MJ News for 06/02/14

7greeneyes

MedicalNLovingIt!
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
8,070
Reaction score
787
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/02/opinion/a-vote-on-medical-marijuana.html




(New York) A Vote on Medical Marijuana


The New York State Assembly easily approved a law legalizing medical marijuana last Tuesday, and there appear to be enough votes to pass similar legislation in the State Senate if that chamber’s leaders agree to allow a vote. They ought to do so before the legislative session ends on June 19. The bills would make the drug available, under tight regulation, to patients who, in many cases, do not get relief from other medications.

The Assembly bill, passed on a 91-to-34 vote, would allow the possession and use of up to two and a half ounces of marijuana by patients certified as seriously ill. It would permit dispensaries to deliver the drug to registered users and their caregivers in a system designed to prevent abuse or illegal uses of the drug.

A Senate version of the measure, sponsored by Diane Savino, a Staten Island Democrat, was recently approved by the Senate Health Committee. It bans homegrown marijuana and allows up to 20 manufacturers to grow marijuana indoors under tight security to prevent diversion to illegal uses. It lists 20 specific conditions, including cancer and AIDS, that would be eligible for treatment with medical marijuana, and it requires that prescriptions be written by doctors, physician assistants or nurse practitioners who certify that the patient has a serious condition, will be under their care and will likely benefit from medical marijuana. It also prohibits the smoking of medical marijuana by anyone under 21, although the drug could be prescribed to younger patients in other forms, such as edible products infused with marijuana.

Critics of the bills have expressed concern that smoking marijuana, which has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, may carry health hazards. Some have also suggested that the Legislature wait for the results of a more limited pilot program announced by Gov. Andrew Cuomo in January. That plan would restrict distribution to 20 hospitals and use strains of marijuana that might not be best for many patients.

The next hurdle is the Senate Finance Committee, where prospects are uncertain. Ms. Savino says 39 senators have told her they will vote for her bill if it reaches the floor, more than the 32 votes needed for passage. The bill has wide support from medical groups and patient advocates, and polls show that a large majority of New Yorkers support medical marijuana. It is time for Senate leaders to allow a vote.
 

7greeneyes

MedicalNLovingIt!
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
8,070
Reaction score
787
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer...d-nfl-to-get-real-about-players-marijuana-use




Time for Roger Goodell and NFL to get real about players' marijuana use


Enough with the NFL's Reefer Madness already. It needs to stop.

I fully realize that nothing of significance changes in this league without a fight between the league and its union, but the fact that lighting up a joint is dealt with in a draconian fashion, while domestic abuse punishment is often meted out in a far-less severe manner, is just one of many incongruous corollaries to the NFL's weed policy.

At a time when the government's approach to pot is taking a dramatic turn, and the drug is being increasingly legalized to some degree or another in state after state, for young stars in their prime like the Browns' Josh Gordon and the Cardinals' Daryl Washington to both be potentially missing all of next season, if not longer, for using marijuana, is ludicrous (now, if you want to kick Washington out of the league for 2014 for other transgressions, you won't get an argument out of me).

This is getting ridiculous.

The penalties are far too severe, seeming to hearken back to a bygone time when stricter federal mandatory minimums for drug possession of any kind were all the rage. The times, they are a changin'-- no matter which side of this issue you are on, and on Friday alone the House passed an amendment restricting the DEA from targeting medical marijuana operations in states where it is legal; a bill that was backed by bipartisan support.

Truth is, over time more and more NFL players will be playing in states where it is not illegal to use pot, and, here's a newsflash, a large number of NFL players use it. Here's another newsflash -- so do a large number of pro athletes in other sports, and so do a large number of accountants, and plumbers and computer programmers, and, well, you get the picture.

Oh yeah, and I dare say an owner or two has dabbled with the wacky weed a time or two. And a coach or two. And a general manager or two. And I get the counterargument -- don't be stupid enough to get caught, players know when they are going to be tested by and large (that is unless or until they enter the drug program, when the testing becomes all-encompassing), so just don't get caught. But anyone who doesn't think that marijuana use is part of the NFL culture is kidding themselves.

It's a drug of choice to help relieve pain, escape the rigors of the game, and compared to the litany of painkillers that teams will gladly distribute via pill or injection, that will wreak havoc with one's liver and kidneys and god knows what else, it's seen by many, many players as a healthier alternative.

