WisconsinWatch.org (https://www.wisconsinwatch.org/author/guest-author/)
During the hectic legislative session in February, one thing got lost: the public’s ability to participate fully in the process. That’s because the public wasn’t given adequate notice of some public hearings.
Marijuana’s illegality nationally makes it difficult to study, and its prohibition in Wisconsin makes it hard to obtain for people who rely on it for treatment.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has OK’d just four medicines containing cannabis-related products; other countries have approved more.
Wisconsin’s tradition of government transparency rests on the state’s open records and open meetings laws. Unfortunately, those laws are woefully underenforced.
As Justice Shirley Abrahamson ends her tenure on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, after 43 years and more than 1,300 authored opinions, she leaves a rich legacy of legal scholarship, importantly including her support for government transparency.
Users of marijuana and its derivatives are everywhere — from children with serious illness to dogs, and in cities and a small town hair salon.
Writing rules has proven to be challenging; many communities that voted ‘yes’ to legalizing recreational marijuana now say ‘no’ to retail sales.
Even in states such as Colorado where cannabis has been legal for many years, not everyone is on board; New Jersey, New York fail to reach consensus on legalization.
Your May piece by Natalie Yahr about illegals detained at our border reinforces the growing argument that our media is doing this country no favors by continuing to cover the immigration issue from just one perspective, i.e. “us vs. them.”
Polls and referenda show Wisconsinites are warming to the idea of legalizing marijuana for medical or recreational use. But not everyone is on board.
Some growers, boosted by the recent legalization of hemp, say the rapidly expanding industry could pave the way for medical or recreational marijuana.
When so much about politics is partisan, one might expect a topic like police body cameras to be contentious, particularly as it relates to public access to recordings.