Tag Archives: commerce

TRUMP’S DHS CHIEF JUST FLIPPED! WHAT HE SAID ABOUT THE WAR ON DRUGS IS GAME-CHANGING!


 

Untitled

The Next News Network

Published on Apr 18, 2017

MORE INFO: http://CannaSense.com | Email Jordan jpage@cannasense.com | Sub for more: http://nnn.is/the_new_media | Eliot Nelson for the Huffington Post reports, Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly said that marijuana “is not a factor in the drug war,” placing him at odds with a number of other Trump administration officials.
Take action MORE INFO: http://CannaSense.com
Email Jordan jpage@cannasense.com
See the report here:
https://youtu.be/LM-f3qlRYMM
ref:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/j…
————————————————————————————
SUPPORT THE NETWORK WITH THE LINKS BELOW!
————————————————————————————
Patreon $5/mo: http://nnn.is/monthly-gift-5
Give Once: http://nnn.is/one-time-gift
Give BTC: 13Hd1HFqS5CDLCMcFQPWu9wumubo6X2hSM
Tip Brian The Editor: http://nextnewsnetwork.com/tip-the-ed…
T-Shirt Shop: http://nnn.is/get-your-gear-here
Teach Your Child About Liberty: http://nnn.is/1HvxU37
Get the Smartphone app that is restoring freedom here:
http://nnn.is/Download-Candid-Here
Learn What Stocks Will Survive The Collapse:
http://nnn.is/n3-trade-genius
Watch Us on Tiger Steam!
http://nnn.is/GET-TIGER — $50 off promocode: BUYTIGERSTREAM
Get The Tea!
http://GetTheTea.com
Stock Up On Survival Food Today!
http://www.foodforliberty.com/nextnews
GET YOUR TACTICAL GEAR!
Get The Light! http://nnn.is/tac-lights
Get The Pen! http://nnn.is/tac-pen
Get The Headlamp! http://nnn.is/tac-headlamp
—————————————-
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL!
—————————————
http://Facebook.com/NextNewsNet
http://Twitter.com/NextNewsNet
http://NextNewsNetwork.com
Hashtag: #N3
Copyright Disclaimer: Citation of articles and authors in this report does not imply ownership. Works and images presented here fall under Fair Use Section 107 and are used for commentary on globally significant newsworthy events. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.

CONTINUE TO VIDEO!!!

The “Lessor of Evils” as a Defense for Marijuana


 

MARY 2

April 13, 2017

Mary Thomas-Spears

I must start out with a initial plea of Guilty but Innocent in Order to initiate the Process of establishing no “Mens Rae” with the Motion of a “Lessor of Evils” defense, based on having no other choice but evil in the case at hand!

As for guilt, I have none and I have already proven it by my already having plead Guilty and Not! Based on a Motion for a “Lessor of Evils”.

I am then given the chance to introduce all the evidence in Court that in fact proves my innocence and my lack of guilt in the case or crime I am being charged for…

The real two evil choices you/we are currently given in a Marijuana Case is either ~

A)

I/you/we know we are being forced into choosing between the Evil of choosing to “Uphold” an evil Abusive LIE… = Unconstitutional Controlled Substance Act = Prohibition which they created to divide the Market place for double the profit in order to drive prices, as this also allows for more venues or avenues, for them to profit in while they enslave everyone we love… and everything through their unconstitutionally declared “Foreign Synthetic War” on Nature, I mean drugs! The “drug war” which evidence shows has already destroyed too much and too many in America… While be forced to give up my/your already won Supreme Court decision of Leary vs The U.S, which established Constitutional Inalienable Sovereign Freedoms and Rights… While we bend over for Evil…

Or

B) We risk being deemed evil and getting arrested, criminalized, going to prison, or even worse dying… shot by a cop… For doing the right thing and flexing my Constitutional Inalienable Sovereign freedoms and rights to utilize this plant untaxed, which was upheld in the Supreme Courts Ruling in Leary vs The U.S.!

