office about how “44 task forces led by the California Department of Justice’s Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement... arrested at least 115 individuals and seized at least $11.9 million worth of drugs as part of a one-day nationwide crime sweep," stated that the operation “promoted the continued funding of the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program that supports local and statewide drug enforcement. The federally funded program has suffered deep cuts over the last few years.” In the advocacy business, when we stage media-worthy events that we hope will affect the legislative process, it's considered lobbying. Were these 38 Coloradans, 115 Californians, the 12 UVA frat boys and others on numerous other occasions really pawns in the political games played by people who hold the power to incarcerate? That can be hard to prove, but it's pretty clear that that dynamic exists, and sometimes it isn't that hard to prove. Indeed, the prosecutor who seeks high-profile prosecutions and large numbers of convictions to bolster his or her political career is a well known creature, and one of the most powerful in government. Let's hope this odious tactic backfires on Colorado's narcs -- on November 7!
Posted
1:17 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
In an informal poll conducted by Colorado State University's student-run newspaper, the Rocky Mountain Collegian, "pot" was considered the "political issue that interests [students] most," ahead of gay marriage, minimum wage and even the gubernatorial race.
Posted
1:09 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
 Denver District Attorney Mitch Morrissey eyes the goods and licks his lips. Fortunately he had enough people's lives to ruin yesterday that he didn't break down and start licking the photo.
Posted
12:29 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Today the DEA stooped to a new low in its pitiful campaign against Amendment 44. It announced the conclusion of a marijuana-based sting that netted 38 individuals (mostly younger adults in their 20s) who were allegedly selling marijuana. Now you might be thinking, hey, this is the DEA and they do bust people for selling marijuana. So what makes this any different than the typical sting operation? Well, this time it was about two weeks out from the election and just a couple days before early voting begins. And one must wonder, if the DEA's job is to bust people for using or selling marijuana, why do they need to hold a massive coordinated press conference with tons of local, state and federal officials? Why did they need to expend even more taxpayer money on massive blown up photos of the confiscated marijuana and money? What purpose does this serve? Well, according to Colorado's DEA spokesman Jeff Sweetin, the purpose was "to send a message." This joker even brought up Amendment 44 and made it very clear that the kids selling pot were "killing people" and "selling drugs in everyday stores we shop at with our families." They also made it very clear this was a case of "BC Bud," which they claimed was "15 times more potent than the marijuana used three decades ago." We found out about the press conference and put together a counter press conference right in front of the DEA building in Englewood. The security guard, along with four other officials, including two supervisors, told SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert he was not allowed to be on the public, federal property. Actually, they made it clear he could be there, but not if he was going to be "talking about what is going on inside." Uhh...yeah...OK. We ignored that, and what'd'ya know...they were bluffing (or too scared to do anything about it with every news station in the city standing there). Below is our press release, as well as a photo from the Denver Post. MEDIA ADVISORY For Immediate Release -- October 18, 2006 As the DEA Announces the Arrest of a Few Dozen Marijuana Distributors, Proponents of Amendment 44 Release the Results of Their Own Investigation Showing 347 Alcohol Distributors in Denver Members of the media are encouraged to ask why the dealers of the LESS harmful substance are being persecuted by the government -- and whether the timing of this operation indicates that it is just for political show DENVER -- On Thursday, October 19, immediately following a DEA press conference to announce a major sweep of "B.C. Bud" dealers in Colorado, the proponents of Amendment 44 will hold a press conference of their own to highlight the fact that 347 dealers of a far more dangerous drug are operating within Denver city limits. It is likely that tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent by federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies tracking down what is rumored to be 38 individuals accused of selling marijuana. The Amendment 44 campaign spent 50 cents doing an Internet investigation* and found 347 alcohol dealers in Denver alone -- and the search even provided street addresses. * See, http://www.superpages.com/yellowpages/C-Liquor+Stores/S-CO/T-Denver/ Every objective study ever conducted has concluded that alcohol is more harm than marijuana. Yet our government continues to tout marijuana arrests and convictions as if they make our communities safer. Instead, these arrests and convictions are merely protecting the turf of the alcohol dealers and ensuring that people are more likely to use alcohol instead of marijuana. "It is not a coincidence that the National Beer Wholesalers Association is the top financial contributor to Republicans in Congress," said SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert. "This system is rigged from the top to the bottom. It is time for the American people to wake up and think about why the government spends billions of dollars on the war on marijuana, while allowing dealers of a far more dangerous drug to operate on almost every street corner." "Tomorrow's press conference at the DEA is an orchestrated political event," continued Tvert. "And those individuals who will be arrested and prosecuted to further this political cause have likely done less to harm society than Mayor Hickenlooper has by operating Wynkoop Brewery or Pete Coors has as the head of the Coors cartel. There is a market for both marijuana and alcohol, and it is simply irrational to create a legal, regulated market for the more harmful substance while arresting and imprisoning those involved in marketing the less harmful substance. Instead of focusing our national energy on arresting our way out of the marijuana problem, we should instead be focusing on how to create a regulated market for this relatively benign substance." Law enforcement officials at the DEA press conference are likely to claim that there are greater harms associated with higher potency marijuana than lower potency marijuana. There is no scientific evidence to back up these claims. Suggestions that more young people are in treatment because of high potency marijuana are undermined by the fact that increases in marijuana treatment admissions over the past 15 years are due entirely to criminal justice referrals. Moreover, users of higher potency marijuana are able to reduce the one actual source of potential harm from marijuana -- irritation from smoke inhalation. "Variations in THC content do not change the impact of THC itself," continued Tvert. "Those who use higher-THC marijuana simply use less, just as people drink less vodka than beer. If our community leaders are concerned about THC levels, they should support the establishment of a regulated system of marijuana distribution so that marijuana is labeled and people can see the THC content of what they are buying."  For an example of the coverage, which we managed to absorb quite a bit of, check out CBS 4. On the right is a Video box. One of the current "Main Video Clips" says, "Supporters of Marijuana Initiative Say Major Bust Prompted by Politics." If it is not there, click on "See All." You should then be able to find it. As you will see, Tvert is pissed, and he lets the DEA agents have it right to their faces. They were just ten feet away, when he loudly answered a question about why the DEA might be using such a shady political tactic: "They're scared as s***."The CBS 4 story actually used a little beep on the expletive, which is quite funny in the segment. There is also video of the NBC 9 story available on-line.
Posted
12:10 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Yesterday's Boulder Daily Camera had a front-page feature story on Amendment 44. The quality of the story is pretty shoddy, as it gives an awful lot of leeway to our opponents -- who for some reason are solely law enforcement officials -- and allows for a lot of bullshit. For example:
All it takes is reading the initiative language or any of the ballot analysis to recognize that this is utterly false. It will remain completely illegal to use or display marijuana in public, thus there would be enforcement on 4/20 at CU as always. But the reporter allows him to suggest it will be a public smoke-out free-for-all if Amendment 44 passes. More importantly, Lt. McGraw knows (or should know) about the difference in the two laws, as he is one of the fine folks who protects and serves our community by citing adults under these laws. So, if he is unaware of the difference in private use laws (CRS 18-18-406(1)) and public use laws (18-18-406(3)), he is incompetent. If he is aware of the difference, he's intentionallly misleading the readers. Which is it Lt. McGraw? We suggest you take a second and ask him yourself. And while you're at it, consider letting the reporter know that you thought she should have done her homework and called these guys out on this nonsense rather than eating it up with a spoon. Thursday, October 19, 2006
Posted
12:58 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Last night the proponents of a Colorado state ballot initiative to make marijuana legal for adults squared off with opponents from...Florida? That's right. Florida. SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert pointed this repeatedly and was even chided by moderator Aaron Harber for doing so. But we must ask Mr. Harber, who will have moderated 21 of these debates as part of the Colorado Decides 2006 series: Has he had any other guest on any of the 20 other shows who resided outside of Colorado? We highly doubt it. So while we understand the residency of the guests is hardly as important as the topic of the debate, it is certainly important to point out that our opposition is NOT based in Colorado. They are federal officials and national anti-drug groups, and they are doing everything in their power to ensure responsible adult marijuana users remain criminals. Thus, we have no regrets about pointing this out, however obnoxious and off-topic it might seem. After all, our opponents aren't going to be arrested and prosecuted if they lose. Tens of thousands of Coloradans are. It has been 70-plus years since prohibition of marijuana began, and otherwise law-abiding adults are still being treated as criminals for simply using a less harmful drug than alcohol. We are not about to hold back now and allow this madness to continue. And we will certainly show NO mercy... The Rocky Mountain News has a pretty good article on the debate in today's paper. One particular part summarizes this entire campaign.
