State looks to build strict controls for marijuana
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - Washington state officials are looking to build a strictly regulated marijuana system that could forestall federal concerns about how the drug will be handled once it's available for public purchase.
Rick Garza of the Washington Liquor Control Board said Monday he expects the federal government will try to take action if Washington's system has loose controls. He said it's important for Washington to have a strong regulatory structure, such as how participants in the system are licensed and how the product is handled from growth to the point of sale.
"The feds are going to tighten the rope if they feel like it's not strictly regulated," Garza said. "The more tightly regulated it is, they are likely to give us a little more room."
One of the biggest issues the state is looking to manage is how much marijuana will be grown under the new system. Garza said it's important for officials to properly project consumption rates so the state is growing the right amount of product for in-state users and not having any extra supply that could spill into other states that haven't legalized marijuana.
Garza's comments came a day before Gov. Jay Inslee was set to meet with the U.S. Department of Justice to discuss the marijuana law. Washington voters approved the marijuana law in November, but Justice Department officials have not indicated whether they will allow Washington and Colorado to create legal marijuana markets, since the drug is illegal under federal law.
Alison Holcomb, who helped lead Washington's marijuana initiative, said the measure was written with the expectation that the system would be intensely scrutinized. She said it makes sense for the federal government to wait and see what the rules look like and what checks and balances are in place. She thinks federal officials will be more willing to allow legal pot to exist if they know it complements federal law enforcement efforts.
"From a public safety standpoint, they are going to look hard at what the outcomes are: Is it compromising public safety, or is it actually improving public safety?"
Holcomb said the initiative was drafted with a conservative approach that would be a small step into the legal pot world.
"We want to be held accountable," Holcomb said. "We want this to be watched to see if it's a workable alternative to marijuana prohibition."
Washington's Liquor Control Board, which has been regulating alcohol for 78 years, is in the process of soliciting advice from experts to help it determine how the state should grow, process, sell and regulate marijuana.
Rick Garza of the Washington Liquor Control Board said Monday he expects the federal government will try to take action if Washington's system has loose controls. He said it's important for Washington to have a strong regulatory structure, such as how participants in the system are licensed and how the product is handled from growth to the point of sale.
"The feds are going to tighten the rope if they feel like it's not strictly regulated," Garza said. "The more tightly regulated it is, they are likely to give us a little more room."
One of the biggest issues the state is looking to manage is how much marijuana will be grown under the new system. Garza said it's important for officials to properly project consumption rates so the state is growing the right amount of product for in-state users and not having any extra supply that could spill into other states that haven't legalized marijuana.
Garza's comments came a day before Gov. Jay Inslee was set to meet with the U.S. Department of Justice to discuss the marijuana law. Washington voters approved the marijuana law in November, but Justice Department officials have not indicated whether they will allow Washington and Colorado to create legal marijuana markets, since the drug is illegal under federal law.
Alison Holcomb, who helped lead Washington's marijuana initiative, said the measure was written with the expectation that the system would be intensely scrutinized. She said it makes sense for the federal government to wait and see what the rules look like and what checks and balances are in place. She thinks federal officials will be more willing to allow legal pot to exist if they know it complements federal law enforcement efforts.
"From a public safety standpoint, they are going to look hard at what the outcomes are: Is it compromising public safety, or is it actually improving public safety?"
Holcomb said the initiative was drafted with a conservative approach that would be a small step into the legal pot world.
"We want to be held accountable," Holcomb said. "We want this to be watched to see if it's a workable alternative to marijuana prohibition."
Washington's Liquor Control Board, which has been regulating alcohol for 78 years, is in the process of soliciting advice from experts to help it determine how the state should grow, process, sell and regulate marijuana.
They need to be loose enough so that individuals can grow their own up to a reasonable number of plants, thereby taking most of the profit incentive away from the cartels. And they need to keep all grow operations relatively small and out of the hands of big agribusiness. Otherwise, we will just trade the criminal Mexican cartels for corporate cartels and it will otherwise be "business as usual".
Its only a matter of time till all smoking will be banned statewide...
too stoned to comment.....
you need to figure out sells, right now the criminal part of this crowd is profiting off the law, can have but cant buy how stupid is that! get on the ball and open the medical dealers to the public, they are already regulated.,that easy enough.
i'm starting to think i shouldn't have been high when i voted...
Looks like some ignorance is bread among man. Â Do some research. Â
Condemnation without investigation, is the height of ignorance. - Albert Einstein
Academy Award Winner Morgan Freeman narrates this film -
Breaking the Taboo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EfjDDuyoh0
Youtube official site -Â http://www.youtube.com/user/breakingthetaboofilm
Â
Maybe i travel in the wrong circles. I have not yet seen a marijuana smoker since pot was legalized. Where does KOMO find these toking, smokin' people shown on the news when they report these type stories?
