Good, bad, ugly
Good, bad, ugly
The selection of two Big Island applicants to receive licenses to operate dispensaries and grow operations (Tribune-Herald, April 30) and legislative failures, metaphorically speaking, resemble something from a movie title.
One successful applicant, Shelby Floyd, a retired business lawyer tied to island and mainland real estate interests, architecture and other “business leaders,” will certainly not be operating a dispensary or growing plants.
Floyd and her investment partners will provide startup capital and bring in expertise from the mainland to grow and operate the dispensaries with a few locals hired for good measure.
A locally owned business? On paper, yes. In reality, rather doubtful.
The other winner, Richard Ha, the former banana farmer on the Hamakua Coast, seems more knowledgeable in growing plants, better positioned to hire locals and hopefully compassionate in keeping medicine prices down. No guarantees, but more the real deal. Politically well-connected, he likely knew he would be selected. A negative: He grows GMO crops for which some might look askance.
Bottom line, Ha is probably the best choice to be on the ground floor of a new industry. He has potential for being a good role model for future dispensaries. He needs to educate himself about growing cannabis strains and obtain help in the operation of his dispensaries.
The ugly: Growing under shade cloth or in greenhouses will not be allowed this year. Plants are required to be grown under lights, a huge investment and energy cost, resulting in burdening patients further with higher medicine costs.
Another ugly: Legitimate taxpaying dispensaries and government officials will demand police clamp down on a cheaper black market. In other words, vertically integrated, monopolized dispensaries won’t tolerate competition from renegade pot farmers/dealers — and government needs their cut.
Again, it’s not about patients. It’s about the money.
Andrea Tischler
Chairwoman,
Big Island Chapter, Americans for Safe Access
No deferral
Tom Munden’s critique (Your Views, Tribune-Herald) of my comments about U.S. Supreme Court vacancies conveniently ignores my major point.
How many times in the last 116 years has a president deferred filling a Supreme Court vacancy? The answer is “zero.” Not one president since 1900 has ever declined to fill a Supreme Court vacancy that occurred during his term, for any reason at all. It never happened, not even once.
The demands from Republicans that President Obama set a new precedent by deferring to his successor are purely partisan, and no amount of equivocation can change that basic fact.
Dan Lindsay
Hilo