Arizona Medical Marijuana Question, Proposition 203, 2010

Voting on Marijuana
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local marijuana Local marijuana tax

The Arizona Medical Marijuana Initiative, also known as Proposition 203, or I-04-2010, was on the November 2, 2010 ballot in the state of Arizona as an initiated state statute, where it was approved. a

Sponsors of the proposed initiative submitted their qualifying signatures to election officials in the state in April and on June 1, 2010, the Arizona Secretary of State qualified the measure. It was verified at the time that the effort had collected enough signatures for ballot access. The Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project was the main sponsor of the measure. Arizona became the 15th state to legalize the use of medical marijuana with the passage of the amendment.

The proposition allowed residents in the state with specific medical conditions to be treated with certain amounts of marijuana for personal use. According to the provisions of the initiative, the Arizona Department of Health Services would be put in charge of regulating the sale and use of medical marijuana. The measure allowed qualified patients and caregivers to purchase the drug from specific, closely watched clinics. Patients would be protected from arrest and prosecution for using the plant for medicinal purposes.

Employers would also not be allowed to discriminate in hiring employees, as well as terminating employment against registered cardholders. However, the measure did not allow workers to be on the medicine while on the job

Aftermath

Strict rules were proposed for the approved measure, relating to potential users and precribers of medical marijuana in the state. According to a Washington Post report, estimates stated that only 20,000 patients would be eligible to use medical marijuana, under the previously mentioned stricter rules. Will Humble, director of the Arizona Department of Health Services stated, “We figured hey, if we put some true checks and balances in this system, we can actually make this a medical marijuana program and not a recreational marijuana program.”

Proposed tax

Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne was one of the opponents of the passage of the measure, however, Horne called for medical marijuana to be taxed. According to reports, state tax collectors plan to tax medical marijuana since it is not a prescribed medicine. State law exempts prescriptions from being taxed, but marijuana would be sold to patients with "certification" from doctors, not with a prescription. According to Anthony Forschino, spokesman for the state Department of Revenue: "It's not a prescription. It's a written certification. It would just be a retail sale, like buying something off the shelf or over the counter." Horne stated that the tax could bring in about $40 million a year to the state.

• See also: Previous attempts to tax medical marijuana in Arizona

Rules governing medical marijuana released

On March 28, 2011, the Arizona Department of Health Services released rules on who can grow, distribute and consume the cannabis plant for medical use. The specifics of the rules governing the procedures surrounding medical marijuana are as follows:

• Effective date that the rules are to be put into effect is April 14, 2011.
• In order to receive a patient registry identification card, the department listed medical conditions the patient must have. In addition, a physician must diagnose the patient with that specific condition. This list included, in the first of the five conditions listed, cancer, glaucoma, HIV, AIDS, and hepatitis C. In all, there were 14 medical conditions listed.
• To renew an identification card, the must submit request, among other information, to the department 30 calendar days before the expiration of their current identification card.
• Dispensaries can begin applying for certificates on June 1, 2011, and the department will accept those applications for thirty days after that date.
• Smoking medical marijuana by a patient in public places is prohibited.
• An employer can't discriminate against a qualifying medical marijuana patient.

To read more of these rules, visit this document, provided by the Arizona Department of Health Services.

Lawsuit

Governor of Arizona Jan Brewer announced that the state would file a lawsuit in federal court by May 27, 2011 in order to clarify that the medical marijuana law was indeed legal. According to reports, the lawsuit was in response to U.S. Attorney for Arizona Dennis Burke, who claimed in a letter to state health officials that the cultivation, sale and distribution of marijuana was against federal law.

According to the letter, Burke stated that he would "vigorously prosecute individuals and organizations that participate in unlawful manufacturing, distribution and marketing activity involving marijuana, even if such activities are permitted under state law."

Brewer said in a statement regarding the lawsuit that would be filed: "I won't stand aside while state employees and average Arizonans acting in good faith are unwittingly put at risk. In light of the explicit warnings on this issue offered by Arizona's U.S. Attorney, as well as many other federal prosecutors, clarity and judicial direction are in order."

Lawsuit dropped, medical marijuana enforced

Jan Brewer dropped her lawsuit during the early part of January 2012, and stated that she would allow state health officials to start the process for licensing dispensaries. However, because of a pending lawsuit, in which potential dispensary owner Gerald Gaines sued due to allegations that the governor failed to fully implement the law, Brewer stated she would not allow workers to issue licenses until the legal challenge was settled.