Â
Someone must have a doper on speed-dial
@Harrison  Your use of terminolgy is offensive. Just because someone recreationally uses pot does not make them a "doper" any more than someone who occasionally has a beer make them a "drunk".   From the pictures description, it is likely the picture came from the night celebration at the Seattle Center.
The feds pick and choose what federal laws they will enforce. They will also cut a deal selectively to not enforce the federal law. Washington state because it is a "good" state can cut a deal, do you think Arizona could make the same deal?
Â
If they are not going to enforce Federal law take it off the books.
I know people in Brooklyn. When I go there, I ask them to call their "delivery guy". In ten minutes, up rides a guy on a bike. in he comes with as much pot as you could want. Small quantities, 1/8 ozs but nicely packaged, exactly weighed, etc. Different high end strains, good prices, the whole thing. It may not be legal, but it sure as hell is convenient. Seattle and Denver residents should've gone this way. Cheaper, no government intervention, etc. Of course, out here in Jersey, I have no problem getting what is very nice commercial weed but for a treat, I go to Brooklyn.
 @Big daddy I used that system when I lived in Manhattan and hated it. The prices in your area are so much higher than what we pay in Washington.Â
@Big daddy  The problem with those areas you speak of is that it is illegal to posses that pot and you risk prosecution for doing so. Here in WA, we can now possess (up to 1 oz) and smoke (as long as its not in public and we dont drive under the influence) it legally. When I want to sit in my house in the evening with my bong or vaporizor, I can now do so without fear of the police.
This comment has been deleted
 @Budswiser Read the constitution. Read the most important 18 supreme court cases. Between those things you'll understand why.
Too late Washington State...it's already available for public purchase.
Pot is against the law at the federal level. Federal law trumps state law. If the federal government doesn't do something to stop Washington and Colorado from allowing pot, or make it legal at the federal level, none of the federal laws that trump states laws will be legal in a court of law.
 @dmw2913 Local law enforcement doesn't have jurisdiction to enforce federal laws.  They enforce local, and state laws.  Enforcement will be done on the Fed's dime, so you probably won't see anything happen. Â
@Hueski Any federal officer seeing a federal law being broken whom doesn't enforce such law is breaking the law and puting his career in danger.
 @dmw2913 Are you really that ignorant of how the law works, or are you just trolling?
@Fooey Patooey! If the feds don't enforce the pot law on the books at this time, anyone charged with a federal crime, can and will argue predijuice toward themselves. The feds are required by law to uphold the laws, not be selective. Any officer of the federal law that sees a crime (smoking, growing or selling pot) whom does not act on such crime is comitting a crime.
 @scared_citizen Actually Obama's administration has deported more illegals than any previous administration. But thats a non sequitor anyway.
@scared_citizen That is correct. And don't forget the voter ID laws that the feds said were wrong. Because of this, anyone tried on a federal violation has a very strong defence. The average citizen is not expected to know which laws he can legally break. Hence, he can not be held in violation of said law if he doesn't know said law was against the law or just on the books to fill space. If the feds can choose which laws on the books are real and which are not, how am I, the average citizen expected to know? It is up to the feds in a court of law to prove I broke the law. Unless they publish a book of legal laws that I don't have to follow how am I to know which ones I have to follow?
@dmw2913  Dont you read? The Fed is already doing just that. The Fed already has laws against illegal immigration (hence the term ILLEGAL) but President Obama has mandated that unless these illegals commit ADDITIONAL crimes, they will NOT be deported.   If your premise had any merit, this federal law that trump states laws would be legal in a court of law. Ask the State of Arizona how that is working out.
the state should not be spending any money projecting consumption rate. Private businesses will be doing the growing let them live and die by their own projections. If a company grows too much they will need to do what every other business in the sate does, lover prices to drive sales and modify projections for the next round.
@Keysontheright The problem is you can't think of it like other businesses. If the state licenses growers for five times the actual use, then obviously some of those growers are going to break the law and sell to illegal distributors taking it out of state.
I like their approach, it keeps people responsible with smoking weed. That is what we need to keep in mind, if we are not responsible about it they will take it away. So, smoke responsibly!
 @keepthepeace28 Agreed...but unfortunately, there's bound to be some idiots out there that will cause the whole thing to implode.  I fear that a bunch of rank amateurs will try to make a go of it and end up screwing the proverbial pooch. Â
Â
Some aspects of western society are so backwards it's amazing. We have a lot of gall talking about other parts of the world when we are so scared of something like marijuana. It's unbelievable.Â
Â
Simply put, you're a gullible and uneducated society if you place more importance on keeping marijuana away from the public but celebrate extremely dangerous opium based pills because they have a company logo on the bottle. We are a society that doesn't think.Â
Before it was legalized studies showed that it was more available to teenagers than alcohol, and they're worried about what now? Please would somebody introduce some sanity into our government.
