>> Announcer: DONNYBROOK IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE SUPPORT OF THE BETSY AND THOMAS PATTERSON FOUNDATION AND THE MEMBERS OF NINE PBS.

>> WELL, THANKS FOR JOINING US FOR THIS EDITION OF DONNYBROOKS ABOUT GOOD TO HAVE YOU WITH US AND WE HOPE YOU STAY THE FULL HOUR BECAUSE ON THE SECOND HALF DURING DONNYBROOK NEXT UP, WE'LL TALK TO DAN VIETS.

HE'S A ST. LOUIS -- CHECK THAT, MISSOURI ATTORNEY WHO WILL EXPLORE MARIJUANA LAWS.

THAT AND MORE.

LET'S MEET OUR PANELISTS.

WENDY WIESE IS TAKING THE WEEK OFF, SO WE'RE SO GLAD THAT CHRISTINE BYERS FROM KSDK FIVE ON YOUR SIDE CAN JOIN US.

WE'RE ALSO JOIN BY MR. BILL McCLELLAN, ONE OF OUR FOUNDERS AND A GREAT COLUMNIST WITH THE ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH.

MR. HARTMANN, GREAT COLUMNIST WITH RAWSTORY.COM AS WELL AS THE RIVERFRONT TIMES AND THE BIG 550 KTRS.

AND WE HAVE MR. ALVIN REID WITH THE ST. LOUIS MRN.

WE'RE GOING TO KICK THINGS OFF WITH YOU, ALVIN, BECAUSE IT'S REALLY STRANGE.

A LAW THAT WAS PASSED IN MISSOURI BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN ITS WISDOM SAYING THAT IT WILL FINE ANY POLICE OFFICER IF HE OR SHE ENFORCES FEDERAL LAWS THAT INFRINGE UPON THE SECOND AMENDMENT, AKA GUN LAWS, AND SO THERE'S THAT AND THE LOCAL CITY AND COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO HIRE ANY FORMER DEA OR FBI AGENT.

THEY ENFORCED FEDERAL GUN LAWS.

THIS RESULTED, ACCORDING TO PUBLISHED REPORTS IN THE RESIGNATION OF O'FALLON, MISSOURI, POLICE CHIEF PHILLIP DUPUIS WHO SAIDst NOT GOING TO WORK UNDER THIS CONDITIONS.

IF I WAS A POLICE CHIEF I WOULD THINK TO MYSELF, DO I NEED LAWSUITS AND SITTING IN DEPOSITIONS AND MEETING WITH ATTORNEYS, I THINK I'LL JUST WALK AWAY FROM THIS JOB.

YOU TAKE HIS RESIGNATION AT FACE VALUE?

>> I KIND OF DO.

WHEN I FIRST READ THE STORY, MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS THIS IS INTERESTING, REALLY.

HE NOTICED SOME THINGS THAT WE PROBABLY ALL KNEW ANYHOW, BUT THE FACT THAT HE POINTED OUT, OH, AND BY THE WAY, THIS LAW WILL PROTECT THE -- AND HE CALLED THEM ACTIVISTS, LIKE EVERY ACTIVIST IS BREAKING THE LAW WITH A GUN IN THE CAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT HE DID POINT OUT THAT A LAW LIKE THIS CAN BE USED BY ANY PART OF SOCIETY WHATSOEVER AND THE INDIVIDUAL POLICE DEPARTMENT, WHETHER YOU'RE RURAL, WHETHER YOU'RE ST. LOUIS POLICE DEPARTMENT, THEY ARE GOING TO FACE PROBLEMS BY SIMPLY TAKING SOMEONE'S GUN WHETHER OR NOT THEY KNOW -- I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS REGISTERED, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

ALL I KNOW IS I HAVE AN ALTERCATION AND YOU HAVE A GUN, I'M TAKING YOUR GUN.

NOW I GET SUED FOR $50,000?

SO I TAKE IT AT FACE VALUE.

THANK YOU, CHIEF, FOR AT LEAST PUTTING IT OUT THERE AND MAYBE IN TERMS THAT MOST MISSOURIANS CAN UNDERSTAND.

>> YOU KNOW, I'M A LITTLE MORE SKEPTICAL.

I THOUGHT THE LAW IS GOOFY, BUT I DON'T THINK THE LAW IS GOING TO STAND UP TO ANY KIND OF A CHALLENGE BECAUSE THE SUPREMACY OF NATIONAL LAWS, AND I THINK THIS LAW GETS BOOTED OUT.

SO I WONDERED IF, YOU KNOW, A NEW CHIEF COMING TO O'FALLON AND THEY'VE HAD SOME LUMPY ROADS WITH CHIEFS IN THE PAST, AND I WONDER IF HE DIDN'T COME HERE AND LOOK AROUND AND THINK, YOU KNOW, MAYBE I SHOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN THIS JOB AND THIS IS KIND OF A CONVENIENT EXCUSE.

I DON'T THINK THE LAW WILL STAND THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE.

>> I GOT TO AGREE WITH BILL HERE.

I MEAN, HE DIDN'T STICK AROUND LONG ENOUGH TO FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THIS LAW AND THE EXPERTS THAT I TALKED ABOUT FOR MY STORY EARLIER THIS WEEK SAID ALL WE NEED TO DO IS GO BACK TO OUR EIGHTH GREAT CIVICS CLASS AND REMEMBER THAT FEDERAL LAW AND STATE LAW, YOU KNOW, STATE LAW CANNOT TRUMP FEDERAL LAW.

AND SO IF HE'S USING THIS AS AN EXCUSE TO RESIGN AFTER 35 YEARS, MAYBE HE'S DOING SO TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE LAW, BUT AS FAR AS IT HOLDING UP IN COURT, HE CERTAINLY DIDN'T STICK AROUND TO SEE IF THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> CAN I BE IN THE MIDDLE ON THIS ONE BECAUSE I ALWAYS GET CREAMED IN THE MIDDLE.

MY FIRST INC. STINGT IS WHAT GIL AND CHRISTINE IS SAYING.

THAT'S THE FIRST INSTINCT I HAD, TOO, BUT TRNGD IT DOESN'T MATTER.

-- AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT DOESN'T MATTER.

WHO AM I TO QUESTION THESE GUYS?

I WILL SAY THE MOST IMPORTANT THING HE DID IS THE STATEMENT HE MADE.

SOMEBODY IN LAW ENFORCEMENT NEEDS TO BE WILLING TO STAND UP, SO I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, HE'S DONE US ALL A SERVICE.

WHATEVER HIS REASONS ARE ARE KIND OF HIS BUSINESS AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

THIS LAW IS PARTICULARLY BAD.

IT'S WAY WORSE -- THIS IS GETTING NATIONAL COVERAGE FOR HOW BAD IT IS.

THIS IS -- THE IDEA -- FIRST OF ALL, THE PARTY THAT'S AGAINST FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS IS ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO DO 50,000 PER LAWSUIT.

IT'S NOT LIKE ONE, AND THAT THE IDEA THAT THERE ARE -- YOU KNOW, AGAINST FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS AND TALKING ABOUT A WAY TO DEFUND THE POLICE, THIS IS IT.

>> I'M SORRY TO SAY, I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT, ON THE CONTENT OF THE LAW.

I THINK BILL WAS CORRECT WHEN HE CALLED IT GOOFY, BUT PEOPLE START TALKING ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION AND THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE.

SUDDENLY WE HAVE ALL THESE CONVERTS TO THAT IMPORTANT CONSTITUTIONAL DOCTRINE AND I HOPE YOU BRING THIS UP WITH DAN VIETS WHEN HE JOINS US AT HALF PAST.

>> I KNEW YOU WERE GOING TO SAY THAT.

>> YOU KNOW I WAS GOING TO GO THERE.

WE'RE LEGALIZING MARIJUANA EVEN THOUGH IT'S ILLEGAL -- JUST GIVE ME TEN SECONDS HERE.

IT'S ILLEGAL PO-PO -- ILLEGAL TO POSSESS, DISTRIBUTE, USE.

WE HAVE ALL THESE MAYORS LIKE LORELY LIGHTFOOT OF CHICAGO WHO INSTRUCTED HIRE POLICE DEPARTMENTS NOT TO COOPERATE WITH FEDERAL OFFICIALS OVER FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS, DON'T OBEY ANY LAWS PROMISE MULL GATED BY THE IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS END FORM, WHERE WAS THE HUGE OUTCRY ABOUT THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE.

>> POINT OF ORDER HERE.

I WASN'T, AND I DON'T THINK CHRISTINE WAS, SAYING THAT WE SUPPORT THE SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION.

WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT THIS LAW WON'T STAND UP.

WE'RE NOT SAYING IT'S -- YOU KNOW, ARGUING IN FAVOR OF ANYTHING EXCEPT THAT THIS LAW WON'T STAND UP.

>> AND I WAS ALSO QUESTIONING, YOU KNOW, THE CHIEF'S TRUE INTENTIONS HERE.

IF THE LAW REALLY IS WHAT'S PUSHING HIM TO RETIRE BECAUSE OF THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE AND THE CHALLENGES COMING UP IN COURT.

>> AND I WAS ARGUING HOW BAD THIS LAW IS, NOT BECAUSE IT'S INVOKING THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE.