Controversial bill

A bill was crafted during 2012 state legislative session that would deny medical marijuana to college students in the state. The proposal, House Bill 2349, would make it illegal to use and possess marijuana on the campus of any public or private college. The legislation was proposed by State Rep. Amanda Reeve, who stated: "They're not going to be able to use or possess marijuana on campus. That's how we deal with the issue so we can stay in compliance' with federal laws."

On the other hand, Joe Yuhas, spokesman for the Arizona Medical Marijuana Association, stated: "This is an attack on patients ... who are abiding by state law."

Election results

See also: 2010 ballot measure election results

Official election results of the measure follow:

Proposition 203 (Medical Marijuana)
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		841,348	50.1%
No		837,008	49.9%

Results via the Official Election Canvass of Results from the Arizona Secretary of State's website.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title that Arizona voters saw read as follows:

A "yes" vote shall have the effect of authorizing the use of marijuana for people with debilitating medical conditions who obtain a written certification from a physician and establishing a regulatory system governed by the Arizona Department of Health Services for establishing and licensing medical marijuana dispensaries.

A "no" vote shall have the effect of retaining current law regarding the use of marijuana.

Short title

The short title of the measure, according to the Arizona Secretary of State's website, read as follows:

The Arizona Medical Marijuana Act protects terminally or seriously ill patients from state prosecution for using limited amounts of marijuana on their doctor's recommendation. Qualifying patients who register with the Arizona Department of Health Services will obtain marijuana from nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries regulated by ADHS. Private cultivation will be allowed by ADHS only when no dispensary is available. The Act is self-funding and establishes safeguards: registration cards; fingerprinting of caregivers and dispensary personnel to exclude drug and violent felons; strict security, recordkeeping and oversight requirements; inspection of dispensaries; restrictions on number and location of dispensaries; and providing penalties.

Summary of initiative

The summary of the initiative, as provided by the Arizona Secretary of State's website, was:

The Arizona Medical Marijuana Act protects terminally or seriously ill patients from state prosecution for using limited amounts of marijuana on their doctor's recommendation. Qualifying patients who register with the Arizona Department of Health Services will obtain marijuana from nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries regulated by ADHS. Private cultivation will be allowed by ADHS only when no dispensary is available. The Act is self-funding and establishes safeguards: registration cards; fingerprinting of caregivers and dispensary personnel to exclude drug and violent felons; strict security, record keeping and oversight requirements; inspection of dispensaries; restrictions on number and location of dispensaries; and providing penalties.

Federal memorandum

Marijuana on the ballot in 2010

On October 19, 2009 Deputy U.S. Attorney General David Ogden issued a memorandum to federal prosecutors in states that allowed for the use of medical marijuana. The memo said that federal resources should not be focused on "individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana."

In light of the recent news, Myers said, "This is the most important event that has happened in the medical-marijuana movement in the last 30 years." Additionally, Myers noted that the federal memorandum will help alleviate concerns for participants and dispensary operators.

Support

Supporters

• The Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project filed the petition with the Secretary of State’s Office on November 23, 2009, which listed Diane Manchester as the official chairman of the organization. Manchester was a former civilian employee of the Phoenix Police Department who retired on disability. She turned to medical marijuana in order to help her cope with pain that resulted from her multiple sclerosis. She took her place as chairman due to the growing fear, at the time, among medical marijuana patients that they might be arrested. According to Manchester: “I am so prone to being scared, and it’s terrible. I want to stop the fear of the people who need it (marijuana). I am so tired of not being able to tell the truth. I know when my name and picture are out there people are going to know me. And that’s okay.”

• Heather Torgerson, chair of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project, stated that she wrote a college paper against the use of medical marijuana. She changed her stance because she stated the reason for her survival of brain cancer was the use of the drug. She stated that chemotherapy and radiation caused her to experience nausea and fatigue, but when she used marijuana, her appetite returned quickly. Torgerson commented about the drug, "I owe my life to it."
• The Pima County Democratic Party recommended a 'yes' vote on the measure.

Arguments

• According to supporters, other steps were taken to ensure that the distribution of medical marijuana would be distributed in a strictly regulated way.

• Supporters further stated that people who were diagnosed with cancer, AIDs, HIV, Alzheimer’s, Hepatitis C and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis would benefit from the measure.

• According to Andrew Myers, of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project, “There are doctors all over Arizona already that are recommending marijuana to their patients, but they're doing it in an extra-legal manner. And we're putting patients who are doing nothing but following a doctor's advice at risk for felony prosecution."

