HOUSE DOCKET, NO. 3216 FILED ON: 1/12/2009 AMENDED HOUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No. 2160
I've tried to keep my questions and comments brief, since I was all over the first part of the bill I reviewed thusly;
but here are the concerns that came up as per this reading for me;
Q* Sliding scale inc fee waiver for low income OP?
Q* Feeling concern, as I read along and take in all these numbers, the fees and fines and the time frames allowed the dept of public health, especially the way it is empowered to be making up regulations after the fact of the bill's enactment into law. I would like to see a lot of the open ended factors addressed in detail sooner, before the passage of the law, not be left so late to be determined, not all at the discretion of the Dept. Isn't it better to get more specific and plan for the eventuality of the law's passage so that sick and especially dying patients don't have to persist without safe legal access for months or years after the law passes, waiting for the dept to figure out what it's doing?
Q*what if QP works at a school or correctional facility, or lives on a college campus, or is incarcerated and seriously ill or debilitated by pain?
* Would like to see good 2 tiered research study involving replacing conventional methadone treatment with MMJ, not addictive, least harm done to the system, legal if medically recommended, anecdotally reported efficacious for helping people stay off harder stuff. Cannabis also reported helpful interrupting PTSD thinking patterns, even severe cases like veterans.. some people need to forget what they were just thinking about!
To other activists currently reviewing the language of this bill;
What if any concerns do you have about this bill which I have not addressed in my questions and comments?
If we may only make a few changes in the language before the bill gets reintroduced, which three or four changes do you consider most important to ensure, and what are your reasons for prioritizing the changes you chose?