For my/your/our needs and or the needs of others…

Which they have deemed as evil? And want to call me/you/us a criminal for  violating and breaking their Unconstitutional Illegal overreach and Acts of Congress and Statutes… Not Law! to use this non-toxic food as it was freely Divinely and Sacramentally given to us as a nontoxic most nutritious meat first!  As we also now know that we are all in fact, Endocannabinoid based species or life forms and we also know that it is in fact malnutrition that causes the majority of disease and death…

While many are suffering in pain, in jails or prison, starving and dying from not having this food and the genocide and Slaves being caused by all their propaganda Legal Lies – Legalize BS Babble being told by their Big Corporate Industrial Synthetic Military Prison Church Complex!

Just in order for us to… be, eat, heal, sleep, maintain,… Naturally as it was Divinely ordained by/in Nature and/or G-d…

As apposed to being forced to utilize addictive and/or become dependent and/or being poisoned by all of it… Their patented chemical synthetic look alikes… When we know for a fact, that Cannabis/Marijuana is non-toxic… Breaks Addiction and Dependency while it has has so many other good industrial uses… For our sustainability and tranquility!

https://marythomasspearsblog.wordpress.com/2017/04/12/is-no-mans-rae-the-plea-to-set-us-free/comment-page-1/#comment-5

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesser_of_two_evils_principle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leary_v._United_States

http://www.differencebetween.info/difference-between-statutory-law-and-constitutional-law

http://norml.org/library/item/introduction-to-the-endocannabinoid-system

Bob Dylan called them the ‘Masters of War’, while US President Dwight D. Eisenhower famously urged Americans to “guard against” the growing power of the “military-industrial complex.”


Arms firms from around the world will descend on East London next week for the 2015 Defence Security and Equipment International (DSEI) exhibition. RT takes a look at this year’s big vendors peddling their wares.

Bob Dylan called them the ‘Masters of War’, while US President Dwight D. Eisenhower famously urged Americans to “guard against” the growing power of the “military-industrial complex.”

In the 21st century, manufacturing death is still a thriving business. With the world’s biggest arms fair taking place in London next week, dozens of weapons companies will descend on the capital to sell their latest tools of destruction.

Global wars have become far more deadly in recent years, despite the overall number of conflicts falling. Wars being fought in Syria, South Sudan, Afghanistan and Iraq are extremely violent partly due to the proliferation of increasingly destructive guns, tanks, fighter jets and drones.

RT takes a closer look at this year’s merchants profiting from war.

Lockheed Martin

With net sales for 2014 totaling $45.6 billion, US-based Lockheed Martin is the largest arms company in the world. Lockheed received $22 billion in contracts from the US Department of Defense alone in 2014, roughly 9 percent of all contracts awarded by the Pentagon.

Lockheed has weathered several high profile scandals since its founding in 1912. The company was caught bribing Japanese Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka in 1976, a revelation which forced his resignation. Last month the company paid $4.7 million to the Justice Department to settle charges it won a lucrative contract by paying a former US Representative-turned-lobbyist with taxpayer funds.

BAE Systems

The third largest arms producer in the world, BAE Systems is a FTSE 100 company which posted a £16.6 billion (US$25.6 billion) turnover in 2014 and a £0.75 billion profit. The UK-based firm has military customers in over 100 countries.

BAE came into existence when British Aerospace merged with Marconi Electronic Systems in 1999. The company manufacturers everything from fighter jets to aircraft carriers and has recently shifted its focus to cyber security.

BAE’s customers include the militaries of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Egypt – three countries known for their authoritarian regimes and, in the case of Saudi Arabia, aggressive foreign policy.

Finmeccanica

Few people have heard of Finmeccanica, yet the firm is the ninth biggest arms company in the world. Part-owned by the Italian state (30 percent), Finmeccanica had a turnover of €15.62 billion (£11.37 billion) in 2014 and a profit of €20 million (£14.57 million). Despite its Italian roots, Finmeccanica is well established in the UK having acquired Westland Helicopters.

In April, Italian police announced they are investigating the firm for suspected corruption in the sale of helicopters to Algeria. An Italian court handed senior Finmeccanica employee Giuseppe Orsi a two-year suspended sentence for false bookkeeping last year, but acquitted him of bribery charges.

Chemring

This UK-based company is ranked 68th in the top 100 arms producing firms, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Chemring is listed on the London Stock Exchange and had a turnover of £474 million in 2014 and a profit of £54.9 million.

