to be consumer safety tested, and didn’t follow up with
audit controls for labs, it opened up a huge window of
opportunity for fledgling labs to enter the market.”
The problems that stem from this lack of overarching
industry standards are manifold, according to Clement. For
one, competition among labs has driven prices down to
such a level that testing businesses, instead of keeping pace
with quality infrastructure and personnel, are forced to
scramble and cut corners, compromising scientific
integrity.
“With no one holding labs accountable for the data they
report,” Clement continues, “we’re seeing huge
discrepancies that introduce critical consumer safety
issues. OG Analytical consistently finds toxic levels of
pesticide contamination in products that have been given a
clean bill of health from other labs.”
Such circumstances leave dispensaries vulnerable to litiga-
tion, Clement says, as well as creating an environment where
growers and producers “can shop around to find a lab that
gives them the results that have the most economic value.”
Clement points out that a number of groups are working
to bolster industry standards during the next legislative
session, including the Cannabis Safety Institute, of which
she is director and co-founder.
‘With no one holding labs
accountable for the data
they report, we’re seeing
huge discrepancies that
introduce critical consumer
safety issues. OG Analytical
consistently finds toxic
levels of pesticide
contamination in products
that have been given a
clean bill of health from
other labs.’
GREEN ON GREEN
Jacques at Oregon Microgrowers Guild says in no uncer-
tain terms that banking regulations will present a major
obstacle for any business dealing in legal pot, because, at the
federal level, marijuana is still considered a controlled sub-
stance whose possession, trafficking and use is a felony
offense.
In February of last year, the Obama administration sent
out guidelines for banks doing business with legit marijuana
outfits, offering reassurance from both the Treasury and
Justice departments that prosecutors would be directed to
give priority to instances “only where financial institutions
have failed to adhere to the guidance,” as reported in The
New York Times.
Reassurances, however, are not legislative fact, and the
so-called Valentine’s Day letter does not grant immunity
from prosecution under federal law. A new administration
— led perhaps by Jeb Bush or Chris Christie, who says he
categorically opposes any form of legalized marijuana —
could decide to crack down on banks in states where pot
has gone legit.
Technically, what this means is that anyone banking pot
money could be convicted, under the Racketeer Influenced
and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, of money
laundering and conspiracy, a potential that is scaring off
most banks from dealing with “potpreneurs.” According to
a recent special edition of Newsweek, many so-called legal
weed businesses in Colorado and Washington have been
forced to lie about the nature of their enterprise, claiming
to banks that they operate other cash-heavy operations like
bars and nightclubs.
“This is a problem at the federal level, but Oregon
needs to take some responsibility and help these businesses
in that regard,” Jacques says. “Ignoring and allowing these
establishments to function as cash-only businesses, or
having to use non-insured banking, is unsafe for everyone.”
Johnson seconds this concern. “Federal laws that hurt
licensed businesses’ access to banking, insurance and
standard IRS deductions are the biggest issues that will
hinder the Oregon legalization system for the near future,”
he points out. “There have been positive developments
recently and we can expect federal laws to improve, but it
could certainly take several years.”
This banking issue reveals a greater conundrum at the
heart of legalization, as recreational pot enters into a kind
of twilight zone of legal illegality, or vice versa, where
officials play peek-a-boo with a Catch-22 that raises
questions faster than solutions can be formulated.
For instance, when Eugene residents of legal age are
allowed, on July 1, to possess up to 8 ounces of marijuana
for personal consumption and grow up to four pot plants,
where do officials suppose they’ll buy that weed or seed?
The OLCC, tasked with administering and enforcing
Measure 91, won’t be taking retail license applications
until Jan. 4, 2016.
— B E T H A N Y C L E M E N T , O G A N A LYTI C A L
A BRIEF HISTORY OF CAPITALISM,
PART TWO
Let’s follow the money for a minute.
Prohibition gives rise to a criminal underclass that
positions itself to meet a demand which refuses to go away
despite the law, such as our craving for alcohol or gambling
or prostitution.
