In April, Amendment 2 looked indestructible. Poll after poll gave it upward of 80 percent in voter approval.
Then all of a sudden the cracks began to show. Numbers dipped slightly. And by May, anybody who says he couldn't see the medical marijuana amendment's steep slide coming wasn't looking very hard.
The signs were there.
And here's what I think happened. I think the smooth-sailing pro-constitutional amendment campaign did such a good job of promoting its early popularity, it became a victim of its own success.
Strong Amendment 2 polling numbers plus an end to the struggle in the Florida Legislature to pass the landmark Charlotte's Web bill launched an entrepreneurial feeding frenzy across the state.
It was like a gold rush. But it was also a turn-off for conservative voters who felt overwhelmed, who wanted medical marijuana, but not the greed they now identified as an accompaniment.
Sold-out, cannabis-themed business expos and training conventions -- particularly the ones in Miami and Orlando -- got big media publicity, lit up Twitter and attracted medical marijuana "experts" from other parts of the country. Law practices and lobbyistscarving out a specialty in medical marijuana consulting were even buying billboard ads along South Florida highways.
The first eye-opening event I remember -- well-publicized before and after -- was staged in mid-April at the Sheraton Hotel in Miami. Bob Calkin, Los Angeles cannabis hustler, charged wannabe entrepreneurs $299 a pop for a 10-hour crash course on how to make a fortune "dispensing medicine." His company, Cannabis Career Institute, headquartered in Calkin's van, raked in $45,000 for a day's work.
As I said, none of this escaped the notice of increasingly jittery likely voters.
All told, it's left a sour taste. Floridians now are asking, is this amendment more about who can profit from it than it is about who it might be able to help?
"What am I supposed to think?" asks Mandy Stokes, 54. "I want sick people who can be helped by medical marijuana to have what they need no matter what. But all these people swarming into the state looking to get rich quick ... I don't want Florida to be Colorado and end up with recreational marijuana."
Stokes, a Vero Beach shopkeeper and grandmother, said she had planned to vote "yes on 2," but now she will vote "no."
Retired Tamarac doctor Garrett R. Richardson, a family practitioner, told Sunshine State News, "If I were still practicing, I would have nothing to do with cannabis therapy until the feds decriminalize the plant. I wouldn't want lawyers and patients in my face constantly to recommend something I may not think is the best therapy. No lawyer would be getting rich at my expense, I can tell you that."
Add to mounting fear the increasing presence of well-financed Vote No on 2. Its slick television ads are all over the state's larger markets.
And John Morgan's profanity-laced video hasn't helped: Morgan, the father of Amendment 2, cocktail in his hand, standing before a group of cheering young people, urging them to vote for marijuana. Negative publicity, to say the least -- and didn't the Vote No on 2 people jump all over it.
This, through no fault ofhard-working proponent Ben Pollara, or the United for Care drive he directs in support of Amendment 2. All of a sudden, United for Care went from "we're in!" to "do we still have a chance?" And it's beginning to lose the battle for money. A successful TV ad campaign can cost $1 million a week. Most of Pollara's money was used up early in the petition drive.
This constitutional amendment needs 60 percent approval to pass and become law on Jan. 6. Yet, of the eight polls released since Sept. 1, the average percentage of support is 57.6. It can still happen -- Amendment 2 isn't off the rails yet. But Pollara & Co. have work to do.
If you're wondering, the top contributors for the "pro" team, People United for Medical Marijuana, are 1) The John Morgan law firm, $3,535,896; 2) prominent Democratic fundraiser Barbara Stiefel, $605,000; and 3) John Morgan personally, $250,000.
Top contributors for the "con" team, Vote No on 2, are 1) casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, $4 million in two combined chunks; 2) the Carol Jenkins Barnett Family Trust, $540,000; and 3) Republican donor and millionaire Mel Sembler, $100,000.
"You can expect to see more of what we have been doing going on until Election Day," Sarah Bascom, spokeswoman for Vote No on 2, told the Fort Myers News-Press. "This includes digital media and grassroots mobilization, television and radio and general get out the vote strategies."
I don't underestimate John Morgan's determination to protect his $4 million investment. But Bascom's strategy is working. And I believe it's working because the same Floridians whose initial motives for embracing medical marijuana were pure and true, are now repulsed by what they see as mob greed -- would-be business people flocking to launch ventures in an industry built on disease and suffering.
I'm not sure how you overcome that.
Reach Nancy Smith at nsmith@sunshinestatenews.com or at 228-282-2423. Twitter: @NancyLBSmith
