The state of Colorado is participating in a gigantic experiment as it implements the constitutional amendment voters approved in 2012 to make recreational marijuana sales legal to those older than age 21. Amendment 64 very clearly included products that contain marijuana – which includes sugary treats such as gummy bears, chocolates, brownies and cookies. What it did not address is how to feasibly package and market those products so as to keep them out of children’s hands and warn users of their potency.
A group tasked with recommending action to the Legislature failed to do so, instead sending lawmakers six divergent proposals. It was a missed opportunity for stakeholders to inform policy.
The Colorado Legislature created the Edibles Work Group in the 2014 session via House Bill 1366, “requiring edible retail marijuana products to be shaped, stamped, colored or otherwise marked with a standard symbol indicating that it contains marijuana and is not for consumption by children.” The requirement will take effect in January 2016, but the Legislature sought guidance from the work group of industry representatives, medical professionals, public-health representatives, elected officials, law enforcement and food-manufacturing experts. The panel met four times beginning in August with the job of drafting recommendations for the Legislature to consider in the 2015 session.
Rather than reaching consensus, though, some among the panel emerged from its sessions further entrenched in their respective positions. The resulting recommendations to the Legislature are wide-ranging. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment would have the Legislature create a commission that pre-approves all edible-marijuana products before they are placed in retail outlets. SMART Colorado, whose mission is to “protect the health, safety and well-being of Colorado youth as marijuana becomes increasingly available and commercialized,” would like all such products to be airbrushed with a universal symbol denoting the marijuana that lies within – so that when they are separated from their packaging, marijuana-laced brownies, cookies, crackers, et al., would be readily identifiable. Chief Marco Vasquez, of the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, proposed a recommendation encompassing that of SMART, but would ban those products that did not lend themselves to such identification. Ian Barringer, who owns a marijuana-testing facility, recommended that the Legislature study the number and nature of accidental marijuana ingestions as compared to other accidental ingestions as well as an estimate of costs to comply with the new rules. Clearly, there is not consensus among the group – even as to whether the law is worth following.
And, in fact, it is. While parents bear the ultimate responsibility of educating their children about marijuana-infused goodies, there must be some very visual indicators associated with the products. The landscape is untrammeled and therefore unfamiliar – for children and adults alike. The ramifications of accidental ingestion could be quite dramatic for an unsuspecting child, or even an adult who is not anticipating such a powerful dose of marijuana. Better, then, to err on the side of caution. Those who know what they are getting into will not be hampered; those who do not may be saved from a frightening or dangerous experience. The Edibles Work Group should reconvene, set aside its differences, and work toward the common good it was asked to inform.