I THINK IT IS ON ITS FACE -- I MEAN, JUST A LITTLE THING YOU GLOSSED OVER.

YOU CAN'T HIRE FORMER FEDS BECAUSE THEY ENFORCED A FEDERAL DRUG LAW YOU DON'T LIKE?

I MEAN A FEDERAL GUN LAW YOU DON'T LIKE?

REALLY?

IF THAT DOESN'T SHOW HOW HIDEOUS THIS LAW IS, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE.

>> IF YOU'RE DRIVING TEN MILES OVER THE SPEED LIMIT, YOU'RE BREAKING THE LAW.

IF YOU'RE DRIVING 75 MILES AN HOUR OVER THE SPEED LIMIT, THEN SOMEBODY NEEDS TO TAKE SOME KIND OF ACTION.

THAT'S HOW I WOULD, YOU KNOW, COMPARE THOSE TWO, CHARLIE.

>> HEY, RAY, JUDGE JON BEETEM HAS SIDED WITH THE STATE OF MISSOURI IN THAT MEDICAID EXPANSION CASE.

EVERYBODY KNOWS, IF YOU DON'T I'LL JUST GIVE YOU A QUICK REFRESHER.

LAST SUMMER, VOTERS IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI VOTED TO EXPAND MEDICAID FOR ABOUT 4% OF THE POPULATION.

IT'S A 90-10 FEDERAL-STATE MATCH.

HOWEVER, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DIDN'T FUND IT.

SO THIS PROGRAM AND ELSEWHERE, THEY SAID, OKAY, IT'S GOING TO END UP IN THE COURTS BECAUSE IT'S SUPPOSED TO START JULY 1st, 2021, JUST NEXT WEEK.

WELL, AS IT TURNS OUT, THE JUDGE DID SIDE WITH THE STATE.

HE SAID BASICALLY THERE WAS NO FUNDING MECHANISM AND IT'S ONLY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT APPROPRIATES MONEY.

SO HE KICK IT.

NOW IT'S GOING TO THE SUPREME COURT.

WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN HERE, RAY?

>> I HAVE NO IDEA.

I GOT A LITTLE EDUCATION, WHICH IS RARE, FROM OUR GUEST LAST NIGHT ON KTRS, LEGAL ANALYST GREG WILLARDS FROM ST. LOUIS UNIVERSITY, VERY MUCH A GUY DOWN THE MIDDLE ON THIS AND NOT TAKING A POSITION.

HE POINTED OUT IT'S WHAT THEY CALL DE NOVO IN THE MISSOURI SUPREME COURT, MEANING WHATEVER THIS JUDGE HAD DECIDED, JUDGE BEETEM, HAS NO -- UNLIKE A LOT OF CIVIL CASES AND OTHER KIND OF CASES WHERE YOU GOT A REAL ADVANTAGE OF ONE SIDE, WHETHER YOU'RE DIVENGD OR MAKING THE A -- DEFENDING OR MAKING THE APPEAL.

HE SAID IN THIS CASE, DE NOVO MEANS THEY'RE STARTING FROM SCRATCH ON THE LAW, SO IT'S KIND OF A WASTE OF TIME FOR EVERYBODY.

THE GUY IS AN ELECTED JUDGE, UNLIKE IN ST. LOUIS, CIRCUIT JUDGES IN JEFFERSON AND A LOT OF THE STATE ARE ELECTED.

HE'S A REPUBLICAN AND THAT DOESN'T -- GREG ALSO SAID HE WROTE A VERY BALANCED OPINION THAT TWEAKED THE LEGISLATURE AS WELL, BUT THE POINT IS WHAT HE DECIDES, NO ONE SHOULD THINK IT HAS ANY IMPACT ON THE ODDS EITHER WAY OF WHAT THE SUPREME COURT IS GOING TO DO.

>> WELL, IT DOES HAVE -- IT DOES IMPACT IT ONLY IN THAT THE DEEPER POCKETS OR THE SIDE OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI ON THIS ONE, AND SO EVEN TAKING IT, AS YOU ADVANCE IT, HEY, WHATEVER PRINCIPLE, RIGHT, WHATEVER I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO FINANCE IT ALONG THE WAY.

SO IT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT.

NOW, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S TURNED OVER OR NOT, I MEAN, ODDS MAY BE ARE THAT IT WILL BE, BUT IT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT.

IT DEFINITELY HAS A VISUAL, PUBLIC RELATIONS IMPACT.

>> YEAH, MAYBE IT'S COINCIDENTAL, BUT THE JUDGE IN COLE COUNTY, JEFFERSON CITY, DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A DEMOCRATIC OPPONENT LAST TIME HE RAN AS I REMEMBER.

IT WAS JUST A PRIMARY, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S HARDLY SURPRISING THAT AN ELECTED JUDGE GOES ALONG WITH THE -- WHAT HE BELIEVES ARE THE FEELINGS OF HIS CONSTITUENTS.

>> WELL, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT AS AN ASIDE, BUT OUR FIRST TWO TOPICS ARE MISSOURI IS NOT EXPANDING MEDICAID AND WE KNOW THAT CENTENE IS THE LARGEST MEDICAID ADMINISTRATOR IN THE COUNTRY AND MICHAEL NEIDORFF, THE CEO, SAID HE'S VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, AND HE'S ALSO CONCERN ABOUT CRIME AND NOW THAT POLICE OFFICERS WHO OBEY THE LAW ARE GOING TO BE FINED $50,000, I GUESS THE ONLY QUESTION IS NEIDORFF GOING TO USE MAYFLOWER OR UNITED VAN LINES WHEN HE MOVES TO CHARLOTTE?

>> YOU KNOW WHAT?

I GOT TO SAY, AS YOU CAN TELL FROM PREVIOUS -- I'M TIRED OF THAT.

NORTH CAROLINA DIDN'T EXPAND MEDICAID EITHER AND THEY HAVE PLENTY OF CRIME TOO, SO THE IDEA THAT THIS -- MICHAEL NEIDORFF HAS DONE A LOT OF GREAT THINGS CIVICALLY, A GREAT CITIZEN IN TERMS OF HIS PHILANTHROPY IN TOWN, BUT IT'S KIND OF A COUSIN OF WHAT WE WERE TALKING TO ABOUT THE GUY IN O'FALLON, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS HE RESIGNING BECAUSE HE'S SAYING THIS OR JUST WANT TO RESIGN.

IF HE WANTS TO LEAVE, HE CAN LEAVE.

IT'S A PRIVATE -- HE HAS THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT HE WANTS.

>> OKAY.

>> DON'T TRY TO -- DON'T GIVE US THAT -- DON'T TRY TO CONTORT THIS AND MAKE ST. LOUIS FEEL BAD ABOUT ITSELF OR WHATEVER.

IF YOU LEAVE, YOU LEAVE, BUT DON'T MAKE IT ABOUT -- IF HE LEAVES, IT'S ABOUT CENTENE, NOT ABOUT ST. LOUIS OR THE STATE OF MISSOURI.

>> BUT RAY, THE RAMS LEFT BECAUSE OF THE RAMS AND THEY KIND OF WENT SCORCHED EARTH, BUT WE CAN IGNORE WHAT THEY SAID OR WE CAN TRY TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

THE SAME THING WITH MICHAEL NEIDORFF WHO I DON'T THINK -- I HAVEN'T PUT A FORK IN THAT ONE JUST YET, BUT I MEAN, THIS IS WHAT WE DO.

HOW DARE YOU CALL OUT OUR WEAKNESSES?

THEY'RE OUR WEAKNESSES.

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO YOUR WEAKNESSES?

NOTHING.

WE'RE GOING TO CALL YOU OUT BECAUSE YOU CALL OUT OUR WEAKNESSES.

EVEN IF FRANCHISES, CORPORATIONS ARE USING IT TO AN EXCUSE IS BECAUSE THEY CAN.

>> WHAT DID STAN KROENKE CALL OUT?

DID ANYBODY GIVE HIM AN OUNCE OF CREDIBILITY?

>> WELL, YES, I DO.

>> WELL, I WILL SAY -- >> I ABSOLUTELY DO.

>> I WILL.

>> ON MONDAY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, EVERYBODY, CENTENE CUT THE RIBBON FOR IT'S NEW $1.1 BILLION CHARLOTTE EXPANSION.

>> RIGHT N, A PLACE THAT DOESN'T HAVE MEDICAID EXPANSION.

GO FIGURE.

>> YOU MAY BE RIGHT.

>> I WASN'T INVITED.

>> I HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT.

I HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT.

CHRISTINE BYERS, CALVIN ADAMS, THE SUPERINTENDENT OF ST. LOUIS SCHOOLS, THIS WEEK DURING A MEETING INVOLVING PARENTS ANGRY THAT VARIOUS SCHOOLS ARE BEING SHUT DOWN, SAID HEY, LOOK, OUR FINANCES.

WE LOST $126 MILLION, THE SCHOOLS DID, OVER THE LAST 12 YEARS BECAUSE OF PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENTS GIVEN TO DEVELOPERS IN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS.

I THOUGHT, WOW, THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY, AND $126 MILLION COULD HAVE BEEN USED IN MANY WAYS TO SHORE UP THOSE SCHOOLS, MAYBE KEEP A FEW OF THEM OPEN.

