Arizona Legalizes Recreational Cannabis | Special
This week, Arizona voters approved an initiative to legalize recreational cannabis in that state. Hosts Andy Lyman and Megan Kamerick talk to Arizona Republic reporter Andrew Oxford about what that initiative entailed and what impacts it may have on New Mexico’s push to also legalize recreational cannabis in the upcoming 60-day session.
Episode Music:
Podington Bear – “Good Times”
Christian Bjoerklund – “Hallon”
Growing Forward Logo Created By:
*******
“Growing Forward” is a collaboration between New Mexico Political Report and New Mexico PBS, and is funded through a grant from The New Mexico Local News Fund.
FULL TRANSCRIPT
♪ ♪
Kevin McDonald: Welcome to a special edition of the podcast “Growing Forward,” a project that’s all about the cannabis industry here in New Mexico. This is a joint project between New Mexico PBS, the New Mexico Political Report. And, we took this week off in terms of a regular episode because of election day. We knew everybody was going to be focused on that. We’ll be back with a brand-new episode next Tuesday, all about testing and licensing and regulation of the medical cannabis industry and the concerns and issues there, when it comes to a potential legal market. But, the big news this week was our neighbors to the west, Arizona… voters there actually passed an initiative that made recreational cannabis legal in Arizona. And so, that left us wondering what that means for our efforts here. Of course, those in favor of legalizing in New Mexico have been pushing, about, wanting to be one of the first in our region, largely for tourism dollars, even, around people coming into the state and the tax revenues that would be generated by that. And, obviously, Arizona being very close, now headed down this path, what impact will that have on that, if the lawmakers are able to push through that proposal in next year’s session? We want to talk a little bit about the timelines, if we’re able to do that, how that lines up with Arizona? What led to this in Arizona? So, we turned to Andrew oxford. He used to work at the Santa Fe New Mexican but is now at the Arizona Republic. So, luckily, he had a few moments for us this week, so we thought we’d bring you a special episode, a conversation with him about what the initiative in Arizona looks like, what it would do, and, again, how it impacts our efforts here in New Mexico. As you’re going to hear, it sounds like the clock is definitely ticking for New Mexico now, if they want this to be the revenue generator that so many are pushing, now that Arizona has done that. Of course, Texas does not seem to imminently be moving in that direction and so, there would still be benefit from the tourism aspect there. But, Arizona is now going to be off the table, as far as that goes, before too long. So, we just wanted to break it all down for you. We appreciate Andrew oxford and his time that he gave up this week. But here now, is our hosts of “Growing Forward,” Andy Lyman of the New Mexico Political Report and Megan Kamerick. She is a correspondent here at NMPBS. She is also an on-air host at KUNM radio, does a lot of freelance work. Lots of different places, you’re familiar with their voices now from past episodes. But here they are now, talking to Andrew Oxford about the developments in Arizona this week.
♪ ♪
Andy Lyman: We’re talking with Andrew Oxford, reporter with the Arizona Republic. Of course, we’re talking to him today because he’s, he was a reporter for the Santa Fe New Mexican. He’s covered legislature issues here and now he’s doing the same in Arizona. So, thanks for talking with us, Andrew.
Andrew Oxford: Hey, good to talk with you.
Andy Lyman: Tt’s nice to see you again after probably, I think it’s been years. So, I understand that you’re not necessarily covering this proposition. I should back up… what we’re talking about today is Arizona voters approved, I think nearly by 60%, proposition 207, which essentially legalizes recreational use cannabis. My understanding is that as soon as march medical dispensaries can start selling recreational-use cannabis, but the tax issue doesn’t go into effect, I think, until 2021, is that right?
Andrew Oxford: Right, and a number of things will begin happening as this rolls out. One is, you’re going to have the existing dispensaries, but we do have a medical, you know, medical marijuana program… the dispensaries are going to be able to sell to anyone, whether or not you’re card holder, adults 21 and over. You’re also going to have, it’ll be legal to grow your own up to six plants at home for personal use. And if you’ve been convicted of marijuana possession in the past, you can begin the process of working to expunge those records. So, there are a few different facets to this.
Andy Lyman: So, I have a story out today, kind of examining what sort of impact legalization in Arizona has on New Mexico. A lot of people are saying for New Mexico, if we want to legalize it, it needs to happen next spring in the legislative session, to sort of stay in parody with Arizona. Do you have any insight as to how that interplay is, given your expertise of New Mexico and Arizona?