Although it’s not as big a player as BAE, Chemring is still a major producer of munitions, counter-IED systems and crowd control products, such as smoke grenades. During the Arab Spring, plastic bullets and gas grenades made by Chemring were used against protestors by Kuwaiti and Egyptian security forces. They also arm Predator and Reaper drones, used by the CIA in controversial assassinations.

CONTINUE READING…

House passes bill to prevent mandatory GMO labeling


 

"We should not raise prices on consumers based on the wishes of a handful of activists."

 

Posted: Thursday, July 23, 2015 5:39 pm | Updated: 6:01 pm, Thu Jul 23, 2015.

Associated Press |

WASHINGTON (AP) — Food companies would not have to disclose whether their products include genetically modified ingredients under legislation passed by the House Thursday.

The House bill is backed by the food industry, which has fought mandatory labeling efforts in several states around the country. The legislation, which passed 275-150, would prevent states from requiring package labels to indicate the presence of genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.

So far, Vermont is the only state set to require the labels. That law will take effect in July 2016 if it survives a legal challenge from the food industry. Maine and Connecticut have also passed laws requiring the labeling, but those measures don’t take effect unless neighboring states follow suit.

The country’s largest food companies say genetically modified foods are safe and that labels would be misleading. They say a patchwork of laws around the country would be expensive for companies and confusing for consumers.

"The reality is, biotechnology has time and time again proved safe," the bill’s sponsor, Kansas Republican Rep. Mike Pompeo, said on the House floor. "We should not raise prices on consumers based on the wishes of a handful of activists."

Advocates for the labels say people have a right to know what is in their food and criticize the legislation for trying to take away states’ ability to require the labels.

"What’s the problem with letting consumers know what they are buying?" asked Vermont Rep. Peter Welch, a Democrat.

Genetically modified seeds are engineered in laboratories to have certain traits, like resistance to herbicides. The majority of the country’s corn and soybean crop is now genetically modified, with much of that going to animal feed. It also is made into popular processed food ingredients like high-fructose corn syrup, corn starch and soybean oil.

The food industry says about 75 percent to 80 percent of foods contain genetically modified ingredients.

The Food and Drug Administration has said GMOs are safe, and the federal government does not support mandatory labels. Even so, the House bill would make it harder for the agency to require labeling nationally by laying out additional standards for such a policy.

At the same time, the legislation would step up FDA oversight by requiring that any new genetically engineered products be reviewed by the agency before they can be sold. That process is now voluntary for most modified foods.

The bill would also create a new certification process at the Agriculture Department for foods that are labeled free of GMOs. That would mean anyone wanting to use that label would eventually have to apply. Organic foods would be automatically certified, since they are already required to be free of engineered ingredients.

A December Associated Press-GfK poll found that two-thirds of Americans support labeling of genetically modified ingredients on food packages.

Many of those who support the labels say they have no problem buying food containing GMOs, but they think there should be more accountability in the food industry. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said Wednesday in a speech opposing the bill that he buys genetically modified foods but thinks it should be a choice.

Michael Gruber of the Grocery Manufacturers of America, the industry group leading the fight against mandatory labels, says those who want the labels are trying to scare people away from genetically modified foods. "This is to tear down brands in the name of right to know," Gruber said.

There is no similar bill in the Senate, although Sen. John Heaven, R-N.D., has said he is working on legislation.

It’s unclear whether President Barack Obama would sign the legislation. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has been supportive of genetically modified crops and has praised voluntary labeling solutions like special bar codes on packages to allow consumers to access information via smartphone. But the White House has not said whether it will endorse the House bill.

Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin said after the vote that people who want to know what’s in their food will eventually win the fight.

Americans "are demanding the right to know," Shumlin said.

___

Associated Press writer Wilson Ring in Montpelier, Vt., contributed to this report.

___

Follow Mary Clare Japonica on Twitter http://twitter.com/mcjalonick

CONTINUE READING…

Marijuana could be a $35 billion market by 2020


Published: July 15, 2015 1:36 p.m. ET

 

If all 50 states were to fully legalize pot, it could generate big sales

 

By

KathleenBurke

Reporter

If all 50 U.S. states were to approve the consumption of marijuana for medical and recreational use, it could become a $35 billion market by 2020.