I'M JUST KIND OF SURPRISED THAT MORE PEOPLE AREN'T SINGING THE SAME TUNE AS DR. ADAMS.

WHAT DO YOU SAY, CHRISTINE?

>> WELL, I HAVE A SON WHO IS ACTUALLY IN THE ST. LOUIS PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM, AND SO I HAVE A FRONTROW SEAT TO THE ISSUES THE DISTRICT IS FACING WITH FINANCES AND ALL THAT.

AND LISTEN, THE DISTRICT NEEDS MORE MONEY.

THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT.

BUT I GOT TO SAY, IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THE FACT THAT I'M -- I'VE ALSO SEEN THE DISTRICT SHRINK, AND IT'S NO SECRET THAT THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, THE POPULATION IS GOING DOWN AND DOWN AND DOWN.

SO THERE ARE LESS STUDENTS TO SERVE AND THESE DEVELOPMENTS WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT THESE INCENTIVES AND THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN BRINGING ANY MONEY IN MAY IF THEY DIDN'T EXIST THERE.

SO IT'S REALLY HARD TO SAY AND REALLY HARD TO FIND THE BALANCE THERE BECAUSE WHILE THE DISTRICT DOES NEED MORE MONEY, IT'S ALSO LOSING POPULATION AT THE SAME TIME.

AND SO I MEAN, I'M REALLY NOT SURE.

I THINK THERE DOES NEED TO BE SOME SORT OF REGULATIONS IN PLACE FOR THESE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES, BUT HOW THAT LOOKS, I'M JUST NOT SURE.

>> WELL, MAKE BETTER DEALS.

IF YOU MAKE BETTER DEALS, LISTEN, MAYBE YOU WOULDN'T RECOUP THE, YOU KNOW, 160-PLUS, BUT MAYBE 80.

SO THERE'S $80 MILLION YOU GOT OVER THIS TIME PERIOD AND, YOU KNOW, EVERY DIME COUNTS.

SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE -- AND THIS IS A BAD, BAD, BAD EXAMPLE, BUT THE WHOLE THING WHERE PEOPLE SAY I HAVE TO COMPLETELY STOP DOING WHATEVER MY, YOU KNOW, VICE IS AND NO ONE REALLY EVEN KNOWS YOU HAD THAT VICE IF YOU JUST CUT DOWN ON IT.

SO MAYBE THAT'S KIND OF HOW YOU ARE WITH THIS.

WE JUST SAY LET'S MAKE BETTER DEALS SO WE CAN COME BACK TEN YEARS FROM NOW AND SAY, LIKE -- >> THE NEW MAYOR, TISHAURA JONES, IS TALKING ABOUT THAT.

I MEAN, SHE'S GOTTEN SOME CRITICISM FROM ME EVEN, BUT AT LEAST SHE'S SAYING LET'S TAKE A HARDER LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE GIVING DEVELOPERS.

SO MAYBE THERE IS SOME KIND OF PULSE ON THE HORIZON.

>> WELL, I HAVE STUDIED THESE AT THE CHARLIE BRENNAN SCHOOL TO ABOLISH CORPORATE WELFARE, AND I HAPPEN TO THINK -- YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING HAPPENING NORTH OF DELMAR, THEN I CAN SAY, WELL, MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED IF IT DIDN'T COME TO ST. LOUIS, BUT LET'S NOT TALK ABOUT -- TO ME, ESPECIALLY -- I THINK THE LARGE MAJORITY OF PROJECTS FOR WHICH CORPORATE WELFARE AND -- EXCUSE ME, TAX ABATEMENTS ARE GIVEN OUT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED.

IN OTHER WORDS, RIGHT NOW, YOU LOOK AT WHERE EVERYTHING IS BEING DONE, WHETHER IT'S DOWNTOWN, DOWN -- CENTRAL WEST CORRIDOR, THESE PROJECTS WERE THERE BECAUSE THERE IS SOME VIBRANCY IN THE CITY, AS YOU KNOW, COMING BACK AS MUCH AS IT'S GOT PROBLEMS, YOU LOOK AT THE GROVE AREA, YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THESE MIDTOWN AREAS, THEY ARE COMING BACK AND I THINK THAT -- I REALLY LIKE THE FACT THAT DR. ADAMS REALLY SPEAKING HIS -- AS CLEARLY AS HE CAN IN THIS ENVIRONMENT, IS WILLING TO AT LEAST CALL PEOPLE'S ATTENTION TO IT.

>> I AGREE.

I WOULD SAY, COME ON, LET'S BE REAL.

SOME OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS WOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT ANYWAY.

I MEAN, YOU HAVE THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX ON KINGSHIGHWAY OVERLOOKING FORREST PARK.

YOU'RE TYPICALING ME THAT HAD -- TELLING ME THAT HAD TO BE SUBSIDIZED?

DON'T DON'T FORGET, WALMART ASKED FOR INCENTIVES IN FLORISSANT.

FLORISSANT SAID NO, IT WAS BUILT ANYWAY.

AND DON'T FORGET THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PARTIES, INCLUDING CONSULTANTS AND LAW FIRMS AND THE ST. LOUIS DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WHICH MAKE MONEY OFF OF THE ABATEMENTS BECAUSE THE SLDC GETS ONES PERCENT OF ALL OF THEM.

SO THERE'S THIS UNHOLY ALLIANCE WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX THAT MAKES MONEY OFF OF THE ABATEMENTS.

AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

>> YEAH, I DEFINITELY THINK THERE ARE SOME DEVELOPMENTS THAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED ANYWAY AND THAT'S WHERE THAT CLOSER EYE NEEDS TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, BUT I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, NOT ALL OF THEM WOULD HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT SOME INCENTIVES.

BUT I JUST THINK THAT FOR TOO LONG, THE CITY HAS GIVEN OUT INCENTIVES LIKE CANDY NO MATTER WHAT.

>> AND I BLAME THE CORPORATE COMMUNITY.

I'M SORRY, I THINK THAT THIS CORPORATE COMMUNITY OF OURS NEEDS TO HAVE A COMMITMENT AND AN INITIATIVE AND LEADERSHIP.

YOU CAN'T PREVENT EVERYONE FROM ASKING, BUT THEY COULD SET A -- MAYBE THE NEW STRUCTURE WILL DO IT, THAT THEY NEED TO SET A VERY DIFFERENT STANDARD ABOUT THE ASK BECAUSE THESE POLITICIANS ARE UNDER ENORMOUS -- PARTICULARLY THE ONES THAT HAVE A NEIGHBORING COUNTY WHERE THEY'RE BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, PLAYING ONE AGAINST ANOTHER.

I MEAN, NEIGHBORING MUNICIPALITY, BUT EVEN WITHIN THE CITY ITSELF, IT NEEDS TO STOP ON THE ASK.

I DON'T KNOW.

>> OKAY, WELL, LET'S MOVE ON.

SPEAKING OF MONEY, BILL McCLELLAN, AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT MONEY, THE MAYOR OF ST. LOUIS, TISHAURA JONES, BECAME ONE OF 12 OR 14 MUNICIPAL MAYORS AROUND THE COUNTRY CALLING FOR REPARATIONS.

SHORT ON THE DETAILS, NOT SURE WHO'S GOING TO GET THEM OR HOW THE MONEY IS COMING UP, BUT THIS WOULD BE REPARATIONS TO DESCENDANTS OF THOSE WHO WERE ENSLAVED.

THERE'S TWO ISSUES HERE.

IS IT GOING TO HAPPEN?

>> IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

I MEAN, I KNOW A LOT OF WHITE PEOPLE AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO JUST SAY, SURE, HERE, TAKE SOME OF MY MONEY.

THEY'RE GOING TO ARGUE AND SAY THAT, HEY, MY GREAT GREAT GRANDFATHER WAS A UNION SOLDIER AND I CAME UP WITH SOMETHING AND BLAH BLAH BLAH.

I MEAN, THE REALISTIC HELP I STILL THINK IS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND CONTRACTS TO HAVE MINORITY INCLUSION AND HIRING MINORITY WORKERS, BUT THE IDEA OF FLAT-OUT REPARATIONS IS JUST KIND OF A REPUBLICAN DAY DREAM THAT THEY CAN THEN GET ALL THESE PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE ANGRY AND -- BUT AS FAR AS THE JUSTICE OF THE CAUSE, I WOULDN'T ARGUE AGAINST THAT.

I JUST DON'T THINK THERE'S A CHANCE OF IT HAPPENING.

>> WELL, ANY -- EXCUSE ME.

ANYTIME YOU HAVE, LIKE, A BUYOUT SITUATION, OKAY?

IT'S FRAMED IN A WAY THAT IF YOU PREFACED IT, LIKE, HEY, IF WE PAID BLACK PEOPLE REPARATION -- EXCUSE ME -- WOULD YOU SHUT UP FOREVER?

WOULD ALL JUST DROP ALL THE RACISM AND ALL THAT.

YOU GOT A BUNCH OF MONEY.

WOULD YOU JUST DROP IT?

THAT'S JUST A FANTASY.