Andrew Oxford: Yeah, you know, I think that, I recall, you know, when we were covering the legislature there in Santa Fe, one of the arguments that proponents could point to was the potential to attract tourists, people from neighboring states, because Arizona didn’t have legal cannabis. Texas certainly didn’t. I think there was also this expectation that neither of those states would move necessarily, particularly quickly to legalize cannabis. Arizona had a measure to legalize in 2016. It failed at the ballot box, not by a lot but it, it did fail. And I think that that probably gave some folks a sense that, if New Mexico could do this, it would be in a good spot, right there in between two states where this wasn’t legal. I think that that… this obviously takes away some of that advantage to New Mexico. There’s, I don’t really think, so much, that argument anymore, that, “Oh you know, folks will be coming from Arizona.” But you know, I think that the other thing about how this pans out, that’s really pretty distinct from New Mexico, is that this had to go to the ballot box. I can’t see the Arizona legislature approving this, even if democrats had won a majority, which they didn’t, even know they really pushed… had, you know, very narrow margins now. This was something that wasn’t going to pass the Arizona legislature. So, this is something that really, Arizona is able to do because of its initiative process. New Mexico, obviously, doesn’t have that. And I think that, you know, that means that it… I don’t think it’s necessarily a reflection of public attitudes being different in Arizona, New Mexico. I think it’s just reflection of the political process is being really different. And what the possibilities are for people who want to kind of bypass gridlock in the legislature.
Andy Lyman: Another issue that we’ve discussed on our podcast is, sort of the, the issue of there’s obviously tax revenue opportunities, but then there’s also sort of social restorative justice issues. And, for those that don’t know, New Mexico does have an experiment law, a very new expungement law, on the books. My understanding is that this proposition would also include experiments for previous convictions, right?
Andrew Oxford: Yeah, that’s really been a big part of the conversation from four years ago to today. And a big part of trying to rally together a coalition that could get this proposal over 50% plus one in Arizona, right? Arizona’s proposition will allow people to petition to have their records expunged. Now, interestingly, Arizona doesn’t really have that process for other laws. This creates that for this. It also allows prosecutors to proactively expunge convictions. So, you know, they can begin this process, sort of, on a larger scale if they want to. You’ve seen the democratic candidate for county attorney here in Maricopa County, who’s been in a pretty competitive race with the republican incumbent, you know, pledging that he would really make an effort to work on that issue if he’s elected. But, that’s been a big part of, I think, addressing concerns that legalizing marijuana would really just be a boon for the industry and not necessarily for people who’ve been adversely impacted by these laws in the past. It still didn’t really satisfy everybody. We did see a number of groups on the left, right, probably, most prominently, La Lucha, which has been doing a lot of the legwork organizing communities going into this election and has been doing legwork for years on the ground, you know, organizing to stop Joe Arpaio, really working at a grassroots level and communities. They raised a number of concerns that this just doesn’t go far enough in terms of undoing some of the adverse impacts of drug laws in the state. But, I think that the argument from proponents of prop 207 has been, “look, we’ve got the votes this year. This is passing with 59% right now. We can, we can allow people to have this sort of process of expungement. We can get this done and stop the felony prosecutions that we’re seeing for, you know, virtually any amount, any amount of possession.” So, you know, it certainly includes everybody, but it was a big part, I think, of the conversations over the last four years of what needed to change between the 2016 proposition and the 2020 proposition.
Megan Kamerick: What did… can I ask, what did Lucha and other groups want to see more of in the bill, to sort of have a restorative justice, kind of, bent?
Andrew Oxford: Yeah, you know, one of the concerns that we’ve seen is really over, also the way that the licensing is going to be set up. This builds on the state’s existing dispensary framework. So, the dispensaries that are operating will be able to open their doors and serve people whether or not they’re their cardholders. This proposition will include some additional licenses that are intended for companies that aren’t currently in the business. You know, the state’s going to have to figure out exactly how those are awarded. This does leave some regulatory discretion to the state, but there’s always been this argument looming over this proposition that this still gives dispensary companies that are already here, too much of a monopoly over the market. And so, that’s been a big, you know, a big criticism against this, really on both sides.
Megan Kamerick: So, the idea is, like, people who are, who are hurt the most from the drug laws in the past don’t stand to gain from it being legal. That’s kind of the argument…
Andrew Oxford: Yeah. You see that in a number of states, right? You know, this point that this is obviously a big industry. And if you’re going to allow that industry to expand, are you just allowing the existing companies to expand? Are you creating opportunities for new businesses new entrepreneurs to come in? Yeah, that’s kind of the debate you see in a lot of places, right? And Arizona was no exception. I think there’s definitely still a concern that this doesn’t go far enough to expand the number of people, who are actually in the business, creating more opportunities for entrepreneurs. And, we’ll see how this plays out with the additional licenses. Like I said, it does leave some regulatory discretion to the state. So, that obviously didn’t satisfy everybody but again, I think the argument again and again for proponents was, this is what, you know, this is what we can do this year.
Andy Lyman: I realized I may have missed part of your introduction. So, anybody that’s just joining us now, just a reminder, we’re talking to Andrew Oxford. He is a reporter with the Arizona Republic newspaper in, I guess based out of Phoenix. Is that right, Andrew?
Andrew Oxford: Yeah, beautiful downtown Phoenix.
Andy Lyman: I have a question about, sort of, the history of these attempts. My understanding is 2016 was the last time they tried to proposition like this. Do you know sort of the breakdown of support or opposition, geographically in Arizona?
Andrew Oxford: Yeah, the, you know, this would… I think, long had been seen as a tough sell in Arizona, right? I think Arizona was considered a socially conservative state in a lot of ways. And so, 2016… I think, for a lot of people, kind of confirmed that. This failed, like I said. Not by a huge margin, but it did fail. And, you know, this year, I think a number of things lined up where the opposition really was not as well organized, not as well funded as obviously the proponents. I don’t think you ever could be, considering that the industry, the dispensaries, were willing to pour millions of dollars into this. But, you still had opposition from socially conservative groups. The center for Arizona policy, which is a socially conservative think tank, and an advocacy group here in the valley, they really, you know, in a lot of ways, spearheaded the fight and lead the fight against this. You have, you know, Arizona has a large lds community and the church has obviously been vocally opposed throughout the years. You’ve also had, you know, the governor has been pretty clear that he’s opposed. He was, if you… anyone who votes in Arizona, you get a little pamphlet in the mail that has all the arguments for and against every proposition. It’s printed up by election officials and you can read through them. And the governor was in there, explaining, you know, why he’s opposed to this. You could ask him for years. His answer was always the same. He doesn’t think Arizona gets any better off by, you know, legalizing weed. So, you’ve had a lot of the opposition has remained the same. I think some of the opposition that was less fierce, you know, the business community, I didn’t see fighting this perhaps in a way that opponents would have hoped. This is a big election year. There are a lot of things on the ballot. Control of the Arizona legislature is on the ballot. A tax measure… it was basically raising taxes for high income earners to fund education. That was on the ballot. That’s really a business community priority. So, a lot of that… a lot of those resources were diverted to that, and away from stopping this proposal, which I think, in some ways, critics have seen not necessarily as more and more of an inevitability anyways, but as something that is less galvanizing as a political issue, maybe, right? As you can see by the numbers, this passing the 59, 60%. This is passing in all but three of Arizona’s 15 counties. This is something that is, I think, was going to be increasingly hard to rally opposition against as we have seen other states. And I think…
Megan Kamerick: Yeah. Oh, no. I’m sorry. I was curious if any of the opponents had argued for… was it just like, no, no, no, or was, how about decriminalize? Where there any, like interim steps, instead of getting full legalization?
Andrew Oxford: That’s a really good point. One of the main arguments that opponents brought forward was that, the initiative process was really the wrong way to do this. So, if you pass something like this through an initiative in Arizona, you’re making it very hard to change. Now, for proponents, that’s a good thing, right? You don’t want the Arizona legislature, which is going to be controlled by republicans, very likely, in the next session to come back and completely change the law. We have what’s called the voter protection act that says they would need a very large majority in the legislature to be able to do something like that. But, opponents said you know if there’s something about this we don’t like, like that licensing scheme or like the expungement process, if you don’t think that goes far enough. You, you’re going to have to pass more initiatives. So, that was really a big part of the argument was, is it a good idea to lock these laws into place, to make it really hard to go back and tweak things? This is a sprawling area of policy that a bunch of different areas of state governments have policy at different levels. Do you want to lock that in through the ballot box, or would it be better to do something in the legislature? Again, opponents would argue that’s a false argument, because nothing’s going to happen at the legislature. But, I think that really was the one of the biggest arguments I’ve heard against it, was that you would have fewer options, or if you were unhappy with this, for changing it in the future.
