Taking the Initiative

Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., lefts, laughs as Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., right, dresses up as Sen. Biden for Halloween, Wednesday, Oct. 31, 2007 on Capitol Hill.  (AP Photos/Susan Walsh)
Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., lefts, laughs as Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., right, dresses up as Sen. Biden for Halloween, Wednesday, Oct. 31, 2007 on Capitol Hill. (AP Photos/Susan Walsh)

Welcome to you Carl Curtis Open Comment Friday!

Feel free to dive into the Comments Section regarding your favorite issue!

There is word that Hillary is sending out emails, or something?
That Jeb is entering a Pork Chop eating contest?
That The Apprentice – Iowa is starting up?

Feel free to make it your own (as you usually do).

But there are a few other items today as well…


What will be the end result of the petition drive and subsequent vote to reinstate the Death Penalty in Nebraska?

Could it mean…more petitions?

It has been suggested that one of the results of the initiative petition vote will be more activism. While both sides of the Death Penalty debate will organize — and many think the pro-Death Penalty side will be victorious — many think the ANTI side will rally more of their peeps who will activate themselves for their candidates and on OTHER issues.

Cases in point…


Leavenworth St. has learned that there may (MAY) be at least two more petition processes in the works.

One is regarding expanded gambling.
Regarding Horse Racing, in particular, there was this snippet in the LJS regarding the annual (single) horse race in Lincoln this year:

Last year, the Nebraska Supreme Court threw out a ballot measure that would have let Nebraska residents vote on whether to allow the machines because it included a second question about redistributing revenue from bets. The state Constitution requires ballot issues to contain only a single subject.

“We’re going to take steps to make sure that doesn’t happen again,” Omaha Exposition and Racing Board President Bob Moser Jr. said.

Not clear what those “steps” may be, but this is certainly interesting. There have been rumors that a gambling petition could also include casinos, but none of that has been confirmed.

Hopefully more on this in the coming days.


The second issue that looks very likely to be on the horizon is an initiative petition on Medical Marijuana.

Nebraska Families 4 Medical Cannabis filed a “Statement of Organization of a Political Committee” with the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission yesterday. This isn’t just your regular NORML group, though the petition would likely be the same.

The difference on this one though, looks like they are more than just the average Phish concert crowd, and there are rumors (again) that they will have a PAID effort to get signatures for the issue. From the NORML site:

To add a new section 31 in existing Article III

“By July 1, 2017, the State of Nebraska shall implement and enact laws allowing the private noncommerical growing, possession, consumption, and distribution of cannabis, also known as marijuana, for any patient with a debilitating medical condition as determined by a licensed Nebraska physician.

Nothing in this section shall be construed to conflict with laws prohibiting persons from engaging in conduct that endangers others.

If any provision of this section or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this section that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this section are severable.”

When contacted (via their Facebook page) they responded…

“We are a group of parents, families, and individuals who care for loved ones suffering on a daily basis from debilitating illnesses such as cancer, MS, Parkinson’s epilepsy, Crohn’s, fibromylagia, PTSD, schizophrenia, chronic pain, etc.

We support and are active in educating and advocating for legal and safe access to cannabis as a compassionate medical option.

If you are interested in learning more about our organization, please contact Shelley Gillen by private facebook message (Shelley Kimnach Gillen). Thank you!”

No word yet on who their main funding source could be, but the NADC filing would seem to be a place on which to keep one’s eye.


And again, should the Hillary juggernaut get derailed, one would THINK that the Joe Biden express would take to the tracks, no?

And we all know who Joe Biden’s best bud is, yeah?

Not saying that Biden-Hagel is any sort of certainty, but it is an INTERESTING idea, no?

Q: What does Hagel list as his home state?

Nebraska…or Virginia?


  1. Unicameral says:

    If people are wondering why the Democrats were able to get so much done this spring with so few of them, look at who left. Many of the Democrats who were elected in 2006 and we’re term-limited last year had no real interest in doing anything that remotely resembled progressive policy and we’re only interested in running statewide.

  2. Henry Robert says:

    Of course Jeb would be in a pork chop eating contest. He needs the big pork barrel spending into his campaign! I would support a candidate that goes right for the baby back ribs. Of course we see Donald eating pizza with a fork, so it’s time to bring everyone to the Iowa State Fair to eat some fried butter on a stick!

