5 thoughts on “MPP’s Mason Tvert Discusses Marijuana Tax Revenue in Colorado”

  1. First off: the 14 million in cannabis sold in CO in Jan 2014 was stolen (state authorized) from state registered patients medical supply–as that was the ONLY pot lawfully being grown for any kind of sale. How many patients are suffering w/o their meds?

    MPP writes language that allows for over regulation (DUI) and over taxation (35-85%) in CO and WA. No one cares where Mason Tvert want’s the money spent because the language his ‘organization’ writes across the nation on cannabis puts full authority on what is psent in the hands of the government. Gov Hickenlooper in CO has already indicated he needs 100 million for further Reefer Madness, 2014 style, filled with ‘stoner’ bashing commercials (already running) and DUI enforcement based on unscientific blood count levels, rehab, drug testing and arrests.

  2. @ Kathleen – Thanks for your comment. Just to set the record straight, MPP played a leading role in drafting the Colorado initiative, which did not include a provision regarding driving and only allowed for an excise tax on wholesale sales of no more than 15%. The DUID law and the extra 10% special sales tax were passed by the legislature. It’s worth noting that the legislature wanted to set it at 15%, but MPP led a successful effort to get it dropped to 10%. It’s also worth noting that MPP opposed the DUID law that was passed in Colorado (the final version, as well as the per se version that was voted down three times), and we will continue to oppose any DUID laws that are not evidence-based and allow for unimpaired people to be convicted of driving while impaired by marijuana. MPP did not play a role in drafting the Washington initiative, so we had no part in the DUID or tax provisions within that law.

  3. Morgan–thanks for the post but just to set the record straight, MPP (Steve Fox, DC, any relation?) wrote A64 (he said so on public record numerous times) and A64 says in Section 6 (b) : ” NOTHING IN THIS SECTION IS INTENDED TO ALLOW DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF MARIJUANA OR DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED BY MARIJUANA OR TO SUPERSEDE STATUTORY LAWS RELATED TO DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF MARIJUANA OR DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED BY MARIJUANA, NOR SHALL THIS SECTION PREVENT THE STATE FROM ENACTING AND IMPOSING PENALTIES FOR DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF OR WHILE IMPAIRED BY MARIJUANA.”

    It’s language like this (enshrined in our Constitution) that screws ALL cannabis users. MPP GAVE the General Assembly FULL power to screw Coloradan’s and mentioning DUI in our Constitution at ALL was either 1. a HUGE MISTAKE or 2. intentional. We asked them to remove it before submission, but no, what do the unpaid local grassroots in CO know after 20 plus years of work out here? The reason MPP ran language here in 1997 was because we the people had done such an awesome job at educating our citizens. We know that and MPP knows that.

    And nowhere does A64 grant a right for a cannabis user. The courts will take years clarifying A64. I’m not going to even get into how pointless MPP made CO’s A64 Constitutional amendment. And we know MPP/DPA/Soros are one.

    “Under the influence OR impaired”–period. Our Constitution. The 5 nano limit, brought to Colorado by NORML via (D, Boulder) Claire Levy then passed by the General Assembly 2 years later doesn’t matter. I listened to the testimony every time it came up and I don’t remember MPP campaigning against it. Must be more of those back room negotiations. Hard to take credit for something the public will never be able to verify. But it was shotty language in A64 that brought this DUID scam to pass….

    MPP created the DUID fiasco in A64 and now claim to be the ones fighting it. Amazing…. Now unfortunate CO pot smokers will have to suffer further with DUID charges while the courts define ‘under the influence’ and clarify that A64 grants no rights to users, the right of the state to prosecute DUID, rights for employers to fire based on hot piss tests and property owners the right to evict tenants…. But I digress…. like I said- A64 6 (b) didn’t need to be included.

    And I never saw any MPP campaign to fight the taxes A64 left wide open for the GA. I saw and participated in the NO TAX campaign and they didn’t get a bit of help or support from MPP. The GA attached the 15% excise tax to the sales tax for one vote, because the language in A64 allowed it to do so. And A64 says in 2017 the GA can charge an unlimited tax.

    At this point, nothing MPP takes credit for or refuses to take credit for surprises me. MPP has been successful in re writing history w/o any more of a problem than a dozen or 2 sets of 20 year plus principled, unpaid, grass-root activist idiots like me commenting in blogs to what is true and what isn’t.

    A response was nice and unexpected as my comments usually just get deleted.

  4. I must admit I think you both have validity to your case. The 36% tax is only going to rise which will only promote cartel like behavior and further the black market.
    You’ve come a long way but much is yet to be seen.
    I’m praying Kentucky can get on board soon.

  5. I doubt that the people who work for mpp that go to different states changing marijuana laws are getting rich.I bet the majority of people that use mj in the states that it is legal are happy for what they got.I believe I’d rather pay some extra taxes than pay 60 grand in lawyer fees to get out of some measly marijuana charge.

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>