That’s according to GreenWave Advisors, an industry research firm that tracks retail sales in the four states and the District of Columbia that have already legalized it. Those markets have experienced explosive growth since marijuana was approved, demonstrating the strong opportunity for industry players and state governments eager to gather the tax on sales and replenish their coffers.

The sale of recreational marijuana in Washington began July 8, 2014, and has steadily grown to $31.9 million in June from $2 million in that first month, or a total of nearly $180 million for the first 12 months, according to an analysis by Marijuana Business Daily of data from the state’s Liquor Control Board.

The Washington market is catching up on recreational sales in Colorado, which began in January 2014. Colorado state retailers brought in about $305 million in sales in 2014, according to GreenWave Advisors.

See also: Get marijuana on demand for $95 a month

Analysts attribute the growth in sales to a variety of factors, primarily the conversion of a long-existing black market to a regulated one.

“We’ve never had an industry that was a black market industry of this size,” said Leslie Bocskor, founder of cannabis industry consulting firm Electrum Partners.

Steve Gormley, chief business development officer at OSL Holdings, Inc. (OSLH), a company focused on consumer advocacy and social activism, compared legalization to the repeal of alcohol prohibition in 1933.

“As was the case in advance of the federal repeal of alcohol prohibition, there is a landscape of opportunity in states that allow for the use of recreational or medical marijuana,” Gormley said.

Analysts identify California as the watershed state that would lead to the rest of the country approving full legalization. State voters will decide on the issue on the November 2016 ballot.

“California is the big kahuna,” said Matt Karnes, founder of GreenWave Advisors.

Gormley agreed. “…It is a tremendous market, with its proximity to Washington and Colorado, there is an advantage from a revenue standpoint of legalizing recreational, and we will start to see other states moving rapidly in the same direction.”

As the recreational industry grows, there will be increasing opportunities for businesses to enter the market.

“This is an industry that is allowing people to come in and start businesses that they otherwise might not have been able to start,” Bocskor said. “The events and pressures—pressure for regulation of markets, federal legality versus state legality—create a unique business environment never seen before.”

See also: Marijuana moms shatter the grass ceiling

Though the budding market might seem attractive to potential investors, Gormley advises careful research before dedicating funds.

“The reality is you want to make investments in companies with solid fundamentals rather than concepts, specifically publicly traded companies in the space,” Gormley said. “If investors are going to go in privately, you need to have a well-developed network of people inside the industry. There are a lot of crooks out there, and investors can get fleeced. ”

Despite the potential risks, analysts expect the market to continue its upward trajectory for the foreseeable future.

“It will eventually plateau, but we still have a few years of growth,” Bocskor said. “Growth begets growth.”

More from MarketWatch

CONTINUE READING…

Let’s talk about DOJ enforcement of marijuana laws…(on Tribal Lands)


In reference to the last post regarding the enforcement of marijuana laws on tribal lands:

Justice Department on Thursday will tell U.S. attorneys to not prevent tribes from growing or selling marijuana on the sovereign lands

Today, via this link, the Department of Justice, as reported by the LA Times has/will produce a “Memorandum” concerning the enforcement of marijuana laws on Tribal Lands which seems to say that they will not bother prosecuting Federal laws on marijuana anymore.

The Justice Department will generally not try to enforce federal marijuana laws on Native American reservations.

“The new guidance, released in a memorandum, will be implemented on a case-by-case basis and tribes must still follow federal guidelines, said Timothy Purdon, the U.S. attorney for North Dakota and the chairman of the Attorney General’s Subcommittee on Native American Issues.”

The policy comes on the heels of the 2013 Justice Department decision to stop most federal marijuana prosecutions in states that have legalized the possession or sale of pot.

I would caution everyone to be very slow to rush in and shout a victory has been won.

The Federal Government has a way of making you think you have won freedoms which in effect you have not as the regulations surrounding that freedom end up making you into a criminal over and over again. Kind of like the CBD bill in Kentucky which it turns out you can buy CBD (with no THC) online all day long and it is legal without a prescription!  So why did we fight for the CBD bill?  So that the Physicians, Pharmas, and other corporate and government entities can make money on the bandwagon to “legalize” on the backs of all of us.

