Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Facebook Connect
 
This Week's SFR Picks
 
— The Radness of King George
'Game of Thrones' mastermind George RR Martin talks childhood, popcorn and his latest acquisition
— The Canary in the Copper Mine (is dead)
How New Mexico's copper industry wrote its own rules
— Slaughterhorse-Five
The inner workings of NM’s first equine slaughterhouse
Guides Santa Fe Manual Restaurant Guide Best of Santa Fe Bar & Nightlife Summer Arts

Letter America: Dear Southwest Airlines

Letter America Dear Southwest Airlines, I’m writing to complain about the unfair way I was treated on a recent flight from San Francisco to Phoenix. ... More

May 20, 2013 By Robert Wilder Comments 3
 
 
 

 

 
Home / Articles / News / Features /  Top Ten Stories of 2010
Features 12.22.2010 3 Comments

Top Ten Stories of 2010

SFR Revisits the top 10 stories of the year—and the conspiracy theories behind them

By Julia Goldberg, Alexa Schirtzinger, Wren Abbott, Rani Molla, Laura Paskus, Zane Fischer

Spleef Beefs

Smoke ’em while you got ’em

As the minutes tick down until a new administration takes over the fourth floor of the Roundhouse, the state’s medical cannabis program faces a critical juncture.

2010 was a big year for pot. Arizona and New Jersey joined the medical cannabis smoke circle, which now consists of 15 states in which medical marijuana is legal. Californians even considered legalizing marijuana altogether on their Nov. 2 ballot (although the measure ultimately failed).

But in New Mexico, the three-year-old program continued to struggle with issues of supply and demand and suddenly faced a new threat: Gov.-elect Susana Martinez who, on the campaign trail, expressed opposition to the program.

For now, the nation’s strictest medical cannabis program, dubbed “schoolmarmish” by Time magazine, is trying to insulate itself from New Mexico’s state budget crisis.

Approximately 200 new medical marijuana patients are currently approved each month. Out of the 17 state-licensed marijuana producers, 11 are currently up and running, according to Department of Health spokeswoman Deborah Busemeyer. With an estimated 3,000 patients approved, and stringent caps on production, high demand and short supply is a matter of simple math.

Less-simple math, perhaps, played into the DOH’s 2010 amendments to the regulations governing the Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act. Those proposals received mixed reviews from the medical marijuana community, and were finalized in the final days of 2010, on Dec. 17.

Application fees for producers will jump from $100 to $1,000; renewal fees will be $5,000 after six months, $10,000 after a year, $20,000 after two years and $30,000 after three years.

Jeremy Theoret, an Albuquerque lawyer representing two producers and six applicants, says he expects producers will pass that cost on to patients.

Former Medical Cannabis Program Coordinator Melissa Milam is concerned about the cost of medical marijuana to patients living on disability.

“I’m shocked at how little they live on,” Milam says. “If you have a $600 disability [check] and pay for rent, your light bill and groceries, I doubt you have $300 left over for an ounce.”

Milam hopes to start a “union” of sorts for medical marijuana patients, to help them respond to program changes and other issues.

Busemeyer says the $30,000 fee is based on what it costs the program to be self-sufficient, and is reasonable given that producers expect to gross more than $400,000 by the end of their third year in production. The fees increase gradually to accommodate the more-limited resources of producers just starting out, Busemeyer tells SFR.

The new fees are the highest in the nation and, even with its new higher plant limit of 150, the program still has the tightest restriction on the number of plants per producer.

At a public hearing on the proposed changes earlier in December, state Sen. Cisco McSorley, D-Bernalillo, said increasing efficiency of scale by raising the plant limit would increase patient choice and drive down prices. Although he praised the Dec. 17 increase as a step in the right direction, he’s still concerned about the high producer fees.

“Really what we’re talking about is a $30,000 fee over whatever the gross receipts tax is…The idea is the department definitely needs to be funded properly so it can provide security and oversight for those involved. So we’ll see if this works,” McSorley says.

Busemeyer tells SFR that DOH had feedback from some producers who said the previous 95-plant limit was useful for limiting federal scrutiny of the program, as well as comments recommending the increase.

The DOH approved eight more producers before the end of the year, but expects it will be three to six months before those producers have usable product.

McSorley says he thinks the program still needs five to 10 more producers to supply the current volume of patients.

The volume of applications hasn’t purportedly increased substantially, despite the impending threat of a new administration and, presumably, a new DOH secretary [SFReporter.com: “Waiting with Baked Breath”].

While campaigning, Martinez said she would try to repeal the medical marijuana law because it conflicts with federal law, and because she believes prescription medications can meet the same needs.

Milam has heard rumors a bill will be introduced to repeal the law.

“If that does happen, we will hopefully kill it in its first committee hearing,” she says.

CONSIPIRACY THEORY: Martinez thinks pharmaceuticals render medical marijuana unnecessary—an opinion Big Pharma probably appreciates in many ways.








Continue reading: Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 |
 

Also in Features

Also from Alexa Schirtzinger, Laura Paskus

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 
 
 

 

 
12.24.2010 at 09:59 | Reply |

Zane flatters us expressing his opinion that WhyFry.org or the Santa Fe Alliance for Health & Safety (founded years ago by four MDs, scientists, and residents) has "been effective in stopping planned towers for Solana Center and Fort Marcy.

 

Sadly, my sense is that the hundreds of towers in the offing are simply waiting for the Santa Fe City Council's vote Jan 12 to prohibit citizens rights to appeal future towers...and we already have hundreds, most "unregistered." Use antennasearch.com to check your neighborhood. Living near a tower has been proven to raise cancer rates from 4 to 8 times higher than those lucky (or wealthy) enough to NOT live near them.

 

Oh Zane, your office has 215 antenna and 15 towers within 200 feet (11 "unregistered"--and a new application for a tower only 60 feet away. Snuggle up, your reception will be great! An investigative journalist might start keeping a journal of co-workers health issues.

 

Is this a conspiracy? Naw, just good ol' American greed...identical to the tobacco companies in marketing and ethics. Latest studies prove only 30 minutes/day for ten years qualifies you to have 240% higher chance of brain tumors, 320% higher rate of eye tumors--right next to where you hold your cell phone. Check www.WhyFry.org/videos/ at the bottom of page is Dr. Oz telling the whole USA--just not the Santa Fe Reporter!

 

12.24.2010 at 11:34 | Reply |

When newspapers depend on Cellular Advertising, they seem to look the other way, but not matter which way they are looking wont change the truth about the science behind microwave radiation, and its effects on health

 

12.25.2010 at 09:46 | Reply |

Not a bad summary.  But this really is going national now.  Devra Davis' book Disconnect about how cell phones got approved despite the DNA damage observed in several laboratories around (but only 1 of several industry funded studies) is selling on Amazon.  She testified before the US Senate on the issue several months back.  Another book is called Zapped by Ann Louise Gittleman.  And the DVD full signal.  The issue was front page news on Yahoo and Women's Health.  And the effect of Wi-Fi on trees covered in the Wall Street Journal.  And Dutch researchers actually tested what Wi-Fi does to trees.  It isn't good:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1332310/Is-Wi-Fi-killing-trees-Dutch-study-shows-leaves-dying-exposure-Wi-Fi-radiation.html

 

 
 
Close
Close
Close