These are players asked to perform quasi-super-human feats every week, risking health and limb to do so. Are we really going to be hypocritical enough, at a time when the nationwide views on this drug are changing, to pretend they might not need a little somethin', somethin' to help them get through those six days before they go back on stage?

So, is it really better for the NFL to make an example out of Gordon or Brandon Browner or Trent Williams or Ricky Williams or any of the hundreds of players who have served lengthy suspensions because of the drug? Or should all parties come to the conclusion that staying the **** out of players' bongs, and just saying no to marijuana testing might just make more sense?

Should the competitive balance of games, and in some cases seasons, be swayed this dramatically because players are using a drug that states are looking more and more to tap into as a tax-revenue source? Should players be losing millions and millions of dollars for using a drug that is not a performance-enhancer, that they are using recreationally. Or would a don't ask/don't tell approach be the way to go? Players agree they keep it the **** away from any stadium or team facility and the league agrees to stay out of their pot stashes. If a player gets arrested for distribution or possession of large amount of pot, let his discipline come under the personal conduct policy, as would any arrest. Otherwise, extend outreach and counseling to players the league believes may be habitual users, but scrap this current policy that is unduly punitive in nature.

"It's getting ridiculous," said a long-time NFL personnel executive who told me he has been in private meetings in the past where his owner admitted using the drug occasionally. "In next five years it could be legal in the entire country, and the NFL is behind the times. This is like prohibition. Didn't they think any of the athletes were drinking back then? You don't think George Halas wasn't hitting the whiskey during prohibition? Get the **** out of here. "Marijuana, it kills the pain; it helps these guys calm their nerves down. It's probably more positive on the medical end than the negative. This is stupid. I can't take it anymore. It has to change, it's just a matter of time. The NFL needs to step up and say this is stupid. I know owners have smoked pot. (Colts owner Jim) Irsay hasn't been suspended yet for what he did, and that's worse than smoking pot. Let's just be honest and have an honest policy. The politics are changing. The policy needs to be overhauled."

Take a look at the NHL, for instance, a league that anyone must admit most closely approximates the NFL in terms of it being a violent, collision sport, where players routinely endure all types of extreme measures to be able to return to games. The league tests for marijuana, but it is not a part of the league's suspension protocol -- only performance-enhancing drugs are.

So the league and the union are aware of what players are putting in their bodies, but that data is compiled to then mutually extend help and treatment, without taking players off rosters and away from their teams. Seems plenty reasonable to me. The NBA will discipline players ... but not nearly in the manner in which NFL players are routinely suspended a quarter of the season, half of a season or, in many cases, an entire season, because of pot. The basketball league requires three failed tests before a player gets an initial five-game suspension. That's five of 82 games, which would equate to a .975 of a game suspension in the NFL (so essentially it would equal one missed NFL game, one missed paycheck).

And that's after what amounts to four failed tests, remember, in basketball. After that first suspension, NBA players will subsequently be suspended "five games longer than his immediately-preceding suspension for violating the Marijuana Program," according to their CBA with the league.

In the NFL the punishment is generally a quarter of the season, then half a season for a second offense, and then a year, though, of course, things are open to negotiation (as with Gordon missing four paychecks last year for his pot suspension, but missing just two actual games).

So, well, if things are this nebulous and free-flowing, why not eliminate it entirely? Or alter its scope greatly. I've been having discussions along these lines for years with players and agents and front office executives, and, in the past few years many more seem open to scrapping the current drug plan.

Commissioner Roger Goodell sent his trial balloon during the season, making comments that seem to at least broach the possibility of reviewing the policy based on changing pot laws across the nation, then, well -- whether influenced by owners or major corporate sponsors or whatever else -- Goodell pretty much quashed that notion during his "State of the League" address prior to the Super Bowl. That was unfortunate.

Since then we've seen more young stars suffer the consequences of this foolish policy, and teams and coaches forced to scramble to prepare for football without them. Veteran player agent Peter Schaffer, who happens to live in Colorado, a state at the epicenter of the legalization movement, has been telling me for years about how heartily he believes the marijuana policy needs to change, with pot a viable alternative for coping with the full-body aches and pains that come from putting one's body on the line every Sunday.