    Also hats off to Melissa Block leaving NPR’s All Things Considered. Great journalist.

  3. Sparkles says:

    “Could it mean…more petitions?”

    Why not!
    Pete’s attempt to buy himself the opportunity to kill a few people, may indeed open a big ol’ can.

    Governance by petition.
    Of course you’ve got the no-brainers; legalized gambling (casino and horse) and pot brownies, Mary J Pops and THC Bon Bons for all the kiddies!

    But why stop there?
    Why not rescind the tax exempt status of all churches and religious teaching institutions!

    And, even if only in Nebraska, how about a special provision banning -entirely- even the mention of a political party, organization, act of governance or elected official by ALL organizations filed as 501c3 or c4.
    Organizations like Pete’s Platte Institute, Joe’s Ending Spending, ALEC, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, Heritage Foundation, CATO, Hudson, Sarah Scaife, Manhattan Institute, Federalist Society, Reason Foundation, AEI, Global Crossroads, Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Express, Tax Day Tea Party, Tea Party Nation, Wyobraska Tea Party, Darrel and Darrel’s Party o’ the Tea, etc..

  4. Sparkles says:

    For those who somehow imagine Trump supporters aren’t in fact disgruntled Republicans (primarily, extremist disgruntled Republicans), google:
    Can We Recalibrate? Erick Erickson

    Good times.

  5. TexasAnnie says:

    We did get the medical marijuana bill passed here this year. Not for marijuana that gets you high, but for marijuana that may prevent grand mal seizures. And that’s the bill I advocated for here at Leavenworth St. earlier this year, and which the Right Wing Professor denigrated as only a false hope for seizure control. Do y’all recall that he staunchly DENIED and medical use for marijuana? Does anyone expect him to recant? Should he break out with glaucoma or some such, do you think he will turn to medical marijuana for relief? I wonder if RWP has ever been high…

  6. TexasAnnie says:

    Sparkles, you’re workin’ it! I wish I knew your identity. Perhaps our paths crossed while I lived there???

    We can’t get tax justice because of the R’s —and the D’s. It’s not just the R’s. While I lived there, the D’s voted for tax injustice (“economic development”) right along with the R’s. Sometimes they made fake speeches about their vote, introduced fake amendments and fake stalling tactics etc., but then the D’s DID VOTE FOR tax injustice as often as the R’s in your officially non-partisan legislature.

    I believe I still have somewhere the transcript from a Revenue Committee hearing in which then-Chairman, Landis, gave his “true-believer” speech. He told those in attendance that while many people do not believe Nebraska’s economic development policies actually net new revenues to the state, true believers require only more time to prove the effectiveness of such policies. He “believed” that with tax abatement, businesses would automatically grant better wages, benefits and working conditions!!!

    Well, y’all have had a lot more time! How is that ‘business-tax-subsidy’ program workin’ for ‘ya? I read last year that y’all had to take your “better wages” by petitioning for a vote on the minimum wage. I wonder why those businesses that have been getting tax subsidies for so, so many years, had not already granted better wages… Do you think “true-believers” are charlatans?

  7. Anonymous says:

    Halloween 2007:

    GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel showed up at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee wearing a “Biden for President” sweatshirt.

    Biden smiled and said, “I’ll tell you what, Hagel for Vice President!”


  8. Sparkles:

    Welcome to Nebraska. Actually, we’ve had quite a few initiative petitions over the years. We banned preferences in 2008. We raised the minimum wage just last year. We got term limits. We capped property taxes ( though not enough) way back in the last century. Historically, the left has tried to close these things down, and the right has tended to use them, though last year was an exception. But really, the death penalty petition is not likely to set off anything that wasn’t going on already.

    Still, congratulations on your new life, and I hope Omaha will not be too much of a disappointment.

  9. TexasAnnie says:

    C’mon Gerard!

    You were wrong about medical marijuana then, and if you won’t admit your error now, then you’re still wrong! Are you provoked?

  10. I’m sorry to disappoint you, TA, but as of my last visit to the opthalmologist, I still don’t have glaucoma. And if I had it, I wouldn’t seek a disproven treatment. But get to work with your eye of newt and toe of frog, and maybe you can conjure up something else.