• Myers went on to argue, "This takes a piece of the market away from the drug cartels and gives patients a safe, legal alternative. There is abuse in any system when you are talking about controlled substances. The good news with marijuana is that you can't overdose on it. It's not physiologically addictive like painkillers."

Controversies, stories and passage preparations

• Supporters of the initiative pointed to an incident in Michigan where a worker was fired by Wal-Mart Inc. under its anti-drug policy. The worker had been legally prescribed marijuana to help treat pain from sinus cancer, but was not exempt from the policy. The firing shed light on the initiative, which supporters say would stop incidents like the one in Michigan due to the provisions in the proposed measure that would prevent workers from being fired if under medical marijuana treatment.

Joseph Casias, of Battle Creek, Michigan, was fired in November 2009 after he was drug tested in a usual screening when he sprained his knee on the job.

According to a Yuma Sun editorial, which commented on the situation in Michigan and the initiative in Arizona, "Even if the marijuana is for medical purposes, it could impair the worker. Employers need to have some way to deal with this potential problem so they can maintain safe workplaces if the use of medical marijuana is allowed."

• A report was given by KVOA in Tucson, highlighting a man who was dependent on the cannabis plant to alleviate his pain. Tom Maza used the drug for 30 years and stated that he was hoping for the passage of Proposition 203. According to Maza, "It would change my life dramatically with just the medical aspect of it being legalized, because as a person who is diagnosed with HIV in 1985 back when there wasn't a single pill for that, it was something at that time that just kept me going...Marijuana has by its ability to open up vascular blood vessels, it makes it go away basically and keeps it away."

• The Pima County Board of Supervisors began their preparations for the passage of the amendment. Although the report stating this did not give light as to what side the board was taking with this issue, it did state that the board gave approval to initiate the creation of a zoning code for medical marijuana facilities and dispensaries. The board voted 5-0 to begin this process. According to supervisor Sharon Bronson, "Should this initiative pass we’ll at least be more prepared than those in California and Colorado."

• There were claims in the state that medical marijuana, if the measure passed, would be sold on mobile "cannabis caravans."However, supporters of the measure stated that the law would be carefully monitored, more so than similar measures that were passed in other states. According to Andrew Myers, of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project, "It is a very detailed and well-regulated piece of legislation. Prop. 203 is entirely unique. We do an excellent job of limiting the medical marijuana, and restricting who can sell it."

Legislative action

The Arizona Legislature had planned to debate whether to tax the possible marijuana law. If the proposal was approved by voters in the November 2010 election (which it was) Senator Jorge Luis Garcia wanted to tax the marijuana that would be subsequently sold under the act. According to reports, an analysis by the legislative budget staff, which was nonpartisan, stated that a medical marijuana tax had the potential to rake in approximately $1 million for the state's General Fund in 2012. The Arizona State Senate approved of the tax on March 26, 2010 with a vote of 17-12. However, no further action was taken.

Campaigns, events and strategies

• On April 20, 2010, medical marijuana activists marched through Safford, Arizona in favor of the medical marijuana measure. One activists, Jerry Benson, told a local newspaper that he wouldn't be alive if it weren't for the cannabis plant. According to Benson, he was prescribed drugs that did damage to his liver and deteriorated his health, at which point doctors gave him only 90 days to live. Benson stated he stopped using the prescribed drugs and started to smoke marijuana, which lead to him living a longer and healthier life. Charles Gilbert, activist and user, stated during the march that marijuana was more effective in alleviating his pain than other prescribed drugs.

• At a debate hosted by Cox Communications and Gateway Community College on September 22, 2010, all ten measures on the November ballot in Arizona were argued for and against by both sides of the issues. Proposition 203 was discussed, to where Andrew Myers, of the Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project, argued about the measure, "Proposition 203 will allow patients safe, legal and reliable access to medication that for many can be life-saving."

Opposition

Opponents

• The main opposition to the measure was Keep AZ Drug Free. According to Carolyn Short, chairwoman of the group, the measure wasn't just about medical marijuana, but about the protection of marijuana users. According to Short, "Saying that this is for medicine for sick people is an absolute smokescreen." Short also pointed out that the law allowed for 2.5 ounces, which was more than what one person could smoke in two weeks. Short stated, "What happens to the excess? I think we know what happens to the excess."