Andy Lyman: we talked to some lawmakers early on in this project about, you know, obviously, you mentioned, we don’t have proposition measures like Arizona does. It’s the constitutional amendments. Even so, anything like that sort of takes some time to work out the kinks, the specifics of it. I noticed baked into this proposition is a 16% excise tax. And it says to fund public programs. So what else is there for the legislature to, sort of, debate on? Does that mean that they have to decide where that money goes? What else is there… what other work for the legislature is there going forward?
Andrew Oxford: Yeah. Well, for one thing, you know, the distribution of a lot of that money is already determined. I mean, you know, again, part of building the, I think, the support for this going into 2020 was being very clear that a lot of this money that would be raised through legalization would go to public safety, would go to, you know, community colleges, would go to some different areas. By the way, that’s something that also opponents have pointed out, is that, technically, if you look at this this funds the police. This increases funding for the police. But, the issue of where does the legislature go from here? There are somethings left up to the state and, in many ways, more on the regulatory end. You know, for example, the state department health services is going to be responsible for these additional licenses. They’re still going to have oversight of the dispensary program. So, you know, you’re going to have a state government that didn’t want to see this proposition pass now responsible for regulating it. And I think that’s going to be interesting to watch. You know, as for how much money does this give the legislature to work with in crafting a budget? You know, obviously, proponents were really bullish on the opportunities for this to raise money over time. With legislators, I think, particularly in the majority, where there wasn’t a lot of support for this in the first place, had always been more cautious. And it always… I don’t think anyone’s necessarily going into this session banking on there being a ton of money from this coming down the chute. Maybe I’ll be wrong. Maybe, you know, in a few months. People will change their tune. But, like I said… the people writing the budget, by and large, are people who didn’t expect this pass, didn’t want it to pass. And I don’t think they’re necessarily counting on this in this budget cycle.
Andy Lyman: Is there room to add additional taxes to it, going forward, if they meet next year and start discussing this stuff? Do you see that happening?
Andrew Oxford: It’s a good question. You know, like I said, you can’t… it’d be very difficult to go back and tweak what is passed by the voters. If the legislature wanted to pass other taxes that would affect this, that’s a good question of whether or, you know, how they could do that. I think we would have to see. I’d be curious if that would invite some debate over whether that infringes on what the voters passed, for example. You know, voters voted for 16%. Is it fair to take up 20 when they said 16%? You know, we could have that kind of conversation, if there’s a move to dramatically change the numbers.
Megan Kamerick: I had a question about you said… so, right now, similar to New Mexico, the department of health seems, the main regulatory body. But, clearly that will have to change, to some extent, if you’re going to full recreational, or full legalization, I should say?
Andrew Oxford: Well, it’s Department of Health Services that is going to have to figure out the new licensing system for the licenses to be distributed. Obviously when it comes to things like enforcement and dealing with, you know, workplace issues, you know, labor laws, everything like that, this is going to touch on a bunch of different areas, when it comes to things like zoning and sort of local-level issues of where can dispensaries go? How can they operate? You know, that’s going to very much be a, sort of, local government thing. So yes, it’s gonna have a lot of tentacles into different parts of government. But, you know, probably that big piece right is now deciding where those additional licenses go. That’s going to fall to the department health services.
Megan Kamerick: And are the people, the folks writing the budget… they’re not anticipating a ton of revenue from legalizing right away, because they’re seeing expenses of, like, figuring out the regulatory structure? Is that why they don’t think they’re going to see a lot of revenue or…
Andrew Oxford: yeah, I think part of it is just the getting up, getting, you know, set up and running. It’s kind of hard to know, you know, what would the demand be? What would the revenue picture be like for something that isn’t there yet, right? So, I see… I think the official numbers I’ve been seeing out of legislative forecast has been fairly conservative. And, you know, I think it’s going to be kind of hard to tell where this leaves things going into the first immediate budget. It could be kind of like what we saw, if I recall correctly in some states, where it took, maybe a little bit of time, to see the revenue really pick up with the expansion of businesses, as you know, markets kind of developed and things like that. You know, we could be heading for the same case here, but yeah, I hadn’t seen a huge, you know, push from legislative forecasters that, if this passes, this is going to, you know, add this huge chunk of money to what will be able to work with next year.
Andy Lyman: Well, I think that’s all the questions I have, do you have anything else, Megan, before we let Andrew go?
Megan Kamerick: Yeah, I did have a question, just some of the details that still have to be worked out as this passes, like law enforcement issues around driving while high. I mean, people tend to bring this stuff up when we talk about legalizing here like, you know, what’s that going to look like? (laughs)
Andrew Oxford: Yeah, I think that’s right and that was certainly a part of the discussion here, too, was, you know, what do you do with all these additional, all these different laws. And again, that’s where it’s going to kind of fall to regulatory and rulemaking agencies that are you know already in state government to have to sort a lot of this out and how this is actually going to function on a day-to-day level. And, I think that’s going to be a kind of, to be seen issue, because like I said, this is an administration and government currently that hadn’t supported this passing. I’m interested to see how they approach the process of rolling it out, implementing new policies, procedures, just how permissive or restrictive those might be. You know, and if this comes down to sort of boards and commissions, the same issue. You know, boards and commissions where a lot of the nominees were picked by politicians who did not want this to pass. And so, you know, I think, I think that’ll really be the thing to watch going forward, is just how much support is there for making this successful, maybe in the way that voters intended? And how much of an effort is there through, kind of the, the administrative levers of the state to maybe pull back on some elements of this and pump the brakes a bit?
Megan Kamerick: And, I was curious if Lucha and other groups had expressed concerns about… some of the data I’ve seen from Colorado is that yes, even though it’s legal, the people who are perhaps pulled over for, I don’t know, driving while high or something like that still tend to be people of color.
Andrew Oxford: Yeah, I think that, and that’s exactly the thing is, you know, this argument that this isn’t necessarily going to change how police police the communities, that have been for a long time really adversely impacted by these laws. You know, it changes what people can be charged with, but it doesn’t necessarily change the way that, for example, police might be operating. So, we definitely heard that. I would note that, you know, groups like Lucha were opposed. I would point out that, really, their opposition was notably late in the process. I don’t think it was until early voting was well under way that I actually saw, you know, ads and you know, a push by them. And obviously, like I said, it’s a busy election year. There were a lot of other things that people were working on. But, I think on the one hand, it was a sign that there was not a lot of investment in stopping this from the left and attacking some of the points that that folks on the left were satisfied with, but at the same time that that criticism has not gone away. That there is still an appetite for, you know, addressing elements of this proposition as time goes by and addressing how its implemented, as time goes by, from the left as well.
Megan Kamerick: I had one more question, Andrew. Thanks. I appreciate you giving us your time. But, we don’t have the initiative process here in New Mexico, as you know, because you reported here for many years. But, it’s interesting… what I’m hearing you say is that, once the voters passed this, you can’t really… it’s hard for the lawmakers, many of the lawmakers who proposed this, to go in and tweak. Can they do other things? I’m thinking of the bill in Florida that passed, that would have allowed former felons to vote, which was passed by the voters. It was a similar initiative. But, the legislature then added this caveat in like, but you have to pay all your outstanding fees, which became a mess, because no one could tell them what their fees were. But, it hamstrung something the voters had approved. So, is there any way that can happen in Arizona?
Andrew Oxford: This is an ongoing issue in Arizona, and, you know, I cover politics, not drug policy. So, I’m kind of fascinated by exactly what you talked about. Yeah, I think that there is a long conversation we had after Tuesday, about how you saw progressive policies passing at the ballot box in places where progressive candidates would not do well. And, you, know maybe Arizona is a case in point in that. This is passing a lot better than Joe Biden did. And, I know you can argue whether or not this is a progressive policy per se, or a libertarian policy, or whatever you want to call it, but the ballot box is really crucial to all of this happening. And there… you’ve been seeing groups working for years in Arizona to use the ballot box. You get around the legislature, which has long resisted things like this, as well as, you know, this is how Arizona raised the minimum wage. It wasn’t the republican controlled legislature raising the minimum wage here. It was voters in the ballot box doing it. And so, that has really sparked a push by a lot of republican lawmakers and by business groups to try and limit the initiative process as much as possible. You’ve seen a lot of proposals, for one thing to make it a lot harder to get things on the ballot. Yeah, there was one proposal, for example, that, you would have to get signatures. Not just a certain number of signatures, but a certain number in a certain number of counties. So, you couldn’t, you know, it would become almost impossibly expensive to fan out across the state and be able to get signatures across the map. You’ve seen a lot of efforts like that to make the initiative process harder, to make laws expire after their passed, after a certain number of years. Things like that. And then on the back end, when things pass you’ve seen, you know, the legislature sometimes push to see how far can they really get in changing what it was the voters passed, to go more their way? Or, to or to fit more in what they would rather do? And, you know, that oftentimes, that’ll end up in court. I’m sure there will be some legal fights over what this really looks like, how this is really implemented, what the legislature can really say about this. That’ll wind up in court. And that’s exactly why we have, you know, we call it the voter protection act. It’s a law that says, you’re going to need a large majority in the legislature to be able to change what it was the voters passed, because this has been such a fight over the years with the legislative trying to go back and tweak the language of these initiatives.
Andy Lyman: How much power do counties have to maybe zone out these sort of things or to make themselves sort of a dry county. You see that with alcohol across the nation, where these pockets of counties that don’t allow…
Andrew Oxford: Yeah, you see, you know, definitely in local communities, often at the town level, city level, you know, real fights over what zoning should look like for dispensaries and efforts to keep dispensaries out, move them to certain areas. So again, another area where I would expect to see a lot of a lot of battles. Although, like I said, we already have, you know, this builds on a mature dispensary infrastructure as it is. But, I’ve seen cities use that, those leavers of zoning and sort of, you know, regulations over when and where you can do business.
Andy Lyman: Well, Andrew, thank you so much for taking your time and talking with us. It gives us some good perspective on, sort of, how this all plays into New Mexico’s battle with legalization.
Megan Kamerick: We do miss is having your reporting in New Mexico, Andrew.
Andy Lyman: Yes.
Megan Kamerick: Good to talk to you. (laughter)
Andy Lyman: Thank you.
Andrew Oxford: Thanks.
♪ ♪
Kevin McDonald: Alright, we hope you enjoyed that interview with Andrew Oxford. Again, we want to thank him for his time. He’s a reporter at the Arizona Republic, but has worked here in New Mexico in the past, at the Santa Fe New Mexican. So, he’s familiar with efforts here to legalize recreational cannabis. And now, of course, his new home state of Arizona, voters there passed a recreational initiative this week and so, that’s going to have a lot of ripple impacts here in New Mexico. We, of course, are following all those developments. We will continue to track that and will just put an extra bright spotlight on the issue in the upcoming legislative session. So, this is growing forward, a podcast all about the cannabis industry in New Mexico. A special episode this week. We’ll be back with a new episode next Tuesday. Again, that’s on regulation, licensing… all the technical issues that come around this industry. And, it’s complicated. I can’t even begin to tell you how complicated it is, but we’ll dive in to some of that next week for sure. We want to encourage you to, if you haven’t already, to subscribe to the podcast, wherever you get your podcasts. And, while you’re there, do us a favor, leave us a review. Rate the podcast. It really helps us out. We apprecaite that very much. We’re also working on other episodes, coming up. We’re going to be looking at how the cannabis industry in New Mexico plays out in tribal communities. It’s a whole other business there and equally as complicated. We’ll dive into that. We’ll also have some odds and ends of things we haven’t had the chance to cover. And, of course, we’re keeping an eye on 2021, when this will be brought up again in the legislature. Right now, we don’t even know how the legislative session will play out. Considering we’re still in a pandemic. Just a ton of questions left there, but we are keeping track of it and dedicated to following through on the developments, as they come. So, we encourage you to keep up to date. You can also, on our website, at nmpbs.org, search for growing forward. You can find the podcast there and listen back to past episodes. We’ve had some really great ones on just such a fascinating topic. It’s one thing, when you’re talking about building an industry from scratch, but an industry like this, that covers business. It covers health. It covers so many areas. It’s super complicated, as we’ve talked about time and time again. Really a fascinating thing to follow along with. And so, we hope you will listen and share the word. Subscribe, rate and review. And we will be back again next Tuesday. Until then, have a great weekend.
♪ ♪