Marijuana backers dislike wording
By David Montero, Rocky Mountain News

September 13, 2006

Sponsors of a statewide measure to legalize marijuana said Tuesday they’re unhappy with wording used in the voter information booklet and are seeking to stop its distribution.

But the Legislative Council, which is in charge of writing the impartial analysis of ballot measures, is set to begin printing the booklet Thursday, and that agency’s director said he plans to go forward unless ordered to stop by a court.

To stop printing and distribution, an injunction must be sought. Sponsors of Amendment 44 said they planned to file a lawsuit in Denver District Court on Tuesday, but Rob Corry said they will instead file it this morning.

They consider the wording inaccurate and accuse the Legislative Council of deliberately misleading voters to ensure the measure fails.

The amendment, which qualified to be on the November ballot, would allow adults over the age of 21 to possess less than an ounce of marijuana without legal repercussions.

The amendment also would allow adults to give marijuana to those between the ages of 15 and 17 - as long as the drug were given and not sold to them, according to wording approved by the Legislative Council.

“That is, in no uncertain terms, a lie,” said Mason Tvert, campaign director for a group pushing Amendment 44.

Tvert said his campaign’s position is that it should be illegal to transfer marijuana to anyone under the age of 21, although he admitted there is a current loophole in the amendment that is murky on whether it can be transferred to anyone between the ages of 18 and 20.

He said that if the amendment passes, legislators “will climb over each other to be first to introduce such a bill.”

Kirk Mlinek, director of the Legislative Council staff, said his group has complied with the law to provide a fair and impartial analysis of the amendment.

He also said the booklet wording was reached with the input of many people during public hearings last week.

“If I knew it was wrong, then the first person you’d find outside the House speaker’s door with a proposed change is me,” Mlinek said. “The simple fact is we stand by the language that’s in the final draft.”

However, Mlinek said if the court ordered him to stop, he would do so immediately.