    I really do wish I believed in karma, but I’m actually convinced there’s very little downside to being obnoxious on the internet. Except one’s own self of self-worth, and not everyone has one of those.

  11. Macdaddy says:

    Wait. Because Texas has passed a medical marijuana bill, marijuana suddenly became an effective treatment for everything from acid reflux to zits? TA, you are actually arguing that point with a science professor? LMAO!

  12. TexasAnnie says:

    You must have made a typo, Gerard. Your last sentence makes no sense. But if you meant to say that you don’t have a sense of self-worth, unless you are being obnoxious, go for it! As for me, note that I did not wish glaucoma on anyone, not even you, Gerard. That was an idea imposed by Anonymous @ 7:38pm, Aug. 15th…

  13. TexasAnnie says:

    Sparkles: Nebraska has quite a history of ‘direct democracy.’ During the decade and half I lived there the people rose up and petitioned three times for legislative term limits. Usually the petitions failed during court challenges, but by the third attempt the language of the petition was perfected and voila, unicameral term limits are in place. Watch for bills each new session attempting to reverse term limits!

    Senator Chambers believes that the term limits were a direct assault on his position of authority. And indeed, many wanted him out of the unicam. My experience with petitions there pertained to gaining Libertarian ballot access, which was not controversial, and which had to be re-achieved each voting cycle. (But I no longer register with the Libertarians; haven’t since my 2008 participation as a delegate to the Libertarian National Convention [i.e. the nomination of Bob Barr]. I learned therein that Libertarians can be bought, too… Now I am an Independent voter, so I ignore taunts about whether I am “Libertarian” enough!)

    But if you will take note of Art. VII, Sec. I of the Nebraska Constitution, you will realize that the unicam has an undeniable obligation to fulfill, and taken in context with the balance of that document, an exalted obligation at that. Sparkles, if I accomplish nothing else via this message, I hope to impart upon the readers here that one cannot simply assume the unicam will abide your Constitution. It doesn’t. Knowing full well it’s affect, the unicam cheated some disabled children and some homeless children of their public education by failing, nay, REFUSING to fix education statutes in conflict with one another. Sooo, the Dept. of Ed. there tried to pass rules and regs. to enable those children to get into school. But then Gov. Ben Nelson, would not sign off on the rules and regs. It was a bizarre and bitter realization for me, being a-political as I was then. And it took four years, -from acknowledging the problem, -to actually fixing those errant education statutes. Four years of knowingly defying their constitutional duty! You gotta’ watch that unicam.

    It appears from your writings that you are Democrat.

  14. My policy on outing anonymous or pseudonymous posters is I won’t do it, unless they shelter behind their anonymity to post personal attacks. Y’all recall a certain prominent local Democrat who did just that, and who unfortunately had a rather distinctive and comical prose style.

    In any case, one reason I don’t post anonymously is that anonymity is hard to maintain; one always ends up posting enough biographical information to give oneself away.

    It’s going to be hot today in the Texas Hill Country. Forecast high of 94 F, I hear.

  15. TexasAnnie says:

    It’s been damn hot here for several afternoons! And I’m pretty sure, that folks who knew me while I lived there, and, who read Leavenworth St., know who TexasAnnie IS.

  16. The Grundle King says:

    @ Anon 9:47

    Pretty ironic question to ask…that is, if you’re at all familiar with what the Dunning-Kruger effect actually is.

  17. TexasAnnie says:

    Yeah, I googled both, Dunning Kruger and cognitive bias. I’m not sure what those psychological theories have to do with my comment (about not being impressed…) of which Gerard responded that I had not heard of the theory. So. Now I have.

  18. TexasAnnie says:

    On second thought, perhaps Gerard meant to imply that I know less about the pharmacology of marijuana than he. Yeah. And he knows less about it that the pharmacists and neurologists that seek better seizure control via extracted oils from the plant. My argument was: I trust the opinions of the later, rather than Gerard’s opinion. Macdaddy thought I should trust Gerard’s…

  19. Macdaddy says:

    No, TA, I was making fun of you confusing science and politics. Let me explain to you what you did: you claimed that GH was wrong about medical marijuana because Texas just made it legal. GH’s argument was that there is a small mountain of literature that shows the opposite of what all the pot heads claim about medical marijuana. The Texas legislature’s actions don’t suddenly change the scientific facts. I thought it was hilarious that you tried to argue that with a science professor. But since you mention it, yes, you should trust Gerard’s opinion on just about everything over Sparkles’ or even your own.