This MEMORANDUM which personally I have not seen published yet, should be studied closely as to what it actually MEANS, not just what it seems to say.

First of all a memorandum from the Department of Justice does not mean they have REPEALED the statutes in existence at the federal level regarding marijuana.  They can and likely will continue to interfere with marijuana production and sales.

This has been proven over and over again in all “legalized” or “medical” states that the Feds can and do still come in to support the “regulating” of the marijuana statutes.

As well, the U.N. has NOT at this point “repealed” any treaty regarding the use of marijuana in any form.  They have “talked about” changing the way that the “drug problem” is handled.  That being said, marijuana is still illegal. See these links:

U.S. states’ pot legalization not in line with international law: U.N. agency

More Police or More Doctors? How to Best Tackle Illicit Drugs: November 6, 2014

So while the Reservations get ready for their “grand openings” at the cannabis casino that they have most likely already planned for, I hope that they realize that once again they may be giving away their sovereign rights via pending “legalization”…

It’s all in the semantics…

Read between the lines first…

smk

How Facebook Could End Up Controlling Everything You Watch and Read Online


 

How many of you are reading this because of a link you clicked on Facebook? In the online publishing industry (which WIRED obviously is part of), Facebook’s influence on site traffic—and therefore ad revenue—is difficult to overstate. Over the past year especially, “the homepage is dead” has become a standard line among media pundits. And more than anything else, it’s Facebook that killed it.

Given that links appear to be more clickable when shared on Facebook, online publishers have scrambled to become savvy gamers of Facebook’s News Feed, seeking to divine the secret rules that push some stories higher than others. But all this genuflection at the altar of Facebook’s algorithms may be but a prelude to a more fundamental shift in how content is produced, shared, and consumed online. Instead of going to all this trouble to get people to click a link on Facebook that takes them somewhere else, the future of Internet content may be a world in which no video, article, or cat GIF gallery lives outside of Facebook at all.

The prospect of Facebook becoming the Internet’s ultimate content cannibal got a big push earlier this week by New York Times media columnist David Carr. In his column Monday, Carr said Facebook is talking to some publishers about simply hosting their pages itself. Facebook’s apparent pitch is it’s already got a mobile experience users love, so why not cut out the extra click and deliver content more directly in a way audiences prefer? Oh, and Facebook will share the ad revenue.

Publishers likely will balk at ceding so much control to Facebook. But in the end, they may not have much choice. The arrangement might sound like a partnership at first, but it could end up like Amazon and the book industry. Book publishers may hate dealing with Amazon and resent its influence over their sales. But the last thing they would do is pull their books from Amazon. Thanks to its outsized leverage, Facebook’s ability to dictate terms to online publishers could wind up much the same.

Mobile Money

As other media companies struggle to make mobile advertising pay, Facebook has become the master of the medium. In third-quarter earnings results reported Tuesday, the company posted a record $3.2 billion in revenue. Of that, nearly $2 billion came from mobile advertising. Facebook’s soaring growth to more than 1.3 billion monthly active users closely parallels its growth in mobile users. What’s more, mobile-only users account for one-third of Facebook’s user base.

For struggling publishers, going all-in with Facebook and getting even a tiny piece of that mobile ad money might seem much more appealing than limping along alone—and not just because Facebook has a proven ability to monetize mobile traffic. A publisher willing to place all of its content within Facebook’s walls could theoretically see that loyalty rewarded with better, more frequent placement in more News Feeds. Meanwhile, publishers that stubbornly stay on the outside might see their links get less of a boost. As a result, their traffic could suffer.

To be sure, Facebook has a strong interest in ensuring good stuff appears in users’ feeds, regardless of where that content calls home. If crappy content creators alone opt into a Facebook-only platform, and Facebook only promotes that crappy content, users might flee to where the good stuff lives. But Facebook probably wouldn’t be so blatant anyway. Its efforts at control will be more subtle.