In recent years, with the NFL urging its team doctors to curb the use of Toradol, a once-common pain-killing injection frequently given to players after games, Schaffer anticipated more use of marijuana, and that's not likely to change, antiquated suspension policy or not, with the drug serving as "alternative post-competition pain management," as he puts it.

"Toradol is a high-grade anti-inflammatory; it's not a pain medicine," Schaffer said. "It's a shot you take and you feel better for 24 hours. And because they're worried -- and probably rightfully so -- about Toradol and long-term health affects, you don't want to be giving guys Toradol and 20 years later they have major issues. But the problem is you just can't bury your head in the sand and say, 'We got rid of Toradol,' and then give the players no alternative pain relief. You still need to have a post-game pain relief medication and an alternative. That's the reality. You have to have a suitable alternative for the players, because otherwise they will turn to what they did in the '50s and '60s which is alcohol, and we know that's not good for you with drinking and driving, and we know that alcohol is highly addictive.

"And marijuana is becoming increasingly socially accepted in many states and medially accepted. And who knows what we're going to find in 10 years or 20 years or whatever, but right now it does not seem to have the adverse medical problems that alternative pain medications have. In the past week we just had one of our best offensive players and one of our best defensive players suspended for a year for this, how does that make the game better? How does that make the game better to punish them for that, when in Colorado half the state is doing it?

"How does it make sense to have some of our best players not playing, not because they're getting arrested or doing anything to hurt anybody, but because they are using marijuana? I don't smoke marijuana at all, and I'm not condoning or advocating for it, but I'm saying if it's a suitable alternative pain medication we need to consider decriminalizing it within the league."

I'm not a pot user, either, though I have no issue with those who partake, and I'm not trying to parent anyone's children or impose my ideals on others. But for this group of adults who play this game for a living, the allure of marijuana will always be there, and it's folly to pretend things aren't changing outside the game as well.

If nothing else, the thresholds for a positive test should be raised substantially (and, if the NFL and NFLPA can ever agree on the final piece of HGH testing and a new global drug policy, the amounts required to trigger a "positive" test very likely would in fact go up. Right now football players are being held to a bizarre standard -- 15 nanograms per milliliter, which constituted a failed test.

"For air traffic controllers, it's three-times higher," Schaffer said. "For WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency), the cutoff level is 175 -- that's for Olympic athletes -- which is over 10 times greater than what we deal with. People who are landing planes can be at 50 nanograms, but an NFL player hurting on Sunday night are at 15? For personal use in your home? I don't get it. I've tried to push the union to raise the threshold for a long time, and I've tried to push the league office to push the threshold higher. I've advocated for this for over a decade. "To me it's a win-win situation -- not suspending your best players for doing something everyone else is doing. If you're that worried about Josh Gordon, get him help. Don't penalize him. And if teams are worried that pot makes players less aggressive, then, hey, that player will eventually get cut if that's the case. But the way this policy is put together now doesn't make sense anyone."

Couldn't have said it better myself. Hopefully, it changes drastically. The sooner the better.
 

7greeneyes

MedicalNLovingIt!
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
8,070
Reaction score
787
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/01/medical-marijuana-farms_n_5427374.html




Medical Marijuana Farms Draining Streams Dry In California


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Some drought-stricken rivers and streams in Northern California's coastal forests are being polluted and sucked dry by water-guzzling medical marijuana farms, wildlife officials say — an issue that has spurred at least one county to try to outlaw personal grows.

State fish and wildlife officials say much of the marijuana being grown in northern counties under the state's medical pot law is not being used for legal, personal use, but for sale both in California and states where pot is still illegal.

This demand is fueling backyard and larger-scale pot farming, especially in remote Lake, Humboldt and Mendocino counties on the densely forested North Coast, officials said.

"People are coming in, denuding the hillsides, damming the creeks and mixing in fertilizers that are not allowed in the U.S. into our watersheds," said Denise Rushing, a Lake County supervisor who supports an ordinance essentially banning outdoor grows in populated areas.

"When rains come, it flows downstream into the lake and our water supply," she said.

Many affected waterways also contain endangered salmon, steelhead and other creatures protected by state and federal law.

Wildlife biologists noticed streams running dry more often over the 18 years since the state passed Proposition 215, but weren't sure why.

"We knew people were diverting water for marijuana operations, but we wanted to know exactly how much," said Scott Bauer, the department biologist who studied the pot farms' effects on four watersheds. "We didn't know they could consume all the water in a stream."