• Governor of Arizona Jan Brewer stated opposition to legalizing medical marijuana. She argued, "Almost all marijuana recommendations come from a few doctors (who) for, say, $150, will prescribe pot to nearly anyone." She also claimed that although people would benefit from the medicine, that "compassion will quickly turn to capitalism."

• Max Fose, a Phoenix political consultant, created a campaign against the idea of a medical marijuana tax called "Stop the Pot." The campaign donated $2,5000 towards defeated the proposed ballot initiative.

• The Journey Healing Centers, a drug rehabilitation organization, stated their opposition to the measure.

• Dough Hebert planned to launch a campaign against Proposition 203. According to Hebert, "It's really not about medical marijuana it's about decriminalization, and tying up the hands of the police, the prosecutors, and the courts...We're going to have actually be plagued with indoor groves around the state of Arizona, because most of Arizona is rural area."

• Carolyn Short, chairperson of the Keep AZ Drug Free anti-203 campaign, the measure was not what supporters were making it out to be. Short stated, "This is not about medicine. It is a backdoor route to legalization. This gives marijuana users unprecedented protections...It is a disaster for employers, which is why the Arizona Chamber of Commerce is supporting our efforts"

• Tim Carter, Yavapai County School Superintendent, claimed in an editorial, "In my opinion, Prop 203 will negatively impact the health and safety of our students, our schools, and our communities. Children and young adults will be allowed to have "medical" marijuana cards and schools may not refuse to enroll them! Prop 203 specifically allows children (with parental permission) to get marijuana cards. Children who are marijuana cardholders will be allowed to smoke before, during lunch breaks off campus and after school. (500 feet away from the school)".

• Linda Turley-Hansen, syndicated columnist and former Phoenix TV anchor, advised a 'no' vote on the measure in an editorial revealing her recommendations for all the propositions on the November 2010 ballot.

• State Senator Ron Gould and State Representative Nancy G. McLain both voiced their opposition to the measure.

• The Tuscon Chamber of Commerce recommended a 'no' vote on the measure in an editorial.

Arguments

Arguments that were made against the measure include:

• According to the Stop the Pot official website, the campaign formed in order to inform Arizona voters of the negative affects of legalizing medical marijuana. Also included on the site was the concern over the credibility of the Medical Marijuana Policy Project, which was the major funding source of the circulating initiative.

• According to the website, when citing the negative affects, "Users will be able to smoke over 200 joints every 14 days. 200 joints a person is a lot of drugs on our streets, in our neighborhoods and around our children."

• Another phrase found on the website stated, "Help keep drugs out of our neighborhoods and away from our children."Not only does the site refer to the amount of drugs being sold, but also the dispensaries that would sell those drugs...Do you want a pot shop in your neighborhood?"

• The measure could result in lawsuits to solve the legal questions surrounding the issue of medical marijuana, and its legalization. Drug Free America Executive Director Calvina Fay pointed out that legal issues arose in California due to the legalization of medical marijuana.

• Carol West of the League of Women Voters, in an editorial published in Inside Tucson Business, stated that the measure should be passed. West wrote, "While the proposition attempts to regulate drug use so it is not out of control, it is difficult to effectively regulate marijuana because the dosage can’t be accurately measured or regulated. There is also the potential for fraud and abuse...Other states that have legalized medical marijuana have had a difficult time regulating its use. This is a time for Arizonans to resist a trend and vote no on Proposition 203."

• Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk stated in an editorial published by the Prescott News, "I have done the research. As a parent and concerned citizen, I will be voting “no” on Proposition 203. I recommend that each voter do their own review and suspect that many will come to the same conclusion. Consider these statistics from states who have adopted laws to “decriminalize marijuana for terminally ill patients”: 97-98% of medical marijuana cardholders are aged 17 to 35 and suffer from “chronic pain” while only 2-3% of cardholders suffer from cancer, glaucoma, HIV and other debilitating illnesses. Under proposition 203, a “cardholder” is entitled to 2.5 ounces of marijuana every two weeks amounting to 140 marijuana joints (10 joints per day). These large amounts of unmonitored and unregulated marijuana are grown, harvested and consumed in the community."

Campaigning and events

• According to reports, MATForce, which was the Yavapai County Substance Abuse coalition, offered an educational presentation on the measure, informing voters of the impacts that the proposal could have. The measure was dissected by Douglas Hebert. Hebert, a board member of the Partnership for a Drug-Free America, was a former Phoenix DEA Assistant Special Agent.