This part was pretty good, too: At another point, Tvert tried to link Amendment 44 opponents to a Florida group that he alleged once withheld food from children and forced them to recite religious hymns as part of an anti-drug campaign. "That allegation is borderline slanderous," countered Dr. Dave Krahl of Save Our Society from Drugs. "He is making allegations that are unsubstantiated and untrue."Unsubstantiated, eh? Well, let us lay it out for you: Our primary opponents (ie. best funded and leading the charge) are a group based in Florida called Save Our Society From Drugs (SOS). They even have a St. Petersburgh, FL, bank listed as their financial institution on their campaign finance reports. Dr. David Krahl is the deputy director of SOS, and as Tvert pointed out he lives and works in Florida when he is not meddling in Colorado state politics. The director of Save Our Society From Drugs is Calvina Fay, who is also the director of the Drug Free America Foundation (DFAF) and resides in Florida. If her name sounds familiar, perhaps it's because she has also been out to Colorado to campaign against Amendment 44. DFAF and SOS are both founded and funded by the same folks, and they actually share the same office (in FLORIDA!). DFAF was formerly Straight, Inc. before it changed its name following a barage of lawsuits, government action against it and exposure in the media. Want to find out everything you need to know about the horrors of Straight, Inc. You can check out this site, which was developed by the parent of a child who was tortured in the program. Or you can read a shorter compilation of the atrocities carried out by Straight, Inc. in this article. The only positive thing that came of Straight, Inc. was the emergence of watchdog groups that now monitor for such insane "drug treatment" facilities. So, is it slander, Dr. Krahl? Or the unfortunate truth that you work for people who used to torture kids to keep them from using drugs and only stopped because they had to. Want to file a suit and draw some much-needed attention to this story? Bring it...
Posted
12:38 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The cover story in the most recent edition of Vail Trail, a lifestyle publication (much like Westword) serving the Vail Valley, discusses voter apathy in the area and folks' general unfamiliarity with state election candidates and issues. Nevertheless, it demonstrates that people are more aware of the marijuana initiative on the ballot than they are of most other issues. ...he had “no clue” about the county commissioner candidates, didn’t know what home rule was, named decriminalization of marijuana and child abuse laws as two of the state ballot issues and said the county coroner was an appointed, rather than an elected, position...We've clearly done our job getting the word out. Now we just need these people to get out and vote...
Posted
12:31 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Today's USA Today has a great article on Amendment 44 and the similar effort underway in Nevada. It is hoped this will draw the attention of other media outlets, who will hopefully follow suit.
Posted
12:23 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Colorado Public Radio (CPR) -- the state affiliate of National Public Radio (NPR) -- will be airing a debate between SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert and our opponents' spokesperson-of-the-day Linda Roady. The program, Colorado Matters, will air at 10 a.m. MST and 7 p.m. MST on KCFR 1340 AM, or you can listen to it live on-line. Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Posted
2:03 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Denver city councilman and rhinestone cowboy Charlie Brown has decided to get back on his high-horse (or should we say drunk horse, Charlie's a scotch drinker) and throw his hat back into the ring. He just can't kick his anti-marijuana habit. As you might recall, Brown was the elected official who walked up and down south Denver streets last year yanking out yard signs for SAFER's Denver initiative (I-100). He was really the only elected official to actively oppose the measure, and he turned out to be a God-send as the lead opponent of I-100. In fact, we sent him a Charlie Brown-themed thank-you note after our victory. Anyway, this guy is now attacking his fellow councilman, Doug Linkhart, for supporting Amendment 44. He made the following comments in a CBS 4 story yesterday: "I don't want to see national headlines if this is approved because I do think it will bring in an element of drug selling that we don't need in this city," Brown said. "That's not the kind of new business we need to attract to our city or to our state."There are just so many great responses to this: 1) Does he really think marijuana dealers are going to pick up and move to Colorado? As he put it during a debate with SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert on MSNBC last year: "We don't need no hippies in their tied-down T-shirts and VW buses..." This guy is clearly delusional... 2) Brown has no problem with drug dealers like Beer Barron Pete Coors and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper setting up shop and reeling in the profits from a far more damaging drug than marijuana. His excuse for the hypocrisy: "But alcohol's a legal drug." So by all means Charlie, marijuana must remain illegal because...it's illegal? How did this guy get elected, anyway? 3) If you don't want to see national headlines, don't get involved this time. These were the headlines when Councilman Brown was at the reins last year: Pot vote prompts worldwide attention - Rocky Mountain News, 11/4/05 Headlines (complete with stories) about the Denver initiative Brown fought so hard against also appeared in/on: Washington Post
Posted
1:22 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Columnists often note that the public is growing more apathetic and disenchanted with the political process every year. Why? Perhaps it's because when an elected official, such as Denver City Councilman Doug Linkhart, actually stands up for the people they represent -- not to mention what they know to be right and just -- they get criticized by these very same commentators. Jim Spencer's column in today's Denver Post is a grotesque effort to appeal to the worst in people by preaching about how others should vote just as he does. Jim, just because you want to vote against something doesn't mean everyone who disagrees is out to get your children. After all, consider this point YOU made in a March 23, 2005, column on a Democratic blog: [S]ocieties that smother dissent are never free.So, it's been established that Mr. Spencer is a total poseur when it comes to issues of liberty and dissent, and readers should no longer take any of his Thomas Paine-esque calls for freedom seriously. We've got two words for you, Jim. 1) sell 2) out PLEASE contact Jim Spencer and let him know he reeks of hypocrisy. You can also contact the editors to let them know you're tired of hearing the Denver Post columnist choir sing out against the devil weed in hopes of saving the innocent children.
Posted
12:54 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Reason Magazine Senior Editor Jacob Sullum dedicated his on-line column this week to highlighting the fact that our opponents are scared out of their wits that Colorado and Nevada could both be making marijuana legal for adults come November 7. The Colorado campaign, which goes by the name SAFER (Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation), emphasizes that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol and asks, "Should adults be punished for making the rational choice to use marijuana instead of alcohol?" This approach puts prohibitionists on the defensive by asking them to justify the disparate legal treatment of the two drugs.Thank you, Mr. Sullum, for being the voice of Reason... Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Posted
1:29 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Talk about ass-backward. The ONDCP had another member of its goon squad in Colorado campaigning against Amendment 44 yesterday, railing on marijuana as a "gateway drug" to methamphetamine. This from an office that has been criticized by Republican and Democratic U.S. senators for focusing too much of its attention and resources on marijuana and not enough attention on the growing meth problem. Nevertheless, this old-school scare tactic led to this piece of yellow journalism in the Denver Post. Kudos federal government -- you truly can get any old bullshit printed in a major newspaper, regardless of whether it is substantiated at all. Consider the title: "Plan called a meth gateway." Just because someone says something, that doesn't mean it is legitimate and should be the headline of a news article. Otherwise, we will certainly be putting out a release tomorrow in hopes of a follow-up headlined, "ONDCP's front door a dishonest-asshole gateway." After all, when we were informed of the comments made by the ONDCP official about marijuana being the "gateway" to meth, we provided the reporter with these specific facts. Did he read them? Did the ONDCP provide any facts of their own? From: mason@saferchoice.orgDon't get us wrong -- we're glad the largest newspaper in the state has actually decided to cover one of the most talked-about issues on this year's state ballot. But this story was garbage...