I'M WITH YOU, I DON'T THINK IT WILL EVER HAPPEN, BUT MAN, RIGHT NOW, THIS DAY AND AGE, ANYTHING SEEMS LIKE IT GOES.

YOU JUST THROW IT OUT THERE AND SEE IF IT STICKS.

>> I THINK AT LEAST WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS IT NOW AND THAT'S A GOOD THING, BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY REALISTIC CHANCE OF IT.

>> I THINK BILL'S RIGHT AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD CONCEPT.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT IF YOU LIKE CRITICAL RACE THEORY, YOU'RE GOING TO LOVE REPARATIONS, MEANING THE REPUBLICANS HAVE ALREADY TAKEN CRITICAL RACE THEORY, WHICH LARGELY DOESN'T EXIST IN PRACTICE -- >> IT'S TWO SEPARATE THINGS THOUGH, BILL.

NOT BILL, RAY.

IT'S TWO SEPARATE THINGS.

>> IT'S THE SAME PRINCIPLE.

THEY'VE TAKEN CRITICAL RACE THEORY WHICH IS ALMOST NONEXIST EXTENT AND TURNED IT INTO THE NEXT -- IF THEY CAN DO THAT, REPARATIONS WOULD BE ON THE LIPS OF EVERY REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE.

THAT'S WHAT CONCERNS ME ABOUT IT.

I THINK IT'S VERY -- I THINK IT'S JUST -- I THINK IT SHOULD BE STUDIED, BUT JUST LOOK AT CRITICAL RACE THEORY WHICH DOESN'T EVEN EXIST AND THEY'VE DEMAGOGUED THAT INTO WHERE REALLY NORMAL MAIN EXTREME REPUBLICANS ARE CONVINCED THIS IS SOME BIG THREAT TO OUR SOCIETY WHEN IT IS NOT.

>> WELL, I THINK AN EASIER, QUICKER SOLUTION IS EDUCATION, WHICH I THINK WE ALL AGREE IS THE KEY TO ADVANCEMENT, AND YOU DO GO INTO SOME OF THESE HIGH SCHOOLS LIKE NORMANDY HIGH AND THEY ARE IN SUCH BAD CONDITION.

YOU THINK, OKAY, REPARATIONS, THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAPPEN.

IT SEEMS REALLY FAR AWAY, BUT I THINK MOST PEOPLE AGREE THAT STUDENTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO STUDY IN A CLASSROOM WITHOUT A LEAKING ROOF AND MOLD AND ALL THAT.

I THINK YOU WOULD COALESCE PEOPLE IF SOMEONE CHAMPIONED THAT.

LET'S HAVE A MARSHALL PLAN FOR URBAN SCHOOLS.

>> I MEAN, AND SECURITY AND I HEAR YOU.

YOU SAID, OKAY, IF IT WAS DECIDED THAT -- IT WOULDN'T BE CALLED A REPARATION, BUT HERE'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

SCHOOLS IN AREAS, WE'RE GOING TO CHECK EVERY SCHOOL THAT NEEDS WORK, ESPECIALLY IN METROPOLITAN AREAS.

IF THEY WERE IMPROVED, I THINK PEOPLE COULD GET BEHIND THAT.

PROBABLY NOT, BUT -- >> BUT I -- >> I SAID COULD, NOT WOULD.

>> RIGHT NOW REPUBLICANS ARE TRYING TO DISENFRANCHISE AFRICAN AMERICAN VOTERS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY TO GO BACK BEFORE THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT.

I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S -- >> AND THE DEMOCRATS ARE ABATING TAXES WHICH REDUCES THE MONEY GOING TO SCHOOLS.

WE'RE ALL GUILTY.

WE'RE ALL GUILTY.

ALVIN REID, WHY ARE YOU KIND OF OPTIMISTIC THAT THIS MIGHT HAPPEN GIVEN HOW POORLY WE'VE MOBILIZED IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY AROUND THE COUNTRY WHEN IT COMES TO THE SIMPLE JAB OF A COVID-19 VACCINE?

HERE WE ARE IN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, 32% FULLY VACCINATED AFTER, WHAT, FIVE MONTHS, AND JEFFERSON COUNTY, NOT EVEN AT 30%.

MISSOURI, THIS PAST WEEK, WAS ANNOUNCED HAS THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF COVID CASES PER 100,000 IN THE NATION.

SO WE'RE LEADING THE NATION NOW IN COVID CASES, INCLUDING THAT DEADLY DELTA VARIANT.

I'M REALLY NOT VERY OPTIMISTIC THAT PEOPLE CAN GET THINGS DONE IN 2021.

>> WELL, I THINK YOU HAVE TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO DO IT.

THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE THAT CAME UP RIGHT BEFORE WE CAME ON THE AIR THAT IT'S PRETTY MUCH NOW LIKE 98, 99% THE PEOPLE WHO PASSED AWAY FROM COVID AT THIS STAGE ARE NOT VACCINATED.

>> RIGHT.

>> YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST -- AND IT'S ALL OVER.

YOU CANNOT SAY IT'S RURAL PEOPLE JUST LISTENING TO TRUMP AND Q-ANON.

YOU CAN'T SAY IT'S JUST BLACK PEOPLE IN THE CITY WHO DON'T TRUST THE DOCTOR OR TUSKEGEE AND THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER THING.

THE WHOLE STATE IS JUST CONCOCTED A WAY TO BE DETRIMENTAL -- AND I'M GOING TO SAY THIS -- THEIR HEALTH BECAUSE I'M VACCINATED, AND I THINK AS TIME GOES BY, MORE AND MORE AMERICANS WILL START THINKING, YOU KNOW WHAT?

IF YOU SUCCUMB TO COVID, IT'S ON YOU.

SO I'M JUST -- I'M LIVING MY LIFE AND THAT'S REALLY SAD.

THAT WILL BE SAD.

>> I THINK YOU CAN HOLD THE POLITICAL LEADERSHIP RESPONSIBLE TO SOME EXTENT.

I MEAN, RIGHT NOW, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.

IN RECENT MONTHS GOVERNORS LIKE DeSANTIS IN FLORIDA AND ABBOTT IN TEXAS SAID, SEE, WE DIDN'T CLOSE OUR ECONOMY DOWN AND WE DID OKAY.

BUT GUESS WHAT, THERE WAS A SPIKE IN THE BALL ON THE FIVE YARD LINE IN SOME WAYS AND IN A STATE LIKE MISSOURI THAT HAS CONSISTENTLY BEEN AT THE BOTTOM OF VACCINATING PEOPLE, WE'VE BEEN THE LAST STATE IN ALMOST EVERY RESPECT IN TERMS OF SHUTTING DOWN SCHOOLS, YOU NAME IT.

REMEMBER THE STATE WOULDN'T EVEN DO THAT.

NOW I THINK THE LEADERSHIP, EITHER, A, HAS TO STAND UP AND ACTUALLY -- AND THAT PARTS WITH PARSON, GOVERNOR PARSON, THEY'VE GOT TO MAKE IT A SERIOUS COMMITMENT BECAUSE THEY'RE HAPPY TO TAKE OWNERSHIP IF THE NUMBERS -- IF THEY SURVIVE IT.

YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.

THEY NEED TO STEP UP OR BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE SUCH THAT -- >> WHAT CAN YOU DO?

PEOPLE DON'T WANT IT.

>> WELL, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY CONCERTED EFFORT IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI THAT REALLY MAKES IT A -- YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE ANY -- >> WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A STATE HEALTH DIRECTOR THESE DAYS.

>> WHO NEEDS THAT?

>> WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A STATE HEALTH DIRECTOR THESE DIS.

>> THAT'S AN IMPROVEMENT OVER THE LAST GUY.

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, IF ATHLETES, IF POLITICIANS WOULD ACTUALLY GET VACCINATED, IF THEY HAVE NOT BEEN, LIKE ON TELEVISION AND ON, YOU KNOW, LIKE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT AND MAYBE ON CHANNEL 9, THAT WOULD HELP.

BUT PEOPLE ARE HESITANT EVEN IF THEY'RE VACCINATED FOR SOME REASON TO TELL THE WORLD THAT THEY ARE VACCINATED.

I DON'T GET IT.

THAT'S THE PART I DON'T GET.

>> WELL, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT THERE AND HAVE MORE NEXT WEEK.

CHRISTINE BYERS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SITTING IN FOR WENDY WIESE.

WE SURE APPRECIATE THAT.

WE'RE GOING TO -- >> ABSOLUTELY, NO PROBLEM.

>> WE HAVE MISSOURI ATTORNEY DAN VIETS ON NEXT UP AND ALVIN AND RAY WILL BE POSING QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS HIS WAY -- >> NO, NO.

>> I'M SORRY, BILL AND ALVIN.

FAKE NEWS.

IT'S BILL AND ALVIN POSING QUESTIONS TO DAN VIETS.

>> THANK YOU, RAY.

>> THANK YOU FOR STANDING UP FOR ME.

>> FOUNDERS HAVE TO HANG TOGETHER.

>> EVERYBODY ELSE, WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

DON'T GO AWAY.

>> Announcer: DONNYBROOK IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE SUPPORT OF THE BETSY AND THOMAS PATTERSON FOUNDATION AND THE MEMBERS OF NINE PBS.

