Missouri’s legalization move meets unexpected resistance

With the Nov. 8 election just two weeks away, Missouri’s move to legalize adult cannabis use has met unexpected opposition from some state organizations and political parties.

Amendment 3 would allow adults to purchase and possess up to three ounces of cannabis flower or equivalent. It would also allow adults to grow cannabis at home with a state-issued registration card. State cannabis excise tax revenues would be earmarked for veterans’ homes, drug treatment programs and public defenders. The amendment also mandates an automatic deletion process for prior offenders.

Despite these proposals, however, a number of organizations — including the Missouri NAACP, the Missouri Democratic Party, and the Missouri Libertarian Party — have refused to support the measure, or even publicly opposed it.

They claim, among other things, that Amendment 3 does not provide sufficient social justice provisions, that it will allow current medical marijuana companies to monopolize the rec market, and that the measure’s ownership limits are arbitrary and will lead to further criminalization .

Related

Election 2022: Guide to Marijuana Legalization in Missouri

NAACP chapters split because of their support

Although the St. Louis and several other branches of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) have supported Amendment 3, the organization’s statewide branch has strongly encouraged residents to vote against it.

“To prevent the permanent exclusion of minorities from the cannabis industry in the state of Missouri, the NAACP is calling on every voter to oppose the criminalization of marijuana possession, the de facto racist regulation of the cannabis market, and the dragging of our eyes by proponents of Amendment 3.” , the group wrote in a statement released earlier this month.

Related

Election 2022: Election Guide to Marijuana Legalization

The NAACP’s comment on the criminalization of marijuana refers to the wording in Amendment 3, which makes possession of three to six ounces of marijuana a civil offense for the first two offenses and a misdemeanor for the third offense. (You can find this language on pages 35 and 36 of the unsearchable amendment text.)

However, the amendment text does not appear to contain any further wording in relation to criminal sanctions. When contacted, legalization campaign officials were unanimous in their response to the NAACP’s criticism.

The Legal Missouri Campaign also noted that an individual arrested for a third felony is currently facing a felony charge under state law. So the change would significantly reduce the penalty a person would face for a third offense.

Does Amendment 3 create a monopoly?

The Missouri NAACP claims that Amendment 3 “does not increase the number of full market licenses available” and criticizes the “very limited” number of small business licenses that would be issued under the law.

Amendment 3 does not contain wording on license caps, nor does it call for new licenses to be granted to non-micro-enterprises.

As Nicholas Phillips detailed in St. Louis Magazine, the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services — which would oversee the program — would have no incentive to issue new licenses, especially once the program takes off and the market stabilizes.

With regard to small business licenses, the amendment requires the issuance of at least 144 cannabis micro-business licenses.

It defines a microenterprise as an entity where a majority of the owners either a) have net worth less than $250,000 or had an income at any given time that was 250% below the federal poverty line, b) is a disabled veteran, c) has been or a family member has been arrested for a nonviolent marijuana crime (other than selling to a minor), or d) lives in a zip code well below the federal poverty line, in a zip code with high unemployment, or in a ZIP code with above-average marijuana arrests. (See page 26 of the amendment text for more details on the definitions of micro-enterprises).

“We are proud to have the support of the NAACP’s St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. Charles County and Columbia branches,” Legal Missouri campaign manager John Payne said in a statement in response to the criticism the national organization.

State Democratic Party does not support

Although many Democratic leaders in Missouri have said they will support the legalization measure, the state party declined to officially endorse it.

Party leaders said they could not support him due to a number of flaws in the amendment. They highlighted a potential for creating a market monopoly for recyclable products among existing medical marijuana license holders and concerns about the effectiveness of the cancellation pathway proposed in the amendment.

The change actually makes all 193 medical marijuana vendors licensed for adult use, and Missouri medical marijuana companies have made large donations to the campaign — almost $700,000 since Oct. 1 alone.