Feed Frenzy

In Facebook’s earnings call Tuesday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg mentioned the prominent role he sees for content in Facebook’s future:

Video is a very big priority. News is a very big priority, because a lot of people want to share that on Facebook already. And enabling public figures, whether they are celebrities, they are athletes, they are actors, or politicians or leaders in different kind of communities to get on Facebook and use the platform to distribute the content that they want.

So those are the three areas that you’ll probably see us investing the most in over the next year or so.

If Zuckerberg calls something a “big priority,” relevant companies best take notice. This is the same CEO who also said products don’t really get interesting until they have about 1 billion people using them. Facebook is now well past that threshold, which shareholders will be thankful to know means Zuckerberg finds it an interesting business. Which from a business standpoint means he’s unlikely to compromise.

What might an uncompromising approach to content look like? Imagine a publisher posts a YouTube link to Facebook and gets a few “likes” and clicks. Then imagine that same publisher uploads a video to Facebook, and gets a lot more views and “likes.” Maybe it’s a fluke. But over time, a pattern emerges. The videos posted straight to Facebook get watched more. Soon enough, all their videos are going straight to Facebook. Perhaps over time, the process repeats itself for other kinds of content.

Content With Facebook

For Zuckerberg, the business rationale behind encouraging such a transition isn’t sticking it to publishers but to YouTube’s parent company Google, which has as much interest in seeing content continuing living on the web as Facebook does in encouraging that content to migrate off it. For that matter, any company that commands outsize audience attention online probably is within Facebook’s sights. For instance, the company no doubt would love to monetize the hours you spend binge-watching on Netflix.

Enter Facebook’s deal with Hollywood studio Lionsgate, which is set to release five short films based on the blockbuster Twilight franchise exclusively on Facebook next year. Facebook may have built its empire on content generated by users. But that empire has become so effective at commanding attention online that Facebook has no reason not to try its hand at original and exclusive professional-grade content. Time spent on Facebook is money for Facebook. If an online shopping site can start making TV shows people will watch, Facebook could, too.

As for owning the future of content, Facebook already does. The company’s $2 billion purchase of virtual-reality headset maker Oculus might seem to be an extravagance in the context of Facebook as it looks and functions today. No one needs to friend you in 3-D. But as Facebook catches up to the web as a content platform, a mature, consumer-ready version of Oculus could catapult the company ahead. Not that Zuckerberg is in a hurry. He said he pictures somewhere between 50 million and 100 million Oculus headsets sold over the next 10 years.

By then, Zuckerberg will be just 40 years old. It’s only natural that he take the long view of his company’s future. “We’re going to be here for decades,” Zuckerberg told Wall Street analysts Tuesday. But when it comes to content, the more important question might be: will anyone else?

CONTINUE READING…

Amneal Undertakes Major Sales and Distribution Expansion in Kentucky


Published: Sept 23, 2014 4:31 p.m. ET

Newly-leased space in Glasgow will nearly double size of current operations

BRIDGEWATER, N.J., Sep 23, 2014 (BUSINESS WIRE) — Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC (www.amneal.com), one of the largest generic drug suppliers in the U.S., has signed a lease for a second location in Glasgow, Kentucky that will nearly double the size of its national sales and distribution center.

Tony Hodges, Vice President for Global Logistics, discussed Amneal’s latest growth plans in the state at a Glasgow-Barren County Chamber of Commerce breakfast on September 12. The company was honored as the 2014 Industry of the Year, chosen by Chamber members, during the event.

Amneal acquired the lease at 40 Aberdeen Drive in the former Carhartt Building from Aphena Pharma Solutions, a medication packaging firm and Amneal supplier, which announced it will cease operations in Glasgow at the end of the month. The building will be refurbished to create a 120,000 sq. ft. warehouse and 6,000 sq. ft. of offices to support logistics. When the expansion is complete, the company’s Glasgow operations will occupy a total of 221,000 sq. ft.

Since 2007, Amneal’s Kentucky sales and distribution capabilities have grown dramatically (see Figure 1 here). Upon acquiring Akyma Pharmaceuticals that year, the company moved into its 3,000 sq. ft. offices at 104 Hippocrates Way and 30,000 sq. ft. warehouse in nearby Fountain Run. In 2010 Amneal consolidated distribution logistics and sales operations in-state rather than relocating these critical functions near its headquarters and manufacturing plants in metro New York by leasing a much-larger 115,000 sq. ft. facility at 118 Beaver Trail.

