Nevadans ready for 2009 legislative session
Last update: November 13, 2008
Recent news
In September, a U.S. district court ruled that the initiative petition law passed by the 2007 Nevada Legislature was just as unconstitutional as the statute it was intended to replace. The old statute required ballot initiative proponents to gather signatures from at least 10 percent of the number of people who voted in the previous election in 13 of 17 counties in order to qualify a question for the ballot; however, that rule was challenged and held to be unconstitutional by a federal court.
During the 2007 legislative session, Nevada legislators responded by passing a bill that required ballot initiative proponents to gather signatures in all 17 counties in proportion to each county's percentage of the total statewide population and a statewide total of at least 10 percent of the turnout from the previous general election in order to qualify a question for the ballot. In essence, lawmakers attempted to fix a bad law by creating a new law that was an even bigger violation of the "one-person, one-vote" standard because it gave voters in rural counties more power than voters in more populated counties like Washoe and Clark.
MPP, the ACLU, and local activists joined together to defeat this unconstitutional law that unnecessarily and unfairly restricted Nevada's ballot initiative process. To read a couple of recent stories that explain the ruling in more detail, click here and here.
Please send your state senator and representative an e-mail reminding them that state ballot initiatives are one of this country's most democratic processes. Let your legislators know that when they try to make it harder for voters to take part in this unique method of lawmaking, it reflects poorly on them, whose very job it is to ensure that the lawmaking process is honest, transparent, and open to all who wish to participate.
Bad bill defeated last session
Last session, a bill was introduced that would have subjected adults who grew marijuana in the vicinity of a child to 15 years in prison. Although SB6 passed the Senate with only three senators voting no, once in the Assembly, it died in committee.
While proponents were quick to hold children out in front of this legislation in order to push it forward, they were at the same time seeking to tear the families of those children apart. Interestingly enough, the bill's sponsor, Sen. Joe Heck (Clark County, Dist. 5), repeatedly stated during committee hearings that he was concerned with "the psychological and emotional injuries that result from seeing a parent taken away in handcuffs" and cited this as a reason to increase the penalties for adults who grow marijuana in the presence of a child. This is patently absurd and flies in the face of reason — you do not protect children from the horror of seeing a parent arrested by increasing the penalties for growing marijuana.
If one is concerned with the trauma children experience from seeing a drug-dealing parent taken away in handcuffs, then why not increase the penalties for someone actually convicted of dealing drugs? Punishing people who are simply growing marijuana for their own consumption is not the answer. When the tactics employed to advance a policy harm the very people who need protecting, something is wrong — please take a few moments to send your legislators an e-mail asking them to be on the lookout for, and to oppose, this type of contradictory legislation in the future.
2009 and beyond
The Nevada Legislature only meets in odd-numbered years, so lawmakers and activists alike are already gearing up to make the most of the 2009 session. Please take a few minutes to ask your legislators to consider introducing sensible marijuana legislation next session.
You can help encourage lawmakers to support rational marijuana policies by downloading and distributing our brochure on taxing and regulating marijuana, which explains how this real solution would save taxpayers money, make our communities safer, and keep marijuana out of the hands of minors. This is a great piece of literature to leave with your legislators, community leaders, family, co-workers, and friends who might need a little educating on the subject. You can also take these to events and hand them out to attendees, or simply leave on car windshields.
To help in your discussions with those willing to listen to reason, use our "Marijuana Prohibition Facts" handout, which gives statistics on the failures of marijuana prohibition.
Another excellent tool that you may find useful is our "Effective Arguments for Taxing and Regulating Marijuana," which will help you respond to common arguments you'll encounter while engaging others in conversation about this crucial issue.
With 44% of Nevada voters electing to replace marijuana prohibition with a system of taxation and regulation in 2006, it is clearly only a matter of time before a majority realizes that the time to end marijuana prohibition is now.
MPP financial assistance program for medical marijuana patients
MPP will cover the cost of Nevada's medical marijuana program application fee for low-income patients. At $200 per application, Nevada's medical marijuana program is the most expensive in the nation. The process for acquiring a state-issued ID card in Nevada is also more complex than in most states, as patients are required first to pay a $50 fee for the application materials, then to pay another $150 when they submit their application for consideration.
Although the Department of Agriculture was at one time in charge of processing patient applications, this duty has been shifted to the Department of Health, perhaps due to the administrative difficulties that the Department of Agriculture has recently encountered.
For more information on how to apply for MPP's financial assistance program, click here. If you would like to sponsor an applicant by donating to help cover the cost of the application, please click here.
Stay connected
Thank you for supporting the Marijuana Policy Project. If you have any questions concerning the status of marijuana policy reform in Nevada, you can contact MPP legislative analyst Nathan Miller at (202) 905-2026 or at Nathan@mpp.org. Also, be sure to subscribe to MPP's free legislative alert service today if you haven't done so already.