* >> HEY, BILL McCLELLAN, ALVIN REID WITH YOU ON NEXT UP.

AND WE'RE JOINED BY DAN VIETS, MISSOURI NORML.

DAN, ALL ACROSS THE NATION, THE QUESTION OF LEGALIZED MARIJUANA AND RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA IS ON THE BALLOTS AND ON THE MINES OF A LOT OF PEOPLE.

SO WELCOME TO THE SHOW AND I'LL START OFF WITH JUST MAYBE ASKING YOU WHERE IS MISSOURI AT ON, LIKE, A REFERENDUM, YOU KNOW, THE MANDATE OF THE PEOPLE A VOTE ON LEGALIZED MARIJUANA IN MISSOURI?

>> WELL, WE THINK WE'RE CLOSE.

AS MANY OF YOUR LISTENERS CERTAINLY KNOW N NOVEMBER OF 2018, MISSOURI VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY ENDORSED LEGALIZING THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA.

WE BECAME THE 33rd STATE.

THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW MORE SINCE THEN THAT HAVE LEGALIZED MEDICAL USE AND THAT PROGRAM IS ROLLING OUT VERY WELL.

THERE ARE OVER 100,000 LEGAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS IN MISSOURI RIGHT NOW AND THAT NUMBER CONTINUES TO GROW.

MANY PEOPLE ARE HAVING THEIR PAIN AND OTHER SYMPTOMS OF SERIOUS INJURIES AND AILMENTS RELIEVED BY HAVING LEGAL ACCESS TO MARIJUANA AS MEDICINE.

I WAS PRIVILEGED AND HONORED TO CHARITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THAT CAMPAIGN AND THAT CAMPAIGN SUCCEEDED SPECTACULARLY.

WE HAD 66% OF THE VOTERS ON OUR SIDE.

NO OTHER CANDIDATE, NO OTHER ISSUE CAME ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THAT LEVEL OF SUPPORT.

>> DAN, I WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE DISAPPOINTED WITH -- OF COURSE, I VOTED FOR THE REFERENDUM AS YOU WOULD IMAGINE.

YOU AND I KNOW EACH OTHER.

>> YES.

>> BUT I WAS DISAPPOINTED.

I THOUGHT THE GOVERNOR HIJACKED THAT BY PUTTING LINDELL STRAKER, A LEGISLATOR WHO WAS TERM LIMITED OUT, IN CHARGE OF IT WHICH ALLOWED STEPHEN TILLEY, THE FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER AND LOBBYIST AND GREAT FRIEND OF THE GOVERNOR, TO START UP THAT MISSOURI MEDICINAL CANNABIS TRADE ORGANIZATION, AND, YOU KNOW, AND THERE WAS SO MANY PROBLEMS.

I MEAN, PEOPLE WHO WERE TRYING TO GET DISPENSARIES AND SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN THEM DIDN'T.

IS THERE ANY WAY WE CAN KEEP THE POLITICIANS OUT OF IT IF AND WHEN WE GO TO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA?

>> WELL, PROBABLY NOT ENTIRELY, BUT BILL, TO BE FAIR ABOUT THIS, AMENDMENT 14 OF THE MISSOURI CONSTITUTION DOES NOT PUT ANY CAPS ON THE NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL LICENSES THAT CAN BE ISSUED.

THERE IS NO MAXIMUM NUMBER SET IN THE CONSTITUTION.

ONLY A MINIMUM.

NOW, THE STATE HAS BEGUN WITH THE MINIMUM NUMBER, BUT THEY'VE NEVER SAID THEY WERE NOT GOING TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LICENSES IN THE FUTURE.

MY PERSONAL VIEW, NORML'S VIEW, I THINK I CAN SAFELY SAY, IS WE DO FAVOR A FREE MARKET AND OPEN LICENSING.

BUT IN FACT, MISSOURI ALREADY HAS MORE DISPENSARIES PER CAPITA THAN ANY OTHER STATE EXCEPT OKLAHOMA.

SO THERE REALLY IS REAL COMPETITION IN THE MARKETPLACE, AND IT IS LIKELY THE NUMBER OF LICENSES WILL INCREASE IN THE FUTURE.

>> I WAS -- >> GO AHEAD, BILL.

>> I WAS GOING TO BRING UP OKLAHOMA BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO LIMITS AND YOU PAY $2500 AND YOU GET A LICENSE AND IT'S FREE ENTERPRISE.

WHO WOULD HAVE EVER THOUGHT THAT OKLAHOMA WOULD BE A NATIONAL LEADER?

>> YOU'RE RIGHT, NO ONE WOULD HAVE.

AND I CAN'T EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED DOWN IN OKLAHOMA, BUT I CAN TELL YOU NO OTHER STATE HAS FOLLOWED THAT MODEL AS YET.

NOW, AGAIN, MISSOURI HAS NOT LIMITED THE NUMBER OF LICENSES.

THAT IS TO SAY, NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION, NOT IN THE LAW.

THERE HAVE BEEN THREE VOTES IN THE MISSOURI HOUSE TO LIFT THE CAPS THAT HAVE BEEN AT LEAST TEMPORARILY IN EFFECT.

SO FAR, THE SENATE HAS NOT JOINED IN THAT EFFORT, BUT THE GOVERNOR COULD CHANGE THAT, THE DHHS DIRECTOR COULD CHANGE THAT, THE LEGISLATURE COULD CHANGE THAT OR THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING COMMISSION HAS ALREADY BEGUN TO CHANGE THAT.

I THINK ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, WE'RE GOING TO SEE MORE LICENSES IN THE FUTURE.

>> YOU MENTIONED THE PER CAPITA OF THE DISPENSARY AND YOU SAID 100,000 PEOPLE HAD A LEGAL LICENSE.

WHERE IS THAT AT PERCENTAGE WISE COMPARED TO OTHER STATES?

IS THAT A LOT OR MODERATE OR FEW?

>> I WOULD SAY IT'S ABOVE AVERAGE.

YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A STUDY COMMISSIONED BY DHHS WITH THE MISSOURI -- UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND SOME PROFESSORS FROM THAT DEPARTMENT LOOKED AT WHAT HAD HAPPENED IN OTHER STATES, AND THEY PUT OUT A REPORT WHICH PREDICTED THAT WE MIGHT REACH THIS MANY PATIENTS SEVERAL YEARS IN THE FUTURE.

BUT THE NUMBER OF PATIENTS WE HAVE ALREADY FAR EXCEEDS WHAT THAT REPORT PREDICTED.

AND ONE OF THE REASONS IS THAT OUR LAW IS RELATIVELY OPEN-ENDED.

IN OTHER WORDS, WE ALLOW DOCTORS TO RECOMMEND CANNABIS FOR ANY CONDITION THEY BELIEVE IS APPROPRIATE.

THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC ONES LISTED IN THE LAW, BUT DOCTORS HAVE THE DISCRETION, AS THEY DO WITH OTHER MEDICATIONS, TO RECOMMEND CANNABIS FOR OTHER INJURIES OR AILMENTS, AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY MORE PATIENTS ARE BEING HELPED HERE IN MISSOURI THAN IN MANY OTHER STATES.

>> WELL, YOU MENTIONED OTHER STATES.

NOW, I USED TO KNOW THIS.

I THINK MISSOURI BORDERS SEVEN STATES, IS IT?

I THINK ILLINOIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS LEGALIZED RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

SO IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT THE STATE THAT GETS IN LINE SECOND COULD REAP A LOT OF PROFIT FROM IT.

I MEAN, HOW MUCH MONEY IS MISSOURI LOSING BY PEOPLE JUST TRAVELING OVER TO ILLINOIS AND TAKING CARE OF THEIR BUSINESS?

>> WELL, IT'S A LOT.

THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT IT.

IT'S MANY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND WE DO HOPE TO SEE THAT CHANGE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

WE HOPE TO SEE AN INITIATIVE TO LEGALIZE RESPONSIBLE, REGULATED ADULT USE OF CANNABIS PASSED BY THE VOTERS PERHAPS AS SOON AS NOVEMBER OF NEXT YEAR.

IN THE MEANTIME, YOU'RE RIGHT.

WE ARE LOSING TAX REVENUE TO ILLINOIS AND THERE'S NO REASON WE SHOULD LET THAT HAPPEN.

WE ALSO LOSE MONEY BECAUSE OUR POLICE STILL HAVE TO WASTE THEIR SOMETIME AND OUR TAX MONEY GOING AFTER MARIJUANA SMOKERS WHEN THEY COULD BE INVESTIGATING SERIOUS CRIME.

THEY COULD BE INVESTIGATING VIOLENT CRIME OR PROPERTY THEFT AND THEY WASTE OUR TAX MONEY ARRESTING ABOUT 20,000 MISSOURIANS EVERY YEAR RIGHT NOW.

WHEN WE PUT AN END TO THAT, OUR TAX MONEY WILL BE MUCH BETTER USED.

>> DAN, WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THE ETHICAL QUESTION OF SHOULD A PERSON GO -- WHO CAN GET A MEDICINE MEDICINAL LICENSE, SHOULD HE GO TO THE MEDICINAL DISPENSARY OR BE LOYAL TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN DEALING HIM WEED ALL THESE YEARS?