Posted
12:32 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
There is a story in today's Denver Post about Denver City Councilman Doug Linkhart (at-large), who publicly voiced his personal support for Amendment 44 and is now being attacked by self-serving law enforcement officials, pandering politicians and our pious opponents. We strongly encourage EVERYONE to PLEASE do one or all of the following -- it will take just 2 minutes! - Contact Councilman Linkhart and thank him for taking a stand on what he knew was right and for refusing to back down when confronted by law enforcers and our opponents. - Contact the Denver Post and voice your support for Councilman Linkhart's decision to take such a stand. - Contact City Councilman Charlie Brown to let him know he is not representing his constituents who voted for the Denver initiative last year and he could learn a few things from Councilman Linkhart. As you might recall, Charlie Brown was the joker who swore up and down before last year's election that the People of Denver would never vote to make marijuana legal for adults. You can get a small taste of the hysterical Charlie Brown vs. Mason Tvert footage from Fox 31's Good Day Colorado on our MySpace page (third one down on the left). These guys NEED to hear from you, as the comments they're reading from police and our opponents are truly disturbing. But Robert McGuire, a campaign coordinator for Save Our Society from Drugs, said: "It's reprehensible that someone in that position of authority would advocate for passing something like this."No, Robert. What's reprehensible is working for people who tortured and brainwashed children to keep them from using drugs and others who testified that industrial hemp products sold in grocery and health stores cause skin cancer overnight. More sickening were the comments from law enforcement officials. These guys actually criticize an elected lawmaker for supporting a law the people he represents want him to support (God forbid). After all, as an at-large member of the council, Linkhart represents Denver, and Denver voted last year to stop punishing private adult marijuana users. "We have an elected city official in charge of the Public Safety Committee condoning the use of an illegal substance, and the Police Department's role is to control the use of illegal substances," Denver Police Protective Association president Mike Mosco said. "We would hope that the chair of the Public Safety Committee would have a better understanding of what the police department does." And we have a bunch of cops who forgot that their job was to enforce laws and not make them. We would hope that the police would have a better understanding of what marijuana does that they would be thrilled they didn't have to waste their time arresting adults for simply using a less harmful drug than alcohol, a drug they likely use themselves. And if this is the Police Protective Association, why on earth would they want to force their officers to pursue cases in which people might simply be smoking a joint? Does it make sense for an officer to go knocking on a strange door simply because the neighbors reported smelling marijuana? And then there's this buffoon:
What business? It will be illegal to sell marijuana in Denver if Amendment 44 passes, and it's not as if people will spend a weekend in Denver just to get high. Where would said "drug tourists" go to get marijuana? Civic Center Park is the only place that comes to mind, but it's already a booming open-air drug market without Amendment 44. So what would be different? Good grief! Just when you thought Charlie Brown had learned his lesson, he went and proved he is still as gullible as ever. Sunday, October 15, 2006
Posted
11:38 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
This Wednesday, October 18, at 7 p.m., KBDI Channel 12 in Denver will be hosting and airing a live televised debate on Amendment 44 as part of its Decision 2006 series. In the corner of justice and honesty: Jessica Peck Corry, GOCAMP co-founder Mason Tvert, SAFER campaign director And in the corner of hypocrisy and distortion: Robert McGuire, once GOCAM and now Save Our Society From Drugs campaign director Dr. Andrea Barthwell, former Deputy Drug Czar in the Office of National Drug Control Policy This should be an exciting one, so be sure to tune in and watch!
Posted
11:06 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
 Pitkin County Sheriff Candidate Magnuson Slaps Self, But Not on the BackFirst, there was Deputy Drug Czar Andrea Barthwell, who -- while she was not opposing marijuana reform efforts such as Amendment 44 -- was sexually harrassing homosexual employees at the ONDCP. Now, we have Rick Magnuson, the Aspen Public Safety Officer running for Pitkin County Sheriff against incumbent Bob Braudis on an anti-marijuana platform. According to a barrage of recent news stories, it appears that while Magnuson is not bashing marijuana and Braudis's reasonable policies on the drug, he is masturbating in front of a camera and submitting it to be aired on public television. Yep, you heard us correctly. Sheriff hopeful Rick Magnuson took footage of himself hitting the flesh pipe and submitted it as a piece of "performance art" to Aspen television stations. What's more disconcerting than this story is the fact that Magnuson seems to think it's better to engage in sexually lewd acts in public than it is to smoke a little pot in private. As he put it in an interview with CBS 4: "What I think is that in everyone's life they have issues that come up and I think art is a good way to deal with it instead of sedating yourself with chemicals. It shows I can be a good role model rather than the way the sheriff deals with his problems. I assume he did something because he just got out of rehab," Magnuson said in a telephone interview Sunday.This is yet another low-blow from Magnuson (pun intended), as he has continually referred to Braudis's efforts to get himself into better shape by checking into a clinic in Arizona for a short time earlier in the year. We applaud Braudis for taking the personal responsibility to acknowledge he needed help getting healthier. As for Magnuson, he is apparently aware of what we wish he'd do: beat it. For more on "whack-job" Rick Magnuson, you can read stories here, and here, and a pretty hilarious letter-to-the-editor here.
Posted
10:42 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
We didn't criticize the Pueblo Chieftain when it ran a guest column by Attorney General John Suthers blasting Amendment 44 and encouraging readers to vote against it. Sure, we criticized the hell out of Suthers, but the Chieftain was still fine by us. But then the Chieftain ran a puff-piece on RMHIDTA Director Tom Gorman holding a talk at Pueblo Community College railing on Amendment 44, at which the chief of police was the ONLY attendee. At this point it became quite clear where the paper stood on the issue. It was only a matter of time before the editors joined Suthers and endorsed a "no" vote on the measure. But the question remained: when would the proponents of the initiative -- the ones who did all the work to get it on the ballot -- have the chance to give their side of the story? Finally, the Chieftain gave us that chance in a guest column from SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert that appeared in yesterday's paper. Enjoy...
Posted
10:27 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
U.S. Drug Czar John Walters on the Colorado Springs NBC affiliate, Oct. 11, 2006: "All those systematic lies that are at the front end of this case are there because if you tell the truth, this gets laughed out of public opinion." Saturday, October 14, 2006
Posted
3:45 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The Craig Daily Press ran a feature story updating the situation with GRAMNET and whether the eight GRAMNET "Team members" broke state law by spending state resources advocating against Amendment 44. As you'll see, we are now requesting information from the Mesa County Meth Task Force, as it appears as if they have spent more than $50 campaigning against Amendment 44. When will these law enforcers accept the fact that they are just that: law enforcers, not lawmakers. Here is the release we sent out Friday afternoon: PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release -- Oct. 13, 2006 Denials of Illegal Campaigning are Rampant as State Entities Continue to Campaign Against Amendment 44
DENVER - As the campaign heats up for Amendment 44, the marijuana legalization initiative, actions by state officials are raising significant questions about their legality and appropriateness. Specifically, there are indications that many members of the Colorado law enforcement community are either breaking or skirting the laws prohibiting campaigning against initiatives by state employees and government entities. The Colorado Fair Campaign Practices Act (Colorado Revised Statutes 1-45-177) prohibits any state or local governmental entity from making any contribution to an issue committee advocating passage or defeat of a ballot initiative. There is an exception for very minimal expenditures. CRS 1-45-177(1)(a)(II) allows a government employee to make an expenditure of up to $50 in the form of letters, phone calls and similar activities expressing their opinion on a ballot initiative. These are very serious and stringent restrictions. In fact, the Colorado Supreme Court has declared that the mere production and distribution of three press releases by a state entity exceeded this $50 exception. Despite this prohibition, on September 26, 2006, the Greater Routt & Moffatt Narcotics Enforcement Team (GRAMNET) distributed an eight-page release to the media (and perhaps others). This release included a cover letter signed by eight individuals who appear to be the GRAMNET "team," along with seven additional pages described loosely as "The Truth About Marijuana." In response to this release, the Amendment 44 campaign filed an open records request with GRAMNET on October 6, seeking records detailing how much staff time was dedicated to producing and distributing this lengthy document. GRAMNET Commander Dusty Schulze sent a reply on October 11, claiming that only one hour of staff time was dedicated to this endeavor. The full text of that response is below. "It seems clear that GRAMNET is aware that they were close to breaking the law," said SAFER Campaig Director Mason Tvert. "Did they really just spend one hour on this document? I guess we will never know. But we will certainly pursue this matter further if they spend additional tax dollars on campaign activities." Not to be outdone, yesterday, at a conference at the Doubletree Hotel in Grand Junction sponsored by the Mesa County Meth Task Force, members of the task force, along with Colorado Attorney General John Suthers and White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) Deputy Director Scott Burns, held a press conference to express opposition to Amendment 44. Even putting aside the question of whether the Attorney General may have exceeded the $50 campaign expenditure limit by traveling to Grand Junction in part to express opposition to Amendment 44, some entity clearly paid for the room rental as well as the banners that adorned the walls. These were very significant campaign expenditures, especially given the fact that they were purchased with the intent of generating thousands of dollars worth of earned media coverage in the Grand Junction market. (A goal achieved by the Attorney General. We assume this was not the goal of the meth task force, since, in theory, they should be focused on meth.) The lead proponent of Amendment 44, Mason Tvert, attended this press conference and asked who paid for the room, noting that an expenditure of greater than $50 by a state entity would be illegal. While Mesa County Sheriff Stan Hilkey initially "deflected" the question by saying that they were allowed to use taxpayer dollars to provide their "expert" opinion to