Two MA lawmakers to rewrite rec marijuana law

A pair of Massachusetts lawmakers have been appointed to apparently rewrite the recreational marijuana legalization law approved by voters last November.

The Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act is an initiated state statute, instead of an amendment to Massachusetts’ constitution. That means legislators still have the legal ability to make changes to the law, despite what was approved by voters.

According to TV station WWLP, pro-cannabis state Sen. Patricia Jehlen and state Rep. Mark Cusack, both Democrats, have been appointed to rewrite the act because “state lawmakers want to make significant changes … before retail shops open in 2018.”

Political leaders “have several concerns,” including issues that range from public safety to how rec cannabis will be taxed, the news station reported. There also may be adjustments to how many cannabis plants are allowed in home grows.

Though WWLP had no other specifics on how the act may be changed, Gov. Charlie Baker wants a new version of the law ready by June, the outlet reported.

In December, Massachusetts legislators delayed the opening of  adult-use stores by six months, until June 2018, to give the state more time to work through the logistics of setting up the industry.

Latest Headlines

4 comments on “Two MA lawmakers to rewrite rec marijuana law
  1. Robert on

    How is it possible to go against what the people voted for. Isn’t that the entire reason for due process and a democracy in the first place. Bunch of whiney haters upset that we the voters are not stuck in the reefer madness days like they are. A little bit of education goes a long way, and ignorance is bliss. There are several other states that have had legal cannabis for years already and what has it caused? Mostly tons of tax revenue and lots of extra pizza deliveries. Why don’t they focus of setting stricter penalties for consuming alcohol figuring its 100 times more likely to end in a fatality than cannabis use. There are a lot more important thing they can spend the taxpayers money on than overturning something we voted for

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *