Example Testimonies

Caregiver Example:

Senator, Representative, and members of the committee,

I am a Maine caregiver, and I strongly oppose LD1847 in its current form.

This bill is presented as a public safety measure, but in reality it functions as a consolidation mechanism. The proposed repeated batch testing requirements are not designed for safety, they are designed for scale. Large, vertically integrated corporations can absorb repeated testing fees across massive production runs. Small craft caregivers cannot.

If I am required to test every micro-batch repeatedly, the cumulative cost per pound becomes unsustainable. This does not improve safety. It simply prices small producers out of existence.

We support testing. We support reasonable safeguards. But we do not support a regulatory structure that creates artificial economies of scale to advantage large corporations while burying independent caregivers in fees.

Maine’s medical program works because it is local, relationship-based, and patient-centered. Please do not replace it with a system designed for corporate consolidation.

I urge you to reject LD1847 or amend it to create a rational, scalable testing protocol that protects patients without eliminating small operators.

Thank you,

Your name here

Patient Example No. 1:

Senator, Representative, and members of the committee,

I am a Maine medical cannabis patient, and I strongly oppose LD1847 as currently written.

Patients are already experiencing rising costs. Inflation, supply chain pressures, compliance costs, and general economic strain have all increased the price of everyday necessities. Many of us are on fixed incomes. Many of us are managing chronic conditions that already carry financial burdens.

We cannot afford additional artificial price inflation created by unnecessary regulatory mandates.

The repeated batch testing requirements proposed in LD1847 will increase production costs. Those costs will not disappear — they will be passed directly to patients. This is not hypothetical; it is basic economics.

We support testing. We support product safety. But there is a difference between reasonable safeguards and regulatory structures that disproportionately burden small producers, leading to higher retail prices and reduced access.

Maine’s medical program works because it balances safety with accessibility. Please do not impose a framework that makes medicine less affordable for the very people this program was created to serve.

I urge you to reject or significantly amend LD1847.

Thank you,

Your name here

Patient Example No. 2:

I am a Maine medical cannabis patient, and I oppose LD1847.

Costs are already rising everywhere! Groceries, housing, healthcare. Many of us are on fixed incomes. We cannot afford additional artificial price inflation caused by unnecessary regulatory mandates.

The repeated batch testing requirements in this bill will increase production costs. Those costs will be passed directly to people like me! That means higher prices and an increased burden on an already strained budget.

We support safe products. We support reasonable testing. But we do not support regulatory structures that disproportionately burden small caregivers and drive consolidation, ultimately raising prices for patients.

Please protect affordability and access by rejecting or amending LD1847.

Thank you,

Your name here

Out of state patient example:

Senator, Representative, and members of the committee,

I am an out-of-state medical cannabis patient who travels to Maine because your program is widely regarded as one of the best in the country.

In my home state, regulations similar to LD1847 were passed under the promise of increased safety. What followed was consolidation. Small operators disappeared, large corporations took over, prices increased, and product quality declined.

Despite strict testing frameworks, we still see contaminated products, recalls, and inconsistent quality. We just end up paying more for it. More regulation did not mean cleaner medicine. It meant fewer small producers and higher costs.

I want to be clear: I support testing. Patients deserve safe medicine. But the structure proposed in LD1847 - particularly repeated batch testing requirements - creates scale advantages for large corporations while disproportionately burdening small caregivers.

Maine is special because its caregiver model incentivizes quality, accountability, and community trust. When I travel here for medicine, I also support local lodging, restaurants, and outdoor recreation. Many out-of-state patients do the same.

Please do not replace what works with a regulatory model that has already harmed patients elsewhere. Protect what makes Maine exceptional by rejecting or substantially amending LD1847.

Thank you.