Amneal has invested over $6.6 million in Glasgow and created jobs for 80 Kentuckians to date, exceeding this year’s goal. Figure 2 (view here) shows actual employment growth from 2008-2014. Once the Aberdeen Drive expansion is complete, the generic maker will employ over 90 local residents.

For its earlier project, Amneal secured multi-year tax incentives through the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority (KEDFA) and the Kentucky Business Investment (KBI) program. The company also obtained an economic development loan from the Glasgow/Barren County Industrial Development Economic Authority, forgivable if agreed-upon headcount growth commitments are met. The KEDFA/KBI grant and Glasgow/Barren County loan were key factors in Amneal’s decision to remain and expand in Kentucky.

Although the financial incentives Amneal has received over the past several years are important, the company is also reaffirming its commitment to Glasgow due to its people.

“From our first opportunity to get to know Akyma’s employees prior to acquiring that business, we have been impressed with the work ethic, integrity, common sense, commitment to success and positive attitude of Kentucky’s citizens,” said Jim Luce, Amneal’s Executive Vice President-Sales & Marketing, who oversees the entire Kentucky operation. “The economic incentives definitely played a critical role in our decision to continue growing in Kentucky, though incentives and nice buildings aren’t worth anything without superb people. And finding all three in Glasgow, it was easy to commit our long term future here.”

About Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC

Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC is a U.S.-based manufacturer of generic pharmaceuticals. Known as “Generic’s New Generation,” Amneal prides itself on its unwavering commitment to quality, meaningful business relationships, and innovative approach to maximizing value for all stakeholders. Extensive investment in R&D, an intelligently aggressive expansion strategy, and focus on vertical integration are key contributors to the company’s impressive growth over the past several years. Amneal is headquartered in Bridgewater, New Jersey with manufacturing, R&D, packaging, sales and distribution facilities throughout the U.S., as well as abroad. For more information, visit www.amneal.com.

SOURCE: Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC

Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC
Jim Luce
Executive Vice President, Sales & Marketing
M: 949-500-5756
jim@amneal.com
www.amneal.com
or
Cheryl Lechok Communications, LLC
Cheryl Lechok
President
Dir: 203-961-9280
M: 203-613-1506
clechok@optonline.net

 

LIST OF PRODUCTS AVAILABLE – SEE HERE

CONTINUE READING….

Legal Pot: The Gateway Drug to State-Run Banking?


By Karen Weise January 09, 2014


 

 

If ever a hippie dream existed, it would probably look something like what’s being proposed in Washington by Democratic State Senator Bob Hasegawa. He wants to open a state-run bank specifically to serve Washington’s newly legal marijuana industry. The proposal would solve two real problems: Pot businesses would no longer be trapped in an all-cash economy thanks to federal laws that prohibit banks from handling drug money, and the state would send less money to Wall Street.

There’s just one state-run bank in the country: the Bank of North Dakota. It uses the revenue collected through taxes and other government income to provide capital for low-interest loans to state residents, including students, homeowners, and farmers. The bank’s operations return millions to the state’s coffers. (It’s worth noting that the bank has nothing to do with pot.)

As the financial crisis caused a credit crunch for borrowers, some citizens and states themselves started looking to North Dakota as a model of how to keep lending afloat. “After the banking crisis in 2008, some farmers came to me from eastern Washington, literally in tears, saying their credit was being cut off,” Hasegawa says.

Story: Making It Safe for Banks to Take (Legal) Pot Money

Heather Morton, who tracks financial regulation at the National Conference of State Legislatures, found bills in six state legislatures in 2010 related to the creation of state-run banks. Interest swelled as the economy continued to struggle and the Occupy Wall Street movement took up the idea of state banks as an alternative to Wall Street. By 2011 the number of states with bills contemplating the creation of their own banks hit 15, according to Morton’s research, before legislation eventually tapered off last year as the economy improved.