  20. You flatter me, Macdaddy.

    But, for example, while the potheads used to plug marijuana for glaucoma, the American Academy of Opthalomogy does not recommend it, because there are prescription meds that are far more effective. As for seizures, early results with CBD just don’t seem to be that good; certainly nowhere near good enough to depart from standard drug trial protocols.

  21. TexasAnnie says:

    No, Macdaddy. I did not confuse science with politics. I simply commented that we did get the medical marijuana bill (that I had previously advocated for here at Leavenworth St.) passed in Texas this year. Both you and RWP have a bad habit of falsely accusing those with whom you disagree, of being stupid or of lying. Certainly not an indication of great intelligence!

    Nebraska Families 4 Medical Cannabis is a NEW organization in YOUR state. This info is contained in the article posted by Street Sweeper above. And since the medical marijuana bill(s) failed in the unicam this year, obviously some folks there want to sidestep the usual legislative process. I don’t blame them. Especially if they are battling life-threatening grand mal seizures of which every known
    medication available to them has failed! The CBD oil has shown promise, whereas currently available seizure medications have not. As with me, Macdaddy, I doubt those Nebraska Families 4 Medical Cannabis will be dissuaded simply by your exalted opinion of RWP…

  22. Anonymous says:

    “Nebraska Families 4 Medical Cannabis” – are you kidding me? This sounds like some corporate, stoner plot to get Cannabis, Inc. into Nebraska, using the some real suffering as a lever. Once NE gets addicted to the tax revenue from legal pot…wow, talk about a gateway drug.

    And the name of the “group” is nuts. I’m going to call my group “Freedom Loving Freedom Lovers Who Love Freedom, With Freedom Sprinkles On Top (For Free).” Makes about as much sense.

  23. The Grundle King says:

    I have no doubt that marijuana may, in fact, have some marginal medicinal value.

    Furthermore, I have no doubt that the majority of the folks advocating for medical marijuana are less interested in the medicinal uses than they are in the recreational uses.

  24. TexasAnnie says:

    Because y’all doubt marijuana’s pain-relieving properties, we’re all supposed to just give up hope of finding better and better pain-relieving substances? I think the real issue is, as I hinted above and which Gerard took as a personal attack, that YOU use(d) marijuana to get high and thus invoke your own experience when considering the intent of others! It has been established (and Gerard has agreed in weeks past) that the oil extracted for seizure control does not get you high!!!

  25. Anonymous says:

    TA, finding “better pain-relieving substances” doesn’t make a pharmacist out of lay person. One of the greatest scourges of modernity is self-medication. Involving the general public & politicians – scientific illiterates both – in a discussion of proper pain relief is an example of the stupid leading the blind. Sorry, not acceptable.

  26. “Because y’all doubt marijuana’s pain-relieving properties, we’re all supposed to just give up hope of finding better and better pain-relieving substances?”

    No. We should subject it to the same clinical trials and standards of evaluation we use for every other pharmaceutical. In fact, this has been done in the past, and several studies are ongoing as we speak.

  27. TexasAnnie says:

    YES! Study it. By all means. And that’s always been the point advocates have had to navigate: possession is (federally) illegal!

  28. The Grundle King says:

    “… possession is (federally) illegal!”

    And yet, a few hundred miles west of here, a whole shitload of transplanted Californians are smoking themselves stupid in Colorado, with no medical rationale whatsoever!

    You’d think that, whilst Obama has turned a blind eye towards enforcement of yet another federal law, those folks would find the time to research the potential medicinal properties of marijuana…but maybe its all going up in smoke before the studies actually begin.

    Researcher A: “Duuuuude…you gotta try some of this ‘medicinal’ OG Kush. It’s…like…”
    Researcher B: “Like…like what?”
    Researcher A: “Have you seen a bag of Funyuns layin’ around?”