• At a debate hosted by Cox Communications and Gateway Community College on September 22,2010, all ten measures on the November ballot in Arizona were argued for and against by both sides of the issues. Proposition 203 was discussed, to where Bill Montgomery, argued about the measure, "A toothache could get you a recommendation for marijuana, a bad back, lumbago, wearing high heels all day." The comment from Montgomery was a rebuttal to Prop. 203 proponent Andrew Myers and his statements in favor of the measure.

Campaign contributions

Support

Groups or individuals that donated to the campaign for the measure and the amount they donated are shown in the table below:

Contributor	Amount
Cox Communications	$64,500
Marijuana Policy Project	$60,000
Marijuana Policy Project	$50,000
Campaign Communications, Inc.	$16,244.95
Marijuana Policy Project	$15,000
Marijuana Policy Project	$15,000
Riester	$14,901
Campaign Communications, Inc.	$13,024.32
Reister	$12,000

Contributor	Amount
J & R Graphics and Printing, LLC	$11,316.26
Jerome Hirsch	$10,000
TKM Trust	$10,000
Lucid Holdings LLC	$10,000
Transportation Reload LLC	$10,000
Patric Allan	$10,000
Shane Howell	$10,000
Ken Kulow	$10,000
Heavy T and Little D	$10,000

Opposition

• The following is the amount contributed to the campaign against the measure.

Contributor	Amount
Arizona Cardinals	$10,000
Wharton and Wadas	$5,847.05
The Symington Group	$3,771.80
Stop the Pot	$2,500
Eric Wnuck	$2,400
Eric Wnuck	$2,000
Carolyn Short	$1,000
Short, Carolyn	$700.00

Contributor	Amount
Donationspages.com	$204.78
Arizona Secretary of State	$80.00
2CO.com	$75.00
Justhost.com	$71.40
Istock International	$58.40
Patricia Wharton	$50.00
PAYPAL	$39.00
Matthew Wharton	$35.00
Fed Ex Kinko's	$14.15

Analysis and reports

Legislative council analysis

A legislative council analysis was performed on the measure and published in the Arizona Secretary of State's Publicity Pamphlet. The analysis was lengthy and impartial, and can be read here.

Fiscal legislative budget analysis

According to a required fiscal legislative budget analysis conducted regarding the measure, at the time, it was found that approximately 66,000 Arizona residents would be able to register under the proposed medical marijuana program. The analysis, performed by the Legislature's budget staff, stated that 39,600 patients would register and that 26,400 approved caregivers would have the projected 66,000 patients by the 2012-2013 fiscal year, the year full implementation the proposal would take effect.

The report also stated that the calculating costs of the measure would be covered by fees, civil penalties and donations. According to reports, the analysis was based on the existing medical marijuana program in the state of Colorado.

Media endorsements

See also: Endorsements of Arizona ballot measures, 2010

Support

• The Arizona Daily Star supported Proposition 203, saying, "Would allow people with specific conditions, such as cancer, who have a doctor's prescription to legally buy and use specific amounts of marijuana for medicinal purposes."
• The Desert Lamp stated in an editorial about the measure: "This measure allows sale of marijuana to patients to be regulated by the state, and patients would be allowed to have controlled amounts of the substance without fear of being cited for possession. Even leaving aside the foolishness of the heavy regulations on marijuana and similar substances, this measure is just what we’ve been needing."
• Goldwater State was for the measure, stating, "If on the other hand you support inexpensive and relatively safe treatment of a number of conditions, if you believe that the ill should not be punished for seeking treatment and that marginal increase in recreational use is far outweighed by this, then vote "yes"."

Opposition

• The Arizona Republic was opposed, saying, "This proposition is a dishonest attempt to nudge the state toward legalization of marijuana. And it saddles the DHS with start-up costs even though the department's general-fund budget has been cut by nearly 50 percent since fiscal 2008. More cuts are likely next year."

• The East Valley Tribune recommended a 'no' vote on the measure, stating, "Look at states like Colorado, Montana and California, where medical marijuana laws are widely abused (essentially legalizing the drug) and crime has risen sharply around centers that distribute the drug. Marijuana also is considered a “gateway” to more serious drugs. This proposition is bad medicine."

• The Yuma Sun was against the measure, writing, "Make no mistake; we support the idea of allowing medical use of marijuana. There are legitimate justifications for it. But clear protections for businesses and private property owners need to be included, and this proposition does not do that to our satisfaction."

