Truth Seeker
New Member
It was hard reading Assemblyman Declan J. O'Scanlon Jr.'s July 20 commentary, , "Medical marijuana: the facts," with a subtitle stating that the "Christie administration has been responsive on (the) issue."
First, the Christie administration has never responded to any potential medical marijuana patients or organizations that advocate for medical marijuana in regard to their specific concerns about the program's regulations, many of which were added on after the bill was signed into law over 2½ years ago.
The entire regulatory process was done behind closed doors. Nobody knows who inserted the additional cumbersome regulations, and the administration is not being as open as O'Scanlon would lead us to believe when such questions are asked.
O'Scanlon states: "We all want our patients suffering from illnesses and chronic pain to get relief," yet he is aware that most illnesses, and chronic pain specifically, are not eligible indications for inclusion into our program.
O'Scanlon's reasoning, as well as Christie's, is that we don't want to become another California or Colorado, where chronic pain patients can readily acquire their medicine.
O'Scanlon defines a good medical marijuana program by how strict it is, no matter how many patients it leaves out.
I, on the other hand, would define a good program by how many patients it is able to help. In that respect, I'm sure that patients in California and Colorado hope that their state never becomes another New Jersey. After all, their lives depend on it.
News Hawk- TruthSeekr420 420 MAGAZINE
Source: app.com
Author: app.com
First, the Christie administration has never responded to any potential medical marijuana patients or organizations that advocate for medical marijuana in regard to their specific concerns about the program's regulations, many of which were added on after the bill was signed into law over 2½ years ago.
The entire regulatory process was done behind closed doors. Nobody knows who inserted the additional cumbersome regulations, and the administration is not being as open as O'Scanlon would lead us to believe when such questions are asked.
O'Scanlon states: "We all want our patients suffering from illnesses and chronic pain to get relief," yet he is aware that most illnesses, and chronic pain specifically, are not eligible indications for inclusion into our program.
O'Scanlon's reasoning, as well as Christie's, is that we don't want to become another California or Colorado, where chronic pain patients can readily acquire their medicine.
O'Scanlon defines a good medical marijuana program by how strict it is, no matter how many patients it leaves out.
I, on the other hand, would define a good program by how many patients it is able to help. In that respect, I'm sure that patients in California and Colorado hope that their state never becomes another New Jersey. After all, their lives depend on it.
News Hawk- TruthSeekr420 420 MAGAZINE
Source: app.com
Author: app.com