What about deletions?

As for the deletion argument, the process described in Amendment 3 would not necessarily be automatic in every case. In addition, the amendment’s wording requires that deletion be granted unless the case presents “reasonable grounds for refusal.”

Amendment 3 “may adversely affect minorities, people of color and low-income Missourians,” the Democratic Party’s state committee said in a press statement released in September.

Trudy Busch Valentine, the Democratic Party’s nominee for U.S. Senate, and Alan Green, the party’s nominee for state auditor, will vote for Amendment 3, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

However, the newspaper added that State Rep. Ashley Bland Manlove, chair of the Legislative Black Caucus, believes Missouri would benefit from waiting for another law.

Libertarians choose not to support this

The Missouri Libertarian Party also decided not to support the measure. Chairman Bill Slantz has been particularly concerned with the three ounce ownership limit.

“It’s going to be ridiculously messy,” Slantz told the Post-Dispatch in a separate article. “If you have 3.2 ounces or 3.1 ounces… has the scale… been checked to make sure it’s accurate?”

While critics can construe any ownership limit as arbitrary, Missouri’s three-ounce limit remains much higher than most other legal states: California, Washington, Colorado, Nevada, and others set the limit at one ounce. New York also has a three-ounce limit. (In New Jersey, however, adults can own up to six ounces.)

Slantz said he would personally vote for Amendment 3.

The 3 ounce limit is three times higher than most states

Dan Viets, a Missouri attorney and chair of the Advisory Board of Legal Missouri 2022, pointed out in an interview with Reason that the three-ounce limit is still higher than the limits of other legal states.

Viets further suggested that the border represented a compromise. “The reason for restrictions in general is that we hope to actually pass this legislation… Certainly there are compromises in Amendment 3 and they are there to get it passed,” he told Reason.

Dubious claims about street vendors and children

The Missouri Association of Prosecuting Attorneys (MAPA) offered further criticism of Amendment 3 in a position paper released in September.

It is not entirely surprising that an organization of public prosecutors has spoken out against a legalization measure. Her reasoning is remarkable.

MAPA claims, among other things, that the change protects people who sell cannabis to minors.

“Amendment 3 does not protect our children from black market marijuana dealers. While a person under the age of 21 cannot possess recreational marijuana, a dealer can supply marijuana to middle school students and only face a $100 “civil penalty,”” the group wrote.

T

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch pointed out that Amendment 3 does not legalize the sale of cannabis to minors. Selling weed to middle school students would still be the subject of drug offenses.

Criticism of the change form

MAPA also pointed out the difficulties in amending a constitutional amendment.

“Think of how many times you’ve heard of a law that had a problem and needed fixing or changing — it happens all the time,” the group wrote.

“If a part of the law is invalid or doesn’t do what it’s supposed to do, our legislature is powerless to fix it other than sending the amendment back for an expensive statewide election.”

Polls are everywhere

It remains to be seen whether these unexpected opposition votes will affect the outcome of November’s vote. Current surveys do not paint a clear picture either.

While a SurveyUSA poll released Sept. 19 concluded that 62% of residents would support Amendment 3, others were less optimistic.

Both polls released in September showed support at 48% and 43% respectively.

Despite the opposition that Amendment 3 has drawn, Legal Missouri’s John Payne remains optimistic about its passage.

“Amendment 3 passes because Missourians of all political persuasions want the Show Me State to legalize marijuana and automatically erase prior non-violent cannabis crimes,” he told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Max Savage Levenson

Max Savage Levenson probably has the lowest cannabis tolerance of any author on the cannabis beat. He also writes about music for Pitchfork, Bandcamp and other bespectacled people. He is the co-host of the Hash podcast. His dream interview is Tyler the Creator.

Check out Max Savage Levenson’s articles

By submitting this form, you are subscribing to Leafly news and promotional emails and agreeing to Leafly’s Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe from Leafly email communications at any time.