the public, in the end, a White House staff member stepped up to say that the federal government paid for the room. A White House spokesperson told the Denver Post the room cost, coincidentally, $50. (Left unasked and, thus unanswered was the question of who paid for the large banners on the wall -- one saying, "MARIJUANA," the other saying, "NOT IN OUR COMMUNITY" -- which certainly cost more than $50 and did not appear to be up to White House standards.) On Monday, October 16, the Amendment 44 campaign will file an open records request with the Mesa County Meth Task Force, seeking all records related to the planning of and paying for the Grand Junction conference. Specifically, the campaign will seek all correspondence between the task force, the Attorney General, and ONDCP prior to the conference indicating that the federal government would be paying for the room and the banners (if the banners were, in fact, purchased for the press conference). "Whether this room was paid for by the federal government or a state entity, the whole situation is inappropriate," Tvert said. "Either way, taxpayer dollars are being used to promote one position on a ballot initiative that is to be decided by the voters of this state. No group of citizens -- especially the 130,000-plus who signed the Amendment 44 petition -- should be forced to pay for the government to advertise their views on such a highy contentious and very close ballot initiative. The government -- especially members of the law enforcement community -- should be carrying out and enforcing the laws, not interfering in the making of them. After all, these officials are breaking more laws than anyone who simply uses marijuana in private." ===================== Text of GRAMNET response to Amendment 44's open records request: October 11, 2006 Dear Robert J. Corry Jr., I am writing in response to your open records act request dated October 6, 2006. Although I agree with your position that the records requested do fall under the public records act, I would advise you that GRAMNET is not the custodian of records for any of the individuals named in the request. I would encourage you to contact the appropriate custodian of records for each of the specific agencies that you are requesting this information from. As to your inquiry into the total time spent on this project I would advise you that this information was copied and pasted directly off of information received from the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area's office. Additional information was also cut and pasted directly off of the www.Stop44.org web page. In my best estimation collectively less than one hour of total time was spent on preparing, distributing, approving, and disseminating this informational document. Based on your request I am researching what documents or drafts, if any, are available and will forward those to you as soon as they become available. Task Force Commander Dusty Schultze GRAMNET Drug Task Force P.O. Box 1327 Craig, CO 81626
Posted
3:26 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Yesterday's Aspen Times included an editorial that encouraged readers to vote YES on Amendment 44. The bottom line is that cops have more important things to do than to bust adults for marijuana possession.The Boulder Weekly editorial gave a run down of the proponents' and opponents' arguments, then provided the editors' opinion: Opponents are full of bull, and a large percentage of Boulder County readers knows it. Why? Because they smoke pot and lead healthy, functional lives. The war on pot is a waste of money and a waste of lives. Prohibition has never worked and never will. If alcohol and cigarettes, which are demonstrably more costly and harmful to human beings and to society, are legal, then ganja should be legal, too. End the hypocrisy. Vote YES on Amendment 44. Friday, October 13, 2006
Posted
5:00 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Yesterday, ProgressNow Action, one of the leading progressive organizations in Colorado, recommended a YES vote on 44 to its members. While an endorsement from a progressive group may not sound all that surprising, ProgressNow Action is a large member-based organization and has support across the left and middle of the ideological spectrum. Moreover, for too many years, progressive groups have turned a cold shoulder to the cause of marijuana legalization. This endorsement is a welcomed change. Plus, when you put this endorsement side-by-side with Colorado conservative radio host Mike Rosen's recent endorsement of 44, it really highlights the fact that this is a non-partisan issue that needs to be addressed by officials on both sides of the aisle.
Posted
4:37 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
We are not the most religious people in the world, but isn't deception a sin? We are curious how Jimmy Dobson and the good Christian folks at Focus on the Family are going to explain this one come Judgment Day. Check out the discrepancy between this story, which appeared on one of their news outlets, and this other story, which appeared on another. We'll help you out by highlighting the key differences. Story 1: The logic from supporters of Colorado’s effort to legalize marijuana is simple: if the drug is legal, people will choose to smoke a joint rather than drink alcohol, according to Mason Tvert with SAFERchoice.Story 2: Mason Tvert, a spokesman for SAFERchoice, said it might mean fewer people would drink and drive.Although Tvert only did one interview with one FOTF reporter, he somehow went from talking about simple consumption of alcohol to driving under the influence of alcohol. Tvert has NEVER said anything about decreasing DUIs and it is quite clear from the first article, which is attributed to an actual reporter (the second is a "Staff Report"), that he was NOT referring to drinking and driving when he made that quote. Clearly this is not a huge deal, as anyone who gets their news from Focus on the Family is probably not voting for Amendment 44 anyway. But we are pissed because now this means Focus on the Family will almost certainly be joining us in Hell...
Posted
4:31 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
This month's Washington Park Profile, a small neighborhood publication, has endorsed our initiative to make marijuana legal for adults in Colorado. Perhaps more importantly, it demonstrates the effectiveness of our message, which is that marijuana is safer than alcohol. We believe that once someone is fully conscious of this fact, there is really no good reason to want to keep punishing adults who make the safer choice. As the author notes, he has come around to support it despite his not supporting our initiative in Denver last year. I voted against this on the local ballot last time, but I'm shifting toward a favorable nod this time around. I think marijuana, like any drug, carries with it the potential for abuse. I'm a believer that alcohol is the ultimate "gateway" drug, and has more damaging effects than marijuana. I believe making simple possession a crime is just clogging our justice system with harmless cases and inmates who are no danger to society.
Posted
4:23 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The drug czar didn't actually come out to Colorado for the marijuana (although he could REALLY use a huge bong hit), but he did come out to campaign against our initiative to make marijuana legal. He also went to Nevada the next day to campaign against the initiative on the ballot there to tax and regulate marijuana. The Washington Times chronicles his little pot-jaunt out west in this story from today's paper. We have but one question for the czar... Which state has better pot?
Posted
3:48 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
UPDATE: The link to the Grand Junction news clip mentioned below was incorrect. It has been fixed, and we encourage you to watch this ridiculous story. After the Drug Czar went back to Washington with his tail between his legs and a sour look on his face (which appears to be permanent, so we take no credit for that), one of his chief lackies was over on the Western Slope to continue the federal government's campaign against Amendment 44. Deputy Drug Czar Scott Burns and his mini-me, 5-foot-nothing John Suthers, actually appeared to be focusing their attention on a drug that needs just that -- attention -- and were the guests of honor at the Regional Methamphetamine Conference in Grand Junction. But clearly these marijuana addicts couldn't tear themselves away from the demon weed, as it took but one hour before the conference took an hour-long recess for a big press conference in another room of the hotel. And wouldn't you know it, the entire thing wasn't on meth, but it was on (drum roll) MARIJUANA! For some reason, we just knew this might happen. That's why SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert took advantage of the meth conference's being open to the public and registered earlier this week and pre-paid the $60 registration fee. You should have seen these guys' faces when he walked in and took a seat at a table full of federal and state law enforcement officials. Tvert was in the press conference -- the first he's been allowed in; that's what happens when you pay the man -- where he was quickly recognized by White House and Attorney General staffers, ONDCP officials and a bunch of other narcs. After Burns and Suthers finished railing on Amendment 44, along with the sheriff and the district attorney of Mesa County -- who actually said he'd "never seen a marijuana case without meth involved" -- it was time for questions. None of the press had any, so Tvert took it upon himself. He asked a simple question: "Who paid to rent the room in which the press conference was being held?" What transpired was truly classic... A broo-ha-ha erupted as the officials took turns yelling at Tvert, as he simply pointed out that if Suthers, the Sheriff or the DA paid for it, they were breaking the law, and if the ONDCP or the Meth Task Force (which was sponsoring the conference) paid for it, they were breaking the law. Unbelievably, the Sheriff of Mesa County got up at the podium and announced that the people pay their taxes so that state officials can campaign against ballot initiatives -- a crime under the Colorado Fair Campaign Practices Act. The Denver Post has a pretty entertaining account of the ordeal. The Grand Junction Sentinel also covered the showdown. Both papers, as well as all the TV news stations in the city were out at our press conference just a half hour later where we unveiled our second billboard of the campaign. This one said in huge letters: "MARIJUANA: It's like alcohol... but without the violence or the hangover." Despite the hysterical dramatizations included in some of the TV news coverage, it was truly poor. It is quite clear that people in "conservative" areas are being pandered to by cheesy reporters like this kid (look for story under "Video On Demand," about half-way down the page). He was acting like a total burner all day with his shirt untucked and hanging out, not to mention what seemed to be a personal interest in the issue, but then buttoned up and launched into "Mr. Marijuana-Is-The-Devil" when the camera started rolling. It's pretty funny that he asks Burns a scripted question about whether Amendment 44 was medical marijuana (which it clearly is not) so that Burns could make sure the people of Colorado -- who overwhelmingly support medical marijuana -- did not think this had anything to do with it. This was Burns's chief talking point all day. Yet what is even funnier is the fact that Burns and his office do not believe in medical marijuana and actively opposed that measure as well. Who do these guys think they're fooling? They don't care if you're young. They don't care if you're old. They don't care if you're healthy. They don't care if your sick and dying. They just do NOT under any circumstances want you using a drug less harmful than one you can buy at Wal-Mart.