So Bauer turned to Google mapping technology and satellite data to find out where the many gardens are, and how many plants each contained.

His study estimates that about 30,000 pot plants were being grown in each river system — each plant uses about six gallons per day over marijuana's 150-day growing season.

He compared that information with government data on stream flows, and visited 32 sites with other biologists to verify the mapping data. He said most grow sites had posted notices identifying them as medical pot farms.

Pot farm pollution has become such a problem in Lake County, south of Bauer's study area, that officials voted unanimously last year to ban outdoor grows.

"Counties are the ultimate arbiter of land use conflict, so while you have a right to grow marijuana for medicinal use, you don't have a right to impinge on someone else's happiness and wellbeing," Rushing said.

Saying they were being demonized, pot users challenged the law, and gathered enough signatures to place a referendum on the June 3 ballot. They argue that grow restrictions like the ones being voted on in Lake County lump the responsible users in with criminals.

"We definitely feel environmental issues are a concern. But more restrictive ... ordinances will force people to start growing in unregulated and illegal places on public land," said Daniel McClean, a registered nurse and medical marijuana user who opposes the outdoor-grow ban.

While some counties are trying to help regulate the environmental effects of pot farms, Bauer hopes his study will lead to better collaboration with growers to help police illegal use of water and pesticides.

Previous collaborative attempts between government and growers have not ended well, said Anthony Silvaggio, a Humboldt State University sociology professor who studies the pot economy.

"The county or state gets in there and starts doing code enforcement on other things," Silvaggio said. "They've done this in the past"

He said pot farmers believe they are being unfairly blamed for killing endangered salmon while decades of timber cutting and overfishing are the real culprits.

However, the environmental damage has led to a split in the marijuana growing community.

One business, the Tea House Collective in Humboldt County, offers medicinal pot to people with prescriptions that it says is farmed by "small scale, environmentally conscious producers."

"Patients who cannot grow their own medicine can rely on our farmers to provide them with the best holistic medicine that is naturally grown, sustainable and forever Humboldt," the group's website advertises.

Despite efforts of some pot farmers to clean things up, the increased water use by farms is a "full-scale environmental disaster," said Fish and Wildlife Lt. John Nores, who leads the agency's Marijuana Enforcement Team.

"Whether it's grown quasi legally under the state's medical marijuana laws, or it's a complete cartel outdoor drug trafficking grow site, there is extreme environmental damage being done at all levels," Nores said.

Officials say until the federal government recognizes California's medical marijuana laws, growers will continue to operate clandestinely to meet market demand for their product due to fear of prosecution. Meantime, enforcing federal and state environmental regulations will be harder.

"If cherry tomatoes were worth $3,000 a pound, and consumption was prohibited in most states, people would be doing the same thing," Nores said.
 

7greeneyes

MedicalNLovingIt!
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
8,070
Reaction score
787
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2014/05/medical_marijuana_pennsylvania_2.html




House Republicans from Pennsylvania vote yes on bill with marijuana amendment


Central Pennsylvania's delegates to the U.S. House of Representatives - all Republicans - on Friday voted in support of a bill that includes an amendment that favors legalized marijuana.

Representatives Lou Barletta (11th district), Charlie Dent (15th district), Scott Perry (4th district), Jim Gerlach (6th district) and Tom Marino (10th district) were among GOP House members who voted in favor of a bill that contains an amendment barring the federal government from meddling in the marijuana laws of 33 states that allow the use or possession of medical marijuana.

The measure - authored by Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) - is an amendment to a larger $51.2 billion funding appropriations bill for the Justice and Commerce departments, among others.

The GOP-controlled house voted 219-189 in favor of the bill.

The issue of federal overreach is certain to have been key in the vote, but speaking to TheHill.com, Rohrabacher said his amendment reflected shifting public opinion toward the use of medical marijuana.

"Despite this overwhelming shift in public opinion, the federal government continues its hard line of oppression against medical marijuana," Rohrabacher said.

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), told TheHill.com: "This train has already left the station. The problem is that the federal government's getting in the way."

Blumenauer's home state of Oregon allows the use of medical marijuana.

Tim Murtaugh, a spokesman for Barletta, said the Republican had voted against Rohrabacher's amendment because it was overly broad and gave federal agents the option to not to enforce the law in certain states. Barletta, he said, is open to discussion of the legal use of medicinal marijuana, but the amendment was not the proper way to go. The Hazleton Republican would like to see hearings and input from the medical community, among others, during that debate, Murtaugh said.

Perry voted in favor of the amendment. The amendment was but one of dozens offered in the bill. The bill provides funding for programs to combat gangs and prevent violence against women, and restores and increases funding for the incarceration of illegal immigrants in local jails, among a slew of other initiatives.

State counterparts in the General Assembly have recently also struck shifting stances on the legalization of marijuana debate.

In November, state Sen. Mike Folmer (R-Lebanon) joined longtime legal marijuana champion and Sen. Daylin Leach (D-Philadelphia) in co-sponsoring a medical marijuana law.

Folmer told PennLive that there were many legally-prescribed drugs, including painkillers, which have negative side effects such as high potential for addiction. Folmer argued that because of their medical benefits, doctors can prescribe these substances, adding that doctors should similarly be able to tap medical benefits of marijuana.

"Medical cannabis is a plant that has been put here by God to be used for our benefit," said the Republican lawmaker.

The bipartisan Senate Bill 1182 - the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Act - would protect state residents with serious and debilitating medical conditions from arrest for using and obtaining medical marijuana under doctors' orders. Twenty states and Washington, D.C. have compassionate laws on the books.

Earlier this month, Gov. Tom Corbett, also a Republican, shifted his stance on medical marijuana, saying he supported legislation that would legalize marijuana extract to treat severe seizures in children.

"I have been looking at this issue extensively over the past few months and listening to many perspectives," Corbett said. "I have heard the concerns and heartbreaking stories of these families and want to help. However, we must address this issue in a way that helps these families, but also protects the public health and safety of all Pennsylvanians."

Corbett, a former Attorney General and opponent of legalized marijuana, previously said he would be open to guidance from the Food and Drug Administration.
 

7greeneyes

MedicalNLovingIt!
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
8,070
Reaction score
787
http://blog.chron.com/bakerblog/2014/06/texas-will-legalize-marijuana-in-2019/




Texas will legalize marijuana in 2019


Following the legalization of retail marijuana sales in Colorado and Washington, and medical marijuana in 22 states with more to follow, marijuana legalization appears inevitable — even in “law and order” states such as Texas. The question is no longer if Texas will legalize, but when? This question has important policy implications for incarceration costs, civil liberties and medical marijuana patients. In this Baker Institute Viewpoints series, five leading experts on marijuana reform examine the question, “When will Texas legalize marijuana?”

My organization, the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), recently started investing real money in the effort to end marijuana prohibition in Texas. This is a coalition effort that will hopefully resemble the coalition effort in Maryland, which is the best example of how organizations across the political spectrum can join together to reform a state’s marijuana laws.

One reason for MPP’s interest in Texas is the public opinion polling, which is quite good. For example, in February 2014, the Texas Tribune and The University of Texas surveyed 1,200 Texan adults and found that 77 percent support legalizing medical marijuana, 49 percent support making marijuana legal for nonmedical purposes, and 23 percent support keeping marijuana illegal under all circumstances. In September 2013, Public Policy Polling surveyed 860 Texas voters and found that 58 percent support taxing and regulating marijuana like alcohol, 61 percent support imposing $100 tickets rather than arrests and jail time for people who possess marijuana, and 58 percent support legalizing the use of medical marijuana.

The national number in favor of legalizing marijuana possession is 54 percent, according to the Pew Research Center’s polling a few months ago, so it makes sense that the Texas number for legalizing marijuana is somewhere around 54 percent. (This means that marijuana policy reform is more popular than most politicians in Texas.)

I understand that people like to believe that Texas is ultraconservative, but that’s not really true. If you look at the polling data and the voter registration numbers, Texas is like Maine, when we think about Republican or Democratic candidates who could reasonably be elected to statewide office in the next couple election cycles.

But there’s another reason I think we’ll legalize marijuana in Texas in 2019: We started putting money into this project a couple months ago, and we’ve found that the gestation period for making big changes to almost any state’s marijuana laws is a handful of years.

Regarding money, a California funder has promised to donate $100,000 to the Texas project if we can match this donation with $100,000 from people who live in Texas. This will probably happen annually. Any well-run advocacy campaign in any state can do a lot of good with $200,000 per year. This is a ridiculously small amount of money if one thinks about saving 70,000 nonviolent marijuana users in Texas from arrest and jail each year, every year, for the rest of time.

In the short term, we’ll attempt to pass two bills through the Texas legislature in 2015 and 2017, as a way of offering short-term relief to some marijuana users and the Texas government. The first bill would legalize medical marijuana, which is now legal in 22 states and the District of Columbia. In Texas, this would mean passing legislation that would authorize marijuana-specific dispensaries to sell marijuana to patients with cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, chronic pain and a few other medical conditions that will be specified by the statute. The second bill would put a stop to the arrests of people who possess less than two ounces of marijuana, which means people like Willie Nelson and his daughter would no longer be arrested.

There are four reasons why the notion of marijuana policy reform is becoming mainstream in Texas, as evidenced by the powerful pair of hearings in the state House of Representatives a year ago. First, the government’s effort to eradicate the marijuana plant from the planet hasn’t been working over the last century, so it’s time for a new approach. Second, marijuana is safer than alcohol. If our society is committed to allowing adults to drink alcohol, shoot guns, drive cars and engage in other behaviors that can actually kill people, it makes sense to allow adults to use marijuana, which cannot kill you. Third, police and prosecutors should be permitted to spend their time on crimes with victims (such as assault or burglary), rather than arresting people for possessing plant material in their pockets. Fourth, marijuana prohibition is wasting the taxpayers’ money on a government program that doesn’t work. If we’re serious about keeping taxes as low as possible, we should regulate marijuana like alcohol (which would be a tax on a small portion of the population that actually wants to pay the tax), rather than prohibiting it (which means imposing a mandatory tax on all Texans to target a small portion of the population).

Texas is the second-largest state, in terms of both population and geographic size. Texas comprises 8.6 percent of the nation’s population, so once the Texas government decides to regulate marijuana like alcohol, the federal government will almost certainly follow.

I’ve been in politics in Washington, D.C., since 1993, so I can state with some surety that Congress will not lead on this issue. Rather, the states must lead, and Congress will then follow.

I’ve also been involved in Texas politics for 10 years, so it’s easy to notice that “marijuana” has changed from being a dirty word to being an “I don’t care” kind of word. This is good news, because marijuana should be less concerning than, say, aspirin, which kills more people each year than marijuana does.

Marijuana prohibition has been sucking the lifeblood out of Texas taxpayers — especially people who are paying property taxes, which are used to fund local jails. When you ask Texans whether they’d rather keep their money for their families’ benefit than have the state spend their money on arresting marijuana users, I think you know what the answer will be.

It will take about five more years to convince Texas legislators that we should follow the will of the people and change the law. So, let’s do this, and it will happen in 2019.
 

7greeneyes

MedicalNLovingIt!
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
8,070
Reaction score
787
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/me...rd-processing-2014-06-02?reflink=MW_news_stmp




Mentor Capital Funds Bhang Financial for Cannabis Card Processing


SAN DIEGO, Jun 02, 2014 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Mentor Capital, Inc. MNTR +10.99% announced that its portfolio company, Bhang Corporation, has established Bhang Financial to offer the Cannabis Community non-cash payment options with Cashless ATMs for PIN Debit Network transactions and ATMs. The new Bhang division will also offer fully integrated Point of Sale (POS) software solutions to enable clients to maintain inventory and track sales efficiently.

Scott Van Rixel, President of Bhang Corporation and recently re-elected National Cannabis Industry Association board member, is committed to help his retail and access providers: “Across the industry, we are all aware of the issues in dealing with a cash business. With a Bhang product being sold every minute of every business day we here are focused on our clients' non-cash payment needs. To best help, Bhang Financial systems have been built by a team of talented individuals with more than 60 years of payment processing and banking experience. These professionals are ensuring Bhang Financial can provide our current and future clients with innovative technology payment solutions at the lowest cost.”

Mentor Capital, Inc. CEO, Chet Billingsley, adds: “A key corporate purpose of Mentor Capital is to provide public market funding to leading cannabis brands to help them expand into the growing legal marijuana market. We are especially pleased to have provided funding for the expansion of our investee, Bhang Corporation, into this important area of card processing.”

Learn more about Bhang Financial by visiting the Bhang Corporate and Bhang Financial booth in Denver, CO on June 24-25 at the First Annual Cannabis Business Summit, of which Bhang Corporate is a sponsor.
 
Top