IT'S KIND OF LIKE GAMBLING.

DO YOU STAY WITH YOUR BOOK CAN I OR GO TO THE CASINO?

>> I'M NOT SURE I KNOW THE ETHICAL ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, BUT MOST PEOPLE ARE GOING WHERE IT'S CHEAPER.

IF THEY CAN GET IT CHEAPER FROM THEIR LOCAL UNLICENSED DEALER, THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GO ON DOING THAT IF THEY'RE SATISFIED WITH THE QUALITY OF THAT PRODUCT.

BUT IN FACT, A LOT OF PATIENTS, A LOT OF PEOPLE IN GENERAL PREFER DISPENSARIES BECAUSE THEIR PRODUCT IS TESTED.

THAT'S ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT BENEFITS OF LEGALIZATION IS THAT MARIJUANA REALLY IS REGULATED AND TESTED AND TAXED, BUT THE TAX ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA IS NOT VERY HIGH.

SO DISPENSARIES SHOULD BE ABLE TO COMPETE WITH THE ILLEGAL MARKET DEALERS.

WHAT THEY GET, THE ADVANTAGE DISPENSARIES HAVE IS NOT ONLY DO THEY TYPICALLY HAVE A MUCH BETTER SELECTION OF PRODUCTS IN DIFFERENT FORMS T EDIBLES, BEVERAGES, OBVIOUSLY FLOWER, HERB, BUT ALSO VAPORIZING HAS BECOME VERY POPULAR AMONG CANNABIS CONSUMERS.

THERE'S A MUCH WIDER VARIETY TO CHOOSE FROM AT A DISPENSARY AND YOU HAVE THE GREAT ADVANTAGE OF KNOWING THAT WHAT YOU BUY HAS BEEN TESTED, ITS PURITY AND ITS POTENCY ARE KNOWN, JUST AS THEY ARE WHEN YOU BUY REGULATED ALCOHOL.

SO THERE ARE MANY ADVANTAGES TO THE DISPENSARIES.

I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO DO JUST FINE.

THERE WILL BE SOME ILLEGAL DEALERS THAT CONTINUE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC AS WELL, OF COURSE.

>> UNDOCUMENTED.

UNDOCUMENTED DEALERS.

>> I LIKE THAT.

>> YEAH, UNDOCUMENTED DISPENSARY.

NOW, PART OF A LOT OF THESE LAWS IN OTHER STATES SAYS BASICALLY WHAT YOU DO ON YOUR PROPERTY IS YOUR OWN BUSINESS.

DO YOU FORESEE MAYBE, EVEN BEFORE YOU SAY LEGALIZED MARIJUANA IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI, LIKE RECREATIONALLY, COULD YOU JUST SEE A VERSION WHERE IT SAYS, LIKE, YOU CAN BASICALLY GROW YOUR OWN?

OR DOES IT ALWAYS HAVE TO BE PART OF A LARGER PACKAGE?

>> NO, NO, IN FACT T RIGHT NOW IN MISSOURI, UNDER ARTICLE 14, MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENT GROW THEIR OWN AND I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA.

FOR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO IT, FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE BOTH REASONABLY COMPETENT GARDENERS, WHICH I'M CERTAINLY NOT, AND WHO HAVE A LANDLORD OR OWN THEIR OWN PROPERTY OR HAVE A LANDLORD WHO WILL ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT.

NOW, THAT'S THE PROBLEM A LOT OF PATIENTS HAVE IS THEY RENT THEIR HOME AND THEIR LANDLORD MAY NOT TOLERATE A MARIJUANA GARDEN IN THE APARTMENT.

BUT IT'S ALSO VERY IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT ARTICLE 14 PROVIDES FOR PATIENTS TO DESIGNATE ONE OR MORE CAREGIVERS.

THEY CAN DESIGNATE ANOTHER PERSON WHO IS THEIR PRIMARY LICENSED CAREGIVER AND THAT CAREGIVER FOR $25 A YEAR HAS THE ABILITY THEN TO POSSESS AND PURCHASE ON BEHALF OF THE PATIENT FROM DISPENSARIES AND FOR ANOTHER $100, THE CAREGIVER CAN GROW MARIJUANA FOR THE PATIENT.

SO THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS RIGHT NOW AND GROWING YOUR OWN IS ABSOLUTELY AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE ENTIRE PICTURE.

>> DAN, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

I MEAN, I GOT EDUCATED RIGHT THERE.

THAT WAS INTERESTING.

I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

>> DAN, HOW ABOUT IMPAIRMENT AND DRIVING?

IT'S NOT THE SAME AS SOMEBODY WHO'S REALLY DRUNK AND THEY MIGHT GET ON THE HIGHWAY GOING THE WRONG WAY AND MAYBE IF YOU'RE STONED, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT, BUT YOU ARE IMPAIRED.

AND SOMEBODY WHO'S REALLY HIGH IS IMPAIRED.

IS THERE ANY WAY THAT THE POLICE OFFICERS CAN MEASURE IMPAIRMENT BY MARIJUANA?

ANY TEST THEY CAN GIVE?

>> YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT POLICE OFFICERS OUGHT TO BE DOING IS ROADSIDE IMPAIRMENT TESTING, AND I DON'T MEAN, YOU KNOW, COUNTING BACKWARDS AND RECITING THE ALPHABET, BUT IT WOULD BE QUITE EASY TO USE EYE-HAND COORDINATION TEST, REACTION TIME TEST, SO NO MATTER WHAT THE CAUSE OF IMPAIRMENT IS, IF A DRIVER IS NOT ABLE TO REACH A MINIMUM LEVEL OF COORDINATION AND REACTION, THEN THAT PERSON SHOULDN'T BE DRIVING.

AND PEOPLE CAN BE IMPAIRED BY MANY THINGS.

FATIGUE IS ONE OF THE MOST COMMON DANGERS ON THE HIGHWAY.

WE DON'T HEAR MUCH ABOUT THAT, BUT IN FACT, FATIGUE, PEOPLE FALL ING ASLEEP WHEN THEY'RE DRIVING, CAUSE AND VERY LARGE NUMBER OF TRAFFIC EXPECT.

TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MARIJUANA CAN IMPAIR DRIVING ABILITY, BUT TO A FAR SMALLER DEGREE GENERALLY THAN ALCOHOL.

PEOPLE WHO USE MARIJUANA FREQUENTLY AND OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, THEY KNOW WHEN THEY'RE IMPAIRED AND THEY ACTUALLY COMPENSATE -- THIS IS SCIENTIFICALLY VALIDATED.

I INVITE PEOPLE TO GO TO NORML.ORG AND WE HAVE A WEALTH OF LIBRARY OF STUDIES AND RESEARCH THERE.

STUDIES HAVE SHOWN GENERALLY THAT SOMEONE WHO'S NEVER SMOKE MARIJUANA IN HIS OR HER LIFE WHO'S USING IT FOR THE FIRST TIME MAY INDEED BE IMPAIRED SUBSTANTIALLY, BUT PEOPLE WHO HAVE USED MARIJUANA FOR MANY YEARS, PEOPLE WHO KNOW HOW MARIJUANA WORKS, GENERALLY THEY RECOGNIZE THEIR IMPAIRMENT.

UNLIKE ALCOHOL CONSUMERS WHO TEND TO BE OVERCONFIDENT, WHO THINK THEY'RE GREAT DRIVERS WHO IN FACT DON'T RECOGNIZE THEIR IMPAIRMENT, MARIJUANA SMOKERS KNOW THEY'RE IMPAIRED AND THEY COMPENSATE.

YOU KNOW, THE OLD CHEECH AND CHONG MOVIE STEREOTYPE IS SOMEBODY'S DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY, THE INTERSTATE, AT 35 MILES AN HOUR AND THAT'S NOT ENTIRELY A FALSE STEREOTYPE.

IN FACT, PEOPLE DO DRIVE MORE SLOWLY.

THEY LEAVE A LONGER SPACE BETWEEN CARS IN FRONT OF THEM, AND AGAIN, THIS IS SCIENTIFICALLY VALIDATED BY THE BEST AUTHORITIES THERE ARE.

MARIJUANA SMOKERS ARE NOT AS IMPAIRED AS DRINKERS GENERALLY.

NOW, PEOPLE THAT USE BOTH MAY HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM.

I DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FROM DRINKING AND SMOKING, ESPECIALLY.

THAT CAN BE VERY IMPAIRING, BUT MARIJUANA BY ITSELF IS REALLY NOT NEARLY AS DANGEROUS AS ALCOHOL, PARTLY BECAUSE PEOPLE RECOGNIZE THAT IMPAIRMENT AND COMPENSATE FOR IT.

>> THAT'S -- BUT DR. JOHNNY FEVER AT WKRP IN CINCINNATI, THERE'S AN EPISODE KIND OF LIKE THAT.

ALL RIGHT, DAN, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT -- I'M DRAWING A BLANK ON HIS NAME NOW, BUT HE USED TO BE THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THIS IS NOT ALL LIBERAL PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE CAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU ARE WITH NORML, THERE ARE CONSERVE TIM PEOPLE THAT ARE WITH YOU -- CONSERVATIVE PEOPLE THAT ARE WITH YOU ON THIS MISSION, THIS EFFORT, CORRECT?