Posted
3:21 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Drug Czar John Walters arrived in Colorado on Wednesday and found a little trap waiting for him: a 48-foot wide billboard (at the bottom of our site's "Humor" page) with his scowling mug on it. The billboard highlights an Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) anti-marijuana TV ad that refers to marijuana as the "safest thing in the world." The ad, called "Pete's Couch," can be seen on the the ONDCP's "Above the Influence" page. Click here and here to see some of the many hysterical television news stories that appeared Wednesday. There were also a number of print stories, including this one from the Rocky Mountain News. The Drug Czar began his day in Colorado Springs where he was joined at a press conference by Springs Mayor Lionel Rivera (who has plenty of time on his hands after losing the Republican primary for Congressional District 5 to a psycho), as well as members of the Springs Chamber of Commerce. While the press gave the drug czar a little more weight in their stories than the Denver press, we still managed to steal quite a bit of his thunder. There were a number of TV news stories (including this one and this one), as well as print stories, which included this one in the Colorado Springs Gazette. Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Posted
12:54 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
When asked for comment, task force commander Dusty Schulze provided the following: "Our response to that is ‘no comment.'"Sure doesn't sound like someone who is confident that they're innocent... GRAMNET has until the end of the day to cough up their records and let us take a look at them to determine just how much of OUR tax money they've been spending against us. After all, as SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert so eloquently put it in the article: "When the police break the law, it's a big deal."
Posted
12:38 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
While reporting last month that the people of Aspen and the elected officials of Pitkin County support Amendment 44, we somehow missed this editorial in the Aspen Times Weekly by an Aspen Times reporter. Now this is a guy who gets it... This is about choice, and whether the state has any business trying to legislate morality and good behavior. It's about control, and whether we want our government to be the arbiter of our most personal decisions about what we do with our leisure time, our bodies, our minds. It is about whether we feel it is prudent and wise to prop up a corrupt bureaucracy of drug agents and social throwbacks who make criminals out of otherwise harmless and productive citizens, and throw them in jail over their choice of relaxation techniques.As always, if you appreciate editorials like this, please feel free to contact the author and let them know.
Posted
12:23 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
In an editorial this past weekend, the Durango Herald urged its readers to vote YES on Amendment 44. While they only provided a brief explanation, they said more detailed explanations are forthcoming for some initiatives. Nevertheless, their explanation sums it all up. Cops and courts have more important business than prosecuting adults for small amounts of pot.Indeed they do... If you appreciate the Herald editors taking this stand, please contact them and let them know it.
Posted
12:03 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The Daily Camera, the un-Boulder Boulder newspaper, took a few jabs at Amendment 44 yesterday in an editorial titled, "Legalizing marijuana doesn't make sense." The author based their opposition to the initiative on the arguments of a federal law enforcement official, RMHIDTA Director Tom Gorman. Yet just last month they wrote an editorial blasting these very officials for making these very arguments titled, "Feds shouldn't use offices to keep U.S. off the grass." Tune in to the Camera next week for their follow-up: "Arresting adults for marijuana makes cents for feds." And, in the meantime, please write the editors a letter and talk some sense into them. Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Posted
1:20 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
We have added a section to the campaign site called concerts, which lists concert venues around Colorado (along with links to calendars for many), as well as other resources for finding concerts in your area. We need folks to print out literature (available in the downloads section), copy it and distribute it at as many of these shows as they can. The more people hear aboout Amendment 44, the more likely they are to get up off their asses and vote for it in the upcoming election.
Posted
12:48 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Today's Rocky Mountain News features an article about the campaign's efforts to mobilize students and register voters on college campuses around Colorado. We won't go into too many details on the article, which you can check out for yourself, but we did want to highlight one thing. Robert McGuire, who is heading up the opposition group Save Our Society from Drugs ... said the strategy might actually backfire.We'll take our chances... but thanks for the advice SOS! He said college-age students tend to view marijuana as counterculture and might not like the idea of turning it into a legal pop-culture phenomenon.Yeah, we hear college kids think it's pretty hip to get arrested, suspended, expelled, lose their financial aid and get kicked out of university housing for using marijuana (especially when students who use alcohol instead face far less severe consequences). After all, that is what the cool kids are doing these days, raging with the machine, fighting for the establishment. Sounds hip, Robert! "They're trying to mobilize young people because they think young people are inclined to vote for them, but I don't know there's really any evidence for that," McGuire said.No evidence? Apparently Mr. McGuire missed it when CU and CSU both overwhelmingly voted in favor of SAFER's student referenda, and when students at UT-Austin, Florida State and the University of Maryland followed suit. And then there were the Denver poll workers who reported an above-average youth voter turnout in Denver during the 2005 election when SAFER's Initiative 100 was on the ballot. Keep your head buried in the sand, Robert. The bad people on marijuana can't hurt you there. And, more importantly, you can't hurt us. Monday, October 09, 2006
Posted
11:22 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
Last month we reported on the easy decision Pitkin County voters have when it comes to the race for sheriff. Based on a profile of the two candidates for sheriff of Routt County in yesterday's Steamboat Pilot, the choice there is not quite as clear. When asked about their position on Amendment 44: Garrett Wiggins, Republican and narcotics investigator for the Steamboat Springs Police Department Not in favor of Amendment 44. “Studies and statistics show that legalizing any amount of marijuana for adults leads to increased use in the youth. Besides, marijuana is not a safe alternative to alcohol.”Gary Wall, Democrat and former Vail police chief Opposed to Amendment 44. Issue is too complicated and federal laws still would supercede [sic] state laws when it comes to marijuana possession. Believes the Legislature and Congress should re-examine drug laws and bring them in line with our current social culture. “There are many more drugs out there that are legal but that are more harmful than marijuana, like alcohol.”Gare! C'mon man! Wall seemed to want to support Amendment 44 and actually provided pretty sound reasoning for doing so. Yet he copped out and used a pretty lame (not to mention flawed) excuse. What is he afraid of? People in Steamboat Springs and surrounding areas wanting marijuana users to continue being treated like criminals?
Posted
1:51 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Sometimes we have to take the bad with the good, and the Rocky Mountain News handed down a pretty bad editorial this weekend. After all, this is the same editorial board that came to Amendment 44's defense and highlighted the false nature of the info slipped into the Blue Book by our opponents, bureacrats and elected officials. It also just ran conservative radio host Mike Rosen's endorsement of Amendment 44. The worst part about this, though, is the author's concession that the paper's reasoning is probably hypocritical: We don't think there is a double standard in our position, but if there is then so be it. More drug use is not one of the many things that might improve this state.That's funny. The very same Sunday section of the newspaper contained tons of liquor store and beer ads. Way to "not improve the state" by promoting drug use! Or do they not consider alcohol a drug? Please contact the Rocky's editors and let them know how you feel about their position on adult marijuana users vs. alcohol users.
Posted
1:32 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Colorado State Rep. Gary Lindstrom (D-56) urged Colorado voters to vote YES on 44 today in an op-ed in the Summit Daily News. His reasoning was short and sweet. I was a police officer for many years and this will do no harm.Here's Rep. Lindstrom's background, which can be found on his Web site: * He served in the United States Air Force from 1960 to 1964, and he was honorably discharged after being awared Disabled American Veteran Status. * He was an integral part of the formation of the first Police Department in Lakewood, and he served there as assistant to the Director of Public Safety. * He moved to the Colorado mountains and eventually became Detective Sergeant with the Summit County Sheriff; Chief Investigator with the Office of the District Attorney, Fifth Judicial District; Undersheriff; and the first ever Director of Public Safety for Summit County. * He has served as Town Council Member for the Town of Blue River, Summit County Coroner and Summit County Commissioner for nearly ten years. He has been Chairman of the Summit County Board of County Commissioners for five years. November 2, 2004, he was elected to the Colorado House of Representative for District 56. Sound like a pothead to you? We have little doubt our opponents will completely ignore this independent perspective from a life-long law enforcer who is retiring from the legislature this year. But if you support Amendment 44 we encourage you to contact him and politely thank him for taking a stand. We should point out that another great letter from Summit County's own letter-writing machine Stan White appeared in the same edition of the Summit Daily News.