  29. Anonymous says:

    So Colorado took in $53 million in pot taxes the first year. And profits from those sales did not go to any drug cartel. The state of Colorado is still functioning just fine. But because of people’s preconceived notions overweighing actual evidence, I doubt I’ll see it legalized in Nebraska in my lifetime.

  30. The Grundle King says:

    So what? Move to Colorado and you can give them all the money you care to.

    The cartels are going to find a way to make money…with or without weed. They’ve already taken over much of the methamphetamine manufacturing. Maybe we should legalize and tax that too, you know, to help put the cartels out of business.

    I hear it’s great for an energy boost, and it really helps you focus on all those damn bugs that won’t stop crawling on your face.

  31. Anonymous says:

    What an idiotic post! You just proved my statement But because of people’s preconceived notions overweighing actual evidence.., There is NO equivalence between marijuana and meth. Google “U.S. Legalization of Marijuana Has Hit Mexican Cartels”

  32. The Grundle King says:

    My preconceived notions have been formed on actual observations…which would make them, not preconceived notions, really. More like postconceived notions, maybe.

    The people I’ve seen use marijuana weren’t taking it medicinally, they were using it to get high. And it was money that they’d have been better off spending on shit they actually needed. But since getting high was more important, we taxpayers were blessed with the opportunity to provide their health care via the emergency room, paid for by Medicaid.

    So please, tell me more about how goddamn awesome marijuana is.

    BTW, I didn’t compare meth and weed, I simply pointed out that many of the more ridiculous justifications for legalizing weed (Hurt the cartels! Collect more taxes! People are going to use it anyways!) work just fine for other drugs.

  33. The Grundle King says:

    I guess you’re wrong! You see, there are safe consumption levels for alcohol, but the same cannot be said for the litany of illicit drugs. Perhaps the same can be said for marijuana…but there isn’t enough scientific evidence at this point to bear that out.

    Which kinda gets back to my point…which was that maybe some of those researchers in Colorado should be focusing their efforts on the medicinal properties (if any) as well as the long-term side effects (if any) of marijuana to make a case supporting legalization…that is, while the feds are still looking the other way. The next President may not be so inclined to let Colorado flaunt the law.

  34. Anonymous says:

    People don’t overdose and die on marijuana. Never has happened. Can’t say that for alcohol. So if you’re so concerned about safety, you’d have to be for Prohibition. Google “marijuana safer than alcohol”. But I don’t expect that facts would change your mind.

  35. The Grundle King says:

    You have me confused with someone who cares what happens to other people when they use and abuse substances.

    Someone overdoses on alcohol? Or cocaine? Or meth? Why should I care? I’m just relieved that they didn’t take anyone else with them.

    Someone gets drunk, or gets high (on any legal or illegal substance), then proceeds to plow their vehicle into a family-filled van or SUV (or even just a city snowplow)…then yes, I have a problem with that. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been driving around Lincoln and smelled the unmistakeable aroma of someone’s burnt ganja as they passed by. I’ve witnessed people smoking it at stoplights. I would hope that even you would be able to recognize and admit that driving-while-blazed is an unsafe practice, and is not representative of a responsible individual.

    Mind you, this is STILL not to be interpreted as a case for prohibition, as we’ve established through experience in this country that prohibition didn’t work. What it does establish a case for, in my opinion anyways, is the need for a standard road-side test protocol to determine just how high someone is when driving. We already do it for alcohol, we should do it for marijuana as well…IF it is legalized. But, as expected, those who want marijuana legalized aren’t really interested in a long-term approach relative to public safety…they just want their weedies.

  36. Anonymous says:

    But, as expected, those who want marijuana legalized aren’t really interested in a long-term approach relative to public safety…they just want their weedies.

    Must be fun being omniscient! Seriously, you have no idea what I or others think, and you’re pretty arrogant to think you do. You’d do yourself a favor by repeating 100 times a day: My opinions are not necessarily facts. You are correct in that Prohibition does not work, and that is as true for marijuana. All Prohibition does is finance a criminal element.

  37. The Grundle King says:

    “Seriously, you have no idea what I or others think, and you’re pretty arrogant to think you do.”

    It’s not really such a leap to reach my conclusion…just look at the deafening silence from the marijuana proponents when it comes to the public safety matters related to legalization.