>> INDEED THERE ARE.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT ABOUT THAT.

MANY CONSERVATIVES RECOGNIZE THAT THEIR CORE PRINCIPLES OF MINIMIZING GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE WITH OUR PERSONAL LIVES ARE CONSISTENT WITH LEGALIZATION.

MANY CONSERVATIVES THAT COME OVER TO OUR SIDE AND SUPPORT THE CAUSE OF MARIJUANA LAW REFORM, AND THAT INCLUDES SOME PEOPLE IN THE MISSOURI GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

THAT INCLUDES PEOPLE LIKE WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY BEFORE HE DIED, HE WENT OUT TO INTERNATIONAL WATERS WHERE HE AT LEAST THOUGHT IT WOULD BE LEGAL FOR HIM TO TRY MARIJUANA, AND HE ENDORSED LEGALIZATION.

BARRY GOLDWATER BEFORE HE DIED, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, ENDORSED MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

IT IS ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH CONSERVATIVE AND REPUBLICAN VALUES.

SO WE HAVE A BROAD BASE OF BIPARTISAN SUPPORT.

>> WELL, SPEAKING OF THAT, TWO QUESTIONS.

ONE, HOW ARE THE DISPENSARIES DOING IN THE OUT-STATE MISSOURI, A PLACE LIKE, SAY, SPRINGFIELD?

AND RELATED TO THAT, PEOPLE SOMETIMES COMPLAIN ABOUT GETTING A DISPENSARY IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

CHRISTINE BYERS WAS ON THE SHOW BEFORE AND WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT.

SO FIRST, HOW ARE WE DOING OUT-STATE AND HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH PEOPLE SAYING, HEY, I DON'T WANT THOSE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD?

>> I THINK THE OUT-STATE DISPENSARIES ARE DOING VERY WELL.

WE -- I AM HAPPY TO SAY THAT THOSE OF US WHO DRAFTED ARTICLE 14 REQUIRED THAT THE DISPENSARIES BE DISTRIBUTED GEOGRAPHICALLY ACCORDING TO POPULATION.

THERE'S A MINIMUM OF 24 PER CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.

SO OF COURSE, THAT RESULTS IN MANY MORE DISPENSARIES BEING IN THE HIGHLY POPULATED AREAS, BUT YOU'RE CORRECT, THERE ARE SOME DOWN IN SPRING FIELD AND THEY'RE DOING VERY WELL FROM ALL INDICATIONS I CAN SEE.

BUT THERE ARE NOT AS MANY OF THEM, OF COURSE, IN THAT AREA AS THERE ARE IN ST. LOUIS AND KANSAS CITY, SO THE GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION, I THINK, HAS WORKED OUT PRETTY WELL.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RURAL AREAS OF THE STATE WERE BEING SERVED AND THEY ARE.

WHILE RURAL FOLKS MAY HAVE TO DRIVE A LITTLE FARTHER FOR LOTS OF SERVICES AND PRODUCTS, CANNABIS INCLUDED, THEY CAN BE SURE THAT TYPICALLY WITHIN A REASONABLE DISTANCE, THEY'RE GOING TO FIND AN OPERATING DISPENSARY.

NOW, WE'VE GOT A LITTLE OVER 100 DISPENSARIES OPERATING RIGHT NOW, BUT BEFORE WE FINISHED, THERE WILL BE 192 DISPENSARIES, SO THERE WILL BE EVEN GREATER ACCESSIBILITY.

>> DAN, HOW DOES THE PERSON GO ABOUT GETTING THEIR MEDICAL MARIJUANA LICENSE?

>> WELL, THEY SHOULD FIRST TALK TO THEIR TREATING PHYSICIAN, TALK TO THE DOCTOR WHO THEY'RE BEING TREATED FOR WHATEVER INJURY OR AILMENT THEY BELIEVE THEY NEED CANNABIS FOR AND ASK THAT DOCTOR IF HE OR SHE WOULD BE WILLING TO SIGN OFF ON A CERTIFICATION.

DOCTORS TECHNICAL DON'T EVEN NEED TO RECOMMEND CANNABIS, THEY DON'T NEED TO CERTIFY THAT THE PATIENT BENEFITS FROM CANNABIS.

THEY NEED TO CERTIFY THAT THE PATIENTS HAVE AN APPROPRIATE AILMENT OR INJURY.

SO WE'VE TRIED TO MAKE IT EASY FOR DOCTORS TO SIGN THOSE.

NOW, WHAT'S HAPPENED IS THAT LOTS OF THE LARGE CORPORATE HEALTHCARE CLINICS AND HOSPITALS ARE FORBIDDING THEIR DOCTORS FROM SIGNING OFF ON CERTIFICATIONS.

I DON'T KNOW WHY IS THAT.

I THINK IT'S KIND OF A KNEEJERK CONSERVATIVE RESPONSE, THEIR LAWYERS PROBABLY THINK THERE MIGHT BE SOME KIND OF LIABILITY INVOLVE, SO WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS THE RISE OF CLINICS.

CLINICS THAT ARE DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY TO HELP PATIENTS BE QUALIFIED AS A LEGAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENT.

THERE ARE MANY OF THEM THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

I THINK THAT ALMOST ALL OF THEM ARE OPERATING AT A VERY LEGITIMATE AND ABOVE-BOARD MANNER, AND THEY FILL A VERY IMPORTANT NEED BECAUSE MANY, MANY DOCTORS, MANY PATIENTS' TREATING DOCTORS AREN'T ALLOWED TO SIGN OFF ON CERTIFICATES.

THAT'S WHY IF THEY'LL SIMPLY TAKE THEIR FILE OR DIAGNOSIS TO ONE OF THE CLTION, THE DOCTORS THERE WILL SIGN OFF AND SAY ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THIS PATIENT, THIS PATIENT DOES SUFFER FROM WHATEVER AILMENT IT MAY BE, AND THAT WILL QUALIFY THE PATIENT.

PATIENTS THEN, OR THE CLINIC IN MANY CASES, FILE THE APPLICATION ON THE INTERNET, ONLINE, AND DHHS HAS DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF GETTING A TIMELY RESPONSE.

WITHIN 30 DAYS AT MOST, THE PATIENT SHOULD HAVE A RESPONSE AND NORMALLY, IN A GREAT MAJORITY OF CASES, THAT AS POSITIVE RESPONSE.

DHHS GRANTS THE LICENSE.

THE PATIENT ACTUALLY PRINTS OFF THE LICENSE ONLINE, CAN PRINT AS MANY COPIES AS THEY WISH OF THAT LICENSE, THAT CARD, AND I URGE PATIENTS TO DO THAT.

DON'T JUST PRINT ONE COPY.

YOU KNOW, PRINT OUT A DOZEN OF THEM AND PUT THEM WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE WHEN YOU NEED THEM.

KEEP A FEW OF THEM IN YOUR CAR, KEEP A FEW OF THEM IN YOUR HOUSE, MAKE SURE YOU'VE GOT ONE IN YOUR POCKET, MAKE SURE YOU'RE ABLE TO PROVE THAT YOU ARE A LEGAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENT.

>> DAN, IS IT STILL A CASH BUSINESS?

I MEAN, THE CLINICS I'VE BEEN TO, THE DISPENSARIES I'VE BEEN TO IN OTHER STATES, YOU HAVE TO PAY CASH AND THAT SCARES PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY GOT TO HAVE ARMED GUARDS AROUND BECAUSE THE FEDS WON'T LET -- WON'T ACCEPT -- BANKS WON'T ACCEPT ANY OF IT.

WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT?

WHAT ARE WE DOING TO AMELIORATE THAT?

>> EXACTLY, AND WE ARE WORKING TO FIX THAT PROBLEM, BILL.

YOU'RE RIGHT, THE BANKS ARE SCARED.

MOST BANKS, THE GREAT MAJORITY OF BANKS ARE RELUCTANT TO EVEN DEAL WITH MEDICAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES BECAUSE IT'S STILL AGAINST FEDERAL LAW.

I GET SO SICK OF HEARING THAT, BUT IT IS TRUE.

IT IS STILL AGAINST FEDERAL LAW.

BANKS ARE WORRIED THAT THEY'RE LOSE THEIR FDIC CERTIFICATION, SO MOST BANKS WON'T DEAL WITH MARIJUANA BUSINESSES.

THERE ARE A FEW WHO WILL, HOWEVER, AND THOSE BANKS ARE DOING WELL.

THEY TAKE THE RISK -- I HAVEN'T HEARD OF ANY BANK GETTING IN TROUBLE YET.

MOST OF THE DISPENSARIES DO REQUIRE CASH.

HOWEVER, THEY HAVE AN ATM RIGHT THERE IN THE DISPENSARY TYPICALLY, SO IT'S NOT HARD.

YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO WALK IF WITH CASH.

JUST GO TO THE ATM, PULL OUT THE CASH, GIVE IT TO THE TELLER, OR THE CLERK, RATHER, AND MAKE YOUR PURCHASE.

THEY'VE ADAPTED.

