The New Mexico regulations ALSO restrict the size of the plants to no larger than 12 inches tall before they are forced to flower and produce medicine. Most cannabis plants don't start flowering until they are at least six feet tall in the natural state. Even when allowed to grow to full size, a plant might produce four ounces of medicine (according to the DEA). At 12 inches, they are likely to produce a half ounce or less. With this absurd restriction, plus the 95 plant limit total -- in either vegetative or flowering mode -- for producers, it will be difficult to NM's producers to provide medical cannabis for 2-3 patients at most. For more problems with the NM program (and there are many), see this interview: www.sfreeper.com/2009/06/03/medical-marijuana-martyr-grinds-new-mexicos-program/

The growth heigth to which the state health Dept defeats the purpose. Many patients use th cannabis for other types of use. Cooking is popular. The substance requires more than 1/2 ounce to utilize for cooking such as cooking oils & creams. The plants are a natural resource limiting or stunting the growth. Unless the grower can produce in a 12 inch plant the effect of a normal growth plant , it is fruit less part of medication. Forcing the plant to flower can cause damage to the plants and change the chemical factors and functions. I vote leave the palnts alone and let them do the requirments and it purpose to treat the patients. Impose law restriction for patients on how many plants can be grown and limit the amount of useable medical marijuana. Washington state laws are as follows 15 plants and 24 ounces in a 60 day period. Allow care gives to regulate and care for the plants

Of course, the experts cannot get jobs, or just don't feel like getting involved to educate the NM government so that they can grow the plant properly. It don't matter anyway, NM is violating Federal law and should be penalized by the Federal Government by cutting funding for health and human services. Marijuana is still classified as a schedule one drug. Why do states continue to disobey the US constitution without penalty. If I was to violate the constitution, I would be arrested and prosecuted and then sued in a civil court. Article Six: Federal power Main article: Article Six of the United States Constitution Article Six establishes the Constitution, and the laws and treaties of the United States made in accordance with it, to be the supreme law of the land, and that "the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the laws or constitutions of any state notwithstanding." It also validates national debt created under the Articles of Confederation and requires that all federal and state legislators, officers, and judges take oaths or affirmations to support the Constitution. This means that the states' constitutions and laws should not conflict with the laws of the federal constitution and that in case of a conflict, state judges are legally bound to honor the federal laws and constitution over those of any state.

In response to Verde, it would be enlightening for you to review the "commerce clause" of the Constitution which assures states that any business conducted within the borders of a state is none of the federal government's business. Although that argument has not held sway with the Supreme Court yet (see the very tortured logic applied several years ago in Raich v. Gonzalez to allow continued interference with California's medical cannabis program), the Obama administration's position is a refreshing (and long overdue) change. To quote our President: "When it comes to medical marijuana, I have more of a practical view than anything else. My attitude is that if it's an issue of doctors prescribing medical marijuana as a treatment for glaucoma or as a cancer treatment, I think that should be appropriate because there really is no difference between that and a doctor prescribing morphine or anything else.... I think the basic concept that using medical marijuana in the same way, with the same controls, as other drugs prescribed by doctors, I think that's entirely appropriate."

I agree with you bernie, but until they have the regulation and control of the medication, it is no different than having a doctor prescribe alcohol as a cure for depression. Quite frankly its quackery at its best. Back on the constitution issue, if you think California is keeping its marijuana trade within its borders, you are a fool. Tons of marijuana continues to cross into the state from BC, and Mexico. It continues to flow outward as well, by Fedex, UPS and just about any other mode of transportation. Now, how does a single state have the right to violate federal law, and the constitution? When a Federal law states clearly that there are drug free zones around places where kids congrigate, how can a state allow this law to be violated. We have a dispensory right next to a youth facility. Explain that? ANd by the way, doctors cannot prescribe marijuana in California, they only make a reccomendation. Most of these doctors only went to medical school to promote the marijuana adgenda, they open up an office and charge $150.00 to tell healthy american 18 year olds that have pain from lifting weights to use marijuana. 18 year old females with menstral cramps to smoke marijuana. 18 year old females with sore ankles from wearing high heels to smoke marijuana. This is what kills me. You seem to have good sensible arguments, but take a look at the relity of what is going on around you. It sickens me.

Verde, you should really read up on the facts of Raich v. Gonzalez. In that case, two very sick women were being provided medical cannabis at no cost by a friend of theirs. No money was changing hands, nothing was moving across state lines -- nothing. In the Supreme Court's decision, they said that since any provision of mmj would have an impact on the illicit (interstate) market, the commerce clause did not apply. Yes, providing medical cannabis to two very sick women for free would have an impact on the illicit market. It would reduce demand for illicit cannabis and, if others followed their lead, the impact would be significant for lowering demand for illicit cannabis. Again, it would be worth reading up on the case -- it is the closest thing I have ever seen to pretzel-logic coming from the Supremes. As far as my vision of how a state mmj program should run, see my comments on the 6/17 JTO story on the RI mmj program (whose gubernatorial veto was overridden almost unanimously by that state's legislature.)

Update: Last week, the single approved NM producer/distributor announced that they will not continue, due to fears that the DEA will raid them. (I would have discontinued because, with the NM mmj regulations as currently written, the producer cannot serve more than 2-3 patients total, making their effort hardly worth the time.) The Santa Fe Reporter has written several articles in the past month on this floundering state program, including an extensive interview with me. Here's that link: http://www.sfreeper.com/2009/06/03/medical-marijuana-martyr-grinds-new-mexicos-program/#more-3577 There is still time to rescue the New Mexico program. But it will take intervention by Governor Richardson and a serious overhaul in program staffing to accomplish that. I wish them well -- New Mexico would be the ideal place to implement an effective mmj program for a variety of reasons.

Six mature plants have the potential to generate 60 to 90 pounds of marijuana bud. So you are telling me that this provider never gave it to anyone that took it out of the state. What about a dispensory opening up right next to a childs daycare facility, is that ok too? What about your so called sick people self medicating in a line for the restrooms at a concert? That's cool too? And how about lighting up that most excellent joint on New Years Eve and sharing it with your family? Are these the things you want for our society? Well these are the things that are already happening in California. Take your weed and stick it!

Verde, Verde, Verde -- what have you been smoking? The DEA's own estimates state that a mature marijuana plant produces, on average, about four ounces of useable medicine. On that score, I agree with them. They revised their estimate downward (from one pound per plant) after research at the University of Mississippi pot farm confirmed this lower level of production. That is not to say that some marijuana cultivars can and will produce more than four ounces of medicine at harvest. But again, according to the DEA, the average production is around four ounces per plant. And that is from plants that are allowed to reach their full potential, generally growing 6-8 feet tall before beginning to flower and then adding another foot or two thereafter. The NM regulations require that their patients' vegetative (pre-flowering) mmj plants must be no taller than 12 inches before being forced to flower. With that unnatural restriction, it is more likely that each plant will produce, on average, about a half ounce of medicine. Thus, at harvest, six NM plants will produce three ounces (or about 3-4 weeks worth of medicine for the typical mmj patient.) Please (oh pretty please) post the link to your "60 to 90 pounds of bud from six plants" source. I really need a good laugh this morning.