Polls

See also: Polls, 2010 ballot measures

• A poll conducted by Rocky Mountain surveying 555 registered voters in the state showed that 54 percent supported the measure. The poll was conducted during October 1-10, 2010 and had a margin of error of 4.2 percentage points.

Legend      Position is ahead and at or over 50%     Position is ahead or tied, but under 50%

Date of Poll	Pollster	In favor	Opposed	Undecided	Number polled
October 1-10, 2010	Rocky Mountain Poll	54%	32%	14%	555

Possible litigation

According to reports, there could be possible litigation. The aspect of the initiative that was under concern was the provision that stated that employers cannot hire, fire and discipline residents who were considered holders of medical marijuana cards. According to Arizona attorney Don Johnsen, state law did not mandate that employers and companies accommodate medical marijuana patients that were employees, or potential employees of the company. According to Johnsen, "This ballot initiative obviously would reverse that." However, there could be challenges to this provision if the measure is passed. Johnsen later stated, "One doctor may say, 'Yeah, based on these facts, in my professional opinion this person was impaired or under the influence.' In another case, a doctor might reach a different conclusion."

The main problem of the provision, according to another Arizona attorney, David Selden, was that a level of impairment on the job due to marijuana usage would be difficult to find out. According to Selden, "Unlike alcohol testing, drug testing doesn't measure the current level of impairment." Selden also stated that basically the most probable way for an employer to fire an employee were to either catch him or her smoking the drug or possessing it while working.

Andrew Myers, who was the campaign manager for the group that spearheaded the initiative, agreed with the assessment that many legal challenges could arise. Myers stated, "Ultimately, we are not able to draft legislation that is going to account for all the situations that are going to come up."

Path to the ballot

See also: Arizona signature requirements and 2010 ballot measure petition signature costs

In September 2009, according to group manager Andrew Myers, the group collected about 125,000 signatures. The petition drive deadline to submit signatures for 2010 ballot consideration was July 1, 2010. The petition drive effort must have collected at least 153,364 signatures since it was a proposed state statute. According to Myers: “This is going incredibly well and better than I would have anticipated”. In October 2009, Myers reported that the group had already collected the required signatures and planned to gather another 100,000 between October and February 2010.

According to reports, on April 14, 2010, petition organizers turned in about 250,000 signatures to the Arizona Secretary of State, significantly more than the 153,364 required in order to placed on the ballot. Andrew Myers, who was the campaign manager for the Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project, stated, "We are proud to turn in these signatures today on behalf of the thousands of patients in Arizona who will benefit from this law once it is enacted." The Arizona Secretary of State verified that enough signatures were collected on June 1, 2010, sending the measure to the 2010 ballot.

Similar measures

Marijuana-related ballot measures voted on previously by Arizonans include:

• Proposition 200 in 1996: Allowed doctors to prescribe drugs to seriously and terminally ill patients. The measure's significant provisions were later repealed by the Arizona Legislature.

• Proposition 300 and Proposition 301 in 1998: The repeals by the Legislature were overturned in yet another citizen vote, but wording of the measure required a written prescription, allowing the United States Drug Enforcement Administration to threaten to revoke prescription-writing priveleges of doctors who wrote medical marijuana prescriptions.

• Proposition 203 in 2002: An initiative failed that would have allowed a written recommendation by a doctor sufficient enough to obtain medical marijuana.

See also

Suggest a link

• Arizona 2010 ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Arizona

External links

• Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project Official Website
• Arizona Secretary of State Official Website
• November Ballot Picture Shaping Up To Be Historic in the Struggle To End Marijuana Prohibition
• Medical marijuana proposition stirs spirited debate

Additional reading

Government documents

• Arizona Secretary of State Publicity Pamphlet-Proposition 203

Opposition

• Letter: Prop. 203 is wolf in sheep's clothing

Other

• World Magazine,"2010 Preview: Ballot initiatives are a way for citizens to settle an issue directly without state legislatures," January 16, 2010
• National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws,"2010 Will Be Even Better Than 2009 For Marijuana Advocates," December 13, 2009
• Medical Marijuana on Arizona Ballot?
• November Ballot Picture Shaping Up To Be Historic in the Struggle To End Marijuana Prohibition
• Arizona voters to vote on medical marijuana
• Arizona medical-marijuana law likely to test workplace regulations

Marijuana in 2010

• Category:Certified, marijuana, 2010
• Category:Marijuana, Wisconsin, 2010