THEY WERE WORRIED, FRANKLY, EARLY ON THAT THE REQUIREMENT TO DEAL IN CASH WOULD RESULT IN MAKING DISPENSARIES A TEMPTING TARGET FOR THIEVES AND ROBBERS, BUT THAT'S TURNED OUT NOT TO BE TRUE.

I MEAN, YES, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME ISOLATED INCIDENTS, BUT PARTLY BECAUSE THERE ARE ARMED GUARDS ON THE PREMISES.

THERE HAVE NOT BEEN VERY MANY DISPENSARIES THAT TRHAVE BEEN TARGETED BY ROBBERS.

>> I'VE SEEN A COUPLE THINGS ON TELEVISION ABOUT THE SPINOFF ECONOMY FROM PLACES THAT DO HAVE MEDICINAL MARIJUANA OR RECREATIONAL, AND LIKE ARMORED CAR DELIVERIES, PICKUPS TWO AND THREE TIMES A DAY, RESTAURANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, SO THERE'S -- ANOTHER WHOLE PART OF THE ECONOMY THAT THIS ALSO INFUSES MONEY INTO ALSO.

>> THAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S RIGHT.

AND BILL, TO ANSWER YOUR EARLIER QUESTION, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO FIX IT, CONGRESS IS WORKING ON THIS PROBLEM AND IT REALLY IS AN A BIPARTISAN ISSUE.

THERE ARE A LOT OF REPUBLICANS WHO NOW SUPPORT MAKING THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA INDUSTRY AND THE ADULT USE INDUSTRY WORK WELL.

ONE THING THAT HAPPENS WHEN BUSINESSES ARE FORCED TO DEAL IN CASH, I'M NOT SAYING IT HAPPENS A LOT, BUT SOME PEOPLE ARE TEMPTED TO SKIM OFF A LITTLE BIT.

SOME PEOPLE ARE TEMPTED TO NOT PAY THE FULL AMOUNT OF THEIR IRS INCOME TAX BECAUSE THEY'RE MAKING ME DO THIS IN ISSUE, AND THERE'S ALSO A PROBLEM CALLED 280(E), A FEDERAL IRS REGULATION THAT SAYS IF YOU'RE DEALING IN A SUBSTANCE THAT'S FEDERALLY ILLEGAL, YOU CANNOT DEDUCT YOUR BUSINESS EXPENSES.

THERE'S SOME WAY TO MINIMIZE THAT PROBLEM, BUT IT'S STILL A VERY REAL PROBLEM FOR THE INDUSTRY.

VERY DIFFICULT TO MAKE MONEY IN ANY BUSINESS IF YOU HAVE TO PAY TAXES ON YOUR GROSS INCOME, AND THAT'S THE SITUATION RIGHT NOW.

HOWEVER, ONCE AGAIN, CONGRESS IN A BIPARTISAN FASHION, WITH LEADERSHIP FROM NANCY PELOSI IN THE HOUSE AND CHUCK SCHUMER IN THE SENATE, THEY ARE WORKING AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE THOSE PROBLEMS FIXED IN SHORT ORDER.

THERE'S SOMETHING CALLED THE SAFE -- THEY LOVE ACRONYMS IN CONGRESS, SO THE SAFE, I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT IT STANDS FOR, BUT SAFE BANKING ACT IS GETTING FARTHER THROUGH THE PROCESS ALL THE TIME.

THAT WILL PIFIX THE BANKING PROBLEM, FIX THE 280(E) PROBLEM AND THERE ARE BILLS PENDING IN THE HOUSE AND VERY SOON CHUCK SCHUMER IS GOING TO FILE A BILL IN THE SENATE TO REPEAL THE FEDERAL PROHIBITION.

THAT IS LIKELY IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE.

I'M TALKING WITHIN ONE OR TWO YEARS, IT IS LIKELY THE FEDERAL PROHIBITION WILL BE REPEALED.

>> AND ONCE THAT HAPPENS, NOW, ARE STATES OPEN TO DO WHAT THEY WANT, OBVIOUSLY, BUT WOULD THAT RELIEVE SOME OF THE PRESSURE TO FEEL LIKE PHILOSOPHICALLY AND PARTY AND WHATEVER REASON, THAT WE HAVE TO STAND AGAINST THIS?

>> I THINK SO.

I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.

I THINK IT WILL MAKE EVERYONE IN THE INDUSTRY A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE.

I CAN TELL YOU MY CLIENTS, I HAVE INDIVIDUALS CHARGED WITH MARIJUANA AND MANY OF THEM ARE PATIENTS AND THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THE FEDERAL PROHIBITION.

NOW, IN FACT, CONGRESS HAS PASSED AN AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL BUDGET EACH OF THE PAST SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS WHICH PHYSICALLY FORBIDS, FEDERAL AGENCIES, THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, DEA, SO FORTH, THEY CANNOT SPEND ONE PENNY OF TAX MONEY INTERFERING WITH THE OPERATION OF STATE LEGAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES.

AND SO ALTHOUGH I FIND WILLFUL COUNTY JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS ARE SUDDENLY VERY CONCERNED ABOUT FEDERAL LAW, IN FACT THE FEDERAL AUTHORITIES NEVER PROSECUTE PEOPLE FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA AS LONG AS THEY'RE OPERATING WITHIN STATE LAW.

>> DAN, HOW ABOUT DRUG TESTING?

I REMEMBER DOING A COLUMN ON POSTAL WORKER WHO WAS INJURED AND THEN WAS REQUIRED AS PART OF THE TREATMENT TO GET AN IMMEDIATE DRUG TEST, AND SHE CAME OUT POSITIVE FOR MARIJUANA AND SHE SAID, WELL, I WAS IN COLORADO ON VACATION A WEEK AGO.

HOW IS THAT SORTING ITSELF OUT?

NOW THAT PEOPLE CAN BE AROUND MARIJUANA.

>> RIGHT, RIGHT.

WE WERE WORRIED, FRANKLY, WHEN WE DRAFTED ARTICLE 14 THAT IF WE TRIED TO INCORPORATE PROTECTIONS AGAINST EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION, WE MIGHT SEE A LOT OF PUSHBACK, NOT ONLY FRBSS, BUT FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

IN FACT, MORE RECENT POLLING SHOWS THAT IS NOT THE CASE.

JUST AS PEOPLE ARE PROTECTED IN THEIR USE OF CONVENTIONAL PHARMACEUTICAL MEDICATIONS, AS LONG AS THEY'RE USING THEM CONSISTENTLY WITH THEIR DOCTOR'S INSTRUCTIONS, THERE IS PROTECTION FOR THEM FROM EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION.

WE ARE CONSIDERING INCORPORATING SUCH PROTECTION INTO THE INITIATIVE WE HOPE TO PUT ON THE BALLOT NEXT NOVEMBER HERE IN MISSOURI.

>> AND THAT'S RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA?

>> WELL, THAT WOULD DEAL WITH -- THAT WOULD ESTABLISH THE LEGALIZATION OF NON-MEDICAL ADULT USE.

I TRY TO AVOID THE TERM RECREATIONAL, WHICH I THINK KIND OF TRIVIALIZES IT, BUT NON-MEDICAL USE, AND WHAT WE WOULD ALSO VERY LIKELY GO BACK AND MAKE SOME TWEAKS IN THE ORIGINAL MEDICAL LAW AS WELL, AND ONE OF THOSE WOULD BE, AS I SAY, AND I HOPE IN THE FINAL DRAFT THAT IT WILL INCORPORATE PROTECTION AGAINST EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS.

NOW, THERE IS -- THERE ARE SOME COMMUNITIES RECENTLY WHO HAVE OUTLAWED DRUG TESTING, PRE-EMPLOYMENT DRUG TESTING.

PHILADELPHIA JUST DID THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'LL SEE THAT VERY SOON HERE IN MISSOURI, AND EVEN THE PROTECTIONS THAT WE DO INTEND TO INCORPORATE IN THE LAW DOES NOT MEAN PEOPLE CAN USE MARIJUANA AT WORK OR COME TO WORK IMPAIRED BY MARIJUANA.

BUT IT MEANS THAT THEY CANNOT BE PUNISHED OR TERMINATED MERELY BECAUSE THEY TEST POSITIVE IF THEY ARE A LEGAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENT.

>> DAN, WE GOT 30 SECONDS BEFORE WE GET OUT OF HERE.

HOW DO WE GET IN TOUCH WITH YOU IF YOU WANT TO SUPPORT NORNL, HOW DO WE DO THAT?

>> WELL, MISSOURI NORML HAS A WEBSITE AND FACEBOOK PAGE.

I URGE PEOPLE TO JOIN NORML, GO TO NORML.ORG, PAY YOUR DUES, SIGN UP FOR THE NATIONAL MAILING LIST AND BECOME PART OF THE CAMPAIGN.

WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING HARD TO GATHER SIGNATURES LATE THIS SUMMER TO PUT THIS MEASURE ACTIVE LEGALIZED ADULT USE ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER.

>> THANK YOU, BILL, THANK YOU DAN.

WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK ON DONNYBROOK AND DONNYBROOK NEXT UP.

HAVE A GREAT WEEK.

>> THANK YOU.

>> Announcer: DONNYBROOK IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE SUPPORT OF THE BETSY AND THOMAS PATTERSON FOUNDATION AND THE MEMBERS OF NINE PBS.