 @Bellevue Scott Quit voting for Spendocrats
 @Bellevue Scott Toke!
Dear Government: If you want the people to play into your legalization scheme then marijuana will need to be made available and regulated just like liquor and tobacco. There's no supply shortage nor will there ever be. People will go along with reasonable regulation that will benefit the general fund; but once you try and get too strict, they'll revert to doing things on the black market. We legalized to get away from that.Â
FIrst step...all state regulators must smoke a doobie a day BEFORE they start regulating...problem solved!
Wasn't the purpose of our vote to get the government out of the marijuana business? Why does there have to be ANY regulation on something you can grow in your basement and smoke in your house and bother NOBODY? Not like we are talking about a dangerous still or something. It is a stinkin' plant, no more dangerous than growing tomatoes. I can see making it illegal to drive after you smoke (which it already is) and taxing it if people want to sell it (like you already have to do for any other product). We should have a state law that sets the limit of what you can grow, smoke and sell, right below the federal limits.Â
@sometimesright "Wasn't the purpose of our vote to get the government out of the marijuana business?"
Â
You must have been pretty baked when you read I-502 huh? Are you confusing this with the alcohol initiative?
The ONE and only reason this passed was because of all the BS that the state would collect billions of dollars in taxes from this, and all our deficit problems would be solved! And already this is costing tax payers millions while the official is trying to figure out what to do! As I said from the start, NOT a very good idea!
"State looks to build strict controls" (marijuana)Â
Boy, such a proclamation is so whats the word.... comforting.
Â
Now who is spouting this and what are the limits?Â
Â
Tag this proclimation to the passed bill. Then final judgement can be rendered.Â
Â
Â
They are facing the same problem medical marijuana faces today,,the more regulations,,the more state employees needed to oversee and police the industry,,which translates into more costs to the consumer.
Â
In order to remove an illegal market you must cut the profits that keep that market in place and at the rate WA and CO ore both going,,the criminals will be able to raise their prices and make even more money while undercutting legal marijuana prices.
@claygooding  The truth is that I would buy Taxed and Regulated pot as long as the quality and quality was comparable to what I can buy (easily) now. The black (gray?) market will continue to be available so what the state has to offer MUST BE competitive or no one will buy it.
Have they not realized that they can't control it? It's a harmless plant, it only seems bad to people because that's what the media has told them. Let people live their own lives, no need for more control.Â
 @IsadoraÂ
I guess it all depends how one defines "harmless". Â I have had extensive experience with people who use marijuana and in my opinion...it is not as "harmless" as you make it sound.
 @IsadoraÂ
Marijuana is known to cause paranoia so severe that people become deranged,,not by the people using it but alcoholic control freak legislators are scared to death of it.
I have some seeds and dirt. I must be a farmer. Where are my subsidies?
Yes, the state will build strict controls, starting with hiring a bunch of state employees. And as soon as they do, the pot smokers will find a way around the controls. Then, more state employees get hired to try and enforce the controls and around and around we go.
Â
The state can't even keep children safe after they take them away from somebody and we expect them to "control" marijuana? I need a drink.
I am VERY much anti-marijuana. However, I am also VERY pro State's Rights. The Federal Government is too big, and has it's booger pickers in too much of our business. If the citizens of the State of Washington voted to legalize MJ, even though I disagree with it, then I have to be cool with that, and I accept it. If it is going on in the boundaries of the State, the Feds SHOULD have no say. The Federal gov has run amok, and it needs to be reduced in size and scope.
 @ButtercupSprinklesÂ
Interesting...2010...Mexican cartel sales of marijuana was about $850 billion dollars. Â Cocaine sales were about $39 billion. Â I agree with your thoughts on the feds to a point but this issue is so much bigger than a dude smoking a joint on his back porch.
@realdeal599 @ButtercupSprinkles  I am very much anti-alcohol. The day when even 1/3 as many people are killed by stoned drivers (stoned on pot) as they are by drunk drivers, I will put down my bong and never smoke pot again.
Why legalize it then if there are going to be strict controls? I am not a marijuana user and never have even tried it but this state is a joke.
Its going to end up a joke. First large commercial growers won't be allowed. They're going to have to put a 99 plant limit on growers or the feds will be here for sure. Also the state itself can't be involved in any way with growing or distribution or the feds will step in. This was a terrible initiative. The only good thing that came out of it is that adults got one of their inalienable rights back to consume a plant that never should have been out lawed to begin with.
 @BlindmanÂ
By not allowing large outdoor grows they have opted for the most expensive method of producing marijuana,,the criminals will continue to operate and at the same time,,no outdoor grows keeps industrial hemp banned,,the goal of the federal government prohibition of marijuana in 1937,,hell you wouldn't even know what :"nylon" and "rayon" is if not for hemp prohibition.
@claygooding Eh? There is nothing in the new law not allowing large outdoor grows, nor is anyone in the government currently discussing that.