Prohibition judges certain activities to be dangerous, and
it labels those who perpetrate or advance those activities to
be criminals. As a moral stance, prohibition is authoritarian,
paternalistic, patronizing and convenient to power.
Crime, on the other hand, is opportunistic and optimis-
tic, willing to accept significant risks in order to operate at
a profit.
Our government loves to meddle with vice. And when
the grass looks greener on the other side of the legal fence,
it makes the leap, giving crimes of opportunity the stamp
of state approval. Hence the Oregon Lottery, which paints
itself as a boon to education but, more than that, funds a
whole new class of bureaucratic administrators reaping the
benefits of other people’s misfortune.
A drug dealer will keep selling to you until you either
run out of money or die. The pimps of vice have a captive
audience. You think the state keeps jacking up taxes on
cigarettes because officials want you to quit? It’s more like
they know you can’t or won’t, and so your habit provides
a steady source of revenue in the form of a “sin” tax that
routinely gets tapped for more.
Sure, 57 percent of the lottery “goes to education,” but
that is after the state takes its cut; of the $1.05 billion in
total operating revenues for the 2014 Oregon lottery, more
than $500 million of that went to operating expenses such
as salaries and wages, advertising and market research, and
retailer commissions.
Anybody sitting at Shari’s Restaurant on 11th Avenue
watching tweakers and retirees slink into the video poker
parlor can see just what a cultural bonus our state lottery
has been. And now here comes legal weed, a taxable
commodity whose revenues will go, in part, to fund
schools and health services and state police — along with
the new enforcement division and expanded reach of the
Oregon Liquor Control Commission.
Philanthropy, Mark Twain said, is a sure sign of wickedness.
Already, local jurisdictions around Oregon are lining
up to override Measure 91’s one-time excise tax, which
hits growers to the tune of $35 for an ounce of flowers, $10
for an ounce of leaves and $5 for an immature plant. The
League of Oregon Cities, for instance, has introduced a bill
in the state Legislature (SB 542) that would give cities and
counties the right to levy additional taxes on recreational
weed. The bill, ironically enough, would also grant cities
the right to ban retail sales altogether.
My friend Kermit says that, beyond mere tax revenues,
government regulation of recreational weed in Oregon will be
a boon to all sorts of industries set to capitalize on the green
rush, including such big-ticket concerns as home security and
surveillance systems, real estate (land and warehouse space
will be at a premium), banking and insurance — not to
mention all the companies providing agricultural products
geared toward home growing with glitzy, stoner-friendly
fertilizers like “Bud Candy,” “Kushie Kush” and “Overdrive.”
Here’s how Kermit puts it: “So ultimately, here in 2015,
it makes sense for lawmakers to control methodology in
order to push industry. That’s what they’re doing. They’re
going to control the methods of how we grow in order to
get us to spend more money as growers. Tax is nothing. It’s
the plastic on the fertilizer bottle you buy. It’s the plastic
that goes around the bag of soil you buy. It’s the workman’s
compensation and insurance policy that have to be in place
to run those types of businesses.”
THIS BUD’S FOR YOU
Perhaps the best that can be said right now about the
consequences of legalizing recreational weed is that the
cops and courts will stop arresting, prosecuting and
imprisoning nonviolent criminals for possession.
Johnson is clear on this point. “The costs and
consequences of marijuana prohibition are just nonsensical
to a majority of American voters when looking at the big
picture,” he says. “Our state and nation incarcerate too
many people and unnecessarily ruin too many lives as we
spend more money on prisons than we do our schools.”
Although hardly sanguine about the idea of legalizing
pot, my weed-dealing friend Kermit admits that, on this
point at least, he empathizes with the folks who voted in
favor of Measure 91. “No human should suffer the
repercussions of trafficking marijuana or possessing it. It’s a
victimless crime, and there should be no consequence. End
of story.” ■
eugeneweekly.com • March 19, 2015
13