Posted
1:05 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
We were curious about this group so we did a little research of our own recently. We found out two little fun facts: 1. Apparently GRAMNET doesn't net too many grams... According to Indepence Institute researchers, GRAMNET is one of just three of the 18 state drug task forces that made more arrests for marijuana than for any other drug, including methamphetamine. This is despite the fact that meth is becoming more and more of a problem in the area. Even more embarrassing, according to this Steamboat Pilot article, GRAMNET would be better off buying marijuana to keep it off the streets than it would enforcing marijuana laws. They had a budget of $450,000, and they managed to round up 3,000 grams of marijuana. It's obviously not fair to suggest they spent all $450,000 on marijuana. But seeing as they only brought in 2,000 grams of cocaine and 2,000 grams of methamphetamine, it appears about 43 percent of the drugs they interdicted were marijuana. (This conforms to national statistics that show that state and local agencies generally spend about 46 percent of their budgets on marijuana. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say they spent just 25-30 percent of their budget on marijuana interdiction. That means they spent about $40 per gram, whereas the street price for high-grade marijuana is about $20 per gram! 2. GRAMNET is not so popular around GRAM... We found countless articles about cities and towns wanting to pull their funds out of GRAMNET. In fact, the Town of Oak Creek did it, and when the county of Grand did it, the task force had to change it's name from "Grand" to "Greater" Routt and Moffatt County Drug Enforcement Team. Otherwise, they'd have had to drop the "G" altogether, in which case they'd have likely been confused for a pornography Web site. After all, they do screw a lot of people...
Posted
12:46 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
A positive op-ed favoring Amendment 44 appeared in the Steamboat Pilot last week, in which the author questioned the tactics of the local drug task force, GRAMNET. Well, I just don’t believe everything the DEA tells me anymore. I’m getting tired of being constantly lied to by federal agencies. The DEA and GRAMNET would like us to believe that they are protecting us and our children from the evil weed, marijuana. I just can’t buy this point of view. We at the campaign also question GRAMNET's tactics, which could possibly be illegal. As you might recall, GRAMNET is the same group of geniuses that sent out this letter that was printed in the Steamboat Pilot last week. Thus, we sent out this release on Friday: PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release -- Oct. 6, 2006 Marijuana Initiative Committee Files Open Records Request to Determine Whether Drug Task Force Violated State Campaign Laws GRAMNET appears to have exceeded $50 limit on advocacy when coordinating, preparing, and distributing 8-page release urging a NO vote on Amendment 44 DENVER - Today, the Alcohol-Marijuana Equalization Initiative Committee filed an open records request with the Greater Routt & Moffatt Narcotics Enforcement Team (GRAMNET) seeking information about how much the entity spent producing and distributing a release urging recipients to "use your constitutional right to vote" and to send a message with a "resounding NO to Amendment 44." If GRAMNET spent more than $50 coordinating, preparing, and distributing the release, it will have violated state law. The text of the open records request is pasted at the bottom of this E-mail. The Colorado Fair Campaign Practices Act (Colorado Revised Statutes 1-45-177) prohibits any state or local governmental entity from making any contribution to an issue committee advocating passage or defeat of a ballot initiative. There is an exception for very minimal expenditures. CRS 1-45-177(1)(a)(II) allows a government employee to make an expenditure of up to $50 in the form of letters, phone calls and similar activities expressing their opinion on a ballot initiative. On September 26, 2006, GRAMNET distributed an eight-page release to the media (and perhaps others). This release included a cover letter (which will soon be available on-line, or you can contact us for a copy) signed by eight individuals who appear to be the GRAMNET "team," along with seven additional pages described loosely as "The Truth About Marijuana." Every minute spent drafting the cover letter, drafting the seven pages of "truth," obtaining approval to include the signatures of the team members, determining the appropriate individuals to whom the release was distributed, and distributing the release itself, would all count toward the $50 threshold. There is solid court precedent to back up the marijuana initiative committee's claim that this activity is likely illegal. In a very similar situation, (See, Coffman v. Common Cause, 85 P.3d 551), the Colorado Supreme Court held that the state treasurer violated CRS 1-45-177 in the 2000 election by putting out three press releases against an initiative and having staff work on the press releases. The key holding in the case was that staff time was held to be an "in-kind" contribution. "We anxiously await a response from GRAMNET detailing how much staff time was dedicated to producing and distributing this lengthy document," said SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert. "Putting together such extensive materials must have taken many, many hours. Based on the response to our records request - along with any other information we receive in the meantime about GRAMNET's involvement in the campaign - we will determine whether to bring this case before the Secretary of State." It is conceded that GRAMNET may not just be campaigning for the sake of campaigning. They actually have a vested interest in keeping marijuana prohibition alive. A report released by the Independence Institute last October, "When Policies Go to Pot," noted that during a one-year period ending June 30, 2004, GRAMNET was one of just three (out of 18) federally-funded Colorado drug task forces to make more arrests for marijuana than for any other illicit drug. In an April 2005 Steamboat Pilot article, one of the eight GRAMNET "team" members who co-authored the release, Steamboat Springs Director of Public Safety J.D. Hays, said, "I would do everything I could to keep this task force together." # # # October 6, 2006 Custodian of Records Greater Routt & Moffat Narcotic Enforcement Team P.O. Box 1327 Craig, CO 81626 Re: Open Records Act Request Dear Custodian of Records: I represent the Alcohol Marijuana Equalization Initiative Committee. We hereby request, under the Colorado Open Records Act, C.R.S. § 24-72-201 et seq., access to any and all "writings," as defined by C.R.S. § 24-72-202(8), "public records," as defined by C.R.S. § 24-72-202(6)(a)(I), and "criminal justice records," as defined by C.R.S. § 24-72-302(4), in your office's possession relating to a press release issued by the Greater Routt & Moffat Narcotic Enforcement Team ("GRAMNET") issued on September 26, 2006, urging a "no" vote on Amendment 44. We also request annual or hourly salary information for the officials, individuals, or employees who drafted, signed, reviewed, or otherwise spent official time working on or disseminating the press release, including but not limited to Dusty Schultze, Buddy Grimstead, John Warner, Walt Vanetta, Jerry Hoberg, Dan Taylor, JD Hays, and Bonnie Roesink. This request includes, but is not limited to, any and all draft and comments regarding the press release, any records reflecting the amount of time or funds spent on drafting and disseminating the press release. Under C.R.S. § 24-72-203(3)(a) and § 24-72-205(1), we would appreciate if the records are made available for inspection and copying as soon as possible after you receive this request. If you decide to withhold from inspection any part of the requested records, we request that you provide a written statement of the grounds for denial, citing the law or regulation under which access is denied or the general nature of the public interest in denying access pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-72-305(6). Please call me at XXX-XXX-XXXX if you have any questions and to arrange for inspection and/or copying. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, Robert J. Corry, Jr.
Posted
12:21 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Apparently nothing if you base it on their newspapers' editorials, despite the fact these two places are very different and have very different people living in them. It would seem the Lehman Communications Corporation, which is based in our opponent Beverly Kinard's hometown of Canon City, owns the Longmont Daily Times-Call, the Canon City Daily Record, and the Loveland Reporter-Herald, and is quite opposed to making marijuana legal. Perhaps the editors at these three papers oppose Amendment 44, but it is hard to believe they all do for the exact same (wrong) reasons. After all, it seems just a little scary that the word gets handed down from above, and each newspaper owned by one company says its editors feel that way. We encourage you to contact these editors with a quick letter (especially if you live in the area they serve) and express your discontent with their faulty logic and lack of distinct voices among the different editors of these different papers. Contact the Loveland Reporter-Herald. Contact the Longmont Daily-Times Call. But most importantly, contact the Canon City Daily Record, and let them know you do not appreciate them using our cities' newspapers to push their anti-marijuana agenda. Friday, October 06, 2006
Posted
2:33 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
  Conservative Colorado Icon Mike Rosen Endorses Amendment 44Today's Rocky Mountain News includes the endorsements of KOA 850 AM's Mike Rosen, who hosts the most popular radio talk show in Colorado. Rosen has long served as one of the state's strongest (and most influential) conservative voices, so we are very excited to hear he is encouraging readers and listeners to vote YES on Amendment 44. As he put it: It's time to decriminalize petty drug offenses. It's a lost cause anyway. Even Clinton smoked the stuff (and I bet he did inhale).It's refreshing to see a leading conservative in the state stand up and point out how big of a waste the government's 70+-year war on marijuana has been. We wonder if our pious opponents will accuse him of being a "druggie," or attack him for "sending the wrong message to the kids," as they do other Amendment 44 supporters. If you get the chance, please send a courteous "thank you" to Mr. Rosen. Otherwise, you can tune into the Mike Rosen Show on KOA 850 AM on Monday, Oct. 30, from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m. to hear SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert debate GOCAM Campaign Director Robert McGuire. We will certainly post a reminder of this program as we get closer to the date. McGuire has yet to step into the ring with Tvert, so it should be interesting to see what transpires.
Posted
2:17 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
In this week's issue of the Colorado Springs Independent, the editors endorsed a YES vote on Amendment 44. Although they seem to downplay the true effect the measure will have on enforcement, their reasoning comes through loud and clear: It is time to send a message.We couldn't agree more. A second piece on Amendment 44 also appeared in the Indpendent, and it discussed how the movement to allow adults to use marijuana is similar to other social struggles. The author points out the race-related history of marijuana prohibition and conveys the message that Amendment 44 would be a step toward a more intelligent and civilized society. Did we mention it is entirely in defense of hippies? And they said Colorado Springs was conservative...
Posted
1:39 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The "Worst Case Scenario" cartoon in this week's Westword has a run-down of all the amendments "with ballot choices personified by leading figures from the entertainment industry." The artist uses Princess Zelda of Nintendo fame to symbolize the proponents of Amendment 44, noting she would prefer to stay inside and use her "psychic" powers, which is "safer than going to bars, where she may be kidnapped" by her opposition. The opponents of Amendment 44 are personified as Ganon, the villain who is "obsessed with sobriety" and wants to "annihilate smokers by turning life into a hellish nightmare of incarceration."
Posted
12:40 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
We've been saying for some time now that the only people in this country TRULY addicted to marijuana are law enforcement officials who just cannot seem to get by without arresting and prosecuting adult marijuana users. One of the biggest marijuana addicts to emerge on the Amendment 44 campaign trail thus far has been Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) Director Tom Gorman. Mr. Gorman is on the payroll of the federal government (thus YOU are paying his salary) and he is spending countless hours traversing the state campaigning against Amendment 44. And we aren't talking weekends and holidays. We're talking Thursdays from noon to 1:30 p.m. (Northglenn-Thornton Rotary Club, 10/3), Wednesdays from 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. (League of Women Voters/Colorado Social Legislation Committee Forum, 10/4) and weekday and weekend nights (Douglas County Republican Women's Forum, 9/25; Pueblo Community College, 10/1). This is not to mention the letters-to-the-editor and the guest columns -- this guy's campaigning harder than we are! Doesn't the one guy in charge of coordinating ALL drug enforcement efforts in Colorado, Montana, Utah and Wyoming have anything better to do with his time? After all, the RMHIDTA's mission statement mentions nothing of fear-mongering and intentionally crying after telling (unsubstantiated) stories of young people dying from marijuana. Nevertheless, he tried to take this show on the road earlier this week, holding what sounds like a truly captivating event in Pueblo. Even though no one attended the night event at Pueblo Community College, Gorman, who now lives in Denver, discussed with Pueblo Police Chief Jim Billings what he sees as the problems of Amendment 44 which seeks to legalize possession of small amounts of pot.The only thing more ridiculous than this "event" was the Pueblo Chieftain's decision to cover it and regurgitate his ridiculous talking points without seeking any rebuttal from our campaign. Apparently the people who busted their asses to collect 130,000 signatures don't get a say, but the ones who sit around all summer eating donuts and drinking beer do. Nevertheless, Gorman joined the growing line-up of state and federal law enforcement officials who have announced that Amendment 44 would effectively halt the arrest of adults who possess small amounts of marijuana in Colorado. "Oh, we have federal law, but it's not going to be enforced," Gorman said. "The federal government doesn't have the manpower. The DEA deals with tons and kilos of marijuana. They won't be able to enforce on these smaller amounts," of marijuana.He also demonstrated his expansive knowledge of political ideology: "It's people who have a real liberal view, who want government to stay out of their life," he said.After all, it is those tax-increasing, social-spending Liberals who oppose government involvement in private affairs... Thursday, October 05, 2006
Posted
2:30 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
What will it take for columnists and other members of the media to stop blindly (and inaccurately) claiming "federal law supersedes state law," as if it matters in the case of Amendment 44? State and federal officials have made it quite clear they will NOT continue citing adults for private possession of less than one ounce of marijuana should Colorado voters approve Amendment 44 this November. Yet this pretty significant news item somehow did not make it onto folks' to-read piles. Unfortunately, we do not expect this to be the last time the existence of a federal law prohibiting marijuana will be used as an excuse to oppose Amendment 44. But we will certainly take every opportunity we can get to school the public (and the media) on the wonders of federalism and common sense. From the Summit Daily News: Questioning Carlisle's column last week
Posted
1:48 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Yesterday, SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert and Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Director Tom Gorman squared off at the social issues forum sponsored by the Colorado Social Legislation Committee and the League of Women Voters. Prior to the event, Tvert and Gorman were standing behind a table with their respective campaigns' literature. A woman in her late 50s or early 60s approached the table, and Mr. Gorman pointed out which pieces of literature were "pro" and which were "opposed." The woman pointed at Tvert and incorrectly repeated, "You're opposed," and then pointed at Gorman and said, "You're pro." Of course Gorman corrected her immediately and said he was opposed to making marijuana legal and Tvert was the one in favor of it. Her response was classic... "So the one in favor of making pot legal is the one wearing a suit, and the one opposed is dressed like this?"SNAP! We have to say, we certainly dig the urban cowboy look Gorman has going. But it must have been embarrasing to be called out by someone from his generation for appearing to be a slob compared to the "pot guy." Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Posted
12:33 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Just days after Attorney General John Suthers cited the phony Blue Book language in a Pueblo Chieftain column, the newspaper has editorialized against Amendment 44. Given the relatively conservative make-up of Pueblo, this does not come us too much of a surprise. But it is unfortunate that the only real reason they cited for opposing it was the erroneous 15-year-old-clause that our opponents and their buddies in the Legislative Council weaseled into the state-sponsored voter guide. Please contact the editors at the Pueblo Chieftain and let them know how you feel. Unlike the Chieftain editors, popular Colorado blog ColoradoLib actually considers the facts and calls Suthers out for intentionally misleading the people of Colorado (again). Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Posted
11:40 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
 Nasty Says: Support Amendment 44!A few local bands -- KBPI DJ Uncle Nasty's band Horse, Brainpan and Crusher Bound Cadillac -- are demonstrating their dedication to the cause by stepping up and throwing down a big concert to benefit Amendment 44. What: Concert to Benefit Amendment 44 Where: Eck's Saloon in Lakwood (map) When: Friday, Oct. 6, at 9 p.m. Who: KBPI 106.7 FM's Uncle Nasty SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert Horse Brainpan Crusher Bound Cadillac The cover to get in is $4.20 and there will be a lot of campaign and other stuff there to be given away. Please come out and support Amendment 44!
Posted
11:22 PM
by SAFER Choice
|
There is a story on Colorado Confidential that discusses the sources of GOCAM's funding. Guarding Our Children Against Marijuana (GOCAM), a group created to oppose Amendment 44, has received $3,140, or approximately 54% of its funding, from two members of the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA). Gorman himself gave $3,090 to GOCAM, the largest amount any individual contributor has donated so far.Is it us, or does it seem shady that a federal law enforcement agent -- who worked his entire life as a narcotics grunt in California-- made a $3,000 donation to our opponents' efforts? We're not saying it isn't possible; we're just saying it's shady. Perhaps we should get into marijuana enforcement, as it appears to be quite the lucrative profession. Think this might have something to do with this particular official's desire to maintain the status quo?
Posted
3:46 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
UPDATE: Sources report Bev is likely backing out so that one of her more articulate (read: sane) minions can step in. The law enforcement guys and our other opponents clearly do not trust Bev. It's a sad day in the anti-marijuana movement when the front-person for a nationally coordinated effort becomes obsolete because she is way too much of an extremist. We'll see if Bev's lapdog, Robert McGuire, or Rocky Mountain HIDTA director Tom "Nothing but free time on my hands" Gorman shows up to take her place. Our money's on the latter... The golden-ager who brought you Students Against Marijuana, Bev Kinard, will face off with SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert at a forum in Denver Wednesday sponsored by the League of Women Voters and the Colorado Social Legislation Committee. The event is being held at Montview Presbyterian Church (1980 Dahlia St.) and Amendment 44 will be up from approximately 3:45 p.m. to approximately 4:15 p.m. The format is not nearly as exciting as that of the NBC 9 debate at DU -- Kinard and Tvert will each get about 10 minutes to make their case instead of a back-and-forth -- but it should be rather insightful. Please come out and hear about the harms of "Pot Tarts" and the "deadly pot gumballs" plaguing Colorado from Bev herself!
Posted
2:27 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Law enforcement officials in Colorado are scared. They realize Amendment 44 could very well mean the end of business as usual when it comes to marijuana enforcement, which is a big cash cow. They made this very clear a few weeks ago in a CBS 4 story. Now they are spinning better fiction than Danielle Steele.  Romance novelist Danielle Steele (left) and Colorado Attorney General John Suthers.One panders to bored housewives, the other weaves sexy stories of passion. In what might be the most disingenous opinion piece ever penned by an elected official in Colorado, Attorney General John Suthers forfeited his final shred of dignity yesterday and used the erroneous Blue Book language to defend his day job. GRAMNET (Grand, Routt and Moffat Narcotics Enforcement Team), a state law enforcement organization that also stands to lose a substantial amount of business if Amendment 44 passes, also alluded to the false Blue Book language in a recent letter to the Steamboat Pilot. And finally there's Tom Gorman, director of Rocky Mountain HIDTA -- a federal law enforcement organization -- who sold his soul in a scary story that appeared in this weekend's Denver Post. We've gotta ask one question: Don't these guys have bigger fish to fry? After all, they appear to be putting more cunning, stealth and coordination into their operation to maintain a $100 fine for simple adult marijuana possession than they ever have in stopping (or even slowing) the scourge of methamphetamine in rural Colorado. It is questionable whether such state and federal officials should be spending their time and resources on these letters and opinion pieces to begin with. But regardless, there is no doubt they are going out of their way to inject misleading information into the news, and in doing so they are doing a disservice to the very people they suggest they are protecting. It's too bad not one of these guys has the balls to debate this issue without hiding behind state-sponsored misinformation.
Posted
2:09 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Last week we reported on the CSU administration's gross attempt to censor students who were seeking to spread the word about Amendment 44 and encourage their peers to register to vote. Whereas we mentioned the CSU newspaper's story and editorial and the Fort Collins Coloradoan's story, we had not yet seen this story (see "SAFER questions free speech on campus") that ran on CTV, CSU's campus television station. We apologize we are getting this to you so late, but better late than never, right? So sit back, relax, and enjoy our state's up-and-coming journalists' initial crack at this very important story. Sources at CSU say things have yet to settle down since the big brew-ha-ha last week, and it is hoped the students there are taking advantage of this FINAL WEEK TO REGISTER TO VOTE. Students can and will make their voices heard in November, and this time around it doesn't matter if the CSU administration ignores them -- the State of Colorado is listening.
Posted
1:58 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Paul Danish may no longer be a Boulder County Commissioner, a Boulder City Councilman, and the editor of the Colorado Daily. But his bullshit radar is still fully functional. This piece of his recently appeared in the Colorado Daily, and when it comes to exposing the bullshit being perpetuated by the DEA and other federal law enforcers, it doesn't get much better than this, folks. The Drug Enforcement Administration is the last place on earth that anyone should turn to for accurate information on marijuana. The DEA and its predecessor agencies like the Bureau of Narcotics have a 70-year record of brazenly lying about marijuana...
Posted
1:23 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
The debate sponsored by NBC 9 and taped last week at the University of Denver's Gates Concert Hall is now available on-line. The debate on Amendment 44 between SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert and Attorney General John Suthers was edited down and aired on NBC 9 on Saturday. The station did a great job of cutting out the BS and simply providing the the participants primary points. Fortunately, this included the 24-year-old pot advocate calling out the 50-something attorney general for being idealistic and failing to understand the real world. As you might recall, Tvert asked Suthers to "act his age" during their first debate on KBDI 12 back in April. And Suthers so maturely stated to a college newspaper reporter after this latest debate: "He was more obnoxious (last time)," Suthers told the Collegian afterward. "I have met Mr. Tvert before so nothing surprises me."Well, Johnny-boy, we assure you you ain't seen nothin' yet... Monday, October 02, 2006
Posted
3:27 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
Today's Denver Post features a summary of the initiative, a column by SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert in favor of the measure, and a column by federal law enforcement official Tom Gorman. Some might ask why we'd even bother posting Gorman's piece. Well, we think Colorado voters are too smart to fall for these scare tactics and disingenuous statements (particularly the line based on the flawed Blue Book language). Plus, his column is a perfect example of how absurd our opponents are and how far they'll go to keep marijuana illegal for adults. Enjoy!
Posted
2:59 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
According to a Rocky Mountain News column by Rocky Mountain Media Watch Chairman Jason Salzman, the Amendment 44 campaign is garnering more media attention than most election issues. The purpose of the article, however, is to point out the discrepancy between the high number of political ads run and the low number of political campaign stories covered during the average evening news hour. It will probably come as no surprise that the Amendment 44 campaign is not running any paid television advertisements. We did, however, splurge on a single radio ad that is running on KTCL 93.3 FM in Denver, Boulder and Fort Collins. It encourages younger folks to get registered before October 10, and of course to spread the word to vote YES on 44. The music for the ad was provided by our friends and supporters at High Bread. We are working on getting the ad on our MySpace page and will let everyone know when it's available.
Posted
2:26 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
This weekend the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel ran a pretty good story about Amendment 44. Like our opponents, however, they mixed up the facts about the initiative. In the very first sentence, they say Amendment 44 is an amendment to the state constitution. Amendment 44 actually has nothing to do with the constitution and simply amends section 18-18-406(1) of the Colorado Revised Statutes. After all, the ballot title -- the question voters will be faced with -- reads: Shall there be an amendment to section 18-18-406 (1) of the Colorado revised statutes making legal the possession of one ounce or less of marihuana for any person twenty-one years of age or older?We have contacted author about the mistake and expect a correction to appear ASAP. But let's focus on the more amusing misleading statements of our opponents, shall we? In this article, Attorney General John Suthers makes this claim: Cops tell me marijuana users are just as erratic as drunks. Apparently Mr. Suthers was out getting "sub-intoxicated" when they covered the lesson of "correlation vs. causation" in his public policy classes. That is, perhaps Suthers's cop buddies find marijuana users to be as "erratic as drunks," but the real question here is whether marijuana users are "erratic" because of their marijuana use? Or is it that "erratic" people are more likely to use marijuana? After all, we're sure you know someone who generally acts perfectly normal, but acts erratic when they're drunk. Do you know many people who become erratic when they smoke a joint? Anyway, this story -- along with a great piece that aired on the Western Slope's NBC affiliate -- is a good sign that our message is getting out to voters in Grand Junction and on the western side of the state. Opponents of Amendment 44 are refusing to recognize the reality that Coloradans will use recreational drugs and ought to use marijuana instead of alcohol, Tvert said. And this from our opponents: Apparently Suthers thinks people in rural and sub-rural areas who value privacy and personal responsiblity need to hear what they should and should not put into their own bodies. Good luck! And, after all, do the people of Western Colorado really want someone who gets "sub-intoxicated" telling them how to live their lives?
Posted
1:48 AM
by SAFER Choice
|
 Herald Highlights Suther's Sub-Intoxicated LifestyleThe Durango Herald ran a fantastic feature article on last Thursday's "Drug Duel." It included this photo, in which you can see all the alcohol we dragged up to the Denver City-County Building. Among Wynkoop jugs and cases of Coors beer was a 4-pack of strawberry daquiri wine coolers. The Cortez Journal, which also ran the story, pulled out and highlighted the following quote from SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert: Oh, by the way, these wine coolers are here in case Attorney General (John) Suthers decided to show up.At first glance it might seem like we're calling the Attorney General a girly-man. But rather, this was meant to address Suthers's ludicrous claim that his use of alcohol is OK -- whereas marijuana use is not OK -- because it can be used at "sub-intoxicating" levels. But whether one drinks 60 beers or one wine cooler, there is no doubt they are both getting intoxicated. After all, having one sip of alcohol makes you intoxicated to some degree, just like taking one hit of a joint makes you intoxicated to some degree. Is it like pulling a 6-foot bong hit with a gas mask -- the equivalent of a keg stand or taking a huge pull on a tequila bottle? Of course not. But it's intoxicating nonetheless. Given Mr. Suthers's preference of getting sub-intoxicated on alcohol and his concern for substance users on the road, he might be interested to read the research, which shows that one glass of wine impairs a person's driving more than a relatively heavy dose of marijuana.
|
 Alcohol use is far more harmful than marijuana use to both the user and to society, and Colorado citizens are fed up with a system that punishes adults for using marijuana while allowing -- and often encouraging them -- to use alcohol. It is time our government stop driving people to drink and allow them to make the safer choice.
|