    It’s not, “We need to legalize marijuana, and HERE’S how we can do it safely…”

    It’s just, “We need to legalize marijuana NOW!!!”

    So if you’ve got some sort of proposals that I haven’t heard, NOW would be a great time to share them.

  38. Anonymous says:

    We need to legalize marijuana, and HERE’S how we can do it safely…

    Was this done by the proponents of Prohibition repeal? I don’t remember reading about it. In Colorado there are DUI standards and prohibition of public consumption, much like the alcohol laws. Unlike alcohol, there are also purchase and possession limits. I’d say the law provides the safety you desire much more than alcohol laws do.

  39. The Grundle King says:

    “Was this done by the proponents of Prohibition repeal? I don’t remember reading about it.”

    Well, you probably weren’t alive then, so that’s not much of a surprise. Lack of proper regulation of alcohol then is not justification for lack of proper regulation of marijuana now.

    To defer to what Colorado has done is a cop-out. If you want to propose the safe legalization of marijuana, then let’s see your full proposal.

  40. Anonymous says:

    “I don’t remember reading about it.”
    Well, you probably weren’t alive then, so that’s not much of a surprise.

    Uh, you can read about the past in history books or old newspaper clippings.
    I presented you with the Colorado law that was tougher on marijuana than alcohol. But exhibiting typical right-wing behavior, don’t let facts alter what your mind believes. Funny how you folks lean libertarian until you don’t.

  41. The Grundle King says:

    Okay, so if I read about something that happened a little over 80 years ago…that neither of us was around for…I’m supposed to defend what was said, or not said, by the people who pushed to end prohibition? Pfft.

    You presented me with Colorado law…which I would characterize as a success when it comes to the government taking more money from the people, and as a failure in regard to Colorado’s DUTY…per the federal government…to keep their drugs from flowing out of state. We can do better.

  42. Anonymous says:

    Colorado has no duty to enforce Federal law, or to prevent product illegal in a neighboring state from being transported there. By your logic, Missouri is required to prevent illegal fireworks from entering Nebraska. Love how you folks are for state’s rights, until you’re not.

  43. The Grundle King says:

    The federal government decided to look the other way on Colorado’s legalization on the condition that the state of Colorado keep marijuana from being trafficked out of state. Those are not my words, but the words of Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole in a memo he sent out on August 29, 2013.

    I suppose that there is some blame to be shared with the U.S. Attorney General’s office, because THEY are the ones who should be looking to crack-down on Colorado for allowing marijuana to leave the state…which is clearly happening. Still, that does not absolve Colorado of their responsibilities.

    BTW, I did enjoy your comparison to fireworks, seeing as lighting off fireworks or lighting up a joint are both akin to setting your money on fire.

  44. Anonymous says:

    Speaking from ignorance….. Tell that to my son who started having sleep problems and a few seizures after being hit on the head. His doctor prescribed some strong meds that produced other side effects. Since he lives in Colorado he decided to try some pot, and he sleeps fine now.

  45. The Grundle King says:

    I’m glad to hear that your son’s experiment in self-medication has worked out well by your account…but once again, we’ve come back around to the crux of my argument. IF marijuana has medicinal value, it should be verified through research and testing, the same way we verify medicinal effects for other drugs. The notion that, “It’s just a plant!” kinda flew out the window when people started hybridization efforts to produce ever higher THC contents. Modern-day marijuana hybrids, while they still look mostly the same, bear as much genetic resemblance to their ancestral origin as modern-day corn hybrids bear to maize.

    And, for the third time, researchers in Colorado would be well-positioned to perform such medicinal-use research, seeing as they reside in one of the very few states where they can legally perform such research. So I must ask, where’s the research?

    I understand that your interest in legalizing marijuana is rooted less in its unproven medicinal value, and more in its proven recreational value. I’m not interested in that, because I’ve lived a perfectly fulfilling life up until now without marijuana, so I don’t see a reason to start.

    From what I’ve seen thus far, the folks pushing for legalization simply want it legalized, then they want the rest of us to figure out how to regulate and contain it…and I reiterate, just saying “Do what Colorado does!” is a cop-out. Cali-radoans have failed in their duty to prevent trafficking beyond the state’s borders…so just doing what they’re doing isn’t good enough.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.