In Washington, one of eight states in which legislation was put forward in 2013, the state-banking push predates the advent of a legal marijuana retail sector. Hasegawa’s bill, which he has sponsored for several years, gained support from 44 out of 98 lawmakers in 2012 but was killed in the banking committee. Each year, Hasegawa tinkers with the legislation in response to opponents, who include the state’s banking community, bond brokers, and the state treasurer. The critics argue that the effort is too risky and would diminish competition, among other things. (After lengthy study, a formal commission in Massachusetts recommended against creating a bank there, saying the effort would be more capital-intensive than it’s worth.)

After voters approved legalizing recreational marijuana in Washington last year, however, Hasegawa saw a new opening. Marijuana businesses have had to resort to largely operating in cash and have been agitating for federal authorities to give banks permission to handle pot accounts. Because pot isn’t legal at the national level, federal money-laundering laws prevent financial institutions from handing marijuana-related money.

Story: Surge Pricing as Colorado’s Pot Sellers Open for Business

Hasegawa has submitted a new bill for the 2014 legislative session that would create a state-run bank as the sole depository for the state’s marijuana businesses. Passage of the bill, which Hasegawa knows is a long shot, would provide “a foot in the door” to a broader state-run bank. But even if it fails, the state senator still sees an upside: “It has drawn the debate away from the detractors of the other arguments.” Washington’s legislative session opens on Jan. 13, and recreational sales in the state are expected to start this spring.

Opposition has now “focused on the illegality of marijuana itself,” Hasegawa says, “which makes me think a lot of their other arguments are really just smoke screens.”

Story: Legal Weed’s Strange Economics in Colorado

Weise_190

Weise is a reporter for Bloomberg Businessweek in New York. Follow her on Twitter @kyweise.

Prohibitionists are Overstating Feds vs. State Marijuana Legalization Case to Media


by David Borden, December 10, 2012, 02:54pm

Posted in:

A mostly great piece in Rolling Stone this weekend, "Obama’s Pot Problem," missed the mark on the federal preemption question — can the feds shut down Washington and Colorado’s legalized regulation systems? Tim Dickinson wrote the following on that subject:

[T]he administration appears to have an open-and-shut case: Federal law trumps state law when the two contradict. What’s more, the Supreme Court has spoken on marijuana law: In the 2005 case Gonzales v. Raich contesting medical marijuana in California, the court ruled that the federal government can regulate even tiny quantities of pot – including those grown and sold purely within state borders – because the drug is ultimately connected to interstate commerce. If the courts side with the administration, a judge could issue an immediate injunction blocking Washington and Colorado from regulating or taxing the growing and selling of pot – actions that would be considered trafficking under the Controlled Substances Act.

But a former Bush administration official quoted in the New York Times on Thursday, former DOJ civil division head Gregory Katsas, made the opposite prediction. Katsas was "skeptical" that a preemption lawsuit would succeed, according to the Times. Why? Perhaps because it’s not just that the feds can’t force states to criminalize drug possession, as Kevin Sabet selectively pointed out to Dickinson. It’s also the case that they probably can’t directly force the states to criminalize sales either. The Controlled Substances Act in fact leans against federal preemption of state drug policy, as pointed out in a law professors brief on preemption submitted in a California case this year.

Dickinson also pointed out that federal officials had used threats to prosecute state employees involved in implementing regulations for medical marijuana. In my opinion the US Attorney letters were deliberately vague — scary enough to influence state officials, but in most if not all cases stopping short of explicitly making that threat. A better piece of evidence, I think, is that in 16 years of state medical marijuana laws, no federal prosecutor has ever tried to actually invalidate such a law in court, not even after the Raich ruling. Why not? They must not think they have a slam dunk case. And if preemption is not a slam dunk for medical marijuana, then it’s not a slam dunk when it comes to legalization either, although there are additional arguments to throw against full legalization.

The reality is that no one knows how this will turn out if it goes to court. Raich established that federal police agencies can use their powers in medical marijuana states to continue to criminalize marijuana federally, justified by the Interstate Commerce Clause. But that is not the same as having the power to forbid states from granting exceptions to the states’ own anti-marijuana sales laws, which in legal terms is what the regulatory frameworks do, and plenty of smart lawyers are skeptical that they can do that. This is not a slam dunk either way.